Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Parking Limits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission debates limits on vehicles for single‑family lots; staff to research traffic‑code options
Summary
Roeland Park City Planning Commission discussed complaints about one property parking many vehicles and opted not to pursue an immediate zoning change; staff and the city attorney said amending the traffic code could provide a cleaner enforcement path and avoid prior‑use legal arguments.
The Roeland Park City Planning Commission on April 15 discussed whether to change local rules to limit the number of vehicles parked on single‑family lots after repeated complaints about one property.
Jennifer Jones Lacey, assistant city administrator and finance director, told the commission the idea began after chronic complaints about a Roe Boulevard home that routinely parks many cars on‑site and that conventional code enforcement had found no clear violation. She said staff has been exploring options and would like feedback from commissioners before drafting any ordinance.
Alex Feldstein, the city attorney, advised the commission against immediately pursuing a zoning code amendment. "If we make this a zoning code change, we would open up the argument that the people that live there... they now have a prior nonconforming use," he said, recommending consideration of chapter 14 (the traffic code) instead because enforcement through the traffic code is less likely to create a prior‑use defense.
Commissioners expressed concern about unintended consequences. The chair asked, "My first reaction to this was, are we overcorrecting?" and several members warned that setting a strict lot limit could simply push vehicles onto neighborhood streets or penalize households with legitimate needs. Commissioners also discussed screening or landscape requirements and the possibility that the property owner is a car collector or running a home business.
Staff noted some existing related code sections (including parking and screening language in chapter 16) and said the city has not found local precedent in Johnson County for a citywide vehicle cap; staff reported examples from other jurisdictions and suggested drafting targeted language if the commission wants to pursue action.
Outcome and next steps: Commissioners did not direct an immediate zoning amendment. Staff (Jennifer Jones Lacey and building inspector Wade Holtkamp) and legal (Alex Feldstein) will research possible traffic‑code amendments, screening requirements, variance options and practical enforcement language and return with draft proposals or options for the commission to consider.
The commission did not take a formal regulatory vote on a code change at the meeting.
