April 4, 2006
The Board of Commissioners of the City of Lawrence met in regular session at 5:45 p.m., in the City Commission Chambers in City Hall with Mayor Highberger presiding and members Amyx, Hack, Rundle, and Schauner present.
It was moved by Schauner, seconded by Hack, to the recess into executive session for the purpose of discussion of non-elected personnel matters until 6:15 p.m. The justification for the executive session was to keep personnel matters confidential at this time. Motion carried unanimously.
The Commission returned to regular session at 6:15 at which time it was moved by Schauner, seconded by Amyx, to recess until 6:35. Motion carried unanimously.
The Mayor called the meeting back to order at 6:35 p.m.
RECOGNITION/PROCLAMATION/PRESENTATION
With Commission approval Mayor Highberger proclaimed April 2nd – 8th, 2006, as “The Week of the Young Child”; the month of April as “Parkinson’s Disease Awareness Month” and “Fair Housing Month.”
CONSENT AGENDA
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to approve Lawrence-Douglas County Housing Authority Board Meeting minutes of February 27th, 2006. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx that the City Commission confirms the study session summary from March 29, 2006. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to approve claims to 318 vendors in the amount of $1,433,393.37 and payroll from March 19, 2006 to April 1, 2006, in the amount of $1,542,229.89. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to approve the Drinking Establishment Licenses to Chipotle Mexican Grill, 911 Massachusetts; Vermont Street BBQ, 728 Massachusetts; and the Class A Club License to Columbus Club, 2206 East 23rd. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to set bid opening date of April 25th, 2006, for the Comprehensive Rehabilitation Program located at 1514 Wedgewood Drive and 1619 East 18th Street. Motion carried unanimously. (1)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to set bid opening date of April 18th, 2006, for Project Number 12-SR5-306(C) 2006 Overlay Program, Phase 3. Motion carried unanimously. (2)
Ordinance 7981, [Z-12-81-05] rezoning 2.19 acres from RM-3 (Multiple Family Residential) District to RM-1 (Multiple-Family Residential) District, generally described as being located south of West 7th Street, east of Wisconsin Street, was read a second time. As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to adopt the ordinance. Aye: Amyx, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner. Nay: None. Motion carried unanimously. (3)
Ordinance 7982, [Z-10-67-05A] rezoning 1.22 acres from RM-1 (Multiple Family Residential) District to RS-2 (Single-Family Residential) District, generally described as being located at 446 Florida, 1500 and 1508 west 5th Street, was read a second time. As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to adopt the ordinance. Aye: Amyx, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner. Nay: None. Motion carried unanimously. (4)
Ordinance No. 7985, adopting the development code of the City of Lawrence, Kansas, November 11, 2005 Edition, text amendment (TA-10-05-04), was read a second time. As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to adopt the ordinance. Aye: Amyx, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner. Nay: None. Motion carried unanimously. (5)
Ordinance No. 7986, adopting the official zoning district map, pursuant to Chapter 20, Article 1, Section 108, of the Development Code of the City of Lawrence as adopted by Ordinance No.7985, (Z-10-49-04), was read a second time. As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to adopt the ordinance. Aye: Amyx, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner. Nay: None. Motion carried unanimously. (6)
Ordinance No. 7987, establishing “no parking” along the south side of Century Drive between Crestline Drive and Madeline Lane, and along the east side of the 600 Block of Connecticut Street, was read a second time. As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to adopt the ordinance. Aye: Amyx, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner. Nay: None. Motion carried unanimously. (7)
Ordinance No. 7783, annexing (A-12-14-03) approximately 119.9 acres, located south of K-10 Highway, between O’Connell Road and Franklin Road, was read a second time. As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to adopt the ordinance. Aye: Amyx, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner. Nay: None. Motion carried unanimously. (8)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to approve the site plan (SP-01-11-06) for the Polk Spec Building, for the construction of a 3600 square feet contractor office/shop facility with exterior storage area, located at 1200 East 11th Street, subject to the following conditions:
1. Execution of a site plan performance agreement per Section 20-1433;
2. Execution of a Floodplain Development Permit per Section 20-9A03;
3. Provision of correct fencing material for screening of outdoor storage areas, per Section 20-14A04.7;
4. The following revisions must be made to the plan:
a. Surfacing of storage area must be shown as pavement, with reference to gravel removed;
b. Driveway radius must be corrected;
c. Sanitary Sewer main must be shown on the Plan, with connection to the building; and,
d. SBC cable must be shown in its current location.
Motion carried unanimously. (9)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to approve the site plan (SP-02-13-06) for the Family Services Center Maintenance Storage, located at 1739 East 23rd Street, subject to the following conditions:
1. Submittal of a Site Plan Performance Agreement;
2. Submittal and approval of a Photometric Plan;
3. Submittal of an Agreement Not to Protest the Formation of a Benefit District for Sidewalk Improvements along East 23rd Street;
4. Revision of the site plan to include the following:
a. Inclusion of all mechanical units;
b. Inclusion of specific shrubbery, per the City’s landscape supervisor, to screen mechanical units and notation of this shrubbery in the landscape schedule;
c. The plant schedule should be revised to include all existing landscaping as noted in the 2000 site plan;
d. The dwarf burning bushes along the eastern side of the parking lot (running north-south) should be replaced with evergreen shrubs such as Sea Green Juniper ‘Juniperus Chinensis’ or Keteleeri Juniper (upright) per the conditions of the 2000 site plan and listing of this shrubbery in the plant schedule;
e. Replacement of (Juniperus Caenertii) ‘Pyramidal Green’ in the plant schedule with Juniperus Chinensis ‘Pyramidalis’;
f. Removal of the note “install laydown curb”;
g. Reduction of the width of the asphalt drive to 20 feet and revision of the impervious/pervious surface calculations;
h. Inclusion of specific locations of all new lighting for the maintenance building;
i. Inclusion of a trash enclosure which meets city standards;
j. Notation of whether or not the existing bicycle rack is located on a paved surface. A paved surface should be included if none exists now; and
k. Revision of the parking summary to include required and provided number of bicycle parking spaces.
Motion carried unanimously. (10)
As part of the consent agenda it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to approve a Temporary Use Permit Upon Review (TUPR-03-06-06) for Searchlight at Seabury Academy, 4120 Clinton Parkway on April 21st and 22nd, subject to the following conditions:
1. Obtain temporary sign permit from Neighborhood Resources Office, if temporary signs are used;
2. If signs are displayed in conjunction with this use they shall comply with City sign regulations and shall not be located on public right of way. Signs for this activity can only be displayed during hours of operation; and
3. The search light must be directed upward at an adequate angle so it does not impact the neighboring residences or streets. It may be shone from dark to 10:00 PM on the dates of the event.
Motion carried unanimously. (11)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to approve the purchase contract with Mary’s Lake Properties, L.L.C. for the City sale of approximately .45 acres and the City purchase of approximately 5.86 acres generally located immediately west of Mary’s Lake in the net amount of $268,000. Motion carried unanimously. (12)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Matrix Consulting Group for $85,000 for services associated with the development review process. Motion carried unanimously. (13)
As part of the Consent Agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Management Partners, Inc. for a not to exceed amount of $125,750 for consulting services and expenses to complete the development of performance measures and a balanced scorecard. Motion carried unanimously. (14)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to authorize the City Manager to enter into a service contract with Commission Fire Accreditation International, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $6,083 for design, development, and facilitation of a department strategic planning process. Motion carried unanimously. (15)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx to receive the request from Clark Cloan for the establishment of a recreational trail between Lawrence and Topeka; refer to draft resolution to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the Bicycle Advisory Board for review and recommendation before final consideration by the City Commission. Motion carried unanimously. (16)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx, to approve signs of community interest, a request from the Lawrence Region Antique Automobile Club of America to place directional and notification signs in various rights-of-way during The Lawrence Swap Meet from May 5-May 7, 2006. Motion carried unanimously. (17)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Rundle and seconded by Amyx, to authorize Mayor to execute the employment agreement with David Corliss, Interim City Manager. Motion carried unanimously. (18)
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT:
During the City Manager’s Report, David Corliss, Interim City Manager, said he had a brief report on the status of the relationship with rural water districts and wanted to highlight information in the report on performance auditing and the general concept of a city auditor. Mark Funkhouser, the auditor of Kansas City, Missouri, gave a presentation on his responsibilities and that position during a recent management team meeting.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
Receive comments from Mayor Dennis “Boog” Highberger.
Mayor Highberger comments were:
“It has been an honor and a privilege to serve as your Mayor this year. I only made one promise when I started my term: that this would be an interesting year. I think that this is another good reminder that you need to be careful what you ask for…
This had been a year of transitions. The past twelve months have seen the retirement or resignation of four of the city’s senior managers: Chief Jim McSwain of the Lawrence-Douglas County Fire and Medical Service, Utilities Director Roger Coffey, Planning Director Linda Finger, and City Manager Mike Wildgen. These four individuals, between them, count 115 years of service to the City of Lawrence. That is a tremendous amount of experience to lose in a single year, but each of these individuals has trained a great staff to carry on after them. It is a testament to their efforts and skills that each of their departments and city organization as a whole had functioned smoothly and have continued to strive for improvements in their absence.
Mike, Linda, Jim, Roger, if you are listening, I want you to know that I admire your service and dedication to this community and it was an honor to have had the opportunity to work with you and we also owe our thanks to the staff members who have filled in after you: Fire and Medical Chief Mark Bradford, Interim Utilities Director Chris Stewart, Interim Planning Director Sheila Stogsdill, and Acting City Manager David Corliss.
As with any year, there were tragedies, including the fire at the Boardwalk Apartments, in which three of our fellow citizens lost their lives, and the fatal shooting outside a downtown drinking establishment. As always, there were challenges and disappointments, such as the damaging winds that struck Lawrence a few weeks ago, the uncertainties over the capacity of the sewer collection system in the northwest area of the city (and we won’t even mention the NCAA tournament). However, during each of these events, our staff has risen to the occasion and performed admirably. Our fire and medical staff, along with many citizen volunteers responded quickly to prevent and even greater loss of life and injury during the Boardwalk fire. The Lawrence Police Department immediately responded with extraordinary efforts and was quickly able to identify and charge a suspect in the downtown shooting. Mere minutes after the recent microburst (or was it a tornado? This is something we will argue about for the next 20 years…) city staff and Public Works, Neighborhood Resources, and Parks and Recreation were on the street starting to clean up the damage. Each interim manager’s has had a crisis- except Sheila, but although there were transitions and tragedies, I think this has been primarily a year of progress and accomplishments.
Our city staff members received numerous well-deserved recognitions for their outstanding work this year. Lawrence became the tenth community in the nation to attain certification under the National Biosolids Partnership’s Environmental Management System program. Our city was the only city in the country to receive EPA and National Clean Water Act Recognition Awards, both for Operations and Maintenance Excellence and for Exemplary Biosolids Management. The Federal Transit Administration presented the Lawrence Transit System with its Award of Excellence. The ambulance of Lawrence-Douglas County Fire and Medical were certified outstanding by the Kansas Board of Emergency Medical Services, and the list goes on. I am very pleased to see that others around the state and around the nation have recognized that here in Lawrence, Kansas, we have dedicated, hard-working staff members who are committed to providing excellent city services.
In February, Lawrence was one of 8 cities selected by the American Institute of Architects to participate in its 2006 Sustainable Design Assessment Team Program. In the fall, a team of architects, planners, and other professionals will visit Lawrence to help start a visioning process that I believe will bring us together as a community around the goals that we share for our future. As of tonight, we have finally adopted a new development code, after a 6- year process, replacing our 40-year-old zoning code with a new code that is more user-friendly, is more suited to traditional neighborhoods, and incorporates many of the policies set out in Horizon 2020. We still have some work to do before the July 1 effective date of the new code, but the vast majority of the work has been done. With this step complete, we can move quickly to adopt additional code language that will allow us to grow in a way that creates more cohesive neighborhoods, safer streets, and makes better use with our land and public infrastructure.
In November, Lawrence hosted a first-ever regional transportation summit that brought representatives from several of our neighboring cities and counties here to discuss how we can work together to meet our regional transportation needs. The South Lawrence Trafficway remains unfunded, with the exception of the federal funding secured by Senator Roberts this year, but I believe that we have made progress toward finding community agreement on a solution that will respect our environment and our cultural heritage as well as better meet our local and regional transportation needs.
In January, we learned of plans for the largest private investment in the city’s history, the expansion of Berry Plastics, which will ultimately create 154 new jobs, all of which will pay a living wage. The Lawrence-Douglas County Bio-Science Authority has been formed and this partnership between the city, county, KU, and the Chamber of Commerce will soon start its efforts to help turn KU research into good local jobs. The Economic Development Board has presented a plan to acquire industrial land and open space, and the city and county will soon consider this proposal.
The city has taken steps to address the issue of homelessness in this community by creating the Community Commission on Homelessness and allocating funds for four new case managers. I am confident that in the coming budget year we will make further progress toward providing adequate shelter space and services to fellow citizens who are in need of housing assistance. In May, dozens of Lawrence citizens participated in a Community Housing Assessment Team process which resulted in recommendations for ways to improve the availability of affordable housing in Lawrence. The newly appointed Housing Needs Task Force will review those recommendations and assess other means for making sure that everyone who works in Lawrence can afford to live in Lawrence.
We are moving forward with plans for an expanded downtown public library and we should be ready for a public vote within the year. A new, larger location has been established for the Lawrence Farmer’s Market, and right-of-way acquisition has begun for the Burroughs Creek Rail Trail in East Lawrence. We have received the long-awaited North Lawrence drainage study, and during the next budget cycle we should take the first steps toward funding the recommended improvements. Lawrence has signed on to the U.S. Mayors’ Agreement on Climate Change and we will continue to make their city more resource and energy efficient.
In our 2006 budget we allocated an additional million dollars for street maintenance, and in upcoming budget discussions, I believe that we will take even bigger steps to improve the maintenance of our city streets. We are proceeding on schedule toward construction of a new water reclamation facility on the Wakarusa River and we are committed to resolving the questions that have arisen about the capacity of our sewage collection system in the northwest area of the city.
These are just some of the challenges and opportunities that we face as a thriving, growing city, but this Commission and all of the city staff are committed to rising up to meet these challenges and take advantage of these opportunities. I think it is finally time to put an end to the false dichotomy between growth and no-growth that we still hear and read so much about. Lawrence is growing and will continue to grow, but we must be sure that that growth is balanced growth, with a healthy mix of residential, commercial, and industrial expansion, and we must ensure that our growth is environmentally sustainable, is respectful of the cultural and historical heritage, and does not place an unreasonable burden on the residents and the businesses who are already here. Although we have our disagreements, I believe that all of my fellow Commissioners share those goals. It has been an honor to serve with all of them this past year and I can assure you that we are committed to working together to do the very best for Lawrence during this time of transition in city management.
Once again, it has been a true privilege to serve as mayor of this wild and wonderful city. Nonetheless, I look forward to joining the League of former Mayors and I very much look forward to serving under our once and future mayor, Mike Amyx. Under his leadership, I am confident that we will continue to make progress toward our common goals and that we will continue with our task of building a city that our grandchildren will love.”
Conduct election of new mayor.
Mayor Highberger called for nominations for the office of the Mayor.
Commissioner Hack nominated Mike Amyx as Mayor.
Moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to nominate Mike Amyx as Mayor. Motion carried unanimously. (19)
Conduct election of vice-mayor.
Mayor Amyx said it was an amazing feeling to be the Mayor of Lawrence after his first tenure as Mayor 20 years ago. He said it was a great opportunity to serve as “Boog” Highberger’s Vice Mayor and he had grown to admire Mayor Highberger. He said they had faced many interesting issues over the last year. One significant attribute of Mayor Highberger was that if the Mayor believed strongly in something, the Mayor made sure that everyone understood how important that issue was to him.
Mayor Amyx presented former Mayor Highberger with a plaque commemorating his outstanding leadership as the Mayor of the City of Lawrence, April 12, 2005 to April 4, 2006.
Mayor Amyx called for nominations for the office of Vice Mayor.
Commissioner Highberger nominated Sue Hack as Vice Mayor.
Moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to nominate Commissioner Hack as Vice Mayor. Motion carried unanimously. (20)
Comments were made from the Mayor and City Commissioners.
Mayor Amyx thanked his family and friends for attending the City Commission meeting. The City Commission’s votes meant a lot and he indicated that he would work hard this year for the City of Lawrence and that his energy would go to his family and to the City that he truly loved.
He assured the City Commissioners that no matter his personal view, he would always carry out the wishes of the majority of the City Commission and at the same time, respect the opinion of those in the minority. He thanked the citizens for their confidence in not only him, but in the City of Lawrence and its government. The citizen’s willingness to get involved, weighing in on issues that were important and sharing ideas, was appreciated. He said with everything that has happened, the City Commission needed to make sure they were able to fulfill the citizen’s wishes.
There were many wonderful things in this community that were a result of former City Manager, Mike Wildgen’s work and expressed his appreciation to Wildgen’s service to this community. He thanked Wildgen for creating a strong organization capable of meeting the needs of Lawrence and for assembling a staff that could keep things moving along. He said City staff, many of which were recognized by their peers and professional association for their expertise and knowledge, was truly professional.
The citizens of Lawrence could rest assured that their confidence was appreciated in city government. City government would continue to provide excellent services and keep implementing ideas necessary to make Lawrence a great place to live.
He said this City would keep running while the City Commission began one of the most critical processes of the coming year, the hiring of a new City Manager which demanded the full attention and energy of this Commission. He said they had started that process and would work diligently, in the coming months, to bring on board a new City Manager.
He said transition periods or times of change could be difficult. The old saying was that, “nobody liked change.” He said the key for Lawrence, during this transition, was to remember things would be okay. He said people might not like change, but they would be able to negotiate through the change and make that transition. He said city services would be in place, decisions would be made, actions would be taken, and business would go on.
The City Commission would tackle a significant list of issues and he looked forward to the challenge with this community. There was a long list of projects, issues, and wishes in which a priority system needed to be created for those projects that could be drawn to a conclusion. He said as former Mayor Highberger stated, the City needed statements of success for items, such as solutions to sewer problems in the northwest, the water reclamation facility, street repair, Southeast Area Plan, homelessness, economic development, open space, and the library. The Commission must identify their priorities and work to complete those projects.
At last week’s sewer summit, he suggested a possible creation of a working Public Utilities Board, which could be a possible solution bringing expertise to Lawrence. The repair and maintenance of streets needed a plan whether it was a 3, 5, or 10 year plan that would bring the City’s streets to an acceptable level of performance. The completion of the Southeast Area Plan was critical to moving ahead because topics such as industrial use and housing were affected by the completion of that plan; and homelessness would continue to be addressed by the City Commission.
He said he learned from former City Manager Buford Watson, during his first term on City Commission, that there was budget and there was money, but they were not the same thing and they needed to understand that thinking as part of their budget process. He said the City Budget was built on the Commission’s priorities. It was the one document that guided city operations and city staff throughout the year. The intricate details of the budget would not be a main focus during the budget process because that level of operation should be the responsibility of City staff and their expertise. He said the Commission must communicate their priorities clearly and early, which could result in a budget document that allowed those projects to move ahead.
He said two additional projects on the City’s list that needed prioritizing was the library and the economic development and open space, ECO2. If it was determined that those projects were priorities, those project should be addressed as soon as possible. He said the work on the topic of industrial development and greenspace involved many people and in moving forward they needed to be focused and work toward a conclusion.
As for the library, downtown would be affected by the future of the library that had a large potential impact for that project. There were many options to be examined before they arrived at a conclusion with the library project, but with everyone’s help, they would bring this item to the public within the next year.
The next important item on his list was the movement of traffic. The extension of 31st Street east of Haskell Avenue and its tie into K-10 Highway needed to be reviewed. Money had been allocated for funding for that project and suggested tapping into that resource and at minimum, for the next year, to begin planning for that connection. He said traffic impact and growth in the area would drive their decision.
He said the City Commission had to assign priorities to those projects to determine where the energy and funding was going to be placed. He said they had to know they were completing work on issues that were important to the community and as a result, could mark that project as completed. He said with this lengthy project list, he was going to ask his fellow Commissioners to weigh in on those issues again in the coming year. He said he wanted the Commissioners’ input on the priority of each of those items and wanted the next twelve months to be focused on completing those items.
He addressed the Commissioners and said he truly respected the differences of opinion. However, he respected the knowledge that each of the Commissioners’ held on a number of topics. This year, he was going to ask the Commission to funnel their expertise, passion, and energy into specific projects, and work with staff in letting them know what was needed to complete those projects. He said he would ask the Commission to take the opportunity to be involved in an issue, along with the staff to provide feedback, and be the sounding board so that when the Commission received recommendations, the Commission knew that they had contributed to the solutions.
In closing, he issued a challenge to the citizens of the City of Lawrence, Kansas. A challenge to meet his level of energy and share his desire to continue to have Lawrence be a great place to live. He said that it was the efforts of so many young unnamed volunteers, thinkers, and doers that contributed to the community. He said those contributions add up to the great things they all loved about Lawrence, Kansas. During the next 12 months, he looked forward to working with a community and for a community that would keep volunteering, contributing, and working to keep Lawrence a great place to live.
He thanked everyone that worked for the City. He said the city had very hard working staff and working crews, and the Commission was there just to make it better.
Vice Mayor Hack said she had the opportunity to visit with students at Free State High School and she was impressed with the young people in this community. So often, young people did not get the credit that they deserved for being our future and the wonderful contributions that they made. She wanted to thank those students that made her feel at home again in the classroom, but also to compliment them on their interest and concern for the community. She said they are truly fortunate in Lawrence to have facilities like the public schools that fostered that enthusiasm and genuine concern for Lawrence, Kansas.
She said serving with “Boog” Highberger had been a wonderful opportunity. She said they did not know each other before he was elected to the City Commission, and she was honored to serve with him. She said this was a man who had incredible fortitude, heart, concern, love, and caring for this community. She said he would fall on a sword for kids and would always do the right thing for children. She said he was also extremely committed to the City of Lawrence, Kansas. They were fortunate to have him on the Commission. She said he had a terrific sense of humor. She said her life was so much better for having “Boog” Highberger in it.
She said her fellow Commissioners did enjoy each other. She said she thought the Mayor had said it correctly, when they voted on something, they respected each others’ positions. She truly believed the Commission was a strong role model on how people could disagree without being disagreeable. She wanted to take a minute to thank staff because it had been a rollercoaster of a year and staff’s knowledge, experience and patience was remarkable.
She said Mayor Amyx outlined some of the issues that the Commission had on their plate, but they always had a lot on their plate. There were so many communities that would love to have the opportunity to build a new library, to continue to invest in downtown, to have citizen involvement. She said they were blessed in this community to have people who felt in their heart that their community was an important thing and would go to great lengths to protect their city.
She congratulated Mayor Amyx and thanked former Mayor Highberger. She thanked her two fellow Commissioners for their dedication and hard work to this community and their devotion to Lawrence, Kansas.
Commissioner Rundle thanked former Mayor Highberger for his energy, time, and extra work last year. He said he was looking forward to taking up the challenges that were placed on the table.
Commissioner Schauner echoed comments of both the Mayor and Vice Mayor Hack on Highberger’s tenure as Mayor. He said he had been fascinated to watch Highberger conduct meetings during difficult times. He always respected the fact that Highberger knew people by their first name and made a good personal connection with everybody.
He also wanted to congratulate Mayor Amyx on his new position. He said he thought it was going to be a great year. He said he wanted to focus on what they agreed on which would be a lot and they would move forward, but to the extent that they did not agree, he knew that would be accepted and they would continue to do good work.
He said he was reminded of a saying that he thought guided everyone which was “Be just and do good work.” He said if they could be just, do good work, and try to find a balance among all the competing interests, the Commission would have served the community well and left for themselves, a legacy that they could all be proud of.
He congratulated the former mayor and incoming mayor again.
Moved by Highberger, seconded by Rundle, to recess for approximately 20 minutes. Motion carried unanimously.
The Commission returned to regular session at 7:40 p.m.
Gwen Klingenberg, Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods, presented former Mayor Highberger with a framed certificate thanking him for his service to the City of Lawrence. She said they acknowledged his timeless efforts in addressing Lawrence’s need to grow and being there to protect that which made Lawrence, Kansas a unique community to which they could all be proud of.
Conduct public hearing on the following proposed special assessment benefit districts:
a) Public infrastructure for Delaware Street Commons.
David Corliss, Interim City Manager, presented the staff report for Delaware Street Commons Benefit District. He said this benefit district involved public improvements that were necessary to help facilitate this residential development. One of the policy issues that the City Commission identified in response to the request from the applicant was the City’s participation in those public improvements. The new development policy indicated that those public improvements would be paid 100% by the property owner. He said it was also noted the City had participated in public improvements for projects that included infill.
He said there was also further inquiry about the Kansas Neighborhood Revitalization Act. Staff was not proposing that they operate under the Neighborhood Revitalization Act in this instance, but it gave the Commission some idea about how that Act would work in projects like this one and it also responded to comments that this property would add property tax base to the community and how the Commission might want to consider that as they looked at the City financial participation question.
He said the City Commission’s action was to conduct the public hearing and staff would take action regarding the resolution. He said the resolution was written pursuant to the existing policy which was that all of the public improvements would be paid 100% by the benefit district.
Mayor Amyx called for public comment.
Rich Minder, representing the developer, Lawrence Co-Housing Group LC, said all of the evidence and information had been prepared by staff and he did not have too much to offer other than their builder had received bids and they had asked the builder to separate the public improvement portion of that bid. The bids received were $51,750 for those public improvements and design costs of $6,500 which brought that amount to $58,250. Their builder received bids from subcontractors for that work that were substantially less than the analysis they had entered into evidence. In financing their project, they were grateful there was an option for a benefit district and were relying on the benefit district as financing for their overall financing package.
Mayor Amyx said there were two different issues. First, establishing the benefit district and second, whether there would be City participation.
Minder said that was correct. He said with regard to the benefit district itself, they were planning on that benefit district as part of their financing package. With regard to City participation, he understood the Neighborhood Reinvestment Act as an option for tax rebates to developers in infill that would not necessarily be tied to benefit districts, but instead just for developments whether or not there was a benefit district or city participation at all. If they had a choice of what contributions the City could make in participating in this project, the Neighborhood Reinvestment Act route would be a lot less difficult than going out to bid. The builder had not indicated they would not have any problem coordinating with others, but they were looking at $190,000 versus $60,000.
Corliss said he thought earlier Minder indicated that he did not want to include Parcel 1, (northern lot) in the benefit district.
Minder said their preference was to include only Parcel 3 in the benefit district. He said they understood there was a rule of a 51% protest. He said if they only had one parcel owned by one owner, he asked how they could have a 51% protest vote. He asked if that necessitated they had at least 3 parcels in order to have a benefit district.
Corliss said no.
Minder said they really did not want Parcels 1 and 2 in the benefit district, but they did not want to wait for another hearing.
Corliss said those parcels could be removed, but property could not be added.
Minder said the problem was Tenants to Homeowners was the northern lot and it had been their intention that to include that area in their neighborhood association with easements and right-of-way in due course. It was not their intention to add to the cost of the development for Tenants to Homeowners.
Commissioner Highberger asked Minder if part of their benefit district was to construct a sidewalk that ends at Lot 2.
Minder said that was a public improvement that was a side improvement that they understood in the Final Development Plan that needed to be completed for the entire PRD. It was the developers’ obligation to construct that sidewalk for the entire PRD including the extension over to the property that would be developed eventually by Tenants to Homeowners in Phase II of the PRD development. He said that was part of the public improvements that directly benefit the other parcels, but it was hard to pick. He said as developers they were not interested in splitting hairs on how much of a sidewalk they had to allocate to those other partners in this entire deal.
Moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Amyx asked what the benefits of the Neighborhood Revitalization Act would have on this project.
Corliss said under the Revitalization Act, they had to establish a neighborhood plan, which was essentially this development. He said they had to indicate how this plan would achieve certain community goals. Then a public hearing would be conducted where the Commission would adopt the plan. Next, they would work with the County Appraiser to track the property taxes on that property as it went from its current vacant status to its completed construction status. If they wanted the City to be involved in the tax rebate, they would need to look at the city property tax increment that was attributed to the improvements, which would be going from vacant land to housing improvements, and that property tax increase would then be able to be rebated back to the property owner in a percentage of something above zero to 100%. He said what the Neighborhood Revitalization Act did was allowed them to provide incentives for improvements to properties.
Mayor Amyx asked if it was a lengthy process.
Corliss said it was lengthy, but it was independent of the public improvements. He said the public improvements under that scenario would proceed. He said the benefit district could still be created and 100% of the benefit district could be assessed to the property owner. If the request was for some type of public participation in order to offset the cost, in this case for the project, not just the public improvements, they would then determine what that appropriate public participation would be.
Commissioner Highberger asked if it was common for the Neighborhood Revitalization Act to be used for a single project.
Victor Torres, Director of Neighborhood Resources, said the act was typically applied to an area and not a particular development.
Commissioner Hack asked if there was anything in the Neighborhood Revitalization Act that prohibited it to be used for a specific development.
Torres said no, but typically it was an area plan.
Mayor Amyx said the City Commission was to consider the resolution that sets up that benefit district and whether the developer was to pay 100% of that benefit district. He suggested that they needed some kind of policy in place that made sense when looking at other projects to see how they would qualify.
Commissioner Schauner said they had talked about the Neighborhood Revitalization Act for a while and his personal preference would be that they not, without a more thoughtful approach to implementing an NRA, do that for this single project. He said he thought it was a device they needed to look at carefully and might have a very good upside in an area that was right for redevelopment or infill development. He said he was not opposed to including this project or area at some point, but it seemed they would not be thoughtful enough about an NRA application on this property.
He said he was not, at this juncture, ready to support moving away from the current policy of 100% benefit district going to the developer. He said he liked the project, but at the same time he did not want to make city policy because it was a big issue. He said he would like to visit about the NRA and how it might apply to this project. He did not hear Minder indicate that his project would not go forward if the City did not participate in the benefit district. He said his preference would be that to stay with the current benefit district policy, direct staff to bring forward a specific area map for NRA application, and move forward.
Commissioner Hack agreed. She said there were three things to discuss. First, was to discuss the benefit district. She agreed with Commissioner Schauner’s comment about deviating from the City’s development policy was not appropriate because that had not been done in like projects and setting a precedent for this project was not a good idea.
She said the Commission had discussed the NRA to the extent they could move forward with that idea in entire neighborhoods, which would be a great opportunity for the older neighborhoods of the city. She said every benefit district was different, but it might be helpful to ask staff to come back with some policy scenarios for benefit districts and infill projects.
Commissioner Highberger agreed. He said if the City changed its policy so there would be City participation in a project like this, they could come back and retroactively provide some support. He said he did not see substantial justification for City participation as opposed to other projects the Commission had seen. Although, he agreed with Commissioner Schauner that it was a great project and would be an asset to Lawrence. He said he supported the creation of the benefit district with no City participation. Regarding the parcels to be included in the benefit district, if the developer preferred just that single lot, then he supported that request.
Commissioner Rundle said other things were relevant to this project such as the East Lawrence Neighborhood Plan and since this was a Community Development Block Grant neighborhood, there might be a way to distinguish that area in the context of the NRA.
He asked staff if the Commission could revisit this issue of City participation if the City changed its policy.
Mayor Amyx asked Minder if he wanted only Parcel 3 included.
Minder said yes. He said for clarification, Tract A was removed from Lot 3. Tract A would not be part of the benefit district.
Corliss said staff would run that legal description by Minder for his review. He said all that parcel 3 included was Block 1, Lot 3, of Delaware Street Commons.
Moved by Schauner, seconded by Hack, to adopt Resolution No. 6637, as amended to include only Parcel 3, ordering the construction of public improvements in the Delaware Street Commons Project, including stormwater improvements, sidewalk construction and other necessary and appropriate improvements. Motion carried unanimously. (21)
Corliss said he understood the Commission was asking staff, as a future agenda item, to discuss infill, changes in the development policy, and the Neighborhood Revitalization Act. He said they had discussed those issues and it was determined that the Commission did not want to use that in a project that he was interested in pursuing downtown. He said the City Commission might want to make sure the City’s policy on infrastructure was appropriate.
Mayor Amyx noted that if the City Commission came up with some policy decision that dealt with infill development and City participation that the City Commission would consider this project in regards to City’s participation, once that policy was established.
Stoneridge, south of West 6th Street.
David Corliss, Interim City Manager, said the Stoneridge south of West 6th Street and north of West 6th Street were discussed on separate City Commission agendas where the City Commission indicated they wanted city participation in those districts because of the city-at- large costs pursuant to their development policy. The City Commission adopted Resolutions establishing the public hearings. He said the first benefit district discussion concerned Resolution No. 6638 which indicated improvements to Stoneridge, south of West 6th Street.
Phil Struble, Land Plan Engineering, said city participation in this project was for the extra widening of the intersection as it intersected West 6th Street in compliance with KDOT plans and construction for West 6th Street. He said above and beyond that all the rest of the costs were borne by adjacent property owners in the benefit district.
Moved by Highberger, seconded by Hack to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Moved by Hack, seconded by Rundle, to adopt Resolution No. 6638, ordering the construction of public improvements of Stoneridge Drive (formerly known as Fenceline Road) from the intersection of West 6th Street (U.S. Highway 40) south approximately 630 feet, including property acquisition, traffic calming/control devices, intersection improvements, bicycle facilities, subgrade stabilization, storm water improvements, waterlines and other necessary and appropriate improvements. Motion carried unanimously. (22)
b) Stoneridge, north of West 6th Street.
Corliss presented the staff report for the benefit district for Stoneridge, north of West 6th Street. He said Resolution 6639 established a public hearing to consider a special assessment benefit district for the improvement of Stoneridge north of West 6th Street. He said there were similar issues regarding City-at-large participation and that project involved a number of property owners including the City of Lawrence where the City was going to build a water tower at that location.
Korb Maxwell, Polsinelli Law Firm, representing the Turner family, said the Turner property was Tract 1 of the benefit district which was a 40 acre parcel that was on the eastern side of the proposed Stoneridge Drive. The parcel was currently used for agricultural uses and had been used for agricultural purposes and farming in the past and would continue to be used for agricultural purposes this year.
He said the Turner family supported this benefit district proposal and they thought it was an excellent idea. He said it would be the key piece to get that public infrastructure in before any development could happen for this parcel or any parcels around this. He said the caveat was that the other critical component of infrastructure that had to be at that location was sewers in that area. He said laying out how this benefit district proposal would work for Stoneridge Drive was that if the Resolution was approved tonight, design work would begin, construction, and the ultimate cost and assessments would be in a future ordinance, that ordinance would be passed and approved, and those assessments would be distributed out to the land owners in the area. The best case scenario or time line would be in November 2007, when property owners would begin seeing assessments, but more likely it would be in November 2008.
He said the concern was the timeline that they did not currently have was that of when the sewer issues and sewer solutions would be found on this area of town and if those would be online, ready, and available for sewer capacity by the time that those assessments come due. His concern was if those timelines would not match up and if the assessments would come due on the streets in November 2008 or earlier, if the work would go quickly, that rather hefty large assessments could become due on this property owner that currently had an agricultural piece of property that is gaining little to no income from the raising of crops on that property.
He asked for the ability for a contingency deferral agreement whereby if sewer capacity was not available by the time those assessments came due, that they could defer those assessments for a year or until the time that sewer capacity was due. He said he was not asking for a free ride, the Turner family would pay its 50% portion, its just they could end up delaying it with those deferrals until the time the sewer capacity would be due and this ground would be ready and proper for development.
Mayor Amyx asked Corliss about the time frame Maxwell described.
Corliss said the improvements that the City Commission had on the agenda to authorized proceeding would allow for that property to be sewered concurrent with their ability to develop that property. He said they would need to construct those streets as well as other infrastructure. Staff was committed to finding some good sewer solutions that would include property owner participation and some acceleration of some projects they already had in the pipeline for the community. He did not think there needed to be a deferral of the special assessments that would be on the Turner property. He thought they could put that deferral agreement issue back on an agenda when they were ready to bid this project, which would be after the design of the road project. He said he had comfort that by then, staff would have a very clear path on how they would proceed with sewers. He said he hoped they would have a clear path by next Tuesday. He said they had met to discuss solutions to present to the City Commission and the Commission could authorize staff to start proceeding with the implementation of those projects
Commissioner Rundle asked if he saw any relevance to this request for a contingency deferral and a deferral on the Collister tract on the south side for a prior benefit district. He said the Turner deferral proposition seemed it would be a much shorter window than the Collister proposal.
Corliss said it was a good analogy. He said the benefit districts that were approved on the south side of Stoneridge included the Collister tract on the east side. He said staff would be discussing with Collister again about a deferral agreement, because in that instance, there was a residence at that location or a farmstead. He said when special assessments had been deferred before it was because people had already been living at that location and the City had essentially had come to them and it was not development property. He said as Maxwell indicated the Turner tract was development property. He said he had the confidence that given the time frame of this project they were going to have to design it, build it, and by that time frame, they would be in good shape to be able to allow sewers at that location.
Mayor Amyx asked if it was Corliss’ suggestion to take up the deferral at the time of the design of the street.
Corliss suggested that when they came back with the design of the street, the City Commission direct staff to contact Maxwell to see whether Maxwell had the same concerns and if so, staff would bring that issue back on the agenda for discussion.
Maxwell said that was an excellent and acceptable solution to the Turner family. He said he just wanted to bring this issue forward because the timelines were not matching up and this was the statutory public hearing and he wanted to make sure they had an acceptable solution for his client.
Moved by Schauner seconded by Highberger, by to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Moved by Hack, seconded by Rundle, to adopt Resolution No. 6639, ordering the construction of public improvements of Stoneridge Drive from the intersection of West 6th Street (U.S. Highway 40) north approximately 1300 feet, including property acquisition, traffic calming/control devices, intersection improvements, bicycle facilities, subgrade stabilization, stormwater improvements, waterlines and other necessary and appropriate improvements. Motion carried unanimously. (23)
Consider rejecting the bids for the Project No. 15-CP4-404(C), Kasold Drive, West 22nd Street to Bob Billings Parkway, Street, Storm Sewer, Waterline Improvements, and establishing a new bid date of April 25th, 2006.
Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, presented the staff report. He said on March 21st staff opened bids for the Kasold project in which only two bids were received. The low bidder was R.D. Johnson Excavating with a total bid of approximately $6.4 million dollars. The engineer’s estimate was $5.2 million. The engineer had talked to city staff and the contractors to find out where the discrepancies were. One of the issues was the construction costs because those costs were continually rising. This project, because of the construction season, would extend into the 2007 season and the contractors had to project what those increasing costs might be.
He said for reference he had presented the City Commissioners with costs such as the cost of a barrel of oil which in 2005, the cost was $160; 2006 was $230; and, next year staff was projecting $320 a barrel. He said several rock quarries had consolidated and aggregate had increased considerably along with cement and fuel costs.
After discussions with both contractors, Bartlett & West and City staff, it was recommended that the bids be rejected and the project be rebid.
The following changes were recommended:
1. Delete 4” drainable base. During the design phase the drainable base was included as an additional component. Kleinfelder Geotechnical did complete a subsurface exploration and found no indications of groundwater in fourteen cores made. Additional discussions with the American Concrete Pavement Association and KDOT have indicated that with a treated base and the edge drain system that remains in the project, the drainable base is not necessary. The drainable base is challenging to work with as it is not a structural component and construction loads can cause the material to fail. Additional effort needs to be taken when using this material. Construction loads tend to expose weak areas in pavement subgrades. If we find an area that has a ground water problem, crushed stone can be added to provide drainage into the storm sewer.
2. Material change. Change 9” lime treated subgrade to 9” flyash treated subgrade. This will not affect the quality of the project in any way. The city uses flyash for base treatment as a standard on city streets.
3. Through ongoing discussions with neighboring residents we have eliminated the need for one area of retaining wall on the east side of the street.
4. Provide an equivalent asphalt pavement section as an alternative to concrete. This may also attract additional bidders.
He said none of these changes would significantly compromise the quality of the project and traffic would be maintained on Kasold and the sidewalk would be constructed. He said with the re-bid of this project, staff was looking at April 25th as the bid opening date, bringing the bids back with staff recommendation to the City Commission on May 4th with a recommendation to proceed on June 1st and the end date would be pushed out to October 6, 2007.
Mayor Amyx asked if the only change were those four recommendations from staff.
Soules said yes, along with minor changes.
Commissioner Highberger asked Soules if the changes staff was recommending would cost more money in the long run.
Soules said he did not think so.
Commissioner Rundle asked if there was anything that could be done to increase the number of bidders.
Soules said staff was surprised because there were 28 sets of plans, 6 general contractors looking at this project, and 21 people that attended the pre-bid meeting. He said he thought a lot of contractors would not want to tie equipment up for two seasons on this project, which might have had some effect on the bidding.
Commissioner Schauner said he had talked off the record for substituting asphalt for concrete even with a new mix specification. He said he thought he heard Soules state that over the life of the two, between the mill and overlay and the various overlay interruptions that the asphalt road life would have during its expected lifetime, they would see some additional costs with an asphalt road bed instead of concrete.
Soules said no, the asphalt lifecycles came in about 8% cheaper than the lifecycle of the concrete. He said that included the mill and overlay every ten years. He said both pavements would need crack seal and minor maintenance, but the big difference was the mill and overlay.
Commissioner Schauner asked if the overlay of the asphalt road would require additional costs and would that overlay take the place of other projects in the future.
Soules said the price was not insignificant. He said to mill and overlay four lanes of pavement from 15th to 22nd, would have a small impact.
Commissioner Schauner said what they knew was that asphalt, a petroleum based product, appeared to have no top to it in terms of cost.
Soules said not from what they had been told.
Commissioner Rundle said it seemed many of the streets did not last a full ten years before they needed to be milled and overlayed.
Soules said that they would get ten years out of that street using mill and overlay. They were anticipating a new mix design for this project and typically would use recycled asphalt product. He said staff felt confident the street would last 10 years before they had to do more work on that street.
Mayor Amyx said with the depth or thickness of the asphalt, they would be making a comparison to what would be equal to a concrete slab.
Soules said that was correct. Staff was looking at 12 inch asphalt versus 10 inch concrete.
Mayor Amyx asked if staff was asking to provide the asphalt pavement section as an alternative that could be used.
Soules said yes.
Commissioner Highberger asked when bids were sent out would the contractors be given an alternative on whether to bid on concrete or asphalt or would staff ask for both from each bidder.
Soules said he would like to ask for both. The downside of asking for both was that an asphalt contractor might not be attracted to the bid if they could not do concrete. He said the contractors spent a substantial amount of time putting their bids together for this project and somehow staff had to figure out how to get concrete and asphalt bids.
Commissioner Hack said when they mill and overlay a road, they knew the road had to close for a certain amount of time and she asked what similar issues there were with concrete. She asked if repair was needed, would the road have to be closed.
Soules said the mill and overlay process was done with traffic involved. He said the asphalt pavement machine took up a bigger area than the mill and overlay operations did. He said in the past they had kept one lane in each direction open or they could do that mill and overlay in the evening.
Commissioner Schauner said Soules made a comment about consolidation of quarries in the area and he asked the type of aggregate the City was using in their current specifications. He said he was thinking back to the fairly recent and negative experience with the use of softer rock and limestone for the City’s aggregate which proved to be a costly fix.
He said based on current prices of asphalt versus current installation of concrete, there was about an 8% cost difference over the expected life cycle of this roadway.
Soules said at present costs.
Commissioner Schauner asked how much of an increase in the price of asphalt would it take to consume the 8% differential.
Soules said he did not have that number at this time.
Mayor Amyx suggested that Soules find that number for the City Commission. He said it was recommended that when a concrete street began deteriorating, then the recommendation would be to mill and overlay that street.
Soules said that Kasold had been a concrete street for 40 years and when getting to the point of deterioration then they needed to overlay that street. He said they had 6 inches of asphalt over that concrete street, but he believed Kasold was only about a 6 inch concrete street when it was first established. He said if the concrete gets bad enough and deteriorates enough that was a cheap fix.
Mayor Amyx said that was a cheap fix that had been used a lot and had worked. He said he did not have any problems considering the four options that Soules had laid out but he wanted to make sure that they were comparing apples to apples and that all bidders understood what was going to be required. He said engineering estimates were going to be looked at a little closer through this project.
Soules said those requirements would be revised to reflect the current conditions.
Commissioner Rundle asked if there was any downside to cement or asphalt, or using both.
Soules said somehow staff needed to receive bids on concrete and asphalt.
Commissioner Schauner said it seemed to him that they were sending a note of discouragement to the concrete bidder right now if they were saying 8% was more expensive over the lifecycle of the road. He said he believed that this should be a concrete road versus an asphalt road. He said it did disincentive to the bidders and a disservice to the taxpayers to put in anything other than a road that had a long term value. He said he thought it should be bid as concrete. He said he did not have any objections to the other three conditions and he was trying to bring several years of driving experience on concrete versus asphalt. It did not make sense to do an asphalt road on Kasold
Soules said they had that discussion when doing the preliminary design report and they recommended concrete. He said Kasold was a major arterial street, but staff felt they needed to bring an alternative to the City Commission because that estimate was missed.
Commissioner Hack said that she appreciated the motivation behind giving alternatives. She said she agreed with Commissioner Schauner that even though they knew the treatment was better, a concrete road would serve them longer.
Mayor Amyx called for public comment.
Jack Rose, Lawrence, asked if keeping one road open was in the plan.
Commissioner Hack said yes. She said her concern was in 10 years what they would do, but there was no plan or conversation about not having one lane remain open.
Mayor Amyx said right now they were looking at rejecting the bids and recommending approval of the recommendations of the Public Director. He said the only problem he saw was with the winter and summer time conditions would have an effect on that street over time and the street, at some point, would need to be overlaid.
Commissioner Schauner said he supported the first three proposed changes, but he would like to have this bid as concrete.
Commissioner Rundle said he was leaning that way.
Mayor Amyx said he thought it was important that they really stay focused on building this street.
Moved by Schauner, seconded by Hack, to reject the bids for Kasold Drive, West 22nd Street to Bob Billings Parkway, Street, Storm Sewer, Waterline Improvements, and establish a new bid date of April 25th, 2006 and approve three of the four recommendations (excluding the recommendation to provide an equivalent asphalt pavement section as an alternative to concrete). Motion carried unanimously. (24)
Moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to recess the meeting until Thursday, April 6, 2006, at 8:00 a.m., at which time the Commission would recess in to executive session. Motion carried unanimously. (25)
The City Commission returned to regular session at 8am April 6, 2006. It was then moved by Schauner, seconded by Hack, to recess into executive session for one hour to discuss non-elected personnel matters. Motion carried unanimously.
The Commission returned from executive session at 9:00 am at which time it was moved by Hack, seconded by Rundle, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
APPROVED _____________________________
Dennis Highberger, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Frank S. Reeb, City Clerk
1. Bid Date – Comprehensive Rehab Program, 1514 Wedgewood & 1619 E 18th, April 25, 2006.
2. Bid Date – 2006 Overlay Program, Phase 3, April, 18, 2006.
3. Ordinance No. 7981 – 2nd Read, rezoning 2.19 acres from RM-3 District to RM-1 District.
4. Ordinance No. 7982 – 2nd Read, rezoning 1.22 acres from RM-1 District to RS-2 District.
5. Ordinance No. 7985 – 2nd Read, (TA-10-05-04) Development Code, November 11, 2005 Edition.
6. Ordinance No. 7986 – 2nd Read, (Z-10-49-04) Zoning Map, November 11, 2005 Edition.
7. Ordinance No. 7987 – 2nd Read, “No Parking” S side of Century between Crestline & Madeline & E side of 600 Blk of Conn.
8. Ordinance No. 7783 – 2nd Read, Annex (A-12-14-03) 119.9 acres, S of K-10 Highway, between O’Connell & Franklin.
9. Site plan – (SP-01-11-06) Polk Spec Bldg, 1200 E 11th.
10. Site plan – (SP-02-13-06) Family Svc Ctr Maintenance Storage, 1739 E. 23rd.
11. Temporary Use Permit – (TUPR-03-06-06) Searchlight at Seabury Academy, 4120 Clinton Pkwy.
12. Purchase contract – Mary’s Lake Properties City sale of .45 acres and purchase of 5.86 acres for $268,000.
13. Contract – Development review process with Matrix Consulting for $85,000.
14. Contract – Performance measures/balanced scorecard to Management Partners for $125,750.
15. Service Contract – Design/Development/Facilitation of strategic planning process with Commission of Fire Accreditation Intl’ for $6,083.
16. Recreational Trail – Request form Clark Cloan for trail established between Lawrence and Topeka.
17. Signs of community interest – Lawrence Region Antique Automobile Club of America, various rights-of-way.
18. Employment agreement –David Corliss, Interim City Manager.
19. Election of Mayor – Mike Amyx
20. Election of Vice Mayor – Mike Rundle.
21. Resolution 6637 – Benefit District Delaware Street Commons project.
22. Resolution 6638 – Benefit District Stoneridge, S of W 6th.
23. Resolution 6639 – Benefit District Stoneridge, N of W 6th.
24. Bids rejected – Kasold, W 22nd to Bob Billings Pkwy, new bid date April 25, 2006.
25. Commission Recess