June 16, 2003
Item 1 on the Agenda: Meeting called to order – Roll Call.
Present: Ms. Abbott Council & Staff Present:
Ms. Alexander Scott Wingerson, Assist. City Manager
Mr. Davis David Ramsay, City Counselor
Mr. Dillingham Mayor Pro-Tem Wayne Beer
Chairman Hill Councilman Carol Rudi
Absent: Mr. Bone
STAFF NOTE: The recording device malfunctioned during this meeting. These minutes were created from staff notes.
Item 2 on the Agenda: Pledge of Allegiance.
Chairman Hill led the group in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
Item 3 on the Agenda: Approval of May 5 and 19, 2003 Minutes.
Ms. Alexander noted that on page 9, last paragraph, first sentence (May 6, 2003 minutes), her driveway “faces” Antioch. Also, on Page 4, second paragraph, third line from the bottom, it should probably read “Now he is sitting in the audience, frantically, trying to make notes”, rather than panically. (Both changes were made in the May 5, 2003 minutes directed by the Commission. Review of the tape indicates that the draft phrases were reflected accurately.)
Ms. Abbott said that in the May 6, 2003 minutes N. Broadway should probably be referred to as Old Pike Road.
Mr. Wingerson said that the tape could be reviewed for those corrections; however the referenced to N. Broadway could have been his error. (Mr. Wingerson did use N. Broadway, when Old Pike Road is accurate.)
The minutes were approved as corrected.
Item 4 on the Agenda: Communications from the Audience.
Item 5 on the Agenda: PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Special Use Permit at 203 NE 73rd Street. Applicant: Amanda Ratcliffe. (#1192) City Council Public Hearing July 14, 2003.
Chairman Hill announced the above application and asked Mr. Wingerson for the staff report.
Mr. Wingerson reported that this request is for a Special Use Permit to have a daycare in the residence at 203 NE 73rd Street and is similar to other daycare permits in nature. He highlighted a couple of the recommended conditions: the maximum number of children in care on the premises at any one time shall be limited to ten (10) full-time, non related; the hours of operation shall be limited to 5:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday through Friday. He suggested that the Commission perform a site visit.
Ms. Newsom asked if the fire inspection had any comments on the request.
Mr. Wingerson explained that after City Council approval the inspection would be performed in accordance with state law.
Amanda Ratcliffe, 203 NE 73rd Street addressed the Commission. Ms. Ratcliffe stated that in the process of obtaining her state licensing, she has had three inspections.
Ms. Lowe questioned the recommended condition which states the maximum number of children will be limited to ten.
Ms. Ratcliffe stated that ten children is the maximum that she can take care of at one time according to State licensing. The State has several ratios depending on the age of the children which are acceptable. The State requires her to have an assistant for emergencies; however, she is also requesting an assistant who would come in a couple of days a week for a few hours so that she could run errands.
Ms. Newsom said that her definition of an assistant would be someone working side by side with Ms. Ratcliffe, but it seems as though she is speaking of an assistant as a substitute or a relief assistant.
Ms. Ratcliffe agreed that was what she was referring to; however the State just defines it as an assistant.
Mr. Revenaugh asked her if the State has any problem with one adult being responsible for ten children.
Ms. Ratcliffe answered that she has the correct ratio for a daytime license by State daycare requirements.
Chairman Hill asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak in favor of the application. Hearing no response, he asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak in opposition of the application. Hearing no response, he closed the public hearing.
Chairman Hill asked Ms. Newsom if she would chair a site visit.
Ms. Newsom accepted and the time and day of the visit was discussed. It was decided that the site visit would take place on Tuesday, June 24th at 5:30 pm. She asked Mr. Wingerson if other Special Use Permits for daycares in Gladstone allow for assistants.
Mr. Wingerson answered that they typically have an assistant for emergencies, but not for relief such as what Ms. Ratcliffe has requested. In the case of Special Use Permits, the impact on the neighborhood must be looked at for things such as traffic interruptions. Generally, if the business introduces additional employees, it has become too large for a neighborhood. He replied that it is certainly the Commission’s right to vary from past permits.
Chairman Hill noted a correction to the draft ordinance. In section 1, the word “renewal” should be deleted.
Mr. Wingerson noted the correction.
Ms. Lowe asked why the recommended conditions did not allow for an assistant.
Mr. Wingerson said that in the past the assistant has always been a closely related family member and only in the case of an emergency.
Ms. Lowe asked if it has been more of a policy, rather than a rule or an ordinance.
Mr. Wingerson answered yes.
Item 6 on the Agenda: PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Special Use Permit at 7513 N. Highland. Applicant: Gladys Morrison. (#1193) City Council Public Hearing July 14, 2003.
Chairman Hill announced that this application has been continued to the July 7, 2003 Planning Commission meeting at the request of the applicant.
Item 7 on the Agenda: OTHER BUSINESS: Consideration of Northaven Village 6th Final Plat at 68th Street and Olive Street. Applicant: Neil Rose. (#1194)
Mr. Wingerson reported that this was the 6th phase of Northaven Village Condominiums. This proposed the ability to sell each of the 18 unites individually. This request is identical to the other phases. Mr. Wingerson offered to answer any questions the Commission might have.
Ms. Newsom made a motion to approve Northaven Village 6th Final Plat at 68th Street and Olive Street, Mr. Revenaugh made the second to the motion.
Roll Vote: Ms. Abbott Yes
Ms. Alexander Yes
Mr. Davis Yes
Mr. Dillingham Yes
Chairman Hill Yes
Mr. Kiser Yes
Ms. Lowe Yes
Ms. Newsom Yes
Mr. Revenaugh Yes
Mr. Steffens Yes
Ms. Wild Yes
Item 8 on the Agenda: Detached Buildings.
Mr. Wingerson distributed a revised copy of the draft ordinance to the Commission. He explained that this draft was a combination of the Planning Commission’s concerns and the ideas of the City Council. He read from the ordinance the following:
Definition: For the purposes of this section, a Detached Accessory Structure shall be defined as: Any structure of any size reasonably determined to be accessory to the primary use, detached from the primary structure and permanent in nature. Examples include storage sheds, hobby shops, pool houses, equipment sheds, gazebos and garages. Excluded from this definition are fences, in-ground and above-ground swimming pools.
For any single or two-family dwelling there shall be permitted one detached accessory structure. Such structure shall be:
(i) A maximum of 144 square feet
(ii) Single story with a maximum height of 15’
(iii) Side and rear setbacks shall be eight (8) feet
(iv) The detached structure shall be no closer than 10 feet from the primary structure.
For detached accessory structures greater than 144 square feet, the following additional requirements apply:
(i) The maximum size and setbacks of any detached accessory structure shall be determined as follows:
Lot Size Maximum Size Side/rear yard setback
Less than 7500 SF 400 SF 10 Feet
7501-10,000 SF 450 SF 15 Feet
10,001-20,000 SF 500 SF 25 Feet
20,001-unlimited 3% of lot with a 25 Feet
max. of 1,000 SF
(ii) The maximum height shall be 28’.
(iii) The roof pitch and materials shall match that of the primary structure.
(iv) Exterior materials and colors shall match that of the primary structure.
(v) The detached accessory structure shall be no closer than 10’ to/from the primary structure.
(vi) A stormwater plan shall be submitted and approved by the City indicating no adverse impacts.
(vii) No imperious surfaces shall exist or be installed within 8’ of any side or rear property line.
(viii) A manufacturer product sheet or architectural elevations shall be submitted and approved by the City.
Final determination of compliance shall rest with the Board of Zoning Adjustment in accordance with provisions governing that body.
Ms. Abbott asked if a resident came in and applied for a building permit for a shed larger than 144 square feet would it be issued at the counter.
Mr. Wingerson said that is what would happen as the ordinance is written now.
Ms. Newsom asked if the ordinance should reference deed restrictions so that homeowners know that they need to check with their association first.
Mr. Wingerson answered that the City has tried to stay away from mentioning deed restrictions because it is a private matter.
Ms. Newsom asked how it is going to work if someone who has a large lot wants to add a detached tool shed and a gazebo.
Mr. Wingerson said that the way the draft is currently presented, only one detached structure would be allowed per lot; however the Commission could change that if they would like.
Mr. Revenaugh said that it seems as though a large lot should be allowed to have more than one detached structure.
Chairman Hill commented that he likes the way the ordinance is set up according to how large the lot is. He suggested that on larger lots, the maximum size of the structure should be able to include multiple structures. Chairman Hill also liked the idea of putting in a sentence or two about applicable deed restrictions.
Mr. Davis suggested re-wording the last sentence regarding the BZA. The way it reads it sounds like the BZA will be hearing all the applications.
Mr. Wingerson reviewed the requested changes:
1. Detached structures will “add up” to the total square feet allowed.
2. Gazebos would not be required to be the same color as the primary structure.
3. The requirement of stormwater plans would be at staff’s discretion.
4. Covenants of homeowners associations should be mentioned on the application or permit.
Mr. Wingerson explained that it might be difficult for the stormwater plans to be at staff’s discretion simply because staff is not going to know how the lot lays; therefore, he may suggest that condition stays as a requirement.
Ms. Abbott agreed that she would like to see the stormwater plans remain as a requirement.
Chairman Hill asked what the next step with the draft ordinance would be.
Mr. Wingerson said that he would make the changes as the Commission suggested and see if the City Council would like to look at it in their next study session.
Item 9 on the Agenda: Communications from the City Council and City Staff.
Councilman Rudi announced that the Bluesfest was this weekend, June 20 and 21. She also announced that there will be an Chamber after-hours meeting at the Amphitheater on Thursday evening and invited the Commission to attend.
Item 10 on the Agenda: Communications from the Planning Commission Members.
Ms. Abbott asked who was responsible for cutting the weeds on the Scharhag property.
Mr. Wingerson answered that part of it is Mr. Scharhag’s responsibility and part of it he has an agreement with AHM Development to maintain. He explained that last week a letter went to both Mr. Scharhag and AHM Development regarding the tall weeds and grass.
Ms. Wild asked about the boat that is sitting on the empty lot next to Commerce Bank.
Mr. Wingerson said that a call was made to the owner of the boat today and it should be gone shortly.
Mr. Steffens asked about the tall grass at that same lot.
Mr. Wingerson said that a letter was sent to the owners (in Texas) and it should be mowed shortly.
Ms. Alexander asked when Larry Whitton is going to clean up the cars in his lot. She also asked about 6212 N. Antioch, as it appears they are running a business out of a residentially zoned lot.
Mr. Wingerson replied that the Code Enforcement Officer has taken pictures of the cars in front of 6212 N. Antioch; however when approached, they denied running a business there. Staff will continue to monitor it. Concerning Mr. Whitton, staff will continue working with him to reduce the number of cars in the front of his building.
Chairman Hill asked if Ballet North is ever going to finish their landscaping.
Mr. Wingerson explained that in the beginning the delay was with MoDot. They were supposed to get the lot seeded; however, now since it will be impossible to seed, they need to order sod. Right now the ballet studio is functioning on a Temporary Occupancy Permit until the sod and a few other things are completed.
Chairman Hill asked if Wal-Mart is going to do the canopy addition that they had planned.
Mr. Wingerson said that they are going to paint the entire building, and he thinks they are waiting until that time to enclose the garden center.
Chairman Hill asked what the status of Tommy’s is.
Mr. Wingerson replied that they are waiting for an insurance settlement to decide how to proceed. There has been some interest in the property from outside parties.
Item 11 on the Agenda: Adjournment.
Chairman Hill adjourned the meeting at 8:42 P.M.
______________________________________ Approved as submitted _____
Becky Jarrett, Recording Secretary
______________________________________ Approved as corrected _____
Brian Hill, Chairman