Meeting Information
-Convene
-Pledge of Allegiance
-Consider approval of minutes of April 25, May 2, May 4, and <1/2xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />May 16, 2005
CONSENT AGENDA
(1) (a) Consider approval of Commission Orders
REGULAR AGENDA
(2) Discussion of Douglas County Addressing Policy (Keith Dabney)
(3) Planning Item: SP-10-71-04: A site plan for Frontier Farm Credit, office building to be located on north side of Highway 56 approximately 1,100 feet east of the Baldwin Junction (Highway 59 & 56). Submitted by Landplan Engineering and Clark Enerson Partners for Frontier Farm Credit, property owner of record. (Paul Patterson)
(4) Consider approval to seek bids for Project No. 2004-8 - Route 442 Mill, Overlay and Paved Shoulders from Route 1029 to US 40 (Keith Browning)
(5) Consider approval of Home Rule Resolution providing for the temporary prohibition of the issuance of permits for the construction or placement of dwellings and mobile homes on certain tracts relying on the 5-acre exemption (Craig Weinaug)
(6) Other Business
(a) Consider approval of Accounts Payable (if necessary)
Jones called the meeting to order at 8:32 A.M. on Monday, May 23, 2005 with all members present. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
Jones moved approval of the minutes April 25, May 2, May 4, and May 16, 2005. Motion was seconded by McElhaney and carried unanimously.
CONSENT AGENDA 05-23-05
There were no consent items.
PLANNING 05-23-05
The Board considered SP-10-71-04: A site plan for Frontier Farm Credit, office building to be located on north side of Highway 56 approximately 1,100 feet east of the Baldwin Junction (Highway 59 & 56). Submitted by Landplan Engineering and Clark Enerson Partners for Frontier Farm Credit, property owner of record. Paul Patterson, staff member of the Lawrence-Douglas County Metropolitan Planning Department, presented this item.
The site plan proposes the construction of a 9,245 gross square foot, one-story Frontier Farm Credit office facility on the subject property. The property was recently rezoned to B-2 General Business and has been platted. There is an existing residence and outbuilding which will be removed from the property.
The plan shows a future addition containing approximately 1,300 square feet on the west end of the building. Prior to a building permit being issued for the future building addition, a revised site plan would need to be submitted.
Patterson recommended approval of the site plan subject to the following conditions:
1. Obtain an access permit from the Kansas Department of Transportation.
2. Provide modifications to General Notes:
a. Note No. 4; change "City of Lawrence Standard Type 1" to a description of the curb and gutter improvement.
b. Note No. 8; change "City of Lawrence Standards" to a description of the curb inlet improvements.
c. Note No. 10; change "area" to are "my" to may.
3. Provision of the following notes on the face of the site plan:
a. "Exterior lights to be shielded so as not to glare off-site per Sec tion 19A-4.12."
b. "A revised site plan will need to be submitted before a building permit is issued for the proposed future building expansion to the west."
c. "Access to U.S. Highway 56 is limited to the area east of a point 420 feet east of the centerline of U.S. Highway 59 Frontage Road."
4. Modify the legal description to include: Platted as Frontier Farm Credit Addition, Block One, Lot 1.
5. Include the "KDOT Right-of-Way" and "Hatching indicates area of prohibited access (see "notes")" as indicated on the Final Plat.
Tim Herndon, Landplan Engineering, appearing on behalf of the applicant, noted that the applicant is comfortable with the conditions.
Jones made a motion to approve SP-10-71-04 subject to the above conditions. Motion was seconded by Johnson and carried unanimously.
ZONING 05-23-05
The Board discussed the Douglas County Addressing Policy. Keith Dabney, Director of Zoning & Codes, stated that the members of the Addressing Committee included the following:
Keith Browning, P.E., Director of Public Works/County Engineer
Marion Johnson, County Appraiser
Jim Denney, Director of Emergency Communications
Rick Miller, GIS Coordinator
Keith Dabney, Director of Zoning and Codes
The Committee met and discussed all issues pertaining to the current Douglas County Addressing Policy. As part of these meetings, research was conducted to determine what types of addressing policies or addressing protocol exist throughout the State of Kansas. The Committee determined that Douglas County's policy is consistent with Johnson County, Sedgwick County, and Miami County, as well as other counties, and recommends that the policy remain as is.
Jones noted that the reason this study was prompted was due to a request received from homeowners who share an entrance. The homeowners are requesting a unique address instead of being assigned "a" or "b" on their address.
It was the consensus of the Board that the current policy remain. No action was taken.
PUBLIC WORKS 05-23-05
Keith Browning, Director of Public Works/County Engineer, requested permission to seek bids for Project No. 2004-8 -- Route 442 Mill, Overlay and Paved Shoulders from Route 1029 to US-40. The referenced project is included in the CIP for construction this year. Plans have been completed by department staff. The project entails 2'-deep milling and asphalt overlay for the traveled lanes and construction of 6'-wide paved shoulders. The project also includes full pavement replacement for the approaches to the bridge located approximately 0.37 miles east of Route 1029. Pavement would be replaced from 20' west of the bridge to 30' east of the bridge with replacement pavement consisting of 8" concrete pavement with 2" asphalt overlay. The project is currently estimated to cost $380,000. After discussion, McElhaney made a motion to approve to seek bids for Project No. 2004-8, which includes 2" mill and overlay of existing traveled lanes and construction of 6'-wide paved shoulders for Route 442 from Route 1029 to US-40 Highway. Motion was seconded by Johnson and carried unanimously.
RESOLUTIONS, PLANNING, PUBLIC WORKS & ZONING 05-23-05
At their meeting on Wednesday, May 18, 2005, the Board briefly discussed the possibility of adopting a moratorium on the 5 acre exemption. Evan Ice, County Counselor, presented two separate drafts of a resolution for the Board's consideration, one of which included a clause which would exempt tracts in certain recorded surveys.
Jones stated he believed this moratorium was necessary because people are using it as a way to develop property instead of its intent, which was to grant a farmer the means to divide his/her property to build for family members.
Johnson expressed his desire to not penalize anyone for costs incurred if they had already started the process.
McElhaney questioned whether it was a good idea to approve a moratorium without documentation that there really is a problem.
Jones asked for public comment.
Bill Harmon, who lives near Baldwin City and is the President of the Baldwin City Chamber, stated he was against the proposal and believed it should be put before the public for a vote.
Philip Bradley, appearing on behalf of Ted and Peach Madl, expressed concerns about the moratorium and requested that it not be approved.
Bobbie Flory, appearing on behalf of the Homebuilders Association, also expressed concerns and stated she did not believe a moratorium should be imposed.
Jones stated that he believed the moratorium was necessary in order to slow things down to give the Board time to come up with a policy that makes sense.
McElhaney stated he would like to see hard numbers from staff to see whether the accelerated building is due to normal spring building activity.
Michael Kelly, County Surveyor, stated that he conducted an informal poll of recorded surveys and found that approximately 70 surveys (parcels) in the vicinity of 5-6 acres were created in 2003 and 2004. Kelly also reported that there were approximately 70 surveys recorded in the first three (3) months of 2005.
McElhaney questioned whether these surveys were outside or inside the Urban Growth Area (UGA) or both.
Kelly responded that some were within the UGA.
Kay Pesnell, Register of Deeds, reported that since the Board first discussed the moratorium, they have had an increase of recordings.
Dave Hill, rural resident of Baldwin City and loan officer with MidAmerica Bank, stated he was against any changes in the 5-acre exemption. Hill noted that it is difficult to finance property any time you go above 10 acres since mortgage companies want to see land that d s not exceed 30% of total value.
Jones asked what the exemption is in other counties.
Hill responded that it is 20 acres in Miami County.
Dennis Snodgrass, 1042 E 850 Road, spoke in opposition of the moratorium, noting moratoriums should be used in emergency situations -- this has been an ongoing issue for several years.
Scott Schultz, District Administrator of Rural Water District #4, noted that Rural Water District Nos. 4 and 5 would likely suffer from the moratorium since they fall into the County's jurisdiction for territory boundaries, but don't contribute to the budgets. Rural Water District No. 4 is making plans to purchase inventory to sell new meters, and any changes would undermine their ability to plan and forecast. Schultz also stated that he believed the land rush started when the revisions to Chapter 13 came out.
McElhaney questioned how many meters an individual typically purchase.
Schultz replied that 90-95% of applicants purchase one (1) meter, but if some one has a plat in process, they might purchase ten (10).
Jones stated he didn't think that the financial implications of the water districts should trump a sound planning decision. He said he believed we could work to mitigate economic problems and part of this discussion has arisen because we are not enthusiastic about the revisions to Chapter 13.
Mike Capra, 43 N 1 Road, agreed with the frustrations with the Planning Commission, noting that real estate lawyers can't even understand the proposed revisions to Chapter 13. He said that in a study of the cities surrounding Lawrence, the majority of their planning commissioners are made up of professionals, we have none. We don't have any architects, real estate lawyers, engineers, etc. It has become a political body. Capra recommended that if we want to fix the problem, then we should hire professionals.
Craig Brown, real estate agent, said that if we have a moratorium on building permits, we essentially force the dice in hands of people who make their living in the County. It will put a freezeframe on activity. Without knowing if the rules will be changed to 10, 20, 30 acres, they will be hard pressed to do any constructive planning. Brown suggested adopting some kind of policy allowing the Zoning & Codes office some latitude in granting or denying building permits.
Jones said he wants to create a playing field with a set of rules and deal with the issue in order to provide a certain sense of clarity of where development should occur. He said he believed that an exemption provision in the moratorium could be addressed.
McElhaney said that he believes there is a playing field in place and that field was extended with the expansion of the Urban Growth Area. If changes are going to be made in the 5-acre exemption, it should be done in a concise, deliberate manner. He said he believed the moratorium would have an economic detriment on people who are in the building/construction trade industry. This Commission is thinking about funding the Biosciences Task Force but denying the process in the building industry. He said he was concerned with the economic impact.
Jones said he didn't disagree but believes that in the long run, this will be a savings to the average taxpayer.
Johnson stated that it is important not to put the Zoning & Codes Department in a position where they have to make judgments based on the "good old boy network."
David Reynolds, a general contractor, asked if the moratorium would impact an existing rural platted subdivision that was approved in 2000.
Johnson stated that he would not be impacted.
Reynolds then noted that he was considering the purchase of 40 acres that is contiguous to the subdivision and questioned whether the moratorium would kill the platting process.
Linda Finger, Director of the Lawrence-Douglas County Metropolitan Planning Department, responded that the platting process would be the same as it has been. She suggested that the moratorium include language that is specific to what can and what cannot be done in order to avoid confusion.
Reynolds then noted that he did not believe that using a moratorium as a planning tool was very positive.
Glen Rogers questioned the process if a person has 3-4 tracts that are recorded and surveyed.
Finger responded that if there are separate deeds, they will be looked at as separate tracts.
Louie McElhaney, 1371 N 1100 Road, commented that the 5-acre exemption has been a hot issue for many years and that he is opposed to the moratorium. He stated he did not believe that due process was taken. He noted that he owns 39 acres that wouldn't fit into the 40 acre platting system. If it takes 20 acres to build a house and he sells that 20 acres, what would he do with the remaining 19 acres1/2
Bill Fleming, attorney with the Barber Emerson Law Firm, stated that he represents clients with development issues and he would have a lot of clients impacted by the moratorium. He pointed out that there is a process to make changes. If the Commission wants new planning rules, they should come up with proposals. He stated that he believes this is bad planning and it is a bad idea to impose a moratorium. Fleming also made comments about the "requirement" that rural subdivisions need to be contiguous. A policy needs to be developed outlining how rural subdivisions should occur within the County. He noted that if one (1) person protests to a subdivision, you can't go forward without a unanimous vote from the County Commission which is why people abuse the 5-acre exemption -- they have no other options. Planning rules need to be set out that recognize rural subdivisions.
Jones stated that the County d sn't want subdivisions popping up just any where anyone wants to build them. We need to come up with better tools and some sort of functional rule where subdivisions are allowed.
Scott Stockwell, 2038 Emerald Drive, pointed out that the landowners are acting rationally -- we have an established planning process which is under revision with eight (8) different versions. That is an indication that perhaps people have something to be worried about. He stated that a moratorium would be a failure of the process and would not be a positive reflection on this Commission. The current process is not working, but the moratorium puts pressure on landowners. What happens if six (6) months go by and the problem has not been resolved1/2 This is not good long-term planning. He urged the Commission to take their time to work things out and give people a better alternative. It is important to provide a deliberative process.
Jones said that the 5-acre exemption is creating a wave of problems. A land rush is happening in response to recent discussions which have the potential of creating a lot of problems that could potentially cost a lot of time and money to resolve. The purpose of the moratorium is to stop the land rush and give the Commission time to address the issues. In the long run, we will have a better policy and more stability. He stated he believes the Board should adopt the resolution effective immediately, for a period of six (6) months, giving staff and the Commission time to adopt permanent regulations.
McElhaney stated that he would not support the moratorium and that he did not believe there has been a land rush. He noted there has been increased activity, but he believes it is because of a change in economic times.
Johnson stated that he proposed the moratorium discussion because he believes the Commission needs to get together on this issue. He noted that he didn't particularly care for moratoriums, but after seeing the latest revisions to Chapter 13, he wanted to explore other options. It is clear that nobody is happy with where we are or where we are going. He said he didn't believe it would be fair to approve the moratorium today since this proposal came up so quickly. Johnson noted that when he campaigned 5-6 years ago, the subject of the 5- acre exemption came up frequently. He said he didn't have a problem eliminating the 5-acre exemption if the Commission can find something to put in its place that creates a win-win situation for the property owner and the planning process. This is an opportunity for us working as a County Commission working with the Planning Commission to barter and do this process to find a win-win situation. The abuse of the 5-acre exemption today is because people have no alternative. They have no reasonable expectation for an alternative. The adoption of the moratorium d s not eliminate the 5-acre exemption, it is more of a temporary "time out." Johnson suggested that the moratorium be effective June 1 and should expire in six (6) months, with the stipulation that the moratorium will not and can not be extended. Johnson further stated that the purpose of the moratorium was not to eliminate the 5-acre exemption, but to eliminate the 5-acre exemption being used to create subdivisions. He suggested that the Commission table a final decision until June 8, 2005.
No action was taken. This item is scheduled for further consideration on June 8, 2005.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 05-23-05
Jones moved approval of accounts payable in the amount of $200,821.25 to be paid 05/23/05. Motion was seconded by McElhaney and carried unanimously.
APPOINTMENTS 05-23-05
Jones made a motion to appoint Rick Trapp, Lawrence, Kansas, to serve as the joint city/county appointment on the Lawrence-Douglas County Mental Health Board for a three (3) year term which shall expire May 31, 2008. Motion was seconded by Johnson and carried unanimously. It should be noted that Trapp replaces Marilyn Bittenbender who was not eligible for reappointment.
APPOINTMENTS 05-23-05
McElhaney made a motion to appoint John Hope, Lawrence, Kansas, to the Jayhawk Area Agency on Aging Advisory Council. Motion was seconded by Johnson and carried unanimously. It should be noted that Hope is filling the unexpired term of Marsha Goff who was appointed to the Jayhawk Area Agency on Aging Board of Directors. Hope's term shall expire on September 30, 2006.
PUBLIC WORKS 05-23-05
Johnson made a motion that Jones be authorized to execute a statement for the Kansas Department of Health & Environment noting that Hi-Tech Antifreeze Recycling is consistent with Douglas County's Solid Waste Management Plan. Motion was seconded by Jones and carried unanimously.
MISCELLANEOUS 05-23-05
At 11:50 A.M., Jones made a motion that the Board recess to go into executive session until 12:15 P.M. with Craig Weinaug, County Administrator; Pam Madl, Assistant County Administrator; Keith Dabney, Director of Zoning & Codes; and Evan Ice, County Counselor, to discuss potential litigation. The Board returned to regular session at 12:12 P.M. No action was taken.
Jones made a motion to adjourn; Johnson seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
_____________________________ _____________________________
Charles Jones, Chairman Bob Johnson, Member
ATTEST:
_____________________________ _____________________________
Jamie Shew, County Clerk Jere McElhaney, Member
Time and Date