May 1, 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 Hack presiding and members Amyx, Dever, Chestnut and Highberger present.

RECOGNITION/PROCLAMATION/PRESENTATION:

With Commission approval, Mayor Hack proclaimed the month of May as “Huntington’s Disease Awareness Month”, “Older Americans Month”, “National Preservation Month”, “Bicycle Safety Month”, and proclaimed the week of May 6 – 12 as “Drinking Water Week.”

The approval of the City Commission meeting minutes from April 17, 2007 was pulled from the consent agenda for correction of a misstatement and would be added to the May 8^th Consent Agenda.

Mayor Hack said the receipt of the 2006 Tax Abatement Report, listed as Regular Agenda Item No. 2 on the revised regular agenda, would be deferred one week and added to the May 8^th Regular Agenda.                                                                                           

CONSENT AGENDA

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to receive the Lawrence-Douglas County Housing Authority Board meeting minutes of March 26, 2007; the Hospital Board meeting minutes of March 21, 2007; the Planning Commission meeting minutes of March 26 -28, 2007; the Traffic Safety Commission meeting minutes of April 2, 2007; and the Board of Plumbers and Pipe Fitters meeting minutes of April 4^th, 2007.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to approve claims to 512 vendors in the amount of $1,950,898.12; and payroll from April 15 – 28th in the amount of $1,692,637.94.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to approve the Drinking Establishment License to Buffalo Bob’s Smokehouse, 719 Massachusetts; and Coyotes Dance Hall, 1003 East 23^rd.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to concur with the recommendation of the Mayor and reappoint Doug Dillon and Kenneth Breithaupt to the Board of Plumbers and Pipe Fitters, to additional terms which will expire April 30, 2010; appoint Sandra Unfred to the Grant Review Board, to a term which will expire December 31, 2007; and reappoint Kathleen Morgan to the Public Library Board to an additional term which will expire April 30, 2011.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement to Design and Construct Public Improvements with Miracon Development for Wakarusa Drive improvements and sign a purchase order of $2,040 with Landplan Engineering for improvements on Wakarusa Drive.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                            (1)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to set bid date of June 5, 2007 for the Kaw Water Supply Low Service Pump Station No. 2 improvements.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                   (2)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to place on first reading Ordinance No. 8107, establishing a 20 MPH Speed Limit when beacons are flashing at the Pedestrian Crossing on 15^th Street and Engel Road. Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                    (3)             Ordinance No. 8102, authorizing the sale, consumption, and possession of alcoholic beverages at Broken Arrow Park on May 11 – 12, 2007 for the Lawrence Sertoma BBQ Cook-off fundraiser, was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to adopt the ordinance. Motion carried unanimously.          (4)

Ordinance No. 8103, condemning property interests, Lot 1, Block 1, Lewis Subdivision (2300 Louisiana Street), as authorized by the City Commission on February 20, 2007, was read a second time.  As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to adopt the ordinance.  Motion carried unanimously.                                             (5)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to authorize the City Manager to sign the Reimbursements Agreement with The Kansas Turnpike Authority (KTA) for the construction of a 6’ sidewalk on the N. Michigan Street Bridge, west side.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                            (6)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to authorize the Mayor to sign a Release of Mortgage for Shannon Graham, 3005 West 19^th Court.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                          (7)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to authorize the Mayor to sign a Subordination Agreement for Donna Williams and Jean Dixon, 1601 Kenwood Drive.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                     (8)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to authorize the removal of a Rolm 9751-10 telephone system from the Kaw Water Treatment Plant by R & R Communications, at no cost to the City.  Motion carried unanimously.                  (9)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to receive 2007 First Quarter Case Management Report from Bert Nash Mental Health Center.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                        (10)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Amyx, seconded by Highberger to approve variance request (City Code Section 19-214A) allowing a private sanitary sewer service line connection, in Oregon Trail Addition Plat, to cross property dedicated to the City of Lawrence and a drainage easement. Motion carried unanimously.                                            (11)

Commissioner Amyx requested the second reading of Ordinance 8100, approving a Special Use Permit (SUP-01-02-07) for Lawrence Community Shelter, located at 944 Kentucky Street, for an additional three (3) years, be pulled for a separate vote. 

Commissioner Amyx said the City Commission had approved an additional 3 year Special Use Permit for the Community Shelter, but believed the Commission should only consider the one year permit and his vote was for voting purposes only.

Mayor Hack called for public comment. 

After receiving no public comment, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Dever to adopt Ordinance No. 8100, approving a Special Use Permit (SUP-01-02-07) for Lawrence Community Shelter, located at 944 Kentucky Street, for an additional three (3) years. Aye:  Chestnut, Dever, Hack, and Highberger.  Nay: Amyx.  Motion carried.                       

CITY MANAGER’S REPORT:

During the City Manager’s Report, David Corliss said the International Code’s update was underway in the City’s movement toward the International Codes. Those codes were recommended by City staff and a number of the different boards.  A special task force board was formed to look at that recommendation and it was also a recommendation from the City’s consultant report that reviewed the development process to move toward the International Codes which was a family of codes.  He said various meetings were underway and staff wanted to thank the volunteer board members for spending time reading technical documents, who would provide staff with recommendations on the particular local amendments the City wanted to consider when adopting those codes in the coming months. 

Also, a memorandum from Cliff Galante, Transit Administrator, responded to some questions about the proposed fare increases for the transportation system which highlight some comparisons with other communities, provided some history on the City’s rates and provided other information that would be of value to the Commission. 

Finally, he said staff had finished the work for the 6^th and Kentucky pump station and that project came in ahead of schedule and below the guaranteed maximum price as far as the design build.  He said that project was one of the City’s first major projects in responding to a number of sewer needs in the community. 

Mayor Hack said she would echo Corliss’ comments about the I Codes.  She said the people on those various boards had committed to following through with City Commission direction to change over to the I Codes and make those codes work for Lawrence.        (14)

REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: 

Receive presentation from ECO² Commission.

Trudy Rice, Chairman, ECO² Commission, presented the report.  She said their board was present to celebrate their first mile marker of a three mile journey that started in 2000.  She said their board was asking the City Commission to consider their request of adoption of the ECO² plan. 

She said the ECO² plan had unique qualities such as: 1) It was independent of any government office or business; 2) It was developed using the expertise of over 100 citizens in Douglas County representing diverse interests; 3) It was a very transparent, inclusive process and public hearings were held throughout Douglas County to allow for public input and understanding; and, 4) It was a unique plan that was built upon consensus among people who lived in Douglas County. 

Larry McElwain, Vice Chairman, ECO² Commission, and Chairman of the Public Education and Outreach Work Group, said one of their big challenges in Douglas County was introducing a new term, ECO².  Sometimes it was difficult for groups to think in terms of exponential benefits, but there were exponential benefits in economic development and ecological preservation resulting in the term ECO².

He said there were over 100 community members actively participating in the process and their purpose was to develop a long term plan of the advancement of industrial business parks and open space preservation in Douglas County.  Their primary areas of focus were the completion of a long term plan which would hopefully be used as a tool for many years.  Process for implementation of the plan was another primary focus as well as consensus building to ensure success.  He said it was his hope the consensus that was built early on in the work group process would carry on through the public discussion during the implementation and funding phases.

He said the Chamber of Commerce initiated ECO² in 2000 because of the difficulties in the American Eagle process and realization they needed to do something different.  In 2002, the Douglas County Commission and in 2003 the Lawrence City Commission came on board and the ECO2 Commission was grateful for the funding from the City and County Commissions.

He said in the summer of 2004 was an incredible summer because of the hundreds of hours of meetings of the two diverse groups which were the industrial space work group and environmental side.  In 2005 the draft plan was proposed and in 2006 the public education and outreach.  The ECO2 Commission had been throughout the County and spoken to many different groups.  He said their guiding principles were some of the most difficult issues they wrestled with in the process. 

One principle was land owner participation in the industrial business park and open space development program.  He said they wanted it to be voluntary and did not want it to be condemning land in order for ECO² development of open space or industrial.  He said those funds generated through ECO² would be used through condemnation of property. 

He said a second guiding principle was partnerships with developers, land trust and other parties positioned to advance the goals of open space, preservation and economic development which would be emphasized to maximal leverage available funds.  Again, their Commission felt the exponential benefits would come into play for both and help in leveraging the funding that would be needed eventually.

He said this guiding principle was important with the dual goals of open space, preservation, and economic development were linked and would be pursued concurrently without favoring one over the other.  This was a huge issue for the work groups to work through to move economic development and open space preservation on parallel tracks in this community, into the future.  The ECO² Commission was committed to net equity.   He said one of the basics of the plan was evaluation criteria for business industrial parks and also developed criteria for open space preservation and was their hope those criteria would be used in an objective way to evaluate projects.  It would be an implementation process, public education and outreach would be on going forever, funding options would be an important discussion that would come later and proposed by laws for the ECO² Commission. 

As part of the industrial business side evaluation criteria, the land owner must have a voluntary interest and participation.  A site must have transportation access to interstate, U.S., or state highways.  A site must be outside the 100 year flood plain and include more than 100 acres.  A site must have an average slope of useable acres less than 8% as determined in preferred order by physical survey or topographic maps.  He said they have an open space site evaluation criteria.  Again, it was an attempt to make the process in the future more objective.  He said the land owner must have a voluntary interest and participation and strong commitment to conservation.  The land could be acquired through purchase or conservation easements with reasonable effort and cost relative to its value.  The land must be eligible under at least one of the open land categories which could be found in the full plan.  The proposed conservation site must promote the overall goals and objectives of the open space preservation program.

He said there was a plan for an implementation flowchart and hoped that plan was worked through with the work groups.  The flowchart would need to be looked at in making sure the process was as friendly as possible, for open space preservation and economic development. 

He said regarding public education and outreach, they met with City Council and the Planning Commission in Baldwin and Eudora.  They met with the public in Lecompton in a public town meeting and had at least three meetings in Lawrence.  It was anticipated in the next stages there would be more public outreach and education needed. 

He said they were asking for the adoption and implementation of the ECO² plan and it might be necessary to look at everything in that phase to make sure of the wording and the public education and outreach. 

This plan represented hundreds of dollars of community toil and discussion over the past 6 plus years.  He said to avoid planning and zoning difficulties, similar to the American Eagle project several years ago, that they, the people of neighborhoods, industrial development, educational institutions, local businesses and many other people all over the county, had come up with a plan in creating jobs, new money for community lifestyle uses, and additional tax revenue, all without compromising the City’s beautiful open space.  Those multiple people and multiple decisions that came together had a unique way to provide for the future generations and also preserve the City’s natural beauty and history. 

He said they knew this document would be tweaked in the implementation stage, which would be the next step after City Commission adoption.  They felt that although some of the wording changes might be necessary over time, the basic concept of net equity for projects that required public funds would stand the test of time.  Those projects could be done without compromising the basic tenant of keeping industrial development and open space preservation on parallel tracks.  He said they were looking at parallel tracks to avoid collision which was seen in this City’s history and would like to do without in this City’s future. 

He asked the City Commission to adopt the plan without the specifics of funding because funding would take a variety of forms with different projects in both the open space and industrial arenas.  Funding would need to be discussed thoroughly in the public arena and they would be there to assist the City Commission all they could with the plan as it unfolded.  He asked the City Commission to commit to this plan serving as a way to move forward when public funds were required and as a tool for private industrial developments and open space preservation. 

            Mayor Hack asked McElwain to further explain the difference between preservation of open space and open space. 

            McElwain said no more open space could be created because there were limits.  They were trying to find a way to preserve open space as much as they could, but not at the expense of growing as a community.  Those kinds of decisions about the growth of the community lie in the City and County Commissions’ hands.  Lawrence had great history; beautiful topography and they wanted to provide a way to preserve those attributes. 

            Commissioner Amyx asked how the implementation phase of the plan would be moving ahead.

McElwain said there was a need for definitions in the ECO² Commission’s role going forward because their Commission was not an elected body and did not make policy.  Their Commission had taken the task of bringing forth a plan for the City and County Commissions to approve.  He said the ECO² Commission saw the plan as a tool for the Planning, City and County Commissions.  He said part of the implementation needed to focus around how this was funded so they knew when a project came to the table, what the options were for the process of funding open space preservation or industrial development.  He said the funding would be a part of that implementation and they needed to have a way to put wheels on this process so it could be taken to the next phase. 

Roxanne Miller said the implementation phase would really kick off when a project came forward and the City Commission determined there was going to be significant public investment in a project.  The ECO2 Commission would then take out the plan and begin working on applying the plan to a particular project, evaluating the project and moving forward. 

Commissioner Amyx said he had great support for the plan, but he had a question about proceeding with the adoption, not understanding what the financial responsibilities and how to fund such a plan.

            McElwain said the ECO² Commission was charged with coming up with options for the City Commission.  He said it would be difficult to pinpoint one funding source that would be used on projects.  He said in open space preservation they might be talking about conservation easements so that might be different than what was seen with industrial park development.  He said this issue was a monumental job for the City and County Commission to think through, but giving the plan as many choices as possible would ensure the plan worked better and not just rely on one particular source.  He said it was a little different than what the City was used to because a number of projects had one source of funding and this type of project might be a variety through grants or foundations that get involved or personal, individual private development might occur and would become a tool to use.

He said he wanted to point out to the City Commission all of the data on page 26 and 27 was correct, but the summary page 28 was incorrect in which a corrected page was inserted to address that incorrect information. 

            Mayor Hack said the City Commission’s action was to receive the report and it would be appropriate to state the City Commission’s action on an agenda. 

McElwain said he understood.

Commissioner Amyx said if the Commission wished to proceed to adopt the plan, the City Commission could receive the presentation and place the plan on the consent agenda for adoption next week.  He said the plan discussed the dual goals of both open space preservation and economic development being linked and would be pursued concurrently without favoring one over the other.  He said the City Commission saw the importance of job development and at the same time understood open space was important to protect and the ECO² Commission had done their job in relaying that information to the City Commission. 

Commission Chestnut said this issue was huge and was a challenge.  He said there were a number of elected entities and options as far as funding and the ECO² Commission had tried to keep those options open. 

            Mayor Hack called for public comment.

            Kelly Kindscher, Kansas Biological Survey, one of the ECO² founders, said Lawrence was sometimes viewed as a controversial community because sides were taken on many issues.  He said the ECO² approach was good because it placed different views in this community on the same page.  He said in discussing the value of open space there were approximately 120 gems of native prairies left across the county and amounted to less than 1/10 of a percent of the land service of the county.  The county was originally 93% prairie.  He said a significant number of those parcels could be protected along with significant forested areas if taken the initiative.  He said that program could help make it happen at the same time industrial park sites were developed that fed the community.  He said regarding funding for this plan, he would love to see a proposal by the Mayor or former Mayor that would ask for the sales tax that listed ECO² as a prime effort.  He said if the City Commission listed ECO² as a prime effort, he would wholeheartedly support the tax increase, but if not, the  City Commission would leave a divided community that was wondering if that tax increase would support both sides of the community. 

            Betty Lichtwardt, member of the League of Women Voters, said she was with the group that was reviewing the plan.  She said they presented a letter that listed four issues they felt had been overlooked in the plan.  One error was typographical and there were three other points made in their letter, but she did not think it invalidated the plan by any means.  They were simply suggesting those issues because the League thought it would help the plan and ECO² further as goals.  She said the League was presenting suggestions in a helpful way and not a negative criticism.  Those suggestions were:

1.         “Paragraph two on page 10 of the Plan, ECO2 Open Space Preservation Program recognizes that “outside the incorporated communities Douglas County is primarily a rural and agricultural county [and]...most of Douglas County is “open space” in the form of farmland and undeveloped land.” We appreciate that the Plan recognizes this, and ask that you include a statement that this undeveloped open space beyond the “open lands” slated for active preservation should be recognized as worthy of continuing as open space and farmland.

On page one of the Plan, the sentence in paragraph three states, “Both open space and industrial/business park development should be pursued...” We think this is a typographical error and would appreciate your adding “preservation” after “open space.”

2. The second area of concern to us is the “concept of net equity in funding” to equate the public investment in open land with that of industrial park public investment. We suggest that the calculation of net equity is more complicated than indicated in the Plan and is difficult to compute fairly.

For example, public costs in services v. s. tax returns should be considered in the computation. When open lands are held as conservation easements by public entities and not in fee simple, these lands still return taxes and require almost no public expense in terms of services. Also, the manner in which industrial investment is publicly funded determines how much of the initial investment will be returned proportionate to similar land uses not publicly funded. Tax increment financing provides repayment of the public investment. However, when the taxes from the industrial development so financed are targeted for repayment of public debt, those taxes cannot be considered as adding to the city or county general revenues, and these uses still require services. We suggest that you examine this concept in more detail.

Industrial/Business Park development may create other side effects that incur public costs. An important consideration is that industrial development encourages growth, and the secondary and tertiary community costs, unless the growth pays for itself, may also contribute to a net loss in public tax revenues.

3. The Industrial/Business Park Program, in its testing of the model for “Selection Criteria and Ranking Process” on page 6, has included a system of ranking sites that the we assume the ECO2 Commission hopes will provide an unbiased system for assessment of sites. Included in these criteria are “Required selection factors” and “Preferred selection factors.” We are very concerned that the two most important selection factors, ones that should be absolute requirements have been incorporated in the grouping of “extraordinary costs” and can therefore be overlooked or ignored.

Incorporation into one of the existing cities in Douglas County should be the first “criterion” and an absolute requirement. Industrial/business parks and/or uses should never be approved for unincorporated status. In conjunction with this should be locations that are in convenient proximity to urban boundaries so as to facilitate their annexation. The purpose of the industrial/business parks is to be beneficial to its hosts. Many studies have shown how devastating is the situation to both the counties and cities where industrial/business parks have existed outside of corporate limits. Provision of urban infrastructure should be the second absolute requirement separate from the other selection factors. We believe that both of these criteria should be attainable before any of the other criteria would apply.

4.         We believe the ranking system for the Industrial/Business Park beyond the two most important absolute requirements listed above, needs reexamining. It is presented as a model for the unbiased future selection process.

The industrial/business park sites are ranked based on the highest scores being ranked first, with the ranking numbers presented inversely to the scores; i.e., the highest scores receive the lowest numbers, meaning they are first in priority, and

on up the scale. In the table ranking the proposed sites for industrial/business parks, we found that there was not an equivalent relationship between the scoring and the ranking of these sites. (Please see Attachment A).

In the table ranking the proposed sites for open lands preservation, we found that a different system of ranking had been used, giving the lands with the highest scores, the highest ranking numbers, also meaning the highest priorities–just the opposite of the system for choosing the industrial sites.”

Laverne Squier, Lawrence Chamber of Commerce, said he wanted to thank all of those who had served from the Chamber’s perspective on this activity, Roxanne Miller especially.  He said Miller took on an issue at a time that needed to be revitalized and the board did great work and all the volunteers that surrounded Miller. 

He said this plan would provide a pathway not only for dialogue, but for outcomes and economic development for the Community.  The plan should be remembered as not a way for sides to somehow get along or relieve tension, but be remembered as a way to have done the right thing, which was more important.  He said it was not everyday they could talk in Kansas, in a community setting, about forests and when thinking about the treasures in this part of the State, those treasures were important and those treasures should be treated accordingly. 

Commissioner Highberger said he wanted to thank the board members and all the other people who participated in this process.  He thought this was one place where there were real leaders in the country.  He talked to people all around and did not know of anyone who was working with industrial development and open space like this community and was something that could be a model for other people in other places.  He would echo what the Mayor said about the benefit this issue had for this community by bringing people from different sides of the table together to find common ground. 

He said he understood some of the concerns raised by the League of Women Voters and there were a couple typographical errors.  He was certainly in support and hoped they would not move forward with a new industrial park for the City without annexation and having it relatively close to the City.  The issues raised by the League could be addressed by the implementation phase.  He said this concept was brilliant and he could not wait to put it into play. 

He said the net equity concept would pose some challenges especially if they were looking at purchasing the Farmland site and the mechanism in acquiring that property.  He said they would need to step up to the plate to find funding sources, but both industrial development and open space preservation would have countless benefits for future generations.

David Corliss, City Manager, said on the implementation report, he asked if it would be referred to the Planning Commission for possible changes to the Comprehensive Plan.

McElwain said that issue had not been discussed in detail, but the consensus of what they had discussed was again they were dealing with voluntary land and creating a tool that would be used by private developers.  He said he was not sure that codifying the Comprehensive Plan was necessary, but as far as they were concerned they liked it more as a free standing tool to be used and not something that was codified inside of Horizon 2020 or zoning regulations, etc.  He said they tried to make this plan subjective in such a way that it would be a friendly tool that people would want to use, especially private developers to bring to the Planning Commission.  He said this issue might need further discussion by the two bodies, but he thought they were happy with it being free standing. 

Moved by Chestnut, seconded by Amyx, to receive the presentation and place the Final Plan for approval on a future City Commission Consent Agenda.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                           (15)

Consider grant application for rescue vehicle for the Fire/Medical Department.

David Corliss, City Manager, said Chief Bradford was attending a meeting out of town and could not be in attendance for the City Commission meeting.  He said staff talked briefly about the grant application last week and thought it was an appropriate grant application to submit.  If staff was fortunate enough to be the recipient of the grant, the City match would need to be budgeted for 2008, but it did not mean taxes needed to be raised.   He said staff would be looking at their different revenues and wanted to make sure it was a conscious choice because it was a substantial amount of money and staff thought it was appropriate to place it on the regular agenda so the City Commission was cognizant of this grant application and if there was any additional discussion about this particular project, he could respond to it. 

Commissioner Chestnut asked if the $115,000 would be part of the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). 

Corliss said for that dollar amount, he was hoping not to put it in the debt budget, which was how he looked at the CIP.  Staff might make a recommendation to put that dollar amount in the general fund and there were some general funds in the Fire/Medical Department that were for equipment purchase, but staff needed to look at what all was planned for next year on some of the smaller scale.  He said that amount would probably absorb most of the smaller scale budgets or staff would look at the equipment reserve fund where some funds set aside for some equipment purchases and sometimes they were emergency or matches to grants or staff might budget all or part of this as part of the 2008 budget and there might be some concerns moving into that issue.

Commissioner Chestnut asked what the cut off was typically for a CIP as far as a dollar amount.

Corliss said when there was a $600,000 quint or $800,000 quint, staff was not able to build that amount into the operating budget so staff placed that amount in the CIP budget.  He said it served as a great opportunity for part of staff’s apparatus needs. 

Commissioner Amyx asked if the application deadline was May 4^th and what was their plan.  He said if staff was not lucky enough to receive the grant, he asked if staff then looked at the CIP.

Corliss said staff talked to the City Commission about priorities and also discussed priorities with Chief Bradford and if this was one of the Chief’s top apparatus priorities, then staff would recommend funding it if the Chief thought staff needed to replace another quint or engine and would go ahead and work with the trailer system.  Staff was getting by now, but it was a trailer system that was operationally effective or efficient as the Chief would like to see. 

Mayor Hack called for public comment.  

After receiving no public comment, it was moved by Highberger, seconded by Dever, to authorize the grant application and budgeting of City match in 2008 Budget.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                               (16)

Consider authorizing staff to apply for available Federal Transit Administration FY 2007 Bus and Bus Facilities Discretionary Program Grant for a total amount of $2,872,225 for the replacement of seven (7) fixed-route vehicles and three (3) paratransit vehicles that have reached their useful service-life requirements. 

Cliff Galante, Public Transit Administrator, presented the staff report.  He said recently the City was notified that the Federal Transit Administration had $438 million available nationwide to grantees.  The money was discretionary funds that were available for bus and bus facilities projects and was a competitive grant process which the deadline was May 22^nd.  He said the FTA would be looking at the following:

•           Fleet replacement needs that cannot be met with formula funds. 

•           Fleet expansion that allows significant service increase and/or improvements and/or  operating efficiencies.

•           Facility construction or renovation to support increased service or introduction of clean fuels.

•           Strategic investments in rural areas where formula funding is inadequate.

• Purchase of clean fuel vehicles.

•           Intermodal terminal projects that include intercity bus providers.

Earlier this year, he approached the City Commission about an earmark request to the Congressional Delegation and that request narrowed the FTA request.  Regarding the earmarked request, what staff asked for and what was received tended to be two different things.  In this case, that earmark request would be Plan B.  Whatever staff did not receive in an earmark request, hopefully through this grant, it might be able to provide that additional funding staff was seeking.  In terms of local match, the grants would cover vehicles paying up to 83% of the vehicles.  For match, staff would be looking at money available in their department’s equipment reserve as well as pursuing the Kansas Turnpike Toll Credits which Mayor Amyx, at the time, sent a letter to the Kansas Department of Transportation to use as in kind match.  He said the Unified Government of Wyandotte County just purchased twelve vehicles and their match came from Kansas Toll Credits.  He said he was hopeful staff could use those toll credits for the first time in this community.

Vice Mayor Dever asked Galante how the toll credits worked. 

Galante said it was any maintenance that was constructed on the Kansas Turnpike and since the federal government considered the turnpike to be a federal road, but there was no federal assistance, the federal government would match that money dollar for dollar.  He said the federal government would allow the money to be used for in-kind match for any type of federal project or transportation project.  KDOT made that assistance available to communities, but only for capital projects, so it was more of an in-kind match and counting on paper as opposed to real dollar value.  It was something that other communities had done for a number of years, but he just learned about that assistance a few months ago and thought it was something this City should look into.

Vice Mayor Dever asked if there were other ways to use those toll credits to this City’s advantage or was this the most common way to expend those credits.

Galante said the toll credits could only be used for capital projects and KDOT indicated the City should not rely on those credits on an annual basis and look to use those credits sparingly for a project of importance.  Usually other cities, when needing a large vehicle replacement was when they used those toll credits.     

Commissioner Amyx asked Galante to explain what the City would receive with the $400,000 feasibility study.

Galante said that money was first originated when the City received an earmark a few years ago for a bus maintenance feasibility study in the amount of $400,000.  Staff changed the language so those funds could be used to address vehicle replacement needs because staff decided it was top priority.  The feasibility study was back on the plate again because in discussions with the University, one of the main benefits seen through coordination was to share in the cost of designing, constructing and operating out of a joint facility.  In terms of the cost of the study and how the $400,000 was initially determined and why it was placed into a prior earmark, he was not sure, but knew $400,000 for the site selection work, environmental analysis, and the feasibility of determining a comparative analysis that tended to be the price.  He said he would prefer to get that bus facility for less and was the reason for the competitive bids.  He said the amount of money staff asked for in those grants did not necessarily mean that was what staff would receive.  If it was determined, once awarded a grant, not to put the money toward a bus facility, the money could be given back to the federal government.  He said this was an opportunity and staff should try to receive that grant money

Commissioner Highberger asked Galante to explain why they were asking for funding for conventional fueled vehicles instead of different alternative fuel vehicles.

Galante said as explained last week during the study session, when looking at alternative fuel vehicles, which he spent a lot of time researching over the last year, what he found was if going with an electric hybrid vehicle which was proven technology, worked very well and many communities were using those types of vehicles.  The downside was it added about $200,000 to the cost of the vehicle and the vehicle manufacturers clearly stated those cost would not be recouped for that additional investment over the life of the vehicle.  If fuel costs continued to rise beyond the present levels, that could be a different study, but right now, based on the current fuel prices at $3 a gallon, cost could not be recouped. 

If deciding to go with liquefied natural gas, the fueling facility alone would cost $2 million.  The technology was proven not to be reliable.  A lot of cities that had CNG busses, had moved away from that type of bus.  He said regarding other technology, Hartford, Connecticut was the first state in New England to get a hydrogen fuel celled vehicle and just for one bus and the fueling facility was $2.9 million.  It would take a while for that price point to come down and make it affordable. 

He said the reason he was looking at conventional diesel busses was because they could operate off of bio diesel fuels.  In terms of the other technologies that were available, staff could pursue those alternatives, but there was a price tag.

Commissioner Dever asked if the City could switch in purchasing an alternative fuel vehicle at some point.

Galante said yes.   

Commissioner Chestnut said there were discussions last week about a heavy duty, low floor 30 foot bus and Galante commented that anything smaller, regarding fuel conservation, was not practical.  It seemed other alternatives could be explored.

Galante said correct and in terms of that, he was following up on that information.

Corliss said it was accurate to say the application would not commit the City to the size of the bus or the fuel delivery system and was simply the dollar amount.  The lead time on the bus construction was 18 months.

Commissioner Dever said regarding the alternate fuel, the dynamics, depending on what would happened with fuel costs, regulation in this area, and federal funding, there might be more incentive to move people in that direction.  He said all options should be looked at because they were evaluating that lack of return on the factors today and he was sure those things would change over time so options should be kept open. 

Mayor Hack called for public comment.

Graham Kreicker said he was surprised when Galante mentioned the lack of success with natural gas busses because as most of them probably knew, the entire bus fleet at Kansas City International Airport ran on compressed natural gas.  He said in talking to the drivers as he did frequently, those drivers seemed to be pleased with the results and most of those busses traveled more miles a day than the typical route buses in Lawrence.  He encouraged staff to check with Kansas City International Airport about their actual costs and how well they liked those vehicles.

Commissioner Amyx said the City Commission needed to support this grant application because some of the City’s vehicles needed to be replaced, but he would not support a $400,000 study.   

Moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger, to authorize staff to apply for available Federal Transit Administration FY2007 Bus and Bus Facilities Discretionary Program Grant for a total amount of $2,872,225 for the replacement of seven fixed route vehicles and three paratransit vehicles that have reached their useful service life requirements.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                              (17)

Consider authorizing the City Manager to sign and submit Letter of Agreement and Request for Provisionally Accredited Levee (PAL) Designation and Agreement to Provide Adequate Compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations. 

Chuck Soules, Director of Public Works, presented the staff report.  He said the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had requested the City sign the PAL agreement to provisionally accredit the City’s levy.  The City’s levee met the appropriate requirements to remain on the FEMA floodplain maps.  FEMA would provide a provisional accreditation until the Letter of Agreement was received in order for FEMA to complete the flood insurance rate map.  The levee would be labeled a PAL during a 2 year period to convey to map users that levee certification verification was underway. 

There was no cost to the City for this agreement, but by endorsing the agreement, the City was agreeing to provide the necessary documentation to comply with 44 CFR 65.10 before June 18, 2009.

He said staff recommended the City Manager sign and submit the PAL Agreement to allow FEMA flood insurance maps to reflect protection from the 1-percent-annual-chance flood.

Commissioner Amyx asked if Soules believed the in-house information would be enough to give the City full accreditation.

Soules said he sent all the information to FEMA.  One issue was several years ago building to one foot above the base flood elevation was sufficient, but now staff understood those regulations had changed.  The question was would the base flood elevation withstand the scrutiny of today’s design standards.  He said staff sent all the information to both FEMA and the Corps and that was not sufficient.

Commissioner Amyx asked if staff had any idea of what the scope of service might be for that accreditation to happen.

Soules said staff was still working with the Corps and the Corps and FEMA were still trying to figure out what it would take for that accreditation.  He said FEMA had Title 44 Section 65.10 that gave guidance for that accreditation and staff was trying to understand what those rules meant.

Commissioner Chestnut said this issue was discussed during the infrastructure discussion and Soules indicated there was ambiguity of FEMA’s expectations for the accreditation.  He said those expectations were open ended and the City really did not have a choice.

Soules said that two year window would give FEMA time to figure out what was exactly needed for that accreditation and what the City needed to provide.

Commissioner Amyx said under the Letter of Agreement in providing adequate compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations, he asked if the City would be agreeing to everything by signing the letter now, prior to the scope of service being written.

Soules said that was yet to be determined.  He said it was an extension of Federal Regulations (44 CFR 65.10).  It gave the City time to establish with the Corps and FEMA what was needed.  He did not know if that answered Commissioner Amyx’s question because there were a number of “unknowns” at this time.  Staff was hoping they could better understand the situation in the next several months. 

Commissioner Amyx asked if the agreement was a contract for everything.

Corliss said it was a contractual obligation of the City to provide all necessary information to show the levy complied with the Federal Regulation.  He said that Federal Regulation had a performance standard and FEMA might require the City to do a lot more then sending materials that staff had so far.  He fully expected FEMA to require the City to do some type of physical study that would require drilling and some on site expertise and was headed toward several thousands of dollars of study.  The City would not be able to get an engineer to certify that levy without a physical inspection and perhaps Corps drilling and other things.  He said the levee was a major structure up and down the Kansas River which included the Mud Creek levee as well that people forgot the City also maintained.  He said this agreement was a substantial commitment on the City’s part and staff did not know the dollar amount, but there was no alternative.

Commissioner Amyx said as he understood, the City was going to be required whether the agreement was signed or not.  The agreement gave the City those 24 months which bought time to figure out those regulations and still have the levee recognized as compliant. 

Soules said yes.

Corliss said in addition to everything that was being done, the City needed to get going on this work.  He said this work needed to be completed next year in order to make sure the information landed on right desk at the Corps of Engineers by June 18^th of 2009.

Commissioner Dever said if he understood, this agreement was also to be provisionally accredited which started the 24 month clock.  If the letter was not signed, then the alternative sounded real bad.

Commissioner Chestnut asked what would happen if the City removed their FEMA map accreditation to the property in the way of floodplain because it was important for people to understand.

Soules said, right now, the levy basically identified on the flood map was protecting North Lawrence from the 100 year flood.  Without that floodplain map, the City would not be eligible for any Federal assistance if there was a flooding disaster and people could not receive subsidized flood insurance through the federal program.  He assumed that would make mortgages fairly difficult to obtain because if the City’s flood map was removed, instead of Lawrence being in the clear zone, the map would show North Lawrence being flooded and the City did not want to lose the protection of the FEMA map of the levy.

Corliss said there was no alternative and staff wanted to work with the Federal Government to comply with their requirements.  He said he wanted the study to mean something and did not want to spend a lot of money on something that was just filling out a lot of paper work.  He said staff had done a good job of maintaining the levy.  He said what staff was speculating, was that FEMA would not quibble with the City on the maintenance of the levy, but FEMA could point that the City could perform at a higher standard.  The levy was built in the 1970’s and there was a standard then and he speculated the standard had improved and FEMA could say the City had the technology and could provide additional protection at a higher standard.  He said Topeka was tasked with those improvements to their levee and it was a $10 million project.

Soules said the amount was $14 million.  He said Topeka was in the Corps program and only needed to come up with $4 million of that total.  He said hopefully within two years, the City could get into that program so it would not cost as much to do the study. 

Mayor Hack called for public comment. 

After receiving no public comment, it was moved by Chestnut, seconded by Highberger, to authorize the City Manager to sign and submit a Letter Agreement and Request for Provisionally Accredited Levee (PAL) Designation and Agreement to Provide Adequate Compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations.  Motion carried unanimously.                   (18)

Receive status report on proposed land use at the northwest  corner 6^th Street and Wakarusa Drive.

Corliss presented the agenda item.  He said the land uses at the northwest corner of 6^th Street & Wakarusa were a subject of litigation.  The parties and judge agreed to continue the trial until September.  Staff had talked to both 6^th Wak property owner and Wal-Mart representatives which applied for uses at that intersection which was part of the litigation.  The property owner was strongly considering, but not guaranteeing, going through the land use approval process again before the City. 

One issue that became evident, early on, was the new Commissioners did not have the benefit of a lot of history at that location and staff wanted to make sure the new Commissioners were appropriately briefed as to a number of those land use issues and some of the history and staff thought it was appropriate to get that information available and see if there was additional information that could be of value to the entire Commission.  He said it was staff’s direction, at the Commission level, not to talk about specifics of the litigation.  The City Commission had been briefed generally on those topics and would get additional briefings in the weeks and months to come.  There were a number of staff reports that were prepared to provide a history. 

He said Sheila Stogsdill, Acting Planning Director, would walk the City Commission through a memorandum that was very concise and helpful as far as some of the land use decisions that happened in the past at that location; Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, put together a memorandum regarding the value and the number of traffic studies at that location; and Amy Miller, Planner, put together a memo regarding the retail market analysis. 

He said it was not staff’s intent to go through all the different items that were presented by the applicants in the past.  He said if the City Commission had specific questions or general questions, the applicants were present to respond to some of those questions.  Again, they were not talking about a specific land use decision and the applicant might feel that it was not appropriate to go into certain details given they were likely to submit another application and staff did not want to interfere with that process.  He said if the applicant submitted another application, the applicant would go to the Planning Office, eventually to the Planning Commission and the City Commission would get the benefit of the Planning Commission’s recommendation.   

Mayor Hack said during the public comment portion of this discussion, the City Commission wanted to make sure that comments and questions were directed at the City Commission.  She said the City Commission along with staff would keep track of those questions and in all likelihood, those questions would not be answered at this time, but when the City Commission had a plan to look at.  She said no decision would be made and no vote would be taken at this time.  She said time limits for speakers would be discussed after staff’s presentation.

Sheila Stogsdill, Interim Planning Director, said she would walk the Commission through the last 10 years at the northwest corner of 6^th and Wakarusa.  She said approximately 10 years ago staff prepared the northwest development plan area, which was the result of the school district’s decision to locate at Free State High School.  She said that four square mile area, at that point and time, at the intersection of 6^th and Wakarusa, was identified as a future commercial location.  She said the majority of the intersection was zoned PCD-2 and PRD properties were located south of Overland and on the west side of Congressional Drive.  There were properties on a corner that was originally identified as a planned office district and it still retained its agricultural zoning designation because staff had not yet received a development plan for that property. 

She said it was first requested for PCD zoning in 1998 as part of an entire 52 acre development the World Company had proposed.  The World Company provided a concept plan, not a formal development plan that showed a mixed use development with a campus style layout.  The Planning Commission was very excited about the opportunity of looking at a 50 acre piece of property and being able to plan a larger block than the Planning Commission then was often seen in Lawrence development proposals.  She said it was approved by the City Commission, however that zoning was never implemented because there was no plan that came forward. 

After that plan, Dial Realty came into the picture and there were two development proposals that Dial Realty had put forward.  First, Dial Realty looked at zoning the entire 52 acres PCD and had a development that included more than 200,000 square feet of retail uses.  That plan was withdrawn before the public hearing and Dial Realty came back with a second request which originally was 32 acres reduced to 26 acres.  That plan had slightly less than 200,000 square feet and the City Commission denied that rezoning request and the applicant withdrew the remaining items, including that plan.

In the fall of 2001, the first 6^th Wak request came in which was a request to zone 19 acres to the PCD category and the development plan of a little over 150,000 gross square feet.  That plan was approved, along with zoning and the preliminary development plan, and a final development plan came to the Planning Commission and was approved.  It included slightly less than the original PDP approval with the 132,000 gross square foot building and two pad sites. 

In the fall of 2002, there was a proposal to increase the size of that building.  The Planning Commission recommended denial and the City Commission never saw that proposal because it was withdrawn before the City Commission acted.  She said that plan with the 40,000 square foot larger was tilted with no pad sites. 

The third request was a 157,000 gross square feet in a single building.  After that plan was denied, the City Commission actually initiated the rezoning of properties, both on that corner and the northeast corner and directed staff to prepare an area plan specifically for the intersection.  That area plan was looking at specific things and trying to identify that it was a community commercial center and specifically looking at building size limitations on both corners.  The rezonings were initiated and ultimately approved by the City Commission in April of 2004. 

Last year, the applicant submitted a rezoning request and a revised preliminary development plan to address issues that had been brought up in previous public comment.  That request reduced the overall square footage on the northwest corner from 154,000 to 128,000.  She said it did involve the rezoning request to increase the building limitation that had been placed on the City initiated zoning of 80,000 square foot in one building to include 99,990.  Last fall, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezonings and voted 5-5 on the development plan.  She said a 5-5 vote was deemed a failure to recommend and that came forward to the City Commission last fall.  The City Commission actually voted 3-2 to deny the development plan and tabled again on a 3-2 vote the rezonings.  The rezonings were actually still out there and had not had a final action.     

Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, presented the staff memo on Traffic Studies which read:

The intent of this memo is to provide a better understanding of what a traffic study means and what it is not.  Several impact studies have been completed along HWY40 / W. 6^th Street with specific reference to the proposed Wal-Mart and Bauer Farms developments.  Traffic studies are based on scientific data but there is also a judgment component.  Traffic engineers develop assumptions based on experience and similar conditions.  Traffic studies look at worse case scenario peak hour volumes.  We have heard about level of “Service F” and failing intersections.  The industry uses these terms for consistency of reporting although they are confusing and often misunderstood by the general public.

Traffic flow along a corridor is measured only at intersections where traffic is typically controlled.   Intersections have a particular level of service, i.e. a standard number of seconds that an average vehicle will have as a delay (or wait) until they can move through the intersection.  The longer the delay the lower the grade (A-F).  A level of service of any grade is the same number of seconds delay in Lawrence as it is in Paola, Kansas City, or Chicago.  However, I think it would be agreed that an intersection designated as failing in Lawrence is probably not the same as a failed intersection in Chicago at the peak hour. 

Computer models and levels of service are only as good as the assumptions made about projected volumes of traffic, distribution of vehicles through the street network, type of traffic (truck, pedestrian), traffic generators, destination of traffic, street improvement and street network.  Finally, an intersection with a designated/average level of service indicates the average amount of time a motorist may wait during a peak hour.  In Kansas City this delay may be experienced through the entire peak hour whereas in Lawrence this delay may only last for a quarter of the peak hour.

W. 6^th Street/HWY 40 Corridor

West 6^th Street improvements were completed in 2005.  The improvements included two through east and west bound lanes and provisions for dual left-turn lanes at each intersection (currently one of the lanes is stripped).  The intersections are Wakarusa, Congressional, Queens, Stoneridge Drive and George Williams Way.  All intersections will be signalized when intersecting streets are constructed.  A conduit for signal coordination was installed to each intersection.  A median between intersections and acquired/purchased access control the corridor integrity for safety and efficiency.  The intersection at Wakarusa and 6^th Street also has dedicated right-turn lanes in all directions.  The total cost of the project was $14,778,418.12; of this the city contributed $5,499,022.74.

Development

The purpose of this section is to assess the impact of trips (traffic) generated by all existing and future developments along 6^th Street from Folks Road to Congressional Drive for the target year 2025 based on approved traffic impact studies.

Two major developments are being proposed in this area, including Wal-Mart and Bauer Farms.

Intersection @ 6^th Street	Approximate Current ADT	2025
Folks Road	19,700	52,000
Champion	--
Wakarusa	22,000	57,000
Congressional	--	--

6^th and Wakarusa Drive

In 2025 the intersection at 6^th and Wakarusa will have an average delay of 46 seconds during the peak hour.  Today this is comparable to the intersections at 23^rd and Iowa (average delay of 54 seconds) or 23^rd and Louisiana (average delay of 50 seconds).  This intersection, as constructed, will operate at an acceptable level and no other improvements are needed. 

Wakarusa and Overland Drive

A right-turn lane from northbound Wakarusa to eastbound Overland Drive needs to be constructed to accommodate traffic generated by the developments today.  In order to accommodate future 2025 traffic this intersection should be signalized and additional left-turn lanes will be needed.

6^th and Congressional Drive

Improvements to this intersection include installation of a traffic signal and the extension of the existing second northbound lane on Congressional Drive to end at the Wal-Mart west drive.  These improvements will accommodate 2025 traffic needs.

Overland Drive and Folks Road

No immediate improvements are required with the proposed developments.  However, to accommodate 2025 volumes a signal and left-turn lanes will need to be constructed.

6^th and Folks Road

Additional left-turning capacity on Folks Road and 6^th Street will be needed to accommodate 2025 traffic.

6^th and Champion Lane

A westbound right-turn lane onto Champion and signalization of the intersection will accommodate the proposed development and 2025 traffic volumes.

Summary

· Access control needs to be maintained for the integrity/efficiency of the street network.

· The proposed Wal-Mart/Bauer Farm developments will add traffic to the 6^th Street corridor.

· The proposed improvements to the intersecting streets and 6^th Street can accommodate the development and anticipated 2025 volumes.

· Concurrent with approval of development plans.  Improvements to the city’s transportation system will need to be completed.  Funding for those improvements should be considered/evaluated.”

Commissioner Amyx asked about the amount of commercial along that strip versus residential and what figure was actually used in the amount of commercial space that was recommended in all the plans and what was going to be dedicated along that strip.

Soules said in the draft CORSIM summary of the VISSIM project, KDOT ran two scenarios, one scenario at 1.2 million square feet the other at 600,000 square feet more or less.  He said at this point staff did not think those numbers were up to date and staff was working with KDOT to correct those numbers.  He said he did not know specifically when the corridor was designed, what kind of commercial was being discussed.

Mayor Amyx asked if Soules understood that roadway was designed to handle up to at least 1 million square feet of development.

Soules said the corridor would support the current approved and proposed developments.

Mayor Amyx said regarding all the plans for Folks to K-10 highway, he asked how much commercial development in those plans was along that strip.

Stogsdill said the commercial development did not exceed one million square feet.  The intersection of 6^th and K-10 was a CC400 and the Northgate Development and the Mercato Development were each recently approved so the total commercial portion of that was less than 400,000 square feet.  She said what were approved at that corner currently was 154,000 square feet and 62,000 square feet of retail on the northeast corner, the Bauer Farm Development, which was for the retail commercial portion.  The remainder of that square footage would be office, multi-family and single family duplex residential. 

Commissioner Highberger asked about the other two corners on 6^th & Wakarusa. 

Stogsdill said the south side had approximately 224,000 gross square feet approved and for the most part built. 

Commissioner Highberger said he recalled KDOT came to the City Commission with the CORSIM and VISSIM study because KDOT had very serious concerns about what would happen if 1.2 million square feet was not built out and KDOT wanted to inform the Commission so that information could be taken into consideration in their deliberations. He asked whether that was a fair recollection.

Soules said yes.

Mayor Hack called for public comment.

Kirk McClure, Lawrence, said he had been trying to update the market analysis which needed to be completed.  He said as mentioned before, zoning was much more than height, bulk and use, it had to do with market impact.  When the City Commission approved a zoning, they were making a set of findings of fact and among those findings of fact was the all important timing issue; would it be to the benefit of the community if built now, would it be beneficial.  What that involved was an examination of the market place which meant they needed to come to fairly clean decisions about whether or not the market could absorb the space that was being built.  Market analysis was pretty straight forward which was applied economics, supply and demand.  They simply looked at some measure of supply, looked at measures of demand, and tried to answer the question if they were in sync.  If they were not, they would end up raising the vacancy, end up creating empty space elsewhere in the marketplace.  He said he took the original data set from the City and visually, with some help, inspected 1,100 buildings in Lawrence, Kansas.  They found some errors of omission, found some mistakes in square footage and fixed it all up.  They ended up with a valid set of buildings, 1,080 structures.  From 1995 – 2007 that stock grew by 3.0%.  This became an important benchmark.  If the demand was growing sufficiently to support that growth, they did not have a problem.  If the demand was not growing fast enough to support that much space, then they did have a problem and had a negative market impact.  He said there had been questions about what was included in the count.  The count included all kinds of commercial space because that was what was in their shopping centers.  When they built a shopping center as seen in the design earlier, they were looking at pad sites, branch banks and food service.  He said in fact if they narrowed down the definition to the narrow version of retail, and general merchandise, in fact, general merchandise had grown by 3.5% in the same years.  The supply was growing even faster if they took a narrower definition.  Personally, he was trying to get them to what he thought was the best definition and the more general definition that included food service, automotive, so forth was probably the better measure.  On the supply side, it was 3%.  The problem with the demand side was there was no way to stick a thermometer into a market and say what the demand was.  It was measured by how many people showed up and signed a lease.  If it was owner occupants, it was how many people filled space.  They had no good way to measure it and had to take half a dozen cuts at it and see the best indication of the growth and demand.  He said probably the most reliable was looking at the activity in the retail market and how much spending was going on.  Pleasantly, they could measure that very accurately through sales tax dollars.  What they found was that was growing at 0.9% and that comparison could be seen very quickly.  Supply was growing at least three times as fast as the demand.  He said a side note to leakage, because that number was subject to leakage, there had been a lot of confusion and it stemmed from the use of the survey of buying power that was used by the City’s consultant.  Surveying buying power gave a misstatement of the income pull.  The way the Kansas Department of Revenue measured was a much more reliable measure.  They looked at the ratio of spending per capita in the jurisdiction relative to state spending per capita.  If they were above the state average, they must be pulling dollars in and if they were below the state average, they must be losing dollars.  There was the problem that income levels were a little lower in Lawrence which meant they expected their ratio to be a little lower.  In fact, it turned out Lawrence’s pull factor was above 1 which meant they were a net importer of dollars.  He appreciated staff pointing out that he missed a few weeks ago the Kansas Department of Revenue updated those numbers so the numbers in his report were slightly off.  They were at 1.1 which had been up for the last three years.  He pointed out that they were not sure if they would continue to rise and the Legends effect would show up in 2006 and they have not seen the 2006 numbers yet.  He said spending in the retail market was the single best indicator and Lawrence was a net importer, but not producing dollars to produce this growth in space. 

Commissioner Amyx asked if any of his studies considered the effect of internet sales on what they were losing in this community.

McClure said that was the beauty of using the Kansas Department of Revenue’s numbers.  If they were losing sales to the internet, then obviously they were not coming through in retail sales tax dollars.  In fact, the retail sales tax dollars was the net effect after leakage, import or after the internet. 

Gwen Klingenberg, Lawrence, said she would like to address recent traffic questions and statements.  First, she wanted to take the time to compare Iowa and 31^st Street and 6^th and Wakarusa.  She said along 6^th Street, there were four direct streets into the neighborhood.  She said regarding 31^st and Iowa with those large big box stores, there was no place anyone could drive directly into a neighborhood.  The neighborhoods on Louisiana were still complaining about the traffic problems from the 31^st and Iowa intersection.  An intersection that big still had a major effect on neighborhoods.  She said to compare 6^th and Wakarusa to Iowa and 31^st was like comparing apples to oranges, but they were compared to bad fruit, at least there was a  common denominator. She asked why would the City want to build another 31^st and Iowa at 6^th and Wakarusa. 

She said traffic along 6^th Street had two studies completed.  One study from KDOT in September 2001 clearly stated that intersection would experience significant operational challenges under future development conditions if arterial flow was not preserved.  The report also indicted that cut-through traffic had already started and that traffic would be very heavy if the arterial flow was not controlled.

She said last year, KDOT completed a VISSIM model which was an objective study along that stretch of 6^th Street and was done by a competent, objective state agency.  She said KDOT was planning another model because there were changes in numbers.  When the project started, the numbers were derived directly from the development community that was planning development along 6^th Street.  The VISSIM study did not include the traffic north of 6^th Street, or north of Overland Drive, traffic coming along Highway 40 west of K-10, and development that was already built along 6^th Street.  The numbers in the chart did not include the numbers of the development, but the model did. 

She said although numbers from the original chart had dropped somewhat because of changes in the development, those numbers have not dropped to zero.  There were 50,000 and 60,000 square feet of office space at Mercato and multi-family now at Northgate because now some of the commercial had been changed.  She said studies from east coasts have shown Wal-Mart’s traffic was 3 to 5 times more traffic than any other big box.  She said the small traffic numbers that  had changed since the traffic model, the added numbers from north of 6^th and west of K-10 showed the model would create unacceptable service levels at the time of build out.  At the rate development was being approved along 6^th Street, build out would occur long before 2025.  She said everyone who had driven on 6^th Street knew the heavy traffic flow started at 3:30 p.m. until 6 p.m.

Jim Carpenter, Lawrence, said he would present to the City Commission, a status report about how the community viewed those proceedings and what was going on with the lawsuit.  He said this issue was controversial for years and one week into the new Commission’s term, they put a halt to a lawsuit.  He said there were four or five plans presented to the Commission by those developers, yet it seemed to be anticipated those developers would get another bite at the apple which left a very sour taste in the mouths of many in this community.  The fact was this issue was scheduled to go to trial on April 16^th and now, every word the Commission would utter and every act taken between now and September was potentially more fodder for this lawsuit.  They heard during the City Commission’s campaigns there was concern in the community about the costs of those lawsuits.  He compared that to the fact the prior Commission voted to expend $250,000 on a week long multimedia presentation about new urbanism.  They should compare that to the lawsuit.  Whether this community got to make decisions about its developer or give a developer more chances to get something through by bullying or expending money that caused the City to respond and spend money or the perception in the community was perhaps the developers were buying the opportunity to have another chance.  He said what was going on left a lot of questions in the minds of those citizens.  He said the citizens were at the point where they could finally find out what the decision making process was that led to this lawsuit, how they got to this lawsuit, who made what decisions, who caused the controversies, and all of that was being denied by the citizens because they had this heard in open court.  Now everything was behind the doors again, the developer got another chance, they were going to have another round, and who knew what would happen.  He asked was the Planning Commission or City Commission going to approve a new plan, or would the old plan come up and be approved by the City Commission, but whatever it was, the City Commission was looking at the potential of increased legal fees to defend this issue instead of going forward at this time.  He asked the City Commission to keep all those thoughts in mind and the perceptions of the community at large when taking those actions, consider this matter, and decide what to do by being brought up to date of the current status. 

Dickie Heckler, Lawrence, said big boxes had plenty of short comings which were not good for land use because those big boxes were too big, out of scale and out of tune for small cities.  Those big boxes were hard on local businesses, on those family’s relationships in the community, sustained by those businesses.  Big boxes created huge traffic burdens and usually paid low wages even within the generally low wage retail sector and provided few benefits or protections to employees.  Those businesses profits were more likely than not exploited out of town and maybe all the way to China.  None of the above was acceptable when speaking of land use in Lawrence, Kansas.  Simply put, Lawrence, Kansas could not afford to use their land that would promote any of the above.  The citizens would probably rather have other businesses come to town.  Large industry and professional services provided higher wages, stable taxes and fewer demands on infrastructure.  Coupled with KU, City/County governments and locally owned businesses, those types of businesses would provide for stability and growth.  However, those new employers had not been coming to town.  Waiting for those new employers, citizens become restless.  He said benefits, jobs and taxes were far less than imagined, even before those were weighed against the cost. 

An economic impact analysis of a proposed Wal-Mart in Greenfield, Massachusetts, estimated the 177 jobs it would provide would be offset by 148 jobs lost in other businesses.  A study in Iowa estimated that 84% of the sales at a new Wal-Mart would come at the expense of existing businesses.  When the same question was asked of a Wal-Mart proposed in Vermont it was concluded that 76% of Wal-Mart sales would come at the expense of local businesses.  

In common conclusion of those studies was that big boxes created little in retail sales and new jobs.  People did not spend more money, but simply spend that money in different places and the jobs sometimes follow them.  He said it was economic displacement, not economic development. It seemed Lawrence might be suffering from economic displacement rather than economic growth, which might explain the serious talk coming from the bench encouraging a variety of increased taxes. 

Lawrence must make the most from its land use.  Talk of new sales taxes locally in order to pay for street repair after 20 plus years of expanding tax base indicated that something was not working.  Therefore, land use could not be used to further promote economic displacement.  He said the strongest money a community could possess was locally circulating dollars.  He asked how the Commission knew this was absolutely the best choice for the land use at this intersection and what data was available.  He asked what current unbiased 2007 studies were available to challenge the findings of Kirk McClure and PlaceMakers who noted the retail was 30% overstocked.  Some of the members of the City Commission had publicly disagreed with the findings regarding retail growth and land use.  He asked based on what substantial document.   Lawrence, Kansas was in no position to make decisions on old information and simply disagreeing. 

As a citizen and taxpayer, he asked the City Commission provide to the tax paying public a thorough 2007 – 2008 cost of community service study in order that the taxpayers of this community might have a clue as to what area of growth in the last 20 years was not producing the desired results. 

Scott Henderson, Lawrence, said a few years back, the request for this project was denied on a 4 – 1 vote by Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA).  The BZA made a mistake in denying this request.  He was on the BZA at that time and was the only one that voted for this project to proceed.  Someone said he voted for Wal-Mart which was not the case.  He took the name Wal-Mart out of the equation and voted for the approval of this project because with the information he had at the time, there was no legal reason to deny it.  The BZA decision was legally binding and because of that, personal opinions needed to be kept out of the decisions and only look at the facts.  Several BZA members, in their summation before their vote, would say things like “I don’t think it would work and cause too much traffic” which were opinions not based on fact. 

The other item that came up as he recalled, was the City stated that Wal-Mart was a department store and Wal-Mart stated they were a variety store.  He asked the City to give a definition of what a variety store was and City staff went to the zoning code and gave him a definition of a variety store.  He then asked the definition of a department store, but the City could not come up with a definition because the City did not have that definition.  He said if comparing apples to apples, the same reference was needed.  

It was reported recently in the newspaper the City had spent over $300,000 in legal fees fighting this lawsuit.  He did not believe the lawsuit should have ever existed.  He thought the BZA, because they were a legally binding board, should have based their decision on fact and not opinion.  He asked everyone to settle this lawsuit because they were spending tax dollars like it was water and was wasting the community’s money.  He said he was at that BZA meeting, knew what he had in front of him, and knew he made the right decision.  He asked the City Commission to settle that lawsuit so they could move on.    

William Martin, Lawrence, said he had spoken before the City Commission before and his background for a couple decades was as a banker, a lawyer, and a City Council person in a small Western Kansas town.  He said his personal position was not in either camp, often seen in Lawrence, the progressive versus pro-development.  He was not a left wing radical and was not sitting in the tree when the Borders went in.  He was in favor of the South Lawrence Trafficway.  He thought a lot of the things done in Lawrence, the redevelopment of existing structures had been excellent.  He said development could be good, but without proper management it could be dangerous. 

He said, regarding McClure’s numbers as to what the existing retail situation was now, he agreed with the Mayor the issue was not what vendor would be at that location if it was approved, the issue was could Lawrence absorb that retail growth at the expense of hurting the existing infrastructure of this community. 

He said when driving through this town vacancies could be seen throughout the community.  He said there were 11 vacancies on Massachusetts Street and that figure alone was staggering. 

He said Lawrence had a positive pull factor and was drawing in more money than lost because people came to Lawrence for something that was different.  People from other cities came to this city because Lawrence offered a downtown type business district.  Everybody had faux downtowns and a lot of developments try to create what Lawrence already had. 

He said his concern was if Lawrence overdeveloped at the current pace, Lawrence was going to lose dollars because the existing structure would be hurt and would end up net losers because there would be less sales tax revenues, not more.  It was a pretty simple concept.  He said because he was in Western Kansas for so long, he could see what happened in those towns, but Lawrence was more complex and it was harder to see. 

He said he spent a lot of time talking and calling downtown merchants to ask those merchants what they felt.  He said the poll seemed to be those merchants were not anti development and wanted growth.  He said downtown felt the growth with the slow rate of sales increase and slow rate of population increase now and downtown was afraid of taking a public stance because of boycotts.  He said the bottom line seemed to be growth was okay, but not right now.  As McClure said, there was no capacity right now and adding it would exacerbate the current situation.  Added growth today would impact this City to the point of no return.  He said his overall pragmatic common sense view of talking to people and observing Lawrence for the last 40 years he had been observing the community, was they had a special thing here and needed to preserve it not for the sake of pure preservation but for the sake of the whole community and mixed growth and no growth.  He said to him, now was not the time to grow because the impact would be so negative and would sit back three or four years from now and say they made a mistake.  He did not think they could afford to make that mistake. 

Beth Ann Mansur, Lawrence, said she wanted to urge the City Commission to read the back of the bill distributed at the meeting because there was a lot of good information about building a second Wal-Mart.  She said she was saddened and concerned about the planned use for this land.  One of her concerns was for the teenagers at Free State High School.  She said those teenagers cross in the middle of the block on 6^th Street at lunch time to get to Dillon’s and more traffic was going to be a more dangerous situation.  She said if really wanting to develop, she suggested trying something different.  She said instead of a big boxed store, why not a roller rink, miniature golf, another skate board park, a soda shop, things to give teens and their families activities to do in a safe place. 

She said another benefit would be no economic displacement of local dollars and local businesses would be better able to support themselves. 

Graham Kreicker, Lawrence, said he would love to be in a town like Lawrence where a Macy’s, Dillard’s, or the Jones Company was banging at the gates trying to build a new store. 

He said the $200,000 or $300,000 spent on that lawsuit, to date, was money that was very well spent.  A dollar per person in this County was being spent get this matter dealt with and the postponement that took place was not for the best of the community and hoped the lawsuit would move forward on April 16^th so that it would be resolved for the benefit of all citizens.  He said let’s hope as things go forward there was an open hearing and this matter resolved. 

He said he could not understand telling people constantly how downtown was going to be protected and then go forward and approve project after project out on the City limits.  He said he lived near the corner of Inverness and Wakarusa and if the northwest corner of that intersection and the northeast corner of 6^th and Wakarusa were developed, he would never have to go east of Iowa Street as long as he lived in Lawrence.  He said those two developments on the northeast and northwest corners of Wakarusa would eliminate the need of anyone going downtown, all the stuff including movies and everything else would be out there.  He urged the Commission, in terms of land use, to pay heed to some of the experts and to be very slow in developing things that were actually going to cause the downtown to wither and die.  A good example of that was to drive through downtown Topeka and then drive down Wanamaker. 

Finally, many national realtors sell guns and hoped that before any projects were approved at the corner of 6^th and Wakarusa, the City’s ordinances could be revised so they could have a prohibition on not selling guns within a certain distance of any public or private school.

Dennis Constance, Lawrence, said he wanted to add his voice to some of the good information he thought had already been presented.  He urged the City Commission to listen very carefully to the information Professor McClure had provided.  The City Commission heard from a resident of one of the impacted neighborhoods about concerns about traffic that were very legitimate.  The Commission had to be concerned about the issues relevant to the lawsuit.  The Commission had to be concerned about the Wal-Mart effect which was a common consequence of a lot of large box stores in that it eroded the community.  There was the high cost of low wages effect where ending up losing more than gained.  The Commission also needed to be concerned about this issue being a manifestation of a larger phenomenon in the country that was detrimental to everyone which was the replacement of diversity with monoculture.  Instead of having a lot of individual smaller scale stores and local merchants that provided those services, they tended to put all their eggs in one basket and if something happened to that basket, the consequences were far reaching and catastrophic.  It was a little like the idea of planting all the streets with Elm trees and then Dutch Elm Disease came along and there were no trees left.  He urged the Commission to take all those things into consideration.  Lawrence always prided itself on being in the forefront and being unique and he did not think it was in anyone’s interest to turn Lawrence into everywhere USA.    

Betty Lichtwardt, Lawrence, said in a letter she sent to the Commission, the letter was in reference to a book she had been reading by Alexander Garvin who was an urban planner.  She read an excerpt out of Garvin book which stated: 

“In most cases consumers choose among stores that compete within the same trade area.  All too frequently, those shopping facilities avert customers from other commercial districts, causing vacancies and property deterioration.  If we are to improve our cities and suburbs, we must further projects that benefit surrounding communities and avoid public investment in retail facilities whose success is detrimental to other parts of town.  We also need to be sure that the induced private market reaction justifies any public action that is necessary to restore or create more retail facilities.”

She said Garvin pointed out how much investment communities put into development and was one factor the City Commission needed to consider, not just the impact of the development itself, but how much in the way of infrastructure and improvements was causing the City to invest in.  She said this was a planning issue and should be based on the facts, not opinions.

Mark O’Lear, Lawrence, said he was opposed to this project.  He said at a previous Planning Commission meeting, someone stated that Wal-Mart should be allowed at that location and businesses were leaving because Wal-Mart was not present to support those businesses and also, Wal-Mart would draw people to the area.  He said the City needed to encourage other types of businesses other than Wal-Mart.  He said he did not know if another Wal-Mart was needed and he had not heard any complaints that Wal-Mart down south was too busy and was turning people away.  He said the City was not going to get new revenue, but would see a shift, hopefully it was only a shift from the current Wal-Mart and not downtown.  He said the City was not drawing people to this community because of Wal-Mart, but because of downtown and he wanted to see downtown survive. 

He said a petition was signed by 490 people who opposed that project.  He said this project was a very contentious issue and there was a lot of opposition.

Susan Chi, Lawrence, said she was concerned about safety at the 6^th and Wakarusa intersection as well as safety in the surrounding residential neighborhoods.  She was also worried about a diminished quality of life that severe traffic would bring to their area.  Also, she questioned many of the assumptions about how the development could serve the community overall.  For example, in terms of jobs, this development would add low paying jobs to the community and she understood it was a highly educated community in comparison with most with many professional commuters.  She asked, how another Wal-Mart brought the kind of jobs to the community they were looking for. 

She said as far as tax revenue, she asked if the proposed retail development would capture dollars now being spent elsewhere.  She believed others had spoken about this issue, but it seemed there were many types of retail outlets not available in Lawrence which could explain some of the out of town spending, not to mention the out of town work and cultural events that brought residents away from Lawrence where they might shop.  Wal-Mart, Target, Ace Hardware, Dillon’s, Hy-Vee all sold similar items and already existed in Lawrence within a few minutes of the proposed site.  She wondered how sure each of the City Commissioners was that net tax revenue would increase in Lawrence if this project was moved forward. 

She said the Wal-Mart traffic studies look at a very small bull’s eye in the area.  There was no specific information about traffic impact on the intersections in the neighborhood such as Harvard and Wakarusa, leading into Harvard and Congressional, 6^th and Folks Road, Overland Drive and Folks Road, where kids were riding bikes, and walking to school.  She said as Klingenberg pointed out earlier, big box stores did not lead straight into neighborhoods from what was seen on south Iowa.  Furthermore, there was no information about the expected impact on traffic where cars exited onto Wakarusa Drive directly out of the shopping centers from both the southeast corner and southwest corner of 6^th and Wakarusa.  Those areas would all experience increased traffic loads from the large development such as that being proposed and those traffic impacts should be looked at.  The applicant’s own traffic study said that drivers might seek alternate traffic routes to avoid expected delays in the area.  The impact study should investigate the alternate routes and provide traffic data that showed the impact that would be put upon the alternate routes which were presumably through their neighborhoods.  Another problem with the applicant’s traffic study was it was conducted during the month of June, conveniently while the nearby high school was out of session.  Anyone driving near this intersection during school arrival or dismissal times at Free State knew that traffic should not have been left out of the study.  She pointed that flaw out at an earlier meeting and the applicant’s attorney later mentioned the Bauer Farms study was conducted during times when school was in session, but believed that the Bauer Farm traffic study did not consider traffic loads from this applicant’s development and furthermore neither study considered specific additional traffic loads from the newly approved large scale of retail development from the intersection at George Williams Way and 6^th Street.  Both the Mercato and Northgate intersection developments which were approved for that intersection should add quite a bit of traffic flowing in and out of 6^th and Wakarusa. 

She said she had to ask about the City’s own traffic numbers because when she was looking at the Wal-Mart traffic study, it often referred to numbers taken from City estimates, but it did not explain what that was.  She asked what City estimates were they talking about.  She said they received some of that information earlier tonight in the presentation, but did not know if the estimates were based on the idea that Horizon 2020, the City’s own planning document was being followed and in that planning document it stated that an 80,000 square foot print was all that should be permitted at the site.  She did not know if those numbers needed revising and the numbers needed to take into account all newly approved retail developments as well as current and expected residential building out in all directions of the intersection.

She said she wondered what the effect would be on pedestrians because she did not see anything about that in the traffic study she was looking at in July of 2006 from the applicant so she wondered what the effect would be on pedestrians and the neighborhood and how long of a wait they would have if they were trying to cross one of those streets.  She wondered what the effect would be on all of them in the neighborhood outside of that Wal-Mart bull’s eye that was in the few blocks of the parking lot.  She said whatever decisions that were made it would have a lasting impact on the City and its residents.  She hoped the City Commission proceeded cautiously and looked forward to a public hearing in the courts with the April court date. 

Paula Pepin, Lawrence, speaking on behalf of the West Lawrence Neighborhood Association, said they had an annual meeting six weeks ago and the topic of development at 6^th and Wakarusa was discussed at the meeting.  She said she had been contacted by neighbors through e-mail and phone and stopping by to give her information to share tonight.  She wanted to express in no way she represented everyone in the area.  She said she knew there was a variety of opinion, but the information she had was collected from people who contacted her. 

The first time she spoke publicly of the issue of development at 6^th and Wakarusa was before the Planning Commission meeting in the fall of 2001 and expressed her concerns that she wanted her children and other children to safely ride their bike or walk to the swimming pool which was going through the intersection of 6^th and Wakarusa.  She said that intersection had double turn lanes and was wide so it was hard to imagine kids crossing that intersection with the development proposed.  She was told by a Planning Commissioner at that time that 6^th Street was Highway 40 and should not expect her child to cross a busy highway and if she wanted to be able to have her children go to the swimming pool, she should build a house by the swimming pool.  She left disheartened that night because she was concerned that was the opinion of the community about walk ability and the safety of their children.  She said she knew now that it was not because they had a lot of commitment to that in the community.  She said it made her have quite a bit of commitment to that issue in their area and their neighborhood association formed shortly after that.  She said she was grateful because it allowed her to form her neighborhood association and she had gotten to know her neighbors a lot better and they have accomplished so much in the last few years.  Some of the things they had done were to work with the City to put a park and trail system in which allowed their kids to get off the busy streets, especially Harvard.  They have worked with the school district to get a crossing guard and were encouraging kids to walk to school.  They were also working on a Safe Routes to School grant at the school and the neighborhood association had been involved with that.  Another way they were trying to support was kids walking and people getting out to know their neighbors.  She said with that commitment they had to walk ability and the safety of the kids and citizens, they did have a lot of concern about how the development would affect the entire area.  Wakarusa was a huge concern and asked in the past because they were concerned Wakarusa would not be able to handle this amount of traffic and those who lived near Harvard and Wakarusa, it backed up and was difficult to get out of at times.  It was a four way stop and even now children trying to cross it and she runs across it, she really had to stop and focus and make sure she was looking at traffic coming from all directions and could not imagine there would not be a lot of traffic coming up Wakarusa to go to the potential development.  She said Chi also mentioned they were concerned about what would happen on Congressional.  There had been a traffic calming plan put in place for their neighborhood that had been approved, but has not been implemented.  She truly hoped that if the development proceeded, the City would take a close look at the traffic calming for Harvard and Congressional.  They had low speed humps and things they would like to see if they did have cut through traffic, it would slow people down.  She said she also heard from residents who were concerned about the proximity to Free State High School and there was not much more they could say about that. 

Sally Cloar, Lawrence, said she was one citizen among many citizens against any big box store at that location.  She was not opposed to development at that location, but should keep in mind what the planners did with Horizon 2020 which was conceived before she moved to Kansas.  She thought it was an excellent plan and the plan needed to follow it and listen to their citizens.

Susan Harris, Lawrence, said she lived at the intersection of Harvard Road and Stoneridge Drive.  She said she was admitting that she went into Kansas City for a lot of her shopping, but did not go to Kansas City to shop at big box stores.  She went for business clothes appropriate for her age, furniture for her house, and some of the smaller chain stores, like The Body Shop, that did not exist in Lawrence.  She said on the other hand she found Lawrence absolutely appropriate and sufficient for big box items.  She said she went to Target, World Market, Home Depot, and Best Buy.  She said she also shopped downtown whenever possible.  She said it was clear from what everyone said and every drive around Lawrence showed that Lawrence was over developed on retail space.  She said what was not needed was more big box stores or banks.  Communities like the crossing at 6^th and Wakarusa did need stores that would serve the area.  For instance, she often thought they could use a coffee shop, a place where there were Xerox machines, fax machines and other communication devices.  She said she thought if there should be another big box development, she was not advocating it but if it had to be, it should be in an area that would serve everyone, multiple communities plus the retailer.  The crossing of routes 10 and 40 has been mentioned as appropriate.  She said that would be a place for people to stop on their way to Topeka, it would bring in traffic off route 70 and would serve a lot of communities as well as the retailer.  She asked the commission to look beyond the narrow demands of the 6Wak developers and make decisions for Lawrence that serve the needs of the broad community as well as individual land owners. 

Joe Herink, Lawrence, asked if the City had followed Horizon 2020 at that intersection and said his thoughts were the City should follow Horizon 2020.  He said if not following that plan, then why did that plan exist.  He said another concern was the traffic situation.  He challenged the City Commission to go to the intersection in question tomorrow morning from 7:45 to 8:15 with stop watches to see how long it took to get from Harvard and Wakarusa through the intersection because he did not know where that 45 seconds came from.  He said if at that location at peak traffic time, 45 seconds did not even start to take care of the traffic today, let alone more development. 

He said several years ago he was at a City Commission meeting where Mustard Seed Church located at Harvard and Wakarusa requested rezoning.  He said it was his understanding that the request was turned down because of traffic concerns.  If that was true, that rezoning was going to have a far less impact than the rezoning at 6^th and Wakarusa.  He said the silent majority was waking up, even though it might be too late, and he would be the first to admit this was a sorry lot when 18% of the populous registered voters, vote.  He said at the same time, many of the citizens were highly opposed to this project and asked if in fact the City had a long range plan, Horizon 2020, the City follow that plan. 

David Smith, Lawrence, said he was present as a parent.  For several years in the recent past he often drove his sons to and from Lawrence Free State High School and knew from personal observation every single day hundreds of student drivers pour through the intersection 6^th and Wakarusa.  Those students drive through that area at 8 AM, often at noon, at 3 PM and often at 5PM, 7PM and 9PM.  Every single day he drove his sons to school he saw 16 year olds with brand new driver’s licenses making beginners mistakes.  He saw many near accidents with far less traffic than they were contemplating at this moment.  In his opinion and an opinion shared by many, it was folly and grave irresponsibility to put a traffic magnet next to a high school.  He said Klingenberg’s earlier point about turning 6^th and Wakarusa into 31^st and Iowa was well taken, but he would point out there was no high school at that intersection.  He said he believed if going forward with the construction of Wal-Mart at this site, there would be accidents involving students as a result of that decision and there might be fatalities.  When those accidents happened, if those fatalities occurred, this discussion would be remembered.  He knew the world’s largest corporation wanted to build at that site and he thought the City should have the character to say no.

Carol Eades Delnevo, Lawrence, said she was a Kansas native, KU graduate, lived out of state for the last 20 years, and last summer she and her husband decided Lawrence was where they wanted to be and where they wanted to raise their family because Lawrence was a special place. 

She appreciated all the big picture points that people had made, but she had a little picture point to make.  She said she lived west of Wakarusa and shopped at the Dillon’s at 6^th and Wakarusa and if a big box Wal-Mart superstore was built on that corner, it was really hard to see how that Dillon’s at 6^th and Wakarusa was going to compete.  She said looking down the road what she was envisioning was no Dillon’s on that corner.  In Lawrence large retail spaces had stood empty for long periods of time and she was concerned that blight would start on the southeast corner of 6^th and Wakarusa.  She thought that Lawrence residents or anyone who lived around Lawrence who chose to shop at Wal-Mart could very easily go south of Iowa and thought that in terms of the unintended consequences at putting Wal-Mart at 6^th and Wakarusa would be a price that was too high for Lawrence to pay. 

Alan Cowles, Lawrence, said he had all the traditional concerns about traffic cutting through the neighborhood.  He said his largest concern at this point was one of future expansion because the proposed future tenant would be back in a year or two asking for another 100,000 square feet in adjacent land so it could be expanded from 100,000 to 200,000 square feet or more.  He said he thought they were going to be faced in a year or two with expansion requests that involved the City’s time again and he was sure the Commission did not want to deal with the whole matter again.  He said on a couple of occasions they asked the proposed future tenant to make a commitment to not come back and ask for an expansion within a few years and the current land owners stood up and stated they had no such discussions and he believed that was true.  He said the conspicuous absence was the absence of any statement from the prospective tenant, that giant corporation and total unwillingness to stand up and make any sort of commitment and not come right back and ask for another 100,000 square feet or more.  He said he recommended to the City Commission to require a binding agreement of the prospective tenants, whoever they were, not to comeback and request expansion within the next 20 years.  

Finally, he said he thought the interest in this matter had disappeared because dwindling groups were coming to City Hall on this issue in recent years.  Much to the contrary, he noticed at a recent neighborhood get together, there was still a lot of interest in this issue and thought it was seen tonight.  He said Wal-Mart was not mentioned by name by much, there was still a great concern the City not be bullied by a giant corporation whose daily overall sales far exceed the City’s annual budget.  He said it was still a big concern and the citizens of Lawrence would be the ones who planned their community and not a giant outside corporation that was able to send $300 an hour lawyers to try to hammer the City into submission.  He asked the Commissioners to stand up for the citizens of Lawrence.

K.T. Walsh, Lawrence, said she attended the retail use session during the PlaceMakers Community Planning Week earlier this year as did many of the people in this room.  At the retail use session during that week, the PlaceMakers national retail consultant presented his analysis of Lawrence’s current situation.  The consultant had studied all the materials provided by the Chamber of Commerce, City Planning Department, and the retail study recently required of Wal-Mart.  After the consultant presented his information and took questions, he had two pieces of advice, one was to reduce retail space, constrain retail in Lawrence because the current abundance of retail created a situation where existing businesses could only get by or just make it, keep their doors open, but not make a decent living for the owners.  The consultant also advised that the recent retail analysis study by the City was deeply flawed, sub par, and pretty useless in terms of hard data.  She said this might be a moot point since they had their local expertise in McClure, but the consultant recommended the City look at their retail situation seriously, hire an objective, respected retail consultant to study the City’s current and projected situation.  He thought Bob Gibbs, a national consultant was excellent, or the 180 Degree Firm in Kansas City.  She said as an active neighborhood person, she supported the West Lawrence Neighborhood Association and their concerns about the traffic dangers to children in their area. 

            Mayor Hack said at this point the City Commission could summarize the questions in terms of traffic issues and Soules talked about working toward getting the data correct and working with KDOT to get what was needed.

Soules said yes.  Staff would be working with KDOT over the next couple of weeks to revise that model and would bring that information back to the Commission.

Commissioner Chestnut asked Soules when he did that modeling, what square footage would he base that on as far as when he was projecting out the 2025.

            Soules said staff would get together with Planning and work together on that information.

Mayor Hack said she assumed that was a standard procedure and Public Works would not operate on their own without Planning’s numbers.

Soules said LSA was responsible for the City’s long range transportation model with T-2030 so some of those traffic projections and volumes were probably received. 

Commissioner Amyx said there was a report that discussed the expansion of sales tax dollars from downtown compared to the remainder of the community and he would like to see that report using the figures from the Department of Revenue.   

Corliss said he thought Downtown Lawrence had produced that report.

Commissioner Highberger asked if Soules’ assignment included answering Chi’s question about the City estimates and the Wal-Mart traffic study. 

Soules said staff could work with Chi and try to find that information. 

Commissioner Amyx said there was a question brought up about whether or not the City had followed their plans in Horizon 2020 and asked that staff comment on that question.

Receive First Quarter City financial report and financial projections.

Casey Liebst, Budget Manager, presented an overview of the First Quarter Financial Report.  She said at the end of each quarter a report was provided of an overview of some budgetary highlights.  The report also provided an update of the implementation of the management system that was based on the goals of the previous City Commission, but used a set of performance indicators and a Balanced Scorecard to provide the City Commission with a big picture of the City’s performance.  

She said regarding the general fund, revenues were at 28% of their 2007 budget, which was an increase of 440,534 or 2.9% if compared to the same period last year.  The City’s sales tax receipts have decreased 2.4% from the first quarter of 2006.  Some other revenue sources were down, including licenses and permits, service charges, fines and interest.  Some revenue sources were up when looking at first quarter of 2007 compared to first quarter of 2006 which were property tax, inter governmental revenues, and some miscellaneous income.

Overall, the City’s expenditures in the general fund were only 21.3% of the budget which was an increase of 255,023 or 2.1% when looking at the first quarter of 2006.  A lot of that increase was public safety related, expenditures in their Fire/Medical Department and Police Department.  Parks and Recreation expenditures from the general fund did increase 14% when compared with the first quarter of last year.  However, that department had only expended 21.3% of their budget for 2007 at the end of the first quarter.  She knew Commissioner Chestnut had some questions about that information, but if looking back to prior years, 2006 first quarter was low and only spent about 19.6% of their budget at this point.  If going back two previous years, percentage was closer to the point that department was at now, so it was not as much as a cause for concern. 

There were three divisions in the general fund that was expended more than 25% of their budget.  Two of those were Public Information and Municipal Court were due to large encumbrances.  She said those divisions encumbered the money at the beginning of the year through a purchase order and spend down that purchase order throughout the course of the year.  With the example of Municipal Court, that department encumbered all those funds for their monthly lease payment, but did not spend those funds until that monthly lease payment was due.  Those numbers provided for the City Commission in the report showed the percent of that department’s budget expended including that encumbrance. 

The other division was the Levee Maintenance and the difference between their 25% budget and where that department was now, was due to the price of chemicals and other supplies that had gone up and staff would be sure to keep a close eye as the year continued.

She said regarding the special revenue funds, in the recreation fund, the revenues were up 6.7% over the first quarter of 2006.  The City’s expenditures were low this quarter which was due to the weather and as they head to the summer, the expenditures would probably go up and staff would continue to monitor those expenditures, too. 

The Transit Fund there was an overall increase of revenues of about 16% which included an 11.5% increase in the fair box receipts.  Expenditures decreased in the Transit Fund and a lot of it was due to the allocation between the federal dollars and the local dollars.  Comparing that to the first quarter of last year was not necessary that telling because the allocation was different.

She said moving on to the enterprise funds, in the water and sewer fund revenues had increased 2.7% from last year and represented 23.7% of the budget.  Expenditures were up 7.4%, but represented only 23.9% of the budget.  She said in comparison at this point last year, it was 27.2% so those expenditures were a little lower than last year at this point. In the solid waste fund, revenues were up 7.1% and the expenditures were roughly equal to this point last year.  In storm water fund, the revenues increased and the expenditures increased 4.8% but represented only 13.1% of the budget. 

She said finally, regarding the golf course, weather effected revenues and expenditures bringing in only 7.5% of budgeted revenues.  If comparing that figure from last year, during the first quarter where only 8.8% of the budgeted revenues was brought in the first three months and there again, no cause for concern.  Expenditures in the golf course were up from this quarter last year, but again represented below that 25% of budget. 

Commissioner Dever said he would like to add the year back in case there was some strange anomaly or something unusual because it would be easier for the Commission to figure out. 

Liebst said when looking at the tables in the report, the table provide one year and asked if Commissioner Dever wanted an additional year.

Commissioner Dever said yes, in order to see a trend.   

Commissioner Amyx said regarding the increase in the water and sewer revenue, he asked if that was due to the increase in rates or was there any increase in water consumption which was a question that did not need to be answered now.  He said Commissioner Highberger brought up the question a couple weeks ago about the conservation of water and thought if might be rate related increases. 

Corliss said he was going to spend a couple minutes to make sure the City Commission appreciated the budget projections.  Staff was going to spend a lot of time with this document in the coming weeks.  He said Ed Mullins, Finance Director, had put together that report and those were the City’s major tax supported funds.  In looking at the general fund, there were areas of concern in the City’s sales tax where staff had projected a 3.5% growth and there were concerns the City was not going to be able to meet that $22.5 million number in sales tax and use tax.  He said in one of the other charts, the sales and use taxes to date, and staff would continue to watch those taxes.  He said he wanted to see what it would be like, if the 2007 numbers could be altered, but the 2007 revenue numbers were pretty well set and the mill levy would not be changed.  The sales tax numbers were what they were going to be and the rate would not be changed and then quickly moved to numbers that did not have much consequence in the larger pictures of the budget.  He said if staff wanted to change 2007 numbers, 2007 expenditures needed to be reviewed.  He said in anticipation of discussions with Commissioners and some concern about the sales tax numbers was staff was looking at the City’s open positions and would continue to see whether that position needed to be filled immediately, or if it could wait, perhaps until next year.  He said as part of the continuous review of different department functions they were asking questions about structure and desires to look for efficiencies in that as well. 

In the general fund chart, it could be seen the City did not spend 100% of what was budgeted to expend in a year.  He said staff had looked at historic expenditures in the general fund and roughly it had been 97% of the budget which was the number seen in the report, the $56.3 million reflected 97% of what they budgeted in 2007.  In some discussions, particularly given the fact that they did have an imbalance with the revenues and expenditures and with some economic trends they were not perhaps moving in a favorable direction, staff wanted to take a look at what they could do to have 95%.  He said staff could talk about what the consequences would be if seeking to have the City’s expenditures not at 97% of budget, but of 95% for example.  He said that idea would be done and seeing what positions could be kept open and what type of expenditures could be deferred.  There were some items in transfers that staff might not need to make.  He said this issue was somewhat complicated because staff needed to look at a number of different moving parts and report back to the City Commission as staff continued to watch as to what that number would be.  He said clearly, if they were able to make progress on the revenue expenditure gap, which was one of the goals that he articulated last week was something he wanted to pursue with the budget, then there would be less of a gap to move in to the 2008 budget. 

He said the other major fund he wanted to point out was transit.  He said what staff had done with the Commission asked that the mill levy be taken down, the aggregate mill levy was taken down and that could be seen in the property taxes, the 2004 and 2005 numbers into 2007.  That mill levy had been reduced and reduced the revenue that was going there.  He said if they looked at the expenditures, there was some of the growth in expenditures, but it was not particularly out of line following some of the growth of the service and some of the growth of other expenditures that would be anticipated with the City’s three member staff.  He said the City had a pretty sizeable fund balance in transit when transit was started and that balance had been spent down and staff would not be able to sustain the level of service unless there were additional revenues in that transportation fund.  He said staff would need to change one or the other, the level of service or the revenues.

Mayor Hack said Galante continuously looked at the routes and which routes were used most, and asked if Galante had a contingency plan for reducing the level of service or revenues, it getting to that point.

Corliss said he had not asked Galante, but right now staff was having a discussion about increasing fares, changing some of the eligibility requirements for the para-transit in responding to some of those issues. He said this issue was going to be a challenge as to what staff would need to do to maintain the level of service and if the City Commission directed staff to look at alternatives in services.         

Commissioner Amyx said when the recommended budget came to the City Commission with a half mill decrease, the recommendation from the Commission was to take the mill levy down one more mill.  He said at the same time fund balances were being used to lower the mil levy to a mil and a half, it was forgotten to lower expenditures the same way so that it was an equal amount.  He said based on the forecast made, it would be wise to look at the 2007 expenditures and work with the City Manager on a recommendation.  He said they could look at the 95% of the budgeted expenditures and the effect that might have on the services provided.  He also suggested looking at 94% so that people could understand what the effect would be on services provided. He suggested that information be placed in a chart that would be easy to follow so people could understand.  He thought people needed to understand the City was a service business and when making changes to the City’s expenditures mid year to help the City in the following year, was where they needed to head.  It was important to understand the effects it would have on the services provided. 

Mayor Hack said she there were a variety of combinations which made it equally difficult and when discussing positions, there were detailed conversations about the need or lack thereof of some of those positions.  She wanted to make sure there was adequate history given to the Vice Mayor and Commissioner to make sure the details of that conversation were understood.

Corliss said every budget was the result of previous decisions and there was a history in why the City had done all of those things and a history of why positions and functions were added.  He said there needed to be that background as to why those decisions were made and why there was value sought in the various different services and programs.  He said staff did not want to just look at the cost, but also the benefit of all those different positions, functions and programs.  He said he had a lot of confidence in the community and growth and a lot of the exciting things they were talking about. 

Commissioner Chestnut said he was doing some number crunching and thought between 94% and 95% was appropriate.  He said it was reasonable to assume the City would fall short in total buy in excess of a million dollars from what was budgeted.  He said that represented approximately 2% of the total revenue pie.  He said if they really wanted to increase the amount of funds spent, spending down the balances that should be where they were at.  He said he was sure staff could put a plan together.                     

Mayor Hack said a cost benefit needed to be taken into consideration.  She said it was important the community understand those types of budget decisions, none of those decisions were made with the idea the City could spend anything they wanted because there were always constraints and the Commission tried to stay within certain parameters of the budget.  She said the City would be faced with some challenges to finish out this year as well as going forward on the next year. 

Commissioner Amyx said the comments he made about the budget and expenditures, he did not want it to be an effect on what he considered a fragile type of economy at this time.  He said the City had to look at their expenditures the same way as businesses had to do throughout the community.

He said Mayor Hack brought up the idea of a sales tax which he thought would work very well.  He said the Commission needed to have discussions on whether or not the City could afford to proceed with those major projects, specifically things like the Library or PLAY which were both excellent programs, but the strain on businesses and families right now were being seen in the City’s own budget concerns. 

Mayor Hack said the problem with the big items was the on-going expenses.  She said she was glad the City Commission’s Goal Setting Sessions overlapped their budget discussion because that allowed the City Commission to prioritize.                                           

Commissioner Chestnut said he thought there was an opportunity because when looking at the first quarter with the understanding there was a shortfall.  One thing to emphasize was the City’s Department Heads could step up to the plate and they would be in a better position to make those decisions with the parameters the City Commission established.  He said in this was a cost benefit situation and understanding what could be done and being creative to reduce expenditures, but also looking at the consequences.  He said he did not want to get into a situation in a year or two where there was a fund balance putting the City on the edge and then significant decisions needing to be made that had not been as well thought out.     

Commissioner Dever said he looked at the number and got a good sense that everyone knew the City was in need of adjustments in spending, but while the City tightened its own belt, they needed to also be looking into the future and be optimistic about growth and increasing those numbers through making Lawrence an attractive place to do business and to shop.  He said it was important the Commission act as though there was issues regarding the City’s monetary condition, but also be looking into the future to try to change it so those types of options were not necessary month.

Corliss said the direction he heard from the Commission was to advise the Commission on the consequences as the Commission looked at expenditures at 94% to 95% and respond to specific questions the City Commission had about the different programs.  He said a lot of the City’s expenditures were investments.  He said less revenue meant the City needed to look at reducing expenditures.                                                                                                                  (20)

PUBLIC COMMENT:            None

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:

05/15/07	●        Mayor Hack plans to be absent from the meeting. ●          Public Hearing on special assessment benefit district hearings for improvement/construction of George Williams Way north and south of West 6^thStreet
TBD	●          Salvation Army Site Plan and Rezoning; ●          Retail Marketing Analysis Code provisions ●         Neighborhood Revitalization Act proposals for target neighborhoods and downtown; NRA policy statement

                                                                                                                                    (21)

COMMISSION ITEMS:

Moved by Amyx, seconded by Chestnut, to adjourn at 11:00 p.m.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                                                       

APPROVED                                                                _____________________________

Sue Hack, Mayor

ATTEST:

___________________________________

Frank S. Reeb, City Clerk

CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 1, 2007

1. Agreement - Public Improvements for Wakarusa, Landplan Engineering for $2,040.

2. Bid date- June 5, 2007 for Kaw Water Supply Low Service Pump Station No. 2.

3. Ordinance 8107- 1^st Read, 20 MPH speed limit on 15^th & Engel Road.

4. Ordinance No. 8100- 2^nd Read, SUP, Lawrence Community Shelter, 944 Kentucky for additional 3 yrs.

5. Ordinance No. 8102- 2^nd Read, sale, consumption, and possession of alcoholic beverages at Broken Arrow Park on May 11-12, 2007.

6. Ordinance No. 8103- 2^nd Read, condemn property 2300 Louisiana Street.

7. Reimbursement Agreement – KTA for construction of sidewalk on N. Michigan Bridge. 

8. Mortgage Release – Shannon Graham, 2005 W. 19^th Court.

9. Subordination Agreement – Donna Williams and Jean Dixon, 1601 Kenwood Drive.

10. Removal telephone system – Kaw Water Treatment Plant by R&R Communications. 

11. 2007 1^st Quarter Case Management Report - Bert Nash.

12. 2006 Tax Abatement Annual Report.

13. Variance - Private sanitary sewer service line connection, Oregon Trail Addition Plat.

14. City Manager’s Report.

15. Presentation from ECO2 Commission.

16. Grant application for rescue vehicles for Fire/Medical Dept.

17. Federal Transit Admin - FY 2007 Bus and Bus Facilities Discretionary Program Grand for replacement of 7 fixed route vehicles & 3 paratransit vehicles.

18. Letter of Agreement & Request for Provisionally Accredited Levee Designation & Agreement to Provide Adequate Compliance with Code of Federal Regulations.

19. Status report – Proposed land use at NW corner of 6^th & Wakarusa.

20. 1^st Quarter City financial report & financial projections.

21. Future Agenda Items.