May 15, 2006
Present: Council & Staff Present:
Ms. Newsom Scott Wingerson, Assist. City Manager
Ms. Alexander David Ramsay, City Counselor
Mr. Boor Alan Napoli, Building Official
Mr. Reynolds Becky Jarrett, Admin. Assist
Mr. Stanley Carol Rudi, Councilman
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 the April 3, 2006 minutes.
MOTION: By Ms. Newsom, second by Ms. Alexander to approve the April 3, 2006 minutes as submitted. The motion carried.
Item 4 on the Agenda: Communications from the Audience.
Item 5 on the Agenda: PUBLIC HEARING: On a request for a Site Plan Revision at
Mr. Wingerson reported that this application concerns Van
Chevrolet at Vivion and
Ms. Newsom asked what kind of material the front of the building would be finished with.
Mr. Marshall answered that it will be a simulated stucco finish with a similar color as shown in the rendering. The construction plans are ready to be submitted as soon as the approval process is done. The completion date is planned for winter 2006.
Chairman Hill asked if the building addition on the northern most tip would be the body shop.
Mr. Marshall said that right now that is a large parts storage building. He said that the one Chairman Hill is indicating is going to be for truck service.
Chairman Hill asked what side the doors would be on.
Mr. Marshall said the overhead doors would face to the east.
Chairman Hill said his concern was the potential for noise to the neighbors to the north.
Mr. Marshall said that the doors will actually be facing the east and therefore, noise should not be an issue.
Chairman Hill asked Mr. Marshall to show him where the closest residence was on the site plan.
Ms. Newsom asked if there would be any excavation for the project.
Mr. Marshall answered that they will be digging a hole for the foundation and there might be a small amount of excavation by the proposed car wash area. They will also be reshaping some of the parking lot areas to get the drainage to work better. They will mainly be taking excess dirt off of the property.
Ms. Newsom said her concern would be mud on the streets from dump trucks and other commercial equipment.
Chairman Hill asked if the gravel drive between
Mr. Marshall answered that Van Chevrolet did purchase that
drive from the State of
Chairman Hill called for anyone in favor of the application to step forward. Hearing no response he asked for those in opposition to come forward.
Chairman Hill asked Mr. Wingerson what might be able to be done to minimize the lighting onto Mr. Nelson’s property.
Mr. Wingerson asked Mr. Marshall to speak about the lighting and the planting of trees. After that, he would be glad to speak about the stormwater run-off.
Mr. Marshall returned to the podium and said that any
lighting they are doing with this expansion is out on the front (south side) of
the property, mostly in
Mr. Wingerson thanked Mr. Marshall for addressing those issues. He suggested that two additional conditions be added to the draft ordinance: 1) lighting shall be designed and installed to reduce impact on adjoining residential property; and 2) additional landscaping shall be designed and submitted to the City Council for consideration.
Ms. Alexander asked about the City helping with the erosion of the creek.
Mr. Wingerson answered that he would have to review that problem separately from this application since there is little or no impact from the current proposal.
Chairman Hill closed the public hearing.
MOTION: By Ms.
Alexander, second by Ms. Suter to approve the Site Plan Revision at
VOTE: Ms. Newsom Yes
Ms. Alexander Yes
Mr. Boor Yes
Mr. Reynolds Yes
Mr. Stanley Yes
Mr. Shevling Yes
Ms. Suter Yes
Mr. Whitton Yes
Ms. Abbott Yes
Mr. Steffens Yes
Mr. West Yes
Chairman Hill Yes
The motion carried.
Item 6 on the Agenda: On a request for a Special Use Permit at 6822 N. Charlotte Street. Applicant/Owner: Lisa Jo Sink. File # 1273.
Mr. Boor stated for the record that he would be recusing him from the vote because of his personal relationship with the applicant which could be construed as a conflict of interest.
Mr. Wingerson stated that the applicant is requesting a special use permit to allow the operation of a daycare at 6822 N. Charlotte. There are several pieces of support documentation that the members received from the applicant. The recommended conditions are typical for a daycare including allowing the maximum number of children to ten (10). The hours of operation are recommended at 6:00 am to 6:00 pm. He realizes that this is a little bit longer than some of the other special use permits with daycares; however, there is also a condition stating that pick-up and drop-off times shall be staggered a minimum of fifteen (15) minutes apart. The applicant has operated a state licensed daycare center at this location for several years. It appears the daycare started small and grew over the years to where a special use permit was required. Staff is recommending approval.
Lisa Jo Sink, 6822 N. Charlotte, approached the podium.
Ms. Newsom asked how it came to Ms. Sink’s knowledge that she needed a special use permit.
Ms. Sink said she received a letter in the mail (from the City).
Ms. Newsom asked if she had any idea that after getting licensed with the State that she would also need to be licensed with the City.
Ms. Sink said it never even crossed her mind.
Ms. Newsom asked how long she has lived in Gladstone.
Ms. Sink answered thirteen years.
Ms. Newsom added that Gladstone is very protective and proud of their neighborhoods.
Mr. Shevling asked how many employees she had.
Ms. Sink said it is just herself. Her State license allows her up to ten (10) children; however, she cannot have more than two under the age of two. She currently has ten, but two are part-time.
Mr. Stanely asked if there is currently any signage on the property.
Ms. Sink answered no.
Ms. Suter asked if, other than this application, Ms. Sink was in compliance with all other regulations, as she understood them.
Ms. Sink answered yes.
Chairman Hill asked for those in favor to address the Commission. Hearing no response, he called for those in opposition. Again there was no response.
Ms. Newsom suggested a site visit on this new, belated request.
It was decided that Ms. Newsom would chair the site visit on Wednesday, May 24, 2006 at 6:00 PM at the site address.
Item 7 on the Agenda: On a request for a Site Plan Revision at 305 NW Englewood Road. Applicant: Vic Mancuso (Mancuso Construction). Owner: CPA Land Ventures. File # 1274.
Mr. Wingerson stated the applicant is proposing a site plan revision to add sixteen additional parking spaces to the east side of the parking lot. The original site plan was approved a couple of years ago but just recently was the building completed. He also mentioned that on the letter to surrounding property owners, it stated that the parking was on the west side, rather than the east. The additional sixteen spaces encroach onto the buffer zone area that is on the east side of the property. To address the intent of the buffer zone, the applicant is suggesting that a modular block retaining wall, additional landscaping and a 6’ shadow box privacy fence be installed along the east property line. Mr. Wingerson explained that currently there is a significant on-street parking problem on Englewood Court because of the growth and the activity of Mazuma Credit Union and the new doctor office building. This proposal should greatly reduce on-street parking and make the situation work much more efficiently.
Mr. Boor noticed that the land where the expansion is proposed is pretty sloped and asked if it was going to be excavated.
Mr. Wingerson answered that the retaining wall will replace the natural grade along with the privacy fence.
Chairman Hill asked the applicant to step to the podium.
Vic Mancuso, Mancuso Construction, PO Box 34551, North Kansas City, Missouri, addressed the Commission. He stated that there will be a small amount of excavation. The parking will be at a slight slope so it will drain. He is hoping to keep the wall at a minimum, maybe four courses, and the top of the wall will be sloped to the neighboring property.
Chairman Hill asked where the stormwater detention is on the property.
Mr. Mancuso said it is right along the curb to the east of the drive-out.
Mr. Boor said he was by the property today and there were eleven cars on the street. There seems to be a need for the additional parking.
Mr. Reynolds asked what the hours of operation for the office building are.
Mr. Mancuso said they are typically regular business hours, 8:00- 5:00 PM.
Chairman Hill asked what the distance is from the office building property line to the existing house.
Mr. Mancuso said he would guess 45’ to 50’ from the property line to the beginning of the garage of the house.
Chairman Hill asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of the application. Hearing no response he asked for those in opposition to come forward.
Dale Groom, 304 NW 55th Terrace, addressed the Commission. Mr. Groom stated that he is not sure that he is in opposition to the proposal; however, he would like to make the point that it is mainly the credit union’s traffic that is causing the back up in NW Englewood Court.
Shawn Vorndran, 206 NW 55th Terrace, addressed the Commission. Mr. Vorndran said he was curious as to what types of businesses were going into the new building.
Mr. Mancuso said it will be doctor offices.
Mr. Vorndran said that he has been informed that the whole area has been zoned commercial rather than residential.
Mr. Wingerson explained that the area around this office building is not zoned commercial, and there are no plans in the future to turn any residential areas into commercial. In terms of the credit union being the problem, the configuration of the parking at Mazuma Credit Union is not ideal for the rush. There is certainly enough parking to service that facility. If people were to use that parking it would be adequate. The building being discussed tonight as the “Mancuso” building also has a sufficient amount of parking for the size of the building. This application is trying to accomplish having enough parking when the office building is fully occupied.
Mr. Vorndran asked if the office building could put up a sign that says “Doctor’s Office Parking Only”.
Mr. Wingerson said that would be a private property decision.
Brian Barash, 305 NW Englewood Court, addressed the Commission. Mr. Barash stated that he is one of the building owners. He said they are trying very hard to be good neighbors and he doesn’t really have a problem if a Mazuma customer wants to park in his parking area. He is concerned, however, since he treats small children that they are not having to park on the street. He doesn’t want to exclude Mazuma customers because he knows that eventually one of his patients may have to park in Mazuma’s lot.
Ms. Suter asked if there will be any additional lighting added.
Mr. Mancuso answered no, there will be no new lighting.
Mr. Barash added that many of the neighbors have told him that they appreciate the additional lighting for extra security.
Chairman Hill closed the public hearing.
MOTION: By Mr. Steffens, second by Ms. Alexander to approve the Site Plan Revision at 305 NW Englewood Road.
VOTE: Ms. Newsom Yes
Ms. Alexander Yes
Mr. Boor Yes
Mr. Reynolds Yes
Mr. Stanley Yes
Mr. Shevling Yes
Ms. Suter Yes
Mr. Whitton Yes
Ms. Abbott Yes
Mr. Steffens Yes
Mr. West Yes
Chairman Hill Yes
The motion carried
Item 8 on the Agenda CONSIDERATION: of a Final Plat at 307/309 NW 55th Terrace. Applicant: John G. Pileggi. Owner: John Pileggi and Alice Daniels. File # 1275.
Mr. Wingerson reported that the applicant is requesting final plat approval to take two lots and make it into three lots in the Brady Hills Subdivision. He referred to the seven recommended conditions in the staff report. This plat appears to be very simple; however, there are some things he would like the Commission to consider. The proposed plat leaves an existing single-family home on Tract A on a lot that is 100’ by 112’. Tract B has the same dimensions and then it creates Tract C that will front on N. Broadway. Tract C is 100’ by 200’. With the number of conditions listed, several which are plan notes, staff may suggest a site visit. One condition is that existing power lines be shown on the plat. The other concern is that the front setback of 35’ is encroached upon by the two existing single-family homes. Staff suggests a 33’ front setback. The front setback on Tract C is shown as only 20’ but should really be 35’. Condition seven also talks about an existing detached building that staff recommends be removed. Mr. Wingerson said there is also some topography issues in terms of locating a new driveway for Tract C. Staff is recommending approval; however, may suggest the Planning Commission perform a site visit to assure that this is an appropriate subdivision of land.
It was decided that the group would do the site visit immediately following the special use permit site visit. Mr. Wingerson also asked that both applicants be present at the site visit if possible.
Item 9 on the Agenda: Other Business
a. Introduce New Planning Commissioner-
Mr. Wingerson welcomed Mr. West to the Planning Commission.
b. Elect New Vice-Chairman-
Ms. Newsom, second by Mr. Whitton nominated Mr. Shevling for Vice-Chairman. Ms. Alexander, second by Mr. Whitton made a motion to cease the nominations. Chairman Hill announced Mr. Shevling elected by acclimation. All said “Aye”.
Mr. Wingerson reminded Chairman Hill that Mr. Revenaugh was also a liaison to the Capital Improvements Committee so he would need to appoint someone to that group at some point.
c. Detached Buildings-
Mr. Wingerson explained that he heard from some Commissioners after Mr. Napoli gave the last presentation on detached buildings that they may want to consider it again. Therefore, he asked Mr. Napoli to come tonight and give another overview of the proposed changes.
Alan Napoli, Building Official, addressed the Commission. He reviewed his original memo dated March 22, 2006 (attached).
Ms. Abbott asked what happens to residents who construct sheds without a permit.
Mr. Napoli replied that if the City finds out and can prove that it was being constructed without a permit, they would place a stop work order until a permit was obtained. The resident would also incur a double fee.
Mr. Wingerson added that on structures that were built and completed without the City knowing about it, it’s often very difficult for the City to prove it was recently built.
Ms. Suter asked about item #11 on the proposed changes which reads “Not more than 30% of the lot can be covered with structures; this includes the primary structure, decks, gazebos, pools and accessory structures.”
Mr. Napoli said that regulation is in the current Zoning Ordinance and has been in place since about 1974.
Ms. Suter commented that it just seems like the new houses being built take up 30% themselves.
Mr. Napoli said that actually 30% is quite a bit of a lot, some homes can look like more.
Mr. Wingerson replied that some lots may have variances that allow them to cover more lot area, but most of the time it is less than 30% and it just looks like more.
Ms. Abbot said that on her she would be allowed to build a 576 square foot building and she feels that is just too big for the lot.
Chairman Hill agreed with Ms. Abbott that it just seems like the buildings allowed are too big. He realizes that the current zoning has minimum lot size requirements, but that many of the older lots don’t meet current code. By making the maximum building size for a 10,000 square foot lot 576 feet; it just seems too large. He is also concerned about the maximum height of 28’. Chairman Hill added that only having a 15’ setback for a structure that is 30’X40’ is too close.
Mr. Wingerson reviewed the concerns he had heard: 1) maximum size of a detached building on a lot that is less than 10,000 sq ft; 2) a 24’X24’ structure is too big for a lot that is small than 10,00 sf and 3) on lots larger than 20,000 the setback is not adequate at 15’.
Ms. Newsom added that the City also has a lot of lots that are very deep, but not very wide and they have small homes on them. This ordinance would allow someone to nearly build something larger than their house in the backyard.
Ms. Abbott commented that she has seen some of these accessory buildings that have second floors and possibly an apartment.
Mr. Wingerson said he understood the concerns, but just to look at the other side of the situation stressed that many homes in some of Gladstone’s aging neighborhoods are not functioning as they originally were. The home may not do what the market wants it to do. He cited some examples: the kitchens is not large enough, the floor plan is not open enough, the bedrooms aren’t large enough or the aren’t enough bathrooms. One of the things that people do to change the function of the home is add a two car detached garage; therefore, converting the existing one-car garage to living space. Mr. Wingerson also explained that there also seems to be a need for separate living arrangements such as caring for an elderly parent, college students living at home or kids moving back.
Ms. Newsom said that she can see the need for other living arrangements and understand that, but the Idea Book that MARC created gives great examples on how to re-do post WWII homes to fit today’s lifestyles. Most of those cases are adding on to the basic structure, not adding an accessory building. This would add value to the home as well as the neighborhood.
Ms. Newsom said that many outbuildings are not kept up and become a detriment to the neighborhood.
Chairman Hill said that it sounds like we need to use the Idea Book to help educate residents. He also said that if people are using outbuildings as apartments is that really a single-family use? He suggested allowing the accessory building to be a certain percent larger than the primary structure.
Mr. Shevling suggested that the height be regulated by stating that the accessory building cannot be any taller than the existing structure.
Ms. Suter believes that this issue is critical to the future of Gladstone. She understands the lifestyle needs, but there is a point where a community turns one way or the other in terms of the overall quality of housing.
Mr. Reynolds said he lives in Brooktree and much of what has been discussed is covered in his homes association covenants; therefore, those areas will be able to be monitored as they age. He observed that the group is mostly talking about older areas where there are not homes associations in place. He agreed with the height regulation that Mr. Shevling spoke of.
Mr. Wingerson said he will bring a revision back in two weeks.
Item 10 on the Agenda: Communications from the City Council and the City Staff.
Councilman Rudi said that Councilman Beer sends his greetings as he is out of town in California. She stated that the Commission’s conversation tonight on detached buildings is right on the edge of something she has been participating in for the past year called first tier suburb issues. The product of that group is the Idea Book from MARC that Ms. Newsom spoke of. This Commission is going to have to be intensely involved in some of those issues because there are issues with setbacks when remodeling small homes. This is a big issue in Gladstone. When she thinks about the homes in Bolling Heights that are probably 900 sq ft and have no garages, it’s not even an option to change a garage into living space. These homes are affordable housing in our community. Without affordable housing, we are going to be at a loss when it comes to certain jobs that we need done. It’s a real hard issue, but she is glad they are starting to think about it. Ms. Rudi continued by commenting about neighborhood associations, which are something that the Council and staff are starting to address. They are discussing how to get associations started where there are none as well as how to maintain leadership in them. If detached buildings were handled through neighborhood associations throughout the City, it would not be up for discussion tonight. Just like City government, homes associations are more local and that’s the best way to do it. Ms. Rudi said Gladstone is competing with cities that have homes with three and four garages, but yet we have houses with no garages. She asked them to keep thinking creatively.
Mr. Wingerson invited the Commission to a community center meeting on June 1, 2006 at 4:00 pm that involves the interior and exterior finishes. On June 5, 2006, at 5:00 pm there is a public meeting to share the overall architectural design. Directly following that meeting there is a joint meeting of the CIP, Planning Commission, Park Board and the City Council to hear a presentation from the architect regarding the features of the community center as well as time frames.
Mr. Wingerson said in the packets this week was the first attempt at the Planning Commission biography. Please make any necessary edits and return to Becky.
He also gave an update on Malone Lawn & Landscape. Mr. Malone has made some real significant progress including resolving his neighborhood issue. He has basically completed the public improvements and directed his attorney to act aggressively towards a zoning change or revision to his current special use permit. He thanked the Commission for their support on this issue.
Item 11 on the Agenda: Communications from the Planning Commission Members.
All the members welcomed new member Mr. West.
Ms. Newsom said that speaking about the Mazuma Credit Union earlier prompted her to think that there needs to be some monitoring done over there regarding cars exiting the credit union onto Englewood Road. She has almost been broadsided there more than once. It is not a good spot. She also wanted to bring to staff’s attention the situation at Pepper’s Hot Tubs. They are still warehousing hot tubs on the sidewalk. The hot tubs actually block the site of the other businesses.
Mr. Wingerson said that two different businesses have been in contact with the City regarding storage areas for Pepper’s Hot Tubs. He will follow up with those two property owners and find out where they are at with it.
Ms. Newsom distributed invitations to the construction kick-off event at the Williams house where the Chamber of Commerce office will soon be.
Ms. Alexander said that she appeared before the City Council last week and addressed a feral cat problem that exists behind N. Oak Garden Center. They are causing Anna and Kenny a lot of extra work and money. In speaking with Chief Adamo, he discussed his concerns in trapping household cats. She said she was hoping for some creativity from the staff and City Council in solving this problem and suggested having household cats wear collars.
Mr. Shevling reminded everyone about Bluesfest weekend coming up on June 9 and 10.
Mr. West said he is looking forward to working with the Planning Commission on future issues.
Mr. Steffens thanked the City for the sidewalk program which was recently implemented in Carriage Hills where he lives; it looks great.
Item 12 on the Agenda: Adjournment
Chairman Hill adjourned the meeting at 9:16 P.M.
______________________________________ Approved as submitted _____
Becky Jarrett, Recording Secretary
______________________________________ Approved as corrected _____
Brian Hill, Chairman