Meeting Information
-Convene
-Pledge of Allegiance
CONSENT AGENDA
(1) (a) Consider approval of Commission Orders
REGULAR AGENDA
(2) Discussion of Southeast Area Plan (Planning Staff)
(3) Discuss status of Project No. 2004-11, the improvement of Route 458 curve at E 1000/N 1200 (Banning's Corner) (Keith Browning)
(4) Consider approval to seek bids for Project No. 2004-11, the improvement of Route 458 curve at E 1000/N 1200 (Banning's Corner) (Keith Browning)
(5) Consider approval of seven (7) Out-District College Tuition Statements in the amount of $1,224 (Debbie Sparkes)
(6) Other Business
(a) Consider approval of Accounts Payable (if necessary)
(b) Appointments
(c) Miscellaneous
(d) Public Comment
Jones called the meeting to order at 6:38 P.M. on Monday, June 22, 2005 with all members present. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
PROCLAMATION 06-22-05
Jones read a Proclamation recognizing the 150th Anniversary of First Baptist Church. Marcus McFall, pastor of First Baptist Church, was present for the recognition and made brief comments. Johnson made a motion that the Proclamation be adopted as read; Jones seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
CONSENT AGENDA 06-22-05
There were no consent items.
PLANNING 06-22-05
The Board considered Item No. 10 of the minutes of the Lawrence-Douglas County Metropolitan Planning Commission dated February 3, 2005. This item is the draft Southeast Area Plan. The plan generally includes the area bounded on the north by K-10 (E. 23rd Street); on the west by O'Connell Road (E 1600 Road); on the east by Noria Road (E 1750 Road); and on the south by the Wakarusa River floodplain. Sandra Day, staff member of the Lawrence-Douglas County Metropolitan Planning Department, presented this item. This item comes to the Board with a 5-4 vote to approve the Southeast Area Plan and forward it to the City Commission and Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation for approval with the land configuration shown and with the following modifications:
- Addition of language about financing public infrastructure;
- Addition of language stating that design standards will be developed to ensure the Employment Center has a "campus" look;
- Franklin Road shall be designed as a multi-modal transportation boulevard;
- Development of a plan for constructing a bridge across the Kaw River;
- Addition of language about connectivity to I-70 and the statement that timing is a high priority issue;
- Addition of signage on Highway K10 to address visibility concerns for businesses in the subject area; and
- Replacement of all references to the undefined term Employment Center to the term(s) defined in Horizon 2020, "Office/Office Research & Industrial."
History
The development of a Southeast Area Plan began in 1997. The primary issues at that time were: timing of development (land uses); connectivity of the major street network, the location and timing of the eastern leg of the South Lawrence Trafficway (SLT/K10); and the timing of city sanitary sewer and water lines to the study area. Meetings were held with the area property owners to gather their input. Planning staff created a draft land use map for the area on August 13, 1997. Staff presented to the Planning Commission an area plan and a summary of the process. The Planning Commission forwarded the Southeast Area Plan to the County Commission for direction on the access points shown in the plan to the SLT/K10. The County Commission deferred a discussion on access due to another, ongoing study of the eastern alignment of the South Lawrence Trafficway (SLT) after this deferral. The Plan was not approved or adopted by any of the three Commissions.
Multiple versions of the plan have been presented to the Planning Commission. The draft plan was referred to the Comprehensive Plan Committee (CPC) for final preparation. The CPC presented two options to the Planning Commission in October 2004. The Planning Commission directed the CPC to pursue a draft referred to as "Option 1" that included a substantial industrial element east of Franklin Road. The proposed plan reflects the Committee's work and discussions with multiple groups and specifically representatives from USD 497 regarding the probability of an elementary school within the study area.
Boundary of the Plan
The Southeast Area Plan encompasses all of Section 9, west 1/2 of Section 10 and portions of Sections 15 & 16 in Township 13 S, Range 19 E. The area plan boundaries are E1750 Road (Noria Road) to the east; the Wakarusa River floodplain to the south; O'Connell Road (E1600) to the west; and K-10 (E. 23rd Street) to the north. The study area is located completely within the Urban Growth Area (Service Area 1). The majority of the study area lies outside of the city limits of Lawrence.
Diverse uses surround the study area. The neighborhood to the west is newer and developed predominately with single-family residences. North of the study area land uses are comprised of large industrial properties including, the vacant Farmland fertilizer plant and the East Hills Business Park. South and east of the study area is the Wakarusa River, the Wakarusa Floodplain and agricultural uses.
Day noted that approval of this Plan would amend Horizon 2020 which is a joint document of the City and County Commissions. The City Commission considered this item at their meeting on June 14, 2005, and voted to return the Plan to the Planning Commission for further consideration based on their discussion.
Johnson asked how long it would take for the document to come back if it was returned to the Planning Commission. Day responded that she did not know but it was unlikely it would be before September. It would depend on whether there were minor revisions or if the entire document would be scrapped.
Jones asked whether the City Commission scrapped the proposal or just asked for revisions. Day said that it was not a full denial, but they did not accept the proposal and sent it back with direction to revisit. She said the changes to the mapping would be easy but returning it within ninety (90) days would be ambitious.
Craig Weinaug, County Administrator, stated that there are two (2) elements to the revisions. The first is the technical part of writing and the other is getting something to present to both bodies. He suggested that it might be useful if the County Commission could get a list of what was said at the City Commission meeting and respond to that so the County Commission has some feel for what might be a consensus.
McElhaney questioned the city's annexation process.
Johnson said that it remains consistent with what the city has done all along -- they don't annex until they are approached by the property owner. But they have agreed to study their annexation policy.
McElhaney stated for the record that this plan is not Planning Staff's plan -- it is the Planning Commission's plan. Planning Staff made recommendations and the Planning Commission approved the revised version under discussion.
Jones then asked for public comment.
Bill Leek, Peridian Group, a landscape architecture, civil engineering, and surveying firm, presented an alternative concept plan for consideration. Leek noted that John McGrew is a client of Peridian Group who has been working with Peridian Group to develop this area. Leek stated that he has been with Peridian Group for two (2) months recently moving to Lawrence from Montana. He has been working with several landowners/developers to put together a conceptual plan and d sn't claim this is the definitive answer. He offered the plan in concept form to encourage the City and County to move forward with a development concept for this area. Leek noted this plan emphasizes mostly residential development in this area. Leek pointed out there is some industrial and other related development in the area mainly along 25th Street because of access from K-10 and the proposed SLT. This plan also reduces the amount of industrial development from the plan offered by the Planning Commission.
Jones asked what the acreages were compared with what the Planning Commission recommended.
Day said there were approximately 112 acres of single family; 143 acres medium density; 45 acres commercial; 681 acres industrial; 22 acres public use; 71 acres parks/open space.
Leek stated his plan offered 500 acres residential; 91 acres office/commercial/retail; 222 acres industrial/warehouse; 63 acres park/open space, not including the trail system; 30 acres for other uses (mostly the jail) and the offering of a potential fire station site, which comes to approximately 910 acres. Leek noted this d s not include land set aside for major arterial streets.
Jones questioned how many landowners would agree with Leek's proposal.
Leek said that he did not have an exact number, but indicated that the landowners he had spoken with were appreciative of the fact that he was proposing an increase in the amount of residential use and cutting back on industrial use.
Jones asked how the City responded to his proposal.
Leek said while they were appreciative of the increase in residential some of them thought industrial was still the way to go. There are some valid reasons for considering industrial, but also valid reasons for more residential. There is already a large chunk of land that is already zoned industrial north of K-10 that obviously needs some clean-up, but it could be developed for industrial uses. There are concerns that any increase in the amount of industrial south of K-10 may detract from the possibility of cleaning up that particular site.
McElhaney made a recommendation that there be less commercial/industrial because of the Farmland property and based on a recent presentation by Lynn Parman, Vice President of Economic Development, Lawrence Chamber of Commerce.
Day noted that the proposed plan is not a change in zoning. Specific steps would need to be taken to change the zoning designation of property.
McElhaney stated that transportation issues will have to be addressed such as what plans for the expansion of 31st Street east of Noria Road, where the City and County stand on that and what the future budgetary plans are. There is a lot of the Southeast Area Plan that is not developable until a commitment is made on the SLT or 31st Street. He noted that the I-70 area is more desirable for industrial development. He basically wants to see the Planning Commission incorporate more of the property owners' wishes and to realize we are in the process of possibly having the Farmland site as commercial/industrial.
Jones stated he had a lot of concerns and honestly did not know what the best land use configuration is. He noted that the Southeast Area Plan -- particularly the visionary concept advanced by the Planning Commission -- will never be successful unless the community is pulling together. He said he heard it suggested the other day that the Planning Commission isn't a political body and he rejects that concept. Planning commissioners are not appointed based on their technical knowledge, but rather appointed through a political process to serve as representatives of the community. As community representatives, they have some obligation to lead the community to consensus. He said he d sn't see support for the proposed plan from parties who would be key to making the Southeast Area Plan actually work. The people who are responsible for marketing industrial land (Chamber) do not support, ECO2 is not supportive, neighbors are not supportive. He sees a very narrow group of people who are advocates of this plan who are pushing aside the broader community. While landowner profits are not his concern, Jones noted that landowner opposition and stopping power is a force that has to be recognized. He asked that the Planning Commission come up with something the community can support -- it d sn't have to be unanimous, but there needs to be a consensus broad enough to support the breadth of the plan. If people who market and own property and the neighborhood indicates this isn't going to work, he has to wonder. Jones noted specific concerns regarding two issues:
- There are three (3) sets of numbers in terms of wastewater capacity ranging from 2600 to 6500. Wastewater capacity estimates and commitments need to be realistic. The decision should be based on something more concrete instead of speculation.
- There is much speculation as to whether industrial or residential will generate much traffic. He would like to see some analysis. While there will be some industrial development there (between the Douglas County Jail and LRM), this plan must address how truck traffic will be moved around the city. We need to come up with a vision on how to address truck traffic in order to prevent more accidents. He stated that the bridge on Noria to force traffic south and then to the west to 59 Highway is not acceptable. The plan must be realistic in the interim and should not expect to have a connection from Noria to I-70.
He summarized his concerns as wanting consensus, better more reliable data on wastewater demands and for the plan to address truck traffic.
Johnson agreed with McElhaney and Jones noting this is a rarity -- we typically have the Planning Commission and Planning Staff caught between what the developer and landowners want to do and here we have the City and County Commissions not willing to accept the Planning Commissions recommendation. The landowners, Chamber, ECO2, Economic Development Board all agree on a plan exactly opposite of the Planning Commissions recommendation. We have had at least two (2) joint sessions with the Planning and City Commissions and verbalized concerns which got nowhere. Johnson also agreed there needs to be a consensus, but the reality is the community generally speaks only to the extent that it is my neighborhood. Johnson stated his message to the Planning Commission would be to listen to what the County Commissioners have been saying - - don't sell short the idea or situation when neighbors and developers are on the same side. Johnson believes the school district position is they will not build a school in the southeast area unless the residential development will present families and children to populate the facility. Johnson noted that the Planning Commission minutes stated that the chairman indicated he has no information whether the planned area would be suitable for residential development . . . any use relies on transportation . . . This is an indication that transportation is an issue which needs to be resolved. The Planning Commission recommendation d s not reflect the community discussions, except to the extent the 5-4 vote indicates they did not listen to the community's comments. He said he cannot support the Planning Commission's recommendation and leans favorably toward Peridian Group's concept plan. We need to listen to who is presenting it -- the interested parties that have to live with it and work with it. If the Planning Commission is doing their job, they need to point out areas of the program that are inconsistent with the way we want to develop the community. He noted that he did not want to see the project go back [to the Planning Commission] and then be dropped. He stated that it was inconsistent to spend taxpayers money to develop an industrial area on the north side and then earmark huge additional areas for industrial development on the south side. This is unfair to the property owners and certainly not responsible to the taxpayers at large. If the Planning Commission recommendation for the Southeast Area Plan is accepted, he will not support the acquisition of the Farmland site.
McElhaney made a motion to reject the Planning Commission's Southeast Area Plan as presented. Motion was seconded by Jones and carried unanimously.
PUBLIC WORKS 06-22-05
The Board discussed the status of Project No. 2004-11 -- improvements to Route 458 Curve at E 1000 Road/N 1200 Road. Keith Browning, Director of Public Works/County Engineer, was present for the discussion.
Project Scope
It was originally anticipated to simply reconstruct the curve to a 55-mph design speed. This would result in a project length of 2225 linear feet. However, the existing N 1200 Road section east of the location where the new curve would meet the east-west tangent has deep ditches with no shoulders. Approximately 1500 feet east of the proposed 55-mph curve the existing Route 458 ditches are shallower and more forgiving to an errant vehicle.
The current plans include construction of 6'-wide paved shoulders and flatter frontslopes and backslopes not only in the reconstructed curve portion but also along the tangent section to a point 1525 feet east of the curve. This increases the originally planned project length by 68.5%. Plans also call for milling and overlaying the tangent section east of the curve and replacing an existing narrow concrete culvert located approximately 1/2 mile east of E 1000 Road.
Construction of the curve only, the original project scope, is estimated to cost $450,000. The estimated construction cost to construct paved shoulders and mill and overlay the 1525-foot section east of the curve, and replace the existing concrete culvert, is an additional $118,000. The additional improvements along the east-west tangent would be much less expensive now as part of the curve reconstruction project than later as a stand-alone project.
Johnson made a motion to expand the scope of Project 2004-11 to include construction of paved shoulders and mill and overlay for an additional approximately 1525 linear feet of existing Route 458 roadway. Motion was seconded by Jones and carried unanimously.
Johnson moved approval to solicit bids for Project 2004-11; Jones seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
OUT-DISTRICT COLLEGE TUITION STATEMENTS 06-22-05
Johnson made a motion to approve the seven (7) Out-District College Tuition Statements in the amount of $1,224. Motion was seconded by Jones and carried with McElhaney opposed.
SHERIFF & GRANTS 06-22-05
The Board discussed an application for the Target Capacity Expansion Grant for the Jail Diversion Program. Ken McGovern, Sheriff, Kenny Massey, Undersheriff, and Kari Wempe, Lieutenant, were present for the discussion. Wempe explained that this grant is a three (3) year program for non-violent offenders, typically those with some sort of mental illness. This would free jail space that can be used for individuals that need to be there. Douglas County would need to agree to commit up to $22,000 each year. After discussion, Jones made a motion to authorize the grant application and agree to commit up to $22,000 per year for three (3) years. Motion was seconded by McElhaney and carried unanimously.
APPOINTMENTS 06-22-05
Jones made a motion to reappoint Sonya Jackson, Lawrence, KS, to the Lawrence-Douglas County Housing Commission which term shall expire June 30, 2008. Motion was seconded by Johnson and carried unanimously.
PURCHASING & FAIRGROUNDS 06-22-05
McElhaney briefed the Commission on the construction of the maintenance building at the Douglas County Fairgrounds, noting there is a need for additional concrete work. Johnson made a motion to waive the bidding requirement of the Purchasing Policy and authorize execution of an agreement with BA Green in the amount of $27,942.00 for the additional concrete work. Motion was seconded by Jones and carried unanimously.
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