CITY COUNCIL MEETING

MINUTES

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2006

 

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 November 27, 2006 with Mayor Robert T. Steinkamp presiding.  Mayor Steinkamp called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

II.         INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

 

The invocation was given by Council Member Anna Marie Martin who then led the pledge of allegiance.

 

III.       ROLL CALL

 

Roll call was answered by Coni Hadden and Harold Phillips, Ward I; LeRoy Coe and Anna Marie Martin, Ward II; Juarenne Hester and John Parry, Ward III; and Nick King, Ward IV.  Also in attendance were Curt Wenson, City Administrator; Cynthia Boecker, Assistant City Administrator; Steve Hansen, Public Works Director; Brian Hess, City Engineer; Craig Knouse, Police Chief; Gary Birch, Fire Chief; Linda Tyree, Finance Director; Tony Sage, Information Services Director; Steve Anderson, Planning & Development Director; Val Drogt, Special Projects Manager; Dan Fernandez, Planner; Rebecca Wymore, Planner; Sara Cooke, Public Relations Coordinator; Shawnna Funderburk, Assistant to the City Administrator; Jane Sharon, Deputy City Clerk; Legal Counsel Paul Campo; Jason Noble, The Kansas City Star; and 13 members of the public.

 

IV.       APPROVE MINUTES AND SUMMARIES

 

A.        REGULAR SESSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 13, 2006

 

Council Member King moved to approve the minutes as distributed.  Council Member Hadden seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

 

B.         SPECIAL SESSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 20, 2006

 

Council Member Coe moved to approve the minutes as distributed.  Council Member Phillips seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

 

C.         STUDY SESSION MEETING SUMMARY OF NOVEMBER 20, 2006

 

Council Member King moved to approve the meeting summary as distributed.  Council Member Martin seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

 

V.        CITIZENS’ PARTICIPATION – None.

 

VI.       MEETING SCHEDULE

 

VII.      CONSENT AGENDA – None.

 

VIII.     PUBLIC HEARINGS

 

A.        AMENDMENT TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TO INCLUDE A ZONING DISTRICT FOR TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT [P&Z CASE NO. 06-049A] – ORDINANCE (to be continued to the January 8, 2007 regular session)

 

Mayor Steinkamp opened the public hearing and stated that the public hearing for the Planning & Zoning Commission had been continued and it was requested that this public hearing be continued to January 8, 2007.

 

Council Member Hadden moved to continue the public hearing and consideration of the ordinance to the January 8, 2007 regular session.  Council Member Phillips seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

 

B.         *PETITION TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IN LIBERTY TRIANGLE – ORDINANCE (continued from the November 13, 2006 regular session)

 

Planning & Development Director Steve Anderson stated a petition had been submitted to the City to establish a Community Improvement District (CID) in the Liberty Triangle.  This step had always been anticipated for the Triangle project in order to accelerate the pay down of the debt.

 

Paul Campo, Special Legal Counsel to the City, with Williams & Campo law firm, noted that much of this CID petition had been reviewed in a general discussion of CIDs at the last study session.  He stated that a question had been asked about the requirement of the petitioner to enter into a cooperative agreement, once the CID is formed.  Mr. Campo referred to the current redevelopment agreement that states a cooperative agreement will be entered into following establishment of a CID.

 

Chase Simmons, 6201 College Boulevard, Overland Park, Kansas, stated that he provided legal representation to the petitioner and introduced Ryan Cook and Scott Cargill, also present to answer any questions on behalf of the petitioner.  Mr. Simmons stated that the CID would permit a one percent sales tax to be added to the tax on sales within the CID which would go toward paying off the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) debt for redevelopment in the CID area.  This action is following through with what was set in motion in 2004 with the execution of the redevelopment agreement.  All tenants within the CID area have agreed to the additional tax in the lease of property and all will receive a notice of the tax, once it is established.

 

Mr. Simmons added that, within sixty days of the establishment of a CID, a board being formed and a sales tax passed, a cooperative agreement would be developed and brought forward for Council consideration.  He stated this is a lengthy process which goes through the Clay County Board of Election and the sales tax would not go into effect until July 2007.  He also noted that the petition cannot be amended this evening, but if required to change anything, a new petition would have to be produced and brought forward.

 

Council Member Martin asked what would happen if the anticipated development doesn’t occur.  Mr. Simmons stated that if the additional revenues are all at the risk of the redeveloper and go to the redeveloper’s bottom line.  There is no risk to the City with this CID.

 

Council Member Parry asked for clarification of whether the cooperative agreement is just a nice idea after the CID is formed or whether it is required.  Mr. Simmons stated it is a requirement within the redeveloper agreement currently in effect.  The redeveloper would be in breach of the redeveloper agreement if a cooperative agreement is not created with this CID.  Mr. Parry asked what the Council could do if it did not want the term of the CID to be fifty years as identified in the petition.  Mr. Simmons stated that the intent is for the CID to run for the length of the TIF.  Beyond that the CID could stay in place and the tax could go down, but the redeveloper would come back to Council to review future plans.  Mayor Steinkamp asked if the redeveloper has estimated double the time needed just to cover its financial obligations.  Mr. Simmons said that was correct and 50 years is a standard in these petitions.

 

Mayor Steinkamp asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the petition.  Seeing none, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the petition.  Seeing none, he closed the public hearing and returned discussion to the Council.

 

Document No. 6596 was read.  Council Member King 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 Phillips seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.  It was approved by the Chair and is inscribed in Ordinance No. 9052.

 

C.         *REQUEST TO REZONE 8.74 ACRES FROM R-1A, SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO C-2, GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR ROGERS’ PLAZA [CASE NO. 06-047R&PDP] – ORDINANCE

 

City Administrator Curt Wenson stated that a TIF District related to this development would be considered by City Council at the December 18 Special Session and that there had been a lot of cooperative work between the applicant, his consultants and the City on both these projects.

 

Planner Rebecca Wymore reviewed the project located north of A Highway and east of Place Liberté.  She stated there are two lots, which are currently open space with the new elementary school zoned R-1A and Place Liberté zoned R-2.  The site is also bordered by A Highway and I-35.  The application is to rezone 8.74 acres from R-1A, suburban residential, to C-2, general business district, which will allow for general business uses.  There is access to adequate public facilities and turn lanes would be added on A Highway.  The Future Land Use Plan calls for part of the land to be commercial and part conservation land.

 

Ms. Wymore continued, stating that the design was appropriate for the site.  Rogers Sporting Goods would occupy Building 1 and the landscape plan goes above what is required with buffering to the north and west of the site.  The Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning and the preliminary development plan.

 

Mayor Steinkamp noted this is a continuation of the public hearing, which was opened at the meeting on November 13, 2006.  He asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of the application.

 

Brick Owens, HNTB Land Planning, 715 Kirk Drive, Kansas City, Missouri, stated that his firm had been asked to create a land plan for the Rogers’ family.  He introduced Shannon Rogers Peisert, Kelly McClelland, and David Matthews, the development team for the project.  Mr. Owens stated this was an opportunity to move Rogers to a new site so that a road could be extended through the current location in the Triangle.  He stated that the site analysis revealed that this fills a niche with multi-family rental units, the school, and a church up to the bend in A Highway.  He stated the grading is a challenge, ranging from 45 feet above to 45 feet below the road.  He stated development would require some assistance, but the area opened for development when the pump station was moved.  With this being a sporting goods store, the site would have an outdoor theme.  There would be a double in and out to the site and Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) requires a traffic study, which calls for a left-hand turn lane and a widening of A Highway.  The north end of the site would be developed in the second phase, with entries established for the best sight distance.  Buffering would be added in the project and would be helped by the roundabout.  The buildings would also serve as buffers, being niched into the ground to act as retaining walls.  Expandability has been built in to the building design.  The first phase would include storm drainage in the form of a wet basin.  The second phase would help with buffering and the signage would face the highway, away from the neighbors.  Wall-mounted lighting would be used on the buildings.  Four-sided architecture would be used on the building toward the front of the development.  The storm drainage would be used for an amenity on the site and trees would be planted around the pond.  Phase 1 would start in 2007 and Phase 2 in 2008.

 

Shannon Rogers Piesert, Rogers Sporting Goods, stated the family was excited to be moving on with Liberty.  She stated this site is about the last available spot in Liberty to move the store’s operation.  She added that they had tried to take the neighbors into consideration when designing the development.  Ms. Peisert stated this would be a great entryway while staying within a growth area in Liberty.  She added that the Missouri Department of Conservation has worked with her on plans for trees, a possible rain garden and a type of asphalt that is more porous to absorb rain.  Ms. Peisert said she hoped the Council would want the business to stay in Liberty.

 

Council Member Hadden asked if the buffering on the northern boundary would be included in the second phase of the development.  Mr. Owens stated a lot of site work is involved and the grading would take place in the first phase; with the trees added in the second phase.

 

Council Member Hester stated this was a very attractive plan and asked if the area near the first building was a service entry.  Mr. Owens stated that was correct.  Mrs. Hester asked if rentals of the other sites would be handled by Rogers and what types of rentals would be permitted.  Ms. Peisert said they would be leasing the other spaces and, though no tenants were signed yet, they would likely be sporting goods type businesses in the first phase.  Mrs. Hester asked if any businesses permitted in C-2 could go into this location.  Mr. Anderson said that was correct and the specific types could be further addressed when a TIF agreement is brought forward.

 

Council Member Phillips asked if all the buildings were designed with the four-sided architecture.  Mr. Owens said only the one facing the highway has that design, but precast architecture with the use of old materials such as metal would be used for the others.  He added there would be more detail provided when a final development plan is brought forward.

 

Council Member Hadden asked if there is any state law restricting the sale of guns near schools or churches.  Mr. Anderson stated the applicant has assured the staff there is none.  The applicant’s legal counsel, Kelly McClelland, stated that there is nothing that would prohibit the sale of guns on this property.  Ms. Peisert stated that she had researched the issue extensively and the only restrictions pertaining to gun sales were in school zones, but not extending to private property.

 

Council Member King asked if all the highway changes would occur at the same time.  Mr. Owens stated the grading of the site would all happen at the same time, but the turn lanes would be constructed in conjunction with the phases of the development.  Council Member Phillips asked what impact the development could have on the intersection of A Highway and 291 Highway.  Mr. Anderson stated that has been considered and it will add to the traffic.  He added that interchange improvements at 291 Highway and I-35 were anticipated in 2010, and in the meantime, the turn lanes would assist with the traffic generated by this development.

 

Council Member King asked about the fencing around the loading area.  Mr. Owens said that the protective fencing would be needed to secure the back area and added that more detail would be provided when the final development plan is brought forward.

 

Mayor Steinkamp asked if anyone else present wished to speak in favor of the application.  Seeing none, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the application.

 

Walt Tabory, 2001 Camille Court, stated that he is opposed to the rezoning for three reasons:  1) it is against the current Land Use Plan, which identifies the area for residential development; commercial development may carry with it monetary benefits for the City but does not benefit the neighbors; 2) what he and his neighbors will have as a view of this development is likely to be Butler buildings and trash receptacles.  Mr. Tabory said he didn’t doubt there would be a nicer view from A Highway, but his current view is of several acres of trees and that will change with this proposal.  He stated he has walked the property and counted 500 trees that are eight inches in diameter or larger.  The addition of this development would change that; and 3) Mr. Tabory stated his opposition is also based on the prospect of a gun shop and ammunition within a short distance of a school.  In summary, he restated that there would be a bad view for the residents and the plan goes against the Land Use Plan and it would place guns in close proximity to schools and neighborhoods.  Mr. Tabory said he looked around for a nice place to raise his children and chose Place Liberté.  He asked the Council to rezone to R-1 instead of C-2.

 

Erin King, 1312 LaChateau, stated this isn’t the best area, but property values could increase being near this development.  She stated that trees are nice, but one-half of the property is zoned for commercial already and someone will come in and develop it.  She noted all she could see from her house is the school.  She stated the Rogers would do a nice job.  Ms. King stated that the Rogers have been in town for a long time and it is good for them to stay in Liberty.  People come to Liberty just to go shop at their store and it would be great to rezone the property to let them build in Liberty.

 

Mayor Steinkamp asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor or in opposition to the application.  Mr. Owens stated that some of the property is already zoned C-2 and development of the ground will fix the problems mentioned regarding trees.  He stated that the City requires two trees to be planted for every tree 8” in diameter that is removed in development.  He stated that the school had removed a number of trees during construction of the school.  He stated that the applicant would work with the neighbors to place trees in the area between the school and the residents, if that was desired.  Ms. Peisert stated that they would like to do more at first but grading of the entire site must be done in order to complete the project, because of the issues with the utilities.  She restated that they want the development to look great, but adding the roundabout required by MoDOT necessitated the rezoning be approved to C-2.

 

Council Member King asked about the size of the new trees to be planted.  Mr. Owens stated the requirement calls for 2-inch in diameter and the trees are about 12 to 14 feet tall.  Mr. King asked how much would be visible behind the buildings.  Mr. Owens stated that, due to the elevations, there would not be much that is visible.  Assistant to the City Administrator Shawnna Funderburk stated that there is a natural berm that would remain in place with the development.  Mr. Owens stated that about six to 12 foot of the building would be visible from the neighborhood and evergreens would be planted in future phases.

 

Seeing no one else wishing to comment, Mayor Steinkamp closed the public hearing and returned discussion to the Council.

 

Document No. 6597 was read.  Council Member King 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 Martin seconded the motion.  Council Member Hadden stated that she had talked with people beforehand who had expressed a concern about this project getting started and not being finished.  She stated that, with all the preparatory work required on the site in the first phase, that issue has been addressed.  She stated that Liberty has high landscaping standards, which at times developers think are too high, but which are important.  She stated a lot of thought went into keeping this Liberty business in Liberty and she would vote in favor of the rezoning.

 

Council Member Martin commended the applicants for continuing its efforts to find a satisfactory place in Liberty and expressed appreciation for their efforts.

 

Council Member Phillips stated he appreciated the applicants’ comments regarding a possible rain garden and working with the Department of Conservation.  He stated this could be a real showplace and also that he would appreciate the applicant going beyond what was required for the replacement of trees.

 

Council Member King thanked the applicant for the extra work done in anticipation of Council’s questions.

 

The motion carried unanimously.  It was approved by the Chair and is inscribed in Ordinance No. 9053.

 

D.        *AMENDMENTS TO THE LIBERTY CODE OF ORDINANCES [P&Z CASE NO. 06-050A]

 

Mayor Steinkamp noted the substitution of language to add those occupying property with regard to limitations on the numbers of dogs and cats.

 

Ms. Wymore stated that Council had directed staff to bring forward ordinances that would affect the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).  She stated the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval of all the ordinances.

 

Council Member Phillips asked if there is a way to balance someone wanting to do something with adjacent neighbors who may be opposed to the activity.  Mr. Anderson stated that if a certain percentage of adjacent property owners are opposed to the special use permit, the vote can require a super majority to pass.

 

Council Member Hester asked for clarification that the 100 acres had been reduced to 40 acres.  Mayor Steinkamp said it had.  Mr. Anderson stated the language change referenced by the mayor earlier pertained to “owner or occupier” of land.

 

Council Member Martin asked if Council Member Parry needed to remove himself from the discussion because of a conflict of interest.  Council Member Parry stated the ordinances do not apply to him but he would not be voting on the home occupations due to a potential conflict of interest.

 

1.                   HOME OCCUPATIONS IN ACCESSORY STRUCTURES – ORDINANCE (SECOND READING)

 

Document No. 6582 was read.  Council Member Coe moved to approve the ordinance.  Council Member Hadden seconded the motion, which carried 6-0-1.  Council Member Parry abstained due to a potential conflict of interest.  The ordinance was approved by the Chair and is inscribed in Ordinance No. 9054.

 

2.                   NUMBERS OF PETS AND DEFINITION OF DOG KENNEL – ORDINANCE (SECOND READING)

 

Document No. 6583 was read.  Council Member King moved to approve the ordinance as amended.  Council Member Phillips seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.  It was approved by the Chair and is inscribed in Ordinance No. 9055.

 

 

3.                   SPECIAL USE PERMITS – ORDINANCE (SECOND READING)

 

Document No. 6585 was read.  Council Member Coe moved to approve the ordinance.  Council Member Phillips seconded the motion, which carried 6-0-1.  Council Member Parry abstained due to a potential conflict of interest.  The ordinance was approved by the Chair and is inscribed in Ordinance No. 9056.

 

IX.       ORDINANCES, CONTRACTS AND RESOLUTIONS

 

A.        ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF VENDOR PAYMENTS FROM NOVEMBER 3, 2006 THROUGH NOVEMBER 17, 2006 – ORDINANCE

 

Document No. 6598 was read.  Council Member King moved to approve the ordinance.  Council Member Coe seconded the motion.

 

Council Member Hadden asked for clarification of the purchase of Polk Directories charged to clothing allowance.  Deputy City Clerk Jane Sharon stated that Polk Directories are a reverse phone directory which allows addresses and names to be looked up by phone numbers.  Finance Director Linda Tyree stated the coding was probably an error and would be researched and corrected as necessary.

 

Vote on the motion was as follows:  Council Member Phillips – yes; Council Member Martin – yes; Council Member Hester – yes; Council Member Hadden – yes; Council Member Coe – yes; Council Member Parry – yes; Council Member King – yes.  The motion carried unanimously; it was approved by the Chair and inscribed in Ordinance No. 9057.

 

B.         *FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 12,000 SQ. FT. ADDITION AT ST. JAMES CHURCH [P&Z CASE NO. 06-048FDP] – RESOLUTION

 

Planner Dan Fernandez stated that the application is for an addition to the St. James Parish south of the Sears Grand Shopping Center and is to be built on the east side of the existing building.  No additional landscaping is required and the plan meets adequate public facilities’ requirements.  The structure conforms to requirements set forth in the UDO and the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval.

 

Council Member King moved to approve the resolution.  Council Member Martin seconded the motion, which carried unanimously and is inscribed in Resolution No. 2266.

 

C.         SOUTH LIBERTY PARKWAY UTILITIES

 

            1.         WATERLINE EXTENSION PROJECT

 

a.         FINAL AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT WITH HAINES & ASSOCIATES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $19.774.97 – ORDINANCE

 

Document No. 6599 was read.  Council Member King moved to waive the rules and consider the ordinance on first reading.  Council Member Coe seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

 

Council Member Coe moved to approve the ordinance.  Council Member King seconded the motion.  Council Member Phillips asked about the mention in the staff report of reimbursement through the TIF or other funding districts.  Ms. Tyree stated that these expenses are placed in reserved accounts in anticipation of TIF Districts being established.  Mr. Phillips asked what funds would cover the expenditures if TIF Districts are not established.  Ms. Tyree stated the monies would come from the Water Fund.  Mr. Anderson added that the Whitehall Station TIF District has just been formed, and may reimburse part or all of this expense.  Mayor Steinkamp clarified that if another TIF District were to be established, reimbursement could come from that source as well.

 

The motion carried unanimously.  It was approved by the Chair and is inscribed in Ordinance No. 9058.

 

b.         ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT – RESOLUTION

 

Council Member Hadden moved to approve the resolution.  Council Member Coe seconded the motion, which carried unanimously and is inscribed in Resolution No. 2267.

 

2.         CONTRACT WITH HOLTHOUSE CONSTRUCTION LLC FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WEST AREA SEWER IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $323,609 – ORDINANCE

 

Council Member Martin asked what made the bids so diverse.  Public Works Director Steve Hansen stated that each bidder bases its numbers on the perception of the job.  Some bid just to stay on the bid list and provide information as required.

 

Council Member Hadden asked if the City has done business with Holthouse Construction in the past.  Mr. Hansen stated it has and the business has been in Liberty for a number of years.

 

Council Member King asked for an explanation of the funding being used that was not required for the Rush Creek project.  Ms. Tyree stated that funds remained from the bond issuance and had been anticipated to be used for the I & I project, but would now be used for this project and the I & I project postponed.  Mr. Wenson noted this project could also be reimbursable through an established TIF District.

 

Document No. 6600 was read.  Council Member Phillips 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, which carried unanimously.  It was approved by the Chair and is inscribed in Ordinance No. 9059.

 

D.        ACCEPTANCE OF HOSPITAL VALLEY SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION PROJECT – RESOLUTION

 

Council Member King moved to approve the project.  Council Member Coe seconded the motion, which carried unanimously and is inscribed in Resolution No. 2268.

 

X.         OTHER BUSINESS

 

XI.               MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS FROM CITY ADMINISTRATOR

 

Mr. Wenson stated that a staff vehicle had been involved in an accident at Sunset and Liberty Drive.  There were no injuries and the accident is still being investigated.  He stated that budget numbers would be provided to Council at the end of this meeting and would also appear in the Council packets distributed next Thursday.

 

Mr. Wenson stated that the City’s legislative program is different than that of a corporation in that it consists of general statements.  Several of the topics remain in the program and have been included for several years, such as economic development issues.  As legislation is filed, the City’s position will be stated with more specificity.  Others are an opportunity to an interest in a particular topic to the legislators, such as the request for legislators to inform the City of grant opportunities.  The program also lists the City’s top transportation funding needs.

 

A.        2007 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM REVIEW

 

Ms. Funderburk reviewed the legislative program proposed for 2007, which annually addresses community needs at the state and federal levels.  The program is submitted to all state and federal representatives.  Included in the program are issues that have been presented in past legislative programs, such as annexation powers; eminent domain; franchising authority, personnel issues, right-of-way management; telecommunications services; tax increment financing; 9-1-1 wireless surcharge; and a primary seat belt law.

 

New issues included this year include property maintenance; law enforcement interstate mutual aid; red light camera law; request for legislative notification of grant availability; and transportation funding priorities.

 

At Council direction, these issues will be brought forward for a formal presentation and consideration at the Council’s December 18 special session.

 

Council Member Parry expressed opposition to including the issues of eminent domain, the red light law and the primary seat belt law.

 

Mayor Steinkamp noted there were two items from last year not on the list this year, which were state legislation to allow imposition of a hotel tax and support for art districts.  Assistant City Administrator Cynthia Boecker stated these weren’t part of the 2006 legislative program but had been discussed during last year’s legislative session.  She added these can be added to the program as Council directs.

 

Council Member King stated the format was very different and he appreciated how easy it is to understand.

 

Mr. Wenson stated that staff planned a brochure to provide to legislators, once a program is approved.  He asked if there was a consensus on the additions mentioned by the mayor.  Mayor Steinkamp said there was and to add them.

 

XII.            MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS FROM MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

 

Council Member Phillips thanked the staff for checking with the Council.  He stated that a resident in the Jewell District contacted him about not seeing parking enforcement in the neighborhood recently.  Council Member Hadden stated she had seen the parking officer in the area.

 

Council Member Coe asked about a house being built on Leonard Street.  Mr. Anderson stated that Bob Rothery is building the house and, since it is not in a historic district, the City has few restrictions with respect to the design of the house.

 

Council Member King asked when the intersection 291 Highway and Claywoods Drive would re-open.  City Engineer Brian Hess stated that MoDOT has order parts for the signals and may put some in before the construction improvements are completed.  He added that both turn lanes are virtually complete and the turn lane on Claywoods Drive is still under construction.

 

Mayor Steinkamp stated that incorrect information about the status of the Flintlock over pass had been reported in the School District’s Quick News.  Mike Brewer, who serves on the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) Committee, had reported information that has since been updated.  Council Member Martin added that the CIP Committee has a meeting scheduled soon to discuss this project.

 

Council Member Hadden stated the Santa Parade is scheduled for Saturday on the Square.  Council Member Parry asked if Santa’s house would be on City property this year.  Mayor Steinkamp said it would be on City property again this year.

 

XIII.     ADJOURNMENT

 

The meeting adjourned at 8:56 p.m.

 

 

                                                                                    __________________________________

Mayor

Attest:

 

 

_____________________________________

Deputy City Clerk