[E-minutes] January 21, 2003 - City Commission meeting minutes
Diane Trybom
dtrybom@ci.lawrence.ks.us
Mon, 21 Apr 2003 14:26:11 -0500
January 21, 2003
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 Dunfield, Henry, Kennedy, and Rundle present. Student
Commissioner Elmore was present.
The City Commission recognized the Friends of Lawrence Parks & Recreation
Department. These individuals had made contributions to the department
through either donations or as a volunteer during 2002. Roger Steinbrock,
Marketing Supervisor, Parks and Recreation Department, announced the
following groups or individuals receiving certificates:
Name Donated Item(s)
Adam Irwin Free weights to East
Lawrence Recreation Center
Lawrence Homebuilders Assoc. & Landplan Engineering $1,500 for
youth scholarships
Meredith Docking 30 hybrid
tea "Meredith" roses
John McGrew $1,595 for riparian
tree planting at the Pat Dawson
Billings Nature Area
Howard Pines Green House Bedding
plants
Ely Stogsdill & Scout Troop #59 Eagle Scout
planted 200 seedlings for future park
trees
Aventis Pharmaceuticals $100 on behalf of
Dr. Mary Vernon
Frances Gale $225 to the Memorial
Tree Program in Memory of Paula T.
Gale
Zivo Walkup $53.45 donation to
the Memorial Tree Program
Sharon Leffott/Hillcrest Elementary School $25.00
donation to Special Populations programs in memory
of Keith Leggott
Joyce Lutz $100 donation to
Memorial Tree Program
Chuck Kelly Two bicycles & a
portable basketball goal
Lunker's Bait, Tackle & Hunting Supplies $500 in
prizes for fishing derbies
Francis Sporting Goods Co-sponsored Mass.
St. Mile and helped with t-shirts
Jayhawk Trophy Co-sponsored Mass.
St. Mile and donated medals
Cathy Musik/KS State Research & Extension-DG County Helped with
special programming for holiday programs, spring
break camp, summer playgrounds and nature day camp
Connie Detweiler/KS State Research & Extension-DG County Helped with
nutrition program for summer camp, spring break
camp, and summer playgrounds
Breakfast Optimist $400
donation and provided volunteers for the Halloween
Paint-in. Also provided $500 co-sponsorship for reversible
Youth Sports shirts
Checker's Donated
drinks and turkeys at cost for Turkey Trot. Also
provides discount on supplies throughout the year for special
events
Let It Ride Donated prizes for
skateboard competition
Douglas County Safe Kids Coalition Donated
skateboard helmets and co sponsored the
skateboard competition
Jock's Nitch Sporting Goods $200
donation in gift certificates for Turkey Trot and
Dam Run
Play-It-Again Sports 20 doz.
Youth Safe-T balls for youth tee-ball league
Bill Kelly
Contributions to the Lawrence City Band
Barbara Kelly Contributions to the
Lawrence City Band
Sue Hack/Students & Faculty of Southwest Jr. High School Picked up
trash along Clinton Parkway
Vera Hadl Tree donation at Oak
Hill Cemetery
Helen Edwards Tree donation at Oak
Hill Cemetery
Andy Galvardt Tree donation at Oak
Hill Cemetery
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by
Henry, to approve the City Commission meeting minutes of January 14, 2003.
Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Henry,
to approve claims to 269 vendors in the amount of $1,211,159.43. Motion
carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Henry,
to approve the Drinking Establishment Licenses for the Alumni Association of
K.U., 1266 Oread Avenue; 8th Street Tap Room, 801 New Hampshire; Astro's,
601 Kasold, Ste: C-107; Louise's West, 1307 West 7th; Rudy's Pizzeria, 704
Massachusetts; the Retail Liquor License for Parkway Wine & Spirits, 3514
Clinton Pkwy, Ste: B; Spirit Liquor, 600 Lawrence Ave., Ste: 1 A/B; Alvins
Wine & Spirits, 905 Iowa; and, Alvins Wine & Spirits, 4000 West 6th. Motion
carried unanimously.
The City Commission reviewed the bids for the special assessment benefit
district for Overland Drive, Wakarusa Drive to Queens Road, Street, Storm
Sewer, and Waterline Improvement for the Public Works Department. The bids
were:
BIDDER BID AMOUNT
Engineer's Estimate
$1,405,311.00
King's Construction
$1,026,456.90
LRM Industries, Inc.
$1,091,576.55
Meadows Construction $1,277,664.19
Razorback Contractors $1,335,580.10
Emerson Construction $1,800,481.00
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Henry,
to award the bid to King's Construction, in the amount of $1,026,456.90.
Motion carried unanimously.
(1)
The City Commission reviewed the bids for the special assessment benefit
district for Congressional Drive, 6th Street to Overland Drive, Street,
Storm Sewer, and Waterline Improvement for the Public Works Department. The
bids were:
BIDDER BID AMOUNT
Engineer's Estimate $568,860.00
King's Construction $378,717.65
LRM Industries, Inc. $464,443.10
Meadows Construction $509,344.11
Razorback Contractors $523,814.20
Kansas Heavy Construction $603,660.75
Emerson Construction $725,351.53
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Henry,
to award the bid to King's Construction, in the amount of $378,717.65.
Motion carried unanimously.
(2)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by
Henry, to place on first reading Ordinance No. 7593, a Text Amendment
(TA-05-03-02) regarding the definition of the term "undue hardship,"
(Section 21-901.6 for the Joint City/County Subdivision Regulations. Motion
carried unanimously.
(3)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by
Henry, to place on first reading Ordinance No. 7532, rezoning (Z-11-41-01)
Lots 3-8, (inclusive) Commerce Plaza Addition along the northeast quadrant
of South Iowa on 31st Street from C-4 and C-5 (General Commercial and
Limited Commercial Districts) to PCD-2 (Planned Commercial District).
Motion carried unanimously.
(4)
Ordinance No. 7607, rezoning (Z-09-28-02) 1.0 acre from RS-1 (Single-Family
Residential District) to RM-D (Duplex Residential District), located at 2010
Riverridge Road, was read a second time. As part of the consent agenda, it
was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Henry, to adopt the ordinance. Aye:
Dunfield, Hack, Henry, Kennedy, and Rundle. Nay: None. Motion carried
unanimously.
(5)
Ordinance No. 7598, rezoning (Z-08-27-02) 3.9 acres from RM-D (Duplex
Residential District) and RM-1 (Multi-Family Residence District) to RS-2
(Single-Family Residence District) for lots 7-18, Block 3, Pinnacle West
Addition, was read a second time. As part of the consent agenda, it was
moved by Kennedy, seconded by Henry, to adopt the ordinance. Aye:
Dunfield, Hack, Henry, Kennedy, and Rundle. Nay: None. Motion carried
unanimously. (6)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Henry,
to approve the site plan (SP-05-35-02) for an addition to an existing
commercial building on the southwest corner of 19th Street and
Massachusetts, subject to the following conditions:
1. A Site Plan Performance Agreement be executed; (Per
Section 20-1433);
2. Curb inlets must be constructed per City standards.
Revise the plan drawing to incorporate this standard and label the inlets as
"City standard";
3. Provide elevations for all inlet tops and pipe
flowlines. Label proposed pipe sizes;
4. The pavement, curbs and sidewalk will be replaced,
therefore it will likely be less expensive to slope the pavement to drain
and eliminate the east curb inlet;
5. Separate sidewalk ramps at intersection;
6. Revise legal description to state, "Lot 1, Block 1,
1901 Addition";
7. Provide a note stating that existing trees will be
protected during construction;
8. Provide an interior landscaping calculation for the
parking lot; and,
9. Show the correct current use and proposed use of the
property.
Motion carried unanimously.
(7)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Henry,
to adopt Resolution No. 6449, setting out the findings and determinations of
the Governing Body and ordering the construction of George Williams Way
between 6th Street and Harvard Road. Authorized by the City Commission on
January 14, 2003. Motion carried unanimously. (8)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Henry,
to refer a pending text amendment concerning platting of contiguous property
to City staff for consideration of language changes as discussed at the
County/USD/City joint meeting of January 15, 2003. Motion carried
unanimously. (9)
Don Shepard, Chair, Grant Review Board, presented a report to the City
Commission. He said the purpose of this board was to review and take action
regarding financial assistance and no interest loans for housing
rehabilitation for low and moderate-income homeowners. The board was made
up of 7 members. There were 5 CDBG targeted neighborhoods which were:
Brookcreek, East Lawrence, North Lawrence, Oread, and Pinckney. The board
meets every other month or more often if necessary, to review on a
case-by-case basis, each proposed housing rehabilitation project. During
2002 the board reviewed 16 projects and recommended approval of 15 of those
projects. The project not recommended was too costly and exceeded program
limits. This was an average number of projects for 1 year.
Shepard said the board also reviewed recommendations and proposed changes in
the Comprehensive Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program. During 2002, the
program was reviewed and project limits were increased to $35,000 from
$25,000. Additionally, the requirement for a 1-year owner/occupied
residency prior to rehabilitation was reinstated. If necessary the board
will hear appeals from homeowners whose properties were denied for housing
rehabilitation. There had been no such appeals during the past several
years.
The board works closely with Neighborhood Resources staff, which included:
Larry Hamm, Tim Pinnick, Margene Swarts, Monica Cardin, and Jerry Allen. He
said staff were efficient, effective, and made their job as board members
much easier.
Lee Queen, Chair, Uniform Building Code Board of Appeals, presented a report
to the City Commission. He said the board meets only on an as needed basis.
In 2002, they met 1 time to amend the City code regarding requirements
governing natural light.
The board currently uses the 1997 Uniform Building Code. He said this year
would be busier because the board planned to review and adopt the
International Residential and Building Codes, which were easier to
interpret.
The members of the Uniform Building Code Board of Appeals are Janet Smalter,
Mark Stogsdill, Ken White, and Mike Porter.
(10)
Chuck Soules, Public Works Director, presented the staff report concerning
the possible improvement of Folks Road from West 6th Street to Mulberry
Drive. He said on January 9, 2003, City staff met with residents to discuss
proposed improvement options to Folks Road. Two options were developed with
the following attributes.
Option 1:
a) A three lane section at the intersection of 6th
Street providing a north and south bound thorough lane and north to west
bound (left) turn lane;
b) Roundabout at the north entrance to the Oakley
Development;
c) An offset alignment to the west;
d) Traffic calming/Harvard neighborhood entrance at
Mulberry. This consisted of a narrowing of the road and inclusion of a
speed hump; and,
e) Roundabout at the intersection of Harvard and
Mulberry.
When staff addressed Option No. 1, staff questioned the need for a
roundabout at the Oakley access. He said staff did not feel that the Oakley
Development would generate the traffic necessary for a roundabout.
He said Folks Road was designated as a collector street and staff
thought to better serve the community a collector street, the street needed
to carry traffic therefore, they straightened the alignment out.
Also, in regards to right-of-way issues, they would need to buy
several tracts of land and homes, which would displace some residents.
Option 2:
a) Three lane section at the intersection of 6th
Street;
b) Centered/straight alignment (the section line is
offset within the right-of-way in order to connect the Mulberry right-of-way
with the 6th and Folks intersection. Structure distance to the back of curb
as compared to homes on Mulberry is relatively comparable. The distance
from the back of the curb to the homes on Mulberry is 47 to 48 feet. With
the exception of two structures, this option provides 50-60 feet from the
back of curb to the structure on Folks Road;
c) Two speed humps between the Oakley Development
access and Mulberry;
d) Traffic calming and neighborhood entrance at
Mulberry; and,
e) Roundabout at Harvard and Mulberry.
He said Option 2 centered the alignment within an 80-foot
right-of-way and split the difference between all the properties. To slow
traffic, staff proposed to put speed bumps at northern and southern ends
where the residents on Folks Road were accumulated.
He said they kept the entrance treatment on the south end just
before Mulberry and added a proposed roundabout.
With regard to Option No. 3, Soules said Harvard Road residents
had a concern about the size of the roundabout at Harvard and Mulberry.
These residents felt that the roundabout would intrude into their
properties. Additionally, residents had a concern about parking issues with
the splitter islands that were needed in advance of the roundabout. The
original roundabout was a "full blown" roundabout with a 110 ft. diameter.
Potentially, staff could reduce the size of the roundabout still achieving
safety aspects and not intruding into the neighborhoods homes.
He said there was opposition to through traffic into the neighborhood. He
said the residents liked the idea to allow traffic to exit the neighborhood,
but not allow traffic into the neighborhood.
Another issue was the potential for a stop sign and why couldn't a four-way
stop sign be installed at this intersection. He said this intersection did
not have traffic volumes that would warrant a four way stop nor the accident
history.
He said at the meeting, they talked about the development as a whole. With
the area not being fully developed, they asked why should they develop the
area at all. Once the need was there, then it was difficult to detour
traffic so that they could build the road.
Soules said Option No. 4 was developed to show a one-way out. There was a
cul-de-sac prior to the south end of Folks Road and north end of Mulberry,
to allow traffic to turnaround.
Option No. 5 included the development of Folks Road to the Oakley access.
He said these options were presented to the Commission for consideration.
If the Commission desired, any of these options could be combined.
Commissioner Henry asked if the first two Options came out of the October
meeting.
Soules said yes.
Vice Mayor Dunfield said there were 2 proposed sized potential roundabouts
at Mulberry and Harvard. He said the smaller roundabout was comparable to
Harvard and Monterey. He asked if the design speed on both roundabouts were
the same and did these roundabouts serve the same function in terms of
slowing traffic?
Soules said effectively they would. The larger roundabout would obviously
push traffic out further and make the roundabout more defined and the
smaller roundabout would be within the right-of-way. He said the traffic
speed would be 20-25 mph to maneuver around both roundabouts.
Commissioner Kennedy asked if both roundabouts would work for larger
vehicles to go around.
Soules said there would be a truck apron that would go around the entire
circle.
Commissioner Kennedy asked Soules to explain a truck apron.
Soules said with a truck apron the curb would be lowered and would roll-up
so that a larger truck could drive straight through.
Mayor Hack called for public comment.
Mark Desetti, Lawrence, said he lived close to the Mulberry/Harvard/Folks
intersection. He was at the neighborhood meeting and was involved in the
Harvard Road group that worked with the Traffic Safety Commission and the
governing body to create solutions to the problems that were experienced on
Harvard Road with high-speed traffic. He said David Woosley, Traffic
Engineer, informed them that the survey of the Harvard Road area had been
completed. He said the two temporary roundabouts were what the residents
preferred and a series of speed humps as opposed to the islands.
He said there was an additional problem concerning Folks Road, which was not
knowing what would happen in this area. He said while they were sensitive
to the need of the developer to have access to that land, they were also
worried about the traffic problems on Harvard Road and the potential of
brining in more traffic. When that road was completed, the east of the east
side of Folks Road also might have good development potential, but they did
not know what would develop at that location.
He said one person at the meeting presented the idea of an exit from the
neighborhood, but not an entrance to the neighborhood, which was reflected
in Option No. 4. He said his belief about the consensus of the group was
that that was a good option. He said having the ability to go in and out
would be nice because he lived close, but he was sensitive to not increasing
the traffic load on Harvard Road anymore than it was now. He said building
Folks Road down and allowing that exit and no entrance would allow the
developers access to the property to be developed, but spared the Harvard
Road area from the increased traffic. He said this was a balanced solution
to this issue. He urged the City Commission to support Option 4.
He said residents were also sensitive to the neighbors on the four corners
at Harvard and Mulberry and thought that the smaller roundabout was
appropriate to meet their needs and spare their property.
Brenda Jackson, Lawrence, asked the Commission not to concur with staff's
recommendation, but to adopt the consensus proposal that was developed among
all affected properties, including City staff at the January 9th meeting.
Short of that proposal or a slight variation to the Harvard/Mulberry
preferred option, she asked the Commission to not open the Folks Road
through to Mulberry without establishing a formal committee with proper
committee input.
She said since the neighbors had last spoken to the Commission in November
26, people attended the meeting with City staff members regarding work on
the Folks and Mulberry Road, including a group from the Harvard and Mulberry
neighborhoods.
On November 5, they spoke at the Commission meeting and asked the City to
work with the neighborhood to develop an acceptable plan. All members of
the City Commission directed City staff to work with the members of the
affected neighborhoods to develop a plan that would among other things, "not
place the brunt" of opening a street on an established neighborhood that was
already having difficulties with traffic and speeding. Among other things,
Mayor Hack asked the City to curve the road. Commissioners also asked staff
to set up a committee to assist in the development of the road.
On January 4th, Harvard and Mulberry Neighbors met to develop alternative
proposals for the City. The group canvassed 30 homes in the neighborhood,
worked with the Neighborhood Association, and submitted their proposals to
City staff informally and in advance of the public meeting.
On January 9th, City staff met with members of Folks/Mulberry neighborhoods
and developers for the Oakley tract. The neighborhood presented its
preferred option for the development of the Folks/Mulberry Road. She said
this particular option had a roundabout between Folks and Mulberry that only
allowed one-way traffic out, had a stop sign at Folks and Mulberry, and
allowed a stop sign at the Oakley tract. This was approximately the same
amount of cost as the proposed Option 4 because there was only one
roundabout. She said this was the neighborhood's preferred option.
At the end of the meeting, Folks Road residents, the developers, and the
Harvard/Mulberry residents were in agreement on a modified general concept
to advance to the City Commission. At City staff's request, they preferred
a smaller roundabout at the corner of Harvard and Mulberry, so there would
be 2 roundabouts and it would only allow an exit out from the
Harvard/Mulberry neighborhood out to 6th Street. This concept was drafted
and emailed to Soules. He replied January 10th that things could be worked
out. However, on an email dated January 13th and again, January 17, Soules
emailed the draft and final recommendations from City staff to the City
Commission. In their recommendation, City staff rejected all
recommendations made by the neighborhood. Staff's recommendation was for a
2-way street from 6th to Harvard which placed the brunt of the City's former
decisions not to place streets through to 6th Street onto the
Harvard/Mulberry neighborhood. A straight road from 6th to Harvard was
recommended not curved as Mayor Hack recommended.
She said there were no speed humps or roundabouts from 6th to Harvard that
were recommended. The first traffic-calming device was the roundabout at
Harvard and Mulberry, despite the fact that correspondence between neighbors
and the City includes various traffic calming devices whenever 2-way traffic
was discussed. The road under City staff's recommendations would be
considered a collector street. A roundabout would be placed at Harvard and
Mulberry. While not as large as first proposed, the roundabout was not the
neighborhood choice. The roundabout clearly favored a 4-way stop sign,
which was the less expensive option.
She said she and her neighbors came to the City Commission and worked with
City staff in good faith. Their original proposal was similar in cost to
the proposal made by City staff, but the consensus proposal was modified to
add an additional roundabout at the January 9th meeting at the City's
insistence, not the neighborhood or the developers. The City staff proposal
sent to the City Commission did not reflect the comments or wishes of the
neighborhood. They had spent countless hours working with City staff to
develop proposals that did reflect their comments and wishes. The fact that
none of their priority preferences were reflected was upsetting which was a
1-way only exit out with reduced influx into the neighborhood. It was
upsetting and suggested to the Commission that City staff met with them
fully intending not to consider their needs and desires.
She submitted 3 proposals with her comments, which she believed the
Harvard/Mulberry neighborhood could live with in the order of their
preferences. She asked the Commission to adopt any one of those proposals
and reject City staff's recommendations.
She said the 3rd proposal was Option No. 5. All three of the proposals,
they suggested, were proposals that they believe Harvard/Mulberry and Folks
neighborhoods, and the developers could live with.
Deborah McVey, Lawrence, said she lived on the east side of Folks Road. She
said to say she was shocked to read City staff's recommendation was probably
an understatement because it was totally unexpected based on the content of
the meetings that they attended. She said these recommendations totally
ignored all of the input that the neighborhood provided.
She said their first priority was that in someway there be traffic-calming
devices placed on Folks Road. They were concerned about the amount of
traffic that would come into their neighborhood especially from Free State
High School and possibly others in the neighborhood using Folks Road as a
way to cut-through from 6th Street to Harvard and eventually down to 15th
Street.
She said if a roundabout was not an option, she believed there should be
speed bumps on Folks Road. The idea of making 1-way traffic north, out of
Harvard at Mulberry was also a good idea and this would prevent cut-through
traffic entering the neighborhood.
McVey said they would like to see the road offset to the west and if that
was not a possibility, she repeated that their needed to be some type of
traffic-calming devices on Folks Road including speed humps and 1-way north
out of Mulberry.
One other concern was the benefit district possibility. At the meeting she
attended it was repeatedly stated by City staff that they did not see how a
benefit district could be created for Folks Road. She asked that this issue
be discussed at another time because it applied specifically to those people
along Folks Road and not the other neighbors.
She asked that the City Commission consider alternatives such as Option 4 or
Option 5 and reject City staff's recommendations.
Mark Jones, Lawrence, said he owned the residence at the southeast corner of
Harvard Road. Being a homeowner there for 7 years, they had seen traffic
grow to a point that they supported traffic calming devices in their
neighborhood.
He said their initial concern with Options 1 and 2 was the size of the
roundabout and were assured that the roundabout could be reduced thus making
it one of the safest corners in town. He said he appreciated these efforts,
but had a concern about traffic coming into their neighborhood. He said
they failed to understand the need to bring more traffic into the
neighborhood and thought that most residents were happy with the current
traffic patterns versus a potential inflow that could occur if the Oakley
tract was developed.
He said Options 4 and 5 presented several goals. The first goal allowed for
development for land to the north of the Harvard neighborhood. Goal 2
limits traffic coming into this area and Goal 3 helps control speeds on
Harvard. In their conversations with many of their neighbors they had found
support for Options 4 and 5 and wanted to make it clear that the biggest
relief they desired was the ability to limit traffic coming into their
neighborhood. He asked the City Commission to support one of their options
that restricts traffic flow into their neighborhood.
Hunter Lott, Lawrence, said he lived just east of the proposed roundabout
and wanted to voice his approval for Options 4 or 5, but thought Option 4
was a better compromise. He said in terms of traffic and speed, he thought
Option 4 was the best for residents and the developers.
Roger Bain, Lawrence, said Ordinance No. 7502, designated Folks Road as main
trafficway and asked for a definition of that term. He asked if the
definition of a main trafficway dictated how it had to be constructed.
He said a lot of people come to live in Lawrence for various reasons. His
relationship with Lawrence goes back 30 years off and on and had always had
the desire to return because of the quality of life.
He repeated staff's recommendations and also the neighborhood's recommended
options. He said the only way the neighborhood could accept staff's
recommendations was if they were guaranteed the zoning for the Oakley tract
and other undeveloped property would stay the same because of the potential
traffic problems.
He had a concern with child safety and environmental concerns. He also said
if the zoning was such that it increased the amount of population in the
area through higher density apartments and duplexes, it might also increase
the crime rate. Because of all these factors mentioned, it would
potentially affect property values and therefore degrade the quality of life
that we've come to expect in Lawrence. He said another option was to do
nothing until they find out what the proposed development was going to be.
He said Option No. 4 was a true compromise. It was progressive, innovative,
and Lawrence's way of thinking. He respectfully requested that if the City
Commission had to make a decision tonight, to approve Option No. 4, if not,
don't do anything until the zoning has been established.
Lucy Flynn, Lawrence, Harvard Road resident, said she preferred Option No.
5, over Option No. 4, but Option 4 would satisfy the influx of traffic. She
said it seemed like Harvard Road was being placed second, and Folks Road was
put in front for development of the Oakley tract. She said with the budget
issues, she felt Harvard Road, an established road, would need to be
addressed before they could move forward to Folks Road.
Greg Polk, Lawrence, owner of a 3-acre tract of Folks Road, said he was also
at the neighborhood meeting and believed it was the consensus of the Harvard
Road neighborhood to make the road 1-way, but he did not believe it was the
consensus of Folks Road for a 1-way street. He said it seemed to him that
if Harvard and Folks Roads were collector streets, you would want to be able
to move traffic both ways onto major collector streets.
Walter Emerson, Lawrence, reiterated Desetti's and Bain's comments about
looking at this whole area together. He said they were not doing that and
instead, separating the road issue and the Oakley tract. He was also
surprised that City staff recommendations did not reflect the consensus of
the neighbors. He said concerning the declaration of substantial change,
the proposed plan was not very different from what they had seen months ago.
He agreed with Bain that Option No. 4 was acceptable to the neighborhood and
if the Commission was not going to approve that option, not to do anything
until the zoning has been established.
Chris Hula, Lawrence, repeated Emerson's comments and stated his first
preference was not to have the road go through until such time that they
know what actually would be approved by the City with regard to
redevelopment or change of zoning. The second alternative was to accept
Option No. 4 because it was in the best interest of the neighborhood.
Mayor Hack asked for the definition of a collector's street and how Folks
Road falls into that category.
Soules said there are three basic classifications of streets: residential,
collector, and arterial. Residential is the standard local street to serve
homes. Collector streets gather people from residential areas and get them
to arterial streets, and arterial streets gets them around the city.
Collector streets serve larger area whereas arterial streets travel from one
side of town to the other.
Linda Finger, Planning Director, said the street system could be described
as a blood system with capillaries, veins and arteries. Capillaries are
your local streets, veins are your collector streets, and your arteries are
your arterial streets. Residential streets serves homes, collector streets
serve many of residential streets by picking traffic up and getting the
traffic to and from arterial streets, which move traffic across town.
Mayor Hack said right now the only collector streets pulling traffic out of
that area are Monterey Way and Wakarusa even though Wakarusa would be
considered in some ways an arterial street.
Finger said Monterey Way and Wakarusa are both minor arterials and Harvard
is a collector street as would be Folks Road.
Mayor Hack said moving from Harvard north, there is no other way to go.
Vice Mayor Dunfield asked staff if there was anyway to hypothetically model
the traffic on Harvard based on whether Folks Road goes through as a 2-way
or as a 1-way, or none at all and based on some assumption about development
occurring in the Oakley tract and infilling that area. He said at some
point there will be some development of some density in that area. He also
asked if there was someway to do that modeling that was not ridiculously
complicated or expensive?
Soules said they could have a model developed by a consulting firm. He said
it is a computer program that is written for the area with variables and
these variables could be changed with density of the area.
Finger said staff has a model, but it is not under the City's ownership.
KDOT developed a model when the City was looking at Transportation 2025.
KDOT is to convey this model to the City, but the program has some bugs
within the computer programming.
Commissioner Dunfield asked if KDOT's modeling would not extend to Harvard
Street.
Finger said yes, it would go to a collector street level.
Commissioner Rundle asked if staff could use the standards for trip
generation for this type of development.
Soules said that is what they did when they looked at the need for a
northern roundabout at the Oakley tract access. He was not sure, but
thought there were approximately 105 units for the Oakley development. He
said staff did not see a need for that roundabout. The hard part is trying
to model the traffic that may potentially come from Free State or off of 6th
Street from that development. He said traffic would not be significant in
staff's opinion.
Mayor Hack asked if the information concerning the Mulberry/Harvard
intersection would not warrant a 4-way.
He said at this point it would not warrant a 4-way stop. He said staff did
not feel if all of the traffic from the Oakley development would access that
intersection, that it would warrant a stop sign.
Mayor Hack asked if the City Commission would like to take any of the 5
Options off the table or discuss specific items in any of the options. For
example, if looking at the roundabout at Harvard and Mulberry, it was clear
to her that if they were to have a roundabout, then they wouldn't want the
larger one because the smaller roundabout would be less intrusive on those 4
corners. She said she did not feel that the Commission should do nothing
about this issue tonight and thought it was important to make a decision for
this road now.
Commissioner Henry said he gathered from comments at this meeting that the
smaller roundabout was acceptable.
Commissioner Kennedy asked if the Commission's direction for staff was to
give them an exact design of the road and would they need to create a
benefit district for project cost purposes? He said the Commission has gone
through different scenarios such as right-of-way given to the City and a
benefit district. All of those property owners in that area were aware that
this was an island that was surrounded by the City and it was a matter of
time that improvements would be made in that area. The Oakley tract is
probably the largest piece of agriculturally zoned property in Lawrence. He
asked if the Commission's objective tonight was to tell staff which
direction they wanted to go for the road and also to create a funding source
for these improvements?
Mayor Hack said she thought the Commission's direction was to give staff
direction for the road. She did not think they should create a funding
source for these improvements because all of the interested parties were not
there for the second issue of financing.
Soules said all these options needed more discussion.
Wildgen addressed an earlier question and said the major thoroughfare
designation allows for different financing methods. That designation allows
you to finance the road improvements with the City-at-large as well as a
benefit district.
Commissioner Kennedy said, as this road becomes a collector street, it would
be like the improvements on 4th Street and Riverridge, which was a wide,
2-lane street that would take traffic in both directions, safely.
Commissioner Rundle said as they have been discussing warrants being met or
standards for collector streets, he said they could not apply those to this
situation as easily as a newly developed area. We already have problems on
Harvard Road, so he was leaning toward the 1-way out option. He said the
Commission was cognizant of people saying that we still haven't got a good
solution to the problems on Harvard Road and the only logical conclusion is
that it will add traffic to the neighborhood if there access into the area.
He did not think they could apply theoretical standards of a collector
street. It would make much more sense to do that on Folks Road going north
where it's largely undeveloped further on.
Commissioner Kennedy said past planning has not allowed the City to
establish this as a collector street because it was not allowed for a
collector street to connect to 6th Street.
Vice Mayor Dunfield said he seemed to have a different intellectual
understanding of the consequences of building or not building this road then
he really heard it expressed. Right now, there was no question that Harvard
Road is a problem. Harvard Road is a collector that acts too much like an
arterial and the traffic calming ideas that they have been applying on a
temporary basis do need to be applied on a permanent basis. He said it was
an entirely appropriate statement that they need to make sure they did not
do more damage to Harvard Road. Part of the reason Harvard acts like an
arterial was because there was no way out of it between Wakarusa and
Monterey Way. There are roughly 320 acres of developed land that basically
all of that development feeds into Harvard and has to go either to Monterey
Way or Wakarusa. Folks Road as a 2 way provides relief for that by
providing another way out. Now you have 3 ways to get out of this
neighborhood rather than 2.
For example, when Mr. Desetti mentioned that he would like to run in and out
on Folks Road to get to Hy-Vee. Without having that connection there,
Desetti is driving on Harvard Road, which is a longer distance because there
is not other way for him to get out. In fact, all of the neighbors that are
using Harvard Road, are using this road more therefore, there is more
traffic on this road because there were no other options. This is why he
asked about the modeling issue because yes, it is true, as those 20 acres
that are zoned agricultural are developed that will lead to more traffic but
it is going to be maybe 5% of the total neighborhood traffic. He said there
is a trade off which was generating more traffic, but you would also take
neighborhood traffic off of Harvard Road. He said he would like to know
what the real consequences are of Folks, whether it is 2 way or 1 way or
whether it doesn't go through to Mulberry at all because he would hate to
see us do something, thinking that were going to help the situation on
Harvard Road, when we've actually got an opportunity to improve the
situation that they were going to turn down because we're worried about
brining new traffic into a neighborhood. This was his concern and the
reason why he did not want to jump ahead without knowing more about that
issue.
The other point that was brought up was the difficulty of making this
decision without knowing more about the Oakley tract and how it is
developing. When the Commission last talked about this issue, he thought
that was one of the big issues that they were confronting which was how to
look at just a piece of this and not at the whole picture. Since we know
that that proposal is working its way through the process again, he thought
it would not hurt to withhold judgment until they know more about what's
happening there. That said, he agreed that the smaller roundabout at
Harvard and Mulberry is appropriate
Mayor Hack asked how long the modeling would take and how expensive would it
be.
Finger said if the Commission would indulge staff for a week, staff could
contact KDOT and find out. She said there should not be a cost because it
was the City's model.
Mayor Hack said concerning the 1 way out, she could see appreciation from
the Harvard residents. What she was concerned about was the assumption of a
person going north, that the person coming south is not actually going to
come all the way through. We assume that signs and stop lights stop cars
and direct people, but if that were the case, the City wouldn't need to hire
5 new traffic officers for this community. She said the 1 way out was a
huge issue for her and that intellectually, logically, and in her heart as
she was asked to appeal this issue, this did not sit right with her, but
that did not mean she could not be persuaded that this option would work.
She said this was a difficult enforcement issue and safety issue for the
whole neighborhood.
Commissioner Henry said he did not mind waiting a week for the model update
from KDOT because they have waited 6 months. He said one issue that was
brought up in a meeting was that Schwarz Road was a 1 way that seemed to
work without difficulty. He said after all of the public comment, he was in
favor of Option 4 or 5 and not do anything until they know exactly what
would happen on the Oakley tract. In the interest of making a right
decision, he preferred to get additional information.
Vice Mayor Dunfield thanked all of residents for their time and efforts and
noted the fact that this is another non-resolution of an issue. However, he
said this is an important decision to make and it is going to affect these
neighborhoods and the City-at-large. He said the Commission wanted to make
the best decision and not wish that they had taken more time to think
through it.
Commissioner Kennedy said as Commissioner Henry said they have worked with
every neighborhood out there to take care of Louisiana and Barker Streets.
He said the residents on Harvard were also on the Commission's priority list
to place devices on Harvard for safety reasons.
Mayor Hack concurred with Vice Mayor Dunfield in apologizing for a
non-resolution to this issue because she was not a fan of deferrals. She
said it was important to get additional information to make sure they do
this right.
Finger said whatever staff finds out about this issue, it could be placed on
the City's website so they could have the same information that goes to the
Commission and that should be by this Friday. The website address is
www.lawrenceplanning.org.
Commissioner Henry said that they needed to move on with this issue quickly
because these residents deserved a decision.
(11)
David Corliss, Assistant City Manager/Legal Services Director, presented the
staff report concerning 2003 Legislative issues. At the weekly municipal
lobbyist meeting in Topeka, he received information concerning critical
finance issues that the League of Kansas Municipalities put together based
on the Governor's proposed State budget.
He said Governor Graves went through an allocation process last November
that reduced demand transfers that are going to cities and counties and
amounted to $48,000,000. Last week, Governor Sebelius proposed the
elimination of all the demand transfers which would impact the City's budget
for a calendar year 2003 and for State fiscal year 2004. In essence, we
would not be receiving any demand transfers the rest of this year and none
in the first half of 2004. The likelihood of demand transfers coming to the
City during this calendar year and during calendar year 2004 are unlikely,
although they would continue to advocate with our legislative delegation,
the tremendous impact that has on our City budget which was approximately
1.3 million dollars.
There is the lawsuit that is continuing on behalf of cities and counties and
we will see how exactly that would impact the State fiscal year 2003 demand
transfers. There was some good news in the Governor's budget in that it did
not affect the distribution of the State tax on alcohol which was an
important revenue source. It also did not impact the State distribution of
gas tax funds that the City gets which was the primary source for our street
maintenance. There is also some indication from the Governor's office that
the Governor will not support any type of tax lid or spending lid that would
be placed on cities and counties. We're always in a difficult situation
where we make the pitch to our legislators that this reduction in revenues
to Cities and Counties impacts our ability to provide services for
municipalities and also increases the likelihood that we'll have to raise
property taxes in order to provide those services. In many cases, some of
the Legislature's response is that they were concerned about raising
property taxes and therefore, we're going to respond with some type of lid
or cap on your ability to raise taxes.
The League is pursuing some initiatives to modernize some investment laws.
Right now, the State of Kansas can invest their funds in banks that are
chartered at a national level as opposed to State chartered banks. We're
not generally able to do that and we would like to be able to have that
authority. We're not getting quite as much yield on our investment so that
the dollar savings is not as dramatic as it may have been in previous years,
but we think that is appropriate.
He said other initiatives the League is looking at were removing the mandate
that we publish all of our Ordinances, Notices, and Resolutions in a
newspaper and instead simply posting those on a City Internet site. There
are pros and cons to this idea. One of the pros is the savings of tax
dollars and also if these publications were posted on the Internet, they
would be there for some time opposed to one day in the newspaper.
He said the League is also looking at initiatives to increase revenue
authority. Right now, we have a lid on our ability to raise city sales tax,
which was 1% unless we have additional statutory authority to go beyond
that. The same is true for counties. For example, last Legislative
Session, then Mayor Rundle, went to the State House and was able to convince
the Legislature to increase the County sales tax authority for the ECO2
proposal. That was a separate enabling legislation that only applied to
Douglas County for those specific purposes. There would be some attempt on
the League's part to say that we want that authority for all cities and
counties for almost any purpose. He said it was a perennial issue of
looking at local earnings tax or piggy backing on a local income tax; all
those kinds of things are in play. The League is pursuing that as they have
in previous years, testing the waters to see what is viable and what is not
and where to spend their efforts.
Corliss pointed out that another one of the League's initiatives is to
create statutory authorization to allow Cities to use red light running
cameras. This was very common in a number of other jurisdictions. For
example, there is a statute in Maryland where it is a civil infraction and
did not apply to your insurance and was not a moving violation. He said
there were concerns about invasion of privacy, constitutional issues and
whether or not it is revenue generating for certain communities on this
issue.
Corliss said the demand transfer issue is going to play all Legislative
Session. Every Legislative Session seems to end with the Omnibus
Appropriations Bill, which is the kitchen sink collection of all of the
different spending issues. That bill almost always sets the demand transfer
appropriation amount and this happens every Legislative Session. It will
probably happen again this Legislative Session, except in previous years
we've had a Governor that has supported 90-95% of what we should have
statutorily. In this case, the Governor is recommending for this next State
budget year that would be zero and there are some Legislators that say that
is not good for cities or counties and would increase property tax
pressures. He said they would not have a good answer on the demand transfer
question until the Legislature goes home, which was April or May. We might
have an answer sooner, but we won't know for certain until then.
Corliss said the State budget decisions were impacting our City budget as
well. He asked the City Commission to keep in mind that next Thursday
morning, they are having Capital Day at the State House and this would be an
opportunity to get more fully briefed by the League and State Legislative
leaders and the opportunity to talk to our legislative delegation.
Commissioner Rundle asked Corliss to explain the local use component of the
Streamline Sales Tax Project he identified in his Critical Finance Issues
document.
Corliss said the Streamline Sales Tax Project refers to the necessity to
have sales taxes that are exactly the same at both the State and Local level
if we ever have the hope of collecting sales tax from catalog or Internet
sales. The Streamline Sales Tax Project is a national effort to recognize
that if you have approximately 600 cities in 105 Counties in Kansas, and it
was spread throughout the entire nation, it is simply not possible that
catalog and Internet sales people expect us to be able to pick and choose
what sales tax applies. The desire is to have a Streamline Sales Tax so
that everything that is taxed from Local sales taxes is also taxed at the
State level, but that is not true right now. For example, water sales for
non-residential customers are taxed at local level, but not at a state
level. There is a distinction on utility sales and a few other things
between the local sales tax and the State sales tax. The local component is
the desire to make sure we're represented at that table and that we are part
of that compromise and also if we are ever able to get a sales tax on those
remote sales, Internet and Catalog, then that revenue then comes back to the
local units that are appropriately levying those taxes.
Student Commissioner Elmore asked Corliss if the issue of red light running
cameras was effective because in Washington D.C., they have had cameras that
ticketed people at three different intersections at the same time. He asked
if this was a shady area to be wondering into.
Corliss said the Kansas Department of Transportation sponsored a study in
Olathe and Overland Park where they put up the red light cameras to
determine their efficacy as far as the technical ability. They didn't send
citations, but looked at the true level of violation. He said what was
determined was that just having the cameras there, reduced the number of red
light violations. He said some experts said that it did not have that much
effect and others that said it did. KDOT and the cities of Olathe and
Overland Park look at this as a safety issue and that it does have the
deterrent effect, encouraging people to stop at the red light. He said
this gives an option and he did not know if this Commission, future
Commission's or Public Works staff would support this idea. He said as
Director of Legal Services, he was concerned about its impact in the
Prosecutor's office and Municipal Court Judges. These cameras may not work
and if not we certainly won't proceed on that path.
Mayor Hack asked Wildgen if he would inform the Commission when they needed
to get together to make some decisions on demand transfers.
Wildgen said staff is preparing a response to some of Commissioner Rundle's
questions. He said this would likely be on next week's agenda.
(12)
During the City Manager's Report, Mike Wildgen, informed the Commission that
there was an article in the League News on Lieutenant Takehiro Suzuki from
Hiratsuka, Japan. Suzuki participated in a training session with the
Lawrence/Douglas County Fire/Medical Department.
Wildgen also gave information on snow removal in his written report, which
addressed costs and staff hours.
Wildgen also reported that the City's Voice Mail experienced disk drive
failure and is expected to be up and running tomorrow (January 22nd).
(13)
Mayor Hack called for public comment.
Dudley Crow, immediate past President of the Lawrence Open Shelter (LOS),
said they have begun the formal filing process for a Use Permitted Upon
Review, which takes approximately 90 days. He said they just found out last
week that they had enough funding to operate for the next 90 days and
expected to spend $8,000 to $9,000 a month to operate. Crow said they have
also negotiated with a landlord for property at 944 Kentucky.
He asked for a temporary interpretation of the zoning ordinances to allow
the LOS to begin operating because the final decision on the UPR would not
be made until late March. He said grants were hard to approve without an
address and this would give them that address.
The building they were looking at was the same building as the Drop In
Center. He said they would have liability and workers compensation
insurance in place. The Salvation Army did not have enough capacity to
handle all the homeless in Lawrence. At any given time, they estimated that
there are 200 homeless in Lawrence and half of those homeless were women and
children.
He said the LOS is not taking families and thought they could best operate
by referring families to the Salvation Army and the LOS would handle adults.
He said this summer they had shelter at St. Johns and the neighbors were
supportive of what they were doing. He said they felt the neighborhood was
safer because the LOS was operating there.
Crow said there were people who protested against the LOS at the Planning
Commission meeting including one lady in particular. He said mid-summer
they had a meeting with all the neighbors and surprisingly this lady was
present and was supportive of what the LOS was doing.
Professionals on staff would train all the LOS monitors and assistant
monitors. The LOS Board had people that were clinical psychologist and have
Master Degrees in Social Welfare. The monitors will be taught how to handle
the Take-in Policy, how to turn people away, medical emergencies, and
disruptive guests. Many of the people that come to the shelter are not
drunks or addicts, but some are. Most of them have some type of
personality disorder. The Supreme Court, approximately 18 years ago, made a
decision that those problems would no longer be the problems of the State,
but would be handled by municipalities.
He said volunteers would be well trained and expected to convince some guest
to accept professional counseling. They had success this summer with some
of their guests who went through detoxification and were able to stay off
the alcohol to which they had become addicted. The LOA is the first step,
for some of these people, in the way of hope.
He said emergency vehicles and the hospital make runs and admit people found
in alleys or on the streets. By having the shelter operating, they would be
mitigating some of those expenses. The shelter will actually save the City
money.
Crow said they believe the streets are safer because the shelter is open.
If this were the summer, he would not be asking the City to make a temporary
interpretation. If the City gives the LOS the authority to open up on a
temporary basis, while they are going through the filing process, they
believe they can open the shelter in approximately 2 ½ weeks.
Mayor Hack commended Crow for all his hard work.
Commissioner Henry asked Finger to elaborate on what happens in the 90-day
waiting period for the UPR.
Finger said the LOS has applied for a Use Permitted Upon Review, which was a
special use permit to allow for a use that is not specifically permitted in
a district, but which can be made compatible with uses that are permitted in
the district. It is a permit that is granted to a specific entity for a set
amount of time, generally no longer than 5 years. In this case, if the LOS
is successful in obtaining a UPR, the UPR would be issued specifically to
LOS and you could make it specific to the current administration. This UPR
places conditions on the operations such as running the business, setting a
number on the clientele and types of training
She said since they had received the application, this would be included in
the Legal Notice, which is published in the Lawrence Journal World for the
Planning Commission meeting, February 26th. The neighborhood has as a
protest area within 200 feet of the application of this specific property.
Letters would be sent giving 20 days notice to those individuals, letting
them know that this will be on the Planning Commission's Agenda for a public
hearing. Those individuals as well as anyone else can attend the meeting.
The individuals within the 200-foot radius have an ability to protest
legitimately and when she says legitimately because that can have an impact
on this governing body's vote. If you have a legal petition of 20% or
greater, then it would require a supermajority, a 4-1 or 5-0 vote by this
Commission to take action. The public hearing is followed by a 3-week
period of time, within which letters of support and/or protest can occur.
There are 14 days after the close of the public hearing when the petition
may be validly filed. She said the Commission would have received the
recommendation on March 25th. Final action would be taken at that meeting
and the Commission would receive all of the correspondence the Planning
Commission received.
Commissioner Henry said by that time however, the issue is rather moot. In
the meantime we have a situation that the Commission is being asked to
address immediately in some manner or fashion.
Commissioner Rundle asked if there was any precedent or avenue for the UPR
without following all those steps.
Wildgen said he was not aware of any precedent. If the Commission
determines that it is connected to the Drop In Center and adds hours to the
building, but these are 2 separate issues. Wildgen suggested a week of
notice to the public before making a temporary decision. He said this was a
difficult situation legally.
Corliss said he agreed with Commissioner Rundle's question about precedent.
The only thing that comes to mind is when the City had found property that
was in violation of the City's Zoning Ordinance, for example, the number of
unrelated person in a single-family zoned district, one of the things the
City has done was to enter into a compliance agreement with that property
owner which allowed that illegal use to continue waiting for the lease to
expire. He said in this situation it was different because you have a
property owner and a user who is saying he needs it now and the City's
process cannot get an approval until the end of March. He said the City has
allowed illegal uses to continue past the date, but the City has done it in
a way that keeps with general Commission direction, that they did not want
to force someone from there residence. This is a difficult situation
because the law says this is what you need to do. That is why staff has
counseled about talking to the property owners in the area because they are
most impacted. He said you could have a compliance agreement that you would
allow this use, subject to the Commission's immediate review, with the
understanding that if it is not approved, then it has to immediately cease.
He said this was genuine to the law, but the law has a number of purposes.
One of the purposes is the process and the other is to give you the
procedures to act on community need.
Mayor Hack said Crow mentioned in his email that the request might be
possible under the Health and Welfare provisions.
Corliss said the purpose of the zoning laws and all the other laws is
general health, safety, and welfare. In the case of zoning it was to ensure
compatibility of different uses. In this situation, you have a good use of
advocacy saying we want to do something about the shelter, which was
something very basic, health and safety. He said he could not tell you that
it followed the law because it doesn't.
Mayor Hack asked if there was a comfort level with the Commission, knowing
that it is going to get down to 3 below zero on Thursday, to wait until
Tuesday which would allow staff time to notify the neighbors and look at
this as a temporary UPR.
Vice Mayor Dunfield said he concurred and said Corliss had stated the
situation clearly. He said on the other had, he would like to see what the
degree of risk is, that the Commission is taking on if they did step outside
the usual process. He asked Crow if 2 ½ weeks would be the minimum to open
the shelter.
Crow said the landlord has some material stored in this area and would take
approximately 1 week to get that cleared. They would also need to install
the sprinkling system that the LOS would be paying for as well as the
insurance in place. He said they had the list of neighbors within 200 feet
away from this building and their landlord owned a number of those
properties. A number of other properties are churches or owned by churches
in the area and are represented on their advisory board. He said there are
other people who own property in that area and one man in particular that
owns several rental properties. To the best of his knowledge, no one has
spoken to him.
Vice Mayor Dunfield said he would be willing to step out on a limb, if the
other Commissioner's agree. We obviously can't do a 90-day process in 2 ½
weeks, but let's do what we can. Let's make sure everyone is notified and
that we have comments from all of the property owners by next week and see
what the Commission can do in terms of saying that it was their intent to
allow this to occur and look at this on an emergency type of basis.
Mayor Hack concurred with Vice Mayor Dunfield.
Commissioner Kennedy said the Commission was cognizant that we make sure
that this building was inspected by fire and building inspectors to ensure
it is safe.
Crow said it was his understanding that the Fire Marshall had already
inspected the building and the only recommendation was that a sprinkler
system be installed and they had already agreed to do that.
(14)
Moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to adjourn at 8:40 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
APPROVED:
_____________________________
Sue
Hack, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Frank S. Reeb, City Clerk
CITY COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 21, 2003
1. Bid - Benefit District, Overland, Wakarusa to Queens,
Street, Storm Sewer & Waterline Improvements to Kings Construction for
$1,026.45.90.
2. Bid - Benefit District, Congressional, 6th to Overland,
Street, Storm Sewer & Waterline Improvements to Kings Construction for
$378,717.65.
3. Ordinance No. 7593 - 1st Reading, Text Amendment
(TA-05-03-02) definition of "undue hardship" 21-901.6.
4. Ordinance No. 7532 - 1st Reading, rezone (Z-11-41-01) Lots
3-8, Commerce Plaza Add, NE quadrant of S Iowa on 31st, C-4 & C-5 to PCD-2.
5. Ordinance No. 7607 - 2nd Reading, rezone (Z-09-28-02) 1
acre, RS-1 to RM-D, 2010 Riverridge Rd.
6. Ordinance No. 7598 - 2nd Reading, rezone (Z-08-27-02) 3.9
acres, RM-D & RM-1 to RS-2, lots 7-18, Blk 3, Pinnacle W Addition.
7. Site Plan - (SP-05-35-02) Commercial Bldg, SW corner of 19th
& Mass.
8. Resolution No. 6449, Order Construction, George Williams Way
between 6th & Harvard.
9. Text Amendment - Platting of contiguous property.
10. Grant Review Board & Uniform Bldg Code reports.
11. Folks from W 6th to Mulberry Dr., improvements.
12. 2003 Legislative issues.
13. City Manager's Report.
14. Lawrence Open Shelter UPR discussion.