PLANNING COMMISSION
April 3, 2006
7:30 pm
Present: Council & Staff Present:
Ms. Newsom Scott Wingerson,
Assist. City Manager
Ms. Alexander David
Ramsay, City Counselor
Mr. Boor Becky Jarrett,
Admin. Assist
Mr. Reynolds
Mr. Stanley
Ms. Suter
Mr. Whitton
Mr. Revenaugh
Ms. Abbott
Mr. Steffens
Absent: Chairman Hill
Mr. Shevling
Item 2 on the
Agenda: Pledge of Allegiance.
Vice-Chairman Revenaugh led the group in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
Item 3 on the
Agenda: Approval of the March 20,
2006 minutes.
MOTION: By Ms. Newsom, second by Mr. Steffens to
approve the March 20, 2006 minutes as submitted. The motion carried.
Item 4 on the
Agenda: Communications from the Audience.
None.
Item 5 on the Agenda: PUBLIC HEARING: On a request for a Special Use Permit at
Vice-Chairman Revenaugh announced that the applicant has withdrawn the application for the special use permit hearing scheduled for this evening.
Mr. Wingerson thanked the residents
who were in attendance for the public hearing and apologized for not being able
to get notice to them prior to the meeting (that the applicant had
withdrawn). The applicant preferred a
zoning change; however, staff advised him that would not appropriate for the
area. The applicant also expressed
interest in purchasing a building.
Economic Development Administrator Melinda Mehaffy will be working with
Mr. Wenenn to find a location for him here in
Vice-Chairman Revenaugh asked what some of the concerns from the residents are.
Ron Smith, 1501 NE 56th Terrace addressed the Commission. Mr. Smith said that on New Year’s Eve, for example, he had called Public Safety a couple of times already because of a party going on there and when his wife got up at 5:00 am the party was still going on. He often has beer bottles thrown in his yard as well as his other neighbor’s yards. He believes that there were some restrictions put on them several years ago that they were supposed to be out of there by midnight….that seldom happens. He spoke with Bob Askrin at the Knights of Columbus shortly after they moved into the facility. That conversation ended with a gruff reply, but the music was turned down a little. Mr. Smith also said that the Knights brought a large dumpster to the site that is not screened.
Vice-Chairman Revenaugh thanked Mr. Smith for his comments.
Item 6 on the Agenda: Other
Business
a. Detached Accessory Structures
Mr. Wingerson said
that about two years ago the Planning Commission started a discussion about how
to deal with detached accessory buildings, such as a garage, hobby shop,
workshop or a shed. Staff drafted a
policy that was presented and accepted by the Planning Commission and City
Council and it was implemented. Since
this was a policy there was no force of law behind it, staff is now ready to
look at transitioning it into an ordinance.
Mr. Wingerson introduced Alan Napoli, Building Official, to give the
presentation.
Mr. Napoli referred
to his memo and Chapter 2400, Detached Accessory Structures, which had been
distributed to the Commission prior to the meeting. The following is a summary of the current
size and setbacks versus proposed sizes and setbacks:
Current:
|
Lot size (sq ft) |
Max Size (sq ft) |
Side/rear yard setback (ft) |
Max height (ft) |
|
Less
than 7,500 |
400 |
10 |
28 |
|
7,501-10,000 |
450 |
15 |
28 |
|
10,001-20,000 |
450 |
15 |
28 |
|
20,001-unlimited |
3%
1,000
max |
25 |
28 |
|
N/A
|
144 |
8 |
15 |
Proposed:
|
Lot size (sq ft) |
Max Size (sq ft) |
Side/rear yard setback (ft) |
Max height (ft) |
|
10,000
or less |
576 |
9 |
28 |
|
10,001-20,000 |
864 |
12 |
28 |
|
20,001-up |
1200 |
15 |
35 |
Mr. Napoli explained
that the minimum lot size for Gladstone has been 8,400 square feet for about
the last 15-20 years, so he lowered the first tier of the chart to 10,000 or
less. He used 576 square feet for the maximum
size for 10,000 or less because that is the typical size of a single car
garage. The setback for the side and
rear changed to nine feet, which is the same setback for a new single-family
residence. For lots 10,000-20,000 square
feet the maximum size accessory structure is 864, which is the typical size of
a two-car garage.
Mr. Napoli continued
by stating that in addition to the maximum size and setback changes, he is also
proposing removing the requirement for a stormwater plan since the City has now
adopted an Erosion and Sediment Ordinance.
This ordinance includes requirements on erosion control, sediment,
drainage and silt fencing. Mr. Napoli
felt this would be more restrictive and easier to regulate and enforce. He also highlighted #10 which states that no
impervious surface shall be installed within 9’ of the side property line. An exception would be when the drive is used
for access to a permitted detached accessory building. Mr. Napoli explained that currently, a permit
is not necessary for a parking pad that does not encroach into the City
right-of-way, therefore, drives could be added at a later date anyway. By permitting them with an accessory
structure, residents won’t have to drive on their grass to access their
detached garages.
Ms. Abbott had some
photographs of a large accessory building that she had taken that also had a
shed in the backyard as well.
Mr. Napoli commented
that he had failed to mention that the proposal would still include only one
accessory structure per residential lot.
Ms. Newsom asked if
a gazebo would be considered an accessory structure.
Mr. Napoli read the
definition of accessory structure, which included gazebos. He said that if the gazebo was built as part
of a deck, it would not be included.
Ms. Abbott said that
28’ seemed high for a maximum height.
Mr. Napoli said that
there was no changed proposed to the 28’ maximum height. It is the same as the current policy.
Vice-Chairman
Revenaugh asked if neighboring cities had a similar height restriction.
Mr. Wingerson
replied that most surrounding cities would match the height with the zoning
district. If it were a single-family
zoning district it would be the same height criteria as the house, which would
be 35 feet (in Gladstone).
Vice-Chairman
Revenaugh asked if the stormwater plan requirement made it too hard for
residents to apply for permits and how the stormwater plan varies from the
Erosion and Sediment Ordinance.
Mr. Napoli said that
one of the reasons the City had to adopt the Erosion and Sediment Ordinance was
because of requirements by DNR and the EPA.
With the new ordinance, homeowners will still have to show how water is
being drained off of their property with construction of a new building, and is
actually an improvement over what was being required before.
Mr. Wingerson added
that with the new Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance being an actual
written document it makes it easier for the homeowner to understand and
comply.
Vice-Chairman
Revenaugh asked if staff thought it would discourage anyone from trying to
build an accessory structure.
Mr. Napoli said he
did not think so.
Vice-Chairman
Revenaugh thanked Mr. Napoli for his presentation.
Mr. Wingerson said
that if the Planning Commission did not have any further questions or comments,
Mr. Napoli will formalize the ordinance and forward it to the City Council for
their consideration.
Item 7 on the Agenda: Communications from the City Council and the
City Staff.
Mr. Wingerson said that Mayor Rudi and Councilman Beer are out of town and send their apologies. He also thanked Mr. Revenaugh for filling in as Vice-Chairman this evening.
Item 8 on the
Agenda: Communications from the Planning Commission Members.
Mr. Whitton asked for the current status on the Malone property.
Mr. Wingerson replied that staff is working on it and is having conversations with Mr. Malone’s attorney.
Ms. Alexander asked if the letter was sent.
Mr. Wingerson said the letter was not sent because staff thought there was some movement.
Mr. Whitton asked about the banner at Creative Kids Academy.
Mr. Steffens said he noticed it was gone when he drove by this evening.
Mr. Wingerson said that since the City Council changed the ordinance on banner signs, Community Development sent out about forty-seven letters to businesses who had banner signs requesting them to obtain a permit or remove them.
Ms. Alexander reported that she attended the planning workshop with Ms. Abbott at MARC last week. She enjoyed it and is grateful for City staff and all the work they do.
Ms. Abbott said that Mr. Scharhag has moved the rocks and seeded/fertilized where the dirt was. She received a call from Mr. Bell and he was pleased. She also appreciated the MARC planning workshop.
Ms. Suter commented that she saw a copy of the KCMO N. Oak Corridor Study and it looked very similar to Gladstone’s. She asked how the two cities work together, if all, on projects like that.
Mr. Wingerson explained that at the time Gladstone was ready to do their study Kansas City was not interested, so they moved forward. Then, of course, when Kansas City was ready, Gladstone was finished so staff members volunteered to sit on some of their committees and give input.
Vice-Chairman Revenaugh said that it has been a pleasure serving with this group the last several years. He does appreciate the time this group spends on these issues.
Mr. Wingerson announced that there will not be a Planning Commission meeting on Monday, April 17, 2006.
Item 9 on the Agenda: Adjournment
Chairman Hill adjourned the meeting at 8:12 P.M.
Respectfully submitted:
______________________________________ Approved as submitted _____
Becky Jarrett, Recording Secretary
______________________________________ Approved as corrected _____
Mark Revenaugh, Vice-Chairman