February 6, 2007

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 Amyx presiding and members Highberger, Hack, Rundle, and Schauner present.

CONSENT AGENDA

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to approve the City Commission meeting minutes from January 16^th, 2007.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to receive the Planning Commission meeting minutes of December 18 – 20, 2006; the Hospital Board meeting minutes of December 20, 2006; the Lawrence-Douglas County Housing Authority Board meeting minutes of December 18, 2006; the Arts Commission meeting minutes of September 12, October 11, November 8, and December 13, 2006; the Aviation Advisory Board meeting of December 6, 2006; the Mechanical Code Board of Appeals meeting of November 8, 2006; the Building Code Board of Appeals meeting of October 19, 2006; the Board of Plumbers and Pipe Fitters meeting minutes of July 12, October 18^th, and November 3^rd, 2006; the Neighborhood Resources Advisory Committee meeting minutes of December 14, 2006; the Community Commission on Homelessness meetings of December 7, and December 12^th, 2006; the Housing Practitioners Panel meeting of October 5, 2006; and the Housing Needs Task Force meetings of November 15 and December 13^th, 2006.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to approve claims to 777 vendors in the amount of $6,589,908.30 and payroll from January 21st, 2007, to February 3, 2007, in the amount of $1,707,882.61.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to approve the Drinking Establishment License to Gaslight Tavern & Coffeehouse, 371 North 2^nd; La Tropicana Restaurant, 434 Locust; Ole Tapas, 1008 Massachusetts; Stu’s Midtown Tavern, 925 Iowa; Pachamamas, 2161 Quail Creek Drive; Pachamamas, 800 New Hampshire; Replay Lounge, 946 Massachusetts; and Jackpot Music Hall, 943 Massachusetts; and; and Taxi Cab License to Jayhawk Taxi, 504 John Doy Court.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to authorize the City Manager to sign an Engineering Services Agreement with BG Consultants, Inc., to design the 14^th and Tennessee Sanitary Sewer Replacement project, in the amount of $28,443.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                          (1)

The City Commission reviewed the bids for collection, disposal and technical assistance for household hazardous waste for the Waste Reduction and recycling Division.  The bids were:

BIDDER                                  BID AMOUNT           

                        PSC Environmental Services                     $53,094

                        Heritage Environmental Services, LLC    $53,589

                        Veolia Environmental Services                  $63,638

                        Clean Harbors Environmental Services   $68,702

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to award the bid to PSC Environmental Services, in the amount of $53,094.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                      (2)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to place on first reading Ordinance No. 8076, amending the franchise fee for AT&T local telephone service.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                      (3)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to place on first reading Ordinance No. 8073, establishing right-of-way use regulations for investor-owned utilities without right-of-way management requirements in franchise agreements.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                           (4)

Ordinance No. 8075, for special use permit SUP-10-04-06, authorizing a special use permit for certain property located at 917 Delaware Street, Lawrence, KS, was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to adopt the ordinance.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                          (5)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to adopt Resolution No. 6698, establishing a public hearing date of February 27, 2007 for the improvement of Oregon Trail Park.  Motion carried unanimously.                                              (6)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to adopt Resolution No. 6700, for construction of Project No. 5-GI1-105(S) for the improvement of the 23^rd Street (K-10) and Harper Street intersection.  Motion carried unanimously.            (7)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to receive correspondence from KDOT regarding Federal-Aid Safety Program.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                          (8)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to concur with the Planning Commission’s recommendations to approve the Final Plat (PF-12-33-06) for East Hills Business Park No. 4, a one-lot industrial subdivision containing approximately 12.907 acres, located at 3841 Greenway Circle; and accept the dedication of easements and rights-of-way subject to the following conditions:

1. Provision of the following fees and recording documentation:

a) A current copy of a paid property tax receipt.

b) An approved Master Street Tree Plan in accordance with Section 21-708a.3.

c) An Agreement Not to Protest a Benefit District for Street and Sidewalk Improvements to Noria Road.

d) Recording fees made payable to the Douglas County Register of Deeds.

2. Submittal of a Temporary Utility Agreement.

3. Submittal of Public Improvement Plans for the construction of sidewalks, if the sidewalk is placed within the right-of-way. If the sidewalks cannot be placed within the right-of-way, pedestrian easements will need to be shown on the plat.

4. Revision of the plat to include the following:

a) A 10-foot wide utility easement along the north side of the lot.

b) A minimum elevation for building opening (MEBO) for the lot.

Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                              (9)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to concur with the Planning Commission’s recommendations to approve the Final Plat (PF-12-34-06) for 6^th and Walnut Addition, a three-lot industrial subdivision containing approximately 2.731 acres, located at 602 Walnut Street; and accept the dedication of easements and rights-of-way subject to the following conditions:

1. Submission of Public Improvement Plans showing provision of public sanitary sewer service for Lots 2 and 3 in the event the City Commission denies the associated request for a variance from Chapter 19, Section 214 of the City Code;

2. Provision of the following fees and documentation:

a. Recording fees made payable to the Douglas County Register of Deeds.

b. Copy of paid tax receipt.

c. Submission of Master Street Tree Plan graphic.

d. Execution of an Agreement Not to Protest the formation of a Benefit District for street and sidewalk improvements along Walnut Street.

e. Execution of Use of Right-of-Way Agreement for Lot 1.

Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                            (10)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to receive status report on UPR-09-06-05:  Lawrence Community Shelter UPR.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                      (11)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to receive the 2006 fourth quarter report from Downtown Lawrence, Inc.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                              (12)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to receive recommendation from the Recycling and Resource Conservation Advisory Board to expand the City of Lawrence’s Pesticide-Free Park System.  Motion carried unanimously.    (13)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to receive Housing Needs Task Force Interim Report.  Motion carried unanimously.           (14)

Mayor Amyx pulled from the consent agenda the request from Downtown Lawrence, Inc., to waive the written consent of the adjacent owner or tenant requirement for DLI’s application for use of right-of-way.  He said in the past they have had some store owners and other folks in downtown who wanted to be a part of the Sidewalk Sale and were not members of DLI and have granted requests for them to use the right-of-way also.  He said the only reason he brought it up was because this item ought to be a regular agenda item.  He said it would be a regular agenda item for the meeting on February 13^th.                                                              (15)

CITY MANAGER’S REPORT:

During the City Manager’s Report, David Corliss said they did receive some information from KDOT about some other transportation funding.  He said they did another year of clean surfacing and they were going to be using that money in state fiscal year 2009 to resurface 23^rd Street between Iowa and Louisiana.  He said they received a letter of denial from KDOT on the economic development projects for the intersection of K-10 and Franklin Road and for improvements for 6^th Street between Monterey Way and Folks Road.  He said they still thought those were valuable projects and would continue those on their capital improvement plan and would continue to look for other funding sources to help them with surface transportation needs. 

He said the rest of the report included some information about the stormwater division.  He said storm water was not only just quantity issues for stormwater but also dealt with quality issues and there was a report from the stormwater division from the Public Works Department that talked about that issue.  He said Jonathan Douglass was coordinating their efforts to make an application from All America City Award and they were going to be seeking additional assistance from a number of other community partners and there was information about those efforts to date and would try to celebrate a number of achievements they have in the community.  He said the City was recognized, in regards to some of their in house inspection programs, that they have conducted in the Utility Department and there was a link to an article in a trade magazine that was also highlighted in the report.                                                      (16)

REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: 

Conduct public hearing to consider the vacation of utility easements (two 8’ utility easements) located between Lot 4 and Lot 5, Block 4, of West Hills Addition as requested by Stephen N. Six.

            Mayor Amyx called a public hearing to consider the vacation of a utility easement located between Lot 4 and Lot 5, Block 4, of West Hills Addition.

Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, presented the staff report.  He said Lot 4 and Lot 5 were owned by Mr. Stephen Six.  He said Mr. Six actually owned the south half of Lot 4 and Lot 5.  He said there were basically two 8 foot utility easements on either side of those platted property lines.  He said it looked like when the addition was platted; all the lot lines received an 8 foot easement.  He said all the utilities were in and they were not using these easements.  He said all the adjacent neighbors were notified and no one had any objections with this.  He said Mr. Six was here to answer any questions otherwise their action tonight would be to hold the public hearing, and pending comments, approve the Order of Vacation. 

Mayor Amyx said if he understood right, those 8 foot utility easements ran side by side. 

Soules said yes.  He said there were two of them; it was a 16 foot total but there was 8 foot utility easement on the south side of Lot 4 and an 8 foot utility easement on the north side of Lot 5.

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

Moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to approve the Order of Vacation of utility easements (two 8’ utility easements) located between Lot 4 and Lot 5, Block 4, of West Hills Addition as requested by Stephen N. Six.  Motion carried unanimously.                                (17)

Consider the following items related to the re-establishment of a benefit district for the construction of Stoneridge Drive north and south of 6^th Street.

a)         Conduct public hearing.  Consider adopting Resolution No. 6701 and Resolution No. 6702.

b) Consider authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with LandPlan Engineering in the amount of $17,500, for design services for the signalization of 6^th Street and Stoneridge Drive.

Mayor Amyx called a public hearing to re-establish a benefit district for the construction of Stoneridge Drive north and south of 6^th Street.

Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, presented the staff report.  He said it all involved Stoneridge Drive and back last April they had a discussion about this.  He said Stoneridge Drive to the north and Stoneridge Drive to the south were two separate benefit districts for the north half and south half.  He said they had some issues come up and needed to reestablish the benefit districts because of increase in costs.  He said several reasons were for when they started their preliminary engineering, they reevaluated the traffic reports and traffic impact studies that were provided with these tracts and they did an overall traffic study for the whole area and what they found was within the next two years, they believe the area was going to be built out enough that they will warrant traffic signals.  He said they do not want to have to come back in two years and put traffic signals in.  He said they have always known that when Stoneridge, Queens Road, George Williams Way went in, traffic signals would be needed for those intersections.   He said they talked with KDOT and typically KDOT will not allow signals in until after they have the warrants made and there was an agreement that instead of building the intersections two or three times, they should build it the first time and build it right.  He said they were adding traffic signals to the benefit districts.  He said additionally, they were adding right turn lanes so they could get people out of the through lanes of traffic so they could make those turns safely without stopping or slowing down to make those right turns into the southern portion or the northern portion. 

He said during the preliminary engineering on the north side, they also did some borings and found there was more rock than they anticipated, so they increased the cost based on some additional rock excavation that would be needed.  He said some of these tracts have plats that have been approved, but have not been filed yet and until the preliminary plans for internal improvements for the roads like Oregon Trail were filed, they did not have right-of-way.  He said additionally there were some other tracts and the cost of property they may have to acquire some additional right-of-way, so additional right-of-way costs have been added.  He said all of these things basically led up to increase cost and last year they saw a tremendous increase in construction prices. He said instead of bidding the projects and finding out after they bid them that the estimates were too low, they have gone back and decided they needed to bring it back to the Commission and the property owners that the cost may exceed what they have previously estimated and these were the new estimates.

He said the City did own Tract 3, so their costs were increasing as a property owner on Tract 3 as well.  He said they did have additional costs that have been capped, but for the additional widths at the end of intersections for turning lanes.

He said they did have on the agenda as well, and with public discussion and comment and Commission directions, a contract with LandPlan to go ahead and provide the engineering services for the signalization of that intersection if the Commission desired. 

Commissioner Rundle asked if tonight’s action was to just re-establish the benefit district and there would be hearings later.

Soules said this was a public hearing to reestablish the benefit districts.

Corliss said they have a valid benefit district that essentially the dollar amount was too low, so they have not changed any of the other parameters of the benefit district including the City’s maximum dollar participation.  He said they were changing the dollar amount and would be the additional assessments on the properties and different benefit districts.  He also mentioned, because there were some property owners who might be interested in this on the north side of 6^th Street at the immediate southeast corner of what would be 6^th and Stoneridge, the City owned approximately 3 acres and that would be the location for an elevated water storage tank.  He said they have seen some of the agenda items for the approval of that engineering design, but that project was proceeding and was likely they would bid it later this year and would see construction later this year and into 2008.

Commissioner Schauner asked if these benefit district costs were assessed on a square foot basis.

Soules said they were assessed initially based on front footage basis for Stoneridge, and then as these tracts developed, they would be spread on square footage basis.

Commissioner Schauner asked if they were spread on future homeowners.

Soules said yes.

Corliss said the other item was, as they did with George Williams Way, on the Collister tract, what they were going to do was do a deferral agreement with the property owner, similar to what they did on George Williams Way, and that the City would pay the special assessment costs that would be assessed on that property until such time as that property chose to develop at which time all those costs would be due.

Commissioner Schauner asked about the acquisition of right-of-way costs for the Collister tract.

Corliss said they would anticipate that unless it was donated, and he did not anticipate that it would be donated, they would pay the value of the right-of-way for the Collister tract.

Commissioner Schauner asked if they would pay that as the construction began instead of deferring that payment until such time as the taxes were due.

Corliss said correct.  He said it would be a benefit district cost.  He said the benefit district for Stoneridge south of 6^th Street would pay for that property acquisition.

Commissioner Schauner said it would pay for it up front as opposed to deferring that payment until such time.

Corliss said that was correct.  He said the property owner would be paid for that acquisition prior to bidding the project, they would close on that transaction and pay for that right-of-way acquisition.

Commissioner Rundle asked if this was a major thoroughfare and was the entire benefit of the traffic signal to those properties.

Soules said what they did with the traffic signals were basically Stoneridge north would pay for 50% and Stoneridge south would pay for 50%. 

Commissioner Rundle it seemed there were other property owners that benefited from that traffic signal.

Commissioner Schauner asked for the cost of the deceleration lanes.

Corliss said it was the widening of Stoneridge at that intersection.  He said this project somewhat lapped over their change on how they were approaching the capital improvement budget.  He said they would see in correspondence files in the City Manager’s Report next week where they have communicated to the development community and the neighborhoods that now was the time for them to submit capital improvement budget requests.  He said they were familiar with the fact that they told the development community and others that if they want benefit district financial participation from the City, they needed to participate with other capital improvement projects.  He said this project essentially got started before they had established that rule. He said when they get to George Williams Way and that improvement; they indicated that in their 2007 capital improvement budget, they had $200,000 for that road improvement and that intersection improvement.  He said they did not have any additional funds in their capital improvement budget for this capital improvement project.  He said if they increase the debt capacity of more than $5 million per year, they would have a mill levy increase so what they were trying to do was watch that number.

Mayor Amyx said they worked hard at the time of platting process and rezoning processes as a development started to occur to have agreements not to protest benefit districts for signalization on these particular intersections. 

Soules said that was correct. 

Mayor Amyx opened the public hearing. 

Chris Collister, owner of Tract 1 in the Stoneridge Drive South benefit district, said last summer when she spoke to the City Commission, she talked about her belief that the cost allocation methodology that was proposed in the benefit district, that of using the frontage foot along the road they were putting in was completely arbitrary and totally unfair to her property.  She said she continued to believe that and there was nothing different in the cost allocation methodology being proposed in this benefit district than there was in last summer’s proposal.  She said she had 40% of the land in the total benefit district, yet her land was asked to be responsible for 50% of the cost which was almost $700,000.  She said her property would be held responsible for $77,345 for every acre that she had in the benefit district while each acre in Tract 2 would be responsible for only $50,408 per acre.  She said she was being asked to pay 54% more per acre than Tract 2 for something she never wanted to be a part of in the first place.  She said she simply did not understand how that was fair.  She said it seemed to her that a method based on relative square feet or relative area within the total benefit district was more fair to everyone.  She said she kept hearing the phrase that those that benefit from some improvement ought to pay for it, and she did not have a problem with that and believed that, but just believed she was being asked repeatedly to pay more than her fair share.  She said if everyone who would actually benefit from this road and these signals in the turning lanes wanted to be a part of the benefit district, there would be a lot more of them than just two.  She said the new features that Chuck just discussed, the signals and the turning lanes, were safety features that they added to the benefit district this time, and was more than last summer’s, and suddenly they were concerned about safety for every single person that drove down 6^th Street or came up the new Stoneridge Drive.  She said she apologized if her attitude showed here, but she would simply like someone to be concerned about her safety and the safety of her property.  She said there have been several times already this winter when the Stoneridge Drive south that she drove to get to and from her property had been totally impassable. She said she could not get up and down it with front wheel drive and four wheel drive trucks could not get up and down it. She said the mail person could not get it in and the propane truck could not get it.  She said no one could get in or out.  She said if they would have needed an ambulance or fire truck, she would have been out of luck at that time.  She said she was being asked in this current benefit district for the safety of a lot of different people and would like someone to be concerned about herself and her property.  She said there were times they had to park at the top of Stoneridge Drive just inside the diamond shaped barricades to keep people from going in and out and leave the vehicles there and hike in and out, hoping no one would bother the vehicle over night and the next day to leave they had to bundle up and hike out again.   

She said last summer she pointed out to the Commission that many of the big beneficiaries of the new Stoneridge Drive south were all of the folks living in the 120 acres south of the benefit district.  She said all of that had been allowed to be developed without Stoneridge Drive being in place, and those are hundreds of people that would benefit from this.  She said when she suggested last summer that she did not see why they should be contributing to the benefit district to make that connection for them to get out on 6^th Street, she was told they have paid for the streets in front of their house.  She said they certainly have not contributed to anything toward the traffic signals and the turning lanes or any of the new safety features that have been added to this benefit district and saw absolutely no good reason why they should not contribute to help pay for the safety and benefits they would need to derive from this district.  She said she could not think of a reason why they should be asked to.  She said they should let those who benefit from the investment really help pay for it.  She said again, back to the first conversation she had with Chuck about this, he pointed out to her when George Williams Way benefit district for the signals was put in, she was not included in that and was aware of that and had she been, she would have been talking to them like she was tonight.  She said she thought she was being asked to pay more than her fair share, she did not mind paying some, but thought what she was being asked to pay was more than her fair share and there were a lot more people out there who were going to get benefit from this and were not asked to pay a dime. 

She thanked Chuck Soules and Dave Corliss for keeping her in the loop on this and they had been thoughtful and e-mails and phone calls and letters and she appreciated that.  She said she wanted them all to know that.

It was moved by Hack, seconded by Schauner, to close the public hearing.  Motion carried unanimously.           

Mayor Amyx said they had been through this before, when the assessment method being either on a front footage or square foot basis.  He said 50% of the signalization cost of that intersection was going to be paid by Tract 1; tract 4 to the north, and then the City’s part and then 50% was to be paid on the south.  He asked how many acres were there in the areas to the north as compared to the acreage to the south of 6^th Street.

Soules said he could not give an exact number on that.

Mayor Amyx said the reason why he brought that up was obviously it was a lot larger property area to the north than it was to the south and the big thing he was looking at was for him to proceed at this point, he needed to know what the difference of the allocation costs on those properties if they were looking at an assessment based on square foot on all of that.  He said he knew that was different than what they had ever done.  He said Ms. Collister brought in an important part.  He said he saw the difference in the amount of the assessment and how it was to be spread.  He said he thought there was benefit to Tracts 1 and 2 to the south with the signalization and the improvements that were made.  He said the spreading of the assessment was what he saw as being the difference because of the amount of land on the side it could be spread to and since there were additional costs that they have found and that they did it different last summer on the method, he thought in fairness he had to look at that before he could proceed with this.  He said they have held the required public hearing on the item so they would not have to do that again, but would like to have that information.

Commissioner Schauner said they had a number of discussions on a number of projects on front footage versus square footage. 

Mayor Amyx said what he was saying was if they looked at the map, 50% of the cost of the signalization was going to be split between Tract 1 and Tract 2 on the south, and then the big tracts to the north and it seemed to him if they were looking at front footage versus land area, the assessments go either way.

Commissioner Highberger said they were discussing allocation of 50% on the south of Tract 1 and Tract 2 and did not recall they had detailed discussion about allocation and 50% north and south. 

Corliss said they did not because they were not talking about the traffic signal.

Commissioner Rundle asked if the little section to the south of Tract 2 was excluded the last time they had this before them. 

Mayor Amyx said he thought it was already there because the payment had already been made by a developer to the stub to the south. 

Corliss said that was correct.  He said Stoneridge Drive went all the way north and terminated at essentially where the southern tip of the Collister track ended. 

Vice Mayor Hack said the portion to Tract 1 had already been paid.

Corliss said it had been paid for by the developers and property owners in that area.  He said it was privately financed and there was no city at large participation on that street.

Mayor Amyx said now because of the signalization they want to require at that intersection and the assessment on that and the amount of area that was to be spread across, they were looking at doing front footage as the assessment on the roadway.  He said he thought it would be wise in looking at that at least the square footage assessment of what that would be because it would have to be a different amount. 

Corliss said they could get that information and share it with the property owners. 

Commissioner Schauner asked if there would be the same differential per acre on the north side of 6^th between Tracts 1 thru 4 that they could use the square footage basis versus a frontage foot basis.  He said it seemed to him to treat both sides of this street the same way, whether it was running front foot or square foot.  He said he had some difficulty in treating the south side in one fashion and the north side in another unless there was some compelling reason to do that.

Mayor Amyx said one of the reasons he brought it up was because they needed to look at what the assessment would be because they were charging both sides of the street the same percentage; the north side would pay for half and the south side would pay for half, but the land area to the north was a lot greater to spread assessment across versus the area to the south. 

He suggested these items be deferred until staff provides additional information on the benefit district costs if they were done on a square footage basis. 

Corliss said they would do that and would talk with Chris Collister when it was convenient for her if she wanted to be here because she lived out of town.

Commissioner Rundle said the benefit was not just down to those properties, as Chris pointed out.  He said he thought if and when they got into an impact fee system, they would be able to spread those costs to the entire area that benefited.  He said he did not think front footage was fair and there was no way to do math to show him that it was.  He said he found in at least one other community, all benefit districts were done on square footage of this nature and if that was the norm, then they ought to make it their norm.

Commissioner Schauner said at least having an alternative option would make sense.

Vice Mayor Hack said she would agree with the comments made by Commissioner Rundle earlier that there was certainly some city at large benefit to the signalization as well and perhaps some information on the cost of that and determined that the City would not be a participant other than the right-of-way, and how that compared to other intersections done before would be helpful.

Corliss said they would put together some information on that as well. 

Commissioner Schauner asked what the proposed cost of signalization was.

Soules said they have estimated $400,000, $200,000 per side of the traffic signal.

Commissioner Schauner asked if that was just for the signalization.

Soules said it was for the signal, cabinet, wiring and signal insulation.  He said the conduits were in for the wiring, electrical, computer cabinet.

Moved by Schauner, seconded by Hack, to defer adoption of Resolutions 6701 and 6702 and to defer authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement with LandPlan Engineering, all until there is information from staff on the comparison of assessing costs on a  square footage assessment method compared to a front footage basis.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                (18)

Receive presentation from PlaceMakers regarding the Traditional Neighborhood Design charrette.

Susan Henderson, PlaceMakers, presented the report regarding the Traditional Neighborhood Design.  She said she did not know when they had been involved in a community that had such amazingly active support.  She said the City had a phenomenal number of concerned citizens which said a lot for how wonderful the City was.  She said looking at Downtown and the historic neighborhoods, they understood that they were not coming into a clean slate, like they were sometimes, they were coming into years and years of dedication and hard work, which did not happen easily and she congratulated them on their perseverance and dedication to maintaining a healthy, walkable, loveable city and she applauded them on that because they go a lot of places and rarely see a place this nice. 

She said what they were proposing with the Smart Code, she was going to begin with a very brief overview to the concept of the organizing engine of the Smart Code, which was something referred to as a transect.  She said as they moved through different portions of the landscape, they moved through distinctively different eco zones and in each one different things happened.  She said the human transect should be the same.  She said it was rural to urban environment, so there was an appropriate place for everything.  She said another illustration showed that on the far left was the most rural, the wilderness, next was farmland, next suburban, then a general urban, urban center and finally urban core.  She said what they found in their observation of Lawrence, it tended to fall between the wilderness, T1, and the urban center, T5, which was like Mass. Street.  She said T6, the urban core, was like Kansas City and really did not occur here and she was not suggesting that it would.  She said as opposed to that, this (referring an image on the video screen) was what they had been doing in the last 50 years of the United States and the reason why they hired them.  She said the sprawl patterns they had seen in America in the last 50 – 75 years was built on mono cultures, where only one thing or pattern happened at a time and was based on use rather than form.  She said as they saw in the rural, the large lot, the suburban, the higher density residential and even once they got into commercial uses, everything was in pods and there was no integration or walk ability.  She said it was the opposite of Mass. Street and their historic neighborhoods.  She said it was not uncommon for people to fear what was going to happen in their backyard and what was going to happen adjacent to them.  She said the next series of illustrations showed how beautifully the different transects could come together in a very respectful manner and in a completely non threatening manner.  She said on the outskirts they saw T2, agriculture, and in the lighter yellow band around that was T3, which was suburban, and on the far right was general urban neighborhoods with a little corner store and townhouses.  She said because it was integrated, rather sort of blending, no one was intimidated by their neighborhood.  She said as they moved more in town to the center from T4 to T5, the transition was gradual so there was no diminishment in the quality of life on where they chose to be.  She said as they moved into the very core, it was still that gentle transition and they did not have shadow or noise issues and the blend was very present.

She said moving into Lawrence in particular, they always started thinking about a region before they started thinking about specifics was that was important was the big picture and one of the citizens brought them a pin up of a map he had done that showed the different planning areas of Lawrence and it was the map overlaid on topography so they could see what happened when, and when they looked at the aerial, they could see from the historical patterns they had a very distinct long block system that was a complete grid and gave them many options for development and connectivity, but as they moved west, that obviously as the 30s, 40s and 50s came along, that pattern changed into what was considered good at the time, but they lost their connectivity and the organizational fabric.  She said what they were planning for and, based on what they had heard that week, what they would like to suggest, as they looked at future developments in their UGA, first of all they consider the things they would like to preserve, which was what they referred to O1, Open 1, or O2, Open 2, which was the light and dark green represented on the image.  She said those areas were usually water, flood plains, steep slopes, even they have included areas that have heritage farmland, excellent agriculture soils, just places that should not be developed.  She said with the bull’s eyes, those were the controlled growth areas; they intend to develop there but in a very methodical manner that the smart code would illustrate further.  She said in the background was what was referred to as G1, their limited growth which did not mean it was off the table, but meant there was no infrastructure and the cost of developing there would be too high and likely no developer or land owner would not be interested because of the expense.  She said this would be an amendment or additional chapter to the comp plan that would go along with the intended growth patterns. 

She said she was going to show examples of the six areas.  She showed the Downtown area.  She said with suggestions for civic buildings, red, civic spaces, the green which already exist, and then the most intense they would see was the three central blocks of Mass Street and then feathering down into the neighborhoods they saw the intensity of the neighborhoods, it lightens and become less intense.  She said the neighbors in east and west Lawrence were not threatened by future development looming in their back yard.  She said there was a small area at 19^th and Haskell.  She said once they got out and saw the transect much more limited and less diversity because they have less opportunities.  She said yet, this was a wonderful solution and was very respectful.  She said instead of having a strip center turning its rear into garbage trucks and such to the historical property behind it, there was actually small cottages on the backside facing the land and getting a wonderful view of the historic house.  She said they would talk about all of the design details in much more detail. 

She said the corner of 23^rd and Louisiana and could see once they get a larger area they were considering, then they got more and more transects and civic spaces involved.  She showed one they considered on 25^th and Iowa and also had more transects as they had a larger space.  She said as they got to the green fills, west of K-10, as they were doing a large area in planning, then they would have the full range of the transect.  She said it went from T5 to T1 and included large civic spaces and would be 4 or 5 complete neighborhoods, three schools, a number of civic spaces, and a completely integrated community.  She said the same they would see south of Wakarusa, except there because of the desires of the land owner to maintain agriculture and because of the flood way, there was much less developable land there and much smaller community and mixed use with less intensity.

She said one thing they thought was important to discuss was they have spent a lot of time and investment in planning as transportation.  She said they had a plan already that talked about multimodal solutions and walk ability, but its focus was on level of service.  She said what they were talking about more was they tended to focus on more about the walk ability issue and was not just recreational walking and not station to station walking, but a combination of the two.  She said as they recognized, it was not a walk able environment.  She said a fortunate thing about their plan and virtually every other transportation plan they had seen in the last 30 years, that conventional street design did not produce walkable streets, it moved cars and that was great in certain locations, but in the neighborhood it was inappropriate.   She said there was a real tight connection between the design of roads and urban sprawl.  She said urban sprawl fed on road capacity and there was no other option for that.  She said once they put in arterials and even collectors for that matter, then they were moving cars faster and enabling them to go further in shorter time, so they do not mind living so far out and going so far for groceries.  She said it was an inescapable result of high speed thoroughfares.  She said obviously, auto only systems place heavy burdens on streets and added to congestion and caused the City to upgrade the streets and add lanes, which actually added back to the problem.  She said the whole thing was an ongoing issue and the only option was to keep building bigger roads further out; more sprawl.  She said Clinton Parkway was an example.  She said it had a very wide sidewalk but had about three feet from the sidewalk and the traffic lane and with no street trees and the cars able to go 65 mph, even if that was not the speed limit, they would feel like their life was threatened so it was not a place where people would walk for pleasure and do it if they could avoid it. 

She said some of the issues they saw in Lawrence were encouraging the walk ability they found downtown, basing their long term thoroughfare and transportation goals around the goal of walk ability and connectivity and balancing the needs of many different modes of transportation, they would like to encourage them to focus more of their financial resources on rapid transit or other solutions of that sort.  She said they did find that creating walk ability than trying to work their way out of congestion by expansion.  She said traditional street networks with the small blocks and their walk ability could actually move the same volume of traffic at a lower level of service as their larger thoroughfares.  She said it encouraged people to walk because it was much more pleasant solution. 

She said this was an interesting comparison that Dwayne Carver discovered that their more south streets through Downtown Lawrence actually carried more traffic than Iowa, which was because they worked as a grid.  She said everyone was not on Mass Street and could disperse on the parallel streets and the comparison was 32,000 trips a day in 2004 on Iowa and 39,000 on the downtown streets.  She said one of the recommendations they would like to make was they needed additional connectivity, not wider streets.  She said instead of pursuing changing their four lanes to six lanes, they would like to suggest that instead they add streets rather than widening streets.  She said this was their recommendation based on the six planning areas they had done and it was just the beginning.  She said a lot of this would be done during development of those properties, if and when that happened.  She said sprawl land use design stemmed from sprawl streets and their current transportation plan fortunately encouraged that so they would like to suggest that the Smart Code could add a layer of function and enjoyment to their street system if they chose to add it as a parallel option. 

She said people in Lawrence ride bikes.  She said they took pictures last week, when it was freezing cold, and people were out on their bikes.  She said one thing they would like to share was bikes could share roads, but under certain criteria.  She said first of all, the roads had to have a design speed of less than 35 mph so the bikers did not have to worry about being hit.  She said they had to be short blocks so that cars would not accelerate and if that was the case, they did not have to have a separate bike lane and they could share the road.  She said when the speeds were over 35, grades were extended, long blocks and heavy traffic; they would obviously need bike lanes.

She said finally, the point if they spent less money on wider roads, they would have the money available to do an enhanced transit system.  She said Dwayne crunched the numbers and the 2025 plan suggested the widening of the 4 to 6 lane streets was going to be $62 million, not that they intended to go to that extreme, but if they just added additional lanes and streets for connectivity that they showed in the previous slide, it was $9 million which was a $53 million difference that gave them a lot to invest in other multimodal solutions.  She said the cost savings could go to transit and increased walk ability. 

She said she would turn the presentation to Bill Dennis to talk about the design solutions. 

Bill Dennis, PlaceMakers, said he wanted to reiterate that they had a really great time this week, really wonderful input, a great team that came from all over the country to work on this.  He said what the design team did was try to illustrate the six different areas they look at which ranged from the most rural, edge condition, to the most urban and see what the smart code could produce.  He said what they were going to see was not necessarily what it will be, but what it could be.  He said Susan had since calibrated all the different areas and they could look at that much more carefully.  He said when they try to come into an area, they try to look at as much of the history of a place as quickly as possible and one thing he liked to do was see about the founding of towns and there were great images for most of the west which were essentially advertisements that towns did because as they know Kansas opened up all at once so there was a great rush for people to establish a town.  He said he thought there were about 5,000 towns established in Kansas and they all wanted people to come to their town.  He said it was really quite remarkable about the beginnings of the University here, South Park, the downtown, and the connection to the river.  He said they were planned out and they were going to grow.

He said in comparison was Kansas City at the same time.  He said it was about the same population and the long two block main street and the same grade lying out.  He said they were also competing to have people establish themselves here.  He said third was Ottawa Kansas which in 1872 was the largest city in Kansas.  He said it had the same two blocks, grid, parks and civic buildings.  He said the point of showing this was to say they could not predict the future with absolute certainty; some towns will grow, some will die, some will get better, some will not.  He said the only thing it could do with their town no matter where they were in that cycle was to whatever they build and try to preserve, was to create was a city of neighborhoods.  He said that was the whole point of a Smart Code and form based code.  He said whatever they built and whatever they revitalized needed to be in the form of mixed use, complete neighborhoods; not pods, not sprawl, but the various neighborhoods they talked about before that each represented a quarter mile radius, five minute walk from center to edge.  He said they found over time that was the most complete neighborhood unit so they should be able to within this area, have some services, even if it was just a corner store, some civic uses, maybe a school, library or community center.  He said throughout this area there were other circles of this size; Lawrence was a city of neighborhoods.  He said they could see in some areas it was much, much harder to create the connections in the circles, but could see in some of the demonstration projects on the edge on how they could begin to do that. 

He said he would start from the edge and work his way in.  He said some people asked why they needed to do urbanism when they are out on the edge and there was countryside.  He said really, urbanism started with two buildings and the conversation between two buildings so it really started at the farm; the house and the barn, it was the space in between.  He said it was much like a community that starts with two people; you cannot have a community with one person.  He said it was a different type of urbanism and ranged from things on the edge, or old farms that are preserved, to slightly denser and denser centers. 

He said they were showing areas for civic uses; schools located on the edge that could use the open space.  He said they had small neighborhood centers, not big boxes but mostly retail and office that serve the neighborhood, in general.  He said if they zoomed in on the school area, there was different types of housing; single family, duplexes, townhouses, maybe a little corner store and the school on the large green.  He said it would become a real anchor for the community; it became a memorable place and a place worth caring about. 

He said south of Wakarusa, there was US 59, 1100 Road, Louisiana and Haskell.  He said it was a very sensitive area with a huge flood plain, beautiful wetlands, lots of flood area and some beautiful rolling hillside.  He said fortunately they have some large land owners in this area who wished to see that preserved and the Smart Code would certainly give them that option and gave them the T2 which could be used for agriculture and live on it still.  He said they could do a little bit of very small development in terms of putting their own houses and outbuildings, but it was really to preserve that area for the future.  He said what they could do with the rest of it, they could still find those critical areas, the T1, the ribbons of water and trees and habitat pathways and preserve those and begin sighting to bring everything in a slight bit more to create centers and edges that were also very clear.  He said one of the interesting things he had done, he talked with the son of the woman who owned the very large property and said he would like industrial to be built there.  He said they know what industrial typically looked like, but he worked on a number of projects where they do an eco industrial neighborhood and the whole idea was there were uses that were not noxious that could be very adaptable, it could be creative uses, it could be jobs, offices, much like Culver City or some place like that which was quite adaptable.  He said those could be around a green, there could be a little bit of retail, there could be some public buildings, and there could even be houses and townhouses.  He said really it became a neighborhood.  He said when they think about how everything in the neighborhood was structured, even if it was a district, some of the best, hippest areas in the country were the old loft districts; the old warehouse districts.  He said if they were going to build industrial, they should build it like a loft district today and have people live in it.  He said they would have a public building or some kind of special building over looking the wetlands.  He said there were large properties that were preserved and the centers.  He said one of the most wonderful things in urbanism, which was a pretty rare thing, was not only the five minute walk from the edge to the center, but it was a five minute walk from the center to the edge and then a three hour walk in nature; which was the really the best of both worlds. 

He said moving in a bit, they came to a typical condition of what they would call a grayfield site, which was something that had buildings on it, but are a little bit tired and things have gone in and out of it and were not being used for their best and highest use.  He said there was a school off of 25^th, a vacant grocery store and various small buildings.  He said they were proposing to redevelop it through the Smart Code, mixing the uses and getting better value of it and not having to use really large boxes in this area but bringing the retail up to a boulevard section, but a slip road off of the main road on Iowa where they could have head in parking, retail right on the faces, and even have housing because they set back a little bit and there was enough of a buffer.  He said as they feather to the back, they get a more delicate mix of uses until they get back into housing and have single family housing.  He said it really took the resources they had, such as the school, and made them important.  He said this was what they used for analysis, which was called figure ground, where the buildings were in black and the ground was in white, because they could see the structure of a place and see how much was floating out there.  He said when they do this and the blocks and interconnected streets; they end up with a more pleasant place to walk down with plenty of parking and a mix of uses.

He said one of the things people say was they could not have McDonalds or a drive thru.  He showed two examples of a drive thru.  He said they could still have every use in today’s society, but they were concerned about the form of it and how it addressed the street.  He said moving in a little bit closer to another grayfield site on 23^rd and Louisiana, along 23^rd they have a fairly large corridor.  He said often people cure that by bringing the buildings right up to the street.  He said the problem was they had so much traffic going on and would have to wait for the revolution to wait for the department of transportation to change a lot of their standards.  He said as a measure in between, they take a page from Paris which had boulevards and moved incredible amounts of traffic with fast traffic in the middle and have the slip lanes where they would go slowly and plug in with more blocks on the side.  He said there was a lot of parking and they could have cafés spilling out.  He said one of the devices they did was try to create a sense of identity and creating a neighborhood square at Louisiana and 23^rd and they could park around and became a memorable space and was not left over junk space.  He said it was based on the earliest automobile oriented area in the country; 1916 Market Square in Lake Forest.  He said today it was still a vibrant place and has never been bad.  He said what they did was they broke into their Main Street a little bit and created an eddy that was wide enough when driving by they got a chance to see it and then turn in.  He said if they make the streets too close, they head past it before they had a chance to turn so they had to have that kind of throat in the public space.  He said it had a lot of head in parking, which they call teaser parking.  He said it was all mixed use, including housing and green space.

He said one of the problems with planning in the Midwest was they were laid out by railroad engineers and tended to go endlessly off into the prairie unless they stuck something at the end of it.  He said John Reps, who was a famous professor who studied the history of urbanism in America, had done incredible books and plans and they used his books all the time to design from. 

He said at 19^th and Haskell, it was a smaller neighborhood and not an area where they would want a big grocery store.  He said the site could fit an 80,000 square foot grocery store and lots of parking, but that  was really not appropriate to the neighborhood.  He said with gas stations they could turn them around with the pumps in the back.  He said they call that “gas backwards”.  He said when they were doing a small infill project; it already had open space that could be filled in very densely.

He said now they came to the heart of the Downtown which was something everyone cared about and should care about.  He said this was where they went when they had visitors or a free Saturday afternoon and where they would like to encourage the health of and the continuing revitalization.  He said there were wonderful neighborhoods that were close by, but could see from the map, things had been nibbled away.  He said they could see the grain of things from this from continuous frontage to raggedy, which was not historically raggedy but things had been torn down, and it was a very delicate fabric.  He showed the sites that needed to be filled.  He said the debate over the next 10 years was how to fill them in because there were not an infinite number of possibilities.  He said they should think comprehensively about how it happened.  He said if they planned this out at once, at least there was a first shot to what they wanted it to look like, what type of uses could go in.  He said he thought they would be able to move this whole thing forward much more and be able to heal the scars that were there between the neighborhoods. 

He said they did a quick sketch model over a Google Map and what was great about this model was even though it was continuous frontage, the texture and grain of it, the 25 foot to 50 foot increment that was the traditional pattern, was helping them keep as many Mom and Pops on main street as it has.  He said they could also begin to see the huge gabs that needed to be filled over time. 

He said a typical healthy Main Street should be a five minute walk.  He said once they get to a point on Main Street, things tend to fall off.  He said it meant that they were different areas and needed to be marketed differently and thought of differently for the health of the community. 

He said there were a couple things they would suggest in the downtown that were management things.   He said they were really important and occur in most successful downtowns.  He said the first was a business improvement district.  He said he knew they tried to get that before in the past, but should try again.  He said what they could do if they do that, they provide a clean and safe program which were people who were constantly cleaning things, there as security, and felt much safer and cleaner.  He said parking management was a huge thing and marketing it.  He said with marketing they needed to see how that place looked like to the whole world.  He said the other important thing to develop in the downtown was a “park once” concept.  He said when they were out on the edge in typical suburban sprawl, they could call it a park three times concept.  He said if they had to do three different things and go to three different parking lots and go on the same street six times.  He said they had to see what that did to asphalt and traffic on the arterials.  He said with mixed use, one could park one time and do three things.  He said that was why the five minute radius was so important.  He said even if they did not think they would be walking places, but they wanted to develop places throughout the city, once they arrive by car they could walk five minutes and do a number of things.  He said in downtown it was perfect but it was important to have a parking strategy in the whole downtown which was a combination of existing lots, surface lots, on street parking and structure parking.  He said they may or may not need additional structure parking as time went on and structures filled in.  He said the management of this was so important.  He said he could not believe they only had a $2 ticket for Mass Street.  He said that was no incentive for someone to park somewhere else.  He said usually in these districts they have a garage that was a 90 minute free garage.  He said the parking was a little bit more expensive and tickets were more expensive so people begin to learn over time if they went to the garage, they would not have to worry because people were resistant to using garages so they have to prod them a little bit.   He said the other thing was it probably needed to be a public/private organization where it was privately managed by the business improvement district.  He said it was done in many cities now where they actually go out and hand out the tickets.  He said the money could still go back to the city and right now at $2 a ticket, he did not know how that paid for it.  He said the important thing was that they could manage it and could find out if it was an employee who was parking in that space or if it was someone who came into the town the first time and with them you can give them a ticket that said thank you for shopping downtown you might want to watch the meter next time but here’s a coupon for 20% off, please come again.  He said if they have someone who came downtown and got a ticket, they will never come back again.  He said the other thing was a 500 foot radius.  He said they found that once people were in their cars, particularly garages and things like that, they would walk 500 feet to go to one thing and walk further to go to a few other things, so they want to make sure they have coverage all throughout the downtown and manage it through the system.  He said if one garage was filled up, there was a sign that said to go to the next garage. 

He said back to the image from the late 1860s, they could see Winthrop Street, which was now 7^th, there were two long blocks, 600 feet, that were built.  He said it was meant to be the strong retail of the town and it kind of fell off both ways.  He said as one of the strategies for the downtown was to create an area a little past 7^th, down to 9^th, that was the main street.  He said they should try to market that and over time with business improvement, they would try to recruit owners appropriate for that and when a vacancy happened, they would make sure that something not appropriate would go in there and kind of work together.  He said it was for the heart of Lawrence and for tourists as well.  He said down below, as they continue from 9^th to 11^th what he called college street, but they have more boisterous activities for college and young adults like music and bars.  He said on the side streets they needed to think what those were.  He said they were not Massachusetts Street and were slightly different.  He said historically there would have been delivery and service things on that street.  He said housing and office to market and grocery and other things.  He said as it faced over on Rhode Island what he called zipper houses that were more appropriate to the scale of the neighborhood.  He said it might have some type of service and arts and provided a place to live and work and housing for the downtown and East Lawrence.  He said on Vermont to the west the component that changed was they still had the post office and other things.  He said it became a civic area as well as office, service retail, and a place to live and work.  He said it would serve West Lawrence neighborhood and the rest of downtown.  He said at the head of this, they looked at how they would enter and how people would enter the town.  He said it was interesting because they had a highway and then came in quite a ways to get into the town.  He said it could be a better entrance and what they suggested was an elongated roundabout, more like an oval about, that could be a civic green.  He said it was significant enough they could put monuments in it, towers, whatever, and would improve the traffic flow in this area and be easier to get down to Massachusetts and get out.  He said they should also create a Civic Center with head in parking and additional spaces for parking.  He said what they were showing was a potential for a library, but at the gateway there were a number of different ways besides the park which would be a gracious entrance to where they could indicate it was special place.  He said they have things like that in San Diego and Whittier College where they put in a roundabout because the downtown was a couple blocks off of the main street.  He said they could use traffic devices as civic devices as well. 

He said they looked at all the proposals for the library and they all had merits and demerits in terms of how real they were and if they were the best site.  He said rather than saying one was better than the other, they asked if there were other options on the table not that these options would be the ones that would be chosen.  He said they looked at a couple sites for the library, one being essentially doing a reading room next door that would connect to where the hotel was so there would be a lot of inexpensive space but would have a beautiful reading room.  He said the other site was on Constant Park which had the transmission area and the sewer pump.  He said backing up a lot of the large space, which could be cheap space to that side and breaking down the mass of the building and creating a really nice, public, civic, dignified front to the park next the street, Watson Park.  He said there would be a courtyard in the back and the Children’s Library could spill out into the courtyard and be protected, and then service and access to underground parking which could be half in the ground and half out.  He said they were not saying they had to use classical or traditional architecture, but it was sort of a benchmark and had to be at least as good as the one shown.  He said it was also not necessarily expensive.  He said because the City owned the land and because there was a lot of it that did not have to be fancy, it would be around $20 million even with the underground parking.  He said they were borrowing the assets they have and putting the library in the park that they use and love.  He said there may be all sorts of reasons as to why it was not a good place to put it, it may be too far from the downtown or the neighborhood might not like it, but one of the things he was concerned about was that it was park land and not sacred.  He said in the old view he showed them, there was a three story factory there on that site so it was not like there had never been a building there.  He said it showed if they did something like this, what it should feel like and should embrace the square and contribute to public ground.

He said on the other side of the oval about was the square where they could park under the trees with diagonal parking and was another alternative for a reading room connected back into all the extra space there.  He said right next to the City Hall was the possibility of creating a community hall and for a town this size it was less than optimal.  He said it was a gracious room that one of the advantages was if it was separate from City Hall, it was for all the community and lots of uses.  He said again, it provided a beautiful terminated vista.

He said on Vermont and New Hampshire they have live work which was vertical townhouses, two, three or maybe four on the corners and the idea was they sell them separately.  He said the reason they do that was if they wanted to encourage mom and pop businesses, this would allow that to happen.  He said it was very hard for mom and pop to pay rent on purpose built new retail.  He said if they could buy that as their townhouse and have their business below, they could make it their going concern.  He said they would have studios and artists happening and had been done for the first time in 50 years for the last 5 or 6 years with enormous success.  He said there was great pent up demand for these. 

He said on New Hampshire was what they called zipper housing.  He said even if they did structure parking or a larger building like a grocery store, the last 50 feet or so should be a building type that mimicked in scale maybe in materials or height of the buildings across so they did not have a big blank wall or parking lot or something like that.  He said if they had a parking garage on one side, they could enter into a hallway and go into four different units around courtyards and the front part could be detailed more like a house.  He said they could be two story and all different kinds of styles.  He said another type of zipper housing might happen behind a new loft building where they have a big parking lot and a little bit of space.  He said this was the type of housing that was over there and might be able to use what they call Katrina Cottages.  He said many of the team had worked in the Mississippi Gulf Coast and developed as temporary housing it started at 600 square feet and went up from there that were houses that could be manufactured, delivered and set on site.  He said they were one to two bedrooms and could be used as live work areas.  He said they only take up a little bit of the parking lot so they could still keep the parking and front these looking to the neighborhood side. 

He said as they moved down to the end of the main street at 9^th and Massachusetts, they were thinking of something to end their view.  He said for that they were suggesting the idea of a clock tower.  He said it would be in a round about in the middle of the street and would be able to drive around it.  He said it was also a busy street on 9^th going the other way and would give them something to look at.  He said there was a study for a potential mixed use grocery between 8^th, 9^th and New Hampshire.  He said there were areas for service and structured parking for part of it.  He said the zipper houses would be on the back side.  He said he also thought of the idea was doing structure parking but moving it to the corner of 9^th and New Hampshire and having it as a hall.  He said whether it was a grocery store running it or if they could not get a grocery store, they would build a big enough hall with permanent stalls on the edge that could be rented out by cheese makers, butchers, fish mongers that could be permanent and the produce could come in as it did with the Farmer’s Market.  He showed a picture of Portland, Maine where it was very successful and there were only 50,000 people in the city of Portland.  He said they would have more infill in different areas with two or three stories with courtyards. 

He said they had been working with this for a long time and thought the Smart Code would be a tool that would be very useful in a lot of these situations so the passion that they put in to debating these issues could be directed into making the projects better from all sides; the developer’s side, the resident’s side and from the City’s side.  He said they had a choice at this point; they could continue to grow through sprawl with large and small lot subdivisions and saying something was 2 acres minimum was still small.  He said at one time this looked like the future and a really wonderful thing, but saw the future and were starting to get the message.  He said if they grow using a Smart Code, a form based code through infill and green fields and some gray fields and whatever they do they do in compact villages and towns and neighborhoods, they would create places for children.  He said they should use that as their benchmark.  He said if it was a good place for children, it was a good place for anybody. 

Mayor Amyx said there was a lot of information that was presented this evening.  He said the work that they had done and the comments they took in had been brought out in the pictures and designs that were presented and some of the recommendations they saw they were headed that way.  He said they plan over the next six weeks with presenting them about what was their recommendation of their code and he wanted to tell everyone their code because they would design and make their changes to what would be their Smart code.  He asked if they thought that time frame would be six weeks.

Henderson said what she perceived as the timing and deliverable from PlaceMakers point of view was they have already done a lot of calibration to the City’s code this week based on staff, elected officials, but a majority of the changes had come from the citizens.  She said they had gotten some incredibly detailed documents from different ones who had given them direction and really appreciated that because it kept them from wasting all of their time.  She said the design metrics would be the first draft of what would go to staff within two weeks.  She said that was just of the code.  She said the entire report would take six weeks but they would be working with staff within two weeks calibrating on revisions and then she was not sure what they would elect to do, but their options were when staff was happy with a calibrated code, they could go public with that and begin their public input even before they were given the final report that included all the planning areas and so forth because it took a lot of writing, text editing, and image editing.  She said her guess was within three to four weeks they would have something to be speaking with the public about although the final report would be to the City at six weeks or before. 

Amyx said so as he understood it and the public understood it, in three to four weeks they would have a draft to the staff and that it would be an item that could be presented to the City Commission and start getting public comments, feedback and recommendations for changes to be incorporated with that final draft that would come to the City Commission 6 – 8 weeks from now.

Henderson said she would like to propose also that since they have had such a really active charrette website and have gotten some great comments and feedback there, and the community was very aware of it, another option was when staff was happy with the first draft, they could post it there, download it, read it at home and then they could also post comments back there where they could actually do the first round of public revisions before even going to the planning commissioners or to the City commission.  She said because of the internet, they should take advantage of those opportunities.

Commissioner Schauner said there were a lot of people that were not able to attend the first meeting last week and he understood that was what proposed was not a replacement for the existing code but rather a parallel code the Commission could adopt after it had gone through the appropriate steps.  He said as either a mandatory code for currently annexed territory and/or certain locations within the current confines of the city limits.

Henderson said yes.  She said the smart code could be implemented in a number of ways.  She said they rarely suggest taking the step of trying to make it mandatory city wide because usually that was politically a nightmare.  She said they suggested it began as a parallel code and were confident in five or six years would be the code of choice.  She said that was the experience they had.  She said the options were if they elected to calibrate it in such a way, it could replace the different layers of ordinances that they had for downtown and was a political decision they had to make.  She said it could be the required code for annexation and some cities elected to do that.  She said once again it was a political decision.  She said they would not be involved in that decision.  She said they would answer questions but it was their call.

Commissioner Rundle said he was curious with the cross town thoroughfares, was that just a general picture of what it might look like or was it specific recommendations. …

Henderson yes, they were specific recommendations.

Vice Mayor Hack asked if the information just presented would be available to the public.

Henderson said it would be on the website in the morning.

Vice Mayor Hack echoed the Mayor’s comments.  She said she thought they had a tremendous outpouring of public participation and it did not surprise her a bit in Lawrence, Kansas and they certainly wanted it that way.  She said every time she came anywhere near Spring Hill Suites, they were working like crazy.  She said she appreciated the things they did and certainly encouraged continued comment and participation, but what they had crafted was because of what the public gave them in terms of information and what the public and various stakeholders wanted to see.  She said it also did not mean that conversation was done, but there was a lot of it to this point and she wanted to make sure that people understood that as well.

Henderson said indeed and an anecdotal aside, she was suggesting six to seven stories downtown and an East Lawrence Neighborhood Association member came in and told her that it was completely inappropriate and brought her a lot of historic photographs so they quickly revised that number down because they had to have that information from the locals.

Commissioner Highberger said he just wanted to say thank you.  He said this was something they had been waiting for since he first ran for City Commission.  He said he really thought it had the potential 20 years from now and would be one of the best things they had done for the community and had real potential.   

Mayor Amyx said if he could suggest so everyone understood where they were going, he would suggest as the information was put on the City’s webpage tomorrow, still bring their comments and would like to have an avenue for people who did not have access to it and assumed they could establish something through the City Manager’s Office.  He said he would suggest that it was not part of their Tuesday evening events but use another place to hold public comments and public input during the time of the reconsideration of this code.  He said they may be able to find another venue that was not as tight and had ample seating so everyone could have the opportunity to comment on the code and make it something they could consider and make it for the community of Lawrence Kansas.  He said he could imagine they would do establishing times over the next several weeks was the draft copy of the code as it began to be put together so that everyone could have copies and would do it away from a Tuesday evening and so that everyone could come and spend the entire night without having to reestablish benefit districts and everything else they had done that evening. 

Commissioner Highberger thanked all the community members who studied this and all the groups that were possible for the process.  He said it took a lot of attention and effort and wanted to say thanks.

Henderson said probably the one thing that she did not mention that she should have mentioned first was that they have a phenomenal staff and they have been helpful and have gotten way more work done than usually because of their help.  She said the GIS system was amazing and gave them a whole new level of detail.  She said really Lawrence had contributed to a tremendous amount to the technicality of the code already.                                                       (19)

PUBLIC COMMENT:                                                                                                                

None.                                                                                                  

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:

02/13/2006

· Staff Recommendation on the Reuse of Old Fire Station No. 2 (Mass. Street) and Old Fire Station No. 4 (Grover Barn / Lawrence Avenue).   Staff is recommending that both facilities be kept in public use.   ·  Library expansion issues

TBD

· Salvation Army Site Plan and Rezoning; · Retail Marketing Analysis Code provisions · Status of Long-Range Planning Resolution (discussion of Resolution No. 6697 has been scheduled as a public hearing item at the Planning Commission’s meeting on February 26, 2007.  Notices will specifically be sent to members of the public that had indicated an interest when this item was listed on the 01/16/07 City Commission Meeting Agenda.)

COMMISSION ITEMS:

Mayor Amyx said as they got closer to the budget process, after hearing the information from the County Appraiser the other day and the dollars available, it really may be just an inflationary number that was going to come up.  He said he thought it would be appropriate to direct the City Manager to send letters to outside agencies upon making requests that this may not be the year they consider large increases, if any increases, as far as requests from the City.  He said he believed the dollars were not going to be there and there was competition for those dollars.  He thought it would be smart to send letters at least notifying those agencies as to what their situation might be.

Vice Mayor Hack said she thought that was very wise.

Corliss said he wanted to make sure they understood they communicated something very similar to that to their departments not so much as to speak to the 2008 budget, but the existing budget and talking about the importance of property taxes and how that built their budget and have been fortunate with assessed evaluation increases in the past and it was not likely to occur now.  He said the number of items they talked about in the study session with the management team; they were most familiar with that.

Mayor Amyx said he would be happy to sign a letter.

Corliss said they could work on that.

Commissioner Rundle said clearly sometimes it was necessary to invest to save higher costs.  He said they should not be discouraged to request increases if they could make a case.

Mayor Amyx said he was not discouraging but warning.

Commissioner Schauner mentioned requesting outside agencies to show performance has been achieved in the past year.  He said if they send something, it seemed to him they ought to be asking for that as well. 

Vice Mayor Hack said she thought they had done that or were in the process of doing it.

Corliss said for the contracts with existing agencies, they have indicated they were going to monitor those items and would expect certain reports and those type of things.  He said he thought it would be good to include that in the letter as well and were also working on the staffing needed and general outline review of all the social service funding and needs assessment.  He said they had talked about that in the past and tried to get that structured and coordinated.  He said all of those items were good to highlight and were different stages of limitation but was good to highlight all of those things. 

Commissioner Schauner said everyone who came to the City Commission and asked for money for outside agencies all believed with their heart and soul what they were doing was valuable work, quality work for the community otherwise they would not be doing it.  He said he thought they would have a difficult time sorting through the requests even after they had received a letter and asked to think about little or no increase for next year.  He said he was not sure how they could set that stage.

REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (cont’d):

Consider motion to recess into executive session for up to 40 minutes for the following purposes: 1) to discuss non-elected personnel matters; and 2) to discuss possible property acquisition.  The justification for the executive session is to maintain confidentiality of non-elected personnel matters and possible terms and conditions of possible property acquisition.

The Commission meeting will resume in the Commission meeting room upon completion of the executive session.

It was then Moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to recess into executive session at 8:55 p.m. for up to 40 minutes to discuss non-elected personnel matters; and to discuss possible property acquisition.   Motion carried unanimously.                                (20)

Moved by Highberger, seconded by Schauner, to adjourn at 9:40 p.m.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                                                         

APPROVED   

_____________________________

Mike Amyx, Mayor

ATTEST:

___________________________________

Frank S. Reeb, City Clerk

CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007

1. Engineering Services Agreement- BG Consultants, design 14^th and Tenn Sanitary Sewer Replacement project for $28,443.

2. Bid- PSC Environmental Services, collection, disposal & technical assistance for household hazardous waste, $53,094 for 2007.

3. Ordinance No. 8076- 1^st Read, amending franchise fee for AT&T local telephone service.

4. Ordinance No. 8073- 1^st Read, est. right-of-way use regulations for investor-owned utilities without right-of-way management requirements in franchise agreements.

5. Ordinance No. 8075- 2^nd Read, SUP-10-04-06 at 917 Delaware.

6. Resolution No. 6698, public hearing, Feb. 27, 2007, improvement of Oregon Trail Park.

7. Resolution No. 6700, construction Project No. 5-GI1-105.

8. KDOT - Federal-Aid Safety Program.

9. Final Plat - (PF-12-33-06) , E Hills Business Park No. 4, 3841 Greenway Circle.

10. Final Plat - (PF-12-34-06), 6^th & Walnut Addition, 602 Walnut.

11. Status report – (UPR-09-06-05) Lawrence Community Shelter UPR.

12. 2006 4^th quarter report from Downtown Lawrence, Inc.

13. Recycling and Resource Conservation Advisory Board - Expand City’s Pesticide-Free Park System.

14. Housing Needs Task Force Interim Report.

15. Downtown Lawrence  - Waive written consent of adjacent owner or tenant requirement for application for DLI’s use of right-of-way.

16. City Manager’s Report.

17. Public Hearing - Vacation of utility easements between Lot 4 and 5, Blk 4 of West Hills Addition.

18. Resolution No. 6701 – Benefit district, order construction Stoneridge Drive, W of 6^th, S approx 630 ft.  Resolution Non 6702 -  Benefit district, order construction, Stoneridge Drive, W of 6^th, N approx 1300 ft.  Agreement – Landplan Engineering, signalization of 6^th & Stoneridge Drive for $17,500.

19. PlaceMakers - Traditional Neighborhood Design charrette.

20. Executive Session.