APRIL 20, 1998

    The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri, met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, April 20, 1998, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri.  The roll was taken with the following results:  Council Members KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, and CAMPBELL were present.  The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also present.

    The minutes of the regular meeting of April 6, 1998, as well as the minutes of the special meeting of April 13, 1998, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mr. Janku.

    Mayor Hindman noted that Report B would be added under Reports and Petitions.
    Upon her request, Mr. Campbell made the motion that Mrs. Crockett be allowed to abstain from voting on B105-98, B95-98, R91-98, and R95-98.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved by voice vote.
    At his request, Ms. Coble made the motion that Mr. Kruse be allowed to abstain from voting on B104-98 and R92-98.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved by voice vote.
    Upon his request, Mr. Janku made the motion that Mayor Hindman be allowed to abstain from voting on R92-98.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved by voice vote.
    The agenda, as amended, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mrs. Crockett.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that the Council reconsider the ordinance on The Terebinths Subdivision, Plat III.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.

A.     Presentation of Tree City USA Award.
    Timothy French, Missouri Department of Conservation, presented the City with this award, which included a plaque, a Tree City flag, and road signs.  Mr. French noted that the City had been working on the award process for a year.  He explained that the National Arbor Day Foundation, in cooperation with the US Forest Service and the National Association of State Foresters, recognizes towns and cities across America that meet the standards of the Tree City USA Program.  In Missouri, he noted only 40 cities, towns, and municipalities have met the standards to qualify for the Tree City designation.
    Mayor Hindman accepted the plaque on behalf of the community.  Mayor Hindman reported another positive outcome of qualifying for the award had been the formation of the Tree Committee, which he thought would provide many benefits.  He had recently attended a Tree Keepers graduation ceremony, which had been comprised of approximately 50 volunteers.  He noted that soon there would be an army of people volunteering their time to improve the treescapes of this community.  Mayor Hindman also thanked Mr. Janku for suggesting that this designation be pursued.


B100-98     Approving Change Order No. 1; approving engineer's final report; levying special assessments for the
                   Silvey Street project.

    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this collector street had been reconstructed last year.  Because a small portion of the street will be tax billed, he asked Mr. Patterson to describe the project and the benefits to the property owners.
    Mr. Patterson explained that the improvement to Silvey Street is one of the projects funded from the 1996 1/4 cent sales tax issue.  He said Silvey Street had been identified as a priority need, particularly after the construction of Smithton School.  Prior to the reconstruction, he noted that Silvey Street was an unimproved (primarily gravel) 20 foot wide street.  The street was improved to collector standards (38 foot width), and included storm drainage systems and a sidewalk along the entire length of the east side of the project.  Extensive landscaping had also been included in the project to provide mitigation of trees that were lost during construction.  A considerable amount of the landscaping has been completed, but there are still some oak trees that remain to be planted.
    Mr. Patterson reported the entire project had been constructed at a cost of $397,823.50.  Abutting property owners are subject to a tax bill not to exceed the cost of curb and guttering, or its equivalent.  That amount was set to be a maximum of $10.25 per foot at the public hearing on December 4, 1995.  If the tax bills are approved by Council, Mr. Patterson said it would generate approximately $21,529 of the project cost.  The balance would come from the sales tax fund.
    Mr. Patterson explained prior to levying the assessments, the Council would need to determine there have been benefits accrued to the properties that are at least equal to the amount being proposed for assessment.  He suggested that the Council consider the following in making their determination:  the curb and guttering improves the stormwater management, appearance and maintainability of neighboring properties; there is improved access to the properties adjacent to the street; safe pedestrian access has been supplied by the new sidewalk; and street maintenance has been improved, particularly as it relates to street cleaning and snow removal.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mayor Hindman said this is one of the better street improvements he has seen, and noted that it meets his definition of what a street project should include -- proper drainage, curb and gutters, sidewalks on both sides of the street, and the planting of trees.  In his view, these elements complete such a project.  He is hopeful that all new streets would have these same features.  Regarding the oak trees remaining to be planted, Mayor Hindman noted that the Tree Keepers had the kind of energy, skills, and talent it would take to get them planted.
    Mr. Kruse pointed out that the new street also has bicycle lanes.  He thought that is an important component to add, if possible, to any transportation corridor.  He said history will show that this is the first street to truly meet "the Hindman test".
    B100-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B104-98     Rezoning five tracts of property owned by Centerstate Properties, LLC and Clarence D. Woodard from
                   A-1 to O-P, C-P and PUD-14.

    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this approximate 180 tract of land is located along US 63, south of the Mexico Gravel Road overpass.  He said a fairly comprehensive plan had been formulated by the property owner and the developer of the property, while working closely with staff and the neighborhood associations in the area.  Mr. Beck noted that most of the City infrastructure already exists in the area (water and sewer lines), with the exception of an acceptable road network.  This has not occurred as there has been no development on either side of US 63.  Mr. Beck reported there had been quite a few meetings held with the Department of Transportation, the developer, City planners, and the developer's hired consultants to look at how traffic could best be handled in the area.
    Mr. Beck explained that the proposed zoning includes planned office, planned business, and planned unit development.  Greenbelts are shown along the Hinkson Creek, there is the potential for a tract of open space on the east side of Hinkson Creek, and there have been discussions with the developer regarding reserving some of this property for a neighborhood park.  He thought the discussions had gone quite well and understood that the developer would work with the City in that regard.  Mr. Beck pointed out that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the plan with reservations regarding overall development of the entire tract.
    Mr. Beck said the staff had been very pleased that the developer has worked with the City on the various details of the project.  He said until the Council makes a determination relating to zoning issues, it would probably be difficult to move forward on the specifications regarding cost sharing of the roadway work and that sort of thing.
    Mr. Beck noted that an amendment sheet had been prepared regarding comprehensive planning and how the work would be phased as it relates to the platting of the property.
    Mayor Hindman asked Mr. Hancock to explain the conditions being proposed.
    Mr. Hancock said the recommendations that came out of the Planning and Zoning Commission, in addition to the proposed uses of each of the districts and the design parameters, addresses the following:
                 1) The City and developer agree to infrastructure and cost sharing, and that an agreement on the timing of construction phases of the infrastructure be agreed upon prior to planned commercial or planned office plan approval.  Before development can occur on the site, a plan must be approved by the Council.
                 2) That a traffic study be prepared that is acceptable to both the City and the developer prior to any plan approval.
                 3) That an agreement be reached between the developer and the Parks Department on the greenbelt along Hinkson Creek prior to any plan approval.  The intent being to make the greenbelt part of the overall development.
                 4) That an agreement with the City regarding stormwater detention be reached.
                 5) That the planned commercial plan on Tract D have some mixed use, including office and multi-family residential.
                 6) That the greenbelt along Pioneer Drive be established.
                 7) That a break in access be granted by the Missouri Highway Commission prior to any kind of plan approval, which would occur relative to the interchange at the location.
                 8)That the plan include a park with a trail having access to Hinkson Creek.
    Mr. Hancock said the one condition the Commission recommended, but was not acceptable to the developer, was included in the amendment sheet.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Ron Shy, 5600 S. Highway KK, said there had been many decisions that had to be made by the developer on whether to embark on a project like this due to the amount of time involved.  Mr. Shy said he had been working on this project himself for nearly 18 months -- just to arrive at this point.  He said there have been a lot of discussions and input from everyone, including the City staff, Highway Commission, and the neighboring land owners.  He displayed an overhead showing the basic road alignment that has been agreed upon and approved by the Highway Department in concept.  The engineering has to be planned and approved before this could become a reality.  Mr. Shy said the rezoning is needed to continue on with the agreement.  He said the developer agrees to all of the conditions suggested by the Commission with the exception of the one.  He said it would be hard to submit a comprehensive plan on the entire project before any platting occurs.  He noted they would not mind doing so on either side of the road, but submitting a plan for the entire project might be somewhat meaningless because of its complexity.
    Mr. Shy explained that the developer, Curtis McDonald, had a market needs assessment study performed on the City of Columbia and the tract in question.  He said it centered around the access.  By establishing access, it opens the tract up to a good deal more potential than currently exists on the site.  A traffic consultant had also been hired to prepare a traffic study as to the affect of the various proposed plans that might be placed on the property, and what it might do as far as an operation of an interchange.  Mr. Shy said the developer had also been concerned about the environment, and a plan had been discussed with the Parks and Recreation Department consisting of a possible connection to the Hinkson Trail.  This connection could be used as part of a loop into and out of this development.
    Sam Borgese, President of Corporate Realty Partners, explained this company had been commissioned in November of 1997, to conduct a retail needs assessment for the project and for the greater Columbia market.  He said Columbia was listed below the national average for retail space per square foot, per capita, by a considerable amount.  He said this report was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission about a month ago.  A further study established an absence of a number of retailers in the Columbia market and the greater Columbia trade area.  Those retailers had been identified, along with their criteria and suitability to locate in the greater Columbia trade area.  It is believed the number of retailers identified is substantial enough to support this planned project.
    Nick Antonucci, reported he had been retained by the development team to evaluate the impacts of the traffic of the proposed development.  He explained that the studies had focused generally on two phases of work.  In the initial phase, they were charged with evaluating a range of development scenarios (from a low intensity development to a high intensity development) and the impacts on the existing transportation network surrounding the proposed site, including I-70, US 63, the 63 connector, and State Route B.  The key finding was that a break in access along US 63 to serve this potential development, or any future development, would be required.  In concept, the state agreed with this assumption and he believed it had been incorporated into the City's Transportation Master Plan.
    Mr. Antonucci said the second phase of work focused more specifically on a refined development scenario that has been generated.  This scenario represents a moderate intensity development based on the five that had been initially studied.  The study primarily focused on the operation of the proposed interchange at Vandiver, and the interchanges and main line of US 63.  The key findings and recommendations of this study had been that the anticipated traffic operations along US 63, as well as the Vandiver ramp terminal intersections, the ramps at State Route B, and the US 63 connector, will all operate at reasonable levels of service under the proposed development plan.
    Mr. Campbell said that traffic coming to this development off of I-70 would have to come through the Route PP interchange.  He asked how much volume that would add to the interchange.  In terms of exact volume, Mr. Antonucci said he did not have the numbers with him.  He said the operation of the intersections along the US 63 connector, including Route PP and the ramp terminal intersections with I-70, currently operate at poor and unacceptable levels of service.  Any additional traffic that will be added as part of the development to the intersections along the US 63 Connector will obviously make a bad situation worse.  As part of the study, Mr. Antonucci explained improvements were proposed along the US 63 Connector, primarily turn lane channelization improvements at Route PP as well as an additional south bound thru lane along the 63 connector.  Based on the implementation of these improvements and the analysis of the anticipated traffic operation, Mr. Antonucci said it is expected that those intersections, with the proposed improvements, would operate at acceptable levels.  Mr. Campbell said he assumed that these improvements would be part of the development plan.  Mr. Antonucci presumed that was something that would be worked out with the City and the developer as part of the cost sharing agreement.
    Mayor Hindman asked if the improvements includes a new bridge.  Mr. Antonucci said the proposed improvements consist of  modifications to the existing structure.  Mayor Hindman asked if they had looked at the proposed modifications for Route PP.  Mr. Antonucci said they had.  He said that the proposed modifications at Route PP are generally turn lane channelization improvements -- the single left turn would be modified to double left turn lanes.
    Mr. Janku asked if the thru lane would bypass the signal lights.  Mr. Antonucci said the additional lane would be a signalized movement as it currently is.  Referring to the proposed improvements, Mr. Janku asked what was meant by operating at acceptable levels.  He asked if that was like a C level or a B level.  Mr. Antonucci explained that generally there are six grades, A through F, with E generally being capacity.  He said different areas of the system would be operating at a level of service from C to D.  Mr. Antonucci said the boundaries of the study generally encompassed an area just north of State Route B on 63, I-70 to the south, State Route B on the west and then the US 63 and 63 connector.
    Mrs. Crockett asked Mr. Hancock if the City has an agreement with the state for a break in access.  Mr. Hancock said a break is planned to allow the ramp connections, but there is no agreement with the state at this time.
    Brian Herrington, 5212 Gasconade, an employee of Allstate Engineering, said he is prepared to address the environmental and greenspace issues.  He said a Phase I environmental study was commissioned and no significant findings had been determined.  A preliminary stormwater analysis had also been performed to gauge the affects the proposed development would have on Hinkson Creek and, based on the preliminary results, the flow will increase no more than 3% over the 100 year base flood.  He noted that the analysis had not included any detention, and Mr. Herrington made reference to the large sized lake on the property.  In addition, there are also a couple of other sites available for stormwater detention if this is ascertained to be necessary by the Public Works Department.
    Mr. Herrington said he had been in contact with Mr. Busteed, the City Arborist, regarding the tree preservation policies.  He said they had walked the site and found there are a number of areas where the landscaping requirements are in compliance with City ordinances.  Regarding the parks or greenspace issues, he said they have looked at the future Hinkson Creek Trail and have made allowances for it.  Mr. Herrington explained that he and the Parks and Recreation Director had walked the entire length of this section of property, and found the green space to be very suitable for a trail.  On the north side of the property, along Pioneer Drive, a 100 foot buffer strip will be left undisturbed.  Mr. Herrington said it would mitigate any of the impacts that they foresee as far as noise and light pollution from the development.  He said there is also an existing stand of large trees in the area that would very nicely buffer the neighborhood.  It has been proposed that the green area around the lake could be utilized as a ten acre park site.  He said the lake is in very good condition and it is felt it would be a centerpiece for the park.  In addition, to the south of the dam there are areas that could be potentially used as a playground or a shelter.  There is also the possibility for a trail around the lake that could connect to the Hinkson Creek Trail closer to I-70, it would follow the hauling road that was used when the bypass was constructed, thereby connecting a loop into the Hinkson Creek Trail.
    Regarding the buffer, Mr. Coffman asked if more than the 100 feet minimum had been considered.  Mr. Herrington said that was basically a number that had been agreed upon during meetings with the homeowners association.  He explained there is an existing drainage way through the area, as well as an existing stand of trees, so the buffer fits nicely.  Regarding the buffer along the Hinkson, Mr. Herrington said the easement they have proposed is 300 feet wide, centered on the creek.  In some places it would be 100 feet and in some places it was more than 200 feet.
    Mr. Campbell said in other developments around the City, consideration is given to construct berms to prohibit car lights and other things from reflecting into the neighborhood.  He asked if the Pioneer buffer would be thick enough to prevent light beams.  Mr. Herrington explained that the existing stand of trees is very thick and it is felt this would be enough of a preventative barrier.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if bike paths or walkways are planned from the residential area.  Mr. Herrington replied this has been planned and discussed.  Mrs. Crockett understood vehicular traffic would not have access to these areas.  Mr. Herrington said this is correct -- the neighborhood was adamant about not wanting connecting streets because of the potential for increased traffic.
    Robert Swearingen, 2908 E. Henley, former contact person for the Mexico Gravel Neighborhood Association, explained that the current president is out of state and had asked him to speak on his behalf.  He said the Association had been involved in the proposed project for the last 18 months, and they were in  full agreement with what had been discussed thus far and had no unresolved issues.  Mr. Swearingen said the City staff had been very helpful in answering any questions they have had over the last several months.
    Curtis McDonald, project developer, CenterState Properties, LLC, explained that they own a portion of the property and plan to purchase the rest in increments.  He talked about traffic patterns and the need for the break in access to avoid failure along Route B.  He said the study had identified six intersections on Route B that would fail if this interchange did not go in.   He said the state saw it as an essential element of the long-range plan for more freeway to freeway components of the interchange with US Highway 63 and I-70.  Before going any further with the project, Mr. McDonald said they needed to know if the proposed land uses are appropriate for the City of Columbia.  He said they had spent a lot of time with the residents of the area and he felt that it was recognized that a quality, turn-of-the-century retail development and office park would enhance the area and, at certain times of the evening, actually have a lesser impact than a high density residential development.
    Regarding the transportation issues, Mr. McDonald said the break in access was seen as an essential component of the transportation master plan.  In terms of the fiscal impact, he acknowledged that this design is costly.  He said the development would take six or seven years to build, and would have to be phased in.  However, in today's dollars, the retail component of the proposed development could generate more than $10 million in annual revenue for the City, the County, and the School District, with over $6 million of it going to the City.
    Mr. Kruse asked how the types of commercial venues that have been considered would differ from what already exists in Columbia.  Mr. McDonald said they had not done much in the area of identifying specific retailers, but generally speaking, Columbia is a very attractive market for retail businesses and the possibility of designing more of a retail village scape is being considered.  He said there is no interest in a massive Wal-Mart type center, and the character of this development would be almost the total opposite of a project such as that.
    Mariel Stephenson, 2111 Rock Quarry Road, Vice-President of the Greenbelt Coalition of Mid-Missouri, said their main concern this evening is to ensure the protection of the Hinkson Creek watershed.  She commended the developer for working with the City Parks and Recreation Department to provide a neighborhood park in the area, as well as their consideration of other trail possibilities.  The Coalition also commended the developer for working with residents in the vicinity to provide a buffer of woods to protect the neighborhood from the affects of development.  She pointed out, however, that these neighbors all live upstream from the proposed development.
    Ms. Stephenson said the Greenbelt Coalition speaks for a broader public that includes all of the downstream neighbors.  She said the Coalition's board of directors has discussed this rezoning request, and have testified about their concern for Hinkson Creek and the adjacent land at previous public hearings.  She noted that their concerns center on Tracts D and E, which lie between US 63 and the Creek.  She said if Tracts D and E are rezoned, then subsequent construction will result in a big increase in stormwater runoff, which causes an increase in flooding, stream bank erosion, and siltation.  Currently, these tracts of land are cultivated in agricultural row crops, and the soil is some of the very best in Boone County (according to a USDA Soil Survey) -- possessing significant water holding capacity.  This type of soil is valuable because it acts like a giant sponge to hold stormwater and release it slowly in a cleansed form into the Hinkson Creek.  Ms. Stephenson said the Hinkson Creek is on a state DNR list for inclusion as an impaired waterway.  By rezoning Tracts D and E, the process of complying with future EPA regulations will become more difficult and expensive.  Until the boundaries of the City's stormwater greenbelt are known, it would be premature to rezone the two tracts.  She asked that the rezoning request be denied on Tracts D and E.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Janku asked Mr. Antonucci to confirm that with the suggested specific road improvements, the level of service could be at a higher level after the project goes forward.  Mr. Antonucci said that was correct.  He said the afternoon/evening peak period had been specifically targeted because it is perceived as the worst case scenario.  Those intersections currently are rated at level F, which represents failure and unacceptable operations.  With the road improvements, while also taking into consideration the additional traffic that will be generated by the proposed development, the intersections are estimated to operate at a service level of D -- an improvement over what currently exists.
    In developing the stormwater runoff plan, Mr. Campbell asked if the type of soil on the property is taken into consideration.  Mr. Patterson said staff reviews the report that is submitted by the engineer.  He said the type of facilities planned for the site also affect the types of measures that will have to be in place to handle excess runoff, and soil conditions certainly have a major role in that.  Mr. Patterson noted that there seemed to be a misunderstanding about the status of Hinkson Creek.  He said staff has also been working very closely with DNR in this area, and Hinkson Creek is not yet identified as an endangered stream in the 303D Section.  He said it has been proposed for consideration, but has not been designated as such.  He said staff assured DNR of the City's commitment to work with them in protecting the creek.  Mr. Patterson also pointed out that the City's regulations are more strict that the state's when it comes to stormwater management.
    Mayor Hindman asked what it would mean if the creek was declared an endangered stream under Section 303.  Mr. Patterson said once specific pollutants are identified, it may provide an opportunity for the City to receive funding to initiate corrective and remedial action on those affected areas.  He said staff is moving forward with a project (in conjunction with the University, the Greenbelt Coalition, and other agencies) to make that evaluation and to examine preventative measures.
    Mr. Coffman asked what aspects of this proposed development would increase the danger to the creek.  He also asked if increasing the buffer would have a positive affect.  Mr. Patterson said this is difficult to determine without having plans or proposals.  He said the developer has an opportunity to do a lot within 100 to 150 feet if they chose to, and it did not necessarily have to be in the form of preservation.  Mr. Patterson reported there are opportunities for berming, swails and plantings that would capture runoff.  He said the best form of protection is to prevent pollutants from getting into the stream.  Mr. Patterson assured the Greenbelt Coalition that their comments and review of the plan are welcome.  Mr. Coffman asked Mr. Patterson if he felt that the proposed buffer was large enough for the type of remedial or preventative measures needed.  Mr. Patterson said he thought it could be if the buffer is properly designed.
    Mr. Campbell noted one of the main runoffs from many of these parking lots are petroleum products, such as oil and similar products.  He asked if there was an effective way to eliminate this from occurring.  Mr. Patterson said the most effective way, and is currently common practice, are the settling pools with skimming or filtration devices in place.  He said these measures are not required by law at this point, but are certainly considered for the purpose of detaining runoff.  He did not think there could be any guarantees that there is not going to be more of that type of contamination.  He noted one of the biggest contaminants currently in the streams is agricultural runoff from fertilizers and other chemicals.  Mr. Patterson said it would be a balancing attempt to try to do what is best in preventing contamination.
    Referring to the amendment sheet, Mayor Hindman asked what was meant by a comprehensive plan.  Mr. Hancock said it would be a C-P/O-P plan on the entire project -- a development plan similar to what is seen in other planned districts.
    Mr. Campbell asked if that would require footprints.  Mr. Hancock said it would.
    Mayor Hindman asked if each time the developer made a modification, whether the plan would have to be approved by the Council.  Mr. Hancock said that would be true whether a plan is submitted before platting, or if a plan is submitted five years from now.  He said the developer would have to follow the process -- minor revisions could be approved by the Planning Department or the Commission, or a complete change would have to be approved by the Council.
    Mayor Hindman asked Mr. Shy if that was the way he understood it.  Mr. Shy understood the condition to mean a preliminary C-P/O-P plan.  Mr. Shy reiterated that to a large extent, it would be meaningless to submit a comprehensive plan on this 200 acre tract because it would have to be amended frequently.  He suggested that the condition be amended to stipulate a plan must be submitted only for one side of the road or the other.  Based on Phase I, whatever that might be, he thought a meaningful C-P/O-P, or PUD plan could be submitted for just one side of the road.  Mr. Shy anticipated when the Phase I plan is submitted, the interchange plan would be included as well.
    Mr. Campbell asked on which side of the road development would occur first.  Mr. Shy thought it would be the east side, which would require the inclusion of roads.  But again, Mr. McDonald said this is not known for sure.  He said on Tract B, there is already a lot of interest in one particular kind of small campus style office development, but the retail development was likely to begin on Tract E -- located on the other side of 63.  He would like to adhere to the spirit of the condition without necessarily trying to submit a seven year forecast.  Mr. Shy reported potential project uses have been identified, but to submit a comprehensive plan right now is beyond their ability.
    Mrs. Crockett said she did not see how the City could ask the developer to bring in a plan for work that will be done over a seven year period.
    Mr. Beck also thought a comprehensive plan could be submitted for only one side of the road (and felt it would probably be acceptable), except that the overall roadway planning should be dealt with early on.  He said the City would definitely need to work within the thoroughfare plan for the entire area.
    Mr. Campbell asked if the Council were to change the proposed amendment to say that "a final plat shall not be approved until a comprehensive transportation plan is approved", whether that would add anything.  Mr. Beck said he thought to include the master thoroughfare plan would be a good idea.  Mr. Hancock said he did not know how a lot of the conditions (A through H) would be accomplished, and how a traffic study could be prepared and published for public comment without a plan for the entire site.  He said the idea was not to have many separate plans.  Mr. Hancock thought the developer planned on submitting a preliminary plat.
    Mayor Hindman asked if the preliminary plat was for the entire project.  Mr. Hancock said it was.  Mayor Hindman asked if it would meet the requirements being discussed.  Mr. Hancock said as far as he knew it would meet the subdivision regulations for preliminary plats.
    Mr. Campbell asked if it met the comprehensive plan requirements.  Mr. Shy said it did not.  Mr. Hancock explained that when he refers to a comprehensive plan, this is meant as a C-P/O-P plan for the entire property.  He said the preliminary plat shows the streets and some lots, but no building locations.
    Mr. Shy said one thing they are trying to establish early on is the major aspects of the thoroughfare plan via the preliminary plat.  He said the comprehensive plan Mr. Hancock is referring to is something quite different.  He said the developer would like to know, as soon as possible, where the thoroughfares are going to be so they could start working in the area.  He said that would be their purpose for the original submission.
    Mayor Hindman said he would like to have a general picture, but not a lot of detail that would soon be amended.  Mr. Shy said he understood, but the tract is so large it poses problems for both parties.
    With regard to addressing the transportation issues and not having a comprehensive master plan, Mr. McDonald said the ordinance describes ratios of parking to building space and open space.  He said what has been done in the traffic studies was to presume the maximum.  He said if the maximum density allowed is calculated, and transportation is planned accordingly, they could proceed with confidence knowing sufficient allowances have been established for the tract.  Mr. McDonald said they could proceed region by region toward a more detailed plan.
    For the PUD portion, Mr. Janku said a general statement of intent had been prepared.  He wondered if something equivalent to that could be submitted now for the other tracts.   Mr. Shy said the developer could, but to project a seven year plan on such a large mixed use project would require many amendments.
    Mr. Campbell said he thought the Council and staff are trying to figure out how to ensure that this is a planned development rather than a random mix.  Mr. Shy said he did not have a good answer for that.  Mr. McDonald said they could perhaps submit plans on the five tracts parcel by parcel, and a master plan for each one (in its entirety) as development progresses.
    Mayor Hindman asked if there was some way of having a concept plan that would give a general impression as to the intentions of the areas not being platted.  Mr. Hancock said surely something could be worked out whereby the City could see the internal street system, general building areas, and street locations and connections on to Vandiver.  Then for Tract D, Mr. Hancock suggested the specific portion of the plan that is required could be indicated.  He said the developer could go through and amend that plan when specifics are known.  He said staff works with minor revisions all of the time when dealing with large general plans.
    Mr. Campbell suggested that the proposed amendment be changed to read, "until a comprehensive plan for each of the five major areas is brought in".
    Mayor Hindman thought the developer probably intended for that to be the case.  He wondered if in addition to this stipulation, whether a general plan of the overall development could be submitted -- without footprints.  Then if the developer was not in conformance with the plan, the Council could question this.  Mayor Hindman said when a tract is ready to be developed, the Council would like to see a comprehensive plan.
    Ms. Coble did not agree with the last statement.  She said with all of the previous conditions, she did not think the plans needed to be very specific.  In addition, the way in which this project has been presented and developed is different.  She said the developer is looking for the best uses and getting input from people that traditionally has not occurred to this extent.  Ms. Coble is much more willing to let this evolve through its development given that some of the basics are covered, i.e., traffic infrastructure, protection of Hinkson Creek, a provision for the greenbelt, the possibility of park space, etc.  She is not as concerned with having any limitations.
    Mrs. Crockett said as long as the roadway plan is submitted, she did not have a problem with not having a comprehensive plan in place.
    There was a question as to whether or not the thoroughfare plan was covered in one of the conditions.
    Mr. Boeckmann said it was -- the City and developer agree to infrastructure and cost sharing, and the infrastructure would include roads.
    Mr. McDonald said they were envisioning the Vandiver extension, the bridge, the ramps, as Phase I of the project, which has to occur before any development can take place.  He said they needed to look at that plan, create a development agreement, finalize this, and then move forward with the platting process on a particular component of the project.  Regarding road infrastructure, Mr. McDonald said they have separated the arterial and main collector roads, and the bridge and ramps as one overall issue that has to secure a global agreement.  Each of the tracts would then be handled separately in terms of its internal road structure.
    Mr. Janku thought an agreement on the cost sharing would have to occur before individual tracts could be approved.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that B104-98 be amended by adding  subsection (i) to Section 6 reading as follows:  "That final plats not be approved on any of the tracts described in Sections 1 through 5 until a comprehensive plan for that entire tract of land is approved by the City Council."  The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman and approved by voice vote.
    Mr. Janku thanked the developer for the process they have gone through to get to this point.
    Mr. Campbell said this is a very comprehensive project in terms of environmental concerns and a wide array of other concerns.
    Mrs. Crockett felt this is a good development, and many meetings have been held to arrive at this stage.  She said all those involved in the project had done a very good job to this point, and thought they would follow through.
    Mr. Coffman is grateful for all of the planning that has gone into the project thus far.  He said when plans are submitted to the Council, he will be interested in looking at how the buffer around the Hinkson Creek is going, and very interested in seeing it enhanced, if possible.  He is hopeful the developer would continue to pay close attention to the stream.
    Mayor Hindman thanked the developer for including the neighborhood as well as the whole community in the planning process. He is very pleased to see that the developer saw the preservation of the greenspace as an amenity that adds to the value of the development.
    B104-98, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL. VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSTAINING:  KRUSE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B105-98     Rezoning two tracts of property owned by Homeview Properties located between Westwind Drive and
                   Barberry Avenue from A-1 to R-1 and A-1 and R-1 to R-2.

    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mayor Hindman noted that a request to table this issue had been received.
    Mr. Beck explained that this tract of land is located in northwest Columbia, north of I-70.  He said the Planning and Zoning Commission had voted for denial.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Rita Preckshot, 3507 Barberry, said she had previously shown the Council photos of the road conditions in the area.  She said there is not a significant change to the developers plan from what the Council denied before.  She thought it was unfair that the applicant continues to request to table this issue without notice to the residents who live in the area.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that B105-98 be tabled, and the public hearing continued, to the May 4, 1998, meeting.  The motion was seconded by Ms. Coble and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B106-98     Rezoning seven parcels of land located in the Benton Stephens Neighborhood from R-3 to R-1.

    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained the policy wherein property owners within a neighborhood can request down zoning and the City will pay the associated advertising costs (this can occur once a year).  Mr. Beck reported the Planning and Zoning Commission were in favor of the request.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B106-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B107-98     Amending Chapter 25 of the City Code requiring all land under single ownership or control (up to 80
                   acres) to be included in a preliminary plat.

    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said this issue came about because of the Council's desire to have an overall view of proposed street layouts on large tracts of land.
    Mr. Hancock explained the Council had directed staff to look at ways to amend the subdivision regulations to require that a minimum amount of property under the control of a particular developer be included in a preliminary plat.  This issue had been discussed with the Planning and Zoning Commission, and it was felt there needed to be a cut-off point so as not to be too onerous on a particular individual, while still allowing a clear picture of the layout of streets and lots.  He said the Commission settled on 80 acres, and this amendment had been distributed to engineers and surveyors in town.  To Mr. Hancock's knowledge, there had been no comment received.   Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mayor Hindman thought this amendment would be a helpful improvement.
    Mr. Janku thought there may be questions about the definition of single ownership or control.  Other than that, he felt this is a good ordinance.
    B107-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B108-98     Amending the Stephens College Master Plan to allow for construction of a multi-purpose building
                   between Willis Avenue and Dorsey Street.

    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that years ago when the City upgraded its comprehensive plan, a provision was included in the zoning ordinance which stipulated that private colleges in the community would submit a campus master plan to be approved by the City Council.  Minor changes to the plan could be handled by the staff, and any building permits issued would be in accordance with the plan.  In this particular instance, Stephens College is proposing to construct a multi-purpose building for athletic and maintenance purposes.  Staff felt that this project is not in accordance with the previously approved plan.
    Mr. Hancock explained that the plan submitted by Stephens College, and approved in the early 80's, consisted of a couple of pages of text describing what might occur in particular areas of the campus.  The amendment under consideration this evening is Area C, which would include the building proposal.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    John Fitzgibbon, Vice-president for Administration and Finance at Stephens College, said the proposed building would house the maintenance operations, and would include a recreational area to be used primarily for basketball and volleyball.  The building would be located just north of the tennis courts, along Bass Avenue and south of the theatre complex.  There is an older white clapboard building that would be razed to make way for the new building.  He displayed a drawing showing the location of the building.  Mr. Fitzgibbon commented that Area C is the only portion of the master plan for which an amendment is being proposed.
    Mr. Fitzgibbon explained that the athletic program at Stephens is classified as NCAA Division 3, and the college is required to comply with a mandate to add one more team sport by the fall of 1999.  He reported the college wants to establish a basketball program because it is felt this type of sport would aid in recruiting and retaining students.  He said the possibility of renovating the auditorium had been discussed, but it had been found to be totally unfeasible due to the cost and the structure of the building.  In addition, due to the sale of the Henley Building to Boone County Group Homes and Family Support, the maintenance facilities department has to be relocated.
    Mr. Fitzgibbon said Stephens is refocusing the campus to the east side of College Avenue, and relocation of that support arm of the institution will assist in efficiently meeting the needs of the college.  He said the site in question is the only location on campus that could adequately house a facility to meet the athletic and maintenance requirements of the college.  The proposed building would be located in the recreational area of the campus -- the swimming pool is across the street and the tennis courts are adjacent to the site.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said the architectural facade of the playhouse can easily be matched on the proposed building to retain a consistent motif throughout this area of the campus.  He said there is available parking just to the east, on Dorsey Street, sufficient to meet the needs of this building.  Mr. Fitzgibbon displayed drawings, elevation, and general layout of the building.
    Mayor Hindman asked about landscaping.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said there would be trees to provide a buffer between the building and the street areas.
    Mr. Coffman said the landscaping appeared to consist of eight trees.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said that was what was shown now.  He said the college would have to comply with all of the landscaping and buffering requirements of R-3 zoning.  Mr. Coffman asked if there were any specifics on the landscaping at this point.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said exact numbers are not known at this point.
    Mr. Coffman reported the East Campus Neighborhood Association plans to express concerns that the proposed building would not be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood.  He said the most serious concern is about the fate of the houses on Willis and the plans for that area.  Mr. Coffman realized that this issue is not associated with the portion of the plan under discussion this evening, but the master plan refers to several rental properties in this location that are primarily being held to meet future parking needs.  He asked what the current plan was for these properties.  Mr. Fitzgibbon replied that those properties would continue to be operated as rental properties for as long as possible.  Mr. Coffman asked if it is intended that the properties would be used for parking.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said it is not the college's intent to change the plan and alter that statement.  Mr. Coffman said that would signify that the intent is to use those properties for future parking.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said that is what is contained in the plan, and had been so for 17 years.
    Mr. Coffman asked if the proposed facility would increase the need for parking.  Mr. Fitzgibbon explained that there is a significant amount of parking on the east side of Dorsey, in addition to the 48 spaces already located at the Macklanburg Playhouse.  Across the street there are over 200 spaces that are either owned by Stephens or Boone Hospital Center (the college has been allowed to use the hospital's spaces when not already in use).
    After reading the Planning meeting minutes, as well as the minutes from the Board of Adjustment meeting, Mr. Coffman understood that the traffic created by spectators and participants in the basketball arena would be almost entirely pedestrian.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said much of it would be pedestrian because Stephens College is a pedestrian campus.  He said the students would not be driving to this facility, and that is why the college felt there would be more than sufficient parking for out of town visitors.  Mr. Coffman asked if it is thought the proposed facility would increase the demand for parking.  Mr. Fitzgibbon did not believe it would significantly increase the demand for parking in the area.  He is hopeful that the spaces on the east side of Dorsey would be used by spectators.  Mr. Coffman wondered if the theatre had sufficient parking that could be used.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said the college would have to carefully plan and schedule events so as not to have theatre events conflicting with events scheduled for the new facility.  Mr. Coffman asked if there was anything planned for Area A that would increase the demand for parking.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said that Area A is the older quadrant (historic core) of the campus, and the Columbia Independent School would be located in this area.  He said within the contract with the school, there are provisions for a parking lot to be built in this area of the campus -- should it be needed.  Because the initial student enrollment would be under driving age, he did not think the parking lot would be needed for some time.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said it would be difficult to ascertain when a lot might be needed.
    Mr. Coffman noted Mr. Fitzgibbon had met with the East Campus Neighborhood Association after the Planning and Zoning meeting, and that Stephens College had incorporated some suggestions from the Association.  He asked Mr. Fitzgibbon for specifics.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said there are locust trees on Bass Avenue that currently form a buffer between the street and the tennis courts.  He said it is the college's intent, upon the Association's suggestion, to carry that on around the corner.  In addition, windows and a covering over the doorway areas have been included in the plans, as well as the use of some architectural details to break the lines of the proposed building.  Mr. Fitzgibbon stated the college wanted to make the building look as aesthetically pleasing as possible.
    Mr. Coffman thought a lot of concern could be alleviated if Stephens would provide some assurances about the very old homes on Willis Avenue that are a treasured part of this historic district.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said he understood resident's concerns about the houses on Willis, but in many ways the college is its own neighbor.  Of the nine houses along Willis, the college owns six of them.  Mr. Fitzgibbon reported the plan has been on the books for a long time, and it is currently not the college's intentions to alter it.
    Ms. Coble said the issue remains that Willis Avenue is an important block and an important part of Columbia to many people.  She said there were exceptions to it being the college's property as this neighborhood is a national historic district.  Mr. Fitzgibbon agreed.  Ms. Coble said she understood he could not give assurances tonight as to the intentions of Areas A and B on the plan, although there is a good deal of support in the community for retaining the historic homes along that block.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said the college would certainly take those viewpoints into consideration if other parts of the plan are amended.  He said it is not something the college is prepared to do tonight.  Ms. Coble said it seems one could easily lead to the other.
    Mr. Kruse asked how many spectators the facility would accommodate.  Mr. Fitzgibbon replied 300 at the most -- this is  portable seating.  He said this is not a large facility.  Mr. Kruse said the college would not have to obtain permission from the Council in order to do anything that is currently outlined in the master plan.  He said the section of street between Willis and College has been in the plan for 17 years as a potential site for expanded parking.  Mr. Kruse assumed the college would have the right to tear down the buildings without Council permission.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said a demolition permit would be needed, but permission would not have to be granted by the Council to do so.  Mr. Kruse reiterated the point that the residential character of this area is very treasured as part of the historic district.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if Stephens has had an upswing in enrollment lately.  She asked if it is felt the new facility would entice more students to enroll.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said the applications are already running well ahead of last year's.  He said the college constantly receives inquiries from prospective students as to the recreational facilities, and many ask specifically about basketball.
    Mr. Kruse asked about the enrollment.  Mr. Fitzgibbon said the enrollment currently stands at 850 students, with full-time enrollment accounting for 550 of those.
    Clyde Wilson, 1719 University, spoke as a member of the East Campus Neighborhood Association.  He said the Association had approached the college a few years ago about some plans Stephens was considering, and they had been considerably rebuffed.  He said this is not an issue about just the proposed building -- there are much broader implications.  He said Stephens College should be required to submit a complete revision of the campus master plan.  Mr. Wilson did not think it is urgent for the Council to take action tonight, which would enable the college to prepare a comprehensive plan to include the intentions for the properties on the west side of Willis.  Mr. Wilson also wanted the Council to suggest to Stephens that the neighborhood has an interest in any of the college's plans, and the Association should be involved in this planning.
    Mr. Wilson reported the people in the neighborhood only have the best wishes and intentions for Stephens College.  He said it would be against their own interest to wish otherwise as a large, vacant area with empty buildings would certainly not be in the neighborhood's interest.  It is important for Stephens to establish a safe environment in the area, and to accomplish this a stable and active neighborhood is necessary.
    Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Wilson if he had any specifics he would like to see added to a new plan.  Mr. Wilson said he wanted to see the intentions for the west side of Willis Avenue in the plan.  He noted that this is a source of low cost housing, which Columbia is always in short supply of.  Mr. Wilson said as the college sells off the homes located in the historical district, the neighborhood would be interested in them, as would other associations.
    Mayor Hindman asked if there was anything in this project, in and of itself, that would be detrimental to the neighborhood.  Mr. Wilson said there would be other speakers present tonight to address those issues.  He said if the Association is convinced the proposed building is essential to the survival of Stephens, he thought residents would support the request.  Currently this is not the case, in addition to the fact that the facility would not be in keeping with the historical district.  A Butler-type building is planned for the site, and even with the changes the college has agreed to make, it would still not be in keeping with the neighborhood.  Mr. Wilson reported the major issue at the moment is the overall planning, which the residents have not been able to participate in.
    Charlotte Overby, 113 Willis, said she owns a home directly across from the proposed 27,000 square foot facility.  In essence, this is a C-3 project being constructed in a residential neighborhood.  If the structure is built, she and her neighbors would look across their porches at large overhead garage doors leading to the maintenance facility.  Ms. Overby said the building is not in keeping with the homes on Willis --  it will be a 220 foot by 150 foot sheet metal warehouse building, constructed as cheaply as possible.  She said it may resemble the theatre, but that too is a cheaply built sheet metal building with a rusting roof.  Ms. Overby felt that Stephens has a poor record as property managers, and added that their approach to maintenance of the older homes had been poor.  She said if the college was going to ask the neighborhood to endure a C-3 building in their historic neighborhood, the very least Stephens could do would be to publicly state, and place in writing, that the five historic homes on Willis Avenue will not be demolished.  In addition to the concerns relating to the aesthetics of the proposed building, the traffic problems associated with the maintenance vehicles have not been addressed.  These trucks would enter from Dorsey Street and come out on Willis.  As Willis is a narrow one-way street, the vehicles will have no choice but to drive down yet another residential street -- Bass Avenue.
    Mrs. Crockett asked Ms. Overby how long she had owned her home.  Ms. Overby said she had owned it for over a year.  Mrs. Crockett observed the theatre was already in place when she moved into the neighborhood.  Mrs. Crockett asked if Ms. Overby knew Stephens owned the five houses on Willis Avenue.  Ms. Overby responded she knew the college owned four of them, but was not aware of the last one on the end.
    Christian Els, property owner of 11 Willis, said Stephens has already advocated the possibility of renting the facility for uses other than its own internal sports activities.  He said these possible uses could include music concerts, and perhaps the Show-Me State Games and activities of those types.  He said people would be coming from miles around as Columbia is an oasis in Missouri for people to attend these types of cultural and sporting events.  He noted those people would be driving, not walking, onto the campus.  Mr. Els questioned whether there would be sufficient parking available to accommodate spectators during these events.  He stated during meal times at Stamper Commons, he often finds it difficult to get into his driveway because it is obstructed by vehicles.  On evenings when the Playhouse has an event, Mr. Els said it is difficult to park anywhere within his neighborhood if he cannot get in his driveway.  He said Stephens does nothing to enforce the parking regulations because it is out of their hands.  This enforcement is left up to the City, but they have much broader issues to deal with.  He did not see any guarantees that the Macklanburg and the new facility would never have scheduled events for the same time period.  Regarding the pedestrian traffic, Mr. Els said they are typically a boisterous crowd, and with the narrow street and small yards on Willis Avenue, he is concerned about the reckless behavior that may ensue when groups leave the facility.
    Roy Hartley, 1308 Bass, is opposed to the revision of the Stephens Master Plan.  He said the master plan that was approved 17 years is significantly different from what exists today.  He said the enrollment at Stephens has declined by more then 60%, and many of the buildings owned at that time no longer belong to the college, and others are leased out.  He said the parking facility that was approved 17 years ago was for an altogether different campus.  Mr. Hartley said the only way the Council could preserve the homes on Willis is to deny the revision of this master plan, and require Stephens to submit a changed plan to eliminate the parking.  He asked the Council to deny the revision at this time.
    Addison Meyers, 1310 Bass, stated it is certainly not his wish to obstruct the efforts of Stephens to restructure their facilities and/or to increase enrollment.  He said they all want to see Stephens prosper, however, residents of this historic area will be affected by these actions long after the current Stephens administrators are gone and the fate of the college is determined.  Mr. Meyers did not believe the building to necessarily be a bad thing, and said the architects are to be commended for at least making the appearance of it palatable.  He said there have been good and necessary revisions to the original plan, and a basketball arena may be a good recruiting device.  He did think, however, that the plans and uses for this building were hastily made.  Mr. Meyers commented that the college has shown little evidence of proper planning for several decades, long before the current administration.  The management of Stephens houses and buildings has, because of budget restrictions and personnel cuts, bordered on shameful.  He asked the Council to consider the neighborhood's reservations and to keep a watchful eye on the project as it develops.  Mr. Meyers believed Stephens should make its plan for the Willis Avenue properties known.  He said it may be none of the resident's business, but without some assurance that the houses will not be torn down, or without some dialogue with the administration, the neighborhood association will not give a blessing to the project.
    Janet Hammen, 1416 Wilson, asked those to stand who were present in support of the neighborhood's view.  Over one dozen people stood.  She said those who live in the East Campus Neighborhood have worked long and hard to revitalize the once grand area, and are disheartened by the college's attitude in choosing to ignore the resident's overtures for improving communication until they were forced to do so just recently.  Even then, residents question some of the answers concerning the demolition of the Willis Avenue houses.  She said to piecemeal the master plan was to make a mockery of the term "master plan".  Ms. Hammen said even though residents have been told that the houses may not be torn down for a long time, the tenants have been told their leases will not be renewed because the houses are being demolished.  She said these are modest structures and perfect for first time buyers.  Ms. Hammen asked the Council to instruct Stephens to allow more active participation by the community.
    Jerry Carrington, 720 Demaret, said it was a shame everyone could not support the college, which is necessary for growth.
    Marcia Kierscht, President of Stephens College, reminded everyone that this is a women's college.  She said hundreds of people would not be coming to Stephens to watch volleyball and basketball games.  She said they were lucky to get 25 spectators at a game, and they all walk in from the campus.  Ms. Kierscht reported this is an educational area that has been  designated to improve the quality of life for the students on campus.  When reference was made about hosting other events on campus, she said the college already hosts cheerleader groups that stay in the dorms.  She said Stephens could potentially be a host for Girls State, which would again be walking groups in the summer.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if Art in the Park is held on the Stephens College campus.  Ms. Kierscht said it was, and added the site used by the group would be retained as greenspace.  Mrs. Crockett asked how many people in the two day period participate in this event.  Ms. Kierscht said hundreds attend.  Mrs. Crockett said parking did not seem to be a problem during this event.  Ms. Kierscht agreed, and said many people walk or take their bikes on to the campus.
    Ms. Coble asked about the houses on Willis.  Ms. Kierscht said that is not what the request is for tonight.  Ms. Coble said it influences her decision on what is before the Council now, out of concern for the total neighborhood.  Ms. Kierscht said she would hate to tie the hands of subsequent presidents of Stephens College, and not let them be able to buffer the campus if that is found to be necessary.  Ms. Coble asked if this meant a parking buffer.  Ms. Kierscht said she did not know what type of buffer, but the college needed to have some control of the surrounding campus property.  She thought that was why her predecessors bought the property.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Coffman said it was clear the neighborhood would rather not see this building at the proposed site, but thought residents would try to accommodate Stephens if there was some participation and understanding for the respect of the historic district.  He said as the Council votes on this issue, they need to understand the need for some message to be sent about consideration of the entire master plan.  Particular attention needs to be focused on the homes on Willis Avenue, and the fact that there is nothing standing between these structures and the wrecking ball.  Mr. Coffman noted that if these homes are razed, that would mean five or six fewer homes available for low and moderate income families.
    Mayor Hindman said a college without some type of athletic facility is hard to imagine, and it should be expected that such an institution will provide this type of facility.  Mayor Hindman said the proposed structure was not the most beautiful building he had ever seen, but it was barely acceptable as it would be buffered by the tennis courts and landscaped.  He thought there would be a general support for the facility if not for the concern about the houses on Willis Avenue being demolished for parking.  Mayor Hindman said he was concerned about these houses, but predicted they would come down because they did not seem compatible with college use.  He did not feel the Council had justification for insisting that these homes be retained.
    Mr. Kruse pointed out that the houses have existed throughout Stephens history, and at a point when five times as many students were enrolled at this institution.  He said much like with the University of Missouri, residential land uses can be appropriate and successfully integrated within the educational campus.  Mr. Kruse said it is also important to remember that it is not just the homes on Willis Avenue that are affected by this plan -- Stephens owns some of (and would probably like to own all) the houses on College as well.  He said the master plan, since 1991, calls for the potential demolition of all of that property for parking.  The point about the college being nothing like it was when the plan was initially adopted was a good one.  He said the Council is being asked to make a major amendment to an archaic plan.  He thought the idea of the gym is a good one, and he is hopeful the college could build it.  However, Mr. Kruse did not think he could vote to approve a change in a plan that he felt was inappropriate to begin with.  Mr. Kruse said he wanted to see the plan updated so that all of the various sections of the campus relate to each other.  He also wanted to see the neighborhoods included in every step of the process.
    Mr. Coffman is optimistic about the issue being tabled so that all of the parties could sit down and discuss it.  He did not know that Stephens necessarily intended to exclude the neighborhood association, and felt a compromise was possible.
    Mr. Janku thought it would be a mistake for the college to follow the original plan calling for the destruction of the houses between Willis and College.  He said universities around the country are trying to work with neighboring residents to create stability and safety.  He said it is very important for the college to establish a stable neighborhood.  He said one of the greatest ways to destabilize this neighborhood would be to completely level the houses.  Mr. Janku did not think the college has the money to buy all of those homes, so there would still be some properties outside of their control.  In addition, he did not think a massive parking lot in the area was the right thing for Stephens.  He thought the college could use the buildings to their advantage for visiting faculty or students.  Mr. Janku said he did not want to prevent Stephens from moving forward with their gymnasium, but thought they needed to look at the possible affects on the entire area.  He asked that the college look at their master plan to see what could be done to address this concern.
    Mrs. Crockett felt the basketball arena was needed on the campus.  She said the houses on Willis Avenue belong to Stephens, and she supposed they could do whatever they wanted to with them, although they have been owned by the college for a number of years and had not been torn down yet.  Mrs. Crockett did not think the plan should be delayed because of the issue regarding the houses.  She said if a couple of the nonrepairable homes were demolished, there are ordinances in place that dictate size and landscaping requirements for parking lots.  Mrs. Crockett said in some cases, this is preferable to houses that are falling down.
    Mr. Campbell said he would support the request with reluctance for several reasons.  He said the college is currently in the midst of recruiting for next year, and this facility is being used as a recruitment tool.  He said Stephens needs all of the tools they could get in order to maintain and enlarge their enrollment.  However, Mr. Campbell understood that if the institution were to make major changes, the neighborhood would be deeply hurt.
    Ms. Coble said she appreciated Mr. Janku's statements about safety.  She said what happened in a very brief amount of time around Columbia College profoundly changed the neighborhood, and it had not been safe.  She was working there at the time and the area was different and no longer the same neighborhood it had been.  Since then, many changes have been made and the neighborhood has rebounded and there is now more cohesion.  Ms. Coble noted her pride in Stephens College and thought there had been a sense of loss as buildings continue to be demolished on this campus.  She noted it is an old ploy to let a house go without repair and then declare that it must be demolished.  Ms. Coble reported when this occurs in other parts of our City, this behavior is condemned.  She thought what would be right for Stephens College would be to regain a sense of community, and not to isolate different parts of the campus from each other, not to isolate parts of the community from each other, but work with the neighbors and try to see if there are offerings that could be greater in facing up to the current problems or needs.  Ms. Coble thought it is time for Stephens College to consider a new master plan.
    B108-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES: HINDMAN, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, COBLE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

(A)     Voluntary annexation of property owned by University of MO located on both sides of New haven Road,
           east of city limits.

(B)     Voluntary annexation of property owned by University of MO located on both sides of Sinclair Road, south
           and west of City limits.

(C)     Voluntary annexation of property owned by University of MO located south of Concorde Office and
           Industrial Plaza Subdivision, south of City limits.

    All three items were read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this request for voluntary annexation involves properties owned by the University of Missouri contiguous to the City.  He noted that all of the property is located within the metro planning area, and has been discussed with the County Commission.  Mr. Beck reported a question had been raised as to whether or not there had been enough communication with the Commission regarding this issue.  Mr. Beck stated notices of the pending action had been sent to the Commission, as well as to all other applicable agencies.  Mr. Beck said perhaps there needed to be more communication, which would be welcomed.
    Mrs. Crockett asked why a City surveyor had written the legal descriptions on the properties.  Mr. Patterson explained that the information that had been submitted did not contain complete descriptions.  He said staff usually does not prepare legal descriptions, but that is not true in this case.  There had been a request that the Public Works Department prepare the necessary descriptions for these annexations.  Mrs. Crockett asked who had requested it.  Mr. Boeckmann said the University attorney had provided him with a number of deeds, which he felt would not be adequate as a legal description for the Charter.  Mr. Boeckmann reported he then forwarded this information to the Public Works Department for review.  Mrs. Crockett asked if a practice such as this would be made for individuals.  Mr. Boeckmann said he did not intend for it to be.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing on all three items.
    Glenda Moore, 3151 S. Rolling Hills Road, asked what the long-range goal was for annexing these properties into the City.  Mayor Hindman said he knew of no plans.  Ms. Moore was specifically concerned about the area off of New Haven because she felt it could not support any type of industry.  She said residents are also concerned about the environmental impact to Gans Creek.  Mr. Beck stated he is not aware of any plan being prepared by the University at the current time.  He said at one time there had been some discussions about a research park with regard to the Phillips property, but he saw nothing on the horizon.  Ms. Moore asked if there would be any zoning regulations placed on the University.  Mayor Hindman said the City cannot impose zoning laws on the state.  Ms. Moore asked what would happen to the chemical waste site on this property, and whether the City had any objections to this tract being annexed as well.  Mr. Beck stated the University would have to follow guidelines established by DNR in regards to maintaining the site.  Mr. Campbell explained that DNR sets the standards for chemical waste, as would occur whether or not the property was in or outside the City.  It was stated that if the University were to sell the property, the tract would be subject to City ordinances.
    William McKee, 2513 Andy Drive, asked for a clarification on item A.  It was indicated that his property will not be affected by the annexation.
     Jerry Carrington, 729 Demaret, thought the University should have the property surveyed at their expense.  He noted that New Haven Road is dangerous, and hoped the County would give the right-of-way so the City would own the entire street.
 Tom Quinn, 5700 Sinclair Road, asked if his property would be in or outside the city.  It was determined that he would be outside the City limits.
    Sally Mirtz, Rolling Hills Road, said residents are very confused about this annexation request.  She said they had a feeling that there was going to be a grand development in the area that nobody is talking about.  She asked why the paper had quoted Mr. Beck as saying the annexation would be very beneficial to both the City and to the University.  She asked if the City wanted a larger tax base.  Mr. Beck responded there would be no tax involved.
    Mayor Hindman explained that urbanization pressures are building, and the properties in question extends into an area which appears likely to become urbanized.  He said the University agrees with the City in that this would be a logical extension of the City limits.  He said the University is cooperating with the extension so that anybody else adjoining their property can voluntarily annex as well.  He said most people choose to annex so as to become eligible to receive urban services.  He said the City is already aware of one property owner who is seeking to annex, contingent upon this request by the University being approved.
    Regarding a research park, Mr. Campbell said he had been a member of the University committee that had been putting together the idea of a research park.  He said those discussions had taken place in the mid-eighties and it died a long time ago.   He has not heard anything about it since.  He also pointed out that this is a voluntary request for annexation.  He said there are a number of land owners that would like to develop their property and have urban services.  He said these people have not been allowed to proceed with annexation because these properties are not contiguous to the City.
    Mrs. Crockett said she had known Mrs. Mirtz for a number of years and assured her that she, as a Council member, was not aware of any type of planned development on these tracts of land owned by the University.  She said this annexation would simply make it easier for other people who are adjacent to the University property to voluntarily annex as well.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing on all three items.  He said no action was required and the ordinances would be introduced this evening under New Business.

B94-98     Authorizing an agreement with the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission for alterations to
                 railroad property required by the reconstruction of Route B; appropriating funds.

    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said this agreement would allow the City to work with the state on widening the railroad crossings located on Route B.  The estimated cost is about $500,000, with the City being reimbursed as part of the project cost.
    Mr. Malon reported this project primarily consisted of improvements to the grade crossings between the I-70 bridge and Route 63, and included the installation of signals at these crossings.
    B94-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B95-98     Authorizing sanitary sewer connection and annexation agreement with Triple S Development.

    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this request is in accordance with the Council's adopted policy which requires an annexation agreement before allowing connection to the City's sewer system.
    B95-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSTAINING:  CROCKETT.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B96-98     Amending Chapter 27 of the City Code to allow an off-peak discount for large industrial service electric

    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Malon explained large industrial customers have real time metering installed that can be read by computer.  He said the City has at least one customer whose load factor is higher than 75%, which means the load is practically constant 24 hours per day, seven days per week.  The new rate would provide a discount for off-peak uses, similar to that of the thermal storage rate.  In addition, this would establish more real time pricing.
    Mayor Hindman asked what was mean by a thermal storage rate.  Mr. Malon said there is another rate on the books where one particular customer has installed a million gallon insulated water storage tank and the water is cooled at night.  During the day, the business circulates the chilled water through the plant with pumps to air condition the building.  This procedure is utilized rather than running compressors all day long, which shifts a lot of load off-peak.
    Mr. Coffman asked if he understood that there is only one customer currently that qualifies for this discount.  Mr. Malon said that was correct.  Mr. Coffman asked if there were any industries that are close to qualifying.  Mr. Malon said there were, and the program would be available for any customers in the large industrial rate.  He said it would also give an incentive to those who are adding load, to do so on an off-peak load and then bring their load factor up to this level.  Mr. Coffman asked how many large industrial customers the City has.  Mr. Malon said currently there are 16 on that rate.  Mr. Coffman thought this discount is a good idea because it helps stabilize the City's load.
    B96-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B110-98     Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code to require operators of motor vehicles to exhibit proof of
                   liability insurance.

    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this bill would amend the current ordinance so that it is similar to state statutes, and it would allow the City and University Police to initiate charges in Municipal Court instead of in state court.
    B110-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

R82-98     Forgiving CDBG loans and authorizing Deeds of Release on properties located at 1002, 1006, 1010 Fay
                 Street and 307 N. Tenth Street.

    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this issue had been discussed and tabled at the last meeting.  Since that time, he had forwarded the Council some additional information that had been received.
    Henry Lane, 1816 E. Broadway, said he was very concerned about any kind of taxpayer money being relinquished. He said even though these are federal monies, it is still taxpayer money.
    Tim Rich, Director of the Salvation Army Harbor House, also co-chair of the Boone County Homeless Coalition, and member of the Boone County Mental Health Board of Trustees, noted that his wife is a CPRC worker with an agency that competes with New Horizons.  Mr. Rich distributed some written information concerning the issue.
    Mr. Rich objected to the forgiveness of the loan as a taxpayer, and he resented the article in this evening's paper that quoted Chi Cheung of New Horizons saying this organization would discontinue services if these notes are not forgiven.  He explained the services provided by New Horizon are not going to discontinue because there are three other competing agencies in this community that are working with the seriously and persistently mentally ill individuals.  Mr. Rich said his organization has experienced very difficult relationships with THA in the past, and these are continuing with New Horizons.  He reported there are continued problems with New Horizon taking clients they do not want to deal with, and dumping them on the street with no medication and no discharge plans.  Mr. Rich said the Dagaz House (run by New Horizon), was funded by a HUD grant in the Supported Living Program.  He explained that grant was up for renewal last year, and because HUD has forced the community to come together through the Boone County Homeless Coalition, those services will not continue even if the City forgives the note.  Furthermore, the Transitional Housing services, where most of the referrals to the emergency shelter come from, could be eliminated by working with Heart of Missouri and Options Unlimited, and hopefully in the future with Comprehensive Services out of Kirksville.
    Mr. Rich stated another problem is that the Council has been mislead to believe there is not tremendous competition for clients that are Medicaid eligible for services under this program.  He said there is no lack of service providers and that should not be an issue.  Mr. Rich said he resented the fact that New Horizons will not allow local representation when funding is received from this community.  He thought it would be a mistake for the Council to forgive the notes.  Mr. Rich stated it would set a precedent for other agencies requesting CDBG money in the future.
    Mr. Janku asked who would be better off if the Council denied the request for forgiveness.  Mr. Rich said he did not know that anyone in particular would be better off.  He did not think the Council would favor any agency by denying it, but would certainly be favoring one agency over three others if the notes were forgiven.  He said Mr. Cheung knew from the start that the notes existed when he offered to take over THA.  He said if the notes were forgiven, he expected to see the services discontinued anyway.  Mr. Rich stated that Mr. Cheung would have control of the properties, and he could sell them and then receive all of the money -- leaving the City with nothing.  Mr. Rich said he has second-hand information that this is the kind of practice that takes place in Jefferson City.
    Regarding the Dagaz House, Ms. Coble said the report the Council has indicates there has been a significant increase in the provision of services since New Horizons has taken it over.  Mr. Rich said from his experience this is not true.  He said his organization stopped making referrals to Dagaz House because all of the people who had been referred returned within 30 to 45 days.  He said the $75,000 HUD grant had been a major piece of the overall budget for Dagaz House.  He did not know how New Horizons would be able to continue to operate it even if the City were to forgive the note.  Ms. Coble asked if there was still a large need in the community for fairly intensive case management services.  Mr. Rich responded absolutely.  He said because of the problems they have had with THA over the past five years and now with New Horizons, they have seen the population of people with mental illness in the shelter rise to 40%.  He said that is unacceptable.  He said when there is Medicaid money and Department of Mental Health money that is all tied up in politics, the services are not focused on the client.  His main contention with the services of New Horizons is that they are still not focused on the client, but on where to bill.
    Jerry Carrington, 729 Demaret, agreed with Mr. Lane and Mr. Rich.  He did not see why the City should treat this differently from any other foreclosure procedure.
    Lana Jacobs, 913 Rangeline, explained that she lives with persistently mentally ill people at the St. Francis/Lois Bryant House.  She is in agreement with everything said by Mr. Rich.  She said three years ago, her operation discontinued referring people to Dagaz House because THA could not handle the kind of people coming from Fulton State Hospital.  Ms. Jacobs expects to get clients in the middle of the night without medication from Fulton State Hospital, but found it very difficult to accept that from an agency in Columbia.  She pointed out that 75% of the people living in the St. Francis/Lois Bryant houses are chronically mentally ill.  She said some of them have lived there for 15 years, and are not going anywhere because there is nowhere for them to go.  She said the people being served are the individuals that can access a service and find their Medicaid card.  She said if someone can be billed, they receive the service.  Ms. Jacobs said they ran both houses (St. Francis and Lois Bryant) last year and served between 35 and 40 people per day for $52,000, which included four meals per day, housing, and medical care.  Ms. Jacobs reported the notes amount to much more than that, and should not be forgiven.
    Ms. Coble said the letter the Council received from the remaining Board of Directors of THA cast the whole issue in complicated terms.  She said it is not complicated, and if the Community Services file on THA was examined, letters would be found stating that very soon the houses would be brought into compliance with ADA.  She said that was part of what the City's CDBG funds went for.  She explained that for years, part of the Council's rationale for forgiveness of loans concerned homes that were in such bad repair that the agency would not be able to get money back out of them.  Ms. Coble believed it was bad management over the years that lead to this state.  She said it has been confirmed by others in the community that there is a question about whether or not the services will remain.  Ms. Coble said she had a lot of concern when there are other agencies organizing locally to expand and provide services, and then the City allows, what is in essence, a windfall of advantage financially to an agency that has not been found ready to receive the core, main HUD grants.  She said if this had been a grant, it would be different, but this is a loan.  Ms. Coble wondered why there is no one present to represent THA if this is such an important matter.  She said the board she serves under is a not-for-profit agency and has director's and officer's liability insurance because that is the liable entity.  She is curious to know why those kinds of discussions have not come up in terms of who shall repay this debt, and to whom the City should contact to receive the funds.  She said there is a paper trail to follow.
    Mr. Campbell said Mr. Rich's comments were very well-taken and one of the questions he was concerned about had been answered.  He was relieved to find out that there are other agencies who offer the same type of services.
    Ms. Coble said those agencies need to be vigilant to ensure that those who do not qualify for Medicaid and do not fit into standard placement types of services, and need very intensive case management and assistance in living, have those services available.
    The vote on R82-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  NO ONE.  VOTING NO:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  Bill defeated.

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

B97-98       Authorizing the acquisition of water line and temporary construction easement along State Highway 763
B98-98       Accepting conveyances for utility and street purposes.
B99-98       Accepting conveyances for utility purposes.
B101-98     Authorizing right of use permit for underground telephone cable on City property at Lemone Industrial
                   and Maguire Boulevard.
B102-98     Approving final plat of Country Farms, Plat 2, a major subdivision.
B103-98     Approving final plat of Smithton Ridge, Plat 1, a major subdivision.
B109-98     Amending the City of Columbia Money Purchase Plan.
R87-98       Setting a public hearing: storm water drainage improvements in the Glen Eagle Drive and Royal
                   Lytham Drive area.
R88-98       Setting a public hearing: levying special assessments against property benefitting from Seventh Street
                   improvement project.
R89-98       Setting a public hearing: water main construction project along Garth Avenue and adjoining side streets
                   south of Business Loop 70.

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

R90-98     Authorizing an agreement with Harrington & Cortelyou, Inc. for engineering design services for the
                 reconstruction of Oakland Gravel bridge.

    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this would widen and upgrade the bridge which has recently been annexed into the City.  The estimated cost of the work is somewhere between $150,000 and $170,000, and it is part of the street widening project.
    The vote on R90-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R91-98     Approving preliminary plat no. 3 of Springdale Estates Subdivision, a major subdivision.

    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this preliminary plat is located on the southwest side of 63, west of Brown Station Road, and it consists of almost 28 acres.  Approval was recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission on a 4-3 vote.  He said staff did not concur with the recommendation for approval because there would be two areas that would not be connected by the bridge which goes over a tributary of Bear Creek.  Mr. Beck said a petition in favor of not having the bridge built was received today and had been forwarded to the Council.
    Mr. Hancock said as submitted, the plat merely ends without a cul-de-sac bulb.  He said there was quite a bit of discussion about plans to reconfigure it.  He said the staff's position is to establish a connection from the south, to continue what is shown as Pineview Drive, into the neighborhood to enhance overall circulation and provide access/convenience to the neighborhood.
    Mr. Janku asked about the necessary replat involving Yoko Court.  He said Mr. Bornhouser had suggested that was what would occur.
    Dave Putnam, a representative of Boone County Bank, is representing the bank because they presently own both plats of The Oaks.  He said it is proposed that Pineview Drive would extend into Yoko Court, and the bottom three lots would be reconfigured into two lots.  He said the street would need a variance on the turn instead of going toward the bridge.  Mr. Putnam said it is felt this would improve the economic feasibility of developing Plat 2 and, therefore, the orderly development of it.  He said there are some other tangible benefits presented by the proposal.  He said one was that there will be a greenbelt established between Plats 1 and 2.  There would also be public access easements along the properties.  Mr. Putnam reported that the two subdivisions, if connected, would provide quicker access from Brown Station Road to Oakland Gravel Road, and also over to Highway 63.
    Glen Strothman, 33 E. Broadway, explained that he is proposing a contract with Boone County Bank for Plat 2 of the subdivision, and he is the current developer of Springdale Estates.  He explained that the previous property owner had very limited access into Plat 2 property, so it necessitated a stub to be laid out in that direction.  He acknowledged it is not a very desirable entrance, but the only guaranteed way into the property --and it still remains the only way.  Upon purchase of the property, Mr. Strothman said two access points are proposed from Springdale Estates into this piece of property, and the bridge that would extend to Plat 1 would be eliminated (the changes would still conform with all subdivision regulations).  He noted that there is an existing extensive greenbelt that runs along the entire south border of Springdale Estates, and they would like to connect to it and continue it to Highway 63.  Mr. Strothman pointed out that he has the overwhelming support of all of the neighbors in the entire area.
    Mr. Janku asked about an easement shown between Lots 20 and 21.  Mr. Strothman said this is a pedestrian access easement.  Mr. Crockett explained that the 20 foot stem is an easement to the common greenspace lot, and it is a separate stem lot.  Mr. Janku wanted to make sure there is right of pedestrian access between the two subdivisions.  Mr. Crockett responded that Lot 72 contains the shaded area between Lots 20 and 21.  He said these lots are under contract with the Bank for replatting should approval be granted this evening.  He said the developer is proposing to extend the pedestrian access across the replatted lots to tie into Yoko Court.  Mr. Janku said he was looking for language to ensure a permanent pedestrian access.  Mr. Strothman said the two subdivisions would be connected with a pedestrian access easement.  He said Boone County Bank agreed to do likewise on their side of the creek as well.  Mr. Strothman reiterated that the two subdivisions shall join.  Mr. Boeckmann said the language dedicating the pedestrian access easement would be included on the final plat.  Mr. Janku asked if it would be a condition for approval of the preliminary plat that the final plat will reflect the dedication.  Mr. Strothman said he would be more than willing to accept language restricting the final plat to allow for a pedestrian easement to connect Plats 1 and 2 of The Oaks.  He thought the bank would also be happy to stipulate this as well.  Mayor Hindman asked if Mr. Strothman was prepared to dedicate a public, pedestrian easement.  Mr. Strothman said that was correct.  He said they are not opposed to pedestrian traffic, but did not feel it was necessary to allow cars the same access.
    Mr. Boeckmann suggested that the Council amend this resolution by adding a Section 4 stipulating that approval of this preliminary plat is subject to the condition that a public pedestrian easement shall be shown on the final plat.
    There was a discussion about exactly where the easement should be.  Mr. Crockett said there would be a replat on the three lots, they would be reconfigured into two lots, and changing the street right-of-way in The Oaks.  He said on this replat, there would be the connotation of a 20 foot ingress/egress public pedestrian walkway.  He said it would tie to what is shown as Lot 72 on the preliminary plat proposed for Springdale Estates.  He said the easement on Lot 72 will include the entire stem that abuts on to street right-of-way in that particular plat of Springdale Estates.  He said the pedestrian walkway will be continuous from one street to the other.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that R91-98 be amended by adding Section 4 to read "the approval of this preliminary plat is subject to the condition that a public pedestrian easement shall be shown on the final plat to connect Plat 3 of Springdale Estates to Plat 1 of The Oaks."  The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved by voice vote.
    The vote on R91-98, as amended, was recorded as follows;  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSTAINING:  CROCKETT.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R92-98     Authorizing a settlement agreement with Robinson Displays, Inc. and Whiteco Metrocom, Inc.

    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said a fairly detailed description of the proposed agreement had been sent to the Council.
    Henry Lane, 1816 E. Broadway, said the city should have settled at $20,000 when they had that opportunity.  He said someone has made a very bad mistake on the part of the City, and taxpayers would be taking an awful hit.  Mr. Lane was wondering if there was any way the City could recover some of the costs.
    Mr. Boeckmann said the outside counsel that represented the City had done a fine job, and he saw no question of malpractice.  He said one of the problems associated with this case was the adverse court decisions that had been rendered during the course of the litigation.
    Mr. Coffman did not think anyone on the Council could have foreseen just how successful the billboard industry would be in the courts, or how successful the industry has been in the legislature protecting their interests.  He said it is a difficult thing to accept, but thought it was time for the City to cut its losses.  He said the billboards that will be put up will be blemishes on the City, and he did not think they would be something most citizens were going to like to see.  He said the voters needed to take this into their own hands and amend the State Constitution.  Mr. Coffman is concerned about what could occur on Stadium, Forum, and other streets in the City that have not yet been littered with billboards.
    Mr. Janku said because of greater liability risk, the Council had decided not to fully exercise their legal options.
    The vote on R92-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSTAINING: KRUSE, HINDMAN.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R93-98     Authorizing an agreement with United Dental Care of Missouri, Inc. for group insurance.

    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said this would simply continue the City's agreement with the organization.
    The vote on R93-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R94-98     Authorizing various Adopt A Spot agreements.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that approval of this resolution would add two adopt a spot locations to the overall plan.
    Mayor Hindman thanked those involved, and noted that the program is becoming successful and is a great contribution to the community.
    The vote on R94-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R95-98     Approving preliminary plat for Thornbrook, a major subdivision.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this is an approximate 202 acre tract of land located on the west side of Scott Boulevard, north of Route K.
    The vote on R95-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CAMPBELL.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSTAINING:  CROCKETT.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

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

B111-98     Establishing permanent A-1 zoning on property located at 2711 Mill Creek Terrace owned by Michael
                   S. and Tammy K. Wulff.
B112-98     Establishing permanent M-1 and M-C zoning on property located east of State Route 763 and south of
                   Prathersville Road owned by the City of Columbia.
B113-98     Approving final plat of Shelter Insurance Subdivision.
B114-98     Approving final plat of Hanover Plaza, Plat 5.
B115-98     Approving final plat of The Terebinths, Plat III.
B116-98     Rezoning property located at 1101 Rangeline Street, owned by Hinshaw Family Partnership, from R-3
                   to O-P.
B117-98     Amending Chapter 29 of the City Code to allow bed and breakfast establishments in the Planned Unit
                   Development District.
B118-98     Voluntary annexation of property owned by the University of Missouri located on both sides of New
                   Haven Road, east of City limits.
B119-98     Voluntary annexation of property owned by the University of Missouri located on both sides of Sinclair
                   Road, south and west of City limits.
B120-98    Voluntary annexation of property owned by the University of Missouri located south of the Concorde
                   Office and Industrial Plaza Subdivision, south of City limits.
B121-98     Authorizing replacement and relocation of water mains along Garth Avenue and adjoining side streets
                   south of Business Loop 70; determining the work will be done by City forces and appropriating funds.
B122-98     Accepting conveyances for water and electric purposes.
B123-98     Authorizing amendment #1 to the City/MU fiber optic agreement.
B124-98     Authorizing an agreement with First Night for sponsorship of New Year's Eve celebration;
                   appropriating funds.
B125-98     Appropriating funds for funding of the 1997 Missouri Fall Festival.
B126-98     Authorizing acquisition of land located at Rangeline and Wilkes for recreational purposes.
B127-98     Accepting a donation from Rick and Sally McDowell for the purchase of police equipment;
                   appropriating funds.
B128-98    Appropriating funds for the purchase of pawn inventory/law enforcement tracking system software and
B129-98    Calling for bids to construct sidewalk along Berrywood Drive, along south side of Business Loop 70 and
                  along north side of West Worley Street.
B130-98    Appropriating funds for repayment to Environmental Protection Agency as a result of a 1993 audit of
                  federally funded sanitary sewer projects.
B131-98    Authorizing an agreement with Allstate Consultants P.C. for design of the Hinkson Creek Trail Phase II
B132-98    Accepting engineer's final report; approving change Order No. 1; and levying special tax assessments
                  against property benefitting from improvements to Seventh Street.
B133-98    Authorizing acquisition of easements and land in fee simple to construct the Mill Creek/Rockbridge
                  Subdivision storm water drainage improvement project.
B134-98    Accepting certain streets for public use and maintenance.

(A)     Intra-Departmental Transfer of Funds Request.

    Report accepted.

(B)     City/Boone County Health Facility.

    Mr. Beck asked for a motion directing the staff to move forward with appraisal work on some potential facilities or sites for the health clinic.  He said staff would report back to the Council with some additional information as to how the agencies might work together to get a facility purchased or constructed.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that the staff be directed to proceed with appraisals.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.

    Upon receiving the majority vote of the Council, the following individuals were appointed to the following Boards and Commissions:

Carlson, Rhonda D., 1110 Willowcreek, Ward 5 - term to expire 5/1/03.

Hunter, Robert N., 4310 Montpelier Pl., Ward 5 - term to expire 5/16/02

Ivey, Jan R., 404 Crestland, Ward 4 - term to expire 7/31/00.

Cecil, Gregory A., 1700 Oak Cliff Place, Ward 4 - term to expire 9/30/98

Scroggs, Stuart S., 1008 Maplewood, Ward 4 - term to expire 7/1/98

Wardin, Robert M., 115 Benton, Ward 1 - term to expire 6/15/01

Broadus, Kylar W., 4195 N. Riviera, Ward 2 - term to expire 3/1/01
    Referring to the corner of Broadway and Fairview, intersecting with Fairview to the north, Mr. Campbell said there is a right hand turn yield sign.  He said it has developed into a problem because there are a number of houses just to the east that have driveways on Broadway, and these residents cannot see vehicles coming around the corner.  Residents are requesting the feasibility of putting in a stop sign.
    Mr. Kruse said a few weeks ago he had brought up the idea relative to an open campaign for work place giving, and  noted that a draft ordinance had been prepared.  The Council had further deliberations on the feasibility of the issue with nothing being decided.
    Mr. Janku said when staff met with the Downtown Association about the Eighth Street Garage, he felt there was a general consensus that the neighboring businesses would like to have the dumpster in the alley removed and possibly relocated.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that staff be directed to pursue the relocation of the dumpster.  The motion was seconded by Mrs. Crockett and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    The meeting adjourned at 12:40 a.m.
                                                                                         Respectfully submitted,
                                                                                         Penny St. Romaine
                                                                                         City Clerk