The meeting was called to order by Mayor Jones at 7:02 p.m.

The Pledge of Allegiance was given.

The Minutes of the February 28, 2005 Finance & Administration Committee meeting were submitted for approval.  A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman McDowell to approve the Minutes.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.

The Minutes of the February 28, 2005 Board of Aldermen meeting were submitted for approval.  A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Gatton to approve the Minutes.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.

Midwest Waste Municipal Account Representative, Tony Lamantia, explained a new recycling process called “Single Stream Recycling”.  With the new process, Midwest Waste will be able to accept a wider variety of materials.  This will increase the amount of recycled material and keep valuable landfill space available.  Through “Single Stream Recycling” recyclables will be picked up in a regular trash truck.  However, this truck will only collect recyclables.  Trash and yard waste will NEVER be mixed in with the recyclables.  This new process allows Midwest to compact this material, without separation.  This means residents can continue to package their material all in one bin without having to separate it.  Best of all, this expanded service is provided without an increase in current rates. 

A grant will be used to purchase additional 18-gallon recycle bins for residents.  The grant has been awarded to the City of Ballwin by Jefferson Solid Waste in the amount of $60,000. 

Alderman Buermann suggested that an article about this new program be placed in the “Horizon”, and a complete list of recyclable items also be provided to the residents.  Mr. Lamantia said this information will also be published in the “Press Journal”. 

Mr. Harry Gillam, Resource Management, said that any paper that tears can be put in the recycle bins for recycling, including phone books. 

Mayor Jones also thanked Code Enforcement Supervisor Jerry Klein for the good job he has done as the City’s liaison with Midwest Waste. 

Jim Keef, 924 Dutch Mill Drive, Woods Mill Subdivision Trustee:  Mr. Keef said the Trustees of Woods Mill Subdivision ask the Ballwin Officials to take some official action regarding the proposed development at the corner of old Hwy. 141 and Clayton Road in Town & Country.  A petition containing approximately 600 signatures stating that they would like consideration given to the Woods Mill Subdivision and the development of this property will be presented to Town & Country officials.  He said there will be a significant increase in traffic.  He suggested that Ballwin officials talk with Target to persuade them to stay on Manchester Road and perhaps even enhance their current location to become a super store.  If Ballwin loses Target to Town & Country, there will be a big gap in Ballwin’s revenue tax stream. 

Mike Touchie, 10 Mount View Court, Woods Mill Subdivision Trustee:  Mr. Touchie said a large shopping center at that location will dramatically affect the drainage.  Woods Mill Subdivision is downhill from this location and the water will come into their back yards.  He encouraged Ballwin and Town & Country to cooperate in developing a more logical plan for this property.

Mayor Jones said that traditionally, Ballwin does not take an official position on development in another city, particularly when it is a commercial development on a commercial site.  He said he received a copy of the traffic study for this area.  Town & Country’s traffic engineer originally proposed alternative access to the site via Henry Road, which would have greatly impacted Ballwin citizens.  As a result of the communication from Ballwin and the Town & Country citizens, the Town & Country officials rejected that additional access even though their traffic engineer said it would reduce the congestion at the Woods Mill / Clayton intersection by about 12%.  Town & Country subjected themselves to litigation for not moving forward with this development.  He said that Town & Country has assured that if this development is eventually approved, a transportation development district will be overlaid on the development, which will help to pay for the infrastructure that is so badly needed.  Mayor Jones said he is not in favor of Ballwin taking an official position on this development, particularly when a commercial development is proposed on a commercial site. 

Alderman McDowell agreed with Mayor Jones.  He said that letters of concern have been sent in the past if a development was going to have an adverse affect on a portion of Ballwin.  Other cities have expressed their concern to us when Ballwin has had developments under consideration.  He said that a letter expressing our points of concern should be sent to Town & Country. 

Mayor Jones said that Target Corp. has maintained that both Target stores are viable.  Mr. Reef suggested dialog between the two governments to see if a better use for the property or a more acceptable use can be discussed.  He said if a landfill was going to be utilized at this location, Ballwin would certainly have objections to this.  To the Woods Mill Subdivision residents, this has the same affect. 

 BILL # 3342 - AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION PLAT FOR DICKENS TRACE SUBDIVISION, AS PROVIDED IN CHAPTER 25 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BALLWIN, ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MISSOURI.

 Alderman Fleming said that based on information that he found out after the last meeting, he has decided to abstain from discussing or voting on either the Dickens Trace or Tall Timbers issues.

 Alderman Pogue asked if the requested storm water information has been obtained from MSD.

 Mr. Jeff Thomas, developer, said that the creek has not been maintained through the years.  Mr. Gotschall (development engineer) said that an extensive study was done on the creek.  The creek was designed as a 6-foot wide flat bottom creek with side slopes 3.33 – 1.  That is not what is there today 

Alderman McDowell said that the developer is outlining the deficiencies of the current creek and it should be upgraded.  He asked if the developer is justifying a lower standard to implement the plan.  Mayor Jones said that a letter from the developer states that even with the deficiencies in this creek, the differential runoff would only raise the level of the creek by 1/10 of a foot.  Mr. Gottschall said that if there are problems today, this development is not going to add to them.  Their calculations have determined that the difference in the runoff would cause a rise in the depth of the water by about 1 inch.  The problems that are already there today are causing a much higher rise in the water.  He said that the only thing that is going to solve their problem is if the creek is returned to its original design. 

Alderman McDowell said that the impact that is projected on the creek is negligible based on the creek being in good condition, not on its current condition.  The creek in the current condition is not up to code and the developer does not know the impact of this development on the creek in its current condition.  Mr. Gottschall said it won’t be raised more than an inch in its current condition. 

Alderman Lembke asked the petitioner who is responsible for the condition creek and who owns it?  Mr. Thomas said that the homeowners of the Coco Terrace Subdivision are responsible for the maintenance and current condition of the creek.  Alderman Lembke said that the City of Ballwin and MSD are not involved in the creek.  The creek, maintenance and problems are the responsibility of the Trustees of the subdivision.  The creek has not been constructed and maintained as originally designed.  Because of improper maintenance, debris, and the addition of retaining walls, the channel has been altered and created these problems. 

Mr. Thomas said that he will consider making a contribution or an escrow deposit of $2,500 to help rectify the problem.  Mr. Gottschall said it will cost more than $2,500 to correct the creek’s problems.  Alderman Robinson asked if the situation can be corrected and how much will it cost?  Mr. Gottschall said it can be corrected and look like the design, but the cost will be substantial.

Mayor Jones said that we do not typically require a developer to make corrections to off-site problems they did not create.  We determine if the differential water flow caused by the development is such that it needs to be detained on-site.  If an engineer is willing to base his reputation on his calculations and says that there is no appreciable differential flow created by this development, we take him at his word.  He said we should not hold up this development by this question.  We need to decide yes, we are going to require detention, or no, we are not going to require detention.

Alderman McDowell agreed.  He asked City Engineer Kramer to explain the calculations.  Mr. Kramer said the calculations that have been done were for the channel that was designed in 1979.  It would be very difficult to calculate the capacity and affect on the channel as it exists today. 

Alderman McDowell said he is not opposed to the development.  He wants this to be in the best fashion for the surrounding residents and the individuals who will live in the development.  One of the options that the Board has is a detention basin.  This is important because the creek has flooding problems now and he is opposed to allowing a development that may contribute to this situation.  Alderman McDowell said he wants to require the construction of a detention basin.  Mr. Thomas said he does not see that detention will change anything.  The large amount of brush is impacting the flow of water.  Mayor Jones said that the Board can require detention if there is an increase in the differential runoff no mater how small it is.  The question to Mr. Thomas is, can you and will you detain on the site – yes or no? 

Ms. Jeannie Aumiller, Attorney for the developer,  asked if detention would be required on both subdivisions or just one to cover both.  Assuming that detention would be required and the plan needs to be reworked, would this have to back to the Planning Commission?  She said they want to get through this process as soon as possible.  The option of going back to the Planning Commission with another preliminary plan and back to the Board just for detention is not to appeasing to them.  He said if the surrounding development has detention, it would not be uncharacteristic to require detention on this parcel of land.  City Attorney Lucchesi said this would not have to go back to Planning & Zoning if the detention was approved and differential runoff was approved by the Board and the lot configuration does not change. 

Alderman Lembke said that this is a problem that was not created by this developer or the previous land owners where this development is proposed.  This problem exists because the people who own the creek have failed to maintain it since 1979.  It’s their lack of maintenance that brought them here thinking that we were responsible for the creek or that MSD was responsible for the creek.  In reality, this creek is the problem of the homeowners and the trustees of that subdivision.  The developer has demonstrated that there’s no appreciable value that is going to come from putting a detention basin on either one of these developments.  He said it is nice of them to even offer a $2,500 contribution to the trustees to start doing what they should have been doing all these years.  The homeowners didn’t realize that the problem is their problem.  It’s not MSD, it’s not Ballwin, or this developer – it’s their individual problem that they have created for themselves.  They didn’t clean out the brush.  They allowed it to grow over.  He said it can be cleaned out.  The developer shouldn’t have to pay for it and we should not require them to put detention on their property to  solve somebody else’s self-inflicted problem. 

Alderman Buermann said he is uncomfortable about clearing brush from a creek because the brush helps prevent erosion.  If someone took away the brush and eroded the land to where the block walls would fall, would the City have any liability?  City Attorney Lucchesi said that, assuming the City is not the one doing this, and if the creek is privately owned, the trustees are responsible.  Whatever they do to it is their responsibility and not the City’s.  If it is privately owned, the City is prohibited from spending tax money on private property. 

Alderman McDowell asked the developer if they are not opposed to detention, this can be solved now and move forward.  He said that if the developer is willing to provide detention, he is prepared to make a motion to move forward with the possibility of detention that will meet Ballwin standards. 

City Attorney Lucchesi said that the Planning & Zoning Commission thought that detention may be required. 

Mr. Thomas said that he does not want detention to be part of a homeowner’s lot.  That is an old design that doesn’t work well with high dollar homes today.  City Attorney Lucchesi said that R-3 allows for 10,000 square foot lots.  As long as they keep the lots above 10,000 square feet, they will meet the requirement.  If the site plan is changed to allow for detention, they will have to go back to Planning & Zoning for a review of the new plan. 

Mayor Jones pointed out that Alderman Fleming has stated that he is not going to vote on this issue and Alderman Suozzi is absent, therefore, six aldermen will be voting and 5 yes votes are required to pass this ordinance.  Alderman Pogue said that he has received information that the developer is interested in acquiring some of the neighboring property and expanding the subdivision.  He asked if this is true.  Mr. Thomas said that this is possible but he has no agreement at this time.  Alderman Pogue said that there is a possibility that the flow downstream could be even larger if the adjoining property is developed.  City Attorney Lucchesi said this decision cannot be based on what might happen in the future.  Detention is either going to be required on this development or not. 

Alderman McDowell asked again if the developer is willing to consider detention.  Alderman Robinson asked why does Alderman McDowell want the developer to change their plan due to a problem that the downstream owners have created for themselves.  He said the downstream owners have created a problem.  The upstream owner is being requested to adjust his property because the downstream owner has made a mess of it.  Alderman McDowell said that the current situation is inadequate.  It will not be proper planning to allow a development that will increase the runoff and do further damage to that situation.  This needs to be totally solved before any new development is approved.  The options are that the creek meet the standards or detention is provided.  In the creek’s current state, it’s not possible to accurately calculate the potential damage and runoff that this development will do to the creek.  He said it is a non-conforming creek.  Alderman McDowell said that his question has not been answered as to whether the developer is willing to go with a detention basin.

Mayor Jones said that Mr. Thomas is saying that he wants the Board to vote on the proposal which will not detain storm water on the site.  He said a commitment one way or the other is necessary for the Board to vote.  This bill is written that storm water detention could be waived if the storm sewers are adequate for storm water disposal.  Generally, when there is a small enough number of lots like this, detention is not required by the Board.

Alderman McDowell said that if the developer can secure commitment from the homeowners to correct the creek to the standard that was set in 1979, he won’t have a problem with this.

Mayor Jones said that if someone makes a motion for a second reading of Bill 3342 and the Board votes on this, it doesn’t necessarily include the detention proviso suggested by Alderman McDowell.  He said he has never seen the Board redesign a developer’s storm water calculations for this small amount of water.  It makes no sense whatsoever. 

Alderman Lembke said that to ask the developer to do something that is not going to solve the problem at all, doesn’t make any sense.  It baffles him that the Board will ask for detention on this facility when i is not going to solve the problem.  If the runoff was significantly higher, this request would be warranted because additional damage would be done.  At this point, to demand that they do something because the people downstream chose not to take care of their property and not to be involved with maintaining it and just saying that it’s somebody else’s problem, this is not what the Board and the developer is here for. 

Alderman Robinson said that Alderman McDowell has indicated that if the downstream owner agrees to correct the situation with the brush and debris in the creek, that he would agree to proceed with the development.  Alderman McDowell said that the creek would have to be brought up to the 1979 standard.  Mr. Thomas said that the owners along the creek have raised their yard lines along the creek to give them more useable yard.  The creek was never designed that way.  He said even the worst developer would never do that.  The owners have graded their yards right up to the creek.  Mr. Thomas said that to increase the flow of water through that channel, the brush should be cleaned out.  Every year the creek will have to be maintained. 

Alderman Lembke said that the depth increase using the 15-year storm, from pre to post development, would add ¼ inch, and according to City Engineer Kramer’s calculations, using the 25 year criteria, the depth would increase 1 1/8 inch.  Alderman Gatton said that we have never before considered depth as an issue.  It has always been cubic feet per second.  City Engineer Kramer said that depth is something people can understand.  Most people don’t understand what a cubic foot per second looks like, but they understand what and inch higher looks like. 

Alderman Lembke said that if he was one of the homeowners with the creek that he now knows that he owns and that the trustees were supposed to be helping maintain the creek, and he can get help from a new developer off-site, seed money to help correct the problem, with the trustees controlling whatever takes place from this point forward so that his property isn’t continuously eroded away, he asked would he rather have that or know that somebody forced the developer to put in a retention detention pond that doesn’t do any good for anyone, but that they spent a lot of money doing this.  He said he would want the help.

Mayor Jones said that Bill 3342 has a condition in Section 3 D:  “Storm water detention may not be required, provided existing storm sewers are adequate for proper storm water disposal.”  He asked how will staff implement this particular condition if we were to pass Bill 3342?  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said that normally we look to see if the downstream system can accommodate the additional flow.  If the downstream system is stable, which is questionable in this case, this wouldn’t be a problem.  In a recent similar development, the pipe system downstream was capable of accommodating the additional nominal flow.  We accepted the study based on the figures that the petitioner’s engineer provided to the City, along with the review of City Engineer Kramer and his confirmation that this is in accordance with standard practices for computing this type of flow. 

Alderman Gatton said that if this meets MSD standards, which we historically require, he cannot go along with penalizing a developer by saying that his project is going to depend on whether or not downstream landowners are ready to rectify their problem he had no part in creating.  He said this is inappropriate for the Board to require.  His project should not be held up by a landowner who has created or allowed a problem to continue downstream.  He said it seems like this project is within Ballwin’s standards, based on what City Engineer Kramer has stated.

Alderman Buermann said that there are large rocks in the creek to prevent erosion.  We have told people to put large rocks in place to hold the creek bank.  The homeowners at the downstream location may not want anything different done with the creek because the rocks are protecting the property.

Alderman Gatton said that he has a problem with holding a developer hostage to the whims of a downstream property owner.  Alderman McDowell said that a detention basin is not punitive to the developer.  Alderman Gatton said that he is not disagreeing with that.  He said that Alderman McDowell’s proposal was that if the downstream property owners would clean up their property, that he wouldn’t have a problem with this.  This is holding the developer hostage to the downstream property owners. 

Alderman McDowell asked the developer if he is willing to do the detention basin for both developments.  Mr. Thomas said they will do this if it is required.  Alderman McDowell said the detention basin will cover both developments.  There will also be no problem with the next development.  There are lots in the adjoining subdivision that have a detention basin adjacent to the property.  He said if this is the case, he will move for a second reading.  City Attorney Lucchesi said this will not have to go back to Planning & Zoning for detention.  If the subdivision lot sizes change, they will have to go back to Planning & Zoning.  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said that Ballwin has never allowed detention in an easement.  It has always been required in common ground, not an individual person’s lot.  Mr. Gottschall said that the lots will have to be reconfigured if the detention basin is required.

City Attorney Lucchesi said that even though R-3 zoning would work, this was not proposed to Planning & Zoning and the subdivision plot is different from what was approved.  It would be the same number of lots but a different layout of the lots.  Alderman Robinson said Alderman McDowell’s position will make the developer go back to Planning & Zoning. 

Alderman Lembke said that if the Board doesn’t require detention, by MSD standards, by default, staff does not require it because they believe that if it is in line with MSD standards, it shouldn’t cause a problem and wouldn’t need to be done.  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said that as a result of the discussion tonight, if the Board approves Bill 3342 with this language that allows it to not have detention, the Board will have accepted the fact that this impact is acceptable.  As long as it is not substantially greater than what the discussion has been tonight, or something else is discovered that is unknown at this point, he said this would be considered acceptable by staff.  If the Board passes on detention tonight and approves it with this language, the Board has accepted it. 

City Engineer Kramer said if detention is not required and they can demonstrate that the existing condition downstream can handle the additional flow, then detention can be waived.  The existing creek is extremely difficult to analyze because there is nothing uniform about it; therefore, the developer is unable to demonstrate whether or not the existing system downstream can handle the flow.  He said we don’t know if the existing condition can.  If it was built the way it was planned in 1979, we could determine that. 

Alderman McDowell said that once the other development comes in, that will push it above MSD standards. 

Alderman Robinson said that he doesn’t think the developer is going to convince the Ward 1 Aldermen to vote yes.  If someone calls for a second reading, the developer is going to lose because 5 yes votes are necessary to pass Bill 3342.  The detention will have to be planned and the petition will have to go back to Planning & Zoning; or, Bill 3342 can be postponed until the April 11 meeting.  At that time, the petitioner can try to convince Alderman Suozzi to vote yes.  He said this has been discussed for more than an hour and the two Ward 1 Aldermen have not changed their minds about detention. 

Alderman McDowell asked if we can put in the proposal that we will follow up with the homeowners and subdivision trustees in the redevelopment of the creek, and that the creek will be brought up to standards.  City Attorney Lucchesi said there is no way that the Board can do this.  Alderman Robinson said that the developer will have to go back to Planning & Zoning if they put in a detention basin because the subdivision plat will have to be redone.  They don’t want to have to do this.

Alderman McDowell said that he is prepared to pass this bill in its current format and he requests that all care be taken to make sure that the runoff does not do any damage to the existing site and the configuration of the creek at this point.  He said that all care be taken to insure that it meets specifications and he requested that a letter be sent to the trustees that this creek should be brought up to standards.  Mayor Jones said that the $2,500 offered by the developer should be handled between Mr. Thomas and the subdivision, not through the City of Ballwin that would be making improvements on private property. 

A motion was made by Alderman McDowell and seconded by Alderman Lembke for a second reading of Bill No. 3342, with the stipulation that all care be taken to minimize all runoff to the adjacent property even with the mis-configuration of the current creek, and that a letter be sent advocating that the creek is not in par with the original standards, and that the trustees are not complying to the standards. 

Mayor Jones said that we don’t want to write a letter to those subdivision trustees and tell them they have to clean up the creek.  Ms. Jeannie Aumiller said they will write the letter from their engineer outlining the issues along with the offer to provide $2,500.  Alderman McDowell said that it is not unusual for staff to send such a letter.  The developer can also send a letter, but this can be explored at a later date.

Alderman Robinson disagreed.  City Attorney Lucchesi said that if the developer writes the letter and offers the $2,500, the City is not obligated at all in that situation.  Alderman McDowell said he is not going to bicker over the letter.  He just wants the creek brought up to standards.

Mayor Jones said that a motion has been made for a second reading that has been seconded with the caveat proposed by Alderman McDowell.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.  Bill No. 3342 was read for the second time.

A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3342 with the following results:  Ayes –Lembke, Gatton, Robinson, Buermann, Pogue, McDowell.    Nays – None.  Whereupon Mayor Jones declared Bill No. 3342 approved and it became Ordinance No. 05-12.

BILL # 3343 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 557, KNOWN AS “THE ZONING ORDINANCE” OF THE CITY OF BALLWIN, AND AMENDING “THE DISTRICT MAP” BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN LAND IN THE CITY OF BALLWIN FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT TO R-3 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT.

Mayor Jones said this is regarding the zoning district amendment for Tall Timbers Subdivision.

A motion was made by Alderman Lembke and seconded by Alderman Buermann for a second reading of Bill No. 3343.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.  Bill No. 3343 was read for the second time.

A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3343 with the following results:  Ayes – Gatton, Pogue, Robinson, Lembke, Buermann, McDowell.    Nays – None.  Whereupon Mayor Jones declared Bill No. 3343 approved and it became Ordinance No. 05-13.

BILL # 3344 - AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION PLAT FOR TALL TIMBERS SUBDIVISION AS PROVIDED IN CHAPTER 25 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BALLWIN, ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MISSOURI.

A motion was made by Alderman Lembke and seconded by Alderman Buermann for a second reading of Bill No. 3344.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.  Bill No. 3344 was read for the second time.

A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3344 with the following results:  Ayes – Gatton, McDowell, Lembke, Buermann, Robinson, Pogue.    Nays – None.  Whereupon Mayor Jones declared Bill No. 3344 approved and it became Ordinance No. 05-14.

None.

 LEGISLATION

 BILL # 3346 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 21, SECTION 21-8 DEALING WITH LATERAL SEWER REPAIRS BY AMENDING SUBPARAGRAPH (J) WITH RESPECT TO THE AMOUNT PAYABLE FOR REPAIRS.

A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Fleming for a first reading of Bill No. 3346.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.  Bill No. 3346 was read for the first time.

Alderman Gatton said that the reason for the increase in the cap from $3,000 to $3,500 is because of increased costs for such work.  He asked what the average sewer lateral expense is to the homeowner.  Assistant City Administrator said that 65% - 70% are at or below the minimum.  He doesn’t believe that this is going to create an issue of running short on funds.  Mr. Gatton said a lot of residents are under the impression that we are maxed out and there is a waiting list.  He suggested that an article be placed in the “Horizon” that there is money available and they can file a claim. 

A motion was made by Alderman Lembke and seconded by Alderman Gatton for a second reading of Bill No. 3346.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.  Bill No. 3346 was read for the second time.

A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3346 with the following results:  Ayes – Pogue, Buermann, McDowell, Fleming, Robinson, Lembke, Gatton.    Nays – None.  Whereupon Mayor Jones declared Bill No. 3346 approved and it became Ordinance No. 05-15.

BILL # 3347 - AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BALLWIN, MISSOURI, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN PROPERTY.

A motion was made by Alderman Gatton and seconded by Alderman Fleming for a first reading of Bill No. 3347.   A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.  Bill No. 3347 was read for the first time.

A motion was made by Alderman Pogue and seconded by Alderman Lembke for a second reading of Bill No. 3347.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.  Bill No. 3347 was read for the second time.

A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3347 with the following results:  Ayes – Pogue, Robinson, Lembke, McDowell, Buermann, Fleming, Gatton.    Nays – None.  Whereupon Mayor Jones declared Bill No. 3347 approved and it became Ordinance No. 05-16.

BILL # 3348 - AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BALLWIN, MISSOURI, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, TO ACCEPT FOR MAINTENANCE, REAL PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS LOCATOR #23S330791, HELD IN TRUST BY THE TRUSTEE OF ST. LOUIS COUNTY, FOR A FEE OF $27.00 (TWENTY-SEVEN DOLLARS) TO COVER THE RECORDING FEE.

A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Fleming for a first reading of Bill No. 3348.   A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.  Bill No. 3348 was read for the first time.

A motion was made by Alderman Lembke and seconded by Alderman Buermann for a second reading of Bill No. 3348.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.  Bill No. 3348 was read for the second time.

A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3348 with the following results:  Ayes – Lembke, Pogue, Gatton, Buermann, Fleming, McDowell, Robinson.    Nays – None.  Whereupon Mayor Jones declared Bill No. 3348 approved and it became Ordinance No. 05-17.

BILL # 3349 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BALLWIN WITH RESPECT TO GRADING PERMITS BY AMENDING CHAPTER 11, SECTION 11-3 ENTITLED “PERMITS” BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SUBPARAGRAPH DEALING WITH FEES.

A motion was made by Alderman Lembke and seconded by Alderman Buermann for a first reading of Bill No. 3349.   A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.  Bill No. 3349 was read for the first time.

A motion was made by Alderman Robinson and seconded by Alderman Lembke for a second reading of Bill No. 3349.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was declared passed.  Bill No. 3349 was read for the second time.

A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3349 with the following results:  Ayes – Robinson, Lembke, Pogue, McDowell, Buermann, Gatton, Fleming.    Nays – None.  Whereupon Mayor Jones declared Bill No. 3349 approved and it became Ordinance No. 05-18.

Alderman Fleming asked that Item B (Greens Mower) and Item D (Skidsteer) be removed for further discussion.

Alderman McDowell asked that Item E (Health Insurance) be removed for further discussion.

A motion was made by Alderman Lembke and seconded by Alderman Pogue to accept Items A and C of the Consent Items.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.

Appointments:  Ballwin Days Co-Chairman:  Mayor Jones said that Pat McDermott expired on December 31, 2004.  He proposed the re-appointment as Co-Chairman of the Ballwin Days Committee.

A motion was made by Alderman Robinson and seconded by Alderman Lembke to confirm the re-appointment of Pat McDermitt as Co-Chairman of the Ballwin Days Committee.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result, and the motion passed.

Ballwin Arts Commission:  Mr. Paul Bailey has attended the last two monthly meetings, even though he has not been named to the commission.  He is conducting classroom training for Creve Coeur Camera.  Mayor Jones proposed this appointment.

A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the appointment was approved.

University of Missouri Extension Council:  Mayor Jones said that Dan Sidoti has served on this committee for 4 years.  He proposed the appointment of Pat Wright, who is an elementary school teacher and has lived in Ballwin for 32 years.  She is committed to education and is working in biotechnology.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.

Planning & Zoning Commission:  Mayor Jones said that there is an open position on this commission.  All of the wards are equally represented.  Jason Rigelsberger contacted Assistant City Administrator Aiken and was interviewed by Mayor Jones for this position.  Mr. Rigelsberger is a Ward 1 resident at 14 Roland Avenue, is a real estate agent and has lived 30 years in Ballwin.  He understands the function of the commission and is interested in serving.  This appointment does not have to be from Ward 1 since the wards are equally represented.

Alderman Pogue said he recommends consideration of Gary Winner.  Alderman McDowell asked that Mr. Winner also be interviewed for the position.  Mayor Jones said he will contact Mr. Winner. 

Alderman Fleming asked if someone in real estate could be considered as having a conflict of interest on the Planning & Zoning Commission.  Alderman Gatton said he believes it would only be a conflict of interest if they were involved in a real estate proposal that is being considered by the Planning & Zoning Commission.  City Attorney Lucchesi said that formerly a chairman of the Commission was the head of a development company.  If there was a conflict of interest, the chairman removed himself from the discussion. 

Greens Mower:  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said this item will replace the oldest of 3 mowers that are used to maintain the greens on the course.  Bids were solicited and 5 responses were received.  The recommendation is to go with the low bidder. 

Alderman Fleming said that we have two fairly new mowers.  He suggested that instead of purchasing another greens mower, that the money should be spent on new Ballwin signage on Manchester Road.  Director of Parks and Recreation Bruer said that without the additional mower, the maintenance crew will still be on the course mowing the greens when the first golfers are ready to tee off.  This will delay the tee off times.  The mowing needs to be done quickly.  Alderman Lembke said that without the additional mower, the other two will wear out much faster.  Alderman Gatton said that if we only have two and one breaks down, we have a major problem. 

Alderman Fleming said his preference is to see the money put towards something else like creating a unique identity on Manchester Road.  He said he would like to see this started as soon as possible rather than put it off.  He said the greens mower is an expenditure that can be deferred for a while.  Alderman McDowell asked Director of Parks and Recreation Bruer if we can get by without another greens mower for a while.  Director Bruer said we would not be able to operate the way we have been.  The operation would change.  Mayor Jones said that we don’t want to discourage play and cause a decline in revenues. 

A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Lembke to accept the bid from Turf Professionals Equipment for $6,994.50.  A voice vote was taken with 6 yes votes, and Alderman Fleming voting Nay.  The motion was passed.

Skidsteer:  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said this is equipment that is utilized by the Public Works Department to repair pot holes and other major road repairs.  This will be the 5^th skidsteer in the department that allows 3 separate crews to function simultaneously.  Three responses to the bid request were received.  The recommendation is to accept the low bid from Bobcat of St. Louis in the amount of $25,147.04. 

Alderman Fleming this will make a positive impact on street repairs.  He said that the recommendation memo from City Engineer Kramer states that an extra full planer and broom attachment is available for the new skidsteer that is requested.  He asked if this is equipment that we already have?  City Engineer Kramer said that these are used but still functional pieces of equipment that we presently own.

A motion was made by Alderman McDowell and seconded by Lembke to accept the low bid from Bobcat of St. Louis.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.

Health Insurance:  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said that the current provider offered to renew Ballwin’s coverage at a 11.4% reduction in premium over last year.  He said City Administrator Kuntz has recommended that this bid be accepted.  He is exploring the possibility of the savings being used for other benefits for the employees such as dental coverage. 

Alderman McDowell asked why the company offered this reduction.  Human Resource Coordinator Morrison said that Blue Cross Blue Shield wants to keep our business.  It is the exact same plan.  A bid was received from United Health Care, but could not be considered because of the price.  Another submitted plan was not comparable to the current plan. 

Alderman McDowell asked if the current Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan meets the employee’s needs?  A plan with a 11.4% premium reduction that does not meet the needs of the employee is not necessarily the best plan.  Human Resource Coordinator Morrison said that it is her understanding that the needs are being met. 

A motion was made by Alderman Lembke and seconded by Alderman Fleming to accept the Blue Cross/Blue Shield health insurance plan.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.

Single Plus One:  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said this is a proposal to create a new class of membership for our recreational facilities.  Director of Parks and Recreation Bruer said that since we opened The Pointe, there have been requests for this classification of membership.  This will meet the needs of young adults who do not have children, and empty nesters who are not old enough to qualify for the senior couples pass.  This group has been under-utilizing The Pointe.  This membership class is priced at a 10% reduction off the family rate.  There are currently 93 family memberships at The Pointe that consist of 2 people.  She said that the question is will the people paying the higher family rate renew at the lower rate and will there be a reduction in revenue.  It will take approximately 10 new memberships to cover this scenario.  There are currently 1,800 family memberships. 

Alderman Fleming said this is a low risk plan and allows us to be more flexible; he is in favor of it.  Alderman McDowell said that we need to calculate the number of how many memberships we are missing out on by not having this plan in place.  Director of Parks and Recreation Bruer said The Pointe has had 20 – 30 calls in the past year requesting this.  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said that the plan can be re-evaluated after 6 months or a year and dropped if judged to be revenue negative.

A motion was made by Alderman Gatton and seconded by Alderman Robinson to draft legislation for consideration for the Single Plus One classification of Pointe membership.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed.

Median Maintenance:  Assistant City Administrator Aiken said that this is an outgrowth of the Olde Towne Plaza construction.  There were several medians that were built in Manchester Road and on Jefferson and Ball Park Drive.  As part of the agreement with the developer of the plaza, these medians became the maintenance responsibility of the City of Ballwin.  They were planted and created by the developer and are connected to the plaza irrigation system.  He said that there is concern about the safety of working in the Manchester Road islands, and the time and expertise necessary to do the job.  It has been suggested to have this done by a private maintenance firm.  Nine local contractors were solicited for bids.  Only two responded.  The low bidder was the company who provides maintenance for Olde Towne Plaza.  The recommendation from staff is that we accept the low bid. 

A motion was made by Alderman Robinson and seconded by Alderman Pogue to accept the bid by Symmetry Maintenance in the amount of $8,849.07.  A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion was approved.

Board of Adjustment:  City Attorney Lucchesi said the Board of Adjustment was sued and the suit was settled by the parties.  Alderman Gatton said that he is aware of the property that caused the lawsuit and he was stunned when he saw it.  He said he could not believe that this was approved by the Board of Adjustment.  He asked if something is being done to instruct the Board of Adjustment on proper procedures to evaluate requests and property.  City Attorney Lucchesi said that this property was consistent with 3 or 4 similarly situated properties that have recently gone before the Board of Adjustment.

Commercial Property Tax Options:  City Attorney Lucchesi said he was asked to research if there can be different tax rates for commercial and residential property in Ballwin.  He said it is possible to do this.  It will require a vote of the citizens of Ballwin.  In the past there has been one rate for everyone.  There was not a separate tax rate for commercial property.  Under the constitution, as long as everyone in the category is treated the same, it is possible to tax differently. 

Alderman Lembke said that there are Ballwin residents who are using a portion of their home for business.  Some have voluntarily gotten business licenses when the City didn’t require it; some are not doing this.  City Attorney Lucchesi said the zoning will be the determining factor, not how the property is being used.

Alderman Gatton asked if a property is in a district zoned commercial but is used for residential, would it be subject to such a commercial tax.  City Attorney Lucchesi said it would be taxed as commercial because of the commercial zoning classification.  If the property is zoned commercial, then everyone in that zoning classification must be treated the same. 

Alderman Gatton said that about a year ago, the Board offered several residents of a subdivision a free pass to have their property rezoned from commercial to residential.  Some took it and some did not.  In the future, those who did not take the zoning change would have to pay the fees to have their property rezoned.  City Attorney Lucchesi said this is correct unless the Board decides something differently.

Mayor Jones asked if this is in addition to the differentiation in the assessed valuation rates which is already a function of commercial vs. residential.  City Attorney Lucchesi said that this would be up to the limit which is $1 (100 cents) per assessed valuation.  Mayor Jones said that this is an item that the Finance & Administration Committee can consider at its next meeting.

Closed session:  City Attorney Lucchesi requested a closed session to discuss litigation. 

Alderman Gatton said that over a month ago, the Board authorized staff to check into the position of  St. Louis County regarding New Ballwin Road.  He asked if there has been any progress.  City Engineer Kramer said that the Director of the County Department of Highways never responded to his February letter.  He will follow up with an e-mail reminder.

Non-Resident Recreational ID Card:  Alderman Pogue asked if a non-resident ID card has ever been considered to make it easier for them to use the facilities.  Director of Parks and Recreation Bruer said that non-resident families receive a card but this has not been offered outside of this program.

Development letter:  Alderman McDowell said that he agrees that we have never sent a message to a neighboring city in opposition to a commercial plan on commercially zoned property; however, he suggested that the City send a friendly letter that we are concerned of the potential traffic impact on the residents of Ballwin, and ask the Town & Country Board t