|
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Regular Agenda -- Public Hearing Item
|
|
ITEM NO. 9: TEXT AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 20 DEVELOPMENT CODE (JCR)
TA-04-04-07: Consider proposed amendments to Chapter 20, Article 8 Subdivision Regulations for Lawrence and Unincorporated Areas of Douglas County regarding access standards. Initiated by the Planning Commission on April 23, 2007.
Pursuant to the provisions of K.S.A. Chapter 12, Article 7, consider revisions to the adopted “Development Code, July 1, 2006 Edition,” enacting a new Chapter 20 of the Code of the City of Lawrence, Kansas, establishing comprehensive zoning regulations and other land use regulations. The “Development Code, July 1, 2006 Edition” is a general and complete revision of the City’s existing zoning regulations and affects all property within the corporate limits of the City of Lawrence, Kansas. The “Development Code, July 1, 2006 Edition” is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth in this notice. Copies of the “Development Code, July 1, 2006 Edition” and proposed revisions are available for review at the Office of the Lawrence-Douglas County Planning Department, City Hall, 6 E. 6th Street, Lawrence, Kansas. The “Development Code, July 1, 2006 Edition” and proposed revisions are also available at www.lawrenceplanning.org. |
|
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission forward a recommendation for denial of the proposed amendments [TA-04-04-07] to Chapter 20, Article 8 Subdivision Regulations for Lawrence and Unincorporated Areas of Douglas County regarding access standards to the City Commission. |
|
Reason for Request: |
A member of the public has requested amending Section 20-810(d)(2)(iii) and has proposed revised language for this section. This section of the Subdivision Regulations provides standards which state the maximum number of residential building lots or dwelling units that may be developed which have only one route of access (or access point) to an arterial or collector street. The applicant would like to increase the maximum number of lots or dwelling units. |
|
RELEVANT GOLDEN FACTOR:
|
|
PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED PRIOR TO PRINTING · The League of Women Voters provided a letter in opposition to the proposed amendment dated April 22, 2007.
|
OVERVIEW OF REVISIONS PROPOSED
Revised language has been proposed by the applicant who proposes to increase the number of lots or dwelling units permitted in a development which has only one access point to a collector or arterial street.
The current language states that “No new subdivision shall be approved in which more than 35 lots or potential dwelling units, or more than 25,000 square feet of nonresidential space will have access to the public road system via a single outlet to the arterial or collector street system as shown on the adopted Major Thoroughfares Plan.”
The applicant proposes two proposals, the first based upon Fire Codes and the second based upon Fire Codes, but with a limitation on total number of units. The applicant prefers that the second option because limitations are provided. However, the limitations provided are higher than those which currently exist in the code. Please see the two proposals below:
Proposal 1
No new
subdivision shall be approved in which more than 35 lots or potential
dwelling units 30 one or two family potential residential
dwelling units, 100 multiple-family (three units or more) potential residential
dwelling units, or more than 25,000 square feet of nonresidential space
will have access to the public road system via a single outlet to the arterial
or collector street system as shown on the adopted Major Thoroughfares Plan.
Where there are more than 30 one or two family dwelling units on a single
outlet and all dwelling units are quipped throughout with an approved automatic
sprinkler system in accordance with the Fire Code, access from two directions
shall not be required. Subdivisions with up to 200 multiple-family (three
units or more) dwelling units may have a single outlet when all buildings,
including nonresidential occupancies, are equipped throughout with approved
automatic sprinkler systems installed in accordance with the Fire Code.
Proposal 2
No new
subdivision shall be approved in which more than 35 lots or potential
dwelling units 30 one or two family potential residential
dwelling units, 100 multiple-family (three units or more) potential residential
dwelling units, or more than 25,000 square feet of nonresidential space
will have access to the public road system via a single outlet to the arterial
or collector street system as shown on the adopted Major Thoroughfares Plan.
Where there are more than 30 but not more than 100 one or two family
dwelling units on a single outlet and all dwelling units are equipped
throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with the
Fire Code, access from two directions shall not be required.
Safety and connectivity are the two primary reasons for limiting the number of lots or dwelling units with a single point of access. While it appears the proposed language is consistent with Fire Codes, this does not mean that the proposed language would result in development which is accessible by other emergency responders. The issue of connectivity is a significant planning and land use concern. Generally, the more intense a development is (i.e. more lots or dwelling units) the greater the need for multiple access points or increased connectivity. There are many reasons for this. Increased connectivity disperses traffic which reduces congestion. For instance, a single access point to a development with large numbers of residential lots or dwelling units may result in significant congestion on the access route, thus resulting in delays and increased difficulty for timely emergency response. Connectivity provides more options for the driver and pedestrian to navigate into, out of, and throughout their neighborhood. More connectivity in the community results in reduced traffic impacts on collector and arterial streets because the driver has alternate routes of travel. Furthermore, increased connectivity encourages walking and bicycling, not just for recreational purposes but also as legitimate forms of transportation because connectivity tends to reduce distance between destinations and because a pedestrian or bicyclist may have the ability to travel between destinations on safer, quieter and less-traveled streets. From the perspective of the environment and sustainable development, increased connectivity has been shown to result in decreased energy consumption because connectivity reduces dependence on automobile travel and creates shorter distances between destinations.
The picture below demonstrates that greater connectivity creates more options for pedestrians, bicyclists, drivers and those using transit services. Lack of interconnected streets and connectivity between neighborhoods forces the traveler to reach their destination by entering a major street which compounds congestion on the major street. Such a route is less direct, which discourages pedestrian and bicycle travel.
Conformance with Horizon 2020
Horizon 2020 encourages street connectivity. Chapter 5, Residential Land Use – Neighborhood Concept #5 states:
“Connectivity should be included within neighborhoods as well as to the surrounding neighborhoods wherever possible. These provide alternative routes to ease traffic congestion and help limit the use of cul-de-sacs. Alleys and short blocks maximize connectivity. Pedestrian/non-motorized access and alternate modes of transportation including public transit should be incorporated wherever possible. Open space, greenbelts, and trails can provide linkages throughout the neighborhood.”
In support of this statement, Horizon 2020 provides the following graphic display to compare appropriate and inappropriate street systems which demonstrate the importance of connectivity:
Criteria For Review and Decision-Making
Section 20-1302(f) provides review and decision-making criteria on proposed text amendments. It states that review bodies shall consider at least the following factors:
1) Whether the proposed text amendment corrects an error or inconsistency in the Development Code or meets the challenge of a changing condition; and
2) Whether the proposed text amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the stated purpose of this Development Code (Sec. 20-104).
[Section 20-104 of the Development Code states that the purpose of the Development Code is to implement the Lawrence/Douglas County Comprehensive Land Use Plan (Horizon 2020) and other applicable plans adopted by the City Commission, hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Comprehensive Plan” – in a manner that protects, enhances and promotes the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Lawrence.]
Recommendation
The proposed amendment is not consistent with the goals of Horizon 2020 as it would permit a higher intensity of development with one access point, and thus less connectivity. Furthermore, the proposed amendment is not a clear correction to an error or inconsistency, nor does it answer the challenge of changing conditions. If anything, greater connectivity (additional access points into and out of a development) is an issue more and more municipalities are attempting to obtain in new development for the reasons explained above. Therefore Staff does not support the amendment to this section of the Subdivision Regulations as proposed.