CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
MONDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2003
I.
CALL TO ORDER
A
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Liberty, Missouri was held
in the Council Chambers at City Hall on October 13, 2003 with Mayor Stephen P. Hawkins presiding. Mayor Hawkins called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
II. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The invocation was given by Council Member Bill Parker,
who then led the pledge of allegiance.
III. ROLL CALL
Roll
call was answered by Mayor Stephen P. Hawkins; Ed Collins and Coni Hadden, Ward
I; LeRoy Coe and Anna Marie Martin, Ward II; Lyndell Brenton and Juarenne
Hester, Ward III; and Bill Parker, Ward IV.
Also in attendance were Patty Gentrup, City Administrator; Cynthia
Boecker, Assistant City Administrator; Steve Hansen, Public Works/Development
Services Director; Craig Knouse, Police Chief; Chris Deal, Parks &
Recreation Director; Gary Birch, Fire Chief; Julie Lawless, Preservation
Planner; Sara Ott, Assistant to the City Administrator – Human Resources; Lyndsay
Heal, Management Assistant; Jane Sharon, Deputy City Clerk; George Kapke, Legal
Services Provider; Summer Harlow, The Kansas City Star; Angie Borgedalen,
Liberty Tribune; Joe Cook, Liberty Sun News; and 11 members of the public.
IV. APPROVE MINUTES AND SUMMARIES
A.
REGULAR SESSION
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 22, 2003
Council Member Martin moved to approve the minutes as
distributed. Council Member Brenton
seconded the motion, which carried 6-0-1.
Council Member Coe abstained due to absence.
B.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 22, 2003
Council Member Hadden moved to approve the minutes as
distributed. Council Member Martin
seconded the motion, which carried 6-0-1.
Council Member Coe abstained due to absence.
C.
STUDY SESSION
MEETING SUMMARY OF SEPTEMBER 29, 2003
Council Member Coe moved to approve the meeting
summary as distributed. Council Member
Parker seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
D.
STUDY SESSION
MEETING SUMMARY OF OCTOBER 6, 2003
Council Member Hadden moved to approve the meeting
summary as distributed. Council Member
Martin seconded the motion, which carried 6-0-1. Council Member Hester abstained due to
absence.
V. CITIZENS’ PARTICIPATION
A.
PROCLAMATION FOR
RED RIBBON WEEK
Mayor Hawkins stated that this presentation would be moved
to the end of the meeting, to allow more time for the recipient to arrive.
VI. MEETING SCHEDULE
Mrs. Gentrup stated that there would be a special
session, beginning at 6:00 p.m. and a study session following that on October 20. She noted that there would be no meeting on
October 27.
A.
APPOINTMENTS
Tax Increment Financing Commission
Reappoint
Dean Buford to a term expiring 10/31/07
Reappoint
Russ Weathers to a term expiring 10/31/07
Council Member Coe moved to approve the appointments. Council Member Hester seconded the motion,
which carried unanimously.
B. AUTHORIZE
EXECUTIVE SESSION TO BE HELD OCTOBER 13, 2003 IN THE COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING
THE REGULAR SESSION TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL LITIGATION MATTERS, AS AUTHORIZED BY
610.021(1) RSMo – MOTION
Council Member Coe moved to approve the
appointments. Council Member Hester
seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS – None.
A.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
OF VENDOR PAYMENTS FROM SEPTEMBER 19, 2003 THROUGH OCTOBER 10, 2003 – ORDINANCE
Document No. 6120 was read. Council Member Martin moved to approve the
ordinance. Council Member Hester
seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion was as follows: Council Member Collins – yes; Council Member
Martin – yes; Council Member Hester – yes; Council Member Parker – yes; Council
Member Hadden – yes; Council Member Coe – yes; Council Member Brenton –
yes. The motion carried unanimously; it
was approved by the Chair and inscribed in Ordinance No. 8587.
B.
*APPEAL OF
DECISION BY THE HISTORIC DISTRICT REVIEW COMMISSION DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A WALL AT 108 NORTH MORSE, DOUGHERTY
HISTORIC DISTRICT [HDRC CASE NO. 03-027D] – RESOLUTION
Preservation Planner Julie Lawless stated that this appeal is from
denial of a certificate of appropriateness allowing a Pavestone wall. She stated that in August 2002 City staff was
notified that a wall was being demolished at the applicant’s residence. Staff contacted the property owners and
explained the requirement for a certificate of appropriateness (COA) to be
approved by the Historic District Review Commission (HDRC). At that time the applicant submitted such a
request for review and a COA was approved by HDRC for demolition of the wall
and construction of a new wall. Ms.
Lawless stated a stipulation of the COA issued at that time was that any new
wall must be constructed using natural stone and the applicant could contact
City staff with any questions about construction materials.
Ms. Lawless stated that in August 2003, staff was notified that the
applicant was putting in a Pavestone wall.
Staff contacted the applicant and explained that a new application
needed to be submitted. A COA was denied
by HDRC at its August 25, 2003 meeting. She
stated HDRC denied the COA based on the Pavestone wall being out of character
for the neighborhood.
Ms. Lawless stated that Council is to consider whether the HDRC erred
in denying the COA or accept its interpretation of the historic preservation
ordinances by upholding the HDRC decision.
She stated that all replacement materials used for exterior work in
historic districts are measured against a four-part test for compatibility
including color, surface texture, reflectivity and finish. Ms. Lawless stated that HDRC had determined
that the Pavestone did not meet the criteria the limestone had
established. She said the limestone wall
was removed from the entire length of the property and the Pavestone wall was higher,
with a uniform pattern and appearance.
Ms. Lawless stated that, in reviewing the streetscape, the Pavestone did
not fit with the character of the neighborhood and HDRC members indicated it
was not compatible.
Council Member Collins asked what had happened to the original
stone. Ms. Lawless stated that it had
been removed and there had been no apparent attempt to save it. Council Member Martin asked if the property
owners had lived there awhile. Ms.
Lawless said they had. Mrs. Martin asked
how property owners are informed about the historic preservation
ordinances. Ms. Lawless said that if
requested, a packet including brochures is available at City Hall; a
centerpiece spread also appeared in a recent Liberty Citizen and information is available on the City’s
website. She stated there are news
flashes on the subject from time to time and packets for those that make
contact with staff. Council Member
Parker asked if the homeowner had any contact with staff before the work
began. Ms. Lawless said there had been
contact earlier, but construction of the wall began before the property owners
discussed it with staff.
Council Member Hadden asked if walls require building permits. Ms. Lawless said they do not if they are
under 48” in height. They require both a
building permit and submission of engineering plans if over that height. Mrs. Hadden asked how information about the
requirement for plans is conveyed. Ms.
Lawless said applicants are notified of the requirement for engineering plans
as well as the requirement to go through HDRC for a certificate of
appropriateness. Staff walks the
applicant through the entire process that is required.
Mayor Hawkins asked about the sequence of the contact made by staff
prior to the new wall being constructed.
Ms. Lawless stated that when demolition of the old wall commenced, City
staff notified the applicant of the need to submit an application to HDRC. This was in 2002. Mayor Hawkins asked if Pavestone was proposed
at that time. Ms. Lawless said it was
not and that the stipulation of the certificate of appropriateness was that
natural stone be used.
Jan Babbitt, 108 N. Morse, provided handouts to Council and stated that
the retaining wall under discussion had deteriorated and was starting to come
down on the sidewalk in fractured pieces.
She stated it was dangerous and they decided to have someone take it
away. She said it remained down for four
years and when they were ready to put in a new wall they talked to the Zoning
Commission and were told no permit would be required. She stated that City staff stopped work on
the wall and they were told about HDRC at that time. She said they applied for a certificate of
appropriateness and were told about the natural stone. Ms. Babbitt stated they had been quoted a
price of $8,200 to install a stone wall and that was too expensive. She said they paid $1,900 for pavers and
wanted it to look neat. She said they
did the work themselves. After that they
received another notice from the City and went back to HDRC. This time, she said, it didn’t pass.
Ms. Babbitt said at one point the wall was over 48” but not now. She said neighbors on both sides signed a
petition that contained fifty signatures.
She said only two had refused to sign.
She said when something is required, the City needs to deal with the
cost, because this requirement would cost too much. Ms. Babbitt said they were not changing the
house or the nature of the neighborhood.
She said there are pavers nearby and they could not get their investment
back if they put in natural stone.
Ms. Babbitt said there were a number of walls in the neighborhood. She said the neighbor’s wall was less than
ten years old and, at the time it was put in, had not been liked by the
neighbors. She said they live in a
neighborhood that has large and modest homes.
She asked if that mix in a neighborhood supports an $8,000 wall. She said she has nice neighbors and believes
they are not embarrassed to live next door to her wall. Ms. Babbitt said one letter she had received
from the City said a problem was the pavers were all one color. She said she has friends with degrees in art
that could add color for variation.
Council Member Brenton asked if the application approved in 2002 had
included the stipulation that natural stone must be used for the wall. He asked if she understood the stipulation
and that she would need to contact staff if it was not used. He asked if they attended the hearing at
which that was approved. Ms. Babbitt
said the approval had included the stipulation to use natural stone. Mr. Brenton asked if the Commission’s
approval had been clear that pavers could not be used. Ms. Babbitt said it was very clear but not
economically feasible or fair. She said
they didn’t change the house and it is a landscape issue. Mr. Brenton asked if she had made these
comments at that HDRC meeting. Ms. Babbitt
said they were given names of two places.
Mr. Brenton said she had an opportunity to mention her concerns in the
2002 meeting. He said it seemed a better
approach to appeal the decision excluding pavers before investing in the
wall. He said it appeared the property
owners had operated outside the process throughout. He said that staff had indicated in the
letter that if there were problems to contact them.
Virgil Babbitt stated they were never included in the process and were
stopped when they started putting in the wall and told it must be natural
stone. He said they said no to Ms.
Lawless. Mr. Brenton asked if there had
been any response by staff to their objections.
Mr. Babbitt said Zoning said okay and there was no problem, then they
got the stop work order. He said they
had applied for a certificate of appropriateness and then finished the wall
before the HDRC denied the application.
He said there needs to be a better line of communication and it should
have been brought to their attention earlier.
Ms. Babbitt said Ms. Lawless had said it could be graded, but it is very
steep and want the area to be attractive to neighbors. She said they were doing their best to make
it look good.
Homer Harrison, said he had owned his property at 113 N. Morse since
1985 and he was a taxpayer and voter. He
said he lives across the street from the wall and watched the old wall fall
down and the new wall go up. He said he
sees it everyday and it looks good. He
said the next property has no wall and asked where the district is in applying
rules. He said they are talking about
aesthetics in a district with different architectural styles. He said the same material was used at the
Junior High School for a wall built by the City. He said his objection is that the rules
should be followed in a timely fashion.
He said he objects to the treatment these people are getting.
Jeff Griffith, 102 N. Morse, said the wall looks nice and is safer than
it was. He said it looks as good as the
yellow umbrellas.
Fay Bedinger said she has a rock wall across the street and this wall
looks as good as the concrete wall at the Junior High. She said Council should spend its time getting
walls repaired.
Mayor Hawkins said that, procedurally, if the Council approves the
resolution, it would override the HDRC decision. Council Member Hadden said Council approval
would replace a certificate of appropriateness.
Council Member Hester asked for clarification that approval of the
resolution would approve the wall. Mayor
Hawkins said that was correct.
Council Member Hester asked if the Junior High School is in the
historic district. Ms. Lawless said it
is not. Mrs. Hester asked if an appeal
of the restriction to natural stone for materials could have been made after
the first COA was approved. Ms. Lawless
said it could. Mrs. Hester asked about
the purpose of the historic districts.
Ms. Lawless stated it is not about aesthetics, but about preservation
and maintaining history and architecture.
She said part of it is character.
She said preserving materials is not about one person liking it, but
about preservation. Mrs. Hester asked if
there is more modern artificial stone that could have been used. Ms. Lawless said there is and it was
initially offered as an alternative to natural stone. She said that, had the applicants contacted
staff, she could have worked with them on the materials.
Mrs. Hester asked if there is any difference between this and the
previous denial appealed to Council. Ms.
Lawless said the same procedure is used for all.
Council Member Hadden stated that she had recently replaced a rock wall
at her home, built in the 1890s, for considerably less than $8,000. She said she feels strongly about
preservation, so much so, that she had helped put historic districts on the
books in Liberty. She said when
the ordinance was written, based upon the one established in Chicago, they had
been told it was not about what we like but about preserving the historic
elements and integrity of structures.
She said there are a lot of new materials that were not previously on
the market that could have been discussed.
Mrs. Hadden said the rules help maintain objectivity in the process. While the rules can’t be written to cover
every instance, they are needed to make sure they don’t show favoritism.
Mrs. Hadden stated that in reading through the minutes, several options
were available – one was grading. She
said it is part of the staff’s job to work with citizens. She said while they don’t always know
everything that is going on, they try to get the word out about the
procedures. Mrs. Hadden said passing this
resolution would set the precedent that if someone doesn’t do as they are
supposed to, but it’s already done, it’s okay.
She said she would vote against the resolution.
Council Member Collins moved to approve the resolution. Council Member Martin seconded the motion.
Council Member Brenton said he was in a quandary; he found the petition
signed by people in the general vicinity compelling. He said it would likely have been compelling
for HDRC and staff. Ms. Babbitt said
that she had been told the petition would not be considered by HDRC. Mr. Brenton continued that the rules are in
place to protect the integrity of the historic districts. He said signing the petition says you
shouldn’t have to pay attention to the rules.
Mr. Brenton said that by not appealing before the wall went up, the
applicants circumvented the process. He
said that this is not picking on the applicant but applying the same standards
to all. He said he would vote in favor
of the resolution but would have done so in 2002 and would have liked the
applicant to take the opportunity to talk with staff; by completing the wall,
that opportunity was removed.
Mr. Babbitt said options were not provided until a month ago. Mr. Brenton said it has been more than a year
since the applicants have had the opportunity to explore options. Mr. Babbitt said they couldn’t get bids.
Council Member Coe said the Babbitts should be commended for their
work, just not how they did it. He said
he believes it is a landscape issue and grading would make it look worse. Mr. Coe said it doesn’t seem right to be able
to tell them what they can use to put a wall in but not be able to say
crumbling walls have to be repaired. He
said he would vote in favor.
The motion failed 3-4-0. Council Members Martin, Hester, Parker and
Hadden voted in opposition.
C.
FRANCHISE
AGREEMENT WITH MISSOURI GAS ENERGY – ORDINANCE
Mrs. Gentrup stated this is a non-exclusive agreement with the utility.
Document No. 6121 was read.
Council Member Collins moved to waive the rules and consider the
ordinance on first reading. Council
Member Martin seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
Council Member Hadden moved to approve the ordinance. Council Member Coe seconded the motion. Council Member Brenton asked if there are any
issues with MGE that should be addressed or resolved before the agreement is
approved – particularly about work in the right-of-way.
Public Works/Development Services Director Steve Hansen said there have
been issues in the past and there are none currently. Council Member Brenton asked if this
agreement is perfunctory. Mr. Hansen
said it is and no other utilities have expressed interest. Mr. Brenton asked about the ten year term for
the agreement. Mr. Hansen said the
previous agreement had been for twenty years and ten years was the minimum the
gas company wanted. He said it can be
renewed up to a maximum of twenty years.
The motion carried unanimously; it is approved by the Chair and
inscribed in Ordinance No. 8588.
D.
AMENDMENT TO
CONTRACT WITH CROWLEY, WADE AND MILSTEAD, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,088.00 FOR
ENGINEERING SERVICES PERTAINING TO THE MOSS TO FAIRVIEW STORM SEWER PROJECT –
ORDINANCE
Mrs. Gentrup stated this extends the scope of the project, due to lower
bid costs than anticipated. Council
Member Martin asked if some of the charges would be reimbursed. Mr. Hansen stated that some costs related to
storm water may be reimbursed.
Document No. 6122 was read.
Council Member Martin moved to waive the rules and consider the
ordinance on first reading. Council
Member Hadden seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
Council Member Hester moved to approve the ordinance. Council Member Brenton seconded the motion,
which carried unanimously. It was
approved by the Chair and is inscribed in Ordinance No. 8589.
E.
ACCEPTANCE OF
SANITARY, STREET, GRADING, STORM, AND WATER FOR CLAY MEADOWS SOUTH, 1ST
PLAT – RESOLUTION
Council Member Collins moved to approve the resolution. Council Member Martin seconded the motion,
which carried unanimously and is inscribed in Resolution No. 2146.
F.
ACCEPTANCE OF
STREET, STORM SEWER AND GRADING FOR GENTRY PLACE – RESOLUTION
Council Member Martin moved to approve the resolution. Council Member Hester seconded the motion,
which carried unanimously and is inscribed in Resolution No. 2147.
G.
ACCEPTANCE OF
STREET, STORM SEWER AND GRADING FOR THE FORD ROAD PROJECT AT GARRISON AND PLUMMER ROADS – RESOLUTION
Council Member Martin moved to approve the resolution. Council Member Hadden seconded the motion,
which carried unanimously and is inscribed in Resolution No. 2148.
H.
AMENDMENT TO LIBERTY CITY CODE CHAPTER 20, “MOTOR VEHICLES & TRAFFIC”,
PERTAINING TO STOP INTERSECTIONS, YIELD INTERSECTIONS SPEED LIMITS AND PARKING
– ORDINANCE
Document No. 6123 was read.
Council Member Collins moved to waive the rules and consider the
ordinance on first reading. Council
Member Martin seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
Council Member Hester moved to approve the ordinance. Council Member Brenton seconded the motion,
which carried unanimously. It was
approved by the Chair and is inscribed in Ordinance No. 8590.
I.
CONTRACT WITH
HAVENS CONSTRUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $88,670 FOR WEST INTERCEPTOR SEWER REPAIR
– ORDINANCE
Document No. 6124 was read.
Council Member Coe moved to waive the rules and consider the ordinance
on first reading. Council Member Martin
seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
Council Member Martin moved to approve the ordinance. Council Member Hester seconded the
motion. Council Member Brenton asked
whether a bid process had been used. Mr.
Hansen said this was the original contractor and most knowledgeable. Mayor Hawkins asked if this is in the nature
of an emergency repair. Mr. Hansen said
not yet, but could pose a problem if left unattended. Council Member Hadden asked if there was a
concern about the unavailability of equipment.
Mr. Hansen said it does take time to get the pumps. The motion carried unanimously; it was
approved by the Chair and is inscribed in Ordinance No. 8591.
J.
*AMENDMENT TO LIBERTY CITY CODE CHAPTER 22, SECTION 21, PERTAINING TO CONCEALED
WEAPONS – ORDINANCE
This item was removed from the agenda without objection.
K.
CONTRACT WITH LIBERTY ONE-HOUR CLEANING FOR DRY CLEANING SERVICES RELATED
TO POLICE AND FIRE UNIFORMS – ORDINANCE
XI.
MISCELLANEOUS
MATTERS FROM CITY ADMINISTRATOR – None.
XII.
MISCELLANEOUS
MATTERS FROM MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
Referring
to the earlier appeal of the HDRC decision, Council Member Brenton said it was
an unfortunate procedure. He encouraged
City staff and the city at large to be as communicative as possible but this
was a no win situation.
Mayor
Hawkins stated that when one owns assets in the hundreds of thousands, that
person is obligated to at least check out the options and to abide by the City
Code. He said the City laws were scoffed
at and laws are put together for the community as a whole. If they are considered okay in general, but
don’t have to be enforced against individual property owners, they should be
reexamined. Perhaps the City should then
question why there are historic districts.
He said it is the City’s job to uphold community standards and that is
not always easy. Mayor Hawkins said Liberty is probably one of the few cities its size that has a
preservation planner. The studies were
done to benefit the community as a whole.
He stated the City can’t have devotion then not hold to it. He said the applicant could have made the
proper appeals before sinking $1,900 into the project.
Marilyn
Poore stated that Colleen Jones was unable to attend the meeting. Mayor Hawkins read the proclamation declaring
the week of October 24-31 as Red Ribbon Week in Liberty and presented it to Ms. Poore.
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
The
meeting adjourned at 8:29 p.m.
__________________________________
Mayor
Attest:
_____________________________________
Deputy
City Clerk