MINUTES
FEBRUARY 5, 2004 – 6:30 P.M., CITY COMMISSION MEETING ROOM, FIRST FLOOR OF CITY HALL AT SIXTH AND MASSACHUSETTS STREET, LAWRENCE, KANSAS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Herndon, Mr. Goans, Mr. Henderson, Mr. Fizell and Mr. Santee
STAFF PRESENT: Mr. Guntert and Ms. Saker
ITEM NO. 1: COMMUNICATIONS
· Memo from Staff explaining request for an interpretation on the variance granted for the Jesus Christ Church of Latter-Day Saints property on W. 15th Street
· Letter from Sabatini & Associates requesting an extension to the variance granted for the Hobbs-Taylor Lofts
· No ex parte communications were disclosed
· No abstentions or deferrals were requested
ITEM NO. 2: MINUTES
One error was noted in the attendance section of the January 8, 2004 meeting minutes. Mr. Fizell had been in attendance, rather than Mr. Goans.
Motioned by Mr. Santee, seconded by Mr. Herndon to approve the January 2004 minutes as revised.
Motion carried 3-0-2, with Mr. Goans and Mr. Henderson abstaining due to their absence from the January meeting.
ITEM NO. 3: DELAWARE COMMONS PRD-2 DEVELOPMENT;
B-01-01-04: A request for a variance as provided in Section 20-1709.1 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Code of the City of Lawrence, Kansas, 2001. Said request is specifically to vary from the provisions of Section 20-1006(b) of said City Code, which requires proposed PRD, PCD, PID and POD developments to have direct access to a major thoroughfare or collector street as shown on the City’s comprehensive plan. The applicant is seeking this variance to allow development of the subject property under the guidelines of the PRD regulations using a local street as the access for the development. The request is for the following legally described property: Lots 1-4, Block 1, Final Plat of Delaware Commons Addition in the City of Lawrence, Douglas County, Kansas, containing approximately 3.2 acres. Said described property is generally located on the SE corner of E. 12th and Delaware Streets. Submitted by Rich Minder, Treasurer for Delaware Street Commons, LLC, property owner of record.
STAFF PRESENTATION
Mr. Guntert explained the request was for a variance from the requirement that planned unit developments take direct access to a major thoroughfare or collector. The nearest streets meeting this requirement would be 15th Street to the south or Connecticut Street to the west. Consequently, the applicant was requesting the variance to allow direct access to a local street.
It was clarified this was technically a request to renew the original variance, which had been approved twice before as requested but had expired. A Preliminary Development Plan had been submitted to Staff and would go before the Planning Commission later in February.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Rich Minder spoke as a member of Delaware Commons, LLC, property owner and applicant. Mr. Minder explained the variance had expired during delays in the development plan process. A Preliminary and Final Development Plan were now nearing completion.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No member of the public spoke regarding this Item.
BOARD DISCUSSION
It was commented that the Board had made this decision twice before and there was no reason to change their decision now.
ACTION TAKEN
Motioned by Mr. Goans, seconded by Mr. Henderson to approve the variance to allow the Delaware Commons planned unit development to take direct access on a local street.
Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
ITEM NO. 4: MISCELLANEOUS
A. Motioned by Chairman Herndon, seconded by Mr. Fizell to approve a 90-day extension to the height variance granted in July 2003 for the Hobbs-Taylor Lofts.
Motion carried unanimously, 5-0
B. It was discussed that this was a request for interpretation of the variance granted in January 2004 for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. During the engineering process, it was determined that more of the existing structure would have to be demolished than originally planned.
The applicant needed an interpretation from the Board about whether the variance granted would be valid for the additional demolition, since it had been conditioned to expire with demolition and redevelopment of the structure.
It was discussed that the intent of the condition had been meant to apply to a different reuse of the structure and that the applicant proposed to keep the final structure within the same general footprint as the Board had approved.
Staff suggested how a motion could be worded to convey the Board’s decision.
Motioned by Mr. Goans, seconded by Mr. Henderson to approve a determination that the proposed demolition and addition within the same overall footprint was in conformance with the intent of the Board’s previous action.
Motion carried unanimously, 5-0
3. It was discussed that the HRC had a regular Item on their agenda to provide comment on any BZA items that involved a historic property, whether or not that project would be on their own agenda.
Related to this issue, Mr. Goans explained he had discussed with Staff the order in which the HRC and BZA would hear Items that appeared on both of their agendas (which body heard it first). It was his understanding from these discussions that it was Staff’s intent to return to the policy – somewhat lost with the temporary absence of a Historic Resources Administrator – that the HRC should hear these issues before the BZA considered a request for the same property.
Official minutes are on file in the Planning Department Office.