Board denies request to raise impervious-surface cap in floodplain at 952 N. Third St.

The Lawrence Board of Zoning Appeals on Sept. 4 denied a request to increase the maximum impervious-surface coverage for nonresidential construction in the Floodplain Overlay District at 952 North Third Street from the city’s 60% limit to 67.5%.

Planning staff recommended denial, saying the higher impervious percentage could increase runoff and adversely affect neighboring properties and that the request did not meet the five variance criteria. "Staff does not believe that the request satisfies all five standard criteria or the remaining floodplain-specific criteria required to obtain a variance," Planning staff said in the staff report and in oral remarks during the hearing.

The site is an approximately 1.1-acre parcel fully encumbered by the city’s Floodplain Overlay District, and staff told the board that a significant portion of North Lawrence is similarly encumbered. The staff report noted the 60% cap had been in ordinance-level floodplain rules for many years and that the higher standard is one of the city’s measures to earn credit in FEMA’s Community Rating System (CRS), which can reduce flood-insurance premiums for residents.

The applicant, represented by Alan Balot, said the property already contains about 67.5% impervious area and that the proposed building would largely cover existing paved areas rather than expand paved area. "What we have is what we have," Balot said, arguing the application was meant to ratify the existing surface coverage.

Neighbors gave detailed public comment about stormwater impacts. Natalia Lowther, who identified herself as an adjacent landowner and operator of Pinwheel Farm, described repeated flooding on her property and said she opposed any variance that would increase impervious cover in the floodplain. "Pinwheel Farm is not the default stormwater detention management system for Grant Township and the city north of the river. I do not consent to my property being used to allow other properties to exceed the standards that have been set to protect my property and everyone else's," Lowther said.

Planning staff and the board discussed mitigation options. Staff said the applicant could reduce impervious area by removing off-street parking or adding interior landscaping islands, or could use alternatives such as pervious pavement; Amy Miller, assistant planning director with floodplain responsibilities, noted pervious pavement has been used on other sites in similar situations and estimated the needed reduction to meet 60% would be roughly 7–8% of the site, roughly 1,500 square feet.

Board members who opposed the variance emphasized the long-term and perpetual nature of variances and the potential downstream consequences for neighbors and public safety. One board member said it is a significant concern that a variance granted now stays with the land as uses change.

After discussion the board voted to deny the impervious-surface variance. The motion to deny passed on a board vote; Palos — aye; Peterson — aye; Rankin — aye; other members voted in favor as recorded and the motion carried. The denial leaves in place the Floodplain Overlay District’s 60% impervious limit for future site activity unless the applicant submits a revised plan that reduces impervious area or otherwise complies with the code.