April 26, 2005
The Board of Commissioners of the City of Lawrence met in regular session at 6:35 p.m., in the City Commission Chambers in City Hall with Mayor Highberger presiding and members Amyx, Hack, Rundle, and Schauner present.
RECOGNITION/PROCLAMATION/PRESENTATION:
The Commission received a public invitation from the Lawrence Civic Choir to its spring concerts.
With Commission approval Mayor Highberger proclaimed the week of April 25 – 29 as “Tree City USA Week” and Friday, April 29th as “Arbor Day”; the week of Friday, April 29 as “Direct Support Professional Day”; the week of May 1-7 as “Vietnam Veterans Recognition Week”; the week of May 1 – 8 as “National Music Week”; and the month of May as “Older Americans Month.”
Vice Mayor Amyx requested deferral from the consent agenda regarding Resolution No. 6587, establishing City Traffic Calming Policy and Resolution No. 6588, establishing a traffic calming priority ranking system for further review by staff. (1)
CONSENT AGENDA
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to approve the City Commission meeting minutes of April 12, 2005.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to approve the Lawrence Arts Commission meeting minutes of January 12, 2005 and March 9, 2005; the Board of Electrical Examiners and Appeals meeting minutes of February 9, 2005; and the Neighborhood Resources Advisory Committee meeting minutes of March 31, 2005. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to approve claims to 306 vendors in the amount of $1,626,575.92. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to approve the Drinking Establishment License for Bambino’s, 1801 Massachusetts; Buffalo Bob’s Smoke House, 719 Massachusetts; Set’em up Jack’s, 1800 East 23rd Ste: G; and Replay Lounge, 946 Massachusetts. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to approve the purchase of necessary interest from David and Joan Brunfeldt for the Monterey Way street improvements in the amount of $46,000. Motion carried unanimously (2)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the City Manager to execute the Supplemental Amendment to the Engineering Services Agreement with Professional Engineering Consultants, P.A., in the amount of $16,000 for bridge improvements on Kasold Drive. Motion carried unanimously. (3)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the City Manager to enter into an Engineering Agreement with BG Consultants in the amount of $10,299, 3rd Street, Alabama to Illinois, Street, Storm Sewer Improvements. Motion carried unanimously. (4)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to place on first reading, Ordinance No. 7877, authorizing the sale, consumption, and possession of alcoholic beverages at Broken Arrow Park on Friday, May 6th and Saturday, May 7 for the Sertoma Club BBQ Cook-off Fundraiser. Motion carried unanimously. (5)
Ordinance No. 7873, rezoning (Z-08-38-04) a tract of land approximately 5.57 acres from RS-2 (Single-Family Residential District) to PRD-1 (Planned Residential Development District; the property is described as being located at 1503 Haskell Avenue, was read a second time. As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to adopt the ordinance. Aye: Amyx, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner. Nay: None. Motion carried unanimously. (6)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to approve a Temporary Use Permit Upon Review (TUPR-04-09-05) for a promotional display of a new housing development at 4500 Bob Billings Parkway. Event to correspond with the Lawrence Homebuilder’s Open House, April 30th – May 1st and May 7th – 8th , subject to the following conditions:
1. A sign permit shall be obtained from the Neighborhood Resources Department for any signs associated with this temporary sale.
The following conditions are required for the tent to be used for the event:
1. Tent must be constructed of flame retardant fabric (label on tent or paperwork available for inspection).
2. A fire extinguisher must be provided for each tent.
3. Provide “No Smoking” signs.
4. Two exits must be provided.
5. Exit signs and emergency lighting is needed if tents have walls (are not just canopies).
6. No parking within 25’ of tent location.
Motion carried unanimously. (7)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to receive a 5-Year Plan. The updated plan project list is due back to KDOT by May 11, 2005 and will be placed on the May 3, 2005 City Commission agenda for approval, pending additional direction. The Planning Commission will receive the plan at their April 25, 2005 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. (8)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to receive notification from the Kansas Development Finance Authority (KDFA) of pending issuance of bonds for the renovation of Hashinger Hall and the refinancing of bonds for Templin Hall (University of Kansas Campus) K.S.A. 74-8905(c) provides that unless the City Commission expresses its disapproval within 15 days of the date of the notice, the KDFA may proceed to issue the bonds. Motion carried unanimously. (9)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the Mayor to sign a Release of Mortgage for Lyle and Jane Platt, 261 North Minnesota. Motion carried unanimously. (10)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to approve as signs of community interest a request from the Lawrence Home Builders Association to place signs for the Spring Parade of Homes in various rights-of-way throughout the City. Motion carried unanimously. (11)
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT:
During the City Manager’s Report, Jeanette Klamm, Residuals Coordinator, City of Lawrence, reported that that the Utilities Department received three awards from The Kansas Water Environmental Association’s annual conference. The honors awarded to the City included:
• Operations and Maintenance Award (in the large plant category)
• Biosolids Management Award (only one award category)
• Plant Safety Award (in the large plant category)
Mayor Highberger said he appreciated staff’s work, especially the safety award because it was good to know that staff was safe on the job.
Also, during the City Manager’s Report, David Corliss, Assistant City Manager, said Chief McSwain would be honored April 29th, with the 2005 Buford Watson Public Service Award.
Linda Finger, Planning Director, outlined suggested “next steps” for the community as a follow up to the Neighborhood Development Workshop and the SmartGrowth Leadership Grant. She said from discussions with design professionals active in the SmartGrowth and new urbanism movement, the next step was to hold a larger, more encompassing visioning process. There were five basic steps to accomplish that goal which were:
Step one Determine a Geographic Area to be Studied [staff recommends this be based on natural watershed or sub-basin boundaries]
For many reasons, it is recommended this not apply to the entire city and that a greenfield site is a better first choice than an inner city or redevelopment site.
Step two Identify Stakeholders and Participants for the process. Establish ground rules for participation (so expectations can be relied upon and participants will see the value of their participation) in Charrette process.
Involving a large, diverse cross section of the community is encouraged to make the visioning and charrette successful. A cautionary note, however, was that there needs to be consistency in who the participants are throughout the process to provide for continuity and to avoid getting stuck in a repeating “training” cycle.
Step three Pre-Charrette work [Series of Community Forums] to provide education and an introduction to the basic concepts and development premises of SmartGrowth
A series of Community Forums, some term this a “community dialog”, can be used to get base parameters agreed upon. For example, in leading up to the Charrette or Visioning process, a series of forums, over 6-9 months, would be held with a specific area covered at each. The first forum would focus on getting everyone “dialed in” to the language of SmartGrowth; the second forum would be used to identify community values (what is important to the community); a third forum would then explore the key issues to address in the visioning (transportation, environmental/natural resources, acceptable residential and commercial densities in mixed developments, connectivity); the last forum would be a broad look at conceptual options to consider in the visioning, perhaps down to the level of some preliminary design work. All of these steps (forums) prepare the community for the larger goal which is a charrette or visioning process. 1
* A key factor to remember is that education is the single most important component of any visioning or charrette process.
Step four Multi-day Community Visioning or Charrette Process led by design professionals [in fields of urban design, architecture, landscape architecture, planning, and or engineering]
A multi-day charrette would be from 3-5 days. Another visioning option is what some term a “design dialogue”. If there is a concern with participants attending or being able to commit to a ‘week long’ charrette process, the design dialogue is an alternative approach. An example of a design dialogue process is:
A design team comprised of 4-5 design professionals comes to Lawrence for three days and spends this time meeting with diverse groups from a wide cross section of the community. They discuss the vision of these individuals and sketch ideas from the many conversations held. At the end of this time, a summary meeting is held by the design professionals with the community disclosing what they have learned and getting a direction on how this information is to be used to develop a vision. The professionals go away, design a vision based on the input they have received and come back and present this vision to the community with a plan for implementation of it.1
Step five Outcomes from Visioning Process [Charrette or Design Dialogue]
1. A concept plan that recommends the types of revisions necessary to the Comprehensive Plan (Horizon 2020) and Development Code [Zoning and Subdivision Regulations] to support walkable, mixed-use neighborhood development;
2. Identification of other development polices that need review/reconsideration; and,
3. The conceptual basis for a pattern book for neighborhood development.
She said a flow chart for achieving the recommended outcomes of the charrette process was a follow-up step that was not listed in the above recommendations but was important to successful implementation. She said those were the five steps that were recommended by staff.
Mayor Highberger asked Finger if there was a timeframe for those steps to be accomplished.
Finger said she did not have a timeframe, but if staff knew how the City Commission would like to proceed, she could talk to the professionals to get an idea of a timeframe. She said the City Commission had received recommendations from the Planning Commission on commercial design standards that could be adopted so those standards could apply until the new development code was in place. The City Commission could also lay the groundwork in the development code by creating the understanding that zoning could be done with conditions. She said the most important step was the educational process to discuss different portions of the concept such as connectivity, density, and mixed use.
Commissioner Rundle said the education issue was important.
Commissioner Hack asked if it was in the purview of staff if given City Commission direction to take the ball a run with it in terms of the flowchart and provide direction on the “next steps.”
Finger said if the City Commission was comfortable with that idea, staff would come back with a more comprehensive flowchart that would show the steps and the ranges of time.
Commissioner Hack said this was a new way of looking at neighborhood and commercial design which was a concern. She said she did not want to slow this process down because she was excited about the prospect, but at the same time, staff needed to proceed cautiously with the education because if everyone was moving in a different direction, then the public would not get the complete picture and therefore, would not be able to embrace it as an exciting concept. She suggested having discussions with staff, the Planning Commission, and City Commission first, rather than jumping into this issue right now without a direction.
Finger said the Congress for the New Urbanism was where staff received many of the principles to get a good foundation of the process. She said a good first step was to get specific members of the community, the City Commission, Planning Commission, or at least a representative, to attend a conference and come back with some understanding on how the process was implemented.
Vice Mayor Amyx asked under step one, determining a geographic area, would there be recommendations to the City Commission as to an area to be studied.
Finger said yes, staff would like to bring back to the City Commission several options to be studied.
Vice Mayor Amyx asked how large of a site would the City Commission address.
Finger said the area should be watershed or sub-basin so that they could get all of the elements for design, for example, looking at an area south of the Wakarusa River. She said it would make sense to target some areas that were already on notice that development would occur or somewhere within the urban growth area, perhaps on the west side of the SLT (K-10).
Mayor Highberger said in terms of size it would be good to focus on at least a section or maybe larger.
Finger said if the City Commission looked at basins or sub-basins, they would need to look at several sections of ground.
Vice Mayor Amyx said it was going to be an extensive study of an entire area which could be part of the Lawrence community someday.
Finger said correct. She said for example, the northwest area was four sections (4 square miles) and would be the smallest area to address which was a portion of a basin.
Commissioner Schauner asked if one of the characteristics of new urbanism was to bring people closer together, have greater density, and rely less on sprawl or suburban development.
Finger said when getting into traditional neighborhoods, it would be based on having that density for public transit, but that was not the only goal. She said it needed to be recognized if using that type of approach, then density was akin to new urbanism. She said that approach could not be done on large sprawling sites because that idea was about condensing, consolidating, and having smaller area with mixed use which was going back to the traditional neighborhoods.
Commissioner Schauner said if staff was to study an area west of the SLT for example, there was a significant difference from most of the population. He asked if they would be creating a new town with its own amenities that was not car reliant unless they wanted to go into the existing part of town. He said he was having trouble making the marriage between the greater density and less car reliance and at the same time they were talking about an area so large that it would need to be in an un-annexed portion of the community.
Finger said the land would not be un-annexed. The land would be within the City’s urban growth area where staff would project annexations or development with urban style within the next 20 to 25 years. The intent was that it would not be developed under rural standards. The very nature of new urbanism was that it needed to be more of an urban compact density. She said to some degree it would develop into a new type of small, neighborhood oriented centers.
Commissioner Schauner asked if there was an advantage to that type of planning closer to the center of town. He said he was troubled about the idea of sprawling further to the west or to the south with this type of a project when many of those same things could be accomplished by staying closer to the center.
Finger said when talking to the experts, they indicated that developing a new green field site, rather than trying to infill that type of development, allowed the flexibility to look at different standards and how those standards could be applied because a lot of the physical built-in environment restricted what could be done and limit the success of the development.
Commissioner Hack said the area of discussion was not halfway between Lawrence and Baldwin. She said they were looking at areas that were contiguous to the current City limits. She said infill development would not make a successful venture if that type of development was used as new urbanism. She said a broader area of study would allow that concept to be more successful.
Finger said that was accurate. The new urbanism principles could apply to infill development. She said there were project that were in the design or development stage where those principles might work well. She said those areas would eventually become an overlay district and would have a separate set of development standards.
Commissioner Rundle said since there needed to be some willing players in terms of development, he asked if it was possible that someone might not want that area to be studied and would the area to be studied be transferable.
Finger said the intent was that those areas were transferable, but the areas would need to be identified in the comprehensive plan.
Commissioner Rundle said concerning step 5, a concept plan that recommended revisions to the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code, was Finger envisioning a parallel set of regulations.
Finger said as the consultants pointed out a parallel code would probably work better for staff than trying to nurture this issue into the whole change.
Commissioner Highberger said those concepts were explained in detail by professionals at a workshop and made more sense once explained. He said steps one, two and three could be accomplished quickly and then the City Commission could determine how to accomplish step 4.
Finger said the Southeast Area Plan was a good plan to start using those steps.
Commissioner Schauner said if this process started on Monday, he asked what was would be a reasonable time for concluding this charrette process.
Finger said a consultant at the conference indicated that the charrette process would take approximately one year. She said if the process was too fast people would not understand the concepts. She said if the process was started Monday, they could get to the charrette portion by January of February.
Vice Mayor Amyx said when looking at the primary urban growth area, west of the SLT and looking at developing a new urbanism growth area, he asked if that area would have all inclusive services. He said Finger had stated that those areas would not replace downtown or other commercial districts, but it would have basic services.
Finger said yes, but they would not be creating a whole new town, but there could be community buildings.
Vice Mayor Amyx said then this concept would show how it related to the existing community.
Finger said yes.
Vice Mayor Amyx said he had a concern that they would be developing small communities that were given names. He asked Finger if that was the concept.
Finger said it would not create small suburbs of a separate identity. She said what needed to be done was to incorporate the area into the fabric of the community and it would need to provide those basic services for a 4 square mile area such as commercial facilities, a church and/or a park system. She said a larger portion of this process was about connectivity to the community.
Commissioner Schauner said he liked the idea of providing the day to day services to an area without having to rely on an automobile to get to or from those services. He said this project would envision an area large enough to support a school, churches, limited retail and other services so that the people in that area would not need to take the “T” downtown to do day to day shopping. He asked if that was the flavor that would be seen in a 4 section area.
Finger said in a 4 section area those services would be expected. She said they would need to identify the area and look at the sub-basin or the drainage basin for the natural area. She said if going south of the river, a good portion of the sub-basin would be floodway or flood fringe and would not be developable, but it was still part of the environment that could be used for recreational paths and connectivity.
Vice Mayor Amyx said essentially they would be going back into time.
Finger said the concept would be providing that type of opportunity. She asked if staff was on target with this concept.
The City Commission directed staff to proceed with the “next steps” that were outlined by staff. (12)
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
Consider request submitted on behalf of the Lawrence/Douglas County Economic Development Board, for direction from the City Commission on various industrial development and open space issues.
Lynn Parman, Lawrence Chamber of Commerce, representing the Lawrence/ Douglas County Economic Development Board, said in March there was a joint study session of the City and County Commission and the School Board that discussed Eco2 and the process they had made and in specific they talked about the short term needs that they were experiencing to identify a future industrial park for Douglas County.
She said currently there were 249 acres available in Douglas County for industrial park development. That was comprised of land that was already annexed, had the infrastructure to the site, was being marketed, and was ready to go. She said when breaking down 249 acres, there was an 87 acre tract and 162 acres that were 5 and 10 acre tracts and 11 to 30 acre tracts. The reason why she brought those tracts up was because they were consuming about 15 to 20 acres a year in industrial land. She said in approximately 8 years they would be out of business and that was Eco2, Planning staff, City and County Commissions as well as the Planning Commission had been focused on this issue of identifying another business park for Douglas County.
She said the Economic Board might be able to play a role in that whole process that they felt might be an adequate role for them. The Economic Development Board was comprised of the Chair of Eco2, the Chair of Douglas County Development Inc., the Mayor, and the Chair of the County Commission along with the higher education and secondary education institutions throughout Douglas County. She said the ED Board might have a specific role to play particularly in the implementation aspects of developing an industrial park.
She said they were requesting that the City and County Commission provide the ED Board with direction to research, develop and recommend a plan for implementation to the City and County regarding the following issues:
1) As aided and informed by the ECO2 report and formula for evaluation tool, how much acreage does the ED Board recommend is needed for industrial development between now and 2012?;
2) Identification and ranking of potential areas where industrial development should occur between now and 2012, along with the Board’s underlying rationale;
3) Prioritization of development sequence or phasing of that potential industrial acreage;
4) Infrastructure issues related to that potential industrial development (particularly wastewater treatment and roads); and
5) Ranking of open-space opportunities for each identified potential industrial site -- as is consistent with the goals of ECO2 -- and priority sequencing or phasing and costs of realizing such open-space opportunities.
She said the County Commission unanimously approved that the ED Board move forward. She said they were looking at conducting an ED Board meeting on May 23rd for an extended time period to talk about those issues and provide some recommendations to the City Commission.
Commissioner Rundle said it was largely the initiative of County Commissioner Charles Jones. He said Jones was trying to focus on the short term goals and Eco2 encompassed both the short and long term goals. He said Jones wanted to focus on what was realistic to accomplish.
Parman said when East Hills Business Park came on line it was truly a public partnership that took place. The City placed the infrastructure in advance through revenue bonds and the County purchased the land in advance also through revenue bonds. Each time land was sold in that business park, those bonds were paid off. She said those issues were addressed in advance for the ability to attract jobs. There were currently 3,000 jobs in East Hills Business Park which was a good investment. She said they were looking for another East Hills Business Park or two because they were running out of land. They were looking at the short term aspect as something they might have a role in being able to prioritize. They also said they would have the people at the table to specifically talk about the implementation aspects such as if they wanted another business park to be similar or how would they involve the private sector in this concept. Since Douglas County Development Inc. had a proven record and history of marketing and managing the park that their expertise would lend a lot of good credibility to that discussion as well.
Commissioner Schauner asked when East Hills Business Park was open.
Parman said the first parcel of land was sold at the latter part of the 1980’s which made that park on line for approximately 15 years.
Commissioner Schauner asked how many acres were in East Hills Business Park.
Parman said East Hills Business Park was a 300 acre business park and there was an 87 acre tract adjacent to that park. She said when they looked at all the industrial land that was available there were 30 to 40 acres left in the park in addition to that 87 acre tract which was encompassed in that 249 acres that she discussed earlier.
Commissioner Schauner said that number would be roughly 117 in or near the East Hills Business Park for 15 years. He asked how many acres were there currently.
She said there were 249 acres and they wanted to keep that 87 acre tract as a standalone tract because there was a fair amount of request that were for 50 acres and above. She said if that figure was taken out there would be 162 acres that was available throughout Douglas County which included Eudora. She said if they consumed 15 to 20 acres a year that would be 8 years that would be gone. At some point you would reach a level to where there were not enough inventories on the shelf for people to even shop in your store. She said it was a long process to get a business park on line, typically 3 to 5 years, which included the funding mechanism, identify the partners, put the infrastructure in advance, and begin marketing the park.
Commissioner Schauner asked what the target audience is for that additional ground.
Parman said the Economic Development Board would have that discussion, but East Hills Business Park was a good example. That area had everything from office/administrative, bioscience production facility to light industrial and distribution. There was no heavy manufacturing in East Hills Business Park it was more of a light industrial. She said a research and development facility, a distribution company, and even an office type of project could work as well.
Commissioner Schauner asked if they could envision that was the same type of marketing target for the additional ground.
Parman said East Hills had been very successful and it would make sense that they would do something similar to that type of park. The Economic Development Board and Eco2 would have those types of discussions.
Mayor Highberger said it was his impression that in the way of needs, they were seeing a need for some larger sites than what was in the inventory at the present time.
Parman said larger sites were a definite need. She said they had no tracts that were 100 acres and above, one site that was 50 acres to 99 acres, and one site from 31 acres to 50 acres in Douglas County. Any request they had for over 30 acres there were two options. In 2004 about 25% of the requests were in that inventory level. In addition to not having enough land for long-term needs, they also had pockets in their inventory which were limiting their ability to attract new companies and to help those existing businesses that wanted a bigger location.
Commissioner Schauner asked what types of businesses would want a 100 acre tract.
Parman said the business could be manufacturing, distribution, light manufacturing and in recent years there was bioscience pharmaceutical manufacturing facility that asked for a site of that size. She said those businesses were typically more in the industrial sector.
Commissioner Schauner said with all of the off shore manufacturing, he was wondering if their target market was really manufacturing. He said it seemed that they were creating a lot fewer of those jobs than 15 or 20 years ago.
Parman said she thought they needed an industrial park or parks with a variety of options for businesses. She said they were missing opportunities right now and they did not have any inventory for the larger tracts. Three to five years from now they would be in a dire situation just for 10 acre tracts.
Commissioner Rundle asked if there was anything that could be said to put the City Commission in the context of what the ED Board was doing.
Parman said when the Economic Development Board was reformulated about a year ago, it was the board’s intent that one of their key roles would be coordination and that was why they worked to try to identify those key organizations that would be able to contribute to the economic development of Douglas County such as the School Superintendent, Chancellor, Baker and Haskell Presidents as well as Eco2, Douglas County Development Inc., and the leadership of the City and County. She said they felt like they wanted to have everyone at the table that could contribute to that discussion. She said coordination was a big aspect of the ED Board which they felt had a role in this particular process from a coordination aspect.
Vice Mayor Amyx said one of the issues that made East Hills Business Park successful was that the City, County, and Douglas County Development worked together. He said the plan was that it would be a 20 year plan before that facility would be at a maximum or they would only have small tracts in which they would need to find specific types of businesses for those locations.
He said he liked the idea of the City, County, and Eco2 assisting to put this concept in motion so they could find areas that made sense for development. He said East Hills Park was a natural progression of the City. He said if the City Commission concurred with Parman’s request, they would need to find those parcels that were natural extensions of this community and have tracts of land that would be marketed for this community.
Parman said the Eco2 formula was unique and would be an awesome tool for the ED Board because it took into consideration slope, number of land owners, if there was existing planning documents, cost of the to get infrastructure to that land, and if it was in the floodplain, it would not show up on the radar screens. She said they found a way to use a formula to evaluate sites and that was what the ED Board was going to rely on.
Commissioner Rundle said he felt they were shooting from the hip. He said it seemed they needed to give the ED Board some framework. When that model was presented, the idea was that the governing bodies would need to decide which factors were weighted and he asked if that needed some type of consideration.
Parman said she would take those comments back to Mike Maddox, Chair, ED Board. She said the ED Board could present the City Commission with different scenarios. For instance, if more point values were assigned to K-10 rather than I-70 that would be how the formula would work. She said if the City Commission decided that extraordinary costs to the site might not be as significant as the number of property owners that would be how the formula would work. The ED Board could give the City Commission a variety of scenarios if that was helpful and that way the City Commission could make the decision as to what might make more sense from a policymaker standpoint.
Commissioner Hack said the ED Board had reorganized and had streamlined a lot of those types of issues. She said they were not using the shotgun approach and they had a much more objective way of measuring the good, bad, and ugly in terms of the availabilities.
She said she understood that the ED Board was asking for the City Commission to bless this concept and the ED Board would come back with periodic reports in terms of how this concept was going and at that time the City Commission could make decisions. She asked if she understood that thinking correctly.
Parman said yes. She said the ED Board did not want to go down that tack, even thought they felt it might be a role for the board. She said they also did not want to go through this effort if it was something that the City Commission did not want them to do. She said guidance would be helpful.
Mayor Highberger called for public comment.
After receiving no public comment, it was moved by Hack, seconded by Rundle, to approve the Lawrence/Douglas County Economic Development Board’s request to research, develop and recommend a plan for implementation to the City and County as indicated in their request. Motion carried unanimously. (13)
Consider the adoption of the 2005 Action Plan of the Consolidated Plan and consider Resolution No. 6591 authorizing the Mayor to execute agreements for the 2005 CDBG and HOME Programs and other such documents as may be required to be submitted to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for such programs.
Margene Swarts, Community Development Manager, Neighborhood Resources Director, said the City was required to submit a Five Year Consolidated Plan or Annual Action Plan to Housing and Urban Development (HUD) each year as part of the requirements for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership Programs and this year submission was the 2005 Action Plan to the Consolidated Plan that covered the years 2003 – 2007. The plan discussed housing and community development needs and priorities for the community and the investment summary, and detailed the activities that were recommended for funding to carry out those needs.
Priorities were determined both by the assessment of needs and which prior activities had been recommended for funding and were completed. The Neighborhood Resources Advisory Committee made the final recommendations to the City Commission for expenditures for the CDBG and HOME Programs with input from other citizen boards and the public, census data, previous homeless counts, and the City Commission at their annual study session which was held last November.
As previously approved by the City Commission, the Advisory Committee continued to consider the “Step Up to Better Housing Strategy” when making funding allocations and strong attention had also been paid to the homeless situation in this community and they had recommended allocation of funds to both the Salvation Army and the Lawrence Community Shelter.
The advisory committee held a public hearing on April 14th which opened a 30 day written comment period and so far staff had received one written comment by email which was included in the plan and if they received anymore, those comments would be included within that 30 day period.
Regarding the investment summary, she noted that by Federal Regulations expenditure funds was limited in two areas. No more than 15% of the CDGB Grant could be used for public service activities and for administration the cap was 20% for CDBG and 10% HOME. The allocations that were recommended by advisory committee in this investment summary were within the regulatory caps. There was no cap for Capital Improvement Expenditures. The next step in the process was adoption of the Resolution that authorized the submission of all the grant documents as the Mayor noted.
Commissioner Rundle said the memo on the agenda discussed some of those expenditures in the restricted area. He asked if that was all the expenditures or did he need to look at the plan.
Swarts said those expenditures were in the Investment Summary. The Investment Summary was fairly clear. She explained the Investment Summary.
Mayor Highberger asked if there were any significant funding shifts from prior years.
Swarts said there were not significant shifts from prior years. She said there were at least two public service agencies that were not recommended for funding this year that were in the past. One agency was Trinity Respite Care was funded $10,000 last year and the other agency was First Step House which was funded $5,000 last year. She said basically those two amounts were included to give the increased amount to the Salvation Army and the Lawrence Community Shelter in that joint request.
Greg Moore, Chair of the Neighborhood Advisory Resources Council (NARC), said as of January this year they met and reviewed grant applications for the CDBG Grant. He said it had been tough this year because of a shrinking budget and it continued to shrink over the past 4 years. He said that number had shrunk by $200,000 from what was received in 2001 to what was received last year.
He said he and Swarts had discussed that 15% cap which limited what they could delegate for operating expenses and salaries which became an issue when looking at the Salvation Army, Lawrence Community Shelter and how they could fully fund those agencies. He said what the council ended up funding those agencies were $53,000 and they were still short $45,000 from their total budget request.
He also said there had been a proposal that had been drafted by the Task Force on Homeless Services. He said what they were asking, because it was a priority of their body, was that this be addressed during the City Commission’s Budget Process. Also, that the Commission consider some other source of funding because of their shirking budget at a steady pace.
Commissioner Rundle asked if there was opportunity as the year progressed to shift funding as long as it stayed in the right category.
Swarts said yes. She said there had been times in the past where they had generated a substantial amendment to the plan, but typically those agencies would spend all of their money.
Mayor Highberger called for public comment.
Moved by Hack, seconded by Amyx, to adopt the 2005 Action Plan of the Consolidated Plan and adopt Resolution No. 6591. Motion carried unanimously. (14)
Commissioner Hack asked that the request be kept on the City Commission’s list for their budget session.
Receive request from Randy Hamm for an exception to the building permit moratorium to allow building permits to be issued at 934 and 940 Ward Avenue.
Randy Hamm, Lawrence, said their request had been forwarded to the City Commission. He said they had tried to do everything that was required, but it appeared they were caught in a glitch and he hoped the City Commission could resolve that issue. He said their permits had been prepared and their site plans had been approved pending the City Commission’s approval of an exception to the building permit moratorium.
Mayor Highberger asked for clarification if a site plan was required for this project.
Hamm said no. He said they prepared the site plan and it was a requirement of Neighborhood Resources to submit a site plan for a building permit.
David Corliss, Assistant City Manager/Legal Services Director, said the terminology was actually a plot plan and it was not a site plan that went though the Planning Department.
Commissioner Schauner asked if that particular neighborhood did not raise objections to this exception to the moratorium.
Hamm said he met with the committee that requested the moratorium for the Brookcreek area and all but two members voted in favor of recommending the City Commission approve their request for an exception. The other two people abstained because they were members of the Barker Neighborhood Association.
Michelle Leininger said the committee met and discussed this issue and came to the conclusion that they had no objection to the exception to the moratorium and that Hamm should work with the Brookcreek Neighborhood to try and assess some of their issues.
She said there were actually three neighborhood associations that were part of the planning process.
Commissioner Schauner said it was the Planning Committee that met and recommended that the City move forward with granting the exception and not all of the neighborhoods had met to place their imprimatur on this project.
Leininger said each of the three neighborhood associations had two representatives on the committee and that was where the approval came from.
Commissioner Schauner asked if the two committee members that abstained were from the same neighborhood.
Leininger said those members were from East Lawrence and Brookcreek Neighborhood.
Commissioner Rundle said if the neighborhood brought something to light that staff felt they could accommodate, he did not think staff was intractable.
Hamm said there were certain things that could be done within the scope of what was applied for without getting into hot water with Neighborhood Resource Department. He said they could not change what had been approved, but they would do what they could to make Neighborhood Resources feel like their project fit into the neighborhood.
Mayor Highberger called for public comment.
After receiving no public comment, Commissioner Rundle acknowledged the very cooperative letters received from neighborhood representatives. He said the representatives requested that information be given as soon as possible in the future. He said there were no objections to the applicant proceeding and therefore he concurred with their request.
Commissioner Schauner asked if there were any other similar projects for which a file wasn’t open, but which might be asking for an exception to the moratorium.
Sandra Day, Planner, said not to her knowledge. She said she took a lot of phone calls from the general public and those conversations could be very vague or very detailed. She said staff tried to assess what that property owner was asking for and staff would try to give those property owners as much information as they could. There were times when questions were vague enough that staff was not sure what that caller was referring to. It was not unusual for a member of the public to come back and state that they had talked to someone in the Planning Office and at times, would mix her up with another Planner.
She said several Planners had added a specific layer that showed the moratorium on their desktops. There were maps that were in front of the Planner of the Day (POD) station to help alter property owner or interested parties when they were in the office. She said there was information that was out there, but not all property owners knew about that information. She said staff tried to give notice to the best of their ability. She said she would not say that the City Commission would not hear that request again through the process. There were no active applications or no applications that would be submitted in the next two weeks that were within that area. There were a couple of on-going projects which were larger project where as lot splits were generally more of an administrative task.
Linda Finger, Planning Director, said staff did not setup an actual file until an application was submitted. She and staff did not set up a file on first contact which was similar to the Neighborhood Resources and Public Works Departments.
Commissioner Schauner said he was trying to be fair to the applicant and the governing body as well as to the moratorium so that the Commission had some theoretical benchmark against what they could measure request for exceptions. He said this request did not seem to be a problem, but he was curious if there would be other requests.
Day said there was not anything that she knew of.
Moved by Rundle, seconded by Hack, to authorize an exception to the building permit moratorium to allow building permits to be issued at 934 and 940 Ward Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. (15)
Receive staff report on Miller-Wells acres sanitary sewer and annexation issues.
David Corliss, Assistant City Manager/Legal Services Director, said the memorandum asked for the City Commission’s permission to proceed with preparation of a service delivery plan for the Miller-Wells area. The area was bounded by North Iowa and Riverridge Road. The bulk of that area was made up of rural residential homes. Some of those lots in that area were not developed and were substantially surrounded by current City boundaries.
The memorandum went into some detail about some of the City infrastructure that had been built in that area. Riverridge Road was constructed as a City/KDOT project a few years back. He said what staff did with the City Commission’s permission was to acquire the rural water district service lines and put in the City water line that was necessitated to be replaced with the road project. The unincorporated residents in the Miller-Wells acres were currently City water customers.
Also, within the past year the City completed the Riverside Pump Station to the north which served the Riverside Business Park where Classic Eagle Distributorship was located and there were industrial lots that were available in that area. He said when that project was constructed; the project was sized appropriately to include the unincorporated Miller-Wells acres area when it would need to receive sanitary sewer services. He said staff had a few requests in recent years for sanitary sewer service and pursuant to the City’s well deserved policy, those properties had annexed into the City and they had been provided sanitary sewer service.
He said staff had been fortunate that the requests that they had were immediately adjacent to existing sanitary sewer lines where there was a good way to construct sanitary sewer service for that area which included the Northfield Estates area, which was immediately at the corner of Riverridge and North Iowa.
He said staff had a recent request from a resident that was in the unincorporated County about sanitary sewer service. The resident indicated that she had concerns about her septic system and she asked when she would be eligible to connect to the sanitary sewer service. He said staff looked at her property in some depth as far as the necessity of extending lines, but staff felt this raised a major policy issue that staff wanted to discuss with the City Commission and develop a plan to how the City would provide service for that area. He said one of the challenges was there would probably be property owners that needed sanitary sewer service in that area that would not be immediately adjacent to the existing sewer lines and would have questions very similar to those that this City Commission dealt with a few years back in the Western Hills Area at approximately Bob Billings Parkway and Monterey Way.
He said Commissioner Amyx had a recollection when the City dealt with some of the annexation issues in the 1980’s when the City annexed that area that was growing west. He said there were approximately 80 lots and one of the issues, at that time, was when would sewer service be available. As a result, the City formed a benefit district where sewer lines were built for those residents. He said their costs per lot were capped at $7,500 which roughly worked out to 50% of the estimated cost of the project.
He said the long and short of this issue was that when the City received those requests, staff wanted to be able to tell those property owners what the City’s policy was and what the City’s plans were for providing sewer service. He said it was staff’s suggestion to develop a service plan. He said staff would go into greater depth as to what the projected costs would be for providing sanitary sewer service for those residents and look at other City services as well. The waterline was a rural water district water line and did not provide fire protection. If the property was annexed into the City, staff would want to have some type of additional water line service so that fire hydrants could be at that location and the City’s fire protection services would be available for those residents.
He said staff was presenting to the City Commission, not the solution, but the permission to ask the questions. He said staff did not have enough information to do that. He said they had not talked to, other than the individual that inquired about sanitary sewer service, the Miller-Wells acres residents about this issue at this time.
He said when Riverridge Road was built and transitions were being done with the waterlines, staff talked generally about annexation and forecasted that some time in the future that would probably be something that the City would want to pursue, but there was no time line given or commitment as to when that would be.
Commissioner Rundle asked how many acres would be in the service plan.
Corliss said that approximate area would be north of Riverridge Road and east of North Iowa, but he did not have the amount acreage.
Commissioner Schauner asked how this area compared in size to Western Hills.
Corliss said the area was a little bit smaller as far as the number of residences which was approximately 50 acres and Western Hills had approximately 85 acres.
Commissioner Rundle asked if this issue would involve contacting all the neighbors as a first step.
Corliss said staff would contact the property owners and invite them to participate in the plan. Also, they would need to discuss this issue with Wakarusa Township and involve the County in some of those discussions.
Vice Mayor Amyx said this issue was more than simply talking about the extension of utilities in the event annexation took place. He asked if staff was actually going to discuss annexation plans.
Corliss said yes.
Commissioner Schauner said there was also a need to have a policy for what happened when the City did annex this area or other areas with respect to the extension of infrastructure whether it was water, sewer, and fire protection in terms of how it was financed.
Vice Mayor Amyx asked if that was a requirement of the law anytime an annexation occurred.
Corliss said it was a requirement of unilateral annexation where annexing the property without the property owners’ permission. The property owners might consent to annexation. Staff did not have enough information yet as to the costs both for the property owners and the City.
Commissioner Schauner said he thought Corliss was asking for direction from the Commission to create a policy on how to deliver infrastructure to an area and how it would be paid for.
Corliss said the City did not have a policy, but the City had precedent as far as some situations such as Western Hills. He said staff might want to come back to the City Commission with a policy. He said while looking at this issue staff also might look at other areas in anticipation of another discussion about annexation with such questions as were there other rural subdivisions that would potentially qualify for this type of analysis. He said when looking at the map it indicated that there were not very many other ones that were similar. He said there was the Martin Park area north of Peterson Road and not much immediately to the west of Lawrence or the southeast area when looking at the southeast area plan.
He said there was a policy on who paid for initial infrastructure costs, but this issue was a situation where there were streets and City water, the question was what would be the costs and benefits of annexing that area and help answer some of those questions ahead of time of the sanitary sewer service issue.
He said staff thought they were ahead of any type of major issues where they might have a number of property owners that had dire circumstances where those property owners were not able to replace their septic systems and they immediately needed to hook up to sewer service.
Commissioner Schauner asked if those streets were built to City standards.
Corliss said those streets were not built to City standards. He said they were chip and seal, no curb and gutter, with culverts.
Vice Mayor Amyx said those were issues that did not need to be up to City standards at this time. Connecting to City sewer was not something that would be required right away as long as the property owner’s current system was up and running.
Mayor Highberger called for public comment.
After receiving no public comment, Commissioner Schauner said it seemed that it would make sense to move forward in drafting a policy.
Commissioner Hack asked if staff wanted to develop a Service Delivery Plan and parallel to that plan, a policy of how that would get done.
Corliss said that was a good direction to include the policy issues about service delivery outside of unincorporated areas.
Commissioner Schauner asked if service delivery would have an application to the urban growth area to the south.
Corliss said it probably would, but there were a lot of other issues if looking at something south of the Wakarusa and how to deal with those situations.
Vice Mayor Amyx asked if the discussion of that policy would be part of the discussion about annexation issues. He asked if that should be where that policy came from rather than Corliss bringing the issue up then.
Commissioner Schauner said he thought staff was looking for direction to develop a policy for when an area was annexed, what the share of cost would be.
Corliss said that was one aspect for this location. He said he was not trying to talk about the issue generally.
Commissioner Hack asked if Corliss also wanted a Service Delivery Plan for this location and a broader policy discussion at a later time.
Corliss said correct. He said that was a good element to include as they talked about annexation more generally.
Moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner. to direct staff to prepare a service delivery plan for the Miller-Wells acres. (16)
Receive report on 2005 Street Maintenance Program.
Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, said the program was broken into multiple contracts based on the type of work planned. Those contracts were:
● crack sealing
● mill and overlay only
● mill, overlay, and curb repair
● concrete repair only
● KLINK funded project
● chip and seal
He said selection of those streets staff chose to maintain this year included criteria which were physical roadway condition, traffic volume, citizen requests for repairs, and project scope. He said staff would determine if the project was presenting on-going maintenance problems that could not be efficiently repaired. He said to help determine the roadway conditions, staff was using the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) ratings that were developed as part of the Pavement Management System.
The total funding this year was just over three million dollars which included the KLINK project. The list of streets slated for repair was approximately 9.3 miles of which was slightly less than 3 percent of the streets that would be affected by this program.
He said staff completed a street inventory which involved inspecting and evaluating street conditions. He said from that information, staff sorted the information looking for low to medium severity cracks and that had a condition rating over 60 which would be best served with a Crack Seal Program. He said the southwest area had been slated for repairs and was the highest concentration of streets that staff felt met the criteria that were established. He presented a map to the City Commission depicting other streets that were slated for repair.
He said within the Chip Seal Program the City would be partnering with the township to repair 35th Street from Iowa to Louisiana and the costs would be split.
Commissioner Rundle asked how many linear feet of those streets on the street inventory, that met the criteria, would not be completed this year.
Soules said staff had not determined that number, but staff could find out that information.
Commissioner Rundle asked if there were the worst weather conditions what were the circumstances for those streets that met the criteria not being crack sealed. He said his first instinct would be to repair all of those appropriate crack sealed projects rather than choosing streets in a high concentrated area because the maintenance costs would be more expensive later if the streets deteriorated.
Soules said Commissioner Rundle was correct, but they did not have the money to repair all of those streets that met those criteria. He said there was a limited source of money and staff could probably purchase approximately 75,000 pounds of material. He said staff felt that they could repair the majority of those streets in that southwest area. If staff tried picking the streets that were low to medium severity with a PCI rating over 60, it would cost more because the contractor would need to move from street to street.
Commissioner Rundle said he understood the process and thought it was valuable. He suggested that staff perform an analysis on whether investing more money for crack sealing would be a good investment to save money in the long run. He said if the City saved money right now by not sending those contractors to various locations, would there be pothole crews next spring running around to address those issues.
Soules said staff could take a look at that issue.
Commissioner Schauner said one road of concern was Kasold Drive from Clinton Parkway to 31st Street which was scheduled for those repairs. He said that stretch of road was just mill and overlaid last year and now that section was slated for repairs less than a year later. He said that was one example of several that he could sight where the mill and overlay had a very short life.
Soules said staff had mill and overlaid those areas in the past and there was not really any pavement repairs unless there was a failure. He said Kasold and Wakarusa had severely cracked streets and it was not something that staff would recommend for a Crack Sealed Program that would be contracted because all the money would be spent fixing those cracks on Wakarusa.
Commissioner Hack said it was not that the mill and overlay was constructed poorly, but it was the base of those streets that was a continued problem.
Soules said correct.
Commissioner Schauner asked if they should continue to mill and overlay that area or bite the bullet and fix the street rather than continuing to throw good money after bad. He said it seemed that the City was spending a lot of money milling and overlaying streets that would have a very short life.
Soules that was the reason staff was recommending repairs on Kasold from 6th to 15th Streets. He said the 5 year Plan had Kasold on that plan if that was the wish of the City Commission. He said traffic played a significant part of this issue. He said if staff could get 5 years out of a mill an overlaid street that was what they were looking for.
Amyx asked if the program was paid from the current budget.
Soules said yes. He said there were bonds that were also issued to pay costs.
David Corliss, Assistant City Manager/Legal Services Director, said the staff memorandum set out funding sources and some of those funding sources were called major thoroughfare bonds which was the discretionary amount and that amount could be increased based on how much debt the City wanted to take on. The rest of streets slated for repair were budgeted from either the General Fund or Guest Tax sources.
Amyx asked the length of those bonds.
Corliss said the bond length of time was for twelve years.
Amyx asked if those bonds would have an average life expectancy of the product. He said when looking at the list, he had a problem with financing something that was only going to last four or five years.
Commissioner Schauner said Commissioner Amyx made a great point. He suggested conducting a more thorough discussion about the City’s long-term street maintenance program. If the City was going to spend 12 year money on projects that lasted 4 of 5 years, it seemed that the City would never catch up. He said staff needed to have some in-depth discussion about how to fund those projects in a way that might give the City a chance to get even instead of refinancing the same projects over again.
Corliss said one of the reasons why staff was recommending the Kasold project between 6th and 15th Streets for the State funds was because staff saw that area as a major maintenance need opposed to building streets in the growing parts of the community.
He said as Soules indicated that street would be milled and overlaid this year, but by the time they got to the state funding, which was at the end of the decade, then it would be time to mill and overlay again. He said hopefully by rebuilding that street, the street would have a longer life.
Mayor Highberger said this discussion would be a good subject for a study session during the budget process or sometime next year.
Corliss said inclusive in that would be once staff had the Pavement Management System completed, that system would help staff get better information for making those recommendations. The gap between what staff was able to spend and where staff would like to be would be that much clearer.
Mayor Highberger asked if staff could scrounge other City funds for increasing the programs beyond what staff officially budgeted for this year.
Corliss said the best source was to acquire additional funding through debt financing this year and in 2006 the City could budget additional funds.
Vice Mayor Amyx said debt financing did not make sense.
Commissioner Schauner said he was pleased with the program. He said he wished there was more money available to repair more streets. He said there needed to be more discussion about how to make the Public Works Department even more effective than it already was.
Soules said staff had to make tough decisions. Staff originally started out with four pages of proposed street repairs and cut that list down to meet the budget.
Vice Mayor Amyx said in no way were his comments to Soules negative because Soules’ department had done a good job. He said he had high regard for Soules and his department, but the problem was how the City borrowed money. He said it did not make sense to finance those road repairs over and over again.
Commissioner Hack said the emails and calls of complaints she received dealt with the City’s roads. She said what the Commission was trying to do was to figure out a way to help Soules’ department in funding those street repairs.
Mayor Highberger called for public comment.
Wilford Grammer said he had a pet peeve concerning streets. He said the streets were constantly being repaired.
Commissioner Rundle said the City Commission needed to discuss when to schedule this issue as a topic for those general issues that had came up.
He said he did not believe that debt financing was the only avenue.
Moved by Rundle, seconded by Hack, to direct staff to proceed with the 2005 Street Maintenance Program as presented and set a bid date of May 10, 2005 for the 2005 Overlay Program, Phase 1. Motion carried unanimously. (17)
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
COMMISSION ITEMS:
Mayor Highberger asked that the Commission review assignments for advisory boards and committees.
Commissioner Hack asked to continue on with the Sesquicentennial Commission as well as the Carnegie Library Re-use Proposal. She also indicted that she would like to be involved with the Economic Development Board and the K-10 Advisory Committee.
Commissioner Rundle indicated that he would like to serve on the Museum/Abolitionist/Carnegie Library and continue on the Downtown Parking Advisory Board.
Vice Mayor Amyx suggested serving on the Student Senate Group – HINU/KU and volunteered to be placed on any of the other boards desired by the Mayor.
Moved by Schauner, seconded by Hack, to adjourn at 8:55 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
APPROVED:
_____________________________
Mike Rundle, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Frank S. Reeb, City Clerk
1. Resolution 6587 & 6588, traffic calming - deferred.
2. Purchase Interest – Brunfeldt for Monterey Way Street improvements for $46,000.
3. Supplemental Amendment – Professional Engineering for $16,000.
4. Engineering Agreement – for 3rd St., Alabama to Illinois to BG Consultants for $10,299.
5. Ordinance No. 7877, 1st Read, sale & consumption of alcoholic beverages for Broken Arrow Park, May 6th & May 7th, Sertoma Club.
6. Ordinance No. 7873 – 2nd Read, (Z-08-38-04) 5.57 acres, RS-2 to PRD-1, 1503 Haskell.
7. TUPR – TUPR-04-09-05 – promotional display at 4500 Bob Billings Parkway.
8. 5-Year Plan – Project list to KDOT by May 11, 2005.
9. KS Development Finance Authority – Hashinger Hall for Templin Hall.
10. Release of Mortgage – 261 N Minnesota, Lyle & Jane Platt.
11. Signs of Community Interest – Spring Parade of Homes.
12. City Manager’s Report – Utility awards/ 2005 Buford Watson Award/Smartgrowth Leadership grant
13. Lawrence/Douglas County Economic Development Board – various industrial development & open spaces.
14. Resolution No. 6591 – 2005 Action Plan.
15. Building Permit Moratorium for 934 & 940 Ward Avenue.
16. Miller-Wells acres sanitary sewer- service delivery plan.
17. 2005 Maintenance Program – Bid date of May 10 for Overlay Program, Phase 1.