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 development. Lacking 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