[E-minutes] January 16, 2004 City Commission meeting minutes
Lisa Patterson
lpatterson at ci.lawrence.ks.us
Fri Jan 16 09:51:26 CST 2004
January 16, 2004
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 Dunfield
presiding and members Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner present.
Lawrence High School representative Jacob Gage was present.
CONSENT AGENDA
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by to approve the City
Commission meeting minutes of January 13, 2004. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by to approve the Public Transit
Advisory Committee meeting of December 18, 2003; the Library Board meeting
minutes of December 30, 2003; the Mental Health Board meeting minutes of
October 28, 2003, December, 4, 2003, and December 30, 2003; and the Smoking
Task Force meeting minutes of December 8, 2003. Motion carried
unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by to approve claims to
vendors in the amount of $ . Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by to approve the Drinking
Establishment License for Jet Lag Lounge, 610 Florida. Motion carried
unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by to concur with the
recommendation of the Mayor and appoint David Horstman to the Convention and
Visitors Bureau Advisory Board, to a term which will expire July 1, 2007;
appoint Sureva Towler to the Lawrence Arts Commission, to a three year term
which will expire January 31, 2007; appoint Jim Sparkes to the Mechanical
Code Board of Appeals, to a term which will expire March 31, 2006; and
appoint Janet Gerstner to the Neighborhood Resources Advisory Committee, to
a term which will expire September 30, 2006. Motion carried unanimously.
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by to place on first reading
Ordinance No. 7739, annexing approximately 1.033 acres of City owned
property for the Riverside Pump Station generally located North of North
Minnesota Street (Miller/Wells Acres). Motion carried unanimously.
(1)
Ordinance No. 7731, an amendment to Horizon 2020 revising the City's Urban
Growth Area (CPA-2003-3), was read a second time. As part of the consent
agenda, it was moved by to adopt the ordinance. Aye: Dunfield, Hack,
Highberger, Rundle, and Schauner. Nay: None. Motion carried unanimously.
(2)
Ordinance No. 7733, exempting evaporator coils from mechanical permits,
was read a second time. As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by to
adopt the ordinance. Aye: Dunfield, Hack, Highberger, Rundle, and
Schauner. Nay: None. Motion carried unanimously.
(3)
As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by to authorize the Mayor to
execute an agreement with the Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) for
the construction administration and inspection of, Haskell Avenue Stormwater
Mitigation Basin, in the amount of $7,435.20. KDOT would reimburse the City
for eighty percent of those costs. Motion carried unanimously.
(4)
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
During the City Manager's Report Mike Wildgen recognized the Parks and
Recreation Department for their achievement in receiving the National
Recreation and Park Association's 2004 Excellence in Aquatics Award.
During the City Manager's Report Victor Torres, Neighborhood Resources
Director, briefed the City Commission on the status of the project that was
updating code enforcement data recording efforts, including new hand-held
data entry devices. He said the PDA device was part of the customer service
initiative and part of the new system that was implemented last September.
He said applicants also now have the ability to check on the status of their
building permit on line.
Torres also updated the Commission on the status 933 Rhode Island. He said
the structure was now secure. A 5 foot chain link fenced was installed
around the structure. (6)
REGULAR AGENDA
Receive staff report and letter from Lawrence Home Builders Association
concerning contractor licensing issue.
Bobbie Flory, Lawrence Home Builders Association, presented the letter from
the Association. She said after reviewing licensing programs in other
communities, they found Johnson County's Contractor Licensing Program to be
acceptable. She said they set up meetings within their general membership
to approach the builders concerning that issue and gain the builders
support. She said the majority of the builders supported contractor
licensing. After they explained the elements of the potential licensing
regulations to a panel representing the builders, code officials, and the
HBA's perspectives, they supported the issue. One element of that licensing
included continuing education which was key to a licensing program. She
said there was an opportunity to receive continuing education from the
Johnson County program because Johnson County already had an established,
high quality curriculum set up. She said they would pay a licensing fee
that would cover the administrative costs, plus a per license fee for that
licensee to take part in the Johnson County program. She said the seminar
was extensive and everyone that she had spoken to felt it increased their
knowledge and made them better business people.
She addressed the issue of licensing framers. Under the Johnson County
ordinance, they did not license framers and licensing framers was not
discussed with their general membership. She said they did not oppose
framers being licensed, but at those discussions with the panel, the framers
were not part of the discussion. She said they had approximately 250
members of the LBA, and nearly one third of those members were actual
builders. She said they did not have a broad based membership of framers
and it was difficult for the LBA to speak on behalf of the framers and how
they felt about being included in licensing.
She said they would like to find out if the City Commission supported this
licensing issue and if so, they were looking for some direction to allow
them to work with City staff to formulate licensing regulations.
Commissioner Highberger asked her to clarify her position on framer
licensing.
Flory said their Board of Directors had discussed the framers licensing
issue and the majority of the board voted not to support licensing framers.
Commissioner Schauner asked if the licensing would provide a more favorable
insurance market for the contractor.
Flory said right now, by law, if a contractor had over $20,000 in payroll,
the contractor would be required to carry workers compensation. If a
contractor was self employed with no employees, the contractor was not
required, to carry workers compensation. Part of the regulations would be
that they would show proof of workers compensation. She said there were
builders who might not be carrying workers compensation and they would be
able to bid a job much lower than the person who was paying workers
compensation.
Commissioner Schauner asked if that would be true if the builder was a
general contractor with no employees and subcontracted all of the work.
Flory said yes because they were required from their subcontractors to get
certificates of liability insurance.
Commissioner Schauner asked if those certificates would be the property of
the subcontractor and not the property of the general contractor.
Flory said they were in the ownership of the subcontractor if the general
contractor subcontracts everything out.
Mayor Dunfield asked if her organization would prefer the continuing
education component be done with Johnson County.
Flory said correct. Johnson County had an excellent and established
program. She thought the City of Lawrence could not provide the extent of
education that Johnson County could. Also, she suggested if the City of
Lawrence wanted to setup a program, the City could honor credit hours for
whatever program the City wanted to provide to the local people. She said
some of the members from the HBA could qualify to set up a program for
credit.
Mayor Dunfield asked Torres if his staff would agree to explore that path in
terms of continuing education.
Torres said yes. He said the Johnson County Program was comprehensive and
fully developed.
Commissioner Schauner asked about the interface with Johnson County building
codes and Lawrence's codes as it related to the ability to use their
continuing education program.
Torres said Johnson County used international codes. He said Lawrence was
in the process of determining which set of codes to adopt and if it did not
adopt the International Codes that could be an issue
Vice Mayor Rundle asked if the City licensed framers with a continuing
education component, would the Johnson County Program serve their continuing
education needs or would there need to be something geared specifically to
framers.
Torres said Johnson County has a program for framing contractors.
Mayor Dunfield called for public comment.
After receiving no pubic comment, Commissioner Schauner asked Flory to
explain grandfathering current contractors.
Flory said it was consistent with other jurisdictions who have added
licensing. She said they did not want a situation where someone who had
been successfully building in Lawrence for 15 years, not passing the test,
and going out of business.
Commissioner Schauner asked how it would be determined who would be
grandfathered.
Flory said it had not been determined yet, but it could be a number of years
in business.
Commissioner Highberger asked if there would be a reasonable license fee set
to recover cost to the City's program.
Torres said yes. Staff identified approximately 150 builders from their
mailing list, but they were also including the framing contractors which
would bring that number to 200. He said those framing contractors were
providing a service to that contractor which was an important component of
the whole structure. He said currently there were 1,000 trade contractors
who were licensed.
He said regarding the question of how staff would find a contractor to be
eligible to be grandfathered, there was an affidavit that would need to be
filled out by the contractor as part of the licensing application and it
would verify their experience.
Commissioner Schauner asked if person doing the foundation would be licensed
under that scenario.
Torres said no. He said they were looking at commercial and residential
contractors.
Commissioner Schauner asked if the person that was pouring those footing for
a basement be subject to licensing.
Torres said no, but they should be. A number of licensing programs licensed
all trade contractors. He said they were looking at Johnson County's
Program as a guide.
Commissioner Highberger said he would recommend staff proceed as outlined in
the staff memo.
Commissioner Schauner thought the Johnson County model was a good model, but
this City was looking for a reputable building community that licensed and
well educated to provide a product that the public could rely upon. He said
it seemed to be a three legged stool with the initial licensing, a good and
thorough inspection process, and continuing education. He also said we
should consider licensing framers and concrete contractors.
Mayor Dunfield said staff might want to research the possibility of concrete
contractors being included and what the implications of that might be.
Vice Mayor Rundle said perhaps staff could come back with a proposal to
accomplish the whole package over a couple of years.
Torres said staff only dealt with a handful of major concrete contractors.
He said staff could identify who they were, but he suspected that they would
not be an additional burden for staff to handle.
Hack echoed what was said previously. She appreciated the work from the HBA
and City staff. She said this licensing would provide quality building in
Lawrence. (7)
Receive staff report and consider adopting Ordinance No. 7733 on first
reading, regarding evaporator coils being exempt from mechanical permits
Mike Wildgen presented the staff report. He said research showed that a
couple of cities did require evaporator coils, but the majority did not.
Vice Mayor Rundle asked Brad Hoff, Management Assistant, if he asked those
cites specifically about evaporator coils in refrigeration equipment.
Hoff said yes.
Commissioner Schauner asked if he was replacing a mechanical coil in an air
conditioner that sat on top of a furnace, would that change out require a
permit.
Torres said no.
Commissioner Schauner asked when a permit would be needed to do that change
out.
Torres said simply changing that component would not require a permit. If
there was additional work in conjunction then a permit would be required for
electrical work.
Commissioner Highberger said he did not see any clear public danger by not
requiring a permit.
Torres said there was no clear public danger in replacing that component.
He said that was a provision in the code that if it was specifically
component work, it would not require a permit.
Commissioner Schauner said the change out would require removing whatever
coolant was in the system and recharging the system. He asked if that was
part of the change out.
Torres said correct.
Commissioner Schauner asked if that activity added any public health issues
to the mix.
Torres said as long as the individual making the change out was licensed and
qualified, they would feel comfortable with that.
Conduct a public hearing on a proposed special assessment benefit district
for drainage and stormwater improvements, and the acquisition of a
conservation easement, on the Orchards Golf Course
David Corliss presented the staff information. He said last year the
previous City Commission adopted a resolution establishing a special
assessment benefit district to acquire the Orchards Golf Course. The City
Commission later indicated that they did not desire to proceed with the
acquisition of the golf course. He said staff had been in discussions with
the neighbors since that time to achieve their goals in regards to their
concerns regarding the possible development or redevelopment of that golf
course. He said there was also a pending stormwater improvement that staff
would like to proceed with on that drainage creek that traverses the
Orchards Golf Course.
He said in late fall, the City Commission adopted a resolution adopting this
evening as the public hearing date to consider establishing a special
assessment benefit district which would accomplish both of those goals. It
would allow the City to proceed with the stormwater project including the
acquisition of the necessary drainage easements in order to achieve that
desired public improvement. It would also, in relationship to that public
improvement, allow the City to acquire a conservation easement. That
conservation easement was the acquisition of the development rights on that
property so that the golf course, or the natural open space of that area,
would remain in perpetuity.
He said staff had reviewed this matter with the City's Bond Counsel as far
as the City's ability to establish a benefit district for those purposes.
As staff wanted to keep the neighbors informed and the potential property
owners of the benefit district informed, staff sent out letters advising
those property owners of the hearing this evening. Unfortunately, staff
used the wrong assessment data. He said staff received assessment data that
had a little bit of a transposition from the Appraisers Offices and staff
misinterpreted that data. He said staff now had the correct 2003 assessment
data, but they found a lot that had a problem and staff would work with the
Appraiser's office to make sure that was accurate.
He said the City Commission's action did not have a lot to do with that data
because the final assessments were not being established, but that would
give all of the property owners some indication of their possible
assessments. This was the first time that the City was using the appraised
value of the property as method of assessment.
One primary issue was the West Meadows Condominium Association, tract 55, in
the southeast corner of the proposed benefit district. He said there were
55 tracts and 84 condominium units on tract 55. He said the Appraiser's
office had been helping staff and neighbors understand the unique property
tax aspects of condominium associations. He said the Condominium
Association was a legal entity but it did not receive a separate property
tax, special assessment bill. Each one of the individual condominium units
received a bill that represented the fair market value of both their unit
value and an undivided property interest in the Condominium Association
itself. The County Appraiser's office did not provide an explicit value for
the land at the Condominium Association. He said what staff had done was to
research some of the methods to achieve the goals that the neighbors had put
forward which was to recognize if they used just purely the appraised value
of all of the 55 tracts, the 84 condominium units would have a very high
special assessment and that did not reasonably reflect their benefit from
the proposed improvement.
He said he had a discussion with the City's Bond Counsel on how they could
reflect the concern about the high assessment that would be placed on the
condominium unit owners and still remain within the special assessment
statutes. One of the special assessment statutes concerns was that the
property that adjoins an improvement be included in a benefit district and
that was particularly important with street improvements. He said staff was
not certain about the level of importance when getting to other
improvements, but that was a value that helped staff in defending the
benefit district. There was also a general value that they wanted to keep
the same assessment method on all property within a benefit district, but
they could vary from that if staff could make an appropriate distinction.
He said they struggled with an articulation as to why they thought it was a
worth while cause and why they thought it was defendable. He said it was
possible that there would be a challenge to the benefit district or to the
assessment, but one of the things that were done to protect the City's
interest was the maximum assessment ordinances before they did the actual
improvement.
He suggested that they change the assessment method on the benefit district,
if the City Commission believed that there could be a distinction between
tact 55, Condominium Association properties and the rest of the properties
based on their location, size, and configuration that their appraised value
should be significantly lower percentage than what there appraised value
was. He said staff would use this method to achieve the goals that were
laid out by the Neighborhood Association. He said the percent amount would
be approximately 15 percent of their appraised value.
Vice Mayor Rundle asked if there would need to be a specific finding made
this evening.
Corliss said staff would include in the resolution the language: "because of
the location, size, and configuration of tract 55, only a certain percentage
would be included." He said that finding was based on those three factors.
Commission Highberger said he wanted to make sure the Commission supported
the neighborhood association, but he was concerned about setting precedent.
Corliss said he did not think it would be setting a precedent that probably
could not be distinguished based upon how the Commission would view another
new and different project. He said this was unusual because it was
appraised value and when looking at the appraised values of the homes in
that neighborhood, they differed based upon where they were located.
Commissioner Schauner said tract 55 included open ground as well as built
structure. He asked if there was no explicit land value for tract 55 by
itself that was maintained by the County.
Marion Johnson, County Appraiser, said Commissioner Schauner was accurate.
Commissioner Schauner said each of the 84 members of those condominiums own
an undivided 1/84th of tract 55.
Johnson said they owned an interest in that association and all the other
things that went with a condominium association which was land usage and all
the other amenities.
Commissioner Schauner asked if it was common for the owner of the remainder
(undeveloped ground) to not have an explicit tax value.
Johnson said correct.
Mayor Dunfield called public comment.
Jean Milstead said she lived in the neighborhood and was one of the property
owners affected. She said the single-family and duplex property owners
whose land abut the Orchards Golf Course had been working almost 4 years to
achieve a win/win situation where in that parcel of land would remain green
space for a golf course. She said they felt that benefit district was the
best of all worlds. It provided the City of Lawrence the opportunity to
make needed drainage and stormwater improvements that would benefit the
taxpayers of Lawrence. It provided the property owner with needed funding
to achieve the goal of maintaining the golf course. By purchasing that
conservation easement, the property owners whose land abuts the golf course
were assuring that the parcel would remain either greenspace or a golf
course forever, thus providing a valuable asset of greenspace to the whole
community.
She said they met with City staff, representatives from the County
Appraiser's Office, City Commissioners, and representatives from the Kansas
Land Trust, to determine how to accomplish that project. She said there
were still some unanswered questions on the implementation of the
conservation easement assessment, but they would continue to work with City
staff and the neighbors in the West Meadow Condominiums to resolve those
issues. She said they were confident that those issues could be resolved
equitably and they thanked the City Commission for their support and
encouragement for the neighborhood. She asked the City Commission to
approve this item.
Jack Skeels, a property owner in the proposed benefit district, spoke in
support of the benefit district. He said it was the location, size, and
configuration of the West Meadow Condominiums that made for this special
exception to full market pricing.
Commissioner Highberger said this was a very creative solution and he would
like to see this issue go forward. He said he was satisfied that the
solution had been worked out.
Commissioner Schauner said the purchase of those development rights, he
asked if that would include the development of the entire tract of the
Orchards Golf Course or would there be any portion of it that would be left
available for development
Corliss said he understood it would be the entire golf course.
Mayor Dunfield said the intent would be not to make the conservation
easement so strict that continued operation and development of a golf course
would not be possible.
Corliss said correct.
Moved by Hack, seconded by Rundle, to close the public hearing. Motion
carried unanimously.
Corliss mentioned there were some title issues as explained in his memo.
He said last week the City Commission discussed referring property
acquisitions of 5 acres or greater to the Planning Commission. He said the
City was not acquiring the fee title for that property, but they were
acquiring the development rights of that property.
Commissioner Schauner thanked Skeels for his work on this issue. He said
this was a creative solution to a vexing problem.
He said now that they were doing that conservation easement purchase of
development rights, it might be a tool the City Commission might consider
using in the future to help preserve greenspace in the established
boundaries of the City. He supported the proposal, but he wanted the
rationale articulated for distinguishing the treatment of this condominium
association differently than they had treated benefit district abutters in
the past. He pointed out that location, configuration and size should be
noted and articulated.
Corliss said it was not the use of the property that they could use as a
distinguishing characteristic. He said the Kansas Courts had been clear
that they should not look at the use of the property or the prospective use
of the property.
Mayor Dunfield said in the last couple of years there had been two other
conservation easements.
Corliss said in most cases the City was still the land owner and a third
party would have been given a conservation easement to alleviate any
concerns about any potential development.
Hack said when they were discussing this issue in the beginning it was the
then Vice Mayor Dunfield suggestion that staff look into that issue.
Corliss said staff would draft the appropriate resolution and work on the
actual assessment methods. He said staff would then come back with the
resolution that would set that percentage for the Condominium Association.
The City Commission would then adopt that resolution if it met with the
Commission satisfaction. He said staff would then do the maximum assessment
ordinance and begin negotiations with the property owner and those that have
other financial interest with the property on the terms and conditions of
the conservation easements. He recommended that the Commission did not
close on the conservation easement and proceed with bidding on the
stormwater project until after the statute of limitations period had ran on
the maximum assessments.
Commissioner Highberger said this was an important matter and that future
acquisitions like this should go to the Planning Commission.
(9)
Receive presentation on Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies and direct
staff to draft and ordinance, as appropriate..
Tom Swenson, Transystems, presented the report. He began with some
background information. He said land use and transportation were strongly
interdependent. He said effective transportation systems were needed to
attract and serve economic development as well as maintain a quality of life
in this community.
Swenson presented other information to the City Commission concerning local
experience, goals, objectives, requirement framework, extent of study
required, study common to all applications, what generated trips,
qualifications to conduct a study, the review and use of a study, staff
responsibilities, and TIA procedures.
In conclusion, he said Transportation Impact Study Requirements were trying
to: 1) assure that the development impacts were accurately and thoroughly
assessed; 2) Set clear expectations and provide a consistent process; 3)
Review development in context with other development and future conditions;
and 4) Consider all modes of travel; and 5) Safeguard the public streets
system.
Commissioner Schauner asked Swenson if he was to do a traffic impact study
on a particular proposed development was it Swenson's experience that there
was no need to go beyond the first major intersection to evaluate the impact
of that proposal. He said his own experience suggested that the immediate
area was not the only area impacted by major commercial or residential
development, but those collector and arterial streets that led to the
development, beyond the first major arterial intersection, were also
affected.
Swenson said it was conceivable and probably related to the development of
the street system and the level of development activity in a particular
area. He said perhaps development was ahead of the investment in a street
system. To some extent, the assessment had been made through long-range
planning on the major streets. He said it was already identified what
needed to be there. The long-range transportation plan was tied to a
certain level of land development. In part, it would depend on what would
be done with that information. He said he could see cases where it might
show that there was a deficiency, but what was causing that was a lag in the
street system development.
Mayor Dunfield said that a basic study was going to be required for a
development of any size, he asked how much of an investment was that
applicant going to need to make in such a study and how much value did the
City gain from a study of a less than 100 peak hour development.
Swenson said it was not a formal study. He said it was basic things that
went along with putting together a site plan. He said measuring site
distances was a fundamental thing that should go on anyway.
Dunfield said so there was value for the City Planners.
Swenson said absolutely.
Commissioner Hack said when looking at the break points and at the houses,
she asked if the burden on the cost of the study would go to the last person
in.
Swenson said those thresholds were for any single application.
Commissioner Highberger asked about the medium level of scrutiny and if it
would include an impact on the adjacent neighborhoods.
Swenson said typically not. He said there was no universal definition of
what should or should not be in a Transportation Impact Study. He said
typically it was a strict technical assessment of adjacent streets for the
purpose of figuring out if they would provide acceptable levels of service
as opposed to making more qualitative assessments.
Commissioner Schauner said if beginning to have a sufficient aggregate of
development in a given location and that intersection had an unacceptable
level of service for the typical travel, his experience was that people
would try to find another way around that intersection. He said at some
point when new development came to that location, it struck him as
reasonable to look at how people had begun to build their own collector
streets around a below service level area.
Swenson agreed. He asked the Commission what they wanted included in those
studies. He suggested viewing this presentation as a technical assessment
for providing the Commission information to make good decisions.
Commissioner Schauner said Lawrence was a surface street City. It would be
difficult in managing the projected growth of the City with the existing
infrastructure. It seemed that it was reasonable to expect that the City's
level of service in most of the City's major intersections would
deteriorate, perhaps, quickly below Level Service D. He asked how they
could use Traffic Impact Studies to help manage that growth and use of the
City's infrastructure.
Swenson said those were not the types of studies that would give the answers
that Commissioner Schauner was looking for. He said that was a broader
issue and the City Commission would need to establish goals and objectives
to reach a conclusion.
Commissioner Highberger asked Swenson if what he was saying was that there
were no objective tools to quantify spill over traffic.
Swenson said that would be subjective. He said patterns could be measured,
but there was going to be a lot of judgment.
Mayor Dunfield called for public comment
After receiving no public comment, Corliss said the Commission needed to
have conversation with staff about what the appropriate form of adoption
would be for those guidelines. He said to some extent they were regulatory
in a sense. When receiving an application, they would want the applicant to
perform certain studies so that staff could analyze it more thoroughly. He
said in addition to being adopted it should also be in ordinance form. He
said he did not see this as part of the zoning code or subdivision
regulations. He said staff would include it in an ordinance in the City
Code that would spell out the key regulatory language and reference some of
the other documents as appropriate. As the land use documents continued
they would then reference those requirements.
Finger said that was an accurate statement. She said staff wanted the City
Commission's reflection from what was presented and then staff wanted to
bring back to the City Commission something specific with a couple of
options on how to implement them.
Commissioner Schauner said he wanted to do this in a way that made sense and
was consistent with zoning and subdivision regulations.
Mayor Dunfield said more information about cut-through traffic would be
helpful. He said those qualitative types of issues were important and those
issues needed to be addressed.
Commissioner Hack asked if Swenson did more of those types of studies for
communities as traffic was less prone to observe general courtesy.
Swenson said not more, it usually reached a certain level of frustration of
a resident. Typically it was related to something on the major street system
that they were trying to avoid.
John Selk, LandPlan Engineering, said they had been doing traffic impact
studies for approximately 20 years and he appreciated the City establishing
some type of protocol. He said at this time they were focused on being
more proactive in transportation planning. He said they try to establish
impacts before they finish a design. He said he would like the opportunity
to be part of the process in drafting the ordinance.
Commissioner Hack said given his expertise that would make sense.
Commissioner Schauner said he was told by another party that a particular
store with a couple hundred thousand square feet would generate 80 or 90
peak hour trips and today he was hearing that a 130 thousand square foot
store would generate 500 peak hour trips. He found it interesting that the
numbers vary so dramatically and it went to the qualitative nature of the
work and the quality of the people that was doing the work. He said he
wanted to see the City have a process that put people without vested
interest in the economic gain or loss of a project in the driver's seat when
determining what the engineering qualifications would be.
Commissioner Hack said per hour versus per peak hour was two completely
different things. She said it would be helpful to have that information.
Wildgen asked if the Commission wanted to send this issue to the Traffic
Safety Commission.
Linda Finger suggested that staff handle that issue first. She said David
Woosley, Traffic Engineer, was involved in that issue. She said Woosley
thought the TSC dealt more specifically with areas that were current rather
than setting standards.
Mayor Dunfield agreed. He said on the other hand it might make sense for
the TSC to get copies of those reports and ask the TSC to comment on those
reports if they had any comments on both the access management and the
traffic impact study.
Vice Mayor Rundle said he thought that the TSC was under utilized. He said
he thought it was a good idea that the TSC stayed in the loop.
(10)
Receive presentation on Access Management Guidelines and direct staff to
draft an ordinance, as appropriate.
Bill Ahrens presented the report. Ahrens explained key definitions of
"Access" and "Access Management." He said there were several major goals in
Access Management which were: 1) Limit the number of conflict points; 2)
Separate the conflicts points; and 3) Remove turning vehicles and queues
from through movements.
He said through Access Management they could reduce collisions, delay, and
emissions. He said also, through Access Management, they could improve
traffic flow, fuel economy, and preserve capacity and public investment.
He said some of the local tools available to manage land development and
transportation were: Horizon 2020, Transportation 2025, Roadway Design
Guidelines, Access Management Ordinance, Development Code, and the Traffic
Impact Study Guidelines. He said all of those tools together were good
methods to help the development process.
Ahren said Access Management will provide guidelines and criteria for the
spacing of traffic signals, intersecting streets and driveways. It would
also influence the area of intersections, median break spacing, left and
right turn lanes, and intersection sight distance.
He said concerning driveway location principles they wanted to keep
driveways away from intersections, direct access to side streets, no backing
out onto the roadways, and avoid driveways along right turn lanes.
Finally, he said Access Management Guidelines would do the following: 1)
Define standards to work from applicable to both new development and
redevelopment; 2) Set a clear expectation and provide a consistent process;
3) Balance traffic service with land access, with safety as the overarching
goal; and 4) Maximize the investment in the public street system.
Vice Mayor Rundle asked if there was any relevance in touching on
pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit when talking about Access Management.
Ahrens said to a large extent it was addressing vehicular traffic.
Commissioner Highberger said he had a concern about the concept of Access
Management. He said the better Access Management was controlled, the more
multi-lane and high speed areas were being created and that was dangerous to
pedestrians. He said he thought there was a relationship between Access
Management and pedestrian accessibility.
Ahrens said if there was a four lane arterial street that was posted at 40
or 45 m.p.h., but because of the volume of traffic on that street and the
frequency of the access points along the way operating at 20 m.p.h., then
there would be a congested situation for a large part of the day and a
number of motorists that were seeking ultimate routes through residential
neighborhoods. He said if they could manage that access and get traffic to
operate at its posted speed, they would hopefully not need to widen that to
six lanes.
Mayor Dunfield said he saw Access Management as being very useful in
arterials, collectors, and commercial areas in terms of allowing the traffic
to flow well which helped keep that spill over traffic off of neighborhood
streets. He said when getting down to the residential collector and local
street scales there seemed to be an issue of whether some of the Access
Management ideas actually work at cross purposes to some of the traffic
calming idea. He said at some point if making the roadways too open, clear,
and inviting to high speed traffic then you were taking away from the
possibility for traffic calming.
Ahrens said it seemed the Mayor was going in two different directions. He
said access management was primarily aimed at arterial and some extent
collector streets. Traffic calming was primarily residential streets and to
some extent collector streets, not on arterial streets because of the
function of those roadways.
Mayor Dunfield said the guidelines that were given went down to the local
street level.
Ahrens said they did in defining the intersection influenced areas and the
driveway locations.
Finger said it was like two different tools to do two different things. She
said Access Management was where there was already high speed traffic. She
said having different approaches that would help calm traffic was good. She
said what had been done inadvertently in this community was talk about
traffic calming in relationship to collector and/or arterials, such as
Louisiana Street, which confused a lot of people. Those were more
management tools because of how the street was used, but pure traffic
calming was something more appropriate for the interior to a neighborhood.
Commissioner Schauner said if an Access Management Plan was working well
then you could remove the incentive for persons to spill over into
neighborhood collector streets. He said what has happened was that Access
Management had not been good enough and some collector streets located in
neighborhoods were turning into minor arterials. He said Harvard Road was
an example because it had become a way to avoid driving on West 6th Street,
as a result, neighbors had increasing amount of complaints about the speeds
through their neighborhoods. He asked how an Access Management Plan could
be developed to minimize that type of issue.
Ahrens said managing the arterials would keep the traffic that was heading
toward the commercial areas on the arterial streets that were designed to
carry that traffic.
Finger said that happened when the coordination of traffic signals were done
on Iowa Street. She said they would not be able to retrofit all of those
arterials immediately.
Commissioner Schauner said when talking about Traffic Impact Studies and
Access Management polices, they would want to create a conflict matrix to
make sure that those two policies served one another.
Ahrens said that was an excellent point. He said they had been developed
concurrently.
Vice Mayor Rundle asked if other communities addressed the pedestrian,
bicycle, and mass transit, in their Access Management Plan.
Ahrens said no. He said again, the main intent was to manage arterial
systems.
Vice Mayor Rundle said it seemed hard for him to reconcile that this was
strictly an arterial systems. He said people on bicycles were not going to
stay isolated on one side of an arterial street or another.
Ahrens said the two issues would work closely together. He said if someone
wished to develop a piece of property, they would look at the Access
Management Guidelines along with other applicable materials and come to
staff with a development plan. He said if in that development proposal
there was development that generated a number of trips then there would be a
traffic impact study.
Commissioner Schauner asked if the benchmarks of the Access Management Plan
changed as the project generated more traffic.
Ahrens said the Access Management Guidelines define how far back from an
intersection, for example, where a driveway should be or what the
intersection influence was between two intersecting arterial streets or an
arterial versus collector.
Commissioner Schauner asked if that meant without regard to the volume of
traffic at that location.
Ahrens said yes.
Commissioner Schauner asked at some point would it be anticipated that part
of the Access Management would provide an elevated access for pedestrians or
bicycles across what would soon become a big intersection. He asked if that
was tool that would make sense at some point.
Ahrens said that was something that could be included in the draft as a
minimum threshold for providing pedestrian overpasses.
Commissioner Schauner said he would like to see it thought about in advance
rather than having it triggered by a fatality.
Mayor Dunfield called for public comment.
John Selk, Landplan Engineering, said this was a good program, but the
Commission needed to be realistic. He said there were certain situations
that would always be and there was an appeals process that was involved. He
said it was not well defined in the process. He said there was always going
to be a situation that would come up that did not quite fit. It was
important to do as much as you could to the greatest extent. He said
specific distances might not always work and that was the reason for an
engineering judgment. He said as a demonstration, he would like to go back
on several large projects and see what implications there were to give the
City Commission a better understanding.
Vice Mayor Rundle suggested that if Selk had any suggestions for flushing
out that appeals process to pass that information on.
Commissioner Hack said this item was in tandem with the previous item and
she suggested asking staff to proceed with this item as well as the previous
item and provide the City Commission with information. She liked
Commissioner Schauner's idea of a study session.
Commissioner Highberger suggested that there be neighborhood input.
Mayor Dunfield said in thinking about testing the guidelines on actual
situation, he thought about Barker Street. He said if those guidelines for
collectors were applied to that street it would look substantially
different. He said a study session would be a good forum to think through
some of those issues.
Commissioner Schauner said concerning retrofitting developments, he
suggested using new developments compared to some older developments. As
those development concepts had changed over the past 15 to 20 years there
were more cul-de-sacs and large curvilinear street development, he suggested
seeing how those policies would impact those projects. (11)
During Commission items Commissioner Highberger asked for a staff report on
enforcement of the snow removal ordinance.
(12)
Moved by Schauner , seconded by Hack , to adjourn at
9:10p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
APPROVED:
_____________________________
David M Dunfield, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Frank S. Reeb, City Clerk
CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 13, 2004
1. Purchase Nalcolyte polymer chemical from Nalco Chemical Co., for
$58,500.
2. Ordinance No. 7731 - 1st Reading, Amend Horizon 2020, Urban Growth
Area (CPA-2003-3)
3. Site Plan - (SP-10-65-03) Children's Learning Ctr., 205 N Mich.
4. Site Plan - (SP-11-69-03) 3 story apt to 12 bedrooms at 1334 Ohio.
5. Subordination Agreement - 1614 E 18th, George & Ardith Shove.
6. City Manager's report.
7. Contractor Licensing - Lawrence Home Builders Assoc.
8. Ordinance No. 7733 - 1st Reading, Evaporator coils exempt from
mechanical permits.
9. Benefit District - Public Hearing for Orchards Golf Course.
10. Traffic Impact Study Guidelines.
11. Access Mgmt Guidelines.
12. Snow Removal report request. (Commissioner Highberger)
_____________________________
Lisa K. Patterson
Communications Coordinator
City of Lawrence
PO Box 708
Lawrence, KS 66044
(785) 832-3406
fax (785) 832-3405
lpatterson at ci.lawrence.ks.us
http://www.lawrenceks.org
More information about the E-minutes
mailing list