MAY 3, 1999

    The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, May 3, 1999, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri.  The roll was taken with the following results: Council Members CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, and JANKU were present.  The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also present.

    The minutes of the regular meeting of April 19, 1999, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Ms. Crockett.

    Mayor Hindman noted a request to remove B121-99 from the Consent Agenda and have it placed under Old Business.  He also noted that R92-99 would be added to New Business.
    Upon her request, Mr. Campbell made the motion that Mrs. Crockett be allowed to abstain from voting on B124-99.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    The agenda, as amended, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mrs. Crockett and a second by Mr. John.


    Mayor Hindman noted that Boy Scout Troop 703 from Fairview United Methodist Church, was present with their leader, Jesse Munkirs.  He reported the Scouts are working on their Citizenship in the Community Merit Badge.

1.    Urban Wussler - Repeal of Columbia's Deposit Ordinance
    Mr. Wussler spoke as Chairman of the Repeal Deposit Ordinance Committee.  Since the Blue Bag System is almost completed, he said it was the Committee's intention to pursue efforts to have the ordinance repealed.  Mr. Wussler said the ordinance was not keeping Columbia clean, which had been the original intention.  He asked that the Council invite the Committee to a work session so they could explain their thoughts.
    Mrs. Crockett told Mr. Wussler she was disappointed that he decided to speak this evening because they had discussed this issue two months ago and she had told him that the Blue Bag System was not totally implemented.  She said the last route was only implemented a month ago, and until the City works out some kind of arrangement with Civic Recycling, it would be hard to repeal the ordinance.  Mrs. Crockett reported once everything is lined up, she did not think there would be a problem getting the ordinance repealed.  She assured him she would do whatever possible to get the ordinance repealed.  Mrs. Crockett is hopeful the Council would put it to the vote of the people, but indicated it had to be taken one step at a time.

B118-99     Rezoning property located on the southwest corner of south William Street and Bass
                    Avenue from R-3 to O-P.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this request conforms with the City's Development Plan and the rezoning had been recommended for approval by the City staff and by the Planning and Zoning Commission on an 8-1 vote.  He explained that the Hospital plans to use the property for a 60 space parking lot.  He said it would require Council approval on the parking plan itself at a later date.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Tom Schneider, an attorney with offices at 11 N. Seventh Street, spoke on behalf of the Board of Trustees of Boone County Hospital.  He said this badly needed parking lot would be located directly across the street from the main parking lot, between two existing lots.  Mr. Schneider noted that about 18% of the area would be green space with 15 trees being planted -- although only 11 would be required.  He explained that drainage issues are also addressed in the Plan.  Mr. Schneider reported the East Campus Neighborhood Association had been contacted and he believed there to be no opposition.
    Mr. Coffman asked if there would be any sidewalks in conjunction with this project.  The reply was that a sidewalk abutting William Street would be constructed and an existing walk on Bass would be replaced.
    Clyde Wilson, 1719 University Avenue, a member of the East Campus Neighborhood Association, said residents appreciate what Boone Hospital is doing and they have no objection.  He commented they are also pleased that the Hospital is building a sidewalk at the present time between Anthony and Broadway.
    Mr. Coffman added his thanks to the Hospital for the sidewalk they are currently constructing on Ann Street.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B118-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO: NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B119-99     Rezoning property located on the east side of South Fourth Street, between East
                    Broadway and Cherry Street from M-1 to C-2.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck pointed out that this is the existing Katy Station site that is currently zoned industrial.  He noted this request for C-2 conforms with the City's Land Use Plan.  The staff as well as the Planning and Zoning Commission have recommended approval of the request.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Tom Schneider, an attorney with offices at 11 N. Seventh Street, spoke on behalf of the property owner, Jack Maher.  Since the restaurant closed, he explained that the south half of the tract is now vacant.  He said the down zoning would be beneficial to the marketability of the property because it would eliminate on-site parking requirements.  He said the area was clearly no longer industrial and he felt this to be an appropriate request.  Mr. Schneider noted the large amount of nearby parking and said there was no longer any need for on-site parking at this location.
    Mr. Janku understood this rezoning would allow the continuation of the alcohol use.  Mr. Schneider said that was correct.
    Ms. Crayton voiced concern about the alcohol use in close proximity of a church.  Mr. Schneider felt that the City no longer has ordinances that address the issue.  He explained that this rezoning would in no way change the uses that could otherwise exist.  Mr. Schneider stated he could not say what Mr. Maher would be doing with the property, and he noted that the existing depot building might once again become a restaurant and have an outdoor cafe on the north side.  Ms. Crayton asked how many other churches have bars near them.  Mr. Schneider explained that particular regulation was once commonplace, but about 15 years ago the United States Supreme Court said that could no longer be done.  Mr. Boeckmann thought there was a statute on the state books with the distance being 100 feet.  He said it requires the consent of the governing body of the church or the school within that distance.
    Mr. Janku said a few years ago the City's zoning ordinance was amended as it pertains to live music, and they came up with a standard at the property line in terms of noise.  Mayor Hindman said that would clearly be a way to deal with the situation, if there was a violation of that ordinance.  Mr. Hancock read from the ordinance which dealt with music played from indoors only, which outlined it is a permitted use in C-1.  Mr. Boeckmann noted that there are also provisions in the noise ordinance that have limitations apart from the zoning.
    Mr. Janku thought this raised an interesting question and noted there are a number of restaurants or bars downtown near some other churches.  He said outdoor music is becoming very popular, particularly downtown, and these kinds of things would surface.  Mr. Janku reported he would vote in favor of this request, but thought the Council needed to look into the potential impact.
    B119-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO: NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B120-99     Rezoning property located south of the eastern terminus of Pendleton Street from R-3 to
                    O-P; approving an O-P Development Plan.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this small tract of land is located within the Housing Authority boundaries.  The plans are to build a 7,400 square foot administration building.  A Development Plan was displayed on the overhead and Mr. Beck said both the rezoning and the plan were recommended for approval by the staff and the Commission.  Before developing the plan, Mr. Beck explained that the applicant had worked with the staff relating to the flood plain area.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Dan Simon, an attorney with offices at 601 E. Broadway, spoke on behalf of the Housing Authority of the City of Columbia.  In order to properly administer the housing units, he said the Housing Authority is in desperate need of new office space.  Mr. Simon explained they have been operating from inadequate and non-handicapped accessible offices in one of their existing developments off of Providence Road.  He noted that this property is immediately adjacent to the main housing project on Providence Road and they own all of the land around it.  Mr. Simon stated that Kimi Chinn, project architect, was present to answer any questions regarding the architecture of the building.  He displayed a rendering of what the appearance of the building would be.  Mr. Simon pointed out that it would be a very heavily landscaped building with a lot of open space, and the building itself would be unobtrusive.  He noted that the land is vacant with the exception of one single family home.  Mr. Simon explained that the owners of the home are joiners of this request.  He reported the Housing Authority has made arrangements with these individuals to either build them a new house on Housing Authority land located immediately to the north, or to move their existing house from its present location to that site so these people will not be inconvenienced.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B120-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.   VOTING NO: NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B121-99     Rezoning property located on the southeast corner of East Broadway and South Ann
                    Street from R-3 to O-P.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this two-tenths of an acre tract is located east of Boone Hospital and presently has two houses on it.  One structure is a duplex unit and it is planned that this structure would be used for offices.  He noted that the Planning staff had not made a recommendation and that the Commission had recommended denial of the request.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Clyde Wilson, 1719 University, explained that the President of the Neighborhood Association was out of state and had asked him to speak on her behalf.  Mr. Wilson said residents are opposed to this request for three reasons:  it represents the northwest-most corner of a residential area, it is an extremely busy corner being the entrance to Boone Hospital Center, and they felt there is no need for office space in the area.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. John felt that O-P versus an R-3 use on this corner would probably be less intense, and added that the City would have input on where the entrance to the site would be located.  He said there was a comment about a house being adjacent to the site, but noted there is an eleven unit apartment building between the subject tract and the houses on Ann Street, with a parking lot wrapping around them.  Mr. John pointed out that this project cannot expand beyond its own bounds and infringe on the neighborhood -- it could only infringe on Broadway.  His thought was that it would be better for the intersection if it was an office building, and would eliminate the potential for the houses being torn down to create a larger apartment building.
    Mrs. Crockett said she shared the concerns of Mr. John, but was troubled that the property owner did not appear this evening to speak to the issue.
    Mr. Coffman felt this rezoning request would create creeping of commercial in the area.  Because the site is sloped, he thought it would be difficult to put in another driveway at that location.
    Mr. Campbell said he has major concerns about traffic in the area and it may be better to have an O-P zone rather than R-3, but that was speculation.  He commented that right now, there is a single unit on the property and he felt wherever possible the Council should encourage the maintenance of single family houses.
    Mayor Hindman noted that the property is zoned R-3 and there are no guarantees it would remain a single unit.
    B121-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, JOHN.  VOTING NO:  CAMPBELL, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  Bill defeated.

B122-99     Rezoning property located within the Benton Stephens neighborhood from R-3 to R-1
                    and R-2.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that several years ago the Council adopted a policy wherein if property owners want to down zone their property, the City would pay the advertising costs as long as the requests were brought in together once a year.  The staff recommended approval of this request as did the Planning and Zoning Commission.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Coffman thanked the owners of these three properties for contributing to the revitalization of their neighborhood.
    B122-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO: NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B123-99     Amending Chapter 29 of the Code to establish a $150 processing fee for most rezoning
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that the Council had asked the staff to look into the cost of rezoning requests.  The Commission recommended a $150 fee on a 5-1 vote, provided that the requests from A-1 to R-1 be exempt.
    There was a discussion as to whether this cost was in addition to the advertising fee.  Mr. Beck confirmed this is a processing cost only, advertising costs would be in addition to this fee.
    Mr. Campbell noted Springfield charges much more for a processing fee.  He asked what it actually costs to process a request and what justification Springfield has for charging such a high fee.  Mr. Hancock said he thought the proposed fee of $150 is an average of what other comparable communities are charging, with the exception of Springfield.  He estimated for staff to process a rezoning request it would be about $300 -- and they just split this cost by 50%.  Mr. Campbell said he believed there is a policy of charging 60% for inspections.  Mr. Patterson said it was 65%.  Mr. Campbell asked why Planning had not applied the same rule in this case.  Mr. Hancock replied the thought at the time was to determine how people would react to the 50%.  He commented staff had not been given direction to recoup a certain percentage of cost, so they had gone with the average.  Mr. Campbell wondered if the City establishes a reimbursement rate of 65% in one case, whether the same rate should be applied in a similar industry.
    Mr. Janku said the theory behind the 65% was that there is some benefit from the inspection that accrues to the public as well as to the private party.  He thought there would be a question as to whether or not there would be a public benefit accrued in rezoning situations.  Mr. Campbell said that was a good point, but there is a Council directed policy of 65% on inspections.  He reported 65% of $300 would roughly be $200.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that B123-99 be amended to raise the processing fee to $200, which would be approximately 65%.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku.
    Mayor Hindman did not agree with the argument of a rezoning not having a public benefit.  He explained that rezoning allows people to use their property to what they perceive to be the highest and best use, which is theoretically good for the community.
    The motion to amend, made by Mr. Campbell, seconded by Mr. Janku, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mrs. Crockett asked why the A-1 to R-1 rezoning is being excluded.  Mr. Hancock felt the Commission's feelings had to do with requests for annexation zoning.  He said they did not want to create a roadblock to annexation and rezoning, or someone taking a holding zone and turning it into an urban type development.
    Mr. John, having been on the Planning and Zoning Commission at the time this issue was discussed, reported that there is still quite a bit of land zoned A-1 from earlier mass annexations, and it seemed unfair to charge these individuals a processing fee since they had not initiated a rezoning request yet.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B123-99, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES: CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO: NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B127-99     Establishing permanent A-1 zoning on property located at 2720 and 2750 Mill Creek
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said the request on this recently annexed six acre tract was recommended for approval by both the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B127-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

(A)     Storm drainage improvements in the Alton Avenue area between Seventh and Eighth Streets.
    Item A was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Patterson explained that this project has been in the planning stages for several years and would connect two projects that have been previously constructed between  Seventh and Eighth Streets.  The cost estimate is $170,000 and involves replacing an undersized drainage system with area inlets and a reinforced concrete box culvert for the entire length of the project.  In addition, standard grade inlets and area inlets will be installed behind the houses.
    Mr. Patterson reported the purpose of the project is to eliminate frequent flooding of properties and structural flooding in the area.  He pointed out that the project was designed by a local consultant (Trabue, Hansen, and Hinshaw), and a representative is present to answer any questions.  Mr. Patterson explained the project would be constructed this summer, and the final design would include the development of landscaping replacement with the neighborhood and property owners.  Mr. Patterson said that all of the property owners have been contacted and there have been discussions on site, but the landscaping plans would be developed with the final plans and specifications.
    Mr. Campbell noted that the report called for a ten year event design.  He thought that seemed to be a relatively short period and asked if staff ever considers a 25 year event.  Mr. Patterson pointed out that ten year frequencies are based, as does all of their calculations, on the full development of a stream based on the Land Use Plan.  What has to be provided for in the design standards is an overflow section that will safely accommodate a 100 year flood.  Based on current conditions of the 100 year flood, Mr. Patterson explained they have resolved any problems that would occur.  The overflow would continue to be over ground, slightly north of the existing channel and would converge back in the same area.  Going to a larger structure in this location would be in excess of the design and it would not prevent any damages that will not be prevented with the overlay.  Mr. Campbell asked if the 100 year event would cause structure flooding.  Under current developed conditions, Mr. Patterson replied it would not.  He acknowledged there is a possibility, if it was entirely paved upstream and changes were made in that area, there still could be some flooding problems.  Mr. Patterson explained that could possibly be rectified with some surface modifications along the property line to the north.  He noted that issue was addressed by the consultant when they looked into what would be necessary to prevent structural flooding.
    Mr. Janku referred to a letter that was just passed to the Council regarding tree replacement.  He noted that Ms. Coble had once pointed out that because of the large amount of rental property in these neighborhoods, the property owners are not always as interested in tree replacement as a homeowner might be.  Mr. Patterson responded staff has to deal with the property owner, and whatever the City does has to be in accordance with the home owner's request.  He said part of the process on final plans would be to develop that.  Mr. Patterson was uncertain how the City could go in and do something to a property just because the renter requested it.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Linda Roots, 807 N. Eighth Street, said her property was the one most always affected by the flooding.  She passed around pictures taken after the heavy rains last week.  Ms. Roots stated residents concede that the facility has to be replaced, but they also know many large trees will be lost, which will probably never be allowed to grow back on top of this structure.  She said the situation calls for a creative plan and someone with expertise needs to help them figure out how to replace the vegetative screening and the privacy currently afforded to the residents.  Ms. Roots noted  Columbia College has a plan on file that calls for quite a bit more paving on the east side of Eighth Street (parking lots).  She trusted the staff had taken advantage of the Master Plan the College has on file.
    John Clark, 403 N. Ninth Street, said the plan needs to be something that encompasses all of the concerns expressed.  He said all property owners need to be contacted because if a plan is created for the whole area, then over a period of time, those trees can be planted.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Patterson pointed out that it is not staff's intent to do piecemeal planning, but they simply need to deal with each individual property owner when they discuss the plan because it is those individuals who have the authority to dictate what should occur on their property.
    Mr. John questioned the use of CDBG funds when there are storm water utility funds.  Mr. Patterson said when they refer to the Storm Water Utility Capital Improvement Program, there are other funds in the CIP.  He reported the City utilizes state grants and CDBG funding when available to supplement these types of projects.  The fact that it is in the CIP may mean it can still come from another source.  Mr. John asked if this was a specific grant the City received for this project.  Mr. Patterson replied it was, and it has to be approved during the annual allocation of CDBG funding defined for that purpose.
    Mr. Beck explained that Columbia is one of the few cities with a storm water utility.  Short of that, the only way one builds storm sewers is through tax bill districts or to tax the entire community to correct the problems when houses have been built in low or flood prone areas.  Mr. Beck related one of his concerns is the rapidly increasing cost of these projects as the City buys out and then replaces trees.  Unless there is a storm water utility, he explained the City would not be able to complete a project of this nature without tax bills or a big ballot issue -- which would be difficult to pass because it would only affect a limited number of people in the community.
    Ms. Crayton voiced her support for any improvements to the First Ward.
    Ms. Crayton made the motion that staff be directed to proceed with the project.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(B)     Street construction on Fourth Avenue from Garth Avenue to Providence Road.
    Item B was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this is a proposed tax bill district, but most of the funding  comes from sources other than the neighborhood.
    Mr. Patterson explained this is a public hearing for improvements being proposed to Fourth Avenue, from Garth Avenue to Providence Road, a distance of approximately 1,300 feet.  He explained that Fourth Avenue is an unimproved local residential street approximately 20-22 feet in width within a 40-foot platted right of way.  There is a four-foot concrete sidewalk along the north side only.  The proposed improvements to Fourth Avenue would consist of a 28-foot wide curb and guttered pavement with sidewalks on both sides of the street.  Because of right of way and utility constraints, the sidewalks will need to be placed directly behind the back of the curb and staff is proposing five-foot sidewalks.  Staff is also recommending that parking be restricted to one side, preferably the north side.  In addition, the project includes minor storm drainage improvements as well as reconstruction of approximately 300 feet of sewer line and manholes.  The improvements as proposed require the removal of approximately four trees over a three-inch caliper.  Mr. Patterson reported a street landscaping plan will be included with the final design which will be based on property owner input.
    Mr. Patterson explained a meeting was held with affected property owners and neighborhood associations on March 9, 1999, to discuss the design proposal, address questions, and seek input.  The staff feels that there was agreement on most issues that could be addressed in the design stage, with the possible exception of underground utilities, light standards and sidewalks on both sides.  There were some requests for sidewalks to be constructed only on the north side.  All adjacent property owners have been supplied copies of this report and have been advised of this public hearing.
    Mr. Patterson reported the resolution estimate is $252,000, with funding for the project being proposed from Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, tax bills against the adjacent properties, and Sanitary Sewer Utility funds.  Since Fourth Avenue is located within the CDBG area, Mr. Patterson explained that the properties would be subject to tax bills assessed at one-half the normal rate, and those who qualify as low-to-moderate income property owners would be eligible for grants to pay the entire tax bill amount.  The maximum tax bill rate through this formula will be $14.50 per abutting foot.
    Mr. Patterson stated If Council approves the project, there would be another hearing to make assessments, at which time the council will need to determine that there have been special benefits accrued to the properties.  Some of the factors that the Council may consider at that time are as follows:
1.     The curb and guttering and associated storm drainage facilities will provide for better overall storm water
2.     The curb and guttering will also improve the appearance and maintainability of the properties.
3.     New driveway approaches will  provide better access to the properties
4.     With the improved street surface, there will be less wear and tear on private vehicles using the street as a
        primary access to the properties.
5.     The City will be able to better maintain the street, particularly with regard to snow removal and street
6.     Under current city policy when streets are upgraded to improved standards, property owners are no longer
        subject to tax bill maintenance costs which could be as much as $2.00 per foot per year.

    Mr. Patterson commented if after receiving public comment the Council wishes to proceed with construction of the project, a motion should be made directing staff to complete final plans, specifications and construction documents.
    There was a discussion about the undergrounding of utilities.  Mr. Beck explained that the Council asked the staff to prepare a report regarding the cost of undergrounding power on neighborhood streets.  He said a fairly detailed report had been submitted to the Council indicating the amounts.  After that discussion, Mr. Beck did not recall any direction to try to underground on these streets because it not only involves the cost to the City's Water and Electric utility, but to the homeowners as well.  Mr. Malon said that was correct, and added that for a small stretch like this not much would be accomplished anyway.  Mr. Janku said another problem is that they are not getting uniform responses -- some people want to do it and some do not.  Mr. Campbell said the staff reports had indicated sizable amounts that each home owner would have to pay.  He noted that would be asking a great deal of people in moderate income areas such as this.  Mr. Patterson reported that when this had been tried before, staff had found that not everyone was willing to pay for such a project.  In addition, that would not accomplish the goal of the project as one may be underground and the next one overhead.  He stated that also causes problems for the supplier of the service.
    Ms. Crayton said she had received a letter regarding the accessability to wheelchairs in this area (someone fell out of their chair when trying to get on the sidewalk).  Mr. Patterson indicated walks will be wheelchair accessible and as sidewalks are being recommended on both sides of the street, this will also improve pedestrian accessability.
    Karen Cupp, 117 Fourth Avenue, reported the street is in very bad repair and the walks are crumbling.  She said many residents park right up to their grass so one cannot walk down the sidewalk.  She was concerned about trees being removed, one in particular in her neighbor's yard.  Ms. Cupp commented that residents are concerned about the increase in traffic after their street is widened.  She said the neighborhood did not want it widened to 28 feet, but were agreeable to it with the hope of gaining some traffic calming or stop signs at the corner of Grand and Fourth.
    John Clark, 403 N. Ninth Street, said the North Central Neighborhood Association discussed the issue of undergrounding utilities.  He suggested that the Council ask the staff to not just develop the cost estimates, but to really search to see if there are some other ways, in the long-term, to fund a 40-year plan to gradually underground utilities.  Mr. Clark noted that if utilities are not undergrounded when doing a project such as this one, it will be more expensive to do it at a later time.  He said there may be no funding mechanisms over a long period of time that could handle ways to spread out payments and so forth, but given the way the Business Loop looks, he suggested it would be a useful study for the staff to look into.
    Mayor Hindman thought the utility should pay for undergrounding, and that a way should be found to start such a program, even if it takes a very long time.  He said the obvious time to do it is when there is a project such as this.  Mrs. Crockett said she thought right now it would bankrupt the utility.  Mayor Hindman responded if it is done slowly enough that would not happen.  Mr. Campbell noted there is an amount being set aside for that each year.  Mayor Hindman said there is no program to get the job done.  Mr. Beck agreed they have not gotten to the residential area, however, there is a program which is to start from the center of the city and progresses outward.  Mr. Beck indicated the Council reviews the program each year and a percentage of the utility budget is set aside for undergrounding.  He thought perhaps the Council needed to talk about stepping up the program at budget time.
    Ms. Crayton made the motion that staff be directed to proceed with the development of plans.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(C)     Improvements at the intersection of Paris Road and Hinkson Avenue.
    Item C was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained this would relocate the intersection of Hinkson to Paris Road 80 feet north of where it is presently.
    Mr. Patterson noted that this is a ballot issue project and the City just recently acquired the property to make the relocation.  He pointed out that staff received a letter of support from the Benton Stephens Community Association.
    At the last meeting, Mr. Patterson said that Mr. Janku had requested that this issue be referred to the Bicycle/Pedestrian Commission.  He said that meeting occurred on site and there are additional pedestrian accommodations they would like to have considered.  He did not think those considerations would prevent them from preceding with the project as it is currently shown.  Mr. Patterson explained those would be additive features if the Council approved them.
    Mr. Patterson reported this project consists of relocating the entrance to the street to allow for a 90 degree intersection with Paris Road, and this portion of the street would be widened slightly on the south side to allow more stacking room for left turn movements.  Staff felt that would facilitate traffic movement at the intersection of Paris and College, as well as make it safer for turning movements on Hinkson.  Mr. Patterson said all property owners that would be affected have been contacted and there were no negative comments received about the project.  He said there were concerns expressed by some members of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Commission who wanted to make additional changes for pedestrian crossings.  Mr. Patterson stated the cost estimate for this project is $90,000, which includes the acquisition of the property.
    Mr.  Campbell asked about the sizable remnants of land and the policy on disposal of same.  He thought it looked like a sizable job for the City to maintain.  Mr. Beck said there is a policy in place where the City can sell property to adjacent property owners based on appraisal.  Mr. Campbell asked if that would be part of this project.  Mr. Patterson said that was certainly a possibility, but at this point they had not made a determination of disposition.  He said there was a discussion about whether the neighborhood association might want to adopt the area for maintenance of landscaping if the City put it in.  Mr. Campbell said he would like to see the disposition as part of the final plan.  Mr. Patterson said that could be brought back at the time of the bid calls.
    Mr. Janku asked about the question relating to a pedestrian crossing on Paris Road.  Mr. Patterson said staff's concern is that this is a high volume road, there is a signalized intersection within 150 feet of the intersection, and staff felt it would create more of a dangerous situation than it would help.
    Mayor Hindman said since this particular pedestrian crossing would be an additive, and it did not sound like the staff would recommend it, he asked where that left things.  Mr. Patterson said the Council will ultimately make the decision on it.  He said the staff's obligation was to try to provide the information with regard to concerns about safety and if Council decided to go ahead with it, what kind of accommodations should be put in.  Mayor Hindman asked when that would be presented to the Council.  Mr. Patterson said he had not seen the recommendation from the Commission.  He indicated he spoke with Mr. Henson (Chair of the Disabilities Commission) this morning, and Mr. Henson had asked that this hearing be delayed until the Commission has time to make a recommendation.  Mr. Patterson felt any recommendation that might be made by the Commission would not affect what the physical configuration of this particular project would be.  He said if the Council wants to delay it, there was no problem on the staff's part, but they felt it would not be necessary to delay it to accommodate anything that is requested later.
    Mr. Janku asked if there is any provision for the street crossing Hinkson and preceding on Paris on the south.  Mr. Patterson said it would be a marked crossing under the present plans.  He noted there are 1,4000 cars per day currently traveling on Paris Road.  Mr. Janku's concern was protection because of the three lanes which he said could be making quick turns.
    Mayor Hindman said the truncation is such that it is very gradual, which he noted would make a really wide pedestrian crossing.
    Mr. Patterson said this project could be delayed until hearing from the Bicycle/Pedestrian Commission.  He said staff is simply trying to move forward with the CIP projects.  Mr. Janku asked if it would make a real difference if they waited to get a report back.  Mr. Patterson said this project could be tabled for a month or two and that would give staff time to do something with it.  Mr. Campbell asked at what point a delay would change the building seasons.  Because of no signal being involved, Mr. Patterson said it could be built in the fall.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, said the Bicycle/Pedestrian Commission and the Disabilities Commission had met with a representative of the Public Works Department.  Regarding the stacking lane planned for the traffic coming down Route B and Paris Road to turn onto College, he hoped the Council would take this as an impetus to meet with the state to plan how that traffic will get off Route B at the bridge and come down the Business Loop and turn appropriately onto College Avenue.  He mentioned other concerns which he said would be addressed in their report.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that Item C be tabled to the June 21, 1999, meeting.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B107-99     Authorizing an amendment to the agreement with Burns & McDonnell; approving Change
                    Order No. 1 and engineer's final report for landfill Cell No. 2 project.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Patterson noted the items of significance being liquidated damages on the project because the contractor did not finish on time.  That resulted in additional quality control work by Burns & McDonnell, which required an amendment to their contract.  He reported they deleted some work they found unnecessary, but there was additional work as far as erosion control and some roadway work.  With additions and deletions, Mr. Patterson said the project still came in slightly less than what the original bid had been.  He said staff was recommending approval of the ordinance.
    Comments were called for with none received.
    B107-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO: NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B108-99     Authorizing the construction of intersection improvements at Sixth/Broadway,
                    Hitt/Broadway, Waugh/Broadway, Eighth/Walnut; calling for bids.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this is a continuation of the City's public improvement effort in the downtown area to address some traffic issues.  He noted the public hearing for this project had been held on April 6, 1999, and the bid call is planned for May 27, 1999.  The estimated cost of this project is $306,600 and will be paid for by the CIP sales tax funds.
    Mayor Hindman noted that there was concern voiced by the Disabilities Commission about the height of the planters (they felt the height obscured a disabled person's ability to see traffic and vice versa).  He asked if that had been taken into consideration.  Mr. Beck said a staff committee worked on this issue.  The committee consisted of representatives from the Police Department, Public Works Department, and the Parks and Recreation Department.  He asked Mr. Watkins to give a summary of their findings.
    Mr. Watkins noted that the Special Business District was also represented on the Committee.  He said the group had met several times to discuss the issue of planter height.  After the meetings, it had been the unanimous decision to recommend that the planter height remain the same.  He listed numerous reasons for that recommendation.  Mr. Watkins said the Committee had asked the Disabilities Commission to take a look at the issue.  He reported the Commission met twice and have not yet made any kind of formal recommendation.  Mr. Watkins said the committee would like to see the construction done so that it does not impact any of the Fall Festivals sponsored by the SBD or the Cultural Affairs Commission.  They also would like to have the improvements completed before the students return in the fall.
    Greg Ahrens, 1504 Sylvan Lane, explained that his housemate is on the Disabilities Commission.  He recalled Dan Burden, an expert on pedestrian walkability features, saying the planters should be lowered.  He did not recall him saying how high they should be, just that they were too high.  Mr. Ahrens reported he had e-mailed Mr. Burden and is awaiting a reply.  He noted that some of the planters are squared off on the ends and some are angled.  He felt the angled planters provided more visibility.  Mr. Ahrens noted that prohibiting right turns on a red light in the downtown area could also be helpful and would eliminate the safety concern about planter height.  In addition, he pointed out that the brick crosswalks are very slick when wet.  Mr. Ahrens suggested that the brick have a different texture to it.
    B108-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO: NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B109-99     Authorizing the reconstruction of Grant Lane; calling for bids.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that at the time of the public hearing, changes were directed by the Council.  He said the plans have been amended and the staff was ready to call for bids.
    Mr. Patterson said staff is still in the process of acquiring some of the right of way, but they would like to go ahead and get the bid scheduled.
    B109-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO: NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B111-99     Confirming the contract for construction of street improvements at Scott Boulevard and
                    Current Road.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said that only two bids were received and the low bid of APAC-MO, Inc. Is being recommended in the amount of $47,573.40.  He said the bid was about $10,000 above the resolution estimate, but this is a project that needs to be done.
    B111-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B112-99     Confirming the contract for street construction on Oakland Gravel Road from the end of
                    improved pavement north of Smiley Lane, 1,600 feet north.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that six bids were received on this project.  The low bid came from J.C. Industries, Inc. in the amount of $16, 795.30.
    Mr. Janku asked if the bridge would have some sort of fencing on the sides.  Mr. Patterson believed there was a protective barrier, but he was not sure of the design detail.  Mr. Janku said he would prefer something other than chain link, if the cost was not prohibitive.  He noted the bridge on Providence (for the trail) is wood and it has held up quite well.  Mr. Patterson said staff would check into that.
    Mayor Hindman asked how the bridge would be widened.  Mr. Patterson said they would add onto the downstream side and it will provide for pedestrian and bicycle lanes.  He explained that the bridge was designed in such a way to allow for additions.
    Mrs. Crockett was hopeful this road would not have the same problem as on Forum with dipping.  Mr. Patterson said in this particular case the bridge is already in place.  The culvert on Forum was a new pour with settlement on each end of it, and on Oakland Gravel, they would be dealing with an established road bed.  Mrs. Crockett was also hopeful that all utilities have already been installed so the street would not have to be dug up and patched for utilities.
    B112-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO: NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B116-99     Authorizing a utility relocation agreement with Boone County.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this agreement relates to the widening and reconstruction of St. Charles Road, east of the City.  He said the water line will be upgraded at the same time the relocation occurs.
    B116-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B124-99     Approving the final plat of The Hamlet, Plat No. 7; authorizing a performance contract.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this 10 acre tract will create 23 R-1 lots.  He further explained that the applicant is providing funding in escrow for a sidewalk along Smith Drive.
    Mayor Hindman asked about the comment in the developer's letter about having no obligations with respect to future improvements on Smith Drive.  Mr. Patterson indicated this developer has petitioned for Smith Drive to be constructed by tax bill and the staff is negotiating an agreement to forward to the Council.  He said this property owner will be involved in the agreement to build Smith Drive.  Mr. Hancock explained that the letter refers to the sidewalk requirements.  He commented their fear is that they will be liable for the sidewalk requirement along an unimproved street for years and years after they are out of the subdivision.  He said that is the purpose of the escrow account.  Mr. Hancock reported the developer has no intention of trying to avoid liability for Smith Drive, in fact, they have petitioned for the tax bill project.
    Mr. Janku noted that he had not seen one of these escrow accounts for some time.  Mr. Hancock said the developers are distraught over the requirement of building sidewalks along unimproved streets.  He said the performance contract not only requires it, but it stipulates that it cannot be assigned to any future owners of lots that may abut or adjoin those unimproved streets.  Mr. Hancock explained they came up with the escrow account several years ago, but the Council did not want to institutionalize it.  However, in this case it became apparent that was the solution for Mr. Herigon, and may be for others as well.
    B124-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO: NO ONE.  ABSTAINING:  CROCKETT.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B125-99     Approving the final plat of Midland Subdivision; approving a variance to the subdivision
                    regulations; authorizing a performance contract.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained the location of this four-tenths of an acre tract to be at the northeast corner of Old 63 and Shepard Boulevard.  He stated it would create one C-1 zoned lot for an existing convenience store and gas pumps.  Approval was recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
    B125-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B128-99     Amending Chapter 2 of the Code to add a new provision relating to the purchase of
                    architectural, engineering and land surveying services.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that two bills had been prepared relating to this issue because  different sections of the city code are affected by the proposed amendment.  He explained that some years ago a previous City Manager prepared a policy for hiring services.  Under state statute, these services cannot be bid, so cities have to obtain requests for proposals.  Mr. Beck reported the goal of this amendment is to streamline the procedure and make a distinction between larger and smaller contracts where it is felt the firms interested in doing the work would not be able to afford  to come to town for small contracts.  He said this would allow an opportunity to approve things faster, which would support getting some of the projects done.
    Mr. Patterson explained that the City is required, by law, to have a procedure that selects professional consultants on the basis of qualifications.  The informal policy currently in place is extremely cumbersome and time consuming, particularly for projects where professional services can be utilized as an extension for the staff.  He noted earlier this evening the Council discussed the Alton Street project, which was designed by a local consultant because it was felt it was important to complete the project this year in order to utilize the CDBG funds allocated for it.  Mr. Patterson stated they were able to utilize the consultant based on special and unique knowledge of the job as they have designed upstream/downstream projects previously.  However, technically speaking, they would have to go out and request proposals, set up interviews, select a consultant and then bring the contract to the Council for approval.  For large jobs, Mr. Patterson reported they would still want to do that as special projects of significant nature (i.e., parking garages, health clinics, etc.) are major improvements and should still go through the process where consultants are individually screened for their particular skills.  He noted that the ordinance has the most impact on the smaller, routine professional services.  It would allow the City Manager to enter into these agreements limited to a maximum of $20,000, or $100,000 for an entire year if there is more than one contract.  The approval process would be based on prequalification of the consultants, and prequalification would consist of examination of credentials, staff capabilities, projects they perform, and would be reported to the City in a standard format which lists all of the qualifications.  In having a list in place that identifies consultants with skills in certain areas, staff would then be able to negotiate the fee schedule with the consultant for the project, and then bring a contract to the City Manager for his execution.  Mr. Patterson indicated this could be reported to the Council on an annual basis, or however Council wishes to do it.  It would provide public accountability while expediting the use of local professionals in a way staff felt would be effective.  Mr. Patterson explained that currently in his department there are three staff openings in Public Works and they have projects they need to get out.  He said if there was something like this in place, any work for a particular project could be farmed out without building up more staff time.  Mr. Patterson reported that passage of this ordinance would allow staff to become more efficient and effective.
    Mr. Beck said he has concerns about getting some projects out more timely, particularly CDBG projects.
    B128-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B130-99     Amending Chapter 2 of the Code to establish the Columbia Trust.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained the purpose of the Columbia Trust is to enhance the existing program whereby the City can better educate and promote donations for funding of small and large projects, as well as real estate and that sort of thing.  Mr. Beck noted that this is a rather new concept for city government, but staff contacted other cities and there seem to be quite a few communities that have established these trust programs.
    Mr. Beck reported even though people will be able to select specific projects that will be promoted, there would also be the opportunity to have special funds set aside in the Finance Department that would elevate the quality of life above the basic needs of the City.  He explained the difference between a community trust and a city trust, and displayed an informational brochure that will be available to the public.
    Mr. Beck indicated that the proposed ordinance outlines the policies for the Columbia Trust and all donations above $1,000 must be approved by the City Council.  He said the Council can create accounts for receipt of certain restricted gifts, with gifts being received under those categories being acceptable without individual approval.  Any gift of $1,000 or less could be accepted by the City Manager and deposited in one of the accounts.  He noted the Columbia Trust funds must be appropriated by the City Council before it can be spent.  Mr. Beck explained it will be a public process whereby citizens will be able to speak on the issue before decisions are made.  If the Council approves the ordinance, he said a kick-off breakfast will be held in the near future.  Mr. Beck spoke about the legacy of giving in the City of Columbia, and said this community has been the recipient of some fantastic donations of property and cash.
    Mr. Janku thought this program was a great idea and hopes it will grow quickly.  He suggested that the City Manager be given discretion to accept all gifts of personal property or cash and that a limit not be imposed.  He was concerned about people making donations towards the end of the year and it would be too late for the Council to accept such until the following year.  Mr. Janku saw no reason why the City Manager could not accept all gifts of personal property and cash.  He said if there is any reason Mr. Beck feels the donation is not appropriate, he could decline to accept it.
    Mr. Campbell explained that he does a considerable amount of appraisal work for museums in town.  He noted oftentimes it is very difficult for a person to refuse something that has nominal value.  He thought bringing it before a public group would make it easier to make those decisions.
    Mr. Janku asked why it would be difficult to refuse something.  Mr. Campbell explained that there are offers made of materials which are not major contributions.   Mr. Janku said he understood that, and noted when he was on the Parks and Recreation Commission they dealt with the real property issue.  He would not have a problem dealing with personal property like that.  Mr. Campbell said he had no problem with the money.  Mr. Janku wondered what a stock or security would be considered as it is not technically cash.  He did not think the Council should be prohibited from accepting cash and marketable securities or other types of cash-like items.
    Mayor Hindman agreed with Mr. Janku's point about giving Mr. Beck the authority to accept things, as well as the authority to decline a donation.  He said if something was offered that Mr. Beck felt was questionable, he would have the authority to indicate the donation would have to be approved by the Council.  Mayor Hindman thought it should be left to the discretion of the City Manager and assumed he would avoid the pitfalls.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that B130-99 be amended by changing the wording in Section 2-502 to read, "a) Gifts to the Columbia Trust of real property may be accepted only by the City Council; and, b) Gifts to the Columbia Trust of personal property and gifts in cash may be accepted by the City Manager or, in his discretion, referred to the City Council."  The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    B130-99, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B133-99     Appropriating funds for the purchase of police equipment.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this was a donation from Rick and Sally McDowell in the amount of $2,000 that they requested be used by the Police Department for equipment over and above what would normally be purchased by the Department.  The gift was given in memory of their son, Taylor Gregory McDowell.  Mr. Beck said this donation, as well as past donations from the McDowell's, is much appreciated.
    Mayor Hindman thanked the family for their gift on behalf of the entire Council.
    B133-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B129-99     Establishing procedures and guidelines for procurement of architectural, engineering and
                    land surveying services.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said this issue had been addressed under B128-99, but a request had been received to have this ordinance removed from the Consent Agenda.
    Toby Gilk, with Peckham and Wright Architects, thanked the Council for moving this item from the Consent Agenda so he could address it.  He commented by-and-large,  other members of the architectural, engineering, and land surveying community are very pleased that the City is developing formal guidelines for the selection.  In addition, they are pleased with the notion of the pre-selection of professionals for rendering service.  Mr. Gilk proposed an amendment to this bill to include local performance of work as one of the selection criteria.  He said local architects, engineers, and land surveyors have repeatedly demonstrated their expertise in past work they have done for the University, area churches, homes, and businesses.  Mr. Gilk reported Columbia has some very talented people working in this community, and these businesses employ dozens of professional people who contribute to the local economy.  He commented the businesses themselves are extremely good corporate citizens and participate in many activities in the City.
    Mr. Gilk explained this is an issue of spending dollars that are generated by local tax revenue within the community -- reinvesting that money in businesses, services, and products that employ Columbians and support the local tax base.  He said the emphasis on including local performance of work is not an attempt to exclude outside professionals from participating in City projects, but to recognize the economic benefit of hiring local vendors for professional services.  He encouraged the Council to structure the bill in such a way that it encourages firms that have a particular expertise to partner with a company within the City of Columbia to bring that expertise and deliver the project and a cost effective method with the local professional service, while also bringing a level of expertise into this community to help train those professionals.
    Mr. Campbell pointed out that Columbia is a regional center.  He asked if Jefferson City, Boonville, Moberly, and surrounding cities have such a regulation in their requirements.  Mr. Gilk said he could not answer that question and he has not had the opportunity to discover whether other communities have similar ordinances.  He said if it is a concern about a protectionist nature, he thought the City of Columbia should be empowered to have reciprocating arrangements with other cities that recognize the value of local performance of work.  Mr. Campbell asked if they would be putting at risk a considerable number of Columbia firms that do work in other cities by inviting them to set up their own protectionist regulations.  Mr. Gilk felt that many outlying communities, with the exception of Jefferson City, probably do not have enough firms to effectively do that.  He said there is not enough local expertise to make it practical to install an ordinance similar to what is proposed here.  Mr. Gilk commented that Columbia and Jefferson City may develop a reciprocal arrangement whereby Columbia professionals could be regarded as local for performance of Jefferson City work and vice versa.  Mr. Campbell said they might  develop a war.
    Earlier tonight, Ms. Crayton observed the Council had awarded contracts to low bidders from other cities.  She wondered if the City were to put restrictions on other companies from coming here, what would happen to Columbia companies going out into other communities.  Ms. Crayton did not believe we should restrict our professionals from going into other cities.  Mr. Gilk thought Ms. Crayton was referring to awarding bids to contractors.  He said there are many reputable contractors outside of the City limits of Columbia who perform work for the City.   He is not proposing that the Council change the system for selecting contractors.
    Mrs. Crockett asked why he would draw the line there.  Mr. Gilk said he was only addressing the bill currently before the Council.  Mrs. Crockett said if the Council supports Mr. Gilk's position, it would open the door for contractors and everyone else.  She asked whether Mr. Gilk realized if the Council were to limit services to just Columbia architects and engineers, that there are larger firms in Kansas City and St. Louis that could come in and set up an office so they would be considered local.  Mr. Gilk explained the proposed amendment would not restrict participation from firms outside of Columbia.  He said it just recognizes an economic advantage of hiring local architects.  He said it makes the local performance of work a selection criteria.  Mrs. Crockett asked Mr. Gilk if he felt the local architects and engineers in the last year have made some progress in being retained by the City.  Mr. Gilk believed that was true - there has been progress on that front.  One thing he thought would benefit the entire professional services procurement process, nation-wide, was recognition of the economics of hiring a local architect, local professional engineer and land surveyor to do, at the very least, that portion of work that makes the most sense to do locally.  Mr. Janku reported the City can do that now.
    Mayor Hindman said the purpose of this ordinance was to try to give the staff the authority to hire that person which is most qualified to do the job.  He said if the City were to stipulate a preference for local businesses, that would throw in a new element to the decision making he was not sure should properly be there.  Mayor Hindman commented this is not true for any of the other professional services.  He explained this issue was discussed when the Council approved some Percent for the Arts projects, and it was felt that local artists should not be favored because they are capable of competing with anybody.  Mayor Hindman stated it is to the general public's benefit that people from the outside feel they can compete on an even playing field with the local businesses, and he felt the bill passed earlier (B128-99) was very favorable to the local professionals.
    Nick Peckham, an architect with offices at 15 S. Tenth, commented that Peckham and Wright Architectural firm has been around for about 21 years doing architecture and other kinds of planning services.  He said that it appears that the 14 local firms that belong to the American Institute of Architects, and who also produce drawings for roughly $100 million worth of work per year, are being overlooked by the City.  He said the perception is that often architectural work goes elsewhere.  Mr. Peckham thought perhaps these individuals needed to demonstrate their skills a little better.  He pointed out that the State of Missouri, either as a written or a practice of public policy, seems to require that a firm residing in Missouri be involved with projects that are funded by the State.  He mentioned a petition that he thought Mr. Gilk was going to give to the Council suggesting that the City of Columbia consider, if not a written policy, at least an informal policy of looking for local representation first.    Mrs. Crockett said she felt the City was already doing that, without having a policy.
    Mr. John reported as a person who has worked with firms that have tried to design things for Columbia using their in-house architects from Iowa and Illinois, knew that these individuals have difficulty interpreting the City's landscaping, parking, and storm water ordinances.  He said the projects he was referring to were continuously being shipped back and forth until he convinced them to hand it over to a local architect to finish things up.  He observed there is some benefit to hiring local firms.  Mr. John thought a policy of exclusion would be a bad precedent to set, but believed it was a good precedent to recognize the expertise.
    B129-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO: NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

    The following bills were given second reading and the resolutions were read by the Clerk.

B105-99     Accepting private streets constructed during 1998.
B106-99     Authorizing acquisition of easements necessary to construct the B-16 Trunk Sewer, B-17
                    Trunk Sewer and Bear Creek Outfall Sewer.
B110-99     Authorizing the reconstruction of Brown Station Road from Route B northward to Starke
                    Avenue; calling for bids.
B113-99     Authorizing the acquisition of easements for the Worley Street - Again Street West
                    drainage improvement project.
B114-99     Amending Chapter 27 of the Code to define "minimum bill" clause as the demand and
                    energy charge for the current month.
B115-99     Confirming the contract for the water main construction project under Route PP.
B117-99     Accepting easements for utility purposes.
B126-99     Voluntary annexation of property located on the east side of Rock Quarry Road, south of
                    City limits.
B131-99     Appropriating funds for the Columbia Trust.
B132-99     Appropriating funds for the printing of "Awareness of Chemical Hazards".
R82-99       Setting a public hearing: construction of water main along Roger Wilson Drive (Phase 2)
                    connecting to old PWSD #1 system.
R83-99       Setting a public hearing: 1999 Columbia Regional Airport improvement project.
R84-99       Authorizing an agreement with the Missouri Department of Health for tuberculosis control
R85-99       Authorizing an agreement with the Missouri Department of Health for public health
R86-99       Authorizing an agreement with the Missouri Department of Health for immunization
R87-99       Authorizing various contracts with social agencies for homemaker/personal care services.
R88-99       Accepting an Emergency Shelter Grant from the State of Missouri; authorizing various
                    emergency shelter service agreements.
R89-99       Authorizing an amendment to the agreement with Crawford, Murphy & Tilly, Inc. for
                    engineering services at the airport in connection with the cargo apron project.

    The bills were given third reading and the resolutions were read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:   CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bills declared enacted and resolutions declared adopted, reading as follows:

R90-99     Confirming the contract of Huebert Builders, Inc. for the renovation of the Daniel Boone
                  Building lobby.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this is one of the last renovation projects scheduled for City Hall.  He reported it incorporates the recommendations of the Council appointed committee as it relates to lobby work and satisfies the fire code requirements.  Mr. Beck stated that the low bid was $265,200, with a $25,600 vestibule alternate.  The staff recommended both projects.  Mr. Beck pointed out that this is a local architect.
    The vote on R90-99 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R91-99     Authorizing an adopt-a-spot agreement with Columbia Treekeepers.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this Treekeepers project was coordinated by Elizabeth Dumm of the Volunteer Services Office.
    Mr. Hood explained that this is simply an agreement with the Columbia Treekeepers to care for the trees they have recently helped plant at the parking lot providing access to the Bear Creek Trail, off of Garth Avenue.  He noted that Treekeepers is a very positive program, which has been a real success for his department.  Mr. Hood indicated his staff would like to continue working with the group.
    The vote on R91-99 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

R92-99     Authorizing a pole attachment agreement with Stephens College.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained the College would like to get these banners up before graduation ceremonies.  He reported staff looked at the banners and they were acceptable.  He noted that similar agreements are in effect with the University, Columbia College and the Special Business District.
    Jim Bryan, a representative of Stephens College, related that Stephens would like to hang 27 banners on College, Broadway, and one on the corner of Willis.  He displayed a banner and said it was felt they would reflect pride, identify the campus, and mark their boundaries.
    The vote on R92-99 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

    The following bills were introduced by the Mayor, unless otherwise indicated, and all were given first reading:

B134-99     Accepting various easements for sewer, drainage, construction and road access
B135-99     Authorizing a municipal agreement with the Missouri Highway & Transportation
                    Commission for improvements to Route AC; appropriating and transferring funds.
B136-99     Calling for bids for the 1999 improvement project at Columbia Regional Airport.
B137-99     Confirming the contract of Hall & Riley Paving Company, Inc. for the installation of traffic
                    signals at the intersection of Nifong and Bethel.
B138-99     Approving the final plat of Arcadia, Plat 5; authorizing a performance contract.
B139-99     Rezoning property located on the west side of Keene Street, between Berrywood Drive
                    and Lansing Avenue, from C-1 to C-P; approving a C-P Development Plan.
B140-99     Rezoning property located north of West Broadway, along both sides of Silvey Lane:
                    Tract A from R-2 to R-1, Tract B from R-1 to R-3.
B141-99     Vacating a utility easement within Heritage Meadows, Plat 5.
B142-99     Calling for bids for the construction of water main along Roger Wilson Drive (Phase 2)
                    connecting to old PWSD #1 system.
B143-99     Confirming the contract of J.C. Industries, Inc. for the construction of a water main along
                    St. Charles Road.
B144-99     Authorizing the water interconnect and purchase agreement with Consolidated Public
                    Water Service District #1.
B145-99     Accepting a grant of easement for utility purposes from The Corporation of the Episcopal
                    Diocese of Missouri.
B146-99     Accepting various easements for water and electric purposes.
B147-99     Authorizing a purchase agreement with the State Environmental Improvement and Energy
                    Resources Authority and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.
B148-99     Authorizing a revolving fund agreement with the State Environmental Improvement
                    and Energy Resources Authority and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.
B149-99     Authorizing the sale of sewage system revenue bonds.

A)     Street Closure Requests.
    Mr. Beck explained these two requests for street closure were from the March for Jesus and the Old Wheels Car Club.  He said both requests have been before the Central Columbia Association and were recommended for approval.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that the requests be approved as submitted.  The motion was seconded by Mrs. Crockett and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B)     Intra Departmental Transfer of Funds Request.
    Report accepted.

C)     Volunteer Hours by Department Quarterly Report.
    Elizabeth Dumm noted that in the first quarter there were 5,808 volunteer hours donated to the City.  If these hours were compared to the national wage that is assigned to volunteers ($13.24/hour) that amounts to a value of $76,897.  Ms. Dumm indicated that amounts to a huge impact for the City of Columbia, not only in the servicesand programs these volunteers help the staff accomplish, but assigning a dollar figure puts the whole program into perspective.
    Mayor Hindman congratulated Ms. Dumm and thanked her.  Ms. Dumm thanked all of the volunteers.

D)     Katy Station.
    Mr. Beck said when it was learned there was a potential to purchase or lease the Katy Station structure the staff reviewed this possibility.  Considering the fact that within the next five years there will be a need for additional office space for the Convention and Visitors Bureau, the Chamber of Commerce, and the REDI Corporation (all housed in one structure now -- the Walton Building), Mr. Beck said it would be an advantage to keep these agencies together.  He explained when the Walton Building was designed, it was intended to provide office space and meeting rooms for both the Chamber of Commerce and the City's C&VB.  Later, when REDI was organized, their offices were placed in the same building utilizing some of the vacant space planned for the first phase expansion of the Chamber and C&VB.  He remarked that all three entities have many common goals, and efficiencies have been gained by their working in the same building.  His recommendation is that, at some future point in time, the City should expand the Walton Building rather than trying to purchase the Katy Station.  He said to purchase the Katy Station would mean separating the entities because that structure is not large enough to accommodate all three.  In addition, to purchase the Katy Station would mean coming up with more money because it would have to be renovated for office purposes.  His recommendation is to no longer pursue the purchase of the Katy Station and look toward expansion of the Walton Building.
    Mr. Beck is hopeful the Katy Station would be put to good use as the Flat Branch area has seen some rapid redevelopment.
    Mr. Campbell asked how many square feet there are in the Katy Station.  Mr. Watkins said he thought it was about 5,500 square feet, and a little over 8,000 square feet is available in the Walton Building.
    Before deciding to expand the Walton Building, Mr. Janku thought the City should conduct a careful review to ensure it can serve the purpose intended given the constraints in terms of parking and other related issues.
    Mayor Hindman agreed that there may be some parking issues that need to be considered.  He believed it might be more advantageous to expand the building upward rather than out.  Although, Mayor Hindman commented he hated to see the City totally disregard the possibility of the Katy Station, but it appeared there is a time deadline that would make it impractical to pursue that option.  He stated if for some reason the possibility lingers for a longer time, and the City has a better chance to analyze the proposal and see what the possibilities are, Mayor Hindman would not want to make a hard and fast decision that the City would not consider it further.  He understood the efficiency of the three groups being together and he thought it made good sense, but he also thought, from a consumer point of view, if the C&VB were located in the Katy Station it would be a wonderful marketing coup.  Mayor Hindman remarked it may be worth some disruption in the inner relationship.
    Mr. Campbell observed the Cultural Affairs Department is in absolutely impossible quarters and they desperately need new space.  He had been hopeful from that perspective.  Based on the square footage estimates Mr. Watkins gave, Mr. Campbell said that comes out to be $163 per square foot.  He thought that is a substantially fair amount compared to what one could construct a new building for.  Mr. Campbell stated they would have to look very closely at that issue as well.
    Mayor Hindman said it would have to be at a reasonable cost if the City were to look further.  Based on what they know now, he thought the City should pursue the expansion of the Walton Building.
    Mr. Coffman said the report was a very good one, but he felt there were other large items he would rather see the City pursue.  He would not be interested in using the parking area on the east side of Flat Branch Creek.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that the Council accept the City Manager's report.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

E)     Proposed Revisions to the O-P and C-P District.
    Mr. Campbell thanked the staff for the report and said he thought the proposal was a good one.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that the report be sent to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their consideration and modification.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku.
    Mr. Janku suggested that they look into, when there are internal streets in a development (similar to what has recently been approved at Nifong and Forum), that maybe that could be a standard to look at -- that those could be incorporated.  He was concerned about complete variability where he thought they would start seeing requests from various neighbors where parking would be reduced to a level that may not be economically viable.  Mr. Campbell suspected that they will come back with a range like they talked about for street width.
    Mr. John felt it was a good idea to allow a little flexibility in the commercial areas.  He said this would give the applicant some flexibility that would allow them to jump over to the planned commercial instead of trying to go straight zoning.
    The motion made by Mr. Campbell, seconded by Mr. Janku, was approved
 unanimously by voice vote.

F)     Southeast Fire Station Site Acquisition.
    In one of the more recent ballot issues, Mr. Beck said funds were included for the acquisition of two fire station sites.  He said the City has been working with the Fire District in developing a master plan to assure there is no duplication of stations in and around Columbia.  He reported it had been determined that a station is needed in southeast Columbia, in the area of Nifong and 63.  Mr. Beck stated the funds are available to purchase a site for the future station.  He thought it was important to come up with a location before the area is fully developed.  Mr. Beck pointed out that the Fire Department was not the only department involved in the site selection process, other departments would be affected and they were included as well.
    Mr. Janku asked if there would be a stop light for direct access to AC.  Mr. Beck said a stop light might not be needed in this location, but there are lights that can be actuated by the Fire Department.
    Mr. Coffman asked where the driveways would be located.  Mr. Beck said he did not know if that had been decided.  Mr. Watkins said it would be on Bluff Creek as the City cannot get direct access onto 63.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion authorizing the City to begin negotiations.  The motion was seconded by Mrs. Crockett.
    Knowing the price of land in the area, Mr. John said this is one of the highest priced parcels in the area.  Moving a block or two in one direction or another could cut the cost of the acquisition by half.  Mr. John asked why this particular site was chosen.  Mr. Beck said it probably relates to response time.  Chief Markgraf confirmed it relates to access and response time.  They looked at developing a quick response to not only the new area, but when one of the other stations are tied up with another emergency, they had to consider how easily access could be gained to Old 63, U.S. 63, and Nifong and Providence Road.  Chief Markgraf commented there are any number of reasons why a different site could be found, but he reported this is the site they felt would best meet  the needs.
    Mr. John said on occasion, the University has contractors that actually acquire the site, construct a building, and then turn it over to the University at a considerable cost savings.  He noted that has been done on other occasions for different agencies as well.  Mr. Beck indicated he was familiar with the process.
    Mayor Hindman suggested the possibility of asking for alternative sites to be presented to the Council, along with arguments pro and con for each location.  He said as of now, this is the only site they know anything about.  Mr. John responded without knowing more about the whole site selection process, it was hard for him to know whether it would be worthwhile to see the alternatives or not.  He did not know what the distance was that would make something damaging to response time.  Mayor Hindman said the Council could ask for a report to further explain those kinds of things.  Mr. Janku commented there is no reason more information could not be gathered while negotiations are taking place.
    The motion made by Mr. Campbell, seconded by Mrs. Crockett, was approved unanimously by voice vote.

G)     Administrative Office Space Needs.
    Mr. Beck explained several years ago a consultant was hired to work with the staff to determine space needs for the next five to 20 years.  Some of the options discussed included an expansion of the City Administration block, but that had not been possible as the ballot issue proposed at that time was not fully approved -- although some funding was allowed for parts of it.  Mr. Beck felt the City needs to hire someone to work with the staff again to update the plan with special emphasis on the Water and Light Offices, which needs to come out of the Police/JCIC Building, so more office space will be available for the Police Department.  Mr. Beck added more space is also needed for the Joint Communications Department.  He requested that the Council authorize the staff to seek proposals on future space needs.
    Mr. Campbell asked if there was some way the City could build on the report that was done in 1993.  Mr. Beck said that was his plan as that had been a very detailed review of all of the offices.  Mr. Campbell wondered if they would bring in the same consultant.  Mr. Beck said there were actually two consultants working together, one from in town and one from out of town.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that the staff be authorized to update the office space needs.  The motion was seconded by Ms. Crayton and approved unanimously by voice vote.


    Mrs. Crockett said she had received another complaint about loud radio noises from cars.  She asked if Chief Botsford had any idea of what could be done to curb some of this noise.  Chief Botsford responded if the Council wanted to restrict the hours further, they would have to pass some kind of revision to the current ordinance.  Mrs. Crockett noted part of the problem is when someone calls in a complaint, the offender is gone by the time the Police arrive.  Chief Botsford indicated he did not have an answer to that particular situation.  He explained that noise is a problem throughout the entire City.  Chief Botsford noted the current ordinance is enforced between the hours of 11 p.m. and 7 a.m.
    Mr. Janku asked if the ordinance is specifically tied to noise of cars or to noise in general.  He said that is the problem -- if the ordinance is amended would it be too restrictive for everyone.  Chief Botsford responded the ordinance addresses noise in general.  He said it would be tough to separate it out.  Mr. Janku said if the Council changed the time to 9 o'clock, that would affect the bars with their outdoor music, and university functions.
    Mr. Campbell asked if any other cities have found anything effective to work with this situation.  Chief Botsford responded they really had not, but there are communities that have earlier time extensions, some as early as 7 p.m.  However, he was not recommending that.
    Mr. Campbell said he had received a complaint about street trees.  He said many years ago when the houses were first built, many people put in pear trees and they have grown up now to be very sizable.  A City employee told these individuals that if the trees were planted after 1993 they were legitimate, but if they were planted before that, they had to be cut down.  He asked if the ordinances needed to be reviewed for compatibility.
    Mr. John made the motion that the staff be directed to report back on the different fire station locations, the response times, and the criteria for picking a location.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. Coffman said he had become aware that Hollywood Theater has been acquired by Wallace Entertainment.  He had not received any response to his calls to Hollywood offices in Texas regarding the traffic light situation.  Mr. Coffman reported the neighborhood is concerned and upset because the traffic light installation was to begin in March with a July 1 completion date.  He asked Mr. Patterson if he had heard anything and if the agreements with Hollywood are transferable to Wallace.  Mr. Patterson said he has talked to the contractor several times, and during the last conversation he had been advised that the contracts have been signed with Hollywood Theater, and that they would be applying for a permit from MoDot.  He stated he had also talked to Matt Myers, with the Department of Transportation, last week and he advised him that contracts for the urban agreement had been sent to the City of Columbia.  Mr. Patterson said he has those agreements at this time.  Upon execution, the state will be authorized to issue a permit for the construction of the signal.  He emphasized that the City does not have a legal mechanism and are acting on their good faith and intention.  Although it is slow, Mr. Patterson thought it appeared they would follow through with their verbal commitment.  He did not feel they would go to the trouble of getting the Highway permits and agreements if they were not intending on following through.
    Mr. Beck said the permit request came into his office on Friday and it referred to the applications for the permits.  He said that is a good sign, but not a definite assurance.
    Ms. Crayton said she had received a call about the Pershing intersection with Worley.  The caller had asked when a sign would be put up.  Mr. Patterson said he would check into the situation and get an answer for her.
    Mr. Janku commented that he had attended the Earth Day activities and he noticed there was some parking on the streets in areas that do not generally permit parking.  He said it seemed to be functioning quite well.  He said there has been concern voiced about losing parking in the area and wondered about putting in meters.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that the staff be directed to evaluate the potential for additional on-street parking meters on portions of Sixth Street and also on Elm, west as far as the Chamber of Commerce driveway and the University driveway.  He asked that staff also look at the potential for parking meters on North Tenth Street.  The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Regarding the Vandiver office building and the question of a pedestrian crossing he asked for an earlier report on, Mr. Janku said he noticed now there is a new gymnasium being built in the same general area.  He said it probably would increase pedestrian traffic and asked for a report on whether something could be looked at, in terms of a safety island or something, for people wanting to cross Vandiver in that area, and also maybe for people getting off the bus that need to get across Vandiver.  Mr. Janku indicated he had asked for a report before, but thought there was more urgency involved now.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that staff report on the situation.  Mayor Hindman asked if he was wanting the report fairly soon.  Mr. Janku said he was.
    Mr. Campbell asked if the Council was about due for a status report on various reports they have requested.  Mr. Beck said there is a thick list of requests and he is trying to get the list reduced in size with feedback from the staff.  He said some require more staffing to get them back timely.  Mr. Beck stated he would send a status report.
    The meeting adjourned at 11:25 p.m.

                                                                              Respectfully submitted,

                                                                              Penny St. Romaine
                                                                              City Clerk