MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
GLADSTONE, MISSOURI
REGULAR MEETING
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
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)
CONSENT AGENDA
DETAIL
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)
REGULAR AGENDA
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.
IN FAVOR
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.
Discussion.
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.
Discussion.
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.
Discussion.
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.
Discussion.
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.
Discussion.
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
______________________________________