M I N U T E S
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - COLUMBIA, MISSOURI

NOVEMBER 15, 2004



INTRODUCTORY

The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, November 15, 2004, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results: Council Members HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN and ASH were present. The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk and various Department Heads were also present.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

The minutes of the regular meeting of November 1, 2004, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion by Mr. Hutton and a second by Mr. Ash.

APPROVAL AND ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA INCLUDING CONSENT AGENDA

Mayor Hindman noted that R238-04 would be added under New Business and that B375-04 would be moved from the Consent Agenda to Old Business.

The agenda, as amended, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion by Mr. Ash and a second by Mr. John.

Mr. John reminded everyone that he was abstaining from B332-04. This was approved at the October 18, 2004 Council Meeting.

SPECIAL ITEMS

None.

SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS

None.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

B332-04 Rezoning property located on the east side of U.S. Highway 63, north and south of Stadium Boulevard, extended, from A-1 to C-P.

The bill was read by the Clerk.

Mayor Hindman explained that an amendment sheet had been prepared.

Mr. Watkins stated this to be a request from Bruce and Kathleen Maier to rezone approximately 42 acres to C-P. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7 - 1 in favor of the request. He noted the item was tabled from the October 18 meeting in order to obtain more input from the neighbors. He explained the amendment to be an agreement between the neighbors and the developers.

Mr. Loveless made the motion that B332-04 be amended per the amendment sheet. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku.

Mayor Hindman re-opened the public hearing.

Phoebe La Mar, an attorney with offices at 111 S. Ninth, spoke on behalf of the potential developers. She handed out information regarding the contents of the amendment. Ms. La Mar felt the property to be ideal for C-P zoning for several reasons. It was located next to the major intersection of 63 and Stadium Boulevard and would ultimately include Stadium, as it would be extended into the property. It also included a wide variety of topography, and as a result, mixed uses on the property was the ideal way to develop this particular property. In addition, she noted the fact that there was a requirement for submission of a C-P plan, which would allow for additional comment on the plan prior to any approval or prior to anything being built on the property. Since this issue was tabled, she noted a great deal of dialogue between the developers and the attorney for the neighbors, Mr. Evans had occurred. During this time, the neighboring property owners' concerns had been addressed to the best of the developer's ability. The amendment sheet, which contained a list of excluded uses, was what they were ultimately able to reach. She stated that it was essentially the list of possible uses that could be made of this property under C-3 zoning minus everything, except three items, that the neighbors were displeased with. She described the three items with their conditions. Ms. La Mar also noted three requirements included in the amendment sheet regarding lighting, pitched roofs, and a traffic study.

David Evans, an attorney with offices at 717 Cherry, spoke on behalf of the Shepard Hills Improvement Association. He said there were other concerns than those agreed to in the amendment sheet, but they thought those issues could be better addressed when the C-P plan came before the Council. He asked that the Council adopt the amendment sheet and ordinance as amended.

Gay Bumgarner, 1315 Rustic Road, stated they were interested in a covenant being attached to this property stating any planned commercial development would not be allowed piece meal, but planned as a whole.

There being no further comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

Mr. Ash understood Ms. Bumgardner's suggestion, but questioned the feasibility and asked if it was a fair burden to place on the developer. Ms. Crayton felt the suggestion was meant to assure the likeness of the buildings. Mayor Hindman liked the idea and suggested statements of intent rather than a detailed plan.

Mr. Janku asked what the traffic study would be required to show. Mr. Patterson replied that the traffic study would have to be based on certain assumed uses, so they would know what types of traffic generators were being planned. He noted that MoDOT would also require traffic information to include what it would do to the interchange before they were likely to allow any connections to Stadium beyond the ramps at this point.

Mr. Ash asked the developer for thoughts on the suggestion. Ms. La Mar did not think the developer was necessarily opposed to having some sort of general plan at the beginning. Expecting a detailed plan, when it was possible that some of the parcels might be sold off at some point before buildings were put on them, she did not see as very realistic.

Mayor Hindman asked, with respect to the zoning, if they would be able to require a statement of intent that would give the Council a reasonable picture of the overall development. Mr. Boeckmann thought it would be better to have a general rule set forth in the zoning ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Commission, he reminded them, would be coming forward at some point with suggested changes to the planned districts. He felt this was an issue they should be considering. In terms of whether or not the Council could do it, he stated that tonight they were dealing with rezoning, but when the plan itself was submitted, which was also part of the zoning process, the Council would have some discretion. He pointed out that the traffic study being required would have to assume the worst - what impact would the most intensive uses would have on traffic. As a practical matter, Mr. Boeckmann suspected they would have to come in with enough of a plan to show the overall burden on the street system. Mayor Hindman made the motion that in connection with any plan submitted, there be a description satisfactory to the Council of the overall intent with respect to the development of the property without requiring a overall detailed plan.

Ms. La Mar pointed out that a portion of it would only be accessible through LeMone Industrial Boulevard and was pretty far away from most of the residential areas. There was another piece of property in the middle between the two arms of Grindstone Creek that were essentially unusable. She was not sure it made sense to expect the entire property to be planned at the same time. She noted relatively different uses on the north and south ends of the property.

Mayor Hindman hoped he had covered that by saying it had to be satisfactory to the Council so the developer could come in and explain why the south part of the property should just get a very general plan explanation.

After being asked to restate the Mayor's motion on the table, Mr. Boeckmann stated the motion would add subsection 4 to Section 2 and read that the developer shall provide a description satisfactory to the Council of the overall intent with respect to development of the property (but not an overall plan). The motion was seconded by Mr. Ash.

Mr. Hutton felt the motion was general enough to support, however, he was concerned about requiring something that was not set out by ordinance. He asked if they would be doing this for all tracts from now on out.

The motion made by Mayor Hindman, seconded by Mr. Ash, was approved by voice vote.

The motion to amend the bill per the amendment sheet, made by Mr. Loveless, seconded by Mr. Janku, was passed by voice vote.

B332-04, as amended, was read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, ASH. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSTAINING: JOHN. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B351-04 Rezoning property located at the northwest corner of Providence Road and Third Avenue (209 and 213 Third Avenue) from O-P to C-P.

The bill was read by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck pointed out that this item had been tabled from the last meeting and that both the Staff and the Commission recommended denial of the request.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

George Smith, an attorney with offices at 717 Cherry, passed out copies of a revised C-P plan. He spoke on behalf of the applicants, Thomas and Pamela Kardon. Using the overhead, he referred to a corridor along Providence which ran from the Business Loop to Hickman Street. Recently, he noted, the Council approved a C-P request for Kilgore Pharmacy across the street and a little south from this proposed site. He felt C-P zoning was the preferred classification because it afforded the City maximum discretion as to what type of structure would be built on the lot. Because the tract was not large he felt only the permitted uses under the lesser zoning classifications of C-1 or C-3 would actually be feasible at this location. Mr. Smith pointed out that this area of Providence was under transition and was becoming decreasingly residential with many of the residential properties being very old and some of them actually being boarded up. He explained that Mr. Kardon had been a resident of Columbia for 34 years and was a well respected auto mechanic. He stated Mr. Kardon planned to build an upscale auto parts store, which would cater to imports, exclusively. There would be no auto repair or machine shop allowed on this site. It would exclusively be a retail store for auto parts.

Mr. Ash asked Mr. Smith if they were asking for all C-3, C-1 and on down uses or if they were willing to limit it to only the use needed to have the auto parts store. Mr. Smith replied that they were willing to do that.

Athanasios Kardon, 1909 Jackson, explained that his parents owned the two lots in question, having purchased them six years ago with the dream of building a parts store. He noted that one of the main sticking points was traffic and explained that they planned on providing a delivery system to other parts stores and repair shops in order to decrease traffic at this location. By building a parts store in this area, they would be providing a necessary service to the neighbors and would add to tax revenues for the City.

Mr. Ash asked if they would be willing to require access off of Third Avenue.

Thomas Kardon, 1909 Jackson, explained the proposed building would be 4,800 square feet with 1,920 being used for sales and 2,880 being used for storage. There would also be 23 parking spaces. Mr. Kardon passed around pictures of the existing structure, which he stated would be razed within the next two weeks. He commented that there was access from Third Avenue and from Providence. Mr. Ash noted it was labeled as a construction entrance off of Providence. He asked if that would remain after construction was complete. Mr. Kardon replied it would. He said the sidewalk would be fixed on Providence. Mr. Ash asked if he would be willing to limit access only off of Third Avenue and not allow access off of Providence. Mr. Kardon noted the Neighborhood Association did not want the traffic on Third Avenue. He indicated that he could go either way. He only wanted a parts store, nothing else.

John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, President of the North Central Columbia Neighborhood Association, noted that they voted unanimously to oppose this request. When the Kilgore rezoning took place, the Planning Commission was explicit about not seeing themselves as setting precedent on putting aside the ban on commercial zoning. Mr. Clark noted that the property was already zoned O-P, making it subject to City guidance on planning. He pointed out information presented tonight that had not been brought out at the Planning and Zoning meeting having to do with the delivery of parts from this store to other parts stores, not necessarily just repair facilities. His understanding was that this was proposed as purely a retail operation. Mr. Clark stated that their neighborhood was going through a planning process and that he was fairly certain that recommendations would include doing corridor planning for College, Providence, and some of the streets inside North Central. He felt that corridor planning process would address the range of uses, the intensities, and the appropriate mix of commercial and office uses in an even-handed manner for the whole corridor. He urged the Council to reject the application.

Mayor Hindman commented that the while the idea of waiting for the development of a corridor plan was appealing, the applicant could go ahead and develop an office right now due to the O-P zoning.

Ms. Crayton asked if Mr. Kardon had been asked to amend his application during his earlier requests for rezoning. When the original application was filed, Mr. Boeckmann explained, they did not designate what uses they wanted allowed in the C-P district. He clarified that they could only do what the ordinance zoning the property allowed. As the ordinance was written, the use allowed would be for store, shops and markets for retail trades, providing merchandise was not displayed, stored or offered for sale on the premises, outside a building, in the required front yard or in any side or rear yard adjacent to a residential zoning district. He said that would be the only use they could make of the property under the ordinance. Ms. Crayton asked about the other uses in the area. Mr. John explained that C-1 was allowed between Forest and the

alley, C-3 from the alley through Austin down to the Business Loop, and O-1 the rest of the way down that side of the street until Sexton, where there was the R-2 lot, which was grandfathered to C-1 and O-1 uses.

There being no further comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

Mr. Janku understood the plan was not part of the ordinance. Mr. Boeckmann replied that was correct. Mr. Janku asked if they needed to have anything in advance about the access issue raised or if when the plan came in, they could approve or disapprove the access. Mr. Boeckmann stated they could specify that up front if they wished, but would not have to. Regarding outside storage, he assumed they would not be able to park cars outside with for sale signs on them and get away with it. Mr. Boeckmann said it would be considered merchandise and would be prohibited. Mr. Janku asked if they should tie down retail trade to auto parts or phrases to that affect. Mr Boeckmann noted that it was a very broad use and was used for stores of all kinds.

Mr. Ash asked if it was possible to get their permission and restrict it only to uses for an auto parts store. Mr. Boeckmann noted that they had done that in the past, but pointed out that if the Council granted it and Mr. Kardon actually built a building on the site, went out of business, and then sold it, it would be limited to only auto parts. Mr. Ash asked if they would have to come back to the Council. Mr. Boeckmann replied that they would. Going back to the Kilgore rezoning, Mr. John pointed out they had a pharmacy where the uses were restricted fairly specifically. If they went out of business and someone else came in, the Council would have to be reasonable and rational at that point also. Mr. Boeckmann noted they could try to restrict the Kilgore property to a pharmacy, but if it was shown to be not economical and the community would not support one, the Council would be in a position where they would have to allow some reasonable use of the property. In the case of the Kardon property, Mr. John said they would have to show there was no support for an auto parts store at that location to get to the hardship point of the Council allowing some other use.

Mr. Janku commented that he was not particularly in favor of this, but noted that if the others wanted to go ahead with it, they should try to figure out, as part of the application, what commercial uses they would permit along this area. He did not think they should try to do it tonight. If approved for an auto parts store, he felt they would be very hard pressed to deny a lot of other uses that might not be very desirable on an equity basis.

If this was approved, Mayor Hindman felt they would be raising expectations of others that might want to come in with commercial rezoning requests. He also stated that he did not think they were in a position to come back in two weeks with a list of acceptable uses. If this was turned down, he pointed out, they could end up with an undesirable office development on it as well.

When Kilgore's was approved, Mr. Janku noted that he had asked Planning and Zoning to come up with a policy of sorts. He assumed they were still working on it and was hopeful it would not be too much longer.

Mr. Ash did not have a problem with the request. As to whether or not it was an appropriate location, he noted O-1 directly to the north and after that commercial all the way to the Business Loop. He saw Providence and the Business Loop as a common sense place for commercial. The only concerns he saw were access issues and too many uses being allowed under C-P. As far as how to decide what was appropriate, Mr. Ash suggested following the Kilgore analogy by striking everything except an auto parts store. If they made the access off of Providence right in/right out only with the main access off of Third Avenue, he felt that would solve the access issues.

In regards to the traffic issue, Mr. Janku noted one of the arguments for the Kilgore rezoning was that a lot of neighborhood people would use it. He did not see an auto parts store having that benefit. They would be bringing in outside traffic. Mr. Ash agreed, but thought someone from the neighborhood might get a job there.

Mr. John noted that an auto parts store would not generate a lot of daily traffic like a lot of other uses could. Traffic was one of those things they could look at when working on a list. He did not see a compelling reason to not allow a low impact use. He explained that Mr. Kardon would have to come back with a plan for a building. He recalled the previous building plan with a lot of brick and glass that he thought would look pretty nice. He noted that he could not put cars on the lot and they could amend it to say auto parts only. He had no opposition to having the access only off of Third Street because there would not be that many cars. He preferred one access coming in and out, rather than two.

Mr. Loveless spoke in opposition to further commercialization further south on Providence Road from where it was now.

Mr. Hutton did not have a problem with the request, especially if they limited it to an auto parts store. He felt they were being premature in talking about access noting it should go through the planning process. He thought an auto parts store would not be significantly different than most of the stuff up and down the area right now, as far as the front of the buildings were concerned. He thought it would certainly be an improvement over what was there, as would an office building, but pointed out that there were many vacant office buildings in the area.

Mr. Ash asked Mr. Smith if they would entertain an amendment to strike all uses except for an auto parts store. Mr. Smith stated they would.

Mr. Ash made the motion that B351-04 be amended by changing Section 1 to read that hereafter the property may be used for an auto parts store only. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B351-04, as amended, was read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, HUTTON, JOHN, ASH. VOTING NO: CRAYTON, JANKU, LOVELESS. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B372-04 Rezoning property located on the west side of Brown Station Road, north of U.S. Highway 63 from A-1 to PUD-12.

The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck described this as an 11.6 acre tract of ground. Staff preferred it to be a PUD-8 instead of a PUD-12, but the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the PUD-12 on an 8 - 1 vote.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

James Pounds, 401 Cheetah, property owner, offered to answer any questions.

Mr. Ash commented that he was in agreement with the Staff's preference. He asked Mr. Pounds if he would be willing to go with a PUD-8 or 10. Mr. Pounds replied that he originally requested an R-2 development, which was rejected by Planning and Zoning. At that time he was encouraged to bring it back as a PUD-12. He added that he would be willing to accept something lower than 12.

Mr. Janku asked about any amenities that might be included in the tract. Mr. Pounds explained that it had a creek running down the center and some really nice trees that they would like to maintain.

Mr. Hutton noted a lot of discussion about density because of the lay of the land. He asked what would be a realistic maximum. Mr. Pounds replied that it laid pretty well for a maximum density of PUD-12. Mr. Hutton assumed from the minutes that his plan was to cluster larger units together. Mr. Pounds replied that was correct. Mr. John thought that was specifically why they had gone against the R-2, because of the duplexes. Mr. Pounds commented that they had told him it would be more aesthetically pleasing to have condo type units. Under R-2 zoning, Mr. Hutton asked what the maximum density could have been. Mr. Pounds thought it would have been about the same as PUD-8. Mr. John noted the theoretical was nine units per acre, but pointed out it would have to lay exactly right to get that done.

There being no further comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

Mr. Janku felt the PUD to be preferable to a duplex type development. The higher density would be a good reward. Mr. Hutton agreed and thought the Commission had been short sighted in the way they went about recommending a number.

Mr. Hutton made the motion that B372-04 be amended to a PUD-10. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless.

Mayor Hindman liked the PUD-12 because it was a piece of land ideally suited for clustering. He agreed with the reward concept and thought the developer should be given the opportunity.

Regarding the higher density being used as the reward for going through the PUD process, Mr. Ash reminded them that the original zoning was A-1. His rule of thumb was that when one was upzoning it should be planned zoning. The planned equivalent of R-2 was PUD-8. He suggested they consider the ripple affect and asked if everything next to it should be PUD-12. He felt normally people went from A-1 to R-1 or something similar.

Mr. Beck commented that when this property came into the City in 1969, most of the land not planned to be used at that time was put in either A-1 or R-1 and was considered as being in a holding zone until such time when it was closer to being developed.

Mr. John stated he could go with a PUD-10 or 12, but noted that by putting a public street through the middle of it, they would lose about two acres and would end up with about 86 units on it. He felt, at a density of 10, they would be at 116 and with a density of 12, they would be at 136. He wanted to encourage less duplexes and more large buildings.

Mr. Hutton stated a PUD-10 was still greater than what he could accomplish with R-2 zoning, so there was a reward factor in it. He felt Mr. Ash made a good point regarding the precedent setting. He also pointed out the adjoining property to the north was R-1.

The motion to amend B372-04, made by Mr. Hutton, seconded by Mr. Loveless, was approved by voice vote.

B372-04, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B373-04 Approving the Boys and Girls Town of Missouri O-P Development Plan.

The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck described this property to consist of approximately 5.5 acres. Both the Staff and Commission recommended approval of the request subject to their depositing $25 per lineal foot toward improvements to Bearfield Road.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

Craig Van Matre, an attorney with offices at 1103 E. Broadway, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He explained that they were wanting to add square footage onto the buildings to allow the existing buildings to be used for teaching as well as residences for the occupants. The occupants would be 14 to 16 year old kids who were at risk and had been taken in by the Boys and Girls Town of Missouri. Pursuant to a question asked by Mr. John regarding shielding the view of the development from the residents to the south, and vise versa, he handed out the landscaping/fencing plan for the buffering for the residents to the south.

There being no further comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

Mr. John asked about the length of the fence. He was told it was 100 feet long.

B373-04 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B376-04 Authorizing acquisition of easements for the Third Avenue and Garth Avenue drainage improvement project.

The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.

Mr. Patterson explained this project was for a neighborhood structural flooding problem they planned to correct by putting in an area inlet and connecting it to the existing storm drainage system. This was a project identified under annual projects in the storm water utility. The project cost was estimated at $19,000 and would be bid through Purchasing. He noted that all but one of the easements had been donated to the City. The remaining one would need to be acquired and was authorized by the ordinance.

Mr. Ash asked if any of the property owners had any concerns. Mr. Patterson replied that he did not have any negative feedback regarding the project.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

B376-04 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B377-04 Authorizing acquisition of property for the construction of the Merideth Branch detention basin.

The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.

Mr. Patterson described this as one of the major regional detention facilities that was identified by the Master Basin Modeling Plan of 1999. They had been working on the project for slightly over two years with a big part of it being involved with the environmental permitting for the project. He showed the area encompassed by the Merideth Branch detention facility on the overhead. He noted it was actually two basins separated by Chapel Hill Road. The public hearing was for the lower basin. the one south of Chapel Hill Road. It was estimated to cost $152,000. The ordinance also allowed for acquisition of one property. This was property the City currently had a storm drainage easement on, but because this was the location of the overflow structure itself, they felt it should be in fee title by the City in order to provide for perpetual maintenance rights and to avoid any potential liability issues for the underlying properties. The project would begin in the Spring of 2005 and would be completed next year. The project was for the purpose of alleviating and mitigating downstream flooding problems already occurring. The upper basin would be constructed and designed in conjunction with the Chapel Hill Road project, which they currently had under contract for design. Within the next two years, they hoped to have both facilities completed.

Mr. Loveless asked what would happen to the vegetation as it grew and if the City would mow the basin. Mr. Patterson replied that since this was going to be part of the Daniel Boone Ball Park area, the City would be mowing the areas that were seeded, but that they intended to let most of the natural areas grow. Only those areas around the ball park area would be maintained. Mr. Loveless thought there would be considerable growth of annual weeds and grass that would put the City in violation of its own weed ordinance. Mr. Patterson replied that this was one of the consequences of our stormwater quality program where they try to maintain natural area. He pointed out a similar situation on the Business Loop, when they put in the experimental project along Cosmo for stabilization of the channel there. The current plan was to try to maintain natural conditions. If they later found they created a nuisance that they had to take care of, they would go in with maintenance operations. Mr. Loveless asked if the flood basin would be fenced. Mr. Patterson replied that it would not. It would be a dry facility and those were not typically fenced because of the short duration of time they had flood waters. It was very similar to the Again Street Project, which was actually on school grounds. Water, which got to depths of 8 feet, would be there for a very short period of time and rapidly dropped below that. Only when they got into areas where they had retention facilities where there were higher danger risks to people did they consider fencing. Even those, he said, were seldom fenced.

Mr. Janku asked if this branch would accommodate a trail and if this moved upstream toward Scott Boulevard. Mr. Patterson replied that it would accommodate the trail and that he thought they had been in discussions with Parks and Recreation about the structure itself as part of that connection. He said he would verify that, but he knew that it had been considered in the project. Mr. Janku assumed, in Chapel Hill's design, that there might be a connection through there. Mr. Patterson replied that was correct.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

Chris Awad, explained that he was a new homeowner in the neighborhood immediately adjoining the ballfields. He asked what the basin would look like and if it would lend itself, when it was dry, to skating or if it would provide an area for vagrants. In addition to weeds and growth, he was concerned about mosquitos, which, he said, was already a bad problem in the area. If this basin held water, he asked if that posed a greater increase of flooding in a severe downfall. He also asked if his property would be used in any way and if there was any type of compensation. Mr. Patterson told Mr. Awad his Staff would be happy to meet with him to explain in more detail what would actually be happening there. He explained that all of the property rights that were involved with the structure had already been acquired, other than the one right under the structure itself. He added that they would not be exposing any areas that were not currently subject to flooding under extreme circumstances with this project. Mr. Awad stated he would appreciate more information. Mr. Patterson replied that his Staff would be happy to contact him.

Joe Frescura, 4701 Cedar Rock Court, explained that this project would directly impact him. Because he had two small children, he was concerned about fencing and their safety, if there was going to be standing water of any depth. He asked how fast the water would go down and stated he would also like to have someone meet with his family. He explained his property line currently extended out and encompassed the present storm sewer drain. He wanted to see how the retention pond was going to be back stopped so he would not have further erosion of his property, past the proposed basin. Mr. Patterson replied that they would be in contact with him.

There being no further comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

Mr. Janku asked if there was work going on upstream near Scott Boulevard. On the east side, Mr. Patterson replied, there had already been detention facilities built with new development. The plans for the project at Scott Boulevard and Smith Drive already include detention also. He pointed out that they were looking at the whole basin.

B377-04 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

OLD BUSINESS

B355-04 Vacating unbuilt street right-of-way for First Street.

The bill was read by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck noted this had been tabled because the Council had requested additional information on the issue. The staff report suggested restrictions on the number of entrances onto Broadway.

Mr. Patterson explained that his Staff worked with Planning on the issue and the conclusion had been that they could not see a benefit in maintaining a public street there, but they felt access should be restricted.

Dan Brush, project engineer with offices at 506 Nichols Street, explained that the current 33-foot right-of-way was being used as a driveway and parking lot. He believed the intent was to continue the same use. As far as restricting the access, he stated he had not had time to contact the owner to discuss it with him.

Mr. John asked if the street led to any place. Mr. Brush replied that it did not. He explained that there was a grade differential between the existing street right-of-way and the adjacent property to the south of nine to ten feet.

If this were to become an official parking lot, Mr. Janku asked if it would have to meet landscaping and other standards. Mayor Hindman asked if the property was zoned. Mr. Boeckmann felt it depended upon how the property was zoned originally. Assuming it was a right-of-way, he thought there was probably no zoning. He guessed it would take the zoning of the adjoining property out to the centerline. Mr. John noted it was C-2 on both sides. Mr. Janku commented that there were no landscaping requirements in C-2.

Regarding the issue of restricting access, Mr. Boeckmann explained the proper way to do that would be to get a conveyance from the property owners. He suggested the issue be tabled to see if the owners were willing to grant a conveyance.

Mr. Janku made the motion that B355-04 be tabled to the December 6, 2004 meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutton and approved by voice vote.

B379-04 Confirming the contract with Emery Sapp & Sons, Inc. for construction of improvements on East Broadway; appropriating funds.

The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck stated three bids had been received for this project with the low bid from Emery Sapp & Sons in the amount of $4,789,783.41. The engineer's estimate had been $4,931,066. Most of the cost would be funded with MoDOT funds, including enhancement funds for the nine foot pedway and six foot sidewalk that was recommended by the Commissions. Mr. Beck noted that work would begin shortly after awarding the contract, with completion being expected during the 2005 construction season.

John Pascucci, 3104 Timberhill Trail, was glad to see this project happening, however, he objected to the project being paid for by the taxpayers instead of by the businesses being developed along this stretch of Broadway.

B379-04 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B375-04 Approving the Final Plat of Vandiver Crossing; authorizing a performance contract.

The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.

Mr. Ash noted a discussion in the P & Z minutes regarding the appropriateness of addressing any driveway access limitations at the final plat stage as opposed to letting the Staff make the determination at the time of the site plan development discussions. Mr. Patterson replied that they liked to get as much done up front as possible, but in circumstances where there were no requests for any change in the use of the land or in zoning and where it was strictly a platting process with no development associated with it, they were trying to put the property owner on notice that when a development plan came in, these were our expectations. He stated they understood that Staff would be looking at the distance from intersections and the type of entrances that should be restricted. In places like this, they felt it made more sense for them to try to address that at the time there was actually a request for development or a change in the use of the property. Mr. Janku agreed it would be preferable to have it resolved in a way that Staff felt was desirable. Mr. Ash was okay with it if Mr. Patterson was satisfied with waiting until the property was developed.

B375-04 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

CONSENT AGENDA

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

B374-04 Approving the Final Plat of Boone Prairie Plat 1; authorizing a performance contract.

B378-04 Amending Ordinance No. 17978 to correct legal descriptions on properties assessed for sewer construction in Sanitary Sewer District No. 144 (Mexico Gravel Road).

B380-04 Authorizing a railway crossing agreement with the City of Centralia, Missouri; appropriating funds.

B381-04 Appropriating funds for the purchase of supplies for the D.A.R.E. program.

B382-04 Accepting a grant from the State Emergency Agency for Citizen Corps Programs; appropriating funds.

B383-04 Authorizing Amendment No. 1 to agreement with the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services for the Lead Agency Program; appropriating funds.

R230-04 Setting a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property located on the west side of Roger I. Wilson Memorial Drive.

R231-04 Setting a public hearing: construction of water main serving CenterState, Plat 4.

R232-04 Setting a public hearing: expansion of the McBaine Water Treatment Plant.

R233-04 Setting a public hearing: construction of water main from the water treatment plant at McBaine to Scott Boulevard.

R234-04 Authorizing Adopt A Spot agreements.

R235-04 Authorizing an agreement with Dan Hagan for the lease of parking spaces on the northeast corner of providence Road and Broadway.

R236-04 Authorizing an agreement with the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey for groundwater monitoring in the wetlands area.

R237-04 Authorizing the City Manager to make FY 2005 Certifications and Assurances for Federal Transit Administration assistance programs.

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

NEW BUSINESS

R238-04 Authorizing an agreement with Chiodini Associates, Inc., for architectural services for the Howard and Gentry buildings.

The resolution was read by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck explained that a public hearing had been held at the last meeting on the upgrading of the two buildings. He noted that money had been appropriated for the work.

The vote on R238-04 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH. 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:

B384-04 Rezoning property located on the southeast corner of West Ash Street and Clinkscales Road from R-3 to C-P.

B385-04 Rezoning property located on the southeast corner of Forum Boulevard and Forum Katy Parkway from R-3 PUD to C-P.

B386-04 Rezoning property located on the northwest corner of Bold Venture Drive and Smiley Lane from A-1 to PUD-8.

B387-04 Approving the Ruby Tuesday C-P Development Plan.

B388-04 Approving the Final Plat of Mill Creek Manor, Plat No. 2; authorizing a performance contract.

B389-04 Approving the Final Plat of The Cascades, Plat No. 5; authorizing a performance contract.

B390-04 Approving the Final Plat of Elm Grove Subdivision, Plat 3, a Replat of Lots 13 and 14 of Elm Grove Subdivision; authorizing a performance contract.

B391-04 Approving the Final Plat of Timber Creek, Plat No. 3, a Replat of Lot 1 of Timber Creek, Plat No. 1.

B392-04 Authorizing acquisition of easements for the construction of the Concordia Drive and Walther Court drainage improvement project.

B393-04 Accepting conveyances for drainage, sewer, sidewalk, street, and utility purposes.

B394-04 Authorizing construction of water main serving CenterState, Plat 4; providing for payment of differential costs.

B395-04 Calling for bids for the McBaine Water Treatment Plant expansion project.

B396-04 Accepting conveyance; authorizing payment of differential costs for water main serving Dakota Ridge, Plat 1; approving the Engineer's Final Report.

B397-04 Accepting conveyance; authorizing payment of differential costs for water main serving Hunter's Gate, Plat 3A; approving the Engineer's Final Report.

B398-04 Accepting conveyances for utility purposes.

B399-04 Accepting and appropriating donated funds for the Special Olympics program.

B400-04 Appropriating SEMA grant funds for the purchase of fire department equipment to be used for weapons of mass destruction incidents.

REPORTS AND PETITIONS

(A) Intra-departmental Transfer of Funds.

Report accepted.

(B) Street Closure Request.

Mr. Loveless made the motion that the request br granted as requested. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(C) Fire Arms Hunting.

Mr. Beck explained the next step to be placement of the ordinance on an agenda for public discussion. He asked if the Council was interested in having a work session on the issue before placing it on an agenda.

Mr. Loveless made the motion that the issue be placed on a work session agenda. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(D) Fannie Mae's Smart Commute Initiative.

Mr. Janku made the motion that Staff be directed to collect the necessary data and contact the partners needed to pursue the program. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless and approved unanimously by voice vote.

BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

Upon receiving the majority vote of the Council, the following individuals were appointed to the below listed commissions.

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CODES COMMISSION

Kempker, David L., 1011 Profits Creek Rd., St. Thomas - term to expire 8/1/07

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

Thornhill, Jason T., 1903 Thoreau Ct., Ward 2 - term to expire 11/1/07

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION

Douglas A. Sebastian, 2026 State Rd. E, Auxvasse - term to expire 9/1/05

COMMENTS BY PUBLIC, COUNCIL AND STAFF

Birgit Wiedmeyer, 202 Haywood Court, spoke in opposition to allowing hunting within City limits. She noted her breakfast was recently interrupted due to gun shots and was concerned about the safety of children and people walking their dogs.

Mr. Hutton commented that he had received a letter from a constituent offering to be an intermediary in regards to the possible donation of some property for park or greenbelt purposes. Mr. Hutton provided the information to Mr. Beck and made the motion that Staff be directed to proceed with necessary actions to accomplish acceptance of the donation. The motion was seconded Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.

Mr. Ash commented on a communication received regarding the development agreement with Bearfield Meadows. The letter described a situation where someone poured stain down a sanitary storm sewer, which then filtered into the ponds that were supposed to be protected. He asked which department was responsible for enforcing development agreements. Unless the development agreement was part of the covenants, Mr. Patterson replied that it was the responsibility of the homeowners association. He noted that some of the stormwater issues were part of the covenants, such as the maintenance of stormwater facilities in Bearfield Meadows. He commented that this particular situation had been brought to his attention by Staff after they received the same communication as Mr. Ash. With the passage of the ordinance at the last Council meeting, he noted, they now had some violations where they could enforce illegal dumping into the storm drainage systems. They were following up on this situation. Mr. Ash inquired if there was anything the City could have done before the passage of the recent ordinance. Mr. Beck reiterated that a large part of the development agreement was the responsibility of the homeowners association. It was deliberately put in that way in order to remove total responsibility on the City's part for those elements. The responsibility of the homeowners was enforced through their own covenants and rules.

Based on an earlier discussion, Mr. Janku made the motion that the issue regarding the outer road of 763 between Blue Ridge and Smiley Lane be referred to the CATSO Technical Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.

Mr. Janku received a call from a constituent about the sidewalk on the Business Loop after seeing someone in a wheelchair negotiating the Business Loop late at night. He stated he would like to get the sidewalk project expedited.

The meeting adjourned at 9:37 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Sheela Amin
City Clerk