photo by: Douglas County

A map shows the three growth tiers, or land in the city's current and future growth area, included in the city and county's comprehensive plan, Plan 2040. Newly proposed regulations for subdividing land for Lawrence and the unincorporated areas of Douglas County would prohibit new residential subdivisions in land in the city's growth area unless the land is annexed into the city.

Among the many factors working against the City of Lawrence’s efforts to have denser, more environmentally sustainable and ultimately more affordable housing is a development trend happening on land just beyond the city’s boundaries.

Recent decades have seen a boom of rural neighborhoods with multi-acre lots near the city’s boundaries, precluding denser city expansion in those areas and creating other problems for both the city and the county. Newly proposed regulations would put a halt to such developments and encourage what planners say is a smarter way for the community to grow.

Lawrence-Douglas County Planning Commission member Karen Willey said the proposed regulations are not anti-development, but are instead meant to create the type of development called for in the most recent city-county comprehensive plan. Willey said housing developments in rural areas have been booming, but these “ranchettes” are not the type of development the community needs.

“In this case, we are saying no to one kind of development because we want more development,” Willey said. “We want more intense use of that land.”

Until recently, transforming farmland or other rural property in Douglas County — even when relatively near the Lawrence city limits — into rural neighborhoods with lots of a few acres or more was essentially as easy as filling out some paperwork. The result has been a drastic increase in the number of residential subdivisions and ranchettes in rural areas designated for city growth, which is problematic for both local governments. Newly proposed regulations for subdividing land for Lawrence and the unincorporated areas of Douglas County would prohibit these residential subdivisions going forward. If approved by city and county leaders, new neighborhoods in land near the city would only be allowed when the development is eligible to become part of the city and thereby follow city standards — meaning smaller lots that provide denser housing options.

City and county planning staff recommended the prohibitions and limitations on the ability to create new residential subdivisions near the city limits, and planning commissioners voted unanimously in June to recommend the changes to county and city leaders. The Douglas County Commission and the Lawrence City Commission are scheduled to consider those recommendations at meetings this month.

Current regulations

The proposed changes represent a turnaround from the relative ease of subdividing rural or agricultural land into residential lots in recent decades, with the goal of stopping the growth of residential developments until that land is ready to be added to the city.

About 30 years ago, only a small percentage of the unincorporated areas of Douglas County were residential, and now those areas take up more than a third of the rural areas of the county. More specifically, in 1992, only 5% of the land in unincorporated Douglas County was residential, according to information from the county. In 2019, 36% of the land was residential.

City and county planners say the reason for the trend has been the relative ease of subdividing agricultural or rural land in the county to build homes.

Mary Miller, a planner in the joint city-county planning and development department, said that until 2020, residential subdivision was an administrative process, meaning that property owners filled out the required paperwork and that was reviewed and approved by county staff members. Miller said property owners had to set aside 40% of a property as land that would not be developed, but the rest could be divided in parcels as small as 3 acres, and most opted for that size.

“I think the rate of growth that was happening, since it was administrative, was pretty high,” Miller said.

Miller said that beginning in 2020, requirements changed following the adoption of Plan 2040, and certain limitations were set on the number of homes that could be built. In addition, developers seeking residential subdivisions now had to go through the rezoning process. That meant notifications had to be sent to neighbors and county commissioners had to approve the rezoning and subdivision. Following that change, Miller said subdivisions began to level off.

However, applications to subdivide land to build homes continue to come to county leaders, and existing developments could create issues for local governments.

Willey said there are already examples of rural neighborhoods made up of homes with large lots that are right up against the city boundaries, including an area on Iowa Street north of Interstate 70 and another area on the southwest edge of town inside the Kansas Highway 10 bypass. She said rural neighborhoods with large lots halt city expansion or cost city taxpayers substantially more money to build out infrastructure such as roads, sewers and water lines to bypass these areas so land beyond the rural neighborhoods can be added to the city.

photo by: Contributed

This map shows an example of a rural neighborhood or larger lots, circled in yellow, that is next to the City of Lawrence and a denser city neighborhood with smaller lots, circled in red.

Not only does that not meet the city’s needs, but Willey said the owners of those rural homes could also be negatively impacted. She said ranchettes on the periphery of Lawrence prevent the area from ever having the housing density that could pay to expand infrastructure like sewers and roads, or enough housing to support a local school or a fire station. She said houses with aging septic systems on the edge of town will need to be annexed one by one, probably at the owners’ expense.

Apart from the issues caused for the city, Douglas County Zoning Director Tonya Voigt said that increased residential development strains rural infrastructure, such as county roads, culverts and single-lane bridges.

Voigt said rural housing developments typically add anywhere from five to 25 houses, and that county infrastructure is not built to accommodate the level of vehicle traffic brought on by these new rural subdivisions. For instance, she said a new development could mean that the county ends up spending $3 million to replace a bridge much sooner than it would have otherwise.

“When that type of density goes in the county, all of a sudden now you’ve got to look at your culverts on the roads, you’ve got to look at your bridges,” Voigt said. “And as more traffic goes on the roads and more people live on the roads, we get more and more complaints about road conditions and bridges.”

Willey said instead of allowing more ranchettes to be built in rural areas near Lawrence, the better option is for land on the city’s periphery to become part of the city and develop with smaller lots to provide denser housing that is more affordable.

“Right now, new housing in the county is acting as a pressure valve for low housing stock in Lawrence, but it can never provide affordability,” Willey said. “We need housing in town.”

Proposed subdivision regulations

The proposed subdivision regulations are tied to goals laid out in Plan 2040, the city and county 20-year comprehensive plan meant to guide growth and development. The plan seeks to increase housing density in the city as a more efficient and affordable way to grow, and to preserve agricultural land in the county.

Plan 2040 has a new growth policy that prioritizes infill development within the city’s current boundaries and adds certain requirements for developers who want to expand those boundaries and build in the city’s designated growth area. The proposed subdivision regulations essentially would ensure that land that has been designated for city growth as part of Plan 2040 does not continue to be developed into rural residential neighborhoods — with lots that are a few acres or more — that don’t meet city goals for density.

photo by: Contributed

This aerial image of agricultural land is included in the the city and county’s comprehensive plan, Plan 2040.

Plan 2040 establishes three growth areas, or tiers, with the highest-priority area being development within the city’s existing boundaries. The second tier is an area that roughly rings the city and is designated as the city’s growth area. The third tier, which is beyond tier 2 and extends further into unincorporated areas of the county, is not anticipated to be added to the city within the timeframe of Plan 2040, with rare exceptions, and is designated as the city’s future growth area.

The proposed subdivision regulations would also align with goals in Plan 2040 to conserve the visual distinction between urban and rural areas throughout Douglas County, while ensuring “efficient and adequate development” is possible as Lawrence grows, according to a county news release.

Miller said the amount of development happening in tier 2 essentially precluded the type of development the city would like to see in its growth area. She said restricting residential subdivisions near the city now will ensure that land is there for denser development in the future, and will make it easier for the city to expand because it won’t have to work around as many rural residential areas.

“We’re wanting a mix of densities, but higher densities are really being sought after,” Miller said.

The proposed regulations would prohibit subdividing land in tier 2, the area closest to the city boundaries, until the property becomes part of the city through a process called annexation. New residential subdivisions would also be prohibited in tier 3, the area that is farther outside the city boundaries, with exceptions for certain types of land divisions such as agricultural and homestead subdivisions.

In addition to preserving the county’s agricultural land, the proposed changes are designed to reduce development stress on rural infrastructure such as roads, bridges and culverts. Voigt said instead of having to react to the pressure new developments put on county infrastructure, the proposed regulations would help the community better plan its housing and the associated infrastructure costs.

“What we are trying to do is just be much more organized at controlling density, thinking about where high density would go and controlling those really major infrastructure costs associated with a lot more housing going on roads,” Voigt said.

Rural property owners can use the county’s online mapping tool, available at gis.douglascountyks.org/propertyviewer, to see whether their land has been designed as tier 2 or tier 3. In order for land to be annexed into the city, at least one part of tier 2 land must be touching the city boundaries, meaning some properties in the city’s current and future growth area will have to wait to develop until they are eligible to be annexed.

Willey said what’s smartest for growth is to make sure land near the city stays available for future city development. She said continuing to allow rural subdivisions near the city worked directly against the city’s goals of having denser and more affordable housing developments.

“You couldn’t ever have density there — you’d have 3- and 5-acre lots forever,” Willey said. “And that would just hem the city in on all sides. We already have places where that is definitely a problem now.”

Willey said that while some property owners will lose some development rights in the short-term, they can make more money in the long-term once their property is eligible for annexation into the city and thereby targeted for denser residential development. She said given the significance of the proposed changes, she was surprised that the planning commission did not hear from any property owners at the meeting when it considered the changes. She said elected leaders needed to hear input from those who will be affected by the new regulations as they prepare to make their decisions.

“The concern is that we haven’t heard from these people, the people that will lose some development rights in the short term,” Willey said.

County commissioners are scheduled to consider the text amendment during their Aug. 11 business meeting, and city commissioners will consider it at their Aug. 17 meeting.