SEARCH
IN THIS SECTION
Popular Pages in this Section
| MORE
SEARCH
IN THIS SECTION
Popular Pages in this Section
Archived Meeting Agendas
Every effort is made to ensure that the Agendas and Minutes provided on this and subsequent pages is timely and correct; however, users should keep in mind that this information is provided only as a public convenience. In any case where legal reliance on information is required, the official records of the City of Ballwin should be consulted. The Board of Aldermen meet on the second and fourth Mondays of each month at 7 p.m. in the Board Room of the Ballwin Government Center, 1 Government Ctr. Schedule and place subject to change. Meetings are open to the public. All citizens are urged to attend. Board of Aldermen MeetingMeeting AgendaMeeting MinutesMINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING July 28, 2008 The meeting was called to order by Mayor Young at 7:03 p.m. PRESENT ABSENT The Pledge of Allegiance was given. MINUTES The Minutes of the July 14, 2008 Board of Aldermen meeting were submitted for approval. Alderman Pogue amended the minutes as follows: Page 3: He said his comment was “On May 19 at the Aldermanic Work Shop, Mayor Young had endorsed three individual tax increases; a ¼ cent sales tax increase, a property tax increase, and a utility tax increase, and that the property tax and sales tax would require voter approval. Alderman Pogue suggested that the utility tax do the same and ask for voter approval before passage.” PRESENTATION PENDING ISSUES CITIZEN COMMENTS Al Zenthoefer, 15062 Clayton Road: Mr. Zenthoefer said that the sound system in the Board room is not good and should be turned up or to speak louder into the microphones. He also requested that Clayton Road have a 35 mph speed limit. He requested that the mosquito fogging be done on the new street close to his property. Mayor Young said that this street has not yet been officially taken over by the city for maintenance. Alderman Lembke said that due to a lack of funds, it was decided this year to postpone mosquito fogging. Previously, this was done weekly from spring to early fall. This year, mosquito fogging began on July 7. Alderman Suozzi said that the new street has not yet been approved by the city for public maintenance. Mosquito fogging and other public services will not be done on that street until this process has occurred. She said the street is open and useable at this time. NEW BUSINESS LEGISLATION BILL # 3537 - AN ORDINANCE VACATING CERTAIN STREETS WITHIN MEADOWBROOK COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES SUBDIVISION WITHIN THE CITY OF BALLWIN. City Attorney Jones said that he has provided the Board with a revised Bill # 3537, which is different from the one posted. He said there are three changes. An exhibit to the ordinance is the original dedication plat for the streets within Meadowbrook Country Club Estates Subdivision, upon which the July, 1998 dedication was based, and an unsigned affidavit from the three Trustees of the Subdivision, which can be signed and notarized at this meeting. He also provided an opinion letter from Earnest Demba, a state certified general real estate appraiser. He said this information satisfies his questions that he had after reviewing the petition when it was submitted on July 14, 2008. He said the changes to the ordinance incorporate the affidavit into the petition. This is important because the crucial issues are a legal description of the property to be vacated. That incorporates by reference the actual dedication plat and shows the streets that are going to be potentially vacated, and omits the area which was repaired last year that will not be vacated if the legislation is passed. City Attorney Jones said that the opinion from Mr. Demba is included to address his concern that Chapter 88, regarding vacation of streets within a fourth class city, may trigger a need to determine whether compensation is due in the same fashion as a condemnation. He said that Mr. Demba’s opinion is that, based upon his considerable experience, that as long as the streets are properly maintained, it makes no difference whether they are public or private. City Attorney Jones said that the revised Bill # 3537 can be voted on and passed with the required numbered of votes, or denied. It has been based upon a petition submitted and an affidavit which supplements that petition which makes the process complete. Alderman Fleming asked Mr. Jack Hanley, does he want the city to take action on this petition because he believes they will be able to complete street repairs this year, with the understanding that if this cannot be done this year, the streets are private and no city snow plowing or leaf removal will be done? Mr. Hanley said that they are aware of this and that Ballwin will not automatically take back the streets after repairs. City Attorney Jones said that the revised Bill 3537 removes the language indicating that the property would be abandoned to the adjoining property owners. By law, this will happen, or it will become property of the Trustees, property owners, and utilities in accordance with the indenture of the subdivision, and other contracts and ownership rights currently in existence. He said this will not be disturbed. It will go back to exactly the way it was before the streets were accepted in 1998. There were already utility easements and facilities in effect at that time. This ordinance is silent in that regard. He said the properties that join the street would be foolish to not allow the utilities to work to fix the facilities if the need arises. City Attorney Jones said that the petition has at least 66% of the interest of the adjoining property owners. City Attorney Jones said that since Bill 3537 is significantly different from the posted document and was not passed out ahead of time at this meeting, it should be read in its entirety, not by title only. A motion was made by Alderman Terbrock and seconded by Alderman Robinson for a first reading of Bill No. 3537 in its entirety. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3537 was read in its entirety for the first time. A motion was made by Alderman Fleming and seconded by Alderman Terbrock for a second reading of Bill No. 3537 in its entirety. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3537 was read in its entirety for the second time.
A motion was made by Alderman Suozzi and seconded by Alderman Pogue for a first reading of Bill No. 3538. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3538 was read for the first time. Mayor Young asked Assistant City Administrator Aiken if he has heard anything from the petitioner. Assistant City Administrator Aiken said he has not had any discussion beyond a discussion of the date these petitions would be brought to the Board. Alderman Robinson said that Planning & Zoning Commission has recommended denial. Mayor Young said this is correct. Six out of eight votes is necessary to override the Planning & Zoning Commission’s negative recommendation. Alderman Robinson asked how the Ward 1 Aldermen feel about this development. Alderman Pogue said that due to the negative recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Commission, he supported denial of the petition. Alderman Terbrock agreed. A motion was made by Alderman Robinson and seconded by Alderman Buermann for a second reading of Bill No. 3538. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3538 was read for the second time. A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3538 with the following results:
City Attorney Jones said that since no one is here representing the petitioner to withdraw Bill 3539, it will have to be voted upon. At this time, Mr. Pete Adams came forward to address the Board. Pete Adams, 614 Broadmore, Chesterfield 63017: Mr. Adams, representing Mr. Kirsten, requested that this be held over to complete the information requested from the Planning & Zoning Commission. City Attorney Jones said that this could be done. This petition has been sent back to Planning & Zoning once because of a significant change in the plans. The Board voted to turn down the petition for rezoning, therefore, the subdivision plat cannot be approved since the rezoning petition has been denied. He said the petitioner will have to start over again with a new petition. He said there’s nothing to hold over at this point. Alderman Pogue said that since Planning & Zoning gave a negative recommendation, and the Board has not held the matter over, will the petitioner have to start over? City Attorney Jones said yes. Alderman Pogue said that unless this Board wants to override and approve the plan, the petitioner will have to start over anyway. City Attorney Jones said that this cannot be done because the Board has voted to deny the rezoning, therefore, there’s nothing to hold over and will have to start over. A motion was made by Alderman Suozzi and seconded by Alderman Pogue for a second reading of Bill No. 3539. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3539 was read for the second time. A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3539 with the following results: Alderman Lembke said that he wants to make sure that Mayor Young asked, prior to the first vote, if there was a representative present from the organization, making an opportunity for the representative to address the Board, in addition to the fact that there is a sign-in policy for speakers to address the Board to make sure their position could be heard. Alderman Pogue said that this was done prior to the first bill reading.
A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Suozzi for a first reading of Bill No. 3540. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3540 was read for the first time. A motion was made by Alderman Suozzi and seconded by Alderman Buermann for a second reading of Bill No. 3540. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3540 was read for the second time. A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3540 with the following results:
A motion was made by Alderman Pogue and seconded by Alderman Buermann for a first reading of Bill No. 3541. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3541 was read for the first time. Alderman Suozzi amended Bill 3541 as follows: “board of aldermen” should be capitalized throughout the ordinance (Board of Aldermen). Alderman Pogue questioned Page 3, Section 1, No. 5, item b: “No interior or exterior improvements, window tinting and treatment, draperies, blinds, signage, landscaping or other devices shall be utilized to block such visibility.” He said that this affects being able to visibly see the lobby area from the parking lot. Some of our existing facilities use blinds and/or tinting on some of the windows. He is concerned about this if it is contained in this document. City Attorney Jones said that passing this ordinance will establish these as legal non-conforming uses. He said this is sometimes unavoidable. There are times that action is taken as a legislature and renders some things as non-conforming uses which are then “grandfathered”. Such non-conformancies will have to be brought into compliance in the future if the facility is remodeled. Assistant City Administrator Aiken said it could stay as it is forever if there are no changes to the facilities. Alderman Pogue said that if they asked for a Special Use Exception, they would have to comply with this regulation. City Attorney Jones said yes. A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3541 with the following results:
A motion was made by Alderman Pogue and seconded by Alderman Buermann for a first reading of Bill No. 3542. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3542 was read for the first time. A motion was made by Alderman Suozzi and seconded by Alderman Pogue for a second reading of Bill No. 3542. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3542 was read for the second time. A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3542 with the following results:
A motion was made by Alderman Pogue and seconded by Alderman Buermann for a first reading of Bill No. 3543. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3543 was read for the first time. A motion was made by Alderman Suozzi and seconded by Alderman Terbrock for a second reading of Bill No. 3543. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3543 was read for the second time. A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3543 with the following results:
A motion was made by Alderman Pogue and seconded by Alderman Terbrock for a first reading of Bill No. 3544. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3544 was read for the first time. A motion was made by Alderman Suozzi and seconded by Alderman Buermann for a second reading of Bill No. 3544. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Bill No. 3544 was read for the second time. A roll call was taken for passage and approval of Bill No. 3544 with the following results:
A. None.
Slide Tower: Assistant City Administrator Aiken said that Parks & Recreation solicited several contractors for bids to repaint the slide tower at The Pointe. Only one bid was received and is under the budgeted amount. Acceptance of the bid is recommended. A motion was made by Alderman Robinson and seconded by Alderman Buermann to accept the bid for painting the slide tower. A voice vote was taken with a unanimous affirmative result and the motion passed. Climbing Wall: Alderman Terbrock asked for an update on the climbing wall. Director of Parks & Recreation Bruer said that it was shipped last week and arrival is anticipated soon.
Intergovernmental Agreement: City Attorney Jones said that at the Board’s request, with help of City staff, and based on notes from a meeting of the City Planners of the five interested cities, he drafted the “Inter-Governmental Agreement for Manchester Road Corridor Great Streets Initiative”. He said he has had feedback from Wildwood, Manchester, Ellisville, and Winchester. The cities are concerned about giving up the cities abilities to exclusively control Manchester Road within their jurisdiction, such as zoning issues. He said they are also concerned about what is a cost overrun and how do the five cities determine who would be responsible to pay. In the draft document, this is on a pro rata basis related to front footage along the curb. The cities are concerned about attempting to bind a Board into the future with these issues. City Attorney Jones said that this document is designed to show East-West Gateway Coordinating Council that the cities are interested in the project without committing to a particular plan at this time. He said he will continue updating the draft with comments and concerns of the five cities for a more complete document for Board review by August 25 or the first meeting in September. Alderman Suozzi requested that the initials EWGCC (East-West Gateway Coordinating Council) be verified. She said that it is her understanding that the correct name is East-West Gateway Council of Governments (EWGCG). The last initial is “G” because the name has been changed. Alderman Suozzi suggested that in the first paragraph, “Missouri” is redundant and the repetition should be eliminated. The cities mentioned are all political subdivisions of the State of Missouri. Mayor Young said that he attended a Mayor’s meeting regarding the Great Streets Initiative. At that meeting, a map of Manchester Road was provided showing the percentage amount that is in each city limits. Ellisville has 35.2%, Ballwin 24.5%, Wildwood 20.5%, Manchester 16.6%, Winchester 3.2%. He said that Wildwood is concerned about their benefits since they don’t have commercial businesses on Manchester Road. Winchester is concerned due to a lack of funds. Manchester is involved in the Manchester Highlands project, a redevelopment plan across the street, and for their ballpark. He said that Ellisville is willing to go forward with the program because it is a necessary project. They suggested a pilot area between New Ballwin Road and past the Post Office since Ballwin and Ellisville share this area. He suggested that the Intergovernmental Agreement be signed by all City Mayors before the first September Board meeting. He said that nothing can move forward without a signed agreement. Alderman Suozzi asked if in-kind contributions and the possibility of private 3rd party contributions have been discussed with East-West Gateway? She suggested East-West gateway consider a soft match vs. our match being totally monetary. Mayor Young said that this will be worked through the cities and negotiated in this manner. Mayor Young said this is an agreement to continue and to look for the next phase. It’s not an agreement for any dollars or other permanent commitments. It’s a united agreement of interest to move forward. Assistant City Administrator Aiken said that when application was made for the Great Streets Program, the West St. Louis County Chamber of Commerce and the five cities jointly submitted the application. The cities working together make it easier to receive funding, which is the purpose of the written agreement. Without the agreement, the likelihood of acquiring funding is much lower. It was a joint application of government and business by including the Chamber of Commerce. Alderman Suozzi said that Manchester Road is not the only Great Streets Initiative project. The funds that East-West Gateway has available is for all of the projects. She said the longer the delay in presenting a united agreement, gives the other projects an opportunity to acquire the funds ahead of the Manchester Road project. Manchester Road is the largest project out of the four that were approved.
Public Works Committee Meeting: Alderman Fleming suggested a Public Works Committee meeting on August 25 at 6:30 p.m. The committee agreed. He said that maps will be reviewed of the street repair history and the type of repairs. Curfew: Alderman Suozzi provided the Aldermen and Chief Schicker with an e-mail from a Ballwin resident requesting a change in the curfew ordinance. She asked that the Police Department review the resident’s concern to determine if the suggested change would be beneficial. Adjourn: A motion was made by Alderman Buermann and seconded by Alderman Suozzi to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 8:08 p.m. WALTER S. YOUNG, MAYOR ATTEST: MC July 28, 2008 |
Contact Us |
(636) 227-9000 voice |