MONDAY,  MARCH 26,  2001


Mayor Dan Bishop called the Regular March 26, 2001 City Council Meeting to order in the City Council Chambers at 7:30 p.m.


PRESENT:     Mayor Dan Bishop

Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross

Councilman Anita Newsom 

Councilman George Nodler

Councilman Shirley Smith


City Manager Kirk Davis

                        Assistant City Manager Laura Gay

                        City Counselor David Ramsay

City Clerk Marilyn Ahnefeld



Item 3. on the Agenda.          PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.


Mayor Bishop welcomed a group of Antioch Middle School students who led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag in which all joined.   


Item 4. on the Agenda.          APPROVAL OF MINUTES.


Councilman Anita Newsom moved to approve the Regular March 12, 2001 City Council Meeting Minutes as written;     Councilman Bill Cross seconded.  The vote:  All “Aye”:     Smith, Nodler, Newsom, Cross, Bishop.  (5-0) 


Item 4a. on the Agenda.        PRESENTATIONS/RECOGNITIONS


*  Mayor Dan Bishop read a PROCLAMATION designating the month of April, 2001 as SAFE SCHOOLS MONTH in Gladstone.  Public Safety Officer Ronn Shatswell, who serves as the School Resource Officer at Antioch Middle School  introduced members of the National Junior Honor Society  who accepted the Proclamation on behalf of the school and thanked the Mayor and City Council for their support.  


Officer Shatswell told the City Council they have a special gift for them and students distributed  a Ribbon of Promise stating that the students do not want violence in their schools and want to remain safe.   The Ribbon of Promise also honors  all the victims of school violence. 


Mayor Bishop said it was very impressive to see so many students here tonight in support of safe schools.   Officer  Ronn Shatswell introduced Antioch Middle School Principal Bob Russell and Phyllis Hopper, a teacher who is involved in programs in the school to help prevent school violence.  He also recognized teacher Cindy Nave who is responsible for bringing the students here tonight.  


*  Mayor Dan Bishop also read  a PROCLAMATION designating Thursday, April 5th, 2001 as ARBOR DAY in the City of Gladstone.  Director of Parks and Recreation Steve Buschor accepted the Proclamation.


The Mayor announced that we will have our own Gladstone Arbor Day celebration at Oak Grove Park on Thursday, April 5th at 10:00 AM.  There will be students attending from St. Charles Elementary School who will receive their own sapling trees to take home to plant.  The Mayor invited everyone to attend and help plant a tree.  He said in recent years we have lost some of our beautiful trees during storms,  so please stop by to observe this day.


* Lastly, Mayor Bishop read a PROCLAMATION designating  April 8th-14th 2001, as INTERNATIONAL BUILDING SAFETY WEEK in Gladstone, Missouri.  Gladstone Codes Supervisor Alan Napoli accepted the proclamation on behalf  of the City.


* APPRECIATION AWARDS were presented by Mayor Dan Bishop to each of the members of the NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION TASK FORCE  as follows:  Chairman Carol  Rothwell,  Anne Alexander, Wayne Beer, Barbara Bowers, Dick Davis, Andrew Dominguez, Terry Hoppenthaler, Jan Kauk, Ralph Maddox, David Ramsay, Carol Rudi, and Al Westphal.


Mayor Bishop stated that back in July of 2000, the Council appointed the Neighborhood Preservation Task Force.  At that time we presented them with a pretty broad mission statement which is found in the front of the booklet (NPTF Report) on Page 3.  It contains statements most people can agree with and then it gives some sample topics that might be investigated by the task force but it throws in that famous phrase in legalese which says that “topics may include but not be limited to” which opens up the entire can of worms.  He remembers after the appointment of the NPTF and giving them the mission statement and telling them to go forth and do your good work, Chairman Carol Rothwell came to him and asked if he had any preconceived ideas where he wanted this to go.  The Mayor said it seemed she was almost hoping he would say yes to sort of narrow the scope of the mission statement a bit.


He told Ms. Rothwell that he did not have any preconceived notions and he said they were to do as they saw fit.  In just short of eight months, the task force of fourteen members which is now twelve individuals, took that mission statement and gathered together a vast amount of information.  When you see the three-ring binder which Anne Alexander brought to show us tonight, it is unbelievable.  He commented before the meeting tonight that no wonder the City’s paper budget is totally blown this year because there are so many photo copies there. 


The Mayor said after the information was gathered  then the tough part came which was what to do with it and what recommendations to make  based on the information.  This booklet received last Thursday, is frankly more than he could ever have wished for when we started the project last July.  It is a little bit scary now.  The question now is what will the Council do with this set of recommendations.  He told the Task Force their job is done, ours is only now just beginning.  It is challenging because we have to figure out how to implement the recommendations given to us.  The price tag frankly, is scary.  It is not certain at first glance how the City will come up with the money.


We were so confident that the recommendations from the Task Force would be worthwhile, that when the Council met last October for the goal-setting session, one of the Council goals which we gave the City Manager and City staff was implementation of the Task Force recommendations.  The Mayor said he  really likes their recommendation for an on-going board or commission with the exclusive responsibility of overseeing neighborhood preservation.  That group can provide continuity into the future to make sure the City stays on task and does not forget the importance of the recommendations and the work that has been done on neighborhood preservation in the report they provided.  He would like to see establishment of that board or commission, and told the members of the present task force that he is looking at about eleven great prospective people to serve on such a committee.  


Mayor Bishop thanked Assistant City Manager for Development Scott Wingerson and Secretary Kelli Behr for their hard work and support of the Task Force.   He appreciates it and knows it could not have been done without tremendous staff support.


Councilman Shirley Smith commented that she is not an avid reader but found she could not put the report down  until the end, it was stimulating and concise.  She said not only did the Task Force provide information on what is wrong, but also some guidelines on where to start and how to go about  making improvements.   It was an incredible report  and she thanks the Task Force for it.


Ms. Anne Alexander commented that they could not have done this without Carol Rothwell pulling it all together for us.


Item 5. on the Agenda.          CONSENT AGENDA


Following the Clerk’s reading, Councilman Bill Cross moved to approve the Consent Agenda as listed.  Councilman Anita Newsom seconded.  The vote:  All “Aye” – Smith, Nodler, Newsom, Cross, Bishop. (5-0)




Councilman Bill Cross moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. R-01-21 - ratifying the actions of the City Manager relating to the purchase of certain real estate property at 6118 N. Oak; and accepting the deed transferring such property to the City.  Councilman Anita Newsom seconded.  The vote:  All “Aye” – Smith, Nodler, Newsom, Cross, Bishop. (5-0)


Councilman Newsom commented that this is the deed purchasing the land for the new fire station.  We are moving ahead with all due diligence and giving progress as promised to our voters for passage of the fire protection sales tax.


Councilman Bill Cross moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. R-01-22 - authorizing the execution of a contract with Greater Kansas City Umpires Association for services in the amount of $18.75 per League game and $18.75 per Tournament game.  Funds are authorized from the General Fund.  Councilman Anita Newsom seconded.  The vote:  All “Aye” – Smith, Nodler, Newsom, Cross, Bishop. (5-0)


Councilman Bill Cross moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. R-01-23 - authorizing execution of a contract with William White & Sons for the 2001 Curb and Sidewalk Program in an amount not to exceed $205,781.25 from the Transportation Sales Tax Fund.  Project #0107.  Councilman Anita Newsom seconded.  The vote:  All “Aye” – Smith, Nodler, Newsom, Cross, Bishop. (5-0)


Councilman Bill Cross moved to approve the FEBRUARY 2001 FINANCIAL REPORTS.  Councilman Anita Newsom seconded.  The vote:  All “Aye” – Smith, Nodler, Newsom, Cross, Bishop. (5-0)


Councilman Bill Cross moved to approve the LIQUOR LICENSE for Class A&B Restaurant Bar Liquor by the Drink License.  Applicant:  El Patio LLC, dba Senor Tequila,  6502 N Oak.   Managing Officer:  Florencio Sanchez J. Reyes.  Councilman Anita Newsom seconded.  The vote:  All “Aye” – Smith, Nodler, Newsom, Cross, Bishop. (5-0)   




Item 6. on the Agenda.          COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE.


Don McLaughlin, 6313 N. Bales, stated that Council may recall that two weeks ago he had asked three questions and the Mayor had asked the City Manager to elaborate on some parts of that.  The first question was why did the addition of Englewood Court  to the 55th and Old Pike project become a priority.  He said Scott Wingerson has provided detailed explanation of his rationale for that.  Mr. McLaughlin said his question is more in terms of priorities.   He said  perhaps in his future endeavors on the Capital Improvements Committee we may need to think about changing those priorities because although we had a five-year plan and resurfaced a lot of streets, there are still many, many streets that are deteriorating rapidly and need something done about them.  He thinks they need to become a priority, the priority perhaps.


The second question he asked was why the developers were not asked to participate in the cost of that project that the City provided as part of the 55th and Old Pike project.   The addendum to that by City staff provided curbs and gutters around that whole property, sidewalks on one side and even though the contract had been let and work started a few weeks before that request came in for rezoning, he thinks the City would have every right to ask them to participate in the public improvements.  We spent something like $16,000 or $22,000 depending on which set of figures you look at rebuilding Englewood Court.  He thinks it would be reasonable and obviously City staff disagrees with him and we can have those disagreements, but he thinks they (developer) should have participated.


Mr. McLaughlin said the third issue, even though there were those who tried to beat him around the head and shoulders for exercising his right to speak at the last meeting, was that  no one answered the question of why in the Planning Commission meeting Mr. Smith entered after this area was discussed.  The conflict of interest rules say he should not participate, he should not vote, and he should notify every member of the Commission that he has an ownership interest in that property.  He does not believe that was done, and it  certainly is  not part of the record of the Planning Commission meeting.  If it was an oversight, future Planning Commission meeting minutes should very clearly show when a member of that Commission, and in this case, the Chairman of that Commission, has an ownership interest in the property being considered.  He thinks it might have raised an issue with some members of the Planning Commission as to whether or not there should be some involvement in the public improvements to that property. 


            Item 7. on the Agenda.          COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL.


Councilman Shirley Smith stated that she attended the Clay County Coordinating Committee dinner last week.  Each city gives their report and a slide presentation was given by a young lady on preservation and architecture in Liberty.  It was extremely interesting and the Liberty representatives  were very proud of what they have in their city.  She would like to see someone or some group research some of the places in our own city.  We do have some historic places in our city and it would be nice to put that together into as  nice a presentation as the one she saw Thursday night. 


Councilman George Nodler had no communications at this time.


Councilman Anita Newsom asked about weekend code enforcement.  Does it start with daylight savings time.  She has noticed the flowers are springing up and the junk cars are starting to spring up.  Scott Wingerson answered it should start next weekend.


Councilman Newsom also reminded everyone to be informed on the candidates and get out to vote on April 3rd.  It is our right and our duty.


Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross wanted to express one thing more to the Neighborhood Preservation Task Force. One statistic  that stuck in his mind is that there are 833 rentals in Gladstone and limited funds for repairs.   He said with the dynamic duo of City Manager Davis and past Mayor Dick Davis, they can put their heads together  to find a  good solution in the next six months to a year.


Mayor Dan Bishop said he  wanted to pick up on a matter that was dealt with at the last Council meeting.  Mr. Don  McLaughlin also spoke at that meeting and raised some questions and provided quite a bit of information.  It had to do with a capital improvement project at Englewood Court.  Based on those inquiries, he presented a number of questions to staff regarding Englewood Court and capital improvements. 


In response to those questions, staff generated a rather lengthy memo of reply which Council was provided last Tuesday evening.  He thanked staff, particularly Assistant City Manager for Development Scott Wingerson for the time and obvious energy that went into producing this memo of reply.  Upon reviewing it, it appears as if staff did not act improperly in terms of bringing forth this capital improvement project.  Unfortunately, however, because of who the developers are and the timing of the events involved in this capital improvements project, it allowed a question to be raised about special treatment.  That is too bad, because any time a question is raised about public officials using their positions for private gain, that is exactly the sort of thing that causes citizens to be cynical and distrustful of government. Mayor Bishop said that the entire incident is unfortunate and sad.


Item 8. on the Agenda.          COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE CITY MANAGER.


City Manager Kirk Davis had no communications.


Item 9. on the Agenda.          CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING on a request to rezone from RP-3 to RP-4, property north of Englewood Road between N. Broadway and N. Main.  Applicant:  Nolte & Associates.  Owner:  Herman Scharhag.  (#1143)


Mayor Bishop opened the public hearing and explained the hearing process. 


Mr. Thomas Nolte, Nolte and Associates, Architects and Planners, 7611 State Line Road, Kansas City, Missouri, the applicant for the Gladstone Senior Housing project said he has stood before the Council on other occasions on this project.   He said this project has come a long way from its early inception and hopefully  they are in the final chapter in organizing the information they have for Council this evening. 


With him this evening is the development team consisting of Mr. Alan Michaels who will be handling the engineering presentation.  He is with LHE Engineers.  Also present is  Mr. Chris Record who is the developer,  and Mr. Herman  Scharhag who is the owner of the property in question.  They have been working with  Mr. Scharhag for a year and a half now.


There are five items on the agenda this evening, 9, 9a, 9b, 9c, and 9d and they include three actions.  There is a rezoning request, a site plan approval request and a development agreement to be executed between the developer and the City for infrastructure and improvements. 


Mr. Nolte stated that although Council received a packet, he will briefly discuss some of the issues associated with the project that will not only bring the Council and Mayor to the current project status so as not to get confused with some of the other issues we had talked about earlier, but also maybe help some of the other members of the audience to identify with some of the newer items on the plan. 


There have been some changes and those changes begin with the removal of the retail portion on the westerly part of the site.  It is now referred to as undeveloped area.  We have also reduced the size of the footprint for the elderly apartment structure.  We have increased the parking from 156 to 178.  That does include 85 additional parking spots that are referred to as deferred.  The reason it is deferred is because very few of the residents own a car, but if it is needed they can provide the parking, but prefer to keep it in green space now. 


Other issues include a comprehensive traffic impact analysis.  It is a very interesting analysis in that it says there would be negligible impact on North Englewood Road and on North Broadway.  In fact, the street system in Gladstone is adequate and provides acceptable levels of service.  That is good news.  Usually when there is rezoning, traffic impact studies are requested and modifications might be needed, but it is nothing but good news and came out in favor of the fact that streets are already well designed and engineered. 


The other issue that we are going to discuss is the improvements to the storm water collection and detention systems and that they have gone above and beyond code requirements. Mr. Alan Michaels will come forward to discuss engineering issues, then he (Mr. Nolte) will summarize.


Mr. Alan Michaels, LHE, P.A. 13000 West 87th Parkway, Suite 108, Lenexa, Kansas, said he will discuss the engineering issues associated with the storm water and traffic issues.  Stormwater is a very significant part of this project due to current flooding in an area that is a tributary on North Broadway to a culvert that passes under the street.  There is currently a 24 inch corrugated reinforced concrete pipe that passes under the street.  The site is divided into three basins.  The area of concern is approximately 11-12 acres and the basin of concern that is currently flooding.  Another area drains to the Leimkuhler pond to the north.  The area to the south is draining into an existing storm system that ultimately goes to the west of the intersection of North Broadway and Englewood. 


They were asked to look at ways to not only minimize, but eliminate the flooding that is currently happening on the northwest corner of the site.  The results indicate the pipe underneath the street as it stands has approximately a 30 cfs capacity maximum.  That is if water ponds up and goes over the road to  the current allowable depth of 7 inches over the roadway, that pipe can carry a maximum of about 30 cfs.  The hundred year storm right now is producing about  47 cfs of runoff.  It was no surprise that there is runoff over the street.  It is in excess of what is allowed by the City design standards.  They have proposed to utilize an existing pond to collect the storm drainage and modify the pond outlet structure to better control the flow out of the large area.  The pond was designed, not based on the current APWA criteria, which is the City’s criteria for detention design, but based on the capacity of the pipe under the road.  That pipe capacity governs the release from the pond.  The pond has been sized to have a 100,000 cubic feet of storage available to detain the 100 year storm.  Equating to gallons, that is approximately 748,000 gallons of water.  The runoff from the entire tributary basin would not flood the road but stay within the pipe without increasing the size of the pipe. 


One topic that came up was increasing the size of the pipe, but they did not want to move the problem down stream.  It would benefit this area, but would create another problem downstream.  With the design of the pond as it stands, and their proposal, the 50 year storm would flow underneath the road  and there  would be very minimal flooding if any, it would definitely be under the 7 inches.   Our calculations indicate it would pass under the road but we are allowed to flow over with a depth of  7 inches.  We have maintained a conservative design with our release rate to try to get it to pass under the road if at all possible.   Our release rate from this site equates to 1.0 cfs per acre of tributary area.  What is currently allowed  under your criteria is 1.8 cfs per acre, so our design exceeds the current criteria that we are required to design to primarily again in an interest to be a good neighbor.   We  do not want flooding down there any more than the neighbors do and he does understand that it has been a huge area of concern for the adjacent residents. So, hopefully with this development, we will solve the problem.   He added that with this development they are reducing the runoff and noted the proposed runoff from that pond from this entire basin is less than what is existing.  So, hopefully we are solving a problem we have been asked to solve.


Councilman Newsom  asked if the calculations includes the impervious area that would be created by the deferred parking to be implemented.  Mr.  Michaels  said that is a very good question.  What these calculations include is the ultimate development of the entire property. So they have looked at the entire property at its ultimate development as currently master planned including the parcel not only as deferred parking but as if it was completely developed.  So they have taken that scenario into account.


Councilman Cross  said so your  facts and figures are based  upon the 24inch pipe that is already in place.   Mr. Michaels  said yes. 


Mayor Bishop said there has been some concern expressed about the stability of the ponds on the property.  There is the one Mr. Michaels  is referring to and there is the one referred to as the  Leimkuhler pond.     He seems to recall that last time we had these discussions in a Council setting there was some indication that the State of Missouri would be coming to do an assessment evaluation of  the stability  of those ponds to  hold not only their current capacity  but perhaps increased capacity due to the development.  He asked  if there is any information about that and the stability of those ponds. 


Mr. Michaels said they do not have any geo-technical testing  or any testing otherwise regarding the pond’s stability, he can  tell us that the proposed design  includes modifying what is currently the dam of the pond and almost relocating it.   It would  include some stabilization of that dam to  build the outlet structure and to gain the additional capacity and area that we need to capture as much runoff as we can.  That dam would almost be reconstructed with this development from the standpoint  that  we must put in an outlet structure and  we must raise the dam to get this design to work.  There will be geo-technical testing that will need to accompany that design to again determine what type of measures we need to include in our design to make sure that the dam is stable and  not going to erode away and  not going to break. 


Mr. Wingerson clarified that the area shaded in blue on the exhibit is on the northern part of Mr. Sharhag's property.  It’s an existing pond referred to in different ways as the catfish pond or the frog pond.   On the Scharhag property there is  also a smaller pond that is just a low lying swampy area referred to as the mosquito pond sometimes.  The Leimkuhler Pond is the kidney or pork chop shaped dark spot on the map.   About a year ago, we asked Missouri DNR what the requirements were and they suggested that they would come out and inspect it and at that time we also notified the property owner, Frank Cucchiara, of the need for that to occur.  We would be glad to check sometime in the next week to see if DNR has done it or if Mr. Cucchiara  has heard anything about the results of an inspection. 


Mayor Bishop asked what  is the anticipated impact on that pond by the development.


Mr. Michaels answered that the portion of the site that drains to this pond is an area that was also included in a study that was done previously by Lutjen  & Associates in January 2000.  The recommendations of that study which I believe were considered by staff stated that the developed runoff from that area could pass through that pond with no adverse impacts.  As part of this development our commitment  to staff is to reevaluate their calculations, their solutions, do our own calculations to verify their findings and that if indeed detention would be required to allow that pond to operate adequately,  we would provide that detention in accordance with the current APWA standards. 


Mayor Bishop asked for clarification  from Mr. Michaels on what he just told us.  


Mr. Michaels  said he was explaining that  if we find the development of this property exceeds the capacity of the downstream system which in this case includes the Leimkuhler Pond per Code we will provide detention per current APWA requirements.  We will basically reanalyze the portion of the study that was done by Lutjen  & Associates.  We will do our own analysis separate and independent of theirs.  Their analysis in January of 2000 indicated that this area could drain developed without any impacts and no additional detention is required.  We have committed to verify that.


The Mayor said he assumes that the studies as to the capacity of the Leimkuhler Pond assume a structurally sound pond. 


Mr. Michaels  said yes.  There was no mention in the study about the stability or structural stability of the pond.  


Mr. Michaels said one other thing he would like to mention in association with the detention issues that we are providing currently is that the inlet that is located on North Broadway is an inlet that is basically functioning as an area or grate inlet that looks like its been run over a few times.  It’s  broken and there’s a rusted grate on top of it which is part of the cause of the system not working as it was intended to.  Part of our design would also include upgrading that inlet to be a standard area inlet that could be modified in the future with any improvements to the roadway if that does ever happen to a curb inlet which will function much better and much safer than what is currently out there.  We can answer any questions you might have in addition to that on storm drainage.  I would like to move on to traffic issues associated with this project.


We completed a traffic study and looked at the peak hour counts in this area and concluded based on our level of service analysis that the existing intersection operates fine as it is under existing conditions with an adequate level of service.  The traffic generated by this development can be determined from the trip generation manual by the Institute of Transportation Engineers.  That traffic based on that accepted standard of trip generation analysis was determined to be insignificant to the amount of traffic on the road.  I believe there is anywhere between 10 and 30 vehicles during the peak hour AM and PM peak hour which would be 15 vehicles in, 15 vehicles out,  max peak hour trip generation.  Again the analysis concluded that  the intersections operated at an acceptable level of service and did not need any further improvements, did not need any additional signal improvements because  they did not meet the warrants outlined in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and those warrants are primarily based on volume,  and the traffic generated by this development didn’t even come close to meeting those warrants.  Referring to the plans,  there was an issue brought up regarding turning movements traffic  that would be exiting and coming down to make a U-turn  at  this intersection where we would agree with staff that it is unsafe traffic movement at that location and have agreed to place a “No U Turn Sign”  directly across from the left-turn lane at that intersection to  at best discourage U-turns.  The traffic associated with flow through the site was not a problem in the traffic study they had done.  It functioned fine,  both entry drives operated with an acceptable level of service because there is not that much traffic generated.  One of the items that had come up with discussion was the flow of traffic through the site primarily from one side to the other which would enable someone to make a left-hand turn.  We do point out that this drive through the  front of the site is a two-way drive and there is access through and in and around the site and we have no problem with traffic issues associated with the development. 


Mr. Michaels invited questions.


Councilman Newsom referring to the flow of traffic in the area of the portico or canopy which she assumes is a drop off area,  asked if the by-pass lane is a one or two lane by pass.    Staff and the developer noted it was two lane.   Ms. Newsom said she thinks this is very important to the flow.   


Thomas Nolte  said he would just reiterate that there have been some improvements made to the plan per the direction of staff on their internal circulation,  They have modified the parking and they have added additional parking and different circulation.    They are using Main Street as their main entry, and it is also the street that has the ability to make full movement turns when you are down on Englewood Road.  Their monument sign is off Main Street and they wish to bring people in at that spot because they can bring people around to the rear of the building,  the drop off zone,  or to circulate through the by-pass line to the west side of the structure.    


Mr. Nolte said as far  as issues that dealt with flooding, he thinks a wise decision was made,  he wants to approach it from a different perspective.  Yes,   they could solve all these problems by adding a larger pipe but it would cause problems down stream.  It is much better to hold the water and control it on the site.  Another issue that Alan Michaels  mentioned was about the dam.      They will be modifying the existing water on Mr. Scharhag’s property.  They will be  taking out the muck that is in the bottom,  they will be deepening it,  and will also be adding additional height to that structure,  so therefore, since they are the ones touching the structure last and they will be touching it with engineering, it will be correctly engineered and it will be stable.  He does not think that was said outright but if they touch it and they modify it and they  engineer it,  they are responsible for it.      


Mayor Bishop said in his mind one of the most significant aspects of the changes in the plan from last time to this plan is the removal of the retail aspect of it on Broadway.   He asked Mr. Nolte to discuss how that has changed the plan as far as run-off and traffic flow. 


 Mr. Nolte said it is one of the main issues for this hearing tonight is the rezoning and how we are handling the density on the site,  but also how we are handing this as a master plan.     There was a lot of previous discussion on the retail  that was aligned with Broadway.    They feel the retail is not a necessary component of this plan at this time.   It had been suggested that that was good use along Broadway and were happy to accommodate it but it was not necessary for their plan to be developed.  They are in the housing business and they feel it is a much better plan  now.     They have better circulation, adequate size, deferred parking,  and they are showing an expanded  walkway and trail system  throughout the westerly side of the site and are still keeping their garden areas, their gazebos  and their outside activity areas.   Mr. Nolte said that concludes his comments and he  will respond to any questions raised at the appropriate time.  


Mayor Bishop invited persons to speak in favor of the application.




Herman Scharhag introduced himself as the current owner of the property and said he has owned it since 1965.    It is a nice piece of property  but he has reached a point where the property needs to be developed.    The property is zoned for apartments and cluster housing.  In 1986 the land was zoned for 154 apartments that were scattered over the entire site  and had nine buildings and two cars per unit which would be  over 300 cars.  There could have been a major problem with water but the new plan  has one building with a minimum amount of parking.    Mr. Scharhag said he understands the problem with flooding and noted that part of the flooding in the past is partly due to the fact that the majority of the land is in Kansas City and the people in Kansas City, Missouri have not been cooperative with the City of Gladstone. At the present time we have done everything possible to satisfy the requirements that Gladstone will insist on and he has made an agreement with the developers to use the lake on the remaining property which he still owns to satisfy and provide the protection that is necessary for the control of any water run-off.  He feels that this is a far better solution with one building providing senior citizen housing in an attractive site with all of the requirements that are needed.   As a retired architect himself he thinks that this is a far better solution than the previously plan for 54 units with nine buildings.   He said we should not overlook the benefits of this project to Gladstone and he urges the Council to approve the project and get it underway because it has been on the agenda for over a year and a half.


Galen Neill,   6010 NorthWyandotte,   speaking for some area residents, said they want to speak in favor of this proposal but there are a couple of items  they would like to have addressed.  


Mr. Neill said one question is in regard to the detention basin.   They just heard that it would be  cleaned out and know there is a lot of debris in that basin and also know there is some erosion that is adjacent to the basin itself.   They  feel that should be addressed where there has been water runoff over  the basin.   


Secondly,  in regard to the vertical pipe that comes up within  the basin itself and will ultimately flow all the way out to the street and connect to the pipe on N Broadway.  They  ask for clarification on  how this pipe is going to be maintained.  They have never heard who will maintain it and if there is a problem how  it will be addressed.   


Thirdly, because they have heard there is going to be 2’ of water there at the maximum height, they feel that from the standpoint of children playing in the area that this should be fenced and they would like to hear what the developer and staff think about that.  They think the children must be protected. 


Mr. Neill said those are the items they want to see  addressed before they make their presentation.


Assistant City Manager for Development Scott Wingerson said he can partially address the first two questions and leave the fence question to the developer.  In terms of the basin itself, we are in an unusual circumstance.  We have more information on the drainage plan for this particular request than we normally would which is due to the focus on the Council, Planning Commission, Staff, the residents who have attended faithfully the numerous  meetings on this as well as a sincere part on the part of the developer to address the concerns.   


Mr. Wingerson said unfortunately we do not have final engineering so he is not sure we can answer as it relates to the basin itself.  In terms of maintenance, he believes he is on the record in front of the Planning Commission to talk about  that just a little bit. All of  the details of the maintenance of the pond, the maintenance of the structures leaving the pond,  and then going to City right of way have not been finally determined.  However, the City  will maintain those parts of the structure that are within the right of way,  and the developer’s representatives are on record as being willing to negotiate a maintenance agreement between the property where the basin is (Mr. Scharhag’s)   and the developers to work out those details and provide those to city staff prior to its final execution so that we have an opportunity to review it and ensure that the basin and structures are maintained and taken  care of.  He said Mr. Michaels will be able to address in much more technical detail the actual structure itself and the design of the structure to allow the pond water out into the storm system which ultimately, the conclusion is that it is an extremely low maintenance and  obstacle free solution.  Mr. Wingerson said many of these ideas were raised  by the residents surrounding this development and have been implemented.


The outlet structure is  what we call a multi-stage weir which is a box that is literally out in the water away from access by children or anybody who would be in that area.  It would act in such a way that at various storm levels it would control the discharge for not only a one hundred year storm which is what is typical in an orpheus type control outflow,  but this would control the run-off for a 10 year,  25 year, and  50 year storm, so that we are decreasing runoff for more frequent storm events than would typically be required.  The box  is a  square shaped weir.  Water would pond up to a certain elevation spill over the weir and then would expand out to cover the next storm event.  He passed a drawing of a similar weir  to the City Council.   


Mr. Michaels noted the detail they have also included along the top of it a safety rail in the event someone decided to go swimming which they would hope would not occur in the vicinity of the outlet structure.   The design helps eliminate  problems of clogging and debris getting in there which would typically clog a small orpheus that is typically used to control the outflow from the pond.  This is a  much more maintenance free approach and again it allows us to control more frequent storms so that if you get a typical rainfall in Gladstone we are having an impact and utilizing the capacity of the pond to its fullest.  


Thomas Nolte said on the first question which was on the clean out and the erosion, of course they would be handling that as he stated earlier along with the construction  and mucking-out of the pond and also the development of the new dam.     He said as Alan indicated the vertical pipe structures that are engineered which tend to be typical for these types of structures allow them to function well.


Mr. Nolte said the third question dealt with the fence and the fence issue is Mr. Scharhag‘s decision.  This is a  pond that is still on  private property.  They have an easement to use this pond because Mr. Scharhag is the seller of  part of this property.    In fact a little less than half of his property is involved in this sale and he has had two ponds there for quite some time and he does not want to have a fence on this pond and neither do they.  They feel it functions quite well as it is.  It is in a wooded area and it is protected, and it is on private property.   Therefore they cannot accommodate the request  if it was a request.  If  it is a question they can answer the question  in the affirmative - no there is not a fence proposed  on this particular water structure.


Mary Abbott. 5905 N Broadway,   thanked the Mayor and  City Council for the opportunity to express her opinion regarding the proposed Senior Apartment complex on the property east of Broadway and north of Englewood Road and distributed copies of her remarks as follows:


This parcel of land is one of the prime sites in Gladstone.  Her daughter played there when the Catlins lived there  a long time ago and she used to come home and tell  them how pretty it was up there.  In all this time it has not changed, it is still pretty up there. 


They have been aware of Mr. Scharhag’s obsession with building  apartments on that prime piece  of real estate since approximately 1964.  The last time was in April 2000.  There were  senior apartments and a strip mall. They all said it was a done deal and you can’t fight city hall, but Galen Neill and she got a petition and with help in five days we got over 200 signatures.  They had an open meeting at Fairview Christian Church  and over  150 people came.  They did a  traffic count on Broadway that indicated there were 7,512 cars in a 12 hour time slot at the entrance to the strip mall.    They felt they had to go the extra mile to stop the development of property that they felt would be a detriment to their neighborhood.  They felt it imperative that it blend with the surrounding area and not be a source of multiple problems for the neighbors.  Mr. Bishop told them that the developer had withdrawn his application for the strip mall.   Ms. Abbott told Mr. Bishop that they  do appreciate his concern and assistance.  When they received the notice from Scott Wingerson  in January  2001 that there was a new plat and application for new zoning from Mr. Scharhag’s developers they were distressed to say the least.  Mr. Wingerson met with Les Smith, Galen Neil, and her any number of times to get input on what they felt would be acceptable and the community could live with.  They have come up with a plan that they personally feel is as good as it is going to get.    She and Galen still do not want apartments, they would rather it be turned into  a big beautiful park but that is out of the question  so she will not oppose the proposed plan as it is right now.  The Plan which is being considered tonight bears absolutely no resemblance  to the plan the developers presented a year ago.


 She would  like to say in closing that she cannot find words to express the appreciation, admiration,  and respect that she has for Scott Wingerson.  He has done everything that he can  possibly do to get the most from this developer in order to satisfy their requests and he got all but one or two and they are so trivial that do not amount to a hill of beans as her mother used to say.


Ms. Abbott  thanked Scott Wingerson and  Les Smith who also helped a great deal and was at all the meetings and his input was invaluable.  In closing she  will say thank you gentlemen for a job well done. You are an asset  to the City of Gladstone.


Galen Neill,   6010 North Wyandotte,   said he will speak in favor of this but does wish that Mr. Scharhag would reconsider as far as the fence.   Reading from his prepared remarks, Mr. Neill said please be advised that he concurs with Mary Abbott’s report here this evening.  They are very pleased with the continued cooperation received from City staff and  Les Smith, Planning Commission, Chairman.  As you know we have worked tirelessly to get this development fine tuned.  They believe the senior development has been fine tuned and will be a program which the City will be proud of and certainly in demand.  Also, they believe the senior housing residents will enjoy the beautiful walking trails that will be on the west side of the housing development. The trails lead to a natural wooded area with green grass and detention basin.  This of course is good for the wild life too.   They believe that this will be a peaceful area for walking and jogging for senior citizens.  Now, as a community, they believe it is time to move on and let this development begin.  As a community, they thank Mr. and Mrs. Scharhag and the Developer Chris Rucker for their cooperation and they know they will be good neighbors.




Barbara Heimsch, 434 NW 58th Street, Kansas City, Missouri  64118. said  she is thankful that the developer removed  the shopping center and she is thankful that this is being designed for a one hundred year storm because they are in the path of all the runoff, eventually a 100% of it is going to get to them one way or another depending on how many one hundred year storms they have every year.  She said she wants to believe that this detention system is going to work .  She wants to believe it with all of her heart because she is here to preserve her neighborhood.   She has lived there for 33 years and there are people who have been there longer.  They were horribly flooded in 1974, came close to a loss of life down there had it not been for a brave young  college student named Mark Bower who literally swam down and pulled a woman  out of her house and saved her life for which he got the Andrew Carnegie Award, and they are very proud of him.  That just leaves you with this feeling that experts are not always right, they can design and intend to do the right thing but it does not  always work out. 


 So they are left down there on their block right there praying that we have a good engineer here, with all due respect.  She sincerely hopes that this works.  But if it doesn’t work,  they will pay a terrible price for it because she does not want her neighborhood to end up like some neighborhoods where all of a sudden you have so much runoff that homes have to be removed and FEMA has to come  in and literally remove homes.  They do not want to see that happen and they want to keep their neighborhood in tact.  She knows that during those first heavy rains they will all be worried down at their end of the block.   She told  the Council they are depending on them to make sure that these figures are all checked by people that know what they are talking about, that have the expertise to look at this and say whether it is really going to work.


Ms. Heimsch said she has to differ a little bit with Mr. Scharhag on who causes their flooding problems.  Kansas City certainly contributes a lot to it but they have come in and made some improvements which have helped them but there is still a limit to how much water their creek can hold.   They take a lot of drainage from Gladstone, as far as N. Oak Trafficway and probably beyond that goes into East Creek.  She concluded  by saying that she hopes it all works out and it is certainly a better plan than it was and she would like to thank the Gladstone Planning & Zoning Commission for listening to them and letting them get up and talk, and for the City Council tonight for listening to what she has to say.


Staff Presentation.


Assistant City Manager for Development Scott Wingerson, referred Council to the proposed site plan ordinance which contains some fourteen conditions  and noted the developer has agreed to implement  each of those conditions.   In terms of the storm water, it is better.  The criteria from day one when this was first heard by the Planning Commission has not changed, what has changed is the implementation of that criteria which has resulted in a much better plan. 


Mr. Wingerson said  the final plat contained in Council’s packet is a little bit different than the one submitted  last Friday.   The differences are twofold.  First, in the northwest corner of the development property on lot 2 in your packet shows a storm water easement that was designed for the previous detention basin.   That is all changed so that is no longer reflected as well as a slight change in the North Main right of way which was made to allow the improvements to line up adequately on the east side of the property with the improvements constructed by Realty Executives when that property was constructed.  So those are the only differences there.  In terms of the development agreement in your packet, Mr. Wingerson said  he marked up a copy based on conversation with the developer.  Mr. Rucker is here tonight and was a little bit hesitant to execute the agreement prior to the Council approving the development because the project does have some history but he is here and he believes he would state to you unequivocally that he will sign the Developer’s Agreement subject to Council’s approval of the development request.  Mr. Wingerson said finally, he will summarize that the Planning Commission recommends approval of this request by a vote of 10 in favor, 0 in opposition, 1 abstain.  Mr. Wingerson said he would be glad to answer any questions Council may have.  


Councilman Newsom said she may be hesitant to vote for this proposal unless the Developer’s Agreement is signed because she thinks we hold the trump card.  


Chris Rucker, 8411 Preston Road, Dallas, Texas,  75225,   (AHM Development, Inc.)  came forward with pen in hand and signed the Developer’s Agreement.  


Councilman Newsom said for the record  she understands that  Public Safety has reviewed the site plan and is comfortable with  ingress/egress and access for emergency services be it fire, ambulance, etc.   Mr. Wingerson said that is correct, Public Safety has been a part of all the group development on all of the site plan.  In addition, the architects and engineers have sat down with the Code Compliance people in the last week and  a half and gone over preliminarily  what the requirements of the building and fire code will be for the structure for permit review and Council approval. 


Ms. Newsom said looking at a very large structure like that with older citizens there will probably be more calls for ambulance, and medical assistance.  It is  important that there be easy access and ready  accessibility and she would hate for someone to lose a life because we were running up and down the halls with a gurney and couldn’t get in some other way.   


Mr. Wingerson responded that this type of facility has some of the tightest on building construction codes of any use there is and certainly Building Codes Supervisor Alan Napoli   will be looking at those issues very, very closely in conjunction with Fire Inspector Chuck Duddy.  


There were no further comments and Mayor Bishop closed the Public Hearing. 


Item 9a. on the Agenda.        FIRST READING BILL 01-12,  rezoning from RP-3 to RP-4, property north of Englewood Road between N Broadway and N Main.  Applicant:  Nolte & Associates.  Owner:  Herman Scharhag  (File #1143)


Councilman Anita Newsom moved to place Bill 01-12 on First Reading;   Councilman Shirley Smith seconded. 




Mayor Bishop commented that there is no doubt in his mind that  this is the best zoning change that we have seen for this property.  It is certainly better than what existed with the apartment opportunities there.   It is better being all residential without  the retail component and he will be supportive of the rezoning.


Mayor Pro Tem Cross said he also concurs with Ms. Abbott’s comment that the plan under consideration tonight has no resemblance to the previous plan a year ago.  The plan has changed and he really is happy that the neighborhood got together and pulled together and stayed  with  their thoughts and ideas to make this something worthwhile.   He appreciates neighborhood representatives  showing up tonight.  


The vote:  All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)  The Clerk  read the Bill.


Councilman Anita Newsom moved to accept the  First Reading of Bill 01-12, Waive the Rule, and place the Bill on Second and Final Reading;  Councilman Shirley Smith seconded.  The vote:  All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)  The Clerk  read the Bill.


Councilman Anita Newsom moved to accept the Second and Final Reading of  Bill 01-12 and enact the Bill as Ordinance 3.787;   Councilman George Nodler seconded.  Roll Call Vote:        All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)  .


Item 9b. on the Agenda.        FIRST READING BILL 01-13,  approving a Site Plan in conjunction with a rezoning of property in the 5700 Block of N. Main.  Applicant:  Nolte & Associates.  Owner:  Herman Scharhag  (File #1143)


Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross moved to place Bill 01-13 on First Reading;  Councilman Anita Newsom seconded.




Mayor Bishop commented that he would echo what has been said that this site plan is so much better than what we have seen.  He is grateful the retail is gone and he thinks that the walking trails and the whole site plan is very attractive.   He is glad to be able to support this because he thinks that obviously we have an aging population in Gladstone and there is a need for this type of senior housing.  


 The vote:  All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)  The Clerk  read the Bill.


Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross moved to accept the  First Reading of Bill 01-13, Waive the Rule,  and place the Bill on Second and Final Reading;  Councilman Anita Newsom seconded.  The vote:  All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)  The Clerk  read the Bill.


Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross moved to accept the Second and Final Reading of  Bill 01-13 and enact the Bill as Ordinance 3.788;   Councilman Shirley Smith seconded.  Roll Call Vote:        All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)


Item 9c. on the Agenda.         FIRST READING BILL 01-14,  approving the Final Plat of Gladstone Senior Apartments located in the 5700 Block of N. Main.  Applicant:  Nolte & Associates.  Owner:  Herman Scharhag  (File #1144)


Councilman Anita Newsom moved to place Bill 01-14 on First Reading;    Councilman George Nodler seconded. The  vote:  All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)  The Clerk read the Bill.


Councilman Anita Newsom moved to accept the First Reading of Bill 01-14, Waive the Rule,  and place the Bill on Second and Final Reading; Councilman George Nodler seconded. The vote:  All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)  The Clerk  read the Bill.


Councilman Anita Newsom moved to accept the Second and Final Reading of  Bill 01-14 and enact the Bill as Ordinance 3.789;   Councilman George Nodler seconded.  Roll Call Vote:   All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)


Item 9d. on the Agenda.        RESOLUTION R-01-24,  authorizing execution of a Land Development Agreement with AHM Development, Inc. relating to the development of a Senior Housing Independent Living facility and the construction of deferred parking in the 5700 block of N. Main. 


Councilman Anita Newsom moved to adopt Resolution R-01-24;  Councilman George Nodler seconded.   The vote: All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom,  Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)


Mayor  Bishop congratulated the applicants and thanked them for their persistence, patience, flexibility, and willingness to work with neighbors, the Planning Commission,  and the City Council.   Councilman Bill Cross asked how long it will be before we see the  finished product.   Mr. Nolte said  we are on a fast track schedule now.  


Mr. Nolte said he does think it is a wonderful example of community involvement and getting a product that everyone is satisfied with. 


Item 10. On the Agenda.      PUBLIC HEARING:  on a request to amend the Gladstone Zoning Ordinance,    dealing with setbacks for decks.   Applicant:   City of Gladstone.  (File #1142)


Mayor Dan Bishop opened the public hearing and explained the hearing process. 


Assistant City Manager for Development Scott Wingerson, speaking on behalf of the City as Applicant, said this is an important proposed amendment to our Zoning Ordinance. It is an issue that has been raised by the Council for many many years,  and an issue that has been raised by the Planning Commission for several years,  and an issue raised by the Board of Zoning Adjustment basically forever.  What is proposed is that for single family homes a typical open deck be allowed to encroach into what is now a 35’ setback.   The Board of Zoning Adjustment is seeing many more variances of this type than they have in the past due mostly for two reasons.     One being the value of the land.  As it becomes more valuable the homes on that land become more valuable and it usually translates to a larger home and it makes it difficult to install a deck  and maintain the 35’ setback.  The other reason is that in the established and developed  parts of town people over the years have converted and changed their properties and at some point in time they always want to have another deck, a larger deck, a better deck.  So those are the two main reasons.


Mr. Wingerson said specifically  the amendment would allow an open deck to encroach into the 35’ setback  a distance of ten feet.  So the setback for a deck would be 25’ and the house itself or primary structure world remain 35’.  The Board of Zoning Adjustment has not taken official action on this but he can promise that they are extremely supportive of this request and the Planning Commission voted 9-0 to recommend approval of the amendment.  


Councilman Newsom  said to clarify,  this  pertains not only to new homes construction but also to existing homes should someone want to increase the size of their deck to that 25’ build line.  Councilman Cross said this amendment pertains to open decks not enclosed.   Mr. Wingerson said that is correct, this amendment adds a definition of “deck” to the list of definitions  in the Zoning Ordinance and defines it as “A flat floored, roofless area that is greater than 18” in height and adjoins a house or built as a structural part of it, being open on one or more sides and containing hand and/or safety railing”.   He said the hand or safety rails differentiates it from  a platform or a patio for building code purposes. 


Ms. Newsom asked about building a deck that included a gazebo on the end of it with a roof.        Mr. Wingerson said under the present definition it would be allowed because it would  be open on one or more sides.  He clarified as long as it is attached to and made a part of the deck, and  not a separate gazebo.  


There were no persons desiring to speak for or against this Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Mayor Bishop closed the Public Hearing.


Item 10a. on the Agenda.      FIRST READING BILL 01-15,   amending Section 32-1 and    32-10 (D) of the Gladstone Zoning Ordinance dealing with setbacks for decks.  (File #1142)


Mayor Pro Tem Cross moved to place Bill 01-15 on First Reading;   Councilman Anita Newsom seconded.  the vote:  All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)  The Clerk  read the Bill.


Mayor Pro Tem Cross moved to accept the  First Reading of Bill 01-15, Waive the Rule and place the Bill on Second and Final Reading;  Councilman Anita Newsom seconded.  The vote:  All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0)  The Clerk  read the Bill.


Mayor Pro Tem Cross moved to accept the Second and Final Reading of  Bill 01-15 and enact the Bill as Ordinance 3.790;   Councilman Anita Newsom seconded. Roll Call Vote:    All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.   (5-0) 


Item 11. on the Agenda.        APPROVAL OF BUILDING PERMIT for Paris II Education Center, 6840 N. Oak Trafficway, for a 1,380 sq. ft. addition to the existing building.  Applicant:  Ken McCall & Associates, Architect   Owner:  Garold Tingler.  (BP #01-0087)


Mayor  Pro Tem Bill Cross moved for approval of the Building Permit for 6840 N Oak Trafficway;   Councilman George Nodler seconded.




Councilman Newsom asked if this building addition will be under the present canopy area.   Mr. Scott Wingerson advised there is an existing canopy on the building as part of the school and some of the offices within  the building will move to the front in that canopied area, and  the building will have  a face lift on the front as well as certain distance on the south side.  


The vote:  All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.  (5-0)


Item 12. on the Agenda.        APPROVAL OF BUILDING PERMIT for the interior and exterior remodel of Long John Silvers/A&W, 7017 N. Oak Trafficway.  Applicant:  Arc Vision, Inc.  Owner:  Yorkshire Global Restaurants, Inc.  (BP#01-0097)


Councilman Shirley Smith moved to approve the Building Permit for 7017 N. Oak Trafficway   Councilman Bill Cross seconded. 


Mr. Wingerson advised this is a partnership between Long John Silver and A&W Root Beer, similar to  the Kentucky Fried Chicken and A&W partnership at  Kendallwood & Antioch Road.     The  colors  will be consistent with Long John Silvers which has blue tones and A&W which uses orange and black and fits together the same way as the Kentucky Fried Chicken/A&W Root Beer facility being built on Antioch Road.  




Councilman Cross  asked if this measure is to improve their business in Gladstone.   Director Wingerson said yes that is their hope. 


The vote:  All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Bishop.  (5-0)


Item 13. on the Agenda.        RESOLUTION R-01-25,  expressing the opposition of the City Council to the passage of House Bill 472 and Senate Bill 369, pending before the Missouri General Assembly that, if adopted, would adversely affect the authority of the City of Gladstone to regulate the use of public rights-of-way for the benefit of the residents of the City. 


Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross moved to adopt Resolution 01-25;  Councilman Shirley Smith seconded.




City Counselor David A. Ramsay explained that this is a Bill pending before the Missouri Legislature that is of concern to local government attorneys.   He found out about it last week when he attended a local government committee meeting.   Of most concern are the restrictions on the ability of the city to properly plan for use of the rights of way.  As those rights of way become more crowded with  telecommunications and other utilities it is going to be even more important for us to have local control over how those are designed and the manner and pace and timing of those designs. 


 One of the concepts that the telecommunications industry seems to be fighting is what’s called “street degradation fees”,  which means in addition to repairing a street cut with a patch, they also contribute to a fund that will allow for the earlier resurfacing of that particular street.  Anyone who holds  a  State Drivers License knows that once you make a street cut, the integrity of that street is impacted and the life of that street cover is shortened.    This is a fee that the telecommunications people do not want to pay.  One of their positions is that it will increase utility bills,  however,  primarily they are talking about  dsl lines and cable television hookups which are optional utilities for residents.   As we have traditionally taxed the use of the rights of way and allocated permit fees to the people who actually use the service,  if they can’t charge those fees then we are relegated to a property tax  which taxes all of  the citizens.           


The Missouri Municipal League has been working in two ways.  One, in direct opposition to these two bills and secondly, in efforts to gain some reasonable amendments that will protect the interests of the cities, and I suggest that Council should be on record as opposing those Bills in recognition of their possible detrimental affect on the city. 


Councilman Anita Newsom asked how soon the Legislature expects to move forward on these Bills.   Counselor Ramsay said two or three weeks.   


Councilman Shirley Smith asked  Mr. Ramsay if he has spoken to any of our State Representatives on this issue.  Mr. Ramsay said  he did  have extensive conversation last week  on this issue with State Representative Phil Willoughby and his frustration was that  all of the information being provided to the legislature is from the communication lobbyists.    The Kansas City Assistant City Attorney and others are trying to impart contrary information in opposition through Missouri Municipal League  and that is starting to have some effect.   


The vote:  All  “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross,  Mayor Dan Bishop.  (5-0)



*   *   *


There were no communications from the News Media or further business to come before the March 26, 2001 Gladstone City Council Meeting, and Mayor Dan Bishop adjourned the Regular Meeting.


MOTION TO ADJOURN TO CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION.   Councilman Newsom moved to adjourn to Closed Executive Session pursuant to Missouri Open Meeting Act Exemption 610.021(3) for Personnel Discussion.    Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross seconded.   Roll  Call Vote:  All “aye” - Councilman Shirley Smith, Councilman George Nodler, Councilman Anita Newsom, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Cross, Mayor Dan Davis.   (5-0) 


Respectfully submitted:





Marilyn F. Ahnefeld, City Clerk


                                                                               Approved as submitted: _____

                                                                    Approved as corrected/amended: _____




                                                                                                    Dan Bishop, Mayor