PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
January 28 & 30, 2008
Meeting Minutes
______________________________________________________________________
Commissioners
present: Carter, Chaney, Eichhorn,
Finkeldei, Harris, Hird, Lawson, and Moore
Staff present:
McCullough, Stogsdill, Day, A. Miller, J. Miller, Leininger, and Brown
______________________________________________________________________
MINUTES
Discussion regarding December 17 & 19, 2007 draft minutes -
Commissioner Harris emailed her suggested changes
prior to the meeting. In the email she suggested changing wording by John
Miller regarding quasi judicial.
Mr.
Commissioner Eichhorn had a few minor changes to
page 25 that he said he would email to Planning Staff.
Commissioner Finkeldei stated that he left the
December Planning Commission meeting early but that he would vote on the minutes.
Motioned by Commissioner Finkeldei, seconded by
Commissioner Chaney, to approve the minutes of the December 17 & 19, 2007
meeting with the suggested changes.
Motion carried, 7-0-1 with Commissioner
Carter abstaining.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Commissioner Finkeldei said that TAC met and had an
extensive meeting and then met again with the T2030 group. Most of the items discussed
are on the agenda tonight or are in progress. They worked on updating the TIP,
draft by-laws for a new reconstituted MPO, and thoroughfare maps.
Commissioner Moore said the Industrial Committee
is in the process of being formed.
Commissioner Harris said that the T2030 committee met
regarding the T2030 draft that will be presented Wednesday night at Planning
Commission.
Commissioner Eichhorn said that RZO did not meet.
COMMUNICATIONS
Mr.
EX PARTE /
ABSTENTIONS / DEFERRAL REQUEST
· No ex parte.
· Abstentions:
Commissioner Eichhorn abstained from the Consent Agenda.
PC Minutes 1/28/08
ITEM NO. 1:
FDP-12-18-07: Final Development Plan for
Motioned
by Commissioner Finkeldei seconded by Commissioner Harris to approve the Final Development Plan based upon the findings of
fact presented in the body of the Staff Report and subject to the following
conditions:
1.
Execution of a
site plan performance agreement;
2.
Revise plan to
show dimension of total building width and length;
3.
Revise plan to
dimension size of storage area;
4.
Revise plan to
show the parking provided for this phase only; and
5.
Submission and
approval of SWP3 prior to release of the Final Development Plan for issuance of
a building permit.
Motion carried 7-0-1, as part of the Consent Agenda. Commissioner
Eichhorn abstained.
PC Minutes 1/28/08
ITEM NO. 2: RM24 TO RSO; 4.41 ACRES; SOUTH HALF OF
Z-10-69-05: A request to rezone two tracts of land
totaling approximately 4.41 acres from RM24 (Multi-Dwelling Residential) to RSO
(Single-Dwelling Residential-Office) [Note: the request originally rezoned the
tracts from RM-2 (Multiple-Family Residential) District to RO-1B
(Residence-Office) District]. The property is generally described as being
located north of
STAFF
PRESENTATION
Ms. Leininger presented the item. She stated the reason
for the request was to follow the recommendations of the HOP District Plan to zone property to the current use based on the
neighborhood association task force study and recommendations.
Commissioner Moore asked if the existing use in
the club would be a legal use in the RSO district.
Ms. Leininger said that in the use in the RSO
district it would require a Special Use Permit but since they are existing they
would be grandfathered. If they were to make significant changes they would be
required to get a Special Use Permit.
Commissioner Moore asked if it was correct that at
this point they would not need to do an SUP.
Ms. Leininger said that was correct.
PUBLIC
HEARING
Emily Hill, Vice President of Hillcrest Area Neighborhood
Association, worked with Planning for 4 years to develop and implement the
plan. The same rezoning was unanimously approved by Planning Commission previously.
She stated that approving this proposal would reaffirm a decision that Planning
Commission already made. She said the primary goal was to create a plan that
would insure positive development in this area of
Sean Williams, gave the history of the area. He stated
that the transportation changed over the years but the zoning was never changed
to reflect the current lower density uses. He said that
ACTION TAKEN
Motioned by Commissioner Harris, seconded by
Commissioner Moore to approve the rezoning of approximately 4.41 acres from the
RM24 District to the RSO District and forwarding it to the City Commission with
a recommendation for approval based on the findings of fact found in the body
of the staff report.
Commissioner Finkeldei disclosed he had ex parte
conversation with Emily Hill about the background on the project.
Unanimously approved 8-0.
PC
Minutes 1/28/08
ITEM NO. 3: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR NORTH FORTY FARMS; 1768 E 1100 ROAD (SLD)
CUP-12-11-07: Conditional Use Permit for North Forty Farms, located at 1768 East
1100 Road. Submitted by Paul Werner
Architects, for North Forty LC, property owner of record.
Item 3 was
deferred prior to the meeting.
PC
Minutes 1/28/08
ITEM NO. 4: INITIATE AMENDMENT TO COMMISSION’S BY-LAWS (SDM)
Consider
initiating an amendment to the Commission’s by-laws to revise the processes
related to posting agendas and other procedural issues to transition to a more
internet-based PC packet.
ACTION TAKEN
Motioned by Commissioner
Finkeldei, seconded by Commissioner Carter to initiate amendment to the Commission’s by-laws to revise the
processes related to posting agendas and other procedural issues to transition
to a more internet-based PC packet.
Unanimously
approved 8-0.
PC
Minutes 1/28/08
ITEM
NO. 5: CPA-2004-02 (AAM) DISCUSSION ITEM; NO ACTION
CPA-2004-02: Receive Board of
County Commissioners recommendation to reconsider a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to Horizon 2020, Chapter 7: Industrial and Employment Related Land
Use. Referred to the Planning Commission on
STAFF PRESENTATION
Ms.
Commissioner Eichhorn
inquired about soils.
Ms. Miller asked for
feedback based on locational criteria.
PUBLIC HEARING
Ms. Nancy Thellman,
Citizens for Responsible Planning, expressed concern about the proposed
industrial development on prime agricultural farm land located on the northern
border of
She stated that the cost
of the proposed infrastructure was estimated by the city at over $8 million.
Serious concerns arose over the city’s ability to provide sufficient flood
protection for
Citizens for Responsible
Planning intend to start conversations about land use issues having to do with
the land: soil type, soil slope, soil stability, as well as floodplain, and
flood fringe development issues. It is their belief that the land identified by
the snowflake in the new revised Chapter 7 as “the land around the airport, and
land south of 24/40” is not suitable for light industry, light manufacturing,
heavy trucking, commercial, or residential uses. She said that before
identifying the area as future industrial that it deserved to be studied
thoroughly. She also stated that the
She requested that the
revised Chapter 7 remove the snowflake from the prime agricultural land around
the airport so that proper studies may be made without the influence and
pressure of premature development.
Commissioner Hird asked
Ms. Thellman if she had comments on the general criteria for identifying the
use.
Ms. Thellman said keeping
a close eye on biological sensitive areas and making the best judgment about
the land.
Commissioner Lawson asked
if Ms. Thellman was responsible for the recent letter (Citizens for Responsible
Planning position paper) about the land use north of the river.
Ms. Thellman replied yes.
Commissioner Lawson told
Ms. Thellman that the tone of the letter and her presentation style were very
similar and he found it to be a compelling document. He asked what her suggestion
would be regarding the identification of prime farmland.
Ms. Thellman said that
Citizens for Responsible Planning has several people working on that and that
they would present that information during the January 30th Planning
Commission meeting with the SmartCode item. She said they had objective data to
identify prime farmland.
Commissioner Lawson
asked what soil classification would be designated for prime farm land.
Ms. Thellman replied, class
1.
Commissioner Lawson asked
if they had given any thought to including class 2 soil. He said that most of
his questions would be directed to the USDA land use classifications.
Ms. Barbara Clark,
member of Citizens for Responsible Planning, said that it should be objective. She
stated the only reason they have not studied class 2 soils was because they
have focused on the soils within the study area and those have been class 1 soils,
Eudora series and Rossville series. She said that if the study area was
extended than there may be class 2 soils included in the study. She stated that
the snowflake and bulls eye are endangering class 1 soils. She said that there
are other class 1 soils that do not have the capabilities that are in the
Commissioner Lawson said
that the criteria needs to be reduced to something specific enough that it can
be utilized. He wondered how they should handle one property that may have
multiple soil types.
Ms. Clark said that
Commissioner Lawson
supported the premise that Citizens for Responsible Planning was starting with
and felt it could be a good service to the community, but felt it would need to
move toward specification and not subject to debate.
Ms. Clark encouraged
them to look at the government Web Soil Survey site, http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/
Ms. Thellman assured Commissioner
Lawson that they are basing their study off of science and data.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
Mr. McCullough said that
the direction from
Commissioner Eichhorn
felt that the community was better served with a snowflake map that identifies
industrial locations.
Commissioner Finkeldei
said the airport was built where it is because it was flat and that flat land
was primary farm land. He inquired about the difference between general and
specific criteria.
Ms. Miller stated that
the way that the chapter was originally designed was that there was general
locational criteria and that the specific locational criteria was for once a site
was obtained. So within that one site it would be more specific. It is a tiered
system.
Commissioner Finkeldei asked
if the wording saying “they should substantially meet the following general
criteria” was intentional because the word “substantially” was not used in
other areas.
Ms. Miller said the word
“substantial” was added late in the game.
Commissioner Finkeldei said
that inconsistencies have happened before where Horizon 2020 says different
things on the exact same topic.
Commissioner Harris also
noticed the difference in wording that Commissioner Finkeldei did. She said
that general criteria should pertain to characteristics of the land and general
information about services. Specific criteria should apply at the time of a
project proposal, such as adjacent land uses and more specific information
about infrastructure. She said that a map could be developed showing what
sections of town meet all general criteria. She also suggested moving some specific
criteria into the general criteria. If a map is developed with no sites then
maybe they should check for areas to allow for industry.
Ms. Miller asked
Commissioner Harris if it should meet all the general criteria.
Commissioner Harris replied
yes. She felt the general and specific criteria should be worked on.
Commissioner Finkeldei inquired
about natural stormwater management.
Ms. Miller said the
original intent would be for natural stormwater management which would mean
potentially direct discharge into the floodplain. Stormwater improvements can
be costly so the more natural means that can be used would be best.
Commissioner Finkeldei said
that some industrial uses they would not want discharge directly into the
floodplain but rather run it through something that would clean and protect it.
Ms. Miller said she has
been in contact with the City Stormwater Engineer. She said that for some heavy
industrial users that could be looked at.
Commissioner Lawson asked
if they should back up and start this from the idea of what the absolute non-negotiable
criteria are and then move out to things that are desirable but not as
absolutely conditional. Should they start with the premise that there will not
be industrial on prime farmland because that is one of the few things that cannot
be changed. He stated that location proximity to transportation can be changed
with money and bulldozers. Slope can be changed with money and bulldozers.
Annexation can be changed as well.
Commissioner
Hird said that some of the general criteria, specifically those with respect to
services necessary to support development, seem to be related to specific
criteria that references adequate utility infrastructure. He asked if those
were related.
Ms. Miller said she
thought they were.
Commissioner Hird said
he was not sure what services were necessary to support the development and thought
that it would change depending on the specific project. He inquired if that was
a general criteria for selecting an industrial site if the sub criteria change
depending on the specific application. He felt that the environmentally
sensitive areas were important but it seemed more like a Site Plan issue than
of criteria for selection of industrial sites. He asked if there had been
analysis of other snowflake sites that are class 1 soils. He also asked if they
had considered
Mr. McCullough replied no,
but felt that this chapter probably comes from the angle from being a development
prone chapter. He said that a lot has been put out into the public from the
airport project. He stated that this was an industrial chapter looking for ways
to get industry in the county. He said that at one point the governing bodies
were fairly comfortable with the snowflake areas. They have not recently looked
at agriculture land with the other snowflakes.
Commissioner Eichhorn asked
if they should revisit the premise of not having industrial development outside
of the city.
Ms. Stogsdill said that
it was in chapter 7.
Commissioner Finkeldei
said that “able to be served with services necessary to support the specific
development” should be moved to specific criteria. He also said that average
slopes and prime agricultural farm land should be moved to the general
criteria. He felt that the specific criteria are not really locational criteria
but more should be.
Commissioner Moore said
he was at the
Commissioner Hird asked
if this address existing industrial uses in the county.
Ms. Miller said the
locational criteria was for siting new development.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
Commissioner Moore felt
that a map was needed.
Ms. Miller said she made
assumptions with transportation regarding feedback from the Chamber of
Commerce. The number one request they have is to be within 1 mile of I-70.
Commissioner Harris said
Ms. Miller should ask the Chamber about her assumptions and if that is their
criteria.
Ms. Miller said she
would like to put the secondary criteria as being 1 mile of any state highway. She
said that the Chamber did not have one request to any other highways other than
I-70.
Commissioner Harris said
they might also want to look at bridges and which ones can take the truck
traffic.
Mr. McCullough inquired
about how they wanted to proceed with the Industrial Committee. He asked if
they wanted discussion to go to that committee first or have it come back to Planning
Commission. He said that
Commissioner Eichhorn
said that the airport asterisk says specifically airport related industrial. His
comment was to put all sites back on the table since it was not a complete
package to begin with.
Commissioner Harris felt
that the criteria should be worked on first and if the snowflake fits the
criteria then I there was no reason why it could not be there but if it does
not fit then take it off the map.
Commissioner Finkeldei
agreed with Commissioner Harris and felt a committee might be helpful.
Commissioner Eichhorn
said that the Industrial Sub Committee could work on the criteria.
Mr. McCullough said that
they can bounce criteria mapping off that committee and help weigh those
factors.
NO ACTION TAKEN
PC
Minutes 1/28/08
ITEM NO. 6: AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLES 3 & 5, COUNTY ZONING
REGULATIONS (SMS)
TA-08-07-06:
Amendments
to Articles 3 & 5 of the County Zoning Regulations regarding the
definition of lot width and the establishment of setbacks along roads based
upon road classification. [Revisions associated with proposed rural
development regulations.]
Item 6 was
deferred prior to the meeting.
PC Minutes 1/28/08
ITEM NO. 7: RMG TO CN1; .483 ACRES; 1420 CRESCENT ROAD (SLD)
Z-07-15-07: A request to rezone a tract of land
approximately .483 acres, from RMG (Multi-Dwelling Residential-Greek Housing)
to CN1 (Inner Neighborhood Commercial). The property is located at 1420
Crescent Road. Submitted by Barber Emerson, LC, for William Muggy, property
owner of record.
Item 7 was
deferred prior to the meeting.
PC
Minutes 1/28/08
MISCELLANEOUS NEW OR OLD BUSINESS
Mr. McCullough said that there had been
interest in attending the American Planning Association conference by several
Planning Commissioners and Planning staff.
Consideration of any other business to come before the Commission.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Recess at
PC Minutes 1/30/08
__________________________________________________________________
Reconvene
Commissioners
present: Carter, Eichhorn, Finkeldei,
Harris, and Moore. Quorum not met
Staff present: McCullough, Stogsdill, J.
Miller, Moore, and Brown
_______________________________________________________________________
BEGIN PUBLIC
HEARING (
COMMUNICATIONS
·
No Communications
EX PARTE / ABSTENTIONS /
DEFERRAL REQUEST
·
No parte.
·
No
Abstentions.
There were only five Planning Commissioners in
attendance. Quorum was not met to hold the meeting.
Mr.
PC
Minutes 1/30/08
ITEM
NO. 8: CPA-2007-6 (MJL)
CPA-2007-6: Amend Horizon 2020 by creating Chapter 15 – Place
Making to ensure proper comprehensive plan language is in place for the
proposed Lawrence SmartCode in the City of
Item 8 deferred
to February Planning Commission.
PC Minutes 1/30/08
ITEM
NO. 9: CPA-2007-7 (DDW)
CPA-2007-7: Amend Horizon 2020, Chapter 14 Specific Plans, to
add a reference to the Lawrence SmartCode Infill Plan.
Item 9 deferred
to February Planning Commission.
PC
Minutes 1/30/08
ITEM
NO. 10: ADOPTION OF THE
TA-11-24-07: Pursuant to the
provisions of K.S.A. Chapter 12, Article 7, consider making a recommendation on
the adoption of “Lawrence SmartCode” enacting a new Chapter 21 of the Code of
the City of Lawrence, Kansas, establishing comprehensive zoning regulations and
other land use regulations. The “Lawrence SmartCode” is an optional development
code that is parallel to the City’s existing zoning and subdivision regulations
and affects all property within the corporate limits of the City of Lawrence,
Kansas. Copies of the “Lawrence SmartCode” are available for review at the
Office of the Lawrence-Douglas County Planning Department, City Hall,
Item 10 deferred
to February Planning Commission.
PC Minutes 1/30/08
ITEM NO. 11A MINIMUM
MAINTENANCE; N 1 ROAD (DCM)
MM-12-03A-07: Request to designate minimum maintenance road status
for a portion of N 1 Road within
Item 11A deferred
to February Planning Commission.
PC
Minutes 1/30/08
ITEM NO. 11B MINIMUM
MAINTENANCE; E 200 ROAD (DCM)
MM-12-03B-07: Request to designate minimum maintenance road status
for a portion of E 200 Road within
Item 11B deferred
to February Planning Commission.
PC
Minutes 1/30/08
ITEM NO. 11C MINIMUM
MAINTENANCE; E 600 ROAD (DCM)
MM-12-03C-07: Request to designate minimum maintenance road status
for a portion of E 600 Road within
Item 11C deferred
to February Planning Commission.
PC
Minutes 1/30/08
ITEM NO. 11D MINIMUM
MAINTENANCE; E 650 ROAD (DCM)
MM-12-03D-07: Request to designate minimum maintenance road status
for a portion of E 650 Road within
Item 11D deferred
to February Planning Commission.
PC Minutes 1/30/08
ITEM NO. 12 TRANSPORTATION
2030 (DCM)
Receive the draft Transportation 2030 (T2030) to begin official open comment period.
T2030 is the updated version of T2025 and
will serve as the long-range transportation plan for the City of
Jim Tobaben, Planning &
Engineering Manger for Parson’s Brinkerhoff Americas, presented the highlights
of the draft T2030 plan.
Commissioner Eichhorn
explained to Commissioner Carter that County and City Commission will not act
on the T2030 since the MPO has the authority to approve it. City & County
Commission will just receive it as another outlet for the public to receive it.
Ms.
PUBLIC HEARING
No public comments.
NO ACTION TAKEN
PC
Minutes 1/30/08
ITEM NO. 13 TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (DCM)
Receive and approve the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
Policy. The policy describes the TIP development process, methods in
amending the TIP, and defining what a “regionally significant” project shall
consist of.
Item 13 deferred
to February Planning Commission.
PC
Minutes 1/30/08
ITEM NO. 14 2008-2011
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (DCM)
Receive the draft FY 2008-2011 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to begin
official open comment period. The TIP is a multi-year listing of federally
funded and regionally significant non-federally funded improvements to the
Item 14 was
deferred prior to the meeting.
PC Minutes 1/30/08
MISCELLANEOUS NEW OR OLD BUSINESS
Consideration of any other business to come before the Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION
ADJOURN