Go To Search
Emergency Alert
 

View Other Items in this Archive | View All Archives | Printable Version

            MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING

 

 

City Hall                                                                                                     November 3, 2003

Council Chambers                                                                                      7:00 p.m.

 

The Mayor led with the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

Present:            Alderman Moreno, Alderman Leahy, Alderman Golfin, Alderman Kramer, Alderman Robertson, Alderman Wynn, Alderman Cross.

 

City Attorney Murphy, City Clerk/Administrator Seemayer, Zoning Administrator Wolf, Economic Development Director Shelton, Executive Secretary Williams.

 

Absent:Alderman Marshall and Treasurer Reynders.

 

CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING OF NOVEMBER 3, 2003

 

Motion was made by Alderman Kramer, second by Alderman Wynn to approve and adopt the Agenda of the Regular Board of Aldermen Meeting of November 3, 2003.  Roll call:  Alderman Moreno, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.

 

CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 2003

 

Motion was made by Alderman Leahy, second by Alderman Robertson to amend and approve the Minutes of the Regular Board of Aldermen Meeting of October 20, 2003 by adding the words “contingent that eminent domain is the last resort” as part of the yes votes approving Bill No. 5209 which is to authorize the initiation of condemnation proceedings in connection with property located at 8734 Suburban Tracks.

 

Roll call:  Alderman Moreno, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.

 

BIDS – None

 

HEARING OF ANY MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST UPON REQUEST OF ANY PERSON PRESENT

 

Kathryn Jepson – 2328 Annalee came before the Board and stated that her comments are regarding the Manchester Road Revitalization Plan and the establishment of a TDD.    She looked at the official plan and the development would be to the south side of Manchester Road but the plan calls for Manchester Road to be moved to the north.  It would drastically change the north side of the road.  As you look at the plan no existing businesses are left.  Is it fair to pass a TDD and basically get the businesses to collect the funds that will eventually spell their demise?  Is it fair to collect money without a hard-core revised plan spelling out exactly what will happen if it is going to be different than the published plan.  Resolution No. 895 deals with the TDD and spells out the bigger project.  The plan includes the soccer park that the City is trying to enlarge by eminent domain.  If that acquisition goes through will it be paid for by the City of Brentwood and used for a park or will it be bought by the 353 Corporation and sold to a developer when this plan wipes out a significant part of Brentwood.

 

Karen Smith – 8930 Harrison came before the Board and asked if park bonds have been issued.

 

Mayor Kelly stated that the voters approved a park bond in 1993.  When those bonds were issued the City did not levy those taxes against the residents.  The bonds are paid through the general revenue of the City. 

 

Ms. Smith stated that because the parks are being supported at a certain level it is requiring the use of the City’s general funds.  This is causing the City to use more and more of the ½ cent sales tax, which is leaving nothing for sewers.  She asked how is this different than Manchester Road.  She understands that Manchester Road is owned by the State.  Shouldn’t they be supporting it much like the argument that is made that MSD is supposed to be supporting the sewers and storm water that they should not be necessarily using City money to cover what MSD should be using?  Why would you set up a taxing district for Manchester Road to cover something that the State is suppose to be covering to make the improvements?

 

Mayor Kelly stated that the TDD would generate the funds needed to match funds to work with the State to facilitate the improvement to Manchester Road.  The TDD money would give them the ability to work with the State to make roadway improvements, bury utility lines and improve sidewalks.  It has nothing to do with redevelopment of Manchester Road.  To say that if the TDD passes that the City would uproot all the businesses on Manchester Road is incorrect.  Manchester Road has been a problem for a long time and will become a bigger problem if the improvements are not made.  If they rebuild I-64/40, Manchester Road will become the main east/west corridor from Highway 270 into the City. 

 

Public Hearing Continued – West Community Credit Union

 

John King – Attorney representing West Community Credit Union came before the Board and briefly went over the site plan that was approved.  He stated that they have met all the ordinance requirements with the approved variances. 

 

Alderman Leahy stated that Bill No. 5210, page 2, section (i) states, “will comply with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or plans for any applicable zoning district regulations and provisions of the Zoning Code”.  As he understands it this section is not correct because the variances applied for are to put the parking lot in a residential area versus the current zoned area.  Should this clause be removed from the bill?

 

Mr. King stated that you could only comply if you can.   The Board may want to remove it, since it does not apply to them because of the variances received which supersedes this clause in the ordinance.

 

Alderman Kramer stated that when a variation of the plan came through the Planning and Zoning Commission there was a question of West Community Credit Union leases for existing parking arrangements with the City and Frank Papa’s.  What is the status of those pending the outcome of this bill?

 

Gary Hindrichs – West Community Credit Union stated that they still have leases in place with the City of Brentwood and Frank Papa’s.  Once the new facility in O’Fallon is opened and they downsize staff in Brentwood they will be able to terminate those leases and contain all of their employees and member parking on the site. 

 

Alderman Kramer asked how would the signage on the building be affected.

 

Mr. Hindrichs stated that they have applied for temporary signage from time to time and are looking do something different with the exterior of the building. 

 

Harold Oestergaard – 2314 Patton came before the Board and said they have been communicating with residents on Patton Avenue that are immediately affected by the West Community Credit Union changes.  While they are not completely comfortable with the incursion of commercial properties into residential areas, they will support it.  They will continue to monitor the Master Plan.  He hopes that when the Master Plan is adopted it allows for diversity in the community. 

 

Kathryn Jepson stated the Board would be asked to vote on a conditional use permit for the installation of a drive through ATM at West Community Credit Union.  As a resident she has always opposed the conversion of residential property to commercial use.   By issuing a conditional use permit there is the leverage of revocation should the ATM prove to be a nuisance.  While you are being asked to vote on this, in fact you have no choice.  Because the Board of Adjustment passed three variances for this property, the project now meets City code.  Site Plan Review was very concerned about precedence and could not reach a consensus before passing it along to the Planning and Zoning Commission.  The Planning and Zoning Commission was equally dismayed over the narrowing of green space between commercial and residential and sent it to the Board with a negative recommendation.  As the Mayor informed everybody, if the Board does not pass it they could be sued outside the umbrella of protection of the City’s insurance.   A couple of months ago she heard some Board members say that nobody can tell them how to vote.   

 

Alderman Golfin stated that as far as he is concerned there are no such restrictions on the legislative action of any alderman in any city as long as he is performing his work and making decisions in the legislative area as he sees it represents his constituency.  His experience on the Board has not been that any of the Board members are forced to vote one way or another.  As long as they are within their legislative prerogative he believes they have immunity in that regard. 

 

Mayor Kelly announced the Public Hearing for West Community Credit Union closed at 7:30 p.m.

 

INTRODUCTIONS, READINGS, AND PASSAGE OF BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

 

Motion was made by Alderman Leahy, second by Alderman Wynn to remove Revised Bill No. 5168 from hold.  Roll call:  Alderman Moreno, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.

 

1st & 2nd Reading of Bills

 

Motion was made by Alderman Golfin, second by Alderman Leahy to give Revised Bill No. 5168 and Bill No. 5210 first and second readings.  Roll call:  Alderman Moreno, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.

 

Revised Bill No. 5168 – Re-subdivision of Property

 

City Attorney Murphy gave Revised Bill No. 5168, AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT ENTITLED “PRELIMINARY PLAT OF ‘BRENTWOOD PLASTICS’” DEPICTING A RE-SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY NUMBERED 8734 SUBURBAN TRACKS DRIVE; ESTABLISHING THE CONDITIONS TO THIS APPROVAL; AND, ESTABLISHING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, its first and second readings.

 

Alderman Kramer stated that in the first whereas of the bill it does not list the applicant’s name.   He asked if MTTA should be clarified in the bill as to who they are.  When the version of the first bill came through the Planning and Zoning Commission it did not have all the revisions that are before them tonight.  Is there anything that requires MTTA to present it back to MTTA with the newest revisions? 

 

Zoning Administrator Wolf stated that most of those conditions were inserted as a result of the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation.  It was recommended by staff, added by the Planning and Zoning Commission and made a part of their vote.  Several were added since then as a result of discussions with the attorney.  More than one has been modified and/or deleted as a result of negotiations between the Public Works Committee and the applicant. 

 

City Attorney Murphy stated that this Board would not necessarily have to include that.  If the applicant wants to have it revised, they could seek to put the bill on hold. 

 

Mayor Kelly noted that the Board could add or delete recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission or stipulations with respect to the bill.

 

Alderman Leahy asked if the west property line boundary noted on page 2 of the bill, section (g) has been defined so that it does not adversely affect Brentwood Plastics. 

 

Mayor Kelly stated that is an issue between the applicant and the property owner.  It is making reference to whatever that final line is. 

 

Zoning Administrator Wolf stated the second sentence in section 2 (g) clarifies that which states, “The city will consider an alternative proposal, such as relocating the parking spaces on Lot 1, so that side yards for both lots will be furnished and will be in conformance with code requirements”.

 

Alderman Leahy stated that his question is if this bill passes they are authorizing the subdivide and yet they are not defining where the subdivide line is.

 

Zoning Administrator Wolf stated it is very well defined with the agreement that they have to move it to the east by 12 feet, so that they can conform to the side yard setback.  They have also said that if they can come up with a different solution they can move it to a different location, which they can do under the boundary adjustment procedure, once its subdivided.  If you subdivide into two lots, any lot line can be shifted one way or the other administratively under the subdivision ordinance.

 

Alderman Leahy stated that section (h) establishes that if any future development plans were ever submitted that a bond would be required to cover the flood insurance but does not define how big a bond it would be.

 

Zoning Administrator Wolf stated it is specific in that it says that . . . “MTTA will furnish a bond in an amount sufficient to protect the owners of property protected by flood insurance from a termination of the flood insurance program in Brentwood if the cause of said termination is the development of the property created by this subdivision”.  If they do not do anything with the property, they do not have to put up a bond.  If they do propose to develop the property and it passes City code, then no bond is necessary because the City would not lose the flood insurance.

 

Mayor Kelly asked if the remaining Brentwood Plastics site has met green space requirements for City code now that the owner is selling a big part of the property.  

 

The proposal received a negative recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and was sent to the Board, which means that two-thirds vote requirement is needed in order for it to pass at the Board level. 

 

Zoning Administrator Wolf stated he is sure they meet green space requirement because there is a 50-foot wide piece of ground that goes over to the prolongation of Mary Avenue from the Brentwood Plastics site and that is proposed to be undeveloped.  That is exclusive of the rail right of way, which is on its own property. 

 

Alderman Robertson stated when Brentwood Plastics did its renovations several years ago they were intending to create that ground as a flood storage area.  He does not see anything in the bill that requires that be met after the re-subdivision. 

 

Alderman Leahy stated that section 2, (a) specifically identify that they maintain for not only their property but for Brentwood Plastics also.

 

Motion was made by Alderman Wynn, second by Alderman Golfin to amend Revised Bill No. 5168 in the second paragraph by adding the words “by MTTA, Inc.”.  Roll call:  Alderman Moreno, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.

 

Mayor Kelly stated that it is still the intention of the City to try to purchase the property for the reasons stated at the last meeting.  The City is concerned that this property was used as a detention area for a building addition years ago and now the property owner is seeking to divide that lot and sell it to someone else to be developed.  The City has great concerns about allowing that site to be developed.

 

Mayor Kelly requested the stipulations of the lot be read into the record. 

 

Alderman Leahy read into record the following conditions which is outlined in section 2 of Revised Bill No. 5168:

 

a) MTTA acknowledges they have a future obligation if and when this property is developed to provide storm and flood water detention on this site for runoff from the adjacent Brentwood Plastics site as well as runoff from this developed site.  The detention volume is to be calculated under the standards established by the more stringent of the Brentwood City Code or the standards of the Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District.   b) MTTA acknowledges in writing that city zoning and subdivision regulations may significantly hinder the ability of the developer to obtain any beneficial use of this property, and may even prevent development of the site as a result of conforming with the zoning regulations and detention requirements for storm water runoff and flood water storage.  c) MTTA agrees to the continuing use by the public and residents of the paved parking area along the north driveway that serves the adjacent Brentwood Plastics site once this property is petitioned for development.  At the option of the owner of the subdivided property, parking spaces may be relocated to a location equally convenient and accessible to the public using the adjacent soccer fields.  d) The owner of Lot 1 is required to grant an easement to the owners of Lot 2, its successors and assigns, allowing full pedestrian and vehicular access across Lot 1 from Brazeau to Lot 2.  This easement shall be for the benefit of the owners of Lot 2, their employees, customers and suppliers.  e) MTTA acknowledges the City of Brentwood may choose to restrict or even prohibit truck traffic on Brazeau.  This could be significant since Mary Avenue is a private street and use of that private street is not guaranteed to the owner of Lot 2.  As an alternative to this acknowledgement, MTTA may procure a permanent easement from the owner of Mary Avenue that would allow in perpetuity unrestricted ingress and egress across Mary Avenue to the owners of Lot 2.  f)  MTTA acknowledges that all requirements for development of property in the floodplain or floodway imposed by Chapter 25, Article VI, Divisions 7 and 8 must be submitted to and approved by the City Consulting Engineer before a future site development plan will be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission.  g)  The proposed west property line for Lot 2 must be moved to the east to a point at least 12 feet east of the easternmost edge of the eastern Lot 1 parking.  The city will consider an alternative proposal, such as relocating the parking spaces on Lot 1, so that side yards for both lots will be furnished and will be in conformance with code requirements.  h) Any future development plan of Lot 2 must conform to the requirements of, and have the approval of, all agencies having regulatory authority over floodplain development prior to commencement of developmentLacking approval of those agencies, should there be any unauthorized use of the subdivided property, MTTA will furnish a bond in an amount sufficient to protect the owners of property protected by flood insurance from a termination of the flood insurance program in Brentwood if the cause of said termination is the development of the property created by this subdivision.  i)The Petitioner be required to deposit funds in an escrow account with the City or post a bond, in the amount of $25,000.00, to assure the construction by the Petitioner of the detention areas shown on the Preliminary Subdivision Plat, said detention areas to be excavated and constructed in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 25 of the City Code within ninety (90) days of the approval of the Final Plat by the Board of Aldermen.

i)  All of the conditions of approval set forth above in this Section 2, with the exception of subparagraphs (d) and (g), be shown on the Final Plat as restrictions.

           

Motion was made by Alderman Golfin, second by Alderman Leahy to approve and adopt Revised Bill No. 5168 as amended.  Roll call:  Alderman Moreno, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.

 

The Mayor thereupon declared Revised Bill No. 5168 duly passed and signed same into approval thereof.  Said Bill was given Ordinance No. 3913.

 

Bill No. 5210 – West Community Credit Union

 

City Attorney Murphy gave Bill No. 5210, AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PROPERTY NUMBERED 8806 HARRISON AVENUE; AFFIRMING ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT THAT AUTHORIZES DRIVE-THROUGH BANKING FACILITIES AT THIS LOCATION; EXPANDING SAID USE PERMIT FOR DRIVE-THROUGH OPERATION TO INCLUDE INSTALLATION AND USE OF AN ADDITIONAL DRIVE-THROUGH AUTOMATED TELLER MACHINE; PROVIDING FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND, ESTABLISHING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE, its first and second readings.

 

Alderman Leahy stated that the third whereas from the bottom of the page establishes that the variances were granted on May 8, 2003.  Those variances were granted in the July 24, 2003 meeting of the Board of Adjustment.  Page 2, subsection (i) needs to be removed because it leads to confusion between the variances and the Comprehensive Plan zoning requirement.  Since the variances take jurisdiction he requested that be removed.

 

Zoning Administrator Wolf asked City Attorney Murphy if subsection (i) should be removed because the variances override it, that is still one of the criteria and one of the findings that the Board must make in order for that use permit to be valid.

 

City Attorney Murphy responded to leave subsection (i) as is in the bill.

 

Motion was made by Alderman Leahy, second by Alderman Kramer to amend Bill No. 5210 by changing the date in the third whereas from the bottom of page 1 from May 8, 2003 to July 24, 2003.  Roll call:  Alderman Moreno, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.

 

Motion was made by Alderman Golfin, second by Alderman Cross to approve and adopt Bill No. 5210 as amended.  Roll call:  Alderman Moreno, yes; Alderman Leahy, yes; Alderman Golfin, yes; Alderman Kramer, yes; Alderman Robertson, yes; Alderman Wynn, yes; Alderman Cross, yes.

 

The Mayor thereupon declared Bill No. 5210 duly passed and signed same into approval thereof.  Said Bill was given Ordinance No. 3914.

 

ACCOUNTS AGAINST THE CITY

 

Motion was made by Alderman Golfin, second by Alderman Wynn to approve the revised warrant list dated November 3, 2003.  All in favor none opposed.

 

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND DEPARTMENT HEADS:

 

Mayor’s Report

 

Coffee with the Mayor

 

Mayor Kelly announced Coffee with the Mayor would be held on Friday, November 21st at 9:00 a.m. instead of the last Friday of the month.

 

Veterans’ Day

 

A Veterans’ Day celebration will be held on Tuesday, November 11th at 6:30 p.m. and everyone is invited.

 

Public Safety Committee

 

A Public Safety Committee meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 5th at 12:00 noon.

 

Public Works Committee

 

A Public Works Committee meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 5th at 4:00 p.m.

 

City Engineer – No report

 

Parks – No report

 

Zoning Administrator

 

Special Use Permit – Christmas Tree Lot

 

Zoning Administrator Wolf stated that the Optimist Club of Brentwood is requesting a Special Use Permit to sell Christmas Trees from December 1st through December 25th.

 

Motion was made by Alderman Wynn, second by Alderman Leahy to approve the Special Use Permit for the Optimist Club of Brentwood.  All in favor none opposed.

 

Ways and Means Committee – No report

 

Planning and Zoning – No report

 

City Attorney – No report

 

City Clerk/Administrator – No report

 

Director of Economic Development – No report

 

Excise Commissioner – No report

 

Library

 

Alderman Wynn stated that the Library had its grand opening ceremony Saturday, November 1st and it was great.

 

Municipal League – No report

 

Waste Management Committee – No report

 

Storm Water Commission

 

Budget

 

Alderman Golfin stated that the Storm Water Committee is still concerned about putting together the budget for 2004.  Their efforts are concentrated on getting an increase in the budget for storm water.  There are some projects that are considered priority and doable with not a large amount of funding. 

 

Communication – No report

 

Insurance Committee – No report

 

UNFINISHED BUSINESS – None

 

NEW BUSINESS

 

Alderman Leahy stated that on November 15th and 22nd, the Boy Scouts of America will be handling the scouting for food bags and collection of can goods for the food pantries in the St. Louis area.  He requested the citizens continue their generous support in helping the Scouts and the food service pantries.

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

Motion was made by Alderman Wynn, second by Alderman Robertson to adjourn the meeting at 8:07 p.m.  All in favor none opposed.

 

 

                                                                                                                                               

                                                                                    Pat Kelly, Mayor

 

Attest:

 

                                                           

Chris Seemayer, City Clerk