The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri, met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, March 1, 1999, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results: Council members COFFMAN, HINDMAN, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, and KRUSE were present. Member COBLE was absent. The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting of February 15, 1999, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mrs. Crockett.
APPROVAL AND ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA INCLUDING
The agenda, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Kruse and a second by Mr. Coffman.
1. David B. Rogers - Presentation of Gift to Columbia Fire Department.
Mr. Rogers explained that recently while trying to cook a turkey in his new deep fat fryer, he had made several serious mistakes which had caused a fire on his deck. He reported the Columbia Fire Department had put on a noteworthy exhibition of professionalism, and had been as competent as he had been incompetent. Mr. Rogers stated after arriving quickly and assessing the situation, the firefighters tended to his burns and also gave his six-year-old granddaughter a teddy bear -- which had immediately calmed the child down. Mr. Rogers presented 18 teddy bears to the Fire Chief to ensure the continuance of the Fire Bear Program. He thanked the department for their efforts.
Chief Markgraf thanked Mr. Rogers for his contribution and read a note that had been received from Mr. Rogers' granddaughter. He explained that the care bears are carried on every piece of fire equipment, and are used in medical emergencies when a child is very upset. Chief Markgraf then presented Mr. Rogers with a care bear of his own.
2. Office of
Community Services and Columbia Public Schools Multicultural Programs
Mayor Hindman introduced Dr. Jim Ritter, Superintendent of Schools, and Monica Naylor, Coordinator of Multicultural Programs.
Mr. Beck explained that the Columbia Public School Partnership in Education is celebrating its 15th year, having been initiated in 1984. He reported there are now over 100 businesses and agencies engaged in activities with the School District. Mr. Beck noted that the City has eight partnerships with the School District, and that this new partnership is between the Office of Community Services and the District's Multicultural Program.
Dr. Ritter said the long-standing partnership between the City of Columbia and the Columbia Public Schools had benefitted both entities in many ways. He said tonight the School District welcomes the ninth partnership with the City, and added that they look forward to continuing their successful experiences with the City. Dr. Ritter thanked the Council for all they do for the City, and also for giving the City departments the opportunity to work with the School District and its children.
Monica Naylor and Phil Steinhaus introduced the members of the Multicultural Steering Committee. Mr. Steinhaus thanked the members for supporting the partnership.
Jolene Schulz, Director School/Community Programs, explained that in order to validate the partnership agreement, it would have to be signed by both partners. Mr. Steinhaus and Ms. Naylor signed the declaration of partnership agreement. Dr. Ritter presented the partners with plaques.
B391-98 Rezoning property located at the northwest corner of Nifong Boulevard and Forum
Boulevard from R-1 and R-3 to PUD-5 and C-P.
The bill was read by the Clerk.
Mayor Hindman announced that a request from the developer had been received asking for a further continuance. He anticipated a motion to do so would be heard and approved.
Mr. Beck explained that Mr. Hancock and Mr. Patterson have been working with the applicant and asked for an update.
Mr. Hancock noted that along with the C-P zoning request, a plan has also been submitted for approval. He said the easternmost portion of the tract is slated for nine buildings, consisting of about 75,000 square feet of retail. He commented that some office zoning has apparently been proposed, but it was not detailed on the site plan. A residential development is proposed for the westernmost portion of the tract (consisting of attached, single family, owner occupied homes) in an area on Sedona Drive.
Mr. Hancock explained that the plan has been revised since the packet was mailed to the Council, and that it is different from that which the Planning and Zoning Commission had acted upon. He said the major points relate to street access, and staff is opposed to access locations that would lie across right-of-way the City purchased years ago. He noted there are other issues as well. Mr. Hancock said the plan the Council was looking at tonight actually shifts some of the driveways to the west. Mr. Hancock said the staff has given a cursory, preliminary review to the new submittal, but a whole set of design parameters still need to be submitted.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
Craig VanMatre, an attorney with offices at 1101 E. Broadway, apologized on behalf of the developer for having to, once again, beg the Council's indulgence in asking for a continuance to April 5, 1999, in order to address many of the issues that remain unresolved. He said the developer is convinced a plan can be delivered that the majority of the Council, if not all, could support as a good plan, and an example of what a mixed use development in a small commercial residential setting can be. Currently, there are about ten issues that need to be addressed satisfactorily in order to answer comments and questions from the Council, staff, and neighbors. Mr. VanMatre reported the residential development has been redesigned to reduce its size and to grant access by means of a common roadway to both the residential and commercial developments. Mr. VanMatre said the developer is also studying whether or not one of the two entrances onto Forum Boulevard can be eliminated. In addition, there will need to be an understanding as to, if the plan is approved, exactly how much will have to be paid to reimburse the City for the cost of obtaining the right-of-way along Nifong Boulevard. Mr. VanMatre observed both Mr. Patterson and Mr. Hancock have indicated they have several problems with the plan, even as revised, and would prefer to have these concerns addressed (parking areas reduced, more landscaping, more aesthetics, and more attention to aesthetics on the northeast corner lot). Mr. VanMatre said the applicant wants to do as much of that as possible in an effort to ensure that no one suffers, and everyone involved benefits as a result of the adoption of the plan.
Mayor Hindman noted that the Council feels this issue needs to be presented to the neighbors in sufficient time that everyone involved would have an opportunity to review it well before the meeting. He asked when the revised plan would be ready to present to the neighbors. Mr. VanMatre said with the exception of the engineering details, they would be ready to do that in a matter of a few days. It would just be a matter of finding a time and place and publicizing the meeting. He suggested Monday or Tuesday of next week. Mr. VanMatre asked the staff how much time they would need. Mr. Hancock said staff would work with whatever time frame the Council wishes to assign them.
Mr. Hancock asked if Mr. VanMatre had mentioned right-of-way acquisition. Mr. VanMatre noted in the earlier plan, the developer was going to pay for certain off-site improvements as compensation for the right-of-way. When the plan got moved, the amount of off-site improvement costs went down. He said it was not their intention to eliminate that responsibility, it is just that they either need to have a method for establishing what that reimbursement amount will be, e.g. an appraisal, or they need to actually have an agreement as to what the amount will be if the plan is approved. Mr. Hancock guessed the time frame for the appraisal would dictate a lot of their actions, but said they would do their best to get it to the Council on the date that is decided on.
Bruce Piringer, 1000 Willowcreek, said residents are tired of delays and last minute changes. He noted the rezoning and commercial development of property at this intersection is opposed by the neighbors, opposed by City staff, and was recommended for denial by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Piringer said not only is it the wrong kind of zoning in the wrong place, but it is also inconsistent with the Land Use Plan and unsafe. He said the developer has a bad plan that will not be made better by another delay. He also commented that the developer made a bad investment and the neighbors should not have to pay for that mistake.
Clifford Ray, 1326 Willowcreek, asked the people in opposition to stand. Approximately two dozen people stood. He said he had talked to two local commercial realtors and they had evaluated the access rights, which was somewhere in excess of $1 million.
Mr. Kruse said he could appreciate the frustration on the part of the neighborhoods involved and also on the part of the developer and the Council. He pointed out that most of the changes being considered are those suggested by the Council. He said the postponement of the hearings is not exclusively because of the developer's wish to be a moving target. Mr. Kruse noted this is a very important location and a very complex issue, therefore, he considered the request to table the issue as being reasonable.
Mr. Kruse made the motion to table B391-98 to the April 5, 1999, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman.
Mr. Campbell agreed with Mr. Kruse and believed the City owed it to the neighborhood and the developer to get the best proposal in front of the Council before a final decision is made.
Mr. Coffman said if the Council votes to table the request, he wanted to make sure they have some kind of assurances in place that any other changes that might be made will also be relayed to the neighbors, and that there is adequate time for everyone involved to review it. Mr. Kruse said he has very strong feelings about all of the parties being given an opportunity, within a week to ten days, to attend a meeting that outlines the plan. Mr. Kruse reported he did not intend to vote to table this issue again after this evening.
Mr. Patterson asked if it was the intent of the Council that staff obtain appraisals on the right-of-access. If so, that may not be possible in 30 days.
Mrs. Crockett questioned how far from the intersection the access goes to the west. Mr. Patterson displayed the location on the overhead. He said it went to approximately where the R-3 zoning starts now, almost to Willowcreek. He believed it was 600 feet of right-of-way along the south side of the property, on Nifong, that is not protected by the access. Mrs. Crockett asked if the City originally bought the right-of-way because of safety concerns. Mr. Patterson said it was purchased for safety and traffic purposes. Mrs. Crockett said she is not in favor of the City selling access rights that were bought for safety. She is not interested in an appraisal on this property, and that all along she has not supported the right in/right out access. Mrs. Crockett reported that sacrificing safety for the money that could be made selling the right-of-way would not be worth it. However, she did not have a problem tabling the issue.
The motion to table, made by Mr. Kruse, seconded by Mayor Hindman, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mayor Hindman explained that the public hearing would be continued to the April 5, 1999, meeting.
(A) Worley Street
and Again Street storm water drainage improvement project.
Item A was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Patterson explained that this public hearing is to outline the second phase of the Again and Worley Street drainage project. He noted that the storm water detention facility had been constructed a couple of years ago, and that the remainder of the project consists of two upstream drainage improvements that will consist primarily of construction of reinforced piping. The areas were shown on the overhead as two sections from Worley down to Again Street. The project is estimated to cost about $189,200, which would come from the storm water utility funds. Mr. Patterson reported this was one of the priority projects that had been approved by a ballot issue when the storm water utility was formed. He explained it had been identified as a separate project that would be on the same bid.
Mr. Patterson reported the project at the west end would involve the construction of 42 and 48-inch reinforced concrete pipe, that would also have some area drain inlets to relieve both the area surface flooding and the structural flooding. He noted it would also be part of the upstream project that was originally a detention facility. He said this had been removed by the developer, who had contributed $9,000 toward the construction of the drainage improvements. Mr. Patterson indicated this project would not involve the taking of any structures, and the work could be done within the constraints of the existing structures.
Mr. Patterson explained the project on the east side is the more severe of the two in that it has a history of severe structural flooding. The existing system consists of a badly deteriorated corrugated metal pipe that in some places even goes under a structure on Again Street. It is proposed that this pipe be replaced with a 42-inch reinforced concrete pipe, in addition to the purchase of one structure located at 1107 Again Street. He said it would allow for the overflow of the 100-year storm to occur without flooding any structures. Mr. Patterson said staff has closely examined various alternatives, and this is the only option to assure structural flooding will not occur. He said there will be a considerable amount of trees and shrubbery that will be displaced with this option, and it is staff's intention to work with the property owners to develop a planting program as part of the final plans and specifications in order to assure that the replanting and landscaping is satisfactory to the people who will be affected by it.
Mr. Campbell asked if he understood this project would replace an existing drainage system. Mr. Patterson said the existing pipes are inadequate and unsatisfactory. He commented staff took into consideration the increase in the size of pipes when they designed the Again Street detention facility. Mr. Campbell asked about the size of the present pipes. Mr. Patterson said one potion of the pipe is 30-inches, and it will be replaced with a 42-inch pipe. He explained concrete provides more flow for pipe diameter. He explained that the present pipes will not handle the ten-year storm, and this project will accommodate the 25-year storm.
Mr. Janku asked if construction on the west side of the project is independent of the east side in terms of possible concerns about a house being removed. Mr. Patterson replied that was correct -- either side could be independently constructed. However, he noted the economy of selecting a contractor is the main reason for doing both projects concurrently. He also pointed out they are both part of the same drainage area.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
William Justus, 1104 W. Worley, said that Ms. Coble may have some comments to share with the Council with regards to meetings she has held with some of the property owners concerning the project. Regarding the portion of the project intended for the east end of Worley Street, Mr. Justus said he was not opposed to any improvement to the storm water drainage in the neighborhood, provided the plan is the most efficient, least invasive, and truly solves the drainage problems of the neighborhood. Mr. Justus said he realized that his personal concerns of having his air conditioning units removed from between the houses, the loss of at least six trees, and the risk to his foundation could be addressed in easement negotiations should the project continue.
Mr. Justus reported that at the November 5th meeting with City engineers, residents were told that a 6-foot wide by 4-foot deep concrete box culvert would be constructed to replace the existing metal drain pipe between the houses at 1104 and 1106 West Worley. His concern at that time was how the culvert could be installed in an area with only 12-feet between the homes. In the last week or so, Mr. Justus explained that his wife contacted the City and was told by an engineer that now the existing 42-inch corrugated metal pipe would be replaced with a 42-inch reinforced concrete pipe. He wondered whether or not the new pipe would adequately handle the storm water drainage, or if that size was selected because of the high level of construction difficulty. Mr. Justus was also told an overflow swale would be constructed between the homes, and he was troubled about the overall design and the placement of the swale, but no details were provided. He was interested in details regarding the swale, its capacity, and the anticipated route of the overflow that would not be handled by the swale. Mr. Justus noted that the storm drain inlet at the north side of Worley Street, at the west entrance of Nowell's parking lot, is often plugged, resulting in slow draining of the runoff from the parking lot and flooding of the street in that area. Currently, recycling bins at the west end of the parking lot produce litter that contributes to the slow draining and flooding. Should this proposed drainage improvement project be completed, Mr. Justus anticipated the litter would be washed through the drain pipe and into the Again Street Park area where it would collect. He felt a more appropriate location could be selected for the recycling bins which would alleviate the problem.
Mayor Hindman felt it would be a good idea to table the issue given the fact that Ms. Coble was not able to attend the meeting due to illness. He said because Ms. Coble has been working on this issue all along, he felt it would be beneficial for everyone to have her input.
Mr. Patterson pointed out that staff attempts to schedule meetings with neighborhoods at a very early stage in a project. At that time, final design parameters are not known. Mr. Patterson reported the 42-inch reinforced concrete pipe that is proposed as a substitute for what was discussed at the November meeting is designed to carry the 25-year storm. The existing 30 by 40-inch arched corrugated metal pipe will not handle a 10-year storm. He noted they do not try to put the 100-year storm in the conduit, they try to provide for it. Mr. Patterson stated the swale will not be between the two houses, and the inlets on Worley Street will be rebuilt on the north side and there will probably be some runoff, but that is material that runs off now anyway. Mr. Patterson commented that staff felt the project is adequately designed from a storm water management standpoint, and felt it can be done without endangering the foundations to the buildings. He said the staff engineer had told Mr. Justus that the City would work with him on the timing of the project, so air conditioning is not a concern. Mr. Patterson indicated staff is well-aware of the impact a project such as this can have.
Mr. Justus asked that the residents be informed more quickly in terms of the changes that might be proposed as the project proceeds.
Mr. Patterson pointed out that a delay would not affect the project as there is no time crisis involved. He said staff would be more than happy to try to further address any questions.
Greg Phillippe, spoke on behalf of his mother, Elizabeth Phillippe, residing at 1107 Again Street. He explained that his mother's home has been tagged for purchase in order to complete the storm sewer structure. His concern was that his mother be given a fair price for the home, and asked the Council to keep in mind that the structure has been well maintained. Mr. Phillippe believed his mother also deserved added expenses for moving costs. He explained that she has lived in the house for 36 years, and she had concerns about leaving it. He asked why the City had not purchased the house at 1109 Again Street when it was auctioned off last fall.
Mr. Patterson explained that the home at 1107 Again Street is where the structural flooding has occurred. He understood the water has been as high as the joists of the basement. Mr. Patterson reported staff evaluated the situation and had thought this residence was the one that would solve the problem. He said if they tried to correct the situation in some other way, there would be a considerable amount of land disturbance and grading, which would be more expensive. Mr. Patterson pointed out that Mr. King, of his staff, had met with Mr. Phillippe last week to explain the situation. Mr. Phillippe confirmed that they had met with Mr. King and he had explained the process somewhat, although, Mr. King could not answer the question as to why 1109 had not been purchased for the project instead of having to buy 1107. Mr. Patterson said the City did not have the authority to purchase it at that time.
Mr. Janku asked if there was anything that could be done to save the home at 1107 Again Street. Mr. Patterson said the other logical structure they looked at, which could be done, would be more expensive. That was the home at 1105 where he said they could have done enough grading to have diverted the water away. He said this is a natural area for water to accumulate and a lot of things have been done to try and alleviate the flooding problems. Mr. Patterson noted quite a bit of work has been done to the back of the Phillippe property in an attempt to keep the water out of the basement. He pointed out when the 100-year event occurs again, there will be water in that area. This project is the proposed solution for that problem.
Mr. Janku asked if Mrs. Phillippe's house has a garage. Mr. Phillippe said it has a garage on the east side. Mr. Janku asked if there was a structure underneath. Mr. Phillippe said the basement does not go underneath the garage, but there is probably about two feet of concrete under the garage, which is the same side the storm drains go under. Mr. Janku wondered if it would be practical to move the garage. Mayor Hindman thought that was an engineering question the Council should not get into. He suggested Mr. Phillippe discuss this issue with Ms. Coble to see what she might think.
Mayor Hindman made the motion that the Council table Item A until the March 15, 1999, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku.
Mr. Janku said he would still like to know if the suggestion he made earlier might be a possibility, and the feasibility of purchasing the home at 1109 Again Street.
The motion to table, made by Mayor Hindman, seconded by Mr. Janku, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mayor Hindman noted that the public hearing would be continued to the March 15, 1999, meeting.
annexation of property located at 2720 and 2750 Mill Creek Terrace.
Item B was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this 6.3 acre tract is located in south central Columbia. He said it would allow the two existing houses that have been approved for development by the County Commission to connect to the City sewer system. The property owners are suggesting that they might have the property zoned agricultural, A-1, when permanent zoning is requested.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
Tim Crockett, of Crockett Engineering Consultants, 2608 N. Stadium, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He pointed out that although there are two homes, one presently has sewer service, so only one would need a sewer connection once the annexation is approved. Mr. Crockett offered to answer any questions.
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
R8-99 Authorizing an agreement with Show-Me Central/Habitat for Humanity.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that some time ago, the City budgeted $40,000 of Community Development Block Grant money to assist Central Habitat for Humanity in their affordable housing program. He reported Habitat plans to develop some housing in the Haden Park area. He said questions have come up from time to time by the neighborhood as well as by the Council. Mr. Beck commented that an agreement has been prepared encompassing some of the questions that have arisen. He noted that an amendment had been prepared.
Ken Pike, 1203 Haven Road, thanked Habitat for their decision to allow for green space in the Haden Park Neighborhood, and residents are gratified they will be constructing sidewalks. He said they were encouraged that there will be further conversations for developing Haden Park as a safe place to raise children. He and his wife offered their support for the agreement, and also for Habitat as the contractor of Haden Park neighborhood as they enter into negotiations with the City for further infrastructure funding sources. Mr. Pike reported the additional monies create the potential for adding carports to some additional homes.
Mayor Hindman asked if the amendment was agreeable. Mr. Pike said they are pleased with what is in it.
Maureen Dickman, 206 S. Garth, President of Show Me Central Habitat for Humanity, offered to answer any questions. She noted that their engineer, Bill Marshall, was also available to answer questions. Ms. Dickman thanked the Council for their concern, and Mr. Hancock for his help in his work on the agreement.
James German, 4217 Stevendave Drive, said he was not in opposition to Habitat for Humanity. Mr. German explained that he had purchased two lots in Haden Park and had waited for several years before applying for a building permit. At that time, he was told he could not apply for Block Grant Funds and asked how Habitat could. Mr. Beck said the area is not in the eligibility area. He explained the grant was being made to Habitat for Humanity, an agency, not because the area is eligible, but because the beneficiaries are low to moderate income families.
Mr. German said he was told he could not sell his lots because they are not legal lots. He asked how someone else could sell lots when he cannot. Mr. German asked for a written explanation as to why he spent his tax dollars on lots he could do nothing with. Mayor Hindman asked the staff to look into the situation and to get back with Mr. German as the Council is clearly not in a position to answer any questions. Mr. Beck asked Mr. German to bring the paperwork to his office so the matter could be reviewed. Mr. Janku thought this is a positive development because there would be sidewalks and a green space easement. He is appreciative the City could work Habitat to help move this issue along. Mr. Janku said he is looking forward to working with Habitat to figure out other ways to enhance this development, and perhaps other future homes this organization may build in the community.
Mr. Janku made the motion that the Council amend R8-99 per the amendment sheet. The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.
The vote on R8-99, as amended, was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: COBLE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:
and directing City Manager to negotiate sale of City property to the
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
After discussing the matter with a representative of the Islamic Center, Mr. Janku explained they requested that this matter be tabled to the next Council meeting. After the opportunity for comments, he would make an appropriate motion.
Comments were called for with none received.
Mr. Janku made the motion that R34-99 be tabled to the March 15, 1999, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman.
Mr. Campbell said he had heard rumors that some alternatives might be presented. He said if this issue is tabled, he would like to see a time line put on it so that any information that is submitted to the Council, is done in an adequate fashion to allow time for proper consideration before any vote is taken. Mr. Janku thought the community would also appreciate knowing about any alternatives that might be offered in advance of the meeting. He noted that the Council has a work session scheduled for the 8th of this month.
Mr. Campbell asked that the motion also stipulate the Council insists on having materials with respect to any offers within a week. Mr. Janku agreed.
The motion to table R34-99, made by Mr. Janku, seconded by Mr. Coffman, amended by Mr. Campbell, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
Chapter 14 to prohibit parking along both sides of Grant Lane from
a point south
of Frontenac Drive to the intersection with Scott Boulevard.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained this is an unimproved street in southwest Columbia in which there has already been a public hearing. He said the Council recommended that Grant Lane be designed to be 30 feet wide with Class III bike lanes. It had been determined at the public hearing because of the narrowness of the street, parking would have to be removed.
B42-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: COBLE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
an airline airport agreement with Ozark Air Lines, Inc.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained this is a fairly standard airline agreement wherein the City would be leasing part of the terminal building that is already set-up for airlines. He reported Ozark needs this information prior to submitting their application to the FAA for an operating certificate.
B43-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: COBLE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
a domestic violence grant; appropriating funds.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this would authorize the City to accept $86,462.69 in grant monies. He said it will not require any new funds.
Chief Botsford said the program has been particularly successful. He pointed out that the Missouri Highway Patrol, the former grantee, has opted not to participate in the program this year, and the grant has been awarded to the Columbia Police Department. Because of the loss of one of the participants, they also authorized another police officer for Columbia, at no cost to the City -- any match being only in-kind. Much to the City's success, Chief Botsford reported the trained Highway Patrol Officer that was in the program opted to leave the Patrol and join the Columbia Police Department to participate further in the grant program.
B45-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: COBLE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
The following bills were given second reading and the resolutions were read by the Clerk.
a conveyance; authorizing payment of differential costs for 8-inch
serving Heritage Meadows, Plat 2; and approving engineer's final report.
B40-99 Accepting conveyances for utility purposes.
B41-99 Appropriating funds to upgrade continuous emission monitoring system at the power plant.
B44-99 Accepting conveyances for sewer, street and drainage purposes.
R35-99 Setting a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property located on the north side of
Smith Drive, west of Stone Valley Parkway.
R36-99 Setting a public hearing: 1998 CDBG and HOME Performance Report.
R37-99 Setting a public hearing: 6-inch water main upgrade serving Gregory Heights Subdivision.
R38-99 Setting a public hearing: 16-inch water main upgrade serving Gregory Heights Subdivision.
R39-99 Setting a public hearing: pedestrian enhancements at the intersection of Forum Boulevard
and Chapel Hill Road.
R40-99 Setting a public hearing: proposed sanitary sewer utility rate increases.
R41-99 Setting a public hearing: street construction at the intersection of Scott Boulevard and
The bills were given third reading and the resolutions were read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: COBLE. Bills declared enacted and resolutions declared adopted, reading as follows:
R42-99 Authorizing application to the Missouri Department of Transportation for Surface
Transportation Enhancement funds.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the federal government, through the State Department of Transportation, has money available for highway enhancement programs each year. He said the staff has brought a resolution to the Council each year designating projects staff would submit to the State Department of Transportation for consideration of funding. This year, there are three projects on the list that the staff has talked informally with the Council about at a public work session. One relates to the COLT Railroad corridor in the Columbia College area. Mr. Beck reported this fiscal year, the City set aside some CDBG money for engineering studies of the area. Once the engineering work is done, the City could consider an actual project. The total estimated cost for the engineering studies is $236,339, with $189,000 being federal money and $47,000 would be City match money.
Mr. Beck explained another project pertained to Route AC -- landscaping the median, sidewalks, and striping for bike lanes. The estimated cost for this project is $466,000.
The third project, and maybe the highest priority, Mr. Beck said related to the Bear Creek Trail program. In Phase I, it had been discovered that a substantial amount of bridge work needed to be done, and the preliminary estimate had been inadequate to complete it. Mr. Beck reported the City could apply for specific funds to construct a bridge on that segment of the trail. The estimated cost of this project is about $135,000, with $108,000 being federal money and $27,000 being City funds.
Because staff is unsure about the amount of money that might be awarded to Columbia, Mr. Beck said it was felt that the City should apply for all three projects and see how the prioritizing comes along when the committee meets with MODOT.
Mayor Hindman asked if this was this year's money. Mr. Beck said that is his understanding. Mr. Hancock agreed. As far as prioritizing is concerned, Mayor Hindman asked if it made a difference and whether that should even be done. Mr. Beck said it probably would if it involved equal amounts of money. He said the City needs to make sure this request is presented in such a manner so that if there is not enough funds for one project, that another project would not be lost altogether. Mayor Hindman pointed out that there would be a gap in the trail if the bridge is not constructed. He felt it should be given the highest priority.
Mr. Janku believed the bridge was probably the most immediate priority in terms of the ability to move forward. He said the City should obviously provide landscaping on Route AC, but that project is probably a year or two away from construction, and it is probable there would be a chance for another grant cycle. He noted the need for the COLT improvements as well, but thought it would be beneficial to establish the bridge as the number one priority because it is necessary. Mr. Janku observed the trail is well-used, and it has not even been officially opened yet.
Mayor Hindman said all of the project Mr. Beck mentioned are important, and he would like to have all of them done. He is hopeful the City could, somehow, reduce the amount of funding that would be needed for the bridge. Mr. Kruse thought the bridge would also be a priority with the State since they have already put money into that phase of the trail.
Mr. Beck agreed with the comments and suggested that the Council amend the resolution to indicate their preference for the trail being the top priority.
Mr. Janku made the motion that the Council amend R42-99 by adding Section 2 indicating that Item 3 in Section 1 is the City's top priority. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Crockett.
Mr. Beck suggested that along with the amended resolution, a copy of the minutes could also be sent which would indicate to the reviewers the feelings of the Council.
The motion to amend R42-99, made by Mr. Janku, seconded by Mrs. Crockett, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
The vote on R42-99, as amended, was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: COBLE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:
the final plat of Willow Brook, Plat 2.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this is a 6.8 acre tract of land at the northeast corner of Oakland and Alfalfa. He noted that it is outside the City limits; however, the applicant wants to connect to the City sewer line, which requires approval by the City Council.
The vote on R43-99 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: COBLE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:
the Mayor's Committee on Physical Fitness and Health.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mayor Hindman explained that this committee had been requested by Naomi Cupp, the Executive Director of the Governor's Council on Physical Fitness. He thought it was a good idea and felt young people, especially, need to learn the advantages of physical activity. Assuming the resolution will be adopted, he would like very much to obtain suggestions from people who would serve on it. Mayor Hindman noted he has already received a fair amount of response so far from people who are interested in serving on this committee.
Mr. Janku said he had heard the discussion about this issue on the radio, and noted that one of the areas that had been discussed pertained to nutrition. Mayor Hindman said several suggestions were made about having a nutritionist on the committee. Mr. Janku urged young people to apply as well.
The vote on R44-99 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: COBLE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:
The following bills were introduced by the Mayor, unless otherwise indicated, and all were given first reading:
construction of a 6-inch water main serving Gregory Heights Subdivision.
B47-99 Authorizing construction of a 16-inch water main serving Gregory Heights Subdivision and
calling for bids.
B48-99 Approving Engineer's Report for Capri Estates, Block 7 water main project; authorizing
payment of differential costs.
B49-99 Accepting a conveyance; approving Engineer's Report for Smithton Ridge, Plat 1 water
main project; authorizing payment of differential costs.
B50-99 Accepting conveyances for utility purposes.
B51-99 Accepting a conveyance for greenspace conservation purposes.
B52-99 Rezoning property located on the northwest side of U.S. Highway 63, south of Pioneer
Drive, from O-P to C-P.
B53-99 Rezoning property located on the west side of Scott Boulevard, south of King's Meadow
Subdivision, from A-1 and R-1 to PUD-10.
B54-99 Approving the final plat of Renaissance Meadows, Plat 2; authorizing a performance
B55-99 Vacating utility easements within Cambridge Place Subdivision, Block 1; accepting a
conveyance for utility purposes.
B56-99 Voluntary annexation of property located at 2720 and 2750 Mill Creek Terrace.
B57-99 Confirming the contract for the Mill Creek/Rockbridge drainage project.
B58-99 Approving Change Order No. 2 to the contract with Paric Corporation for the construction
of the 6th and Cherry parking garage.
B59-99 Calling for bids for the Oakland Gravel Road street improvement project.
B60-99 Calling for bids for the street improvement project at the intersection of Scott Boulevard
and Current Road.
B61-99 Authorizing the pedestrian enhancement improvements at the intersection of Forum
Boulevard and Chapel Hill Road; utilizing city forces.
B62-99 Amending Chapters 13 and 22 of the Code to increase charges for sewage service.
B63-99 Authorizing the acquisition of land for the Scott Boulevard hazard elimination project.
B64-99 Amending Chapter 11, Article IX of the Code relating to smoking in public places.
B65-99 Amending Chapter 16 of the Code by repealing section 162 pertaining to distributing
B66-99 Amending the Pay Plan to establish the positions of Information Services Supervisor I and
Information Services Supervisor II.
B67-99 Appropriating funds donated by the Cosmo Club for the purchase of an American flag.
REPORTS AND PETITIONS
A) Street Closure Requests.
Mr. Beck said this included four requests from the Columbia Track Club, Mid-Missouri Soap Box Derby, Palm Sunday, and Stephens College for their graduation program. He noted that the requests had been reviewed by the CCA Board, and they had no problem with any of them.
Mr. Janku thought there was discussion about rerouting the Track Club race, but said he preferred that the Club be allowed to proceed with their usual route with a request to consider a substitute location in the future. His preference was the Flat Branch Trail Park because the race would not have to cross Broadway and disrupt traffic.
Mr. Janku made the motion the requests be approved as submitted. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Crockett and approved unanimously by voice vote.
Transfer of Funds.
C) Boone County
Commission's Request for Expanded Notification on Annexation Zoning
Mr. Beck explained the report suggested that by Council direction, a policy could be developed wherein property owners within 1,000 feet of a subject zoning, particularly in newly annexed areas, would be notified of the public hearing for such. He said this would be done whether people live either in or outside of the city.
Mayor Hindman asked whether the County uses a notification process, and if it was for property within 1,000 feet. Mr. Beck thought it was. Mr. Hancock said he did not know if the County notifies City residents within 1,000 feet of a rezoning in the unincorporated area. He was hopeful they would reciprocate with this. Mayor Hindman thought perhaps the City should meet with the County representatives as there are some situations where there would be a fairly dense population, and the 1,000 feet would be almost prohibitive.
Mr. Campbell thought there might be a practical position in which notification would include all properties immediately adjacent to the subject tract, as well as the first layer of residences beyond that. That would enable a number of people to be reached, but not necessarily stipulate a specific distance. Mr. Campbell thought the distance was what was confusing. He noted in the City's case, 185 feet usually affects one or two lots, but in the County, 185 feet might not even include one lot. In order to get around the density question, Mr. Campbell suggested including all adjacent properties and one layer beyond. He wondered if the County would notify everyone within 1,000 feet in a dense area like Indian Hills. Mr. Beck suggested the staff explore this issue, and then perhaps come up with a definition that does not specify a 1,000 foot distance.
It was decided the matter would be taken up at a later date.
of Private Parking Lots in the Central Business District.
Mr. Janku said he had heard a number of comments about this issue from a variety of people. He would like to see it referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Janku explained that when a public parking lot is considered, there is a public hearing before any action is taken. He would prefer to see something else required, such as a conditional use permit. He did not want to prohibit parking lots in the Central Business District, but some sort of process and standard should be in place. That way, if a building burns down, it is not automatically turned into a parking lot.
Mr. Kruse noted that some cities allow only a certain percentage of the lot fronting a street to be in hard surface. He said there will be parking on half of the lot and a building on the other half. Mr. Kruse observed it relates to how the buildings are sited on a lot.
Mayor Hindman said he has become convinced that this is a significant problem. He said commercial areas need to be pretty tight with everything being approximate -- blocks need to be small, and the distance people travel should be concentrated. Mayor Hindman thought parking lots were something that could be very detrimental to a downtown.
Mr. Janku made a motion that the matter be referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their review and report back. The motion was seconded by Mr. Kruse and approved unanimously by voice vote.
E) Stop Sign
Request on Forum at Woodrail and Crestwood.
Mr. Beck explained that Public Works had performed a study at this location and had recommended that there not be a stop sign placed at this location. It did not meet traffic warrants and it was pointed out that during the morning peak hour, the average time one waited was 6.9 seconds at Woodrail and 5.5 seconds at Crestwood.
Mr. Kruse said the request was made by a neighborhood who had presented a petition. He thought there was more than just the concern about making a left turn from Crestwood going south onto Forum. He said the grade is problematic. Mr. Kruse felt the report was correct.
Mr. Campbell thought staff needed to take into account the peak traffic periods, rather than just the average traffic periods. Mr. Beck noted that the averages outlined in the report were at the peak period. Mr. Campbell disputed the figures.
Mr. Janku saw this as a lesson in terms of "be careful what you ask for, you may get it". He reported these residents wanted reduced traffic flow through their neighborhood, and now they do not have enough traffic flow to justify a stop sign. He noted many neighborhoods want to cut themselves off from through traffic.
of the Nifong Boulevard at Bethel Street Intersection - Supplemental
Mr. Beck said the Council had asked the staff to do some more review into the design of this intersection after the public hearing was held. He noted at one time, the City was trying to do the two intersections on Nifong at the same time. Staff proposes to get the Bethel intersection bid as quickly as possible so most of it could be constructed this summer.
Mr. Kruse made the motion that the staff be directed to proceed as described. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Crockett and approved unanimously by voice vote.
G) Snow Removal
Mr. Campbell thanked the staff for preparation of the report and said it had been very well done. He said many property owners are quite willing to shovel their sidewalks if they know their neighbors are going to do it also. He suggested, before snow season begins next year, that the City take a brochure (door hanger) around to certain areas of the City to remind people they do have the obligation during the winter months to keep their sidewalks clear. Mr. Campbell nominated Stewart Road for the project. He said it is a small thing, but thought it might have an impact with the people there if they see other neighbors out shoveling their snow. Mr. Campbell was hopeful the City would not encounter another situation like the one that had occurred this winter when there was some considerable danger to pedestrians as a result of the sidewalks not being cleared.
Mayor Hindman thought the suggestion was reasonable, and added that it would be a good idea to also include information about individuals who are interested in clearing sidewalks. He suggested that the City advertise for individuals who are willing to shovel sidewalks and be the clearing house for this information. Mayor Hindman commented residents could then call the City to obtain a list. He mentioned a program in Colorado where they coordinate young people with elderly people.
Mr. Campbell noted that he had suggested earlier that such a list be put on the City's web page. Mayor Hindman said they might be able to put the information on a hang tag.
Mr. Beck noted that there is an agency that is providing those services now. Mr. Campbell said that was for older people, this would be for anyone.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
COMMENTS OF THE COUNCIL, STAFF, AND PUBLIC
Mr. Coffman explained that the Council had received a letter from the Historic Preservation Commission indicating that they were about ready to take applications for landmarks. He said these would be single pieces of property that would have the historic preservation overlay on them. It was noted in the letter that the request for a landmark designation would probably cost $300. The Commission is asking that the Council consider waiving those fees to encourage people to apply for the historic designation. Mr. Coffman said there is a precedent for this in the down zonings the Council has allowed in his neighborhood.
Mr. Coffman made the motion that the staff be directed to report back on how this might be accomplished. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mr. Kruse noted another accident over the weekend at the Carter Lane/South Providence connection. He asked some time back about the possibility of a slip lane and signalization at this location. Mr Kruse emphasized the importance of City staff meeting with the Department of Transportation to find out if that is something that is on their agenda.
Mr. Kruse said he had received a request from the Grasslands Neighborhood about the possibility of some sort of traffic calming device. He explained that the residents are concerned about traffic coming off Providence and into the neighborhood, particularly on Bingham, but on Burnam and Brandon also. Mr. Janku asked if it was cut through traffic. Mr. Kruse thought it was caused by people living in the neighborhood. Mr. Janku asked if a "No Thru Traffic" sign would help. Mr. Kruse said there is no place to cut through to. Mr. Campbell thought one of the reasons for people going in was for parking.
Mr. Kruse made the motion that staff be directed to look into the situation and report back. The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
At the last meeting, Mr. Kruse explained that the Council defeated a request for annexation and zoning at the intersection of the proposed Southampton and Sinclair. He requested that this issue be reconsidered because he thought the proposal would bring in the C-P as an R-1 holding zone. At some time in the future, he supposed some other type of zoning would probably be proposed.
Mr. Kruse made the motion that the request be reconsidered. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mr. Campbell spoke about the proposed commercial zones the Council has recently been discussing pertaining to questions of parking, and how much there should be and the type it should be. He gave examples of Cherry Hill, and the Jurgensmeyer and Tosini proposals.
Mr. Campbell made the motion that the Planning and Zoning Commission be asked to examine the parking regulations in C-P or C-1 zones, and report back as to their feelings about the best way to handle the parking regulations in some of the smaller, more innovative proposals. The motion was seconded by Mr. Kruse and approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mrs. Crockett pointed out that when Public Works and Parks and Recreation bids out work for engineering services, the project comes before the Council for approval. She noted that Water and Light does not do that. She asked why that department is treated differently than the others.
Mr. Beck said Water and Light must either go through Purchasing or the City Council. He said they cannot hire a contractor on their own. Mr. Beck pointed out Water and Light is attempting to establish an arrangement wherein they could obtain proposals on several projects together, perhaps on an annual basis, in order to avoid delays in getting projects completed. Mr. Beck said that had been a concern of his, and before too long something would be brought in regarding that process. He noted it is currently under review.
Mr. Janku said there are a couple of items in the Capital Improvement Budget from last year, the sidewalks and landscaping on North Providence and improvements on Garth. He asked for a report.
Regarding recent STP applications for improvements to the Business Loop and the development of a plan, Mr. Janku said the City had been told by the Department of Transportation that we cannot obtain money from them for planning. It was stated a plan must be in place before the request for funding. Mr. Janku asked for a staff report about what could be done to begin the planning process so the next time the STP grant process starts, the City will be able to submit a request for funding.
Mr. Beck said the problem is that the State will not fund a master plan for the entire Business Loop, but they will fund the planning for segments that are part of a project. Mr. Beck suggested that the City hire a firm in order to obtain some estimates, working with the staff or a committee. He thought that would require a lot of work with the staff from a technical standpoint.
Mr. Janku asked for a preliminary report on staff suggestions as to how to approach the issue, and some suggested direction to the Council so movement could proceed forward.
Mr. Campbell remembered a report from four or five years ago indicating it would cost $100,000 plus to develop a plan for the Business Loop.
Mr. Janku said he realized the Council may have discussed this issue previously, but it has never moved forward. He thought perhaps just a segment should be used as a prototype for a demonstration project.
Mr. Beck said the staff could try to put together some alternatives and see if a renewed cost estimate could be obtained. He asked Mr. Hancock if the City received a cost estimate from a firm when this issue was last addressed. Mr. Hancock could not recall if that was the case, but would look and see what is in the files. He would forward that information to the Council, as well as talking to some folks about getting estimates.
Mayor Hindman had heard that the Missouri Legislature passed a bill pertaining to a system whereby neighborhoods or sections of a community can collaborate and form something similar to county Neighborhood Improvement Districts (NIDS). He noted these can be used for all kinds of improvements. Mr. Kruse said they are Community Improvement Districts. Mayor Hindman said he would like more information about them and what they can be used for. He said it might apply very well to the Business Loop 70 situation. Mayor Hindman thought it was a tool the Council should be familiar with. He asked that someone research it. Mayor Hindman also requested that someone look into another recently passed bill dealing with distressed communities.
The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
© 2016 City of Columbia