February 6, 2001

 

The Board of Commissioners of the City of Lawrence met in regular session at 6:45 p.m., in the City Commission Chambers in City Hall with Mayor Henry presiding and members Dunfield, Hodges, Kennedy and Rundle present.  Student Commissioner May was present.

Student Commissioner May requested the City Commission meeting minutes of January 23, 2001, be amended to reflect that she was present.

Moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to amend the City Commission meeting minutes of January 23, 2001, as requested.  Motion carried unanimously.

Moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to approve the City Commission meeting minutes of January 23, 2001, as amended; and, the City Commission meeting minutes of January 24, 2001.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to receive the Public Transit Advisory Committee meeting minutes of January 16, 2001; the Lawrence Housing Authority meeting minutes of December 19, 2000; the Aviation Advisory Board meeting minutes of October 16, 2000; the Sign Code Board of Appeals meeting minutes of January 4, 2001; and, the BZA meeting minutes of December 7, 2000 and January 4, 2001.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to approve claims in the amount of $2,566,628.33 and payroll from January 14, 2001 to January 27, 2001, in the amount of $1,155,672.64.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, Rundle, seconded by Dunfield, to approve the Drinking Establishment Licenses for La Tropicana Restaurant, 434 Locust; Shenago Lounge, 2907 West 6^th; J.B. Stout's, 721 Wakarusa, #100 (Contingent Upon State License); Free State Brewery, 636 Massachusetts; Set'em Up Jacks, 1800 East 23^rd; Mariscos, 8421 West 6^th, No. A (Contingent Upon State License); and, Henry's on Henry Street, 11 East 8th. Motion carried unanimously.

Melinda Henderson requested the City Commission defer appointments to the Lawrence/Douglas County Economic Development Board until other people who may be interested had an opportunity to apply for appointment.  If it was not appropriate to defer these appointments, she requested future appointments be made using a more open process.

Pat Kahde expressed a concern on how the Board was appointed.  She wanted to see a more open opportunity for people to participate in the process.  She thought the process for Board appointments was flawed, especially in this situation.

David Corliss, Assistant City Manager, said these were joint appointments by the City and County.  The Douglas County Commission had appointed these people to the Board.

Mayor Henry requested time to review these appointments with the County Commission.      

Moved by Dunfield, seconded by Rundle, to defer for one (1) week the appointments to the Lawrence/Douglas County Economic Development Board.  Motion carried unanimously.

Moved by Rundle, seconded by Hodges, to approve the appointment of Mary Boyden, Donna Swall and Frank Day as City appointees replacing Ed Dutton, Glenna Herd, and Margaret Hopkins to the Lawrence/Douglas County Council on Aging.  Motion carried unanimously.

The City Commission reviewed the roofing of the Forestry Building at 1110 Haskell Avenue for the Parks & Recreation Department.  The bids were:

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to award the bid to Mid West Coating, in the amount of $9,950.00.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to approve the purchase of equipment for the new Indoor Aquatic Center to Splashtacular, Inc., in the amount of $47,900.00.  Motion carried unanimously.

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to place on first reading Ordinance No. 7327, amending Article 6, Chapter 19 of the City Code concerning pretreatment regulations for the City's sanitary sewer utility.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                      (1)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to place on first reading Ordinance No. 7328, rezoning [Z-10-47-00] approximately 3.205 acres from RS-2 (Single-Family Residence) to PRD-2 (Planned Residential Development), property commonly known as Delaware Commons.  Motion carried unanimously.                                    (2) 

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to place on first reading Ordinance No. 7329, declaring Louisiana Street from 17^th Street south to the City boundaries a main traffic-way.  Motion carried unanimously.                                     (3)

Ordinance No. 7317, changing the name of Red Cedar Court in Sonegate Townhomes Addition to Firefly Court, was read a second time.                   

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to adopt the ordinance.  Aye:  Dunfield, Henry, Hodges, Kennedy, and Rundle.   Nay: None.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                          (4)

Ordinance No. 7318, establishing “no parking” 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m., Mon-Fri, along the west side of Raintree Place from University drive to Valley Lane, was read a second time.  

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to adopt the ordinance.  Aye:  Dunfield, Henry, Hodges, Kennedy, and Rundle.   Nay: None.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                          (5)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to adopt Resolution No. 6274, declaring 1102 E. 13^th Street environmentally blighted and allowing the property owner 20 days to abate.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                    (6)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to adopt Resolution No. 6275, authorizing $350,000.00 in General Obligation Bond Authority for the first phase of Louisiana Street traffic calming projects which included sidewalks on the east side from 18^th to Broke Arrow Park and four pedestrian refuge islands at various locations along Louisiana Street and authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with EBH & Associates for this engineering work, in the amount of $21,381.25.  Motion carried unanimously.                     (7)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to adopt Resolution No. 6276, authorizing $1,750,000 in General Obligation Bond Authority for the construction of Fire Station No. 2 on Harper Street.  Motion carried unanimously.                       (8)            As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to adopt Resolution No. 6277, making certain findings for the creation of a benefit district for sanitary sewer improvements in the Westwood (northeast of 15^th and Iowa) neighborhood.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                         (9)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to adopt Resolution No. 6278, establishing the benefit district for sanitary sewer improvements in the Westwood (northeast of 15^th and Iowa) neighborhood.           Motion carried unanimously.      (10)

As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to approve the site plan (SP-06-45-00) for an addition to Douglas County Public Works Shop, located at 711 E. 23^rd Street, subject to the following conditions:

1.                  Provide a Revised Site Plan depicting the following:

a.                  Addition of one (1) accessible parking space;

b.                  Locate proposed structures outside of required setbacks; and,

2.        Provision of an executed Site Plan Performance Agreement.

  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                      (11)

            CL Maurer, LandPlan Engineering, representing the property owner on the Final Plat of Wood Addition, requested the applicant be allowed to keep two (2) access points to North 2^nd Street.  The Planning Commission recommended one (1) access point to North 2^nd Street on the Final Plat.  If the northern access were closed, it would cause difficulty for transport trucks accessing the site without blocking traffic at the gasoline pumps.  Maurer said it would require a total redesign of the site.  The site was extremely difficult to develop because it was narrow and triangular. 

            Kyle Mieras, Planner, said staff from Planning, Public Works and KDOT met with the developer on the site and believed access for these vehicles could be taken from North 3^rd Street.

            Mike Wood, owner of the site, said maintaining a second access on to North 2^nd Street would make access to the site and flow through the site more safe.

            Rundle asked if elimination of greenspace on North 3^rd Street would allow better access for the transport trucks.

            Wood said that would possibly give them more room to maneuver.

            Henry suggested deferring this matter to staff for review.      

Moved by Kennedy, seconded by Hodges, to refer the issues related with the condition on the Final Plat of one (1) access point to North 2^nd Street for Wood Addition to Planning Staff for review.    Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                        (12)

            As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to approve the annexation request and place on first reading Ordinance No. 7330, (A-12-22-00), annexing approximately 50.759 acres of City owned property, located west and north of the intersection of Kasold Drive and W. 31^st Street.  Motion carried unanimously.                        (13)

            As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, toauthorize the Mayor to sign a release of mortgage for Rebecca Stakes, 431 Elm.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                (14)

            As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Airport Development Group in the amount of $75,000 (FFA provides 90% funding) for airport environmental assessment.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                        (15)

            As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with BG Consultants for 2001 waterline improvement engineering design project.  Motion carried unanimously.                                     (16)

            As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to concur with staff’s recommendation to decline further proceedings regarding the request to make Pikes Peek Place a public street.   Motion carried unanimously.                                                 (17)

            As part of the consent agenda and upon request of staff, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to defer an amendment to the City's Budget Billing Program for Utility customers.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                   (18)

            As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to approve the naming of City-owned property south of 27^th Street which was recently donated by John McGrew as the Pat Dawson Billings Nature Area.  Motion carried unanimously.               (19)

            As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to authorize City Manager to execute a contract with The Peridian Group for the engineering design of Inverness Drive, 24^th Place to 27^th Street, in the amount of $80,000.00.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                 (20)

            As part of the consent agenda, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle, to authorize City Manager to execute a contract with the Peridian Group for Project for the engineering design of the box culvert reconstruction at Crossgate Drive and 27^th Street, in the amount of $75,000.00.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                           (21)

            Michael McGrew, representing Grand LLC, presented the request from Grand LLC for temporary building permits for the Grand Subdivision near 31^st and Kasold.   McGrew said they were asking for three (3) duplex permits immediately with the possibility of seven (7) more duplex permits by April 1, 2001, if substantial progress was made on the streets, sewers and water line.  He understood and agreed that they would not be able to connect to City services or allow any occupancy of the units until the street, storm sewer, sanitary sewer and water lines were completed and accepted by the City.  The street plan and corrected sanitary sewer plans were submitted to Public Works for review.

            Rundle asked the reason for the request.

            McGrew said because of tax consequences, it was important for them to make substantial progress on these building by the end of April.  They would like to be able to work on the building and infrastructure improvements at the same time.

            Rundle asked if there were any potential consequences for allowing these structures to be started prior to the infrastructure improvements.

            Mike Wildgen, City Manager, said that question would need to be addressed by the engineers designing the street and the contractors building the home.  He did not anticipate any substantial problems.  That was a liability faced by the developer.  Wildgen encouraged the escrow of funds for storm sewer improvements to the creek.

            Moved by Hodges, seconded by Kennedy, to approve the request from Grand LLC for three (3) temporary building permits for the Grand Subdivision near 31^st and Kasold subject to the condition that funds were escrowed for the storm sewer improvements.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                         (22)

            Mike Wildgen, City Manager, presented the staff report on the proposed grant from the Kansas Department of Transportation for Geometric Improvement at K-10 and East Hills Drive.  KDOT has approved a program at an estimated cost of $400,000.00 for lengthening the deceleration and acceleration lanes at this location.  KDOT would pay approximately $320,000.00 for the project.  The City would be responsible for all the cost over $320,000.00 as well as right-of-way and utility cost, if any.  The City share was estimated to be $80,000.00.

            Keith Folkman, Sauer Danfoss, requested the City Commission delay making a decision.  He asked that KDOT gather additional input from employers and employees of the Business Park and encourage KDOT to change the speed limit from 65 mph to 45 mph in this area.  The KDOT report shows that traffic signals would not work in this area and he thought that was because of the speed being 65 mph. 

            David Boyer, ProSoCo, said the City Commission needed to witness on a first hand basis people entering and leaving the park in the early morning and late afternoon.  He invited the City Commission to come to ProSoCo along with KDOT to talk with people about this situation.  Boyer expressed a concern that if the City Commission accepted this proposal, KDOT would think the problem has been solved.  Traffic signals, flashing devices and rumble strips were appropriate for this location.

            Anton Menning, 1517 Rhode Island, said the City Commission should look well into the future to address this problem.  By spending $40,000.00 at this time, it would not resolve the additional growth that would occur in this area twenty five (25) years into the future.

            Rundle asked if the City had discussed the speed issue with KDOT.

            Mike Wildgen, City Manager, said the grant was given to the City based upon previous discussions with KDOT about problems in this area.  The report back from KDOT showed 65 mph was appropriate for the area.  He would request KDOT to meet with employees and employers of the business park.

            Dunfield said as veterans, working with KDOT on several other projects, it appeared that unfortunately answers to problems always fall back to statistics.

            Moved by Rundle, seconded by Dunfield, to authorize acceptance of the project and City funding responsibility for the proposed Geometric Improvements at K-10 and East Hills Business Park and direct the City Manager to write a letter to KDOT stating this was not the ultimate solution to problems at this location and inviting them to a meeting with employers and employees from the East Hills Business Park to discuss this intersection.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                                                                                            (23)

            Mayor Henry requested a deferral on discussion of a letter from the Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods concerning Gas Franchise Fee Payments until after the February 21, 2001 Board Meeting of Warm Hearts.  He was a Board member of Warm Hearts and would discuss this issue with the Board.

            The City Commission concurred to defer discussion of the Gas Franchise Fees until after the February 21, 2001, meeting of Warm Hearts.                            .                                         (24)

            David Corliss, Assistant City Manager, presented the draft Ordinances on the proposed Zoning Code changes and a City Rental Licensing Ordinance which they directed staff to prepare.  The Ordinances were ready for adoption pending amendments by the City Commission.  These Ordinances were not on the agenda for first reading.  Ordinance No. 7323 amended Sections of the Zoning Code to establish the “family” definition to reflect no more than two (2) unrelated persons and contained exemptions suggested by the City Commission.  Ordinance No. 7324 contains language requiring the registration of non-conforming uses created by Ordinance No. 7323 within 90 days.  Registration of non-conforming uses was a necessary function to determine the location and status of non-conforming uses.  Ordinance 7325 addressed the issue of eliminating non-conforming uses based on the expiration of a lease.  He requested the City Commission provide guidance on the appropriate timeframe for the elimination of non-conforming uses.  Ordinance No. 7326 was a Draft Rental Licensing Ordinance which was new language that neither the City Commission nor the public has seen.  A number of assumption were made in drafting the Ordinance.  The Draft Ordinance only applied to rental of dwellings in RS Zoning Districts.  It required licensure of the owner, a three (3) year cycle of inspection of all licensed properties and an annual twenty-five dollar ($25.00) license fee.  After July 1, 2003, the rental of RS Dwelling in violation of the new definition of “family” unless the dwelling was owner occupied, would be a violation of the Ordinance. 

            Hodges asked if there were a licensing program as identified in Ordinance No. 7326, would Ordinance No. 7325 discussing non-conforming uses be needed.

            Corliss said if the City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 7326, Ordinance No. 7325 may not be necessary.

            Rundle suggested that more discussion and public comment was needed prior to adoption of Ordinance No. 7326, requiring rental licensing.

            Dunfield asked what type of inspections were in place for exiting residential structures.

            Corliss said code and housing violations were investigated upon a complaint basis.  Some multi-family units were inspected by the Fire Department for fire safety codes.  In addition, multi-family complexes were site planned.

            Dunfield said by adopting licensing and inspection for single-family units, were they being held to a higher standard.

            Corliss said a rational for licensing and inspection of single-family units was that single-family structures were not intended or designed to be used for multi-family type uses.

            Tony Backus, 1534 Vermont Street, expressed a concern about the definition of “family.”  It was inappropriate for the City Commission to define a “family” because of the many different living arrangements that were prevalent today.

            Anton Menning, 1517 Rhode Island, said he was a student and homeowner.  He has three (3) other students living with him.  He said he was not able to afford the house without three (3) other people living with him.  He was interested in buying other homes and could not make enough money renting to a family to purchase additional houses.

            Eric Bloom, 1645 West 19^th Street, spoke against licensing of a single-family residential rental because it was unfair.  He suggested holding every rental unit to the same requirements.  He recommended a compromise of three (3) unrelated individuals.

            John Lowther, 1120 Pennsylvania, spoke against the licensing process required by the proposed Ordinances.  He expressed a concern about the intrusive nature of licensing and inspections.  He was not opposed to reducing the number of unrelated people, but the licensing would impose additional costs on landlords and make rental costs more expensive.

            Mary Beth Harmon, 925 E 21^st Street, owned rental property in East Lawrence and said it was the character of the people in the rental units, not the number.  Existing Ordinances should be better enforced.  Tenants should pay penalties for violating current Ordinances and not Landlords.  Harmon said only one percent (1%) of rental units caused problems. She suggested continuing to deal with these issues on a complaint basis, but enforcing violations.  If registration was required for single-family rental units, registration should be required for all rental units.

            Jim Schneider, 3708 Stetson Drive, gave statistics on the number of University Students in Lawrence.  He said fifty-five percent (55%) of all rentals were students.  Most single renters were students and this Ordinance would force students out of the neighborhoods.  Students provided busing, CDBG monies for neighborhoods, and supported businesses in this community.  He thought it was unfair to drive students out of neighborhoods.

            Beth Ann Mansur, 1217 Prospect, supported changing the number of unrelated people in single-family residential districts.  Parking was especially a problem in these areas because single-family residences were not designed to provide parking for multi-family uses.  Within her immediate area, there were four (4) rental units with three (3) of the four (4) being problem houses.  That was to her seventy-five percent (75%) of units being problems not one percent (1%) as one person suggested.

            Harold Shepherd said there were enough Ordinances on the books, but they needed to be enforced.  He spoke in opposition to the new Ordinances and said they were directed at poor people.  The City should take responsibility in cleaning these things up.  The proposed Ordinances would put small landlords out of business.  He encouraged the City Commission to enforce the existing Ordinances.

            Serina Hearn, 1539 Vermont, spoke in opposition to reducing the number of unrelated individuals living in single-family homes.  The City Commission should regulate the behavior of these people and not the number.  She expressed a concern that her children would be identified as causing blight because they decided to live with friends when they were older. 

            Patricia Weis, a non-resident landlord, said there was a problem with the proposed Ordinances because landlords could not ask the marital status of tenants.  The dictionary defines “family” as all people living under one (1) roof.  She asked how the City could discriminate against people because of their martial status.  The proposed Ordinances would require landlords to violate the law.

            A person spoke against the proposed Ordinances because it violated the basic Human Rights of all people.  Using a definition based upon marriage appeared to be creating a relations police.  The proposed Ordinances appeared to endorse discrimination of stepchildren, gay and lesbians, domestic partner arrangements and any other people wanting to live together.

            David Greenbaum, 1834 Vermont, expressed a concern about the definition of “family.”  He said you cannot define “family” by a legal marriage.  Domestic partnerships existed all around and the City needed to rethink the definition of “family” based upon these relationships.  The proposed Ordinances were a restraint on the property rights of gay and lesbians.  He suggested reducing the number of unrelated individuals to three (3).                                

            Lois Schneider, 3808 Stetson Drive, expressed a concern about the proposed Ordinances violating anti discrimination laws.  The proposed Ordinance would put landlords in a position of discriminating against people.  She encouraged enforcement of existing Ordinances.  The occupants of the building should be held responsible for their actions because many times landlords did not know about the problems.  She requested the time frame for non-conforming uses be August 1, 2003, instead of July 1, 2003, because most leases were based on that date.  Schneider expressed a concern about the fines which appeared to be too high.  She recommended reducing the number of unrelated individuals to three.  Schnedier encouraged using tax abatements to encourage single-family home ownership.

            Don Weis, 887 East 1000 Road, expressed a concern about the regulations found in the licensing Ordinance.  He presented pictures of single-family owner/occupied residences that were not well maintained.  He saw many potential problems with the regulations found in the licensing Ordinances.

            Craig Campbell, 3708 Elizabeth Court, spoke in opposition to the proposed Ordinances because he thought it was divisive and would cause additional division within the community.  He suggested bringing all of the interested people together to reach a solution.

            Erin Simpson said students were a vibrant part of the community.  They made many contributions to the community including volunteer hours at many local social service agencies.  She recommended exempting K.U. and Haskell Indian Nations University students from the Ordinances.  Exemptions were granted to other group requesting exemption.  The Ordinance discriminates against people because of their age and familial status.

            Better Alderson spoke in support of all of the proposed Ordinances because they supported single-family owner/occupants.  The previous Ordinances adopted by the City Commission attempted to address symptoms caused by multi-family units in single-family areas.  The proposed Ordinances would address the cause of the disease and not just the symptoms.  The proposed Ordinances were not targeted at students and did not discriminate against adult relationships.  Alderson expressed a concern about converting single-family residential units to multiple living units without appropriate access to the living quarters and appropriate parking for cars.

            Aravind Muthkrishnan from the student senate, University of Kansas Student Senate, spoke in opposition to the Ordinances.  He presented data about the mobility of Lawrence residents.  The Ordinances would not change the current situation with families continuing to seek newer areas to the southeast and west.  The proposed Ordinances would increase the need for additional rental units which would be constructed on the fringes of the community and increase traffic in those areas.  He spoke in support of enforcing existing Ordinances and landlord registration for all units being rented.  He suggested incentives be given to owner/occupied residence.

            Holly Krebs, Student Senate, supported registration of all rental properties.  She said the City was ignoring the needs of student renters.  Krebs suggested legislation holding landlords accountable to the tenants.  With the adoption of these Ordinances, people living in single-family areas would have additional protection that those living in multi-family districts would not have.  She encouraged the City Commission to provide equal protection for all renters.

            Grant Butler spoke in opposition to the proposed Ordinances because they discriminated against students.

            Bronden Bell, 1247 Ohio Street, expressed concern about licensing landlords.  He thought the entering of these units under reasonable suspicion was violating the privacy of both the landlords and tenants.  It gave the enforcing agencies the authority to search homes without legal protection.  Bell said this Ordinance was aimed specifically at students and would force students into the blighted properties around the University.

            Jessica Bankston has volunteered time in schools in East Lawrence.  These proposed Ordinances would not increase enrollment at that school.  She said you cannot separate Lawrence from the University and suggested there were tools in place such as the party house and Nuisance Ordinance that could deal with these problems facing neighborhoods.  Students needed equal protection to rent where they chose in the community.

            Deborah Synder, 1909 Maine, said this was a land-use issue.  She presented a list of over seven hundred (700) signatures supporting the Ordinances.  The purpose of the Ordinance was to promote family occupancy.

            Marlon Marshall said the proposed Ordinance unfairly targeted students.  He asked about the relationship that created a family and what documents were needed to prove that you were a family.  He expressed a concern about discrimination by the Ordinances. 

            George Lacey was a landlord in the community for thirty-five (35) years.  He spoke in opposition to the proposed Ordinances.  Lawrence was overwhelmed with single-family units and there were not enough families to fill these units.  If landlords could not rent their single-family units, the value of those homes would go down which means fewer tax dollars for the City.  This would cause the City Commission to raise taxes.

            Max Entrikin, 1737 Mississippi, said the City Commission should act boldly to correct something that has been wrong for many years.  Four (4) unrelated people living in a single- family structure was inappropriate.  He said the City Commission should take action to set right what has been a problem. 

            Cortney Lehman, 315 Pleasant, said renters had a concern about strong neighborhoods just as individual owner/occupants.  She supported concepts such as the East Lawrence Revitalization Plan to  help neighborhoods in maintaining their strengths.  The students were the future of the community and the City should support them.  These Ordinances would push students further and further out of the community.

            Alan Zimmerman, 1747 Barker Ave, said he purchased several homes around his area because he wanted to control the type of people living in those homes.  He had a concern about the proposed Ordinances because they would reduce rental capacity within the community.  This would raise rent throughout the community.  The proposed Ordinances would also encourage urban sprawl to make up for the short fall in these units.  The proposed Ordinances would reduce property values.  He did not oppose regulation of properties, but suggested it to be Citywide.  He had a problem limiting registration to only single-family units.

            Bob Blank, 2133 Owens Lane, presented a map showing the number of students in elementary schools between 1993 and 1999.  It showed the migration of elementary students to outlying schools.  Blank said result of current zoning has not allowed individual families to purchase homes in the inner portions of the community.  He predicted more dyer consequences over the next twenty (20) years.

            Brian Hausherr, 1505 Cresent Road, said the proposed Ordinances were an insult to single people. He encouraged the City Commission to enforce its existing Ordinances.  The City Commission should not expect landlords to police their tenants and the City should not pass off its responsibility to property owners.  The City should site the people causing the problems and not the property owners.  The fines proposed in the Ordinance were a confiscation of property.  He did not think the fines were appropriate for the offences.   It appeared the City was not interested in addressing the problem, but only wanted to generate revenue.  The proposed Ordinances put the landlords in a bad situation.

            Andrew Bailey, 1510 Sigma Nu Place, said families were being attracted to the new areas because of the greenspace and type of construction.  Students care about the community and over 2,000 students were registered prior to the last election.  During that election, seventy percent (70%) of those students voted.  There were a lot of “ifs” associated with this Ordinance and the only given in this situation would be that rent would go up.  In addition, traffic would increase because of the new units that needed to built to accommodate the renters.  Going from four (4) unrelated individual to two (2) was a big jump.  He recommended going to three (3) unrelated individuals and if that did not work, change the number of it.

            Arley Allen said changing a simple number has gotten a number of people excited.  The proposed Ordinances were neither illegal, nor discriminatory.  Some people had projected that if these Ordinances were adopted, the center of the City would be left empty.  There were over a hundred and fifty (150) families looking for places to live and these Ordinances would result in a supply of single-family homes for these people.  He asked the City Commission to look at the map and think about the consequences of the current policy and the impact it would have on the future of Lawrence.  He supported adoption of the Ordinances.

            Mark Lehman said many groups and individuals do not support the change from four (4) unrelated individuals to two (2) unrelated individuals.  They included Duncan and Associates, East Lawrence Neighborhood Association, Old West Lawrence Neighborhood and more.  Lehman said the City Commission should not pass Ordinances that hurt small business and most landlords were small business people.  He suggested the City strike a compromise changing it from two (2) unrelated individuals to three (3) unrelated individuals and create a volunteering inspection program that would allow existing rental property to be grandfathered to four (4) persons as long as the ownership did not change.  This program would be voluntary and the landlord could either reduce to three (3) unrelated individuals or have a voluntary inspection in houses that were larger than three (3) bedroom to allow the four (4) people.  These houses should have a place to park four (4) cars off-street, egress windows and other code requirements.  This privilege would be revoked if the house became a problem.  Lehman thought this would accomplish the goals of the original concept and have a better chance of helping neighborhoods.  He recommended a task force to come up with solutions to these problems which would include representatives from homeowners, tenants, landlords, public safety and planning.  He encouraged the development of neighborhood plans using the East Lawrence Neighborhood Revitalization Plan as a model.  Lehman encouraged both sides to listen to each other and form a solution without hating each other.

            Rundle asked if there was concern about asking the familial status of people.

            Corliss said both State and Federal Courts had generally supported this type of Ordinance.  Staff advised people that you could ask the relationship of individuals, but cannot ask if they were married. 

            Rundle asked if other communities had been surveyed concerning this type of Ordinance.

            Corliss said a wide range of communities were reviewed.  They included Ordinances from University Communities as well as other communities addressing this issue.

            Rundle asked if there could be a distinction made between multi-family and single-family units.

            Corliss said there were distinctions between single-family units and multi-family units.  One was the fact that single-family units were not site planned.  Another was that multi-family units have fire/medical inspections enforcing the Fire Code.  Typically, single-family residences were not designed to accommodate unrelated multiple use.

            Rundle asked about non-traditional concepts of family and dependent children living in those households. 

Corliss said in the definition of family, added the word  “children” to respond to that question.

Rundle asked about exchange students and other temporary people living in a household. 

Corliss said under the existing Ordinance where there had been a question concerning this type of residency, staff had worked with the owner or the tenant to resolve those question.  Typically, when there was a defined period time for which a person was living within the unit, there was no problem. 

Rundle supported the exception under rental registration for owner/occupancy because it would allow older people and persons with disabilities to remain in their house instead of seeking other types of care.

Hodges asked if there was any way to determine the number of rental units in single-family zoning districts.

Mike Wildgen, City Manager, said the Utility Billing System estimates approximately 5,000 rental units in RS Districts.

Hodges was ready to enact the Ordinances for unrelated individuals, but had a concern about registration and felt the issue needed to be discussed in greater detail.

Henry thought compromise may be appropriate on this issue. He was not comfortable with the registration Ordinance as it was presented.

Rundle apologized to the students for bringing this issue up on Stop Day.  He thought it would have been more appropriate to wait until after the break to discuss this issue.  It was the City Commission’s intent to protect single-family residential neighborhoods.  Zoning by its nature was discriminatory.  It separated single-family, multi-family areas and commercial areas.  Each of these districts had zoning implications and standards for its particular area.  Standards for single-family zoning districts did not include parking created by four (4) unrelated people living in those units.  Rundle said this problem was not limited to the central City. This was occurring all over the City and was creating significant problems. The City wanted to foster single-family renters and single-family owners living in single-family zoning districts. Rundle thought real estate community was a significant part of the problem.  He felt some real estate agents were promoting economic red lining.  Enforcement was also an issue and the need for additional enforcement certainly was a symptom of the problem.  Students were vibrant and contributing members of the community; and, so were single-family homeowners.  In balancing these two interest, students do not get to trump single-family homeownership.  Rundle said student population has increased, but not doubled.  In the past, students and single-families had co-existed, but over time the City has seen a significant change.  The City should attempt to address this change before it becomes a major problem.  Rundle thought registration was an important part of the effort to address the problem.

Dunfield said Lawrence was a community that prided itself in diversity.  The discussion this evening was a healthy discussion with diverse and passionate views.  Students, as a class, have every right to live where they want.  The question was how.  It was true that some families want to live in the newer areas with the amenities that come with that style of living.  Other people, however, want to, and find advantages, in living in older areas.  These areas needed to have special protection.  Dunfield said he has struggled with a specific number of unrelated individuals living together.  He supported two (2) unrelated individuals, but has a concern about discriminating against domestic partnerships.  Dunfield thought the City Commission could not wait until that issue was resolved to take action.  He supported reducing the number of unrelated individuals from four (4) to three (3).

Kennedy supported three (3) unrelated individuals and wanted more information on what were the numbers of rental property and the composition of those rental units in single-family areas.

Corliss reminded the City Commission that there was a negative recommendation from the Planning Commission on the text amendments.  There were two (2) options before the City Commission.  One was sending it back to the Planning Commission with recommendations which require three (3) votes the other was amending the existing code which would require four (4) affirmative votes.

Hodges said action needed to be taken quickly to attempt to right what had gone wrong.  He supported adopting Ordinance No. 7323 amending the family definition to reflect no more than three (3) unrelated persons and Ordinance No. 7324 which required the registration of non-conforming uses.  On the rental licensing issue, the City Commission should spend some additional time for review.  Hodges asked if it was possible to approve the first two (2)  Ordinances; or,  did they need to adopt all four (4) Ordinances.

Corliss said there were some issues that related to all Ordinances.  He thought it would be appropriate to go head with the Zoning Ordinances and take more time on the rental licensing process.

Rundle said consensus among the City Commission and the community was important on this issue.  There was still a lot of work to do.                    

            Moved by Rundle, seconded by Kennedy, to direct staff to amend Ordinance No. 7323, establish the family definition to reflect no more than three (3) unrelated persons and Ordinance No. 7324, requiring registration of non-conforming uses and return those Ordinances to the City Commission in one week.  Motion carried unanimously.                                                                    (25)

            Moved by Hodges, seconded by Dunfield, to extend the meeting for five (5) minutes.  Motion carried unanimously.

            Dunfield said rental registration and licensing was a key to protecting neighborhoods.  He thought this would be an effective tool for several reasons.  He thought it should  be part of the entire effort to protect the neighborhoods and would like to see discussion on this issue as soon as possible.

            The City Commission concurred to discuss rental registration in two (2) weeks.

            Rundle asked staff to report on the current complaint process for noise and environmental issues. 

            Mike Wildgen, City Manager, said there has been a request from the City of Manhatten to travel to Manhatten for an exchange of ideas.  The proposed date was Friday, March 15, 2001.

            Brian Hausherr requested the City provide a format for the registration form required in Ordinance No. 7324. 

The City Commission concurred to direct staff to develop that form. 

            Moved by Kennedy, seconded by Rundle            , to adjourn at 10:35p.m.   Motion carried unanimously.                                                                    

 

APPROVED:

                                                                        _____________________________

James R. Henry, Mayor

ATTEST:

 

___________________________________                                                                        

Raymond J. Hummert, City Clerk

COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 6, 2001

1.                  Ordinance No. 7327 - 1^st Reading, Amend 19-6, Pretreatment Regs for City Sanitary Sewer Utility.

2.                  Ordinance No. 7328 - 1^st Reading, Rezone [Z-10-47-00] 3.205 acres, RS-2 to PRD-2, Delaware Commons.

3.                  Ordinance No. 7329 - 1^st Reading, Major Trafficway,  Louisiana Street from 17^th,  S to City boundaries.

4.                  Ordinance No. 7317 - 2^nd Reading, Street Name Change, Red Cedar Ct to Firefly Ct.

5.                  Ordinance No. 7318 - 2^nd Reading, “No Parking, W side of Raintree Pl from University Dr to Valley Ln.

6.                  Resolution No. 6274 – Blight, 1102 E. 13^th .

7.                  Resolution No. 6275 – GOB Authority,  $350,000, Louisiana St traffic calming projects.

8.                  Resolution No. 6276 - GOB Authority $1,75000, Fire Station No. 2 on Harper.

9.                  Resolution No. 6277 – Benefit District (Certain finings), Sanitary sewer improvements in the Westwood neighborhood.

10.              Resolution No. 6278 – Benefit District (Establish), Sanitary Sewer improvements in the Westwood neighborhood.

11.              Site Plan  - (SP-06-45-00), Douglas County Public Works Shop; 711 E. 23^rd Street.

12.              Final Plat - (PF-10-39-00), Wood Addition, one-lot commercial subdivision, 0.253 acre,  N 2^nd and N 3^rd Streets in N Lawrence.

13.              Ordinance No. 7330 – 1^st Reading, Annex (A-12-22-00) 50.759 acres, W & N of Intersection of Kasold & W 31^st.

14.              Mortgage Release – 431 Elm, Rebecca Stakes.

15.              Airport – Environmental Assessment, Airport Development Group for $75,000.

16.              2001 Waterline Improvement Engineering Design Project – BG Consultants.

17.              Pikes Peek Place – Decline to make a public street.

18.              Budget Billing Program for Utility Customers. (Deferred)

19.              Name Property – City owned S of 27^th St, donated by John McGrew.

20.              Engineering Design Contract – Inverness, 24^th Pl to 27^th St, to The Peridian Group for $80,000.

21.              Box Culvert – Crossgate & 27^th, to The Peridian Group for $75,000.

22.              Temporary Bldg Permits – Grand Subdivision near 31^st & Kasold.

23.              City/KDOT – K-0 Improvements.

24.              Gas Franchise - Fee payments. (Deferred until after February 21, 2001)

25.              Unrelated persons in single-family homes discussion.