Lawrence planning commission backs rezoning of 2000 Bluffs Drive to allow higher-density housing

The Lawrence Planning Commission voted Sept. 24 to recommend approval of two rezoning applications for 2000 Bluffs Drive that would change about 6.8 acres from R-3 and M-2 to R-4 high-density residential, forwarding both items to the City Commission for final action.

Staff planner Avery Kerner told commissioners the eastern application (Z-25-0010) covers about 2.86 acres proposed to move from R-3 to R-4 and the western application (Z-25-0011) covers about 3.96 acres proposed to move from M-2 to R-4. Kerner said staff’s review found the proposed R-4 designation is consistent with Plan 2040 chapters on growth and housing and would be compatible with surrounding zoning and land uses, noting existing R-4 districts abut the site to the northeast and south.

“The proposed R-4 district does align with chapters 3 and 4 of the comp plan, which address growth and development in neighborhoods and housing,” Kerner said.

Applicant Lance Adams of Adams Architects presented conceptual site plans and said the proposal would reuse an existing, largely vacant office building and the terraced site’s existing access points on Bluffs Drive. Adams said the project emphasizes preserving existing trees on city-owned property that act as a buffer and that access would be contained to Bluffs Drive so as not to introduce new cut-through traffic to adjacent neighborhoods.

“We are not looking to add any traffic onto any other streets,” Adams said, adding the project includes a mix of one-, two- and three-bedroom units, a clubhouse and amenities designed to fit the site’s terraces.

Neighbors raised legal and access concerns during public comment. Jacqueline Schafer told the commission she wrote a public comment letter and said a recorded covenant for the property prohibits road access onto Fifth Street or Iowa and requires a green‑screen buffer between the development and neighboring properties. Marcy Francisco, who said she served as mayor in the early 1980s and signed the covenant, reiterated the agreement existed and noted earlier litigation related to the development.

“I have been informed that I, in my duties, I think as mayor from 1981 to 1983, did sign that covenant,” Francisco said.

Adams responded that the R-1 parcel fronting Fifth Street was separated from the applicant’s request and intentionally excluded from the rezoning to preserve that buffer, and he said existing city-owned, treed property provides the green screen outside the applicant’s control.

Commissioners asked whether rezoning the western portion from M-2 to R-4 would remove opportunities for mixed-use development. Kerner and staff explained the city’s new land development code treats the M-2 district as having intensity comparable to R-4; multi‑dwelling development can occur under M-2 but some mixed-use standards may require a proportion of nonresidential floor area. Kerner also clarified density rules: the R-3 district carries a minimum density of 7 dwelling units per acre and a maximum of 15; the proposed R-4 minimum is 16 and maximum 32.

After questions, the commission approved motions to forward both rezoning applications to the City Commission with recommendations for approval. The votes were taken by voice and recorded in the minutes as carried; the transcript does not include a roll-call tally.

Next steps: the City Commission will consider the two rezoning ordinances; any future development on the site would require site plan review and building permits before construction.