July 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:

With Commission approval Mayor Highberger proclaimed Tuesday, July 26, as the “15^th Anniversary Celebration of the American’s with Disabilities Act; and the week of August 1^st – 7^th, 2005 as “Breastfeeding Awareness Week.”

CONSENT AGENDA

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to approve the City Commission meeting minutes of July 12, 2005.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to receive the Traffic Safety Commission’s meeting minutes of July 11, 2005; and the Sister Cities Advisory Board meeting minutes of May 11, 2005 and May 21, 2005.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to approve claims to 326 vendors in the amount of $2,958,518.29 and payroll from July 10, 2005 to July 23, 2005 in the amount of $1,537,436.57.  Motion carried unanimously.     
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to approve the Drinking Establishment Licenses for the Plum Tree, 2620 Iowa; Crosstown Tavern, 1910 Haskell Ave, Ste: 6 & 7; and Henry T’s Bar and Grill, 3520 West 6th.  Motion carried unanimously.   

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to concur with the recommendation of the Mayor and appoint Bob Schumm to the Convention and Visitors Bureau Advisory Board, to a term which will expire July 1, 2006; and appoint Jessica Mortinger to the Public Transit Advisory Committee to a term which will expire December 31, 2007.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Nutri-ject Systems, Inc. for $45,000 for the cleaning of the Wastewater Treatment Digesters.  Motion carried unanimously.      (1)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Walker Parking Consultants for $25,800 for professional services for the Riverfront and New Hampshire parking structure.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                            (2)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract for $64,931 to equip six marked police cars for the patrol division with the integrated computer/radio systems necessary for using the Douglas County’s Public Safety Mobile Data System.  Motion carried unanimously.                    (3)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Capitol Electric Construction Company, Inc., for $179,660.30, pending FAA actions.  The City’s share of funding for the construction of this project will be $8,983.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                   (4)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to place on first reading, Ordinance No. 7910, establishing a “reserved parking for persons with disabilities” space in front of 714 Alabama Street.  Motion carried unanimously.                    (5)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to place on first reading, Ordinance No. 7911, establishing “2-hour parking”, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday – Friday in the recessed parking area adjacent to Veteran’s Park between 18^th and 19^th Street.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                   (6)

Ordinance No. 7842, rezoning (Z-08-39-04),19.282 acres from A (Agriculture District) to RS-2 (Single-Family Residential District) (the property is located on the east side of George Williams Way (extended) and west of Stoneridge Drive (extended)), was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to adopt the ordinance.  Aye:  Amyx, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner.   Nay: None.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                  (7)

Ordinance No. 7861, rezoning (Z-12-54-04), 2.14 acres from RS-2 (Single-Family Residential District) to PRD-1 (Planned Residential Development District) (the property is described as being located at 1535 Haskell Avenue), was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to adopt the ordinance.  Aye:  Amyx, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner.   Nay: None.  Motion carried unanimously.  (8)

Ordinance No. 7887, rezoning (Z-03-18-05), .19 acre from C-5 (Commercial District) to PCD-2 (Planned Commercial District) (the property is located on at 3400 & 3434 South Iowa), was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to adopt the ordinance.  Aye:  Amyx, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner.   Nay: None.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                      (9)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to approve the site plan (SP-05-41-05) for Jehovah’s Witness Congregation, a site plan for the renovation of the existing building to include two building additions and parking lot improvements, located at 1802 East 19^th Street, subject to the following conditions:

1. Execution of a site plan performance agreement;

2. Approval of a photometric plan;

3. Submittal of public improvement plans for parking lot perimeter curb construction, sidewalk construction, and the removal of a curb cut on Myers Court;

4. Revision of the site plan to include the following:

a.         The addition of two street trees within the landscaped setback abutting E. 19^th Street;

b.         The addition of a note stating the provision of 82 parking spaces;

c.         The removal of note stating, “Install lazy-back type curb”;

d.         The addition of a note stating that perimeter parking lot curbing with notches will be installed per city standards;

e.         The addition of a note stating all parking lot runoff must be directed to the existing street curb inlet;

f.          The addition of a note stating that the existing trash receptacle will be screened in accordance with city standards;

g.         The addition of a note stating that the site plan has been designed to comply with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG);

h.         The reconfiguration of the accessible spaces to show a 5-foot sidewalk leading from the accessible parking spaces to the main building entrance. The spaces should be reconfigured to show one 5-foot access aisle and one 8-foot access aisle, with ramps leading from each aisle to the sidewalk;

i.          The removal of the note stating, “After compliance with planning department comments (5/31/05): parking spaces provided: 62 total (58 regular spaces, & 4 handicap spaces).”

Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                       (10)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to concur with the Traffic Safety Commission’s recommendation to establish a “reserved parking for persons with disabilities” space in front of 714 Alabama Street.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                                                (11)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to concur with the Traffic Safety Commission’s recommendation to establish “2-hour parking” from 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m., Monday – Friday, in the recessed parking area adjacent to Veteran’s Park between 18^th Street and 19^th Street.  Motion carried unanimously.                                (12)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to authorize the City Manager to execute an encroachment agreement with Partners in Grace, Inc. allowing encroachment on Perry and Lincoln Street right-of-way.  Motion carried unanimously.

(13)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to authorize the Mayor to sign a Release of Mortgage for Leah D’Ercole, 2218 Breckenridge Drive.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                             (14) 

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle, seconded by Amyx, to authorize the Mayor to sign a Subordination Agreement for Sandra Sloop and Enrique Penaloza, 2539 Ridge Court.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                        (15)

CITY MANAGER’S REPORT: 

During the City Manger’s Report, Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, said HNTB was hired by the City to work with 23^rd Street Access Management Plan and coordinate the plan with 35 business owners.  He said staff also entered into an agreement with the Long John Silver’s redevelopment as far as access management and consolidation of their accesses at that location.  He said what they were hearing back from the property owners was that everyone was interested.  The next step was to meet with the property owners and if there were 2 or 3 businesses where there could be some cross access agreements and consolidate some of the access, then staff could start looking at engineering design.      

He said in the next couple of months there would be negotiations and that issue would be brought back to the City Commission for further discussion and evaluation.

Commissioner Schauner asked if there was a goal in mind for reducing the number of access points by any particular number or percentage.

Soules said no.  He said staff was trying to follow the Access Management Plan and work with the adjacent businesses.  One of the goals was to have a successful project. 

Corliss said the meeting that he attended last week emphasized that there was a budget with KDOT’s participation and the City’s participation and the challenge for the consultant and the staff was to prioritize which curb cut closures and improved access would they get the most  for the dollars available and to try to stretch those dollars as far as they could in prioritization and then the economy of doing the actual road closure work and if necessary having to buy any access rights or additional right-of-way in order to make those improvements.  He said there were a number of curb cuts and staff wanted to try and reduce those curb cuts with the dollars available and establish that priority.    

Mayor Highberger said he was not questioning the adopted policy on reducing access points on 23^rd Street.  He said he perceived some conflict between the requirements for access management and the discussion about the need for a more interconnected street grid and also designing streets for the speed they wanted people to drive.  Obviously, if there was a street with no cross traffic at all people would drive a lot faster.  He suggested scheduling a study session at some point so they could discuss how those different policies interact with each other so they could make sure they were being consistent.

Soules said a lot of the project was not just to keep traffic moving faster, but safety and that would be the main priority to eliminate those conflicts.     

Commissioner Schauner said the question comes down to one of balance, how do you balance the interest of moving traffic, but not moving that traffic too quickly and at the same time avoiding as many conflict points as you could.             

Soules said left turns were the biggest problem.                                                            (16)

REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:

Conduct water and sewage system refunding and improvement revenue bond sale.  Award bid to lowest responsible bidder.  Declare an emergency to allow for first and second reading.

Ed Mullins, Finance Director, reviewed the bids.  He said there were six bidders and the low bid was by Piper Jaffray of 4.0229%. The one issue that should be noted was that the City recently was upgraded from an A1 on revenue bonds which the City had not issued revenue bonds since 1997.   Springstead who was the City’s financial advisor helped out significantly in terms of figuring out what exactly needed to be placed in this bond issue such as what type of coverage ratios and debt service, and reserve funds.  As a result, the City moved into an AA3 which was one notch below General Obligation Bonds and was a good reflection on the City Commission.  He said when the Commission was looking at raising the water and sewer rates, they realized that the City had a commitment to make that a sound system and fund the improvements that needed to be funded.  As a result they felt comfortable moving the City from A1 to AA3 level and that was reflected in receiving lower interest rates and saving money over the long term.

The second part was to not only provide them money for the new projects, but also to refund some of those outstanding bonds.  There were two outstanding issues and staff was able to combine on those and save in excess of $650,000 in present value terms.  That made it worthwhile to refund and the City exceeded the payback percentage that was in the City’s policy of approximately 3.5 percent and the other two were a little over 5 percent and 8 percent. The City substantially exceeded the minimum standards the City had for refunding.  In addition, the old bond covenants had the City with a 1.45 coverage ratio which meant the income available for debt service had to be 1.45 times the amount of debt service that the City had, but the City had been able to reduce that debt service to 1.2 and at the same time get higher bond ratings.      

Vice Mayor Amyx asked, concerning the $650,000 refunding amount, if the recommendation was to increase the water and sewer rates and did those rates need to be at that level even though there would be a refund.

Mike Wildgen, City Manager, said given the size and number of the Capitol Improvement Projects $650,000 would be used quickly for those other projects.

Mullins said that did not mean that the City had $650,000 in hand.  Those savings were over the next 15 years.  He said there were 10 years left on the 1996 and 1997 issues. 

Wildgen said the City was issuing additional bonds at a lower rate.

Mullins said while they could put it into today’s dollar terms, those savings were realized over another 10 year period of time.

Commissioner Schauner said the question was still the same that if the City saved $650,000 over the next 10 to 15 years, the question was did the City need to continue with its proposed rate schedule increase over that same period of time or was that such a small amount of money, in global terms, that the City proposed rate scheduling increases needed to continue.

Mullins said if wanting to look at it over a 10 year period of time, it would be $65,000 a year.  In terms of the rate impact, it was probably not that significant.  Depending on how much rain the City received, that would have a bigger influence.

Randy Irey, Gilmore and Bell, said another issue the City Commission might want to keep in mind was that the City did have capital needs coming down the line and the City would be doing bond issues in the next couple of years.  To the extent there was some debt service savings, if rates would happen to go up, this savings could provide some cushion.

Commissioner Schauner asked what Irey’s view was about the bond market. 

Irey said his view was that rates had obviously gone up and the federal government had raised short-term rates, but long-term rates had stayed relatively low.   He said eventually those long-term rates would go up, but when they would go up, he did not know.  He said it was what people perceived as how much inflation was there going to be in the years to come and right now, people know there was inflation out there, but when looking at the numbers there was not a lot of inflation, particular if taking out energy. 

Commissioner Schauner said the City should refund what could be refunded now and take advantage of the low rates as those rates were still with us.                

The City Commission reviewed the bids for the water and sewage system refunding and improvement revenue bonds.  The bids were:

BIDDER Net Interest Cost                              True Interest Rate (%)

Piper Jaffray & Co.                     $10,811,651.76                                      4.0229%          

            Prager, Sealy & Co., LLC           $10,824.028.33                                      4.0390%

            George K. Baum & Co.               $10,755,057.50                                      4.0452%

            Citigroup Global Markets, Inc.     $10,907.968.41                                      4.0732%

            RBC Dain Rauschier Inc.            $10,841.226.08                                      4.0743%

            Commerce Capital Markets, Inc. $10,941.320.16                                      $.0780%                      

Moved by Schauner , seconded by Amyx  , to award the bid to Piper Jaffray for the Net Interest Cost of $10,811,651.76 and an Average Annual Net Interest Rate of 4.0229%.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                          (17)

Moved by Schauner, seconded by Amyx, to declare an emergency and adopt on first and second reading Ordinance No. 7909, authorizing and providing for the issuance of $25,910,000, principal amount of water and sewage system refunding and improvement revenue bonds, Series 2005  .  Aye: Amyx, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner.  Nay: None.  Motion carried.                                                                                                        (18)

            Moved by Schauner, seconded by Amyx, to adopt Resolution No. 6603, authorizing the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2005.  Motion carried unanimously.                            (19)

Conduct public hearing to consider the vacation of a 10 ft. utility easement centered on the property line of Lots 4 and 5, Block 3, Stonegate IV Addition, as requested by North Stephens, LC. 

Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, presented the staff report.  He said the area was north of Peterson Road and east of Monterey Way.  The easement was dedicated on the plat as a utility easement, but what was really needed was a drainage easement.  There was no development or improvements, therefore, all utilities were satisfied.      

Staff recommended approval of the vacation and the owner of the property had indicated that they would dedicate by separate instrument a drainage easement.

Mayor Highberger called for public comment.

After receiving no public comment, it was moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to close the public hearing.  Motion carried unanimously

Moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to approve the Order of Vacation of a 10 ft. utility easement centered on the property line of Lots 4 and 5, Block 3, Stonegate IV Addition and authorize the Mayor to sign the vacation order.  Motion carried unanimously. (20)

Conduct public hearing to consider the vacation of city right-of-way of Perry Street west of N. 7^th Street (platted as Maine Street) Smith’s Subdivision in North Lawrence, as requested by Mike and Sheri Nieder.  

Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, presented the staff report.   He said that section of Perry Street, east of 7^th Street was vacated in the 1980’s and that section being requested did not connect through.  He said the property owners would like to use the area for garages for the two houses.  

He said property owners within 200 feet and all utilities had been notified by staff and staff recommended approval of the vacation.

Mayor Highberger asked if there was any pending development planned in the area.

Soules said he had no knowledge of any planned development for that property.

Commissioner Schauner asked if vacating that ground would cause that property to be landlocked.

Soules said there was access to the north.

Commissioner Amyx asked, if the property would redevelop, would access be from the north.

Soules said the property had access to Lincoln Street.

Mayor Highberger asked how the area was zoned.

Linda Finger, Planning Director, said the area was zoned M-2 (General Industrial District).

Mayor Highberger called for public comment.

After receiving no public comment, it was moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.

Commissioner Schauner said his concern was that this property did not become landlocked.  If the Commission approved that vacation, he asked what needed to be done administratively to prevent a future Commission from being faced with a question about lack of access.

Linda Finger, Planning Director, said when land was vacated, the vacation would be filed with the Register of Deeds and staff would record that vacation on the City’s GIS system for mapping purposes.  If staff was to pull up that request, they could see that area was vacated which was a first step in talking to staff about development.  She said without coming to the City first, it might be later that a person would find out about a vacation when a person submitted their application.   

Commissioner Schauner said with the access only from the one end of this property, if the Commission approved this vacation, he asked if Finger had any sense about what was done to the value of that undeveloped or vacant property that adjoined. 

Finger said the M-2 zoning (General Industrial District) did more to the value of the property than leaving one access.  She said the M-2 created difficulty for existing residential that were in the area, but it also created difficulty for the residents that were on the property because it was difficult to acquire homeowner’s insurance when a property was not zoned as their specific use.  She said it would do more harm as a residential purpose. 

Moved by Amyx, seconded by Schauner, to approve the Order of Vacation of city right-of-way of Perry Street west of North 7^th Street (platted as Maine Street) Smith’s Subdivision in North Lawrence and authorize the Mayor to sign the vacation order.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                        (21)

Conduct public hearing regarding UPR-5-9-94, a request to amend the milestones for the adaptive reuse of 805 Ohio.  The Use Permitted upon Review for this adaptive reuse was approved in 1994 and set milestones for the temporary use of this house as a multi-family structure as well as for reconstruction deadlines for scheduled improvements.  This request is to modify the milestone dates to allow the apartment phased out schedule to be extended as well as modification to the garage construction. 

Lynne Braddock Zollner presented the staff report.  She said originally this UPR was to generate income for the restoration of the structure.  The applicant was asking for an extension of the milestone for this UPR to allow the applicant time for the completion of this project.

Commissioner Hack asked if staff’s recommendation was for a one year extension.

Zollner said correct. This item was before the City Commission last year and at that time the Commission granted a one year extension for the property owner to go through the UPR process which was becoming the special use process under the new code.  Since that code had been delayed in becoming the new code, the applicant did not have that opportunity to go through under the new code.

She said what staff had done, at the request of the applicant, was to research the existing code and the proposed new code and there were not substantial differences between the process that the applicant would need to go through.  She said staff felt that a year’s extension from the existing UPR dates would allow the applicant to go through that process allowing for neighborhood and public input whether or not the new code was adopted within that year or not.   

Mayor Highberger called for public comment.

A member of the public, who had a lease agreement for that property, said he had read the memo that was written to Finger which stated that there was currently a lease agreement with one individual and a family friend who was occupying a second apartment.  However, there was currently a lease agreement with three individuals in addition to the family friend, which in the memo it explained that it was a temporary situation with that individual, however, that individual specifically stated that she was there on a permanent basis.  He said now there was four individuals, three signed leases and a family friend all living on this property.  He said prior to granting the years extension, he thought the City Commission might want to consider whether or not the milestone information that was submitted was completely accurate. 

In addition, the memo made claim of the restoration of the four parlors downstairs having been completed this year.  He said his apartment contained two of those four parlors and he was not sure what the criteria for being restored was, but he had holes in the hardwood floor and provided visibility of the basement which was unfinished.  Also, the stained glass windows had holes and leaked air.  He said he did not know to what standard that structure had to be restored.  He said he had a feeling that there were a number of claims potentially being made in that letter in addition to the milestone that was resubmitted in May that were untruthful.           

Moved by Schauner, seconded by Amyx, to close the public hearing.  Motion carried unanimously.

Mayor Highberger said he did not check the expiration date of the current UPR and he asked if the City Commission needed to act on this request at this time.

Finger said a UPR did not have an expiration date. 

Zollner said last year the City Commission extended the use of one apartment that was to be phased out to September this year.  If the Commission did not grant this extension then that apartment was due to be phased out.  Also, the garage construction was to be completed by September and to her knowledge that construction was not underway or anywhere near completion and was probably not a possibility, at this point, by September.

Vice Mayor Amyx said in light of the comments made, he asked what all had been done to this structure.

Dan Riedemann, son of the applicant, said the member of the public who spoke earlier was a disgruntled tenant who broke his lease in April or May and another person took over that tenant’s lease.  He said Zollner had inspected the structure and one of the apartments had been vacant for three weeks and the family friend had moved out three weeks ago.  He said they would be happy to have the structure re-inspected. 

As for the hole in the floor, those were 130 year old pine floors and the hole looked like a bullet hole in the floor which was part of a character of an old building.  He said the hole was not big enough for his thumb, so no one was in danger of falling through. 

Concerning the windows, he said there was a bay window in that lower unit that consisted of five stained glass windows.   There were at least two or three of the very small pieces of stain glass that were cracked.  He said they had not taken the time to do anything about those pieces of glass because with it being 130 years old, it would be nearly impossible to find the matching color of stained glass. 

Vice Mayor Amyx said in the applicant’s letter it stated that inspections took place in January.  He asked if that inspection had take place.

Riedemann said yes.

Vice Mayor Amyx asked if some type of improvements had been made since the 1^st of January.

Riedemann said yes.  He said they just repainted one of the apartment units and had done quite a bit of remodeling in the back end of the owner’s suite which was the bigger portion of the house.  He said there had been a lot of repainting and redecorating in the last four to five months.                        

Vice Mayor Amyx asked if the new zoning ordinance allowed multi-family use to continue at that location.    

Finger said the new zoning ordinance would allow for adaptive reuse much the same as what the applicant was doing now through a special use permit.

Vice Mayor Amyx asked if the applicant would need to go through this process on an annual basis to make this a multiple structure.

Finger said the Commission could approve a special use permit in that way without having annual reviews.  The reason those reviews were placed on the structure was because at the time the use permit was requested, the rental income was suppose to be a way of getting the property upgraded to a historic property and that was why a timeframe and milestones were set out.

Vice Mayor Amyx asked Riedemann, regarding the recommendation from staff for the one year extension and milestones, if that was acceptable until the new zoning ordinance was in place.

Riedemann said yes, for right now, because it would get them over the hump.

Commissioner Rundle asked if Zollner agreed where the applicant indicated that certain milestones were completed. 

Zollner said the structure was inspected three or four weeks ago.  She said she looked at the milestones of the original application along with the documentation that was taken at that time because she did not do the inspection 11 years ago, to see if there had been progress made.  She said it appeared that there was substantial progress being made on the rehabilitation of that structure.  She said she felt comfortable, after the inspection that the applicant was making progress, but it was not as quick as the applicant initially thought it would be.  She said as having done rehabilitation projects several times, typically when getting into an older house it would be a much larger project than anticipated.

Commissioner Schauner asked what promise was made by the property owner 11 years ago about what would happen and when it would happen to this property. 

Finger said the timeline that was originally approved, which had been modified now three times, was part of the Special Use Permit approval.  The intention given at that point in time was that this was to be returned to a single family structure, but there needed to be an income flow to allow those improvements to happen because it was such a large structure.  Having a heritage, not only as a single-family home, but as a hospital and many other types or non-residential activity there was an expectation by the neighborhood at that point in time that this would become a contributing home, not a multiple family apartment.

Commissioner Schauner said it struck him that what they were seeing was yet another delay in moving to the intention originally expressed in 1994 to Old West Lawrence residents that this would become a contributing structure.  He said he did not see that a lot of progress was being made.  He said a year ago there was an extension and now they were asking for another extension at this time.  He said he was trying to figure out where the extensions stop and when they would actually get to the intention.

Finger said a year ago with the applicant came forward, they were both anticipating that there would be a new code and the applicant would specifically request a special use permit under that for a use that would permanently be multiple family of some intensity.

Commissioner Schauner said that was a different intention than the one expressed in 1994.

Finger said that intention was different than when it was originally started.  She said she thought he was moving along the path of trying to rehabilitate the structure, but it might have dawned on him through his endeavors that financially this might not be a single family structure.  She said the applicant had made progress, but the progress was much slower than anticipated. She said it was a great benefit having Zollner aboard because Zollner had done those types of inspections many times in the past and knew what she was looking for.

Commissioner Schauner said the original intention expressed was that this structure would move back to a single-family residence/contributing structure and even if there was a new code and a special use permit granted, that would not achieve that intention expressed in 1994.

Finger said correct.

Commissioner Hack said it was important to keep in mind the size of that home which was enormous and had been used disrespectfully for several years prior to its sale.  She said she would agree that she would like to see the rehabilitation move quicker, but it was a difficult process to go through.  She said there was a suggestion that this project could go through under the new codes that were not in place yet and that extension would help get this situation to the new format when the application was made.     

Finger said that extension was a stop gap measure because the applicant did not have the ability to ask for a special use permit for the permanent use of that structure under the new code because of its lack of availability.

Commissioner Schauner said under the new code or old code the intention now was to move to a special use as opposed to a primary residence which was totally different than the expressed intention in 1994.  The house was not any bigger or smaller today than it was in 1994.  He said what he saw staff doing was enabling this individual to change intention midstream and he thought the Old West Lawrence folks were saying in 1994 was that they were okay with that intention as long as there was a light at the end of the tunnel moving this back to a primary residence and now that light seemed to be dimming. 

Finger said staff was not enabling any type of action away from the original use permit.  The structure of the conditions placed on that one year extension brought them closer to actually having compliance with the rehabilitation of that structure because it brought professionals into the mix who would actually give them guidance on how that rehabilitation could stay on task.  She said staff saw that the task slipped several times and there was a system in place, at this point, where staff would be monitoring, over the next 12 months, to make sure it did not slip.   

Commissioner Rundle said he understood the neighborhood supported this issue because they recognized that it was not simply an old house, but an old house that had been not well cared for along with recognizing the financial burden.  He said the neighbors wanted to make it as feasible as possible to see the structure restored.  He suggested that the City Commission receive updates from staff as staff monitored the applicant progress on a two or three month basis to be able to know what had changed and how much progress was being made. 

Vice Mayor Amyx asked if there was a request from a previous applicant for some other type of commercial facility.

Wildgen said there was a request for a restaurant which did not happen.

Vice Mayor Amyx said that was when Riedemann appeared and went through that whole process.  He said this applicant was the only one willing to refurbish that structure.  He said with staff monitoring the applicant’s progress, he thought that was a reasonable course to follow. 

Commissioner Schauner said he did not have a problem with the extension.  The problem was in the future he would see a request for a special use permit which would make a permanent use of that structure.  He said that was not the expressed intention in 1994 and was the basis for the neighborhood saying that “yes” this was okay.

Mayor Highberger agreed with Commissioner Schauner, but it was also the expressed intent last year when the Commission approved the extension. 

Vice Mayor Amyx said the Commission could not debate that future request whether it came or not. 

Commissioner Schauner said he understood, but he wanted the record and applicant to be clear that at least one member of the City Commission had an interest in seeing that the original intention be completed.  He said he did not have any problem with the extension because that extension was probably reasonable.  He said he had done rehabs on homes and they were difficult, expensive and took longer than one would think.  He said he was thinking beyond the current request which was what he was trying to express a concern about.

Vice Mayor Amyx said he thought the Commission shared the same concern to make sure that the structure went back to its original request.

Commissioner Schauner said he was not being critical of the applicants work on the property.   

Moved by Schauner, seconded by Amyx, to approve the request for an extension to modify the milestone dates for UPR-5-9-94 to allow the apartment phased out schedule to be extended as well as modification to the garage construction.  Motion carried unanimously. (22)

Consider approving, subject to conditions, site plan SP-05-40-05: A site plan for an additional two-story office building to be located at 4101 W. 6^th Street. Submitted by Taylor Design Group for Doug Garber Construction Inc., property owner of record.  (Was deferred by the City Commission at 07/05/05 meeting)

Paul Patterson, Planner, presented the staff report.  He said this site plan approval was located across the street from the western entrance into Hy-Vee grocery store on the south side of West 6^th Street.  There was an existing two-story office with a studio apartment currently on the property with access off of 6^th Street into the parking lot.

The applicant was proposing to build an additional two story office building which was south of the other building plus expansion of the parking lot facility.  The applicant was also looking at proposing to increase the stormwater drainage detention basin and that was the reason this issue was before the Commission at this time.

He said this issue was originally heard on July 5^th and the City Commission requested that staff meet with the neighbors to go over the stormwater detention plan which had occurred.  He said staff recommended approval of the site plan subject to the four conditions as listed in the staff report.

Commissioner Schauner asked Patterson to summarize the neighbor’s views after the meeting.

Patterson said there were seven representatives of those neighborhoods at that meeting and he believed staff addressed most of their questions.  The person most impacted by the existing condition probably still had some concerns as he would if his basement was to flood during stormwater events.  The understanding that was conveyed was that this particular project would assist the stormwater detention in the area and would make improvements to the stormwater detention a little bit beyond what was required.  He said what was required was that the south did not increase the stormwater drainage after the development as it was before the development. 

Commissioner Schauner asked whether the person whose basement was most affected, not only had his or her questions answered, but whether he or she was satisfied.

Patterson said he did not know if she would ever be totally satisfied.

Vice Mayor Amyx asked, if looking to place those two buildings on that lot along with the parking improvements, what would be the detention requirement on that site.  He asked if the increase from the 7,000 to 14,000 cubic feet per acre was adequate if those two structures were going to be built on that site.

Chad Voigt, Stormwater Engineer, said that amount would be adequate.  He said it was approximately .82 acres of property and generally they were getting between 6,000 to 10,000 cubic feet per acre.  He said 82% of 6,000 to 10,000 cubic feet per acre was the additional detention that they would be achieving with that design.  He said he did not know the exact number because it was a combination of different projects rolled together.

Vice Mayor Amyx said the 14,000 cubic feet was more than adequate for that site and the piping that would run out of that location along with the new piping would be adequate to take that water away from that site and get that water to the open drainage to the east without the water going into someone’s house.

Voigt said correct. 

Mayor Highberger called for public comment.

Alberto Amon, Lawrence, who lives near the proposed development, said the current drainage was between two houses which he identified on a map.  He said they discussed adding additional drainage, but the only additional drainage he knew of was to go between his house and his neighbor’s house.  Currently, there was 8 feet 10 inches between his chimney and his neighbor’s chimney and right in the middle was a stormwater drain.  He said the City placed the stormwater drain between the two houses to alleviate a local flooding problem which was an agreement between the property owners and the City and that drain had done a good job so far. 

Amon said right now when there was any type of serious rain, his and his neighbor’s sump pump would run for hours and that was just pulling away the ground water that was retained by the berm.  He said he understood that the applicant was proposing to go 5 feet down in that area and as to the existing pipes, he was confused to where those pipes were and exactly how that water was going to be taken away.  He asked that that issue be addressed.  He said they were also talking about additional capacity for drainage and he did not know where that would come from.  He said some of that water drained under Chouteau Court and dumped in the back yards of the people on Sturbridge which was a flooding problem as well.  He also said he had a concern about who would maintain that area where a fence would be placed.  Also, he understood that utilities needed to be moved to put in a berm and he asked where those utilities would be moved.

Amon said if the City was going to create a huge swimming hole in a neighborhood of children which the intent was to back that huge hole up with water and let it slowly drain out, then the City needed to realize that kids are going to be kids.

Voigt said, in response to the design concept for this project, what the applicant had came up with was to expand the existing detention area which was storage that was currently in an oblong shape and they would make it an “L” shape so they’re increasing ground that the detention would occupy. The pipe that would be replaced was the outlet pipe and would run over to a new structure to complete the tie in and the existing pipe would not be affected which was the pipe that ran between the houses.  He said they took the existing downstream pipe and realized that no more water could be put into that pipe and that was their control and after that was done, there would be less water.  There was additional storage upstream to absorb the additional run-off. 

He said what was out in that area today was a reduced version of this with a structure that was standing up in a berm and it was wasted space and they would remove all that high ground and make that storage which would be a consolidation of storage.

He said the overall system was an issue.  This area was platted approximately 1990 – 1992 which was four years before he started working for the City and then it was four years before the City implemented the current design standards, which was a bleak period in the history of stormwater management in Lawrence.  

He said the study quantified this plan and he reviewed and was happy with the plan.  He said the City would inspect the project which involved working in existing easements.

Mayor Highberger asked Voigt in his professional opinion whether this project, if constructed according to those plans, would not increase the flooding problems of the adjoining residential properties. 

Voigt said that was correct.

Commissioner Rundle asked if Voigt could place a figure on the added capacity that that holding pool would have with the excavation.

Voigt said the existing 7800 cubic feet proposed 14,680 which was an additional 7,000 cubic feet.  The basin that they were working on was designed as part of Prescott Subdivision and that was a very convoluted process.  He said there had been discussion about the fact that that basin had been modified over time.  The original design was oversized and it made it difficult to build those houses and at some cost to the City, they did some work to improve the buildability of those lots.  He said the City crew would be in that area the next few weeks working on the south basin to try and improve drainage because there was a yard that did not drain and it was in a drainage easement.

Commissioner Schauner said what he was hearing was that this project with the increased storage capacity would not make it worse for the adjoining property.

Voigt said correct.

Commissioner Schauner asked if the increased storage capacity would make drainage better.

Voigt said the applicant was able to make drainage better.   He said they were providing enough storage in the grading that it would actually reduce the amount of water that would be forced into that pipe. 

Commissioner Schauner said then there was a better ability to hold water and reduce the flow into the existing pipe between the two houses in a way that should make that pipe better able to carry the water run-off.

Voigt said correct.  He said it would function like a culvert under a road if increasing the area upstream. 

He said there was a question about safety and in the event that this system filled to capacity in a 100 year storm which was 3 feet of water, the argument was if that was the type of storm that was happening, then the kids should probably not be outside.  He said staff made a point to review those systems so there were no vertical walls and someone who was in 36 inches of water could find their way out.

Commissioner Schauner asked how often the City would get a 100 year flood.

Voigt said the City had not had a 100 year storm to test those systems yet. 

Commissioner Schauner said his impression was that when someone said a 100 year storm, the City would get one about every 100 years, but in fact the City faced those storms quite a bit more frequently.

Voigt said that 100 years storms were based on rainfall data.  In June of 1996 there were two, 50 year storms.  He said those storms could happen multiple times, it was just a question of intensity.  He said there was a difference between a 100 year flood and a 100 year storm which was the rainfall amount.

Commissioner Schauner asked which of those events this storage was built to satisfy.

Voigt said the 100 year storm.  He said this had nothing to do with the river and the floodplain.  This was an intense rain event, a small one, falling on that subdivision and feeding that system.

Commissioner Schauner asked about the rain total.

Voigt said 7.8 inches over 24 hours. 

Vice Mayor Amyx asked about the stormwater requirements for the property to the west, and when that area developed would they need to look at the same type of detention requirements that they were placing on this site to help hold some of that water back.

Voigt said yes.

Vice Mayor Amyx said from the property to the west of this property and on down to the receiving stream to the east, he said if they did not require more detention on that area, they would be creating a problem on this property and the properties to the east. 

Voigt said they would put detention on that site and it would be private and not like this public system because it did not cross property lines. 

Vice Mayor Amyx asked, if the property to the west developed, where would the tie in for the run-off from that site be.

Voigt said that was another advantage of moving forward with this plan because the plan would create a drainage path, right now there was a puddle and not a good downhill path.  He said once this was in, there would be a tie in point and it would fall into a portion of the channel and slide into the basin. 

He said according to current standards, as properties developed, if there was an upstream property that needed access they would require a connection point.

Mayor Highberger said there were other questions raised about fences, maintenance of easement and utilities.

Voigt said utilities were going to be relocated in the existing utility easement, but those were vertical relocations so that the grading could be done. 

Patterson said concerning the fence, the site plan was identifying a 6 foot high wooden fence to be located along east side of the proposed parking lot along the property line which would go up to 27 feet from the south property line and almost all the way across the property from east to west.  The reason why it was 27 feet from the south property line was the applicant’s agent had talked to the property owner to the south and the site plan would be putting in a number of trees, constructing the detention basin improvements and putting in turf that would give more privacy to that owner to the south.

Mayor Highberger asked about the distance from the fence to the property line.

Patterson said it was his understanding that it would be adjacent to the property line or within a foot of that property line.

Vice Mayor Amyx said if that fence was within a foot of the property line, he asked if that left a 10 foot gap in between the fence to the east and this fence.

Patterson said it appeared on the site plan that there was going to be several feet between where the proposed fence on the property line was and possibly where the adjacent owner currently had a fence. 

Vice Mayor Amyx asked how someone would get into the space between the two fences.

Patterson said if that was the adjoining property owner’s fence and property, you would not necessarily be able to, or have the right to, go on the adjacent property owner’s property.  He said the two property owners could decide where to place that fence and discuss how to maintain that area in the future.

Amon asked who owned the pipe between his house and his neighbor’s house.

Wildgen said it was City owned and part of the public system.

Amon asked how much space did the stormwater drainage take up.

Voigt said 10 feet wide.

A member of the public said there was not 10 feet between the two houses.  He said from his chimney to the chimney next door was 8 feet 10 inches.

Finger said the code allowed for encroachment of things such as chimney’s by a foot and a half to two feet.  She said he was probably encroaching into the easement legally, but he was allowed to do that by the zoning code.

Amon said the lagoon would take care of the current development and potential future development as well.

Amyx said the future development on the west would need its own detention. 

Mayor Highberger said before they approved any further development, in order to approve the site plan, it would need to meet the stormwater requirements.

Amon said there were several issues brought up in the last several weeks by the property owners to the east of this development. He said things would have happened without the stormwater development being involved.  He said if the property owners would not have brought this issue up, the applicant would have constructed a massive parking lot and those property owners in the area would have been flooded.  He asked how would they as property owners know that when the future development was done that all of those would be put into place.

Voigt said he approved his portion of the site plan requirements on June 10^th and it was submitted on May 17^th so the site plan review process and drainage study was early in that process.

Mayor Highberger said there was another question about how the citizens had assurance that the City would address stormwater requirements for future developments.

Vice Mayor Amyx asked what requirements and what review was needed to make sure that it met the detention requirements.

Voigt said it was City Code.  He said when a site plan came in and it proposed additional impervious surface over a 10% increase of what was at that location, there would need to be a drainage study and that drainage study had to address downstream situations.  The study would need to look at run-off and stormwater management concerns.   He said it was in the City Code and it was a process that staff followed.

Commissioner Hack asked if there were no changes to the original plan since the 5^th of July.

Voigt said correct.

Commissioner Hack said the plan that was approved by Voigt was in place, the plan met the code and that this proposal would make the existing development better.  Any future development would need to go through the same rigorous process.        

Voigt said correct.

Commissioner Schauner said staff did a great job on those site plans, but at the same time he thought it was always incumbent on neighbors to pay attention to what was going on in their neighborhood.  He suggested that the neighbors keep watching.

Moved by Schauner, seconded by Hack, to approve the site plan (SP-05-40-05) for an additional two-story office building to be located at 4101 West 6^th Street, subject to the following conditions:

1          Execution of a site plan performance agreement per Section 20-1433;

2.         Revision of the site plan to include:

a.         30’ wide by 80’ long cross access easement located at the W. 6^th Street driveway access, with recorded book and page number;

b.         Clearly show the layout of existing and proposed easements. (The revised detention basin in the wider drainage easement may require relocation of utility easements.);

c.         Provide recorded book and page number for drainage easement on site plan;

d. General Note No. 4, change “manul” to “manual”.

3.         Submission and approval of Public Improvement Plans for the storm drainage system (including an SWP3 for the site) to Public Works Department, prior to the release of the site plan to Neighborhood Resources.

4. Written permission for off-site grading from adjacent property owner to the south.

Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                  (23)

Receive letter from Burroughs Creek Corridor Plan Study Committee regarding the Sale Barn site-purchase proposal concerning City acquisition of Lot 1, Sale Barn Addition (911 E. 11^th Street). Proposal received March 29, 2005.  

Mike Wildgen, City Manager, briefly summarized the letter.  He said the Burroughs Creek Corridor Plan study committee had looked at a number of issues along that corridor and one of their ideas was to have the City consider purchasing a little less than a 3 acre tract on the north side of 11^th Street just east of the ball fields, the old sale barn property. He said there were no improvements in that area and was vacant property at this time.  He said the committee was recommending an overall picture of that area and this issue was part of that picture.

Mayor Highberger said if the Commission had some interest in this issue then the next step might be to direct staff to seek an appraisal.

Wildgen said yes, usually the city would request a competent appraiser to look at the value of the property.

Vice Mayor Amyx asked if any member of staff talked to the owner of that property.

Wildgen said he talked to the owner today.  He said he mentioned to the property owner that this issue would be on tonight’s City Commission agenda, but the property owner did not express any interest in attending. 

Mayor Highberger said he understood that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board had suggested acquisition of this property also.

Wildgen said yes.

Mayor Highberger called for public comment.

After receiving no public comment, Mayor Highberger said based on what he has read he thought the Commission should continue the process of looking into that idea and he suggested that staff seek an independent appraisal of the property.

Vice Mayor Amyx asked what the possible use of the property would be.  He asked if that property was subject to discussion by the Commissioners as to what the future use might be.  He said he did not mind staff investigating the idea of buying that piece of property, but he would like to know the specific use for that property. 

Wildgen said the general idea was to add to the Hobbs Park area.

Commissioner Schauner said he thought he read in a memo that the area was a historic anchor tied in with the Civil War.  

Wildgen said there was clearly some history at that location.  He said it was on the path of a route that was being proposed for the rails to trails project.

Commissioner Hack agreed with the Vice Mayor Amyx in asking staff to explore this idea in terms of numbers, but until there was a sense of the use, she would reserve judgment.

Moved by Rundle seconded by Hack, to direct staff to investigate this further and seek an independent appraisal.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                             (24)

Consider recommendations from the Housing Trust Fund Board. 

Margene Swarts, Community Development Manager, briefly reviewed the recommendations.  She said there had been no changes to the document that the Commission received from the original recommendations. Those recommendations were:

Table of Contents
#	Description	HTF Request		Other Funding Source		Total Project Cost		HTF Allocation
1	Emergency Services Council
	Emergency Rental Assistance	$	15,000	$	70,000	$	97,000	$	10,800
2	Lawrence Community Shelter
	Purchase/Development of Emergency Shelter	$	400,000	$	0	$	1,950,000	$	0
3	Lawrence Community Shelter
	Homeless Management Information System	$	36,225	$	12,000	$	48,840	$	36,225
4	Lawrence-Douglas County Housing Authority
	New Units (9) of Affordable Elderly Housing	$	300,000	$	578,000	$	878,000	$	200,000
5	Lawrence Habitat for Humanity
	Acquisition/Development of Property	$	400,000	$	0	$	1,600,000	$	100,000
6	Praise Temple Church
	Counseling Center Assistance	$	300,000	$	0	$	300,000	$	0
7	The Salvation Army
	"Homeless to Housed" (H2H)	$	50,640	$	0	$	50,640	$	48,775
8	Tenants to Homeowners, Inc.
	Land Acquisition for Community Land Trust	$	300,000	$	250,000	$	1,425,000	$	175,000
	TOTAL	$	1,801,865	$	910,000	$	6,349,480	$	570,800

Amyx asked who all would have access to the HMIS system. (Homeless Management Information Strategies)

Swarts said, in addition to select city staff, there would be approximately 17 agencies that would be accessing that system in one form or fashion.  The HMIS System was a highly sophisticated system that provided anonymity for clients.  She said it was a system to track by number in the aggregate all the types of services, number of people, and the demographic that this City would be serving by those various agencies.

Commissioner Schauner said in concept was it possible that the HMIS would help avoid duplication of services and/or reduce in some aggregate fashion, the City’s cost.

Swarts said yes because it would track those services.  She said the HMIS System had two important components.  One was that it helped identify the need because the agencies that were assisting the people could determine what help the people were already getting or not getting and help them access the correct places.  For instance, there were multiple places in town that a person could receive emergency utility, rental assistance, or help with food.  She said for agencies that were tied into that system people could not shop around and get the same things from multiple places.  She said that was the lesser part of that system could do.  She said the greater ability was to identify the needs of this community and help people who have those needs.

Commissioner Schauner said the system would give better information, but it was not intended to be a policing of programs.

Swarts said correct.

Commissioner Amyx asked if the state was going to move on this system.

Swarts said as part of the State’s last Statewide Continuum of Care Grant, they were in the process of implementing an HMIS System.  She said she anticipated that at some point with two entities using the same system, there would be a possibility of coordination of those types of information and services down the road.    She said Johnson County and Wyandotte County Unified Government were already using MacLink.  The basis was to have a consolidated system.

Commissioner Rundle asked to what extent the federal government was requiring this type of system.

Swarts said that was not mandated yet, but everything seen indicated that idea was coming down the pike and they would want communities who were participating under various funding streams like the Emergency Shelter Grant. 

Vice Mayor Amyx asked if this was the system the Federal Government was going to require.

Swarts said the Federal Government had not dictated a particular system, but they were saying that a City would need to manage homeless information such as numbers and demographics.  She said she attended a conference with several communities that were the size of Lawrence and there were different entities that did that sort of thing, but MacLink was the one that after a study performed by local practitioners was the group that was identified that could best meet the need that they thought needed to be addressed.

She said the State was going with MacLink.  The issue was going to be the anonymity part and how agencies would feel comfortable in protecting their clientele. Certainly the numbers would be available.  The numbers were availably now for this City through Johnson and Wyandotte Counties.  Those counties had information on their websites all the time.  Numbers would be readily available to do reports.  She said she anticipated that was the sort of thing that they could easily get from the State and do comparisons about what was seen in this community versus statewide. She said she could not say for certain how it would exactly work.  

Commissioner Rundle asked if Swarts sat on the roundtable of Practitioners meetings.

Swarts said she had attended several of those meetings.

Commissioner Rundle said there had been effort to at least look toward developing a common intake.  He said that would save time and be able to make more efficient use of those various staff members.  One of the key things to this idea was the collaboration, much of which they were already seeing to the extent that they were able to in the community, but this would further that because there would be better ways for people to communicate with one another than what they had now.  He said now it was by telephone or email and this would be a better system.

He said this funding of $36,225 for the HMIS plus the $12,000 that the Douglas County Community Foundation had set aside would enable the HMIS System to be funded in full for three years.  If the recommendations from the Housing Trust Fund moved forward that was at least one piece of this homeless issue in the community that the City would not to deal with.  He said there was some hope by the agencies that by the time it was time to talk about funding again, that they would have identified other sources or might be able to wrap it into their existing agency budget in a way that it could move forward seamlessly and they would not necessarily need to come back to the City for additional funding.

Mayor Highberger called for public comment.

Hilda Enoch said she was not present to speak negatively about good and important low income housing proposals that the Housing Trust Fund Board had submitted for the second time.  She said she was present when Barbara Huppee, Lawrence Housing Authority, with her spade dug the first bit of land for the Peterson Acres and a number of them pressed very strongly that there be more low income housing for seniors. 

She said everyone knew that Habitat for Humanity and Tenants to Homeowners were with their fingers in the dike trying to help with low income housing.  She said she was not speaking against those good programs, but she was speaking however about this Commission with this action tonight.  She said losing trust with the original goal of the establishment of a Lawrence Housing Trust Fund.  That there would be dedicated funds put aside year after year so that it would not be a one time package deal and that would be the end of it.  She said her feeling was that if the City Commission approved those recommendations then the Commission would need to work hard to re-establish the Lawrence Housing Trust Fund and Board.  She said the Housing Trust Fund Board did not have any choice because they did not have any more money and there was no source of money coming in, but that was not the way it was setup.  She said there needed to be dedicated funds.  This City was building $500,000 and $1,000,000 homes in this community and surely there were a few pennies that could be left over.  The community had never been asked if they wanted to help with low income housing.   She said she had no problem with what the Housing Trust Fund had recommended, but what they had not been given was the lifeline to be able to see that next year that they had some money. She said good projects that came before the community would be funded because they need that funding desperately.

Vice Mayor Amyx asked how many current Lawrence addresses were there for assisted living.  He said he heard that there were approximately 1100 Section 8 addresses that the Housing Authority took care of.

Barbara Huppee said the Housing Authority was responsible for approximately 1100 units of assisted housing and included 369 units of public housing which were owned by the City.  Beyond that number there were other housing subsidize units and those included places like Clinton Place, Prairie Commons, Vermont Towers, and Prairie Ridge as well as others in Eudora.  Of those properties just cited there were roughly 200 units of assisted housing.  It was a project based assisted units and they were privately owned.

Vice Mayor Amyx asked if there were 1100 to 1300 of the total number of rentals units in Lawrence Kansas that were of a tax supported nature.

Huppee said yes, those units that could be considered affordable.      

Vice Mayor Amyx said the City was providing housing for a lot of people in Lawrence Kansas.  

Commissioner Hack said the Commission gave the direction to the Housing Trust Fund Board to work through this process for recommendations.  She said the Commission was continuing to work through implementation of some of the recommendations of the task force.  The Housing Trust Fund Board did exactly what the Commission asked them to do and she fully supported their recommendations.   

Commissioner Rundle said he would take up the gauntlet that Hilda Enoch had thrown down in some sense.  There were some opportunities that were out there, but it required going to the legislature.  He said there was another entity that was going for the same source and it did not seem feasible to have two different political groups trying to go for the same funding, particularly with this legislature.  He said Enoch could ride herd and gear up for the next legislative session in January.  He said that was clearly what the Trust Fund needed.  To have a long term impact and the Housing Trust Fund wanted the Commission to identify that source of money or let them have an impact with the resources they had.  He said he understood Enoch’s concerns, but it was a good decision to move ahead.

Mayor Highberger concurred with most of Commissioner Rundle’s comments.  He said there was a follow up conversation with some of the participants in the CHAT process and his intention was to appoint a task force to implement some of the CHAT recommendations to start work soon.  He said one of the charges on that task force would well be to identify some longer term funding for public participation in providing affordable housing in Lawrence.  One thing he got out of that whole process was that it was going to be extremely difficult for the market to provide affordable housing without some sort of help.  He said he thought the City’s Housing Authority would need to play a big role in providing affordable housing. 

He said they had a board that was very frustrated because they did not have anything to do because there was not that on-going funding stream.  He said he supported the current action to use the money in the fund now and he supported the recommendations of the board.

Mike Wildgen, City Manager, said staff was not planning on distributing that money until those agencies came back with specific hard documentation. 

Moved by Schauner, seconded by Amyx, to approve the recommendations of the Housing Trust Fund Board.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                   (25)

Consider adopting on first reading, Ordinance No. 7899, allowing pursuant to the provisions of 2005, the sale at retail of package cereal malt beverage and package alcohol on Sundays and certain holidays.   An approved ordinance would be effective on and after November 15, 2005, unless a successful protest petition is filed

Dave Corliss said at the Commission’s June 28^th meeting, they received a memorandum that discussed the 2005 State Law changes concerning cereal malt beverage and alcohol.  Specifically, this new State Law allowed cities and counties to adopt local laws, ordinances or resolutions to allow Sunday and certain holiday sales of package cereal malt beverage and alcohol. 

Pursuant to the City Commission direction staff sent a mail survey and put information on the City’s website soliciting general citizen input.  In the memorandum in the City Commission’s packet were the results of the mail survey and citizen input.  He said he also did receive one additional correspondence from the Texaco, in the 1700 Block of Massachusetts favoring Sunday sales for CMB. 

He said if the City Commission wanted to proceed with allowing Sunday sales for CMB and continuing Sunday sales for package liquor, the City Commission’s action would be to place on first reading Ordinance No. 7899.  That ordinance would not take affect until November 15, 2005 and it was also subject to a protest petition.             

Mayor Highberger called for public comment.

After receiving no public comment, Mayor Highberger said he did not hear a lot of public comment, although there was one citizen who was opposed to passing that ordinance.  He said he personally had not seen any negative consequences from the current ordinance and it seemed to be favored by most of the public. He supported Ordinance 7899. 

Commissioner Hack concurred.  She said the only thing she heard was the concern that it was expensive to keep the store open on Sunday, but no one was requiring that those businesses open on Sunday.  She supported the ordinance.

Moved by Hack seconded by Rundle, to place on first reading Ordinance 7899, allowing, pursuant to the provisions of 2005, the sale at retail of package cereal malt beverage and package alcohol on Sundays and certain holidays..  Motion carried unanimously.               (26)

Consider the following items related to the 2006 Budget:

a) Receive staff memo regarding adjustments to the 2006 City Manager’s Recommended Operating and Capital Improvement Budget and information requests.  

Mike Wildgen, City Manager, said regarding adjustments to the Capital Improvement Budget, there were two items that the City Commission previously discussed which were the Sesquicentennial and ECO² request for additional funds.  Those two requests were now in the proposed budget and staff had decreased the reserve fund transfers to cover those requests. 

Also, there were three specific questions concerning the Webmaster position, Zoning Enforcement Manager position, and the 2006 Street Maintenance Program in which staff drafted memo’s to the City Commission addressing each of those concerns.  

Mayor Highberger called for public comment.

After receiving no public comment, Commissioner Schauner said he was not able to support the webmaster position because it would be nice to have resources to meet other needs.  He said he was satisfied with the response concerning the Neighborhood Resources position and with the street maintenance piece.  He said he would like to see the City’s mill levy reduced by an additional mill.  

Commissioner Rundle said clearly there was a lot of justification brought to this discussion by staff for that position, but he felt there were other pressing needs.  He said if they approved that position, they would need to find funding to meet other needs.  He said Neighborhood Resources, during the department hearings, pointed out that they had looked at standards on how many inspections an inspector could reasonably be expected to perform which should not exceed 10 inspections a day.  The International Code Council said each inspection required approximately 20 minutes.  He said they would be apparently, after full funding of all the staff that was requested, performing 25 to 31 inspections per day per inspector, but did not take into account driving time.  He said he thought there was inadequate staffing to keep pace with the growth of the City. 

He said staff had been wishing for an Economic Development Planner and during the ECO² discussions, they indicated that they were forecasting handing off some of the on-going work of their group to staff which was something an Economic Development Planner could take on.  He said clearly, staff wanted that Webmaster position, but he had wanted other positions for a number of years and the City needed to start catching up.      

Mayor Highberger said he would like to lower the mill levy too, but he did not know if there was $750,000 in cuts that could be agreed on.

Commissioner Schauner said part of his rationale was that the Commission had a lot of discussion about reserves or carry over by that amount.  The truth of the matter was if assessed valuations had gone up 8%, even a half mill reduction would represent an increase in tax, liability and obligation to property owners in Lawrence.  He said there was not a single proposal that the City Commission heard that could not be supported with a rational argument.  The question was about what was the balance.  He said he thought it was appropriate for that balance to lean toward a leaner more value oriented approach and he thought that could be done with another mill reduction, even if it meant making up that mill revenue through the use of the City’s surplus or reserve.  He said he did not think that was bad long-term policy or planning. 

He said he also wanted to respond to Commissioner Rundle’s comment about the Economic Development Planner.  He said he thought that would be a position that would be of great value to the City in the long term.  He said for purposes of this discussion, he thought, given all of the other circumstance that existed today, they did not necessarily need to have that Webmaster position.  He said the City used interns with some success and he did not know why they could not continue that approach.

Mayor Highberger said the Commission had continually asked staff to expand the City’s Website and E-Government services and if looking at what other cities our size had done, almost everyone had at least one person devoted to that service.  He said he thought it was a fairly reasonable proposal. 

He said he understood the interest in an Economic Development Planning position too, but that was one of the reasons he tried to institute a process this year whereby Commissioners could suggest program improvements early enough in the budget to get those improvements considered at the same time as the other program improvements so the City Manager could use that information when crafting the budget.  He said he would have been willing to consider the idea of reducing the mill levy a couple of months ago, but he was not sure he was willing to consider that issue right now.  He said for the reduction of a mil in the total budget was something that should have been raised substantially earlier in this process.  He said he supported the Webmaster position.                    

Commissioner Hack said it was thought sometimes that a Webmaster was someone that was putting together the City’s website, but it was so much more involved.  As the City moved toward more E-Government and ask more of staff in that area, she thought the Commission was short changing the community by not providing that link to the website.  She said in looking at the Business Retention Task Force business link, it would require a lot of inner connection between the departments that handle planning and permitting and it would be crucial that was done in a way that was fair, efficient, and quick.  She said this discussion had been discussed for a long time and it was one of the positions that came to the surface as the City became more involved in E-government that need to be funded.

She said concerning the budget, she agreed with the Mayor that there had been ample opportunity for specific positions, specific mill levy increase or decreases.  She said to throw out new ideas at this point, even if they had been raised in the past, those ideas had not been in this budget cycle discussion. 

Vice Mayor Amyx said he did not agree with Commissioner Schauner’s proposal to eliminate the webmaster position from the proposed budget, but he did not disagree with the thought of taking the mill levy down a mill.  Although, at this point, he thought recommendations for the budget were completed. 

He said the Commission had been through a process where they had monies available that they decided to spend on a lot of programs that were needed throughout this community.  The Commission received requests for all types of improvements and they had tried to meet all of those requests.  At the same time, the City was going to borrow $700,000 next year to maintain streets.  He suggested that they needed to look at better ways to make sure the City did not need to borrow money for street maintenance.     

Commissioner Schauner responded to Hack’s comments.  He said they had an affect on the taxes people pay.  He said they could not affect the assessment that the County performed, but the City did have a direct impact on the mills that they levied on that assessed valuation.  He disagreed with others that suggested it was too late now to talk about an additional mil reduction.  He said they could fund everything the City Manager had proposed because this City had the ability to pay for the proposed funding and still reduce the City’s mill levy by an additional mill for the 2006 budget.

Commissioner Rundle said the Mayor had stated that they needed to start looking for 1 mill which was roughly $750,000.  He said he did not bring issues up earlier because the Commission did not have a clear sense of where they were financially until they received their annual financial report which just came to the Commission recently.  One clear example where an adjustment could be made on assumptions or revenue projects was in the balance for 2004.  He said the Commission knew how much they had for 2004 which was over $13,000,000 and the proposed budget was $950,000 less.  He said if the balance forward was adjusted for 2004, the current year would be $905,000.     

He said the City’s budget projections were not scientifically generated and were more of assumptions and best guesses.  To make those tough decisions, he thought they needed to have the best information available, both in terms of the financial audit information and projections.  He said with making adjustment to some of the existing revenues and projections, they could find the additional money to maybe lower the mill levy and make sure they still had that healthy fund balance.     

Mayor Highberger said what they would be authorizing staff to publish was a budget with a maximum levy.   There was still the flexibility to reduce the mill levy, but they would not be able to raise that levy.  

Wildgen said on the 25^th of August the City had to certify the budget to the County.  He said the Commission could reduce the amount that they wanted to certify to the County Clerk.   

Commissioner Rundle said he was going to register his horse trading sense in that he did not mind honoring staff’s need for that position if they could find someway to meet those other staffing needs.  He said that was where his vote against the Webmaster position would come.   

Moved by Schauner, seconded by Amyx, to receive a staff memo regarding adjustments to the 2006 City Manager's recommended Operating and Capital Improvement Budget and to remove the Webmaster position from the proposed budget.  Aye:  Amyx, Rundle and Schauner.  Nay:  Hack and Highberger.  Motion carried.    (27)

Commissioner Schauner said what would be helpful was a follow up to the idea of a one mill reduction issue.  He suggested that the Commission receive additional information from the City Manager about whether they could change the proposed carry over by an amount equal to an additional mill reduction in their proposed 2006 Budget.

Commissioner Hack asked if Commissioner Schauner was also suggesting that staff also come back with additional Planning and/or Neighborhood Resources positions and if so, she asked Commissioner Rundle if that would allow him to agree to the Webmaster position.   She said Linda Finger, Planning Director, had indicated that until that audit was completed that Finger was not comfortable with having additional Planning Staff until she felt comfortable within the department.  There had been conversations about an Urban Planner if the City was moving toward new urbanism.  She said if the Commission felt there should be additional people in Neighborhood Resources, she said they needed to find out how many they needed, what their jobs would entail and give that information to staff so that could be placed in the budget.

Commissioner Rundle asked if there was a request for technical staff in Neighborhood Resources recommendation.

Wildgen said correct.  He said the highest priority was the Zoning Administrator.

Commissioner Schauner said he thought he heard Commissioner Rundle say that the Neighborhood Resources Department needed more people in the field to get the number of inspections per day down to a number that was doable.    

Commissioner Rundle said that was staff’s recommendation.

Debbie Van Saun, Assistant City Manager, said staff’s first choice was not the technical position or program improvements, but more of a permit processor and someone to help with the licensing program and the continuing education.

Commissioner Rundle said with his conversation with Tim Pinnick, Inspections Supervisor, it enabled shifting efforts around so that people could be more efficient.  He suggested trying to find a more effective way to get that average number of inspection down.

Vice Mayor Amyx asked if the discussion was about inspections on things like rental housing.

Commissioner Rundle said new construction.  He said he remembered getting in trouble once before by not understanding the jargon and he would rather toss this back to that department for additional information.

Commissioner Schauner said he thought the Continuing Education Licensing person was going to be essentially funded out of fees for that licensing.   

Van Saun said there would be some funding of the continuing education portion directly by the contractors.  She said there would be some administrative fee portion as well which would help off-set some of those costs. 

Commissioner Schauner asked if Victor Torres, Neighborhood Resources Director, believed that the cost of administering and licensing would exceed the license fee revenue. 

Van Saun said she thought Torres did not have that figure completely figured out.  The continuing education portion would be clearly covered, but she did not know if Torres had calculated the administrative fee to the penny or even close to match the staff expenditure time. 

b) Receive staff recommendation to publish 2006 Budget Summary and set August 9, 2005 as public hearing date.  Publication of the Proposed Budget 2006 Expenditures will establish the maximum limits of the 2006 budget. 

Mayor Highberger called for public comment on staff’s recommendation to publish the 2006 Budget Summary and set August 9, 2005 as the public hearing date. 

Moved by Hack, seconded by Hack, to authorize the publication of the 2006 Budget Summary and set August 9, 2005 as the public hearing date.  Motion carried unanimously.                (28)

Public Comment:  None                                                                                                                                                .

Moved by Schauner, seconded by Amyx, to adjourn at 9:10 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                               

APPROVED:

_____________________________

Dennis Highberger, Mayor

ATTEST:

___________________________________                                                                       

Frank S. Reeb, City Clerk

CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 26, 2005

1. Agreement – Wastewater Treatment Digesters to Nutri-ject Systems for $45,000.

2. Agreement – Riverfront & New Hamp parking structures to Walker Parking Consultants for $25,800.

3. Contract – 6 marked police cars equip with computer/radio systems for $64,931.

4. Contract – Pending FAA actions to Capitol Electric Construction for $179,660.30.

5. Ordinance No. 7910 – 1^st Read, reserve parking for persons wit disabilities 714 Alabama.

6. Ordinance No. 7911 – 1^st Read, 2 hour parking, 8 – 4 pm, mon-fri, Veteran’s Park between 18^th & 19^th.

7. Ordinance No. 7842 – 2^nd Read, rezone (Z-08-39-04) 19.282 acres, A to RS-2, E side of George Williams Way & W of Stoneridge Dr.

8. Ordinance No. 7861 – 2^nd Read, rezone (Z-12-54-04) 2.14 acre, RS-2 to PRD-1, 1535 Haskell Ave.

9. Ordinance No. 7887 – 2^nd Read, rezone (Z-03-18-05) .19 acre, C-5 to PCD-2, 3400 & 3434 S Iowa.

10. Site Plan – (SP-05-41-05) Jehovah’s Witness Congregation, 1802 E19th.

11. TSC –Parking – “reserved parking for persons with disabilities, 714 Alabama.

12. TSC – Parking – “2 hour parking”, 8 – 4 pm, mon-fri, Veteran’s Park between 18^th & 19^th.

13. Agreement – Encroachment, Partners in Grace on Perry & Lincoln rights-of-way.

14. Mortgage Release – 2218 Breckenridge, Leah D’Ercole.

15. Subordination Agreement – 2539 Ridge Ct, Sandra Sloop & Enrique  Penaloza.

16. City Manager’s Report – 23^rd St Access Mgmt.

17. Water & Sewer Bond Sale – Bid to Piper Jaffray for $10,811,651.76, interest rate 4.0229%

18. Ordinance No. 7909 – 1^st & 2^nd  Read,  issuance $25,910,000, water & sewage system refunding revenue bonds, Series 2005.

19. Resolution No. 6603 – authorize sale of GOB, Series 2005

20. Order of Vacation – Public Hearing, Stonegate IV Add, 10’ utility easement, Lots 4 & 5, Blk 3.

21. Order of Vacation – Public Hearing, Perry St., W of N 7^th , Smith’s Sub, N Lawrence,  city right-of-way.

22. UPR – Public Hearing (UPR-5-9-94) 805 Ohio, amend milestones.

23. Site Plan – (SP-05-40-05) 2 story office bldg, 4101 W 6^th.

24. Purchase Sale Barn – Burroughs Creek Corridor Plan.

25. Housing Trust Fund Board – recommendation discussion.

26. Ordinance No. 7899 – 1^st Read, sale of retail & CMB on Sunday’s.

27. 2006 City Manager’s Operating & Capital Improvement Budget.

28. 2006 Budget Summary – Aug 9, 2005 public hearing.