JANUARY 18, 2000

    The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Tuesday, January 18, 2000, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results: Council members HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, and COFFMAN were present. The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also present.

    The minutes of the regular meeting of January 3, 2000, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mr. Janku.

    Mayor Hindman noted that B23-00 would be removed from Introductions.
    Upon her request, Mr. Campbell made the motion that Mrs. Crockett be allowed to abstain from voting on B7-00 and R9-00. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    The agenda, as amended, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mr. John.

    Mayor Hindman welcomed the fifth grade classes from Grant Elementary School along with their teachers, Linda Afdahl, Jim Hogan, and Annie Bradley.


B399-99     Approving the revisions to the O-P Development Plan of The Environment.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mayor Hindman explained that another request had been received to further table this bill to the first meeting in March.
    Mr. Beck stated that this issue relates to the amendment of the O-P plan to allow for the relocation of a free standing sign. He explained if the Council approves the request to table, it would allow more time for the applicant to work out an alternate site which would dismiss the need for the revision to the plan.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman continued the public hearing.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that B399-99 be tabled to the March 6, 2000, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B456-99     Voluntary annexation of property located on the west side of Bearfield Road, approximately 500 feet
                   south of Nifong Boulevard; establishing permanent PUD-6 zoning.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mayor Hindman noted than an amendment sheet was prepared for this bill and a protest petition had been submitted. He explained that five affirmative votes by the Council would be necessary for passage, assuming the petition was valid. Mr. Boeckmann said it was.
    Mr. Hancock explained staff received an amended statement of intent that speaks to storm water issues that were raised at the previous meeting. He reported the neighborhood also submitted a two page document relating to the same type of issues that they would like to see incorporated into the developer's statement of intent.
    Mayor Hindman asked where the Council stood as far as the statement of intent. Mr. Boeckmann explained the Council is free to express their opinion to the developer on what it will take for them to approve the plan or the zoning -- which could be added to the statement of intent. However, this has to be agreed to and be signed by the property owner.
    Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Montgomery to explain the guidelines he talked about earlier relating to Springfield's storm water runoff limits. Mr. Montgomery explained that Springfield passed a watershed protection policy for the Fullerton Spring and Pearson Creek watersheds. This area serves as a partial water source for the water system for the City of Springfield. He explained Springfield's water quality protection plan includes structural and non-structural practices. The structural practices are referred to as best management practices. After reading this information, Mr. Montgomery said the report indicates that a combination of non-structural and structural practices are necessary. Mr. Campbell commented since this development could set a precedent in regards to storm water management, he believed the Council should consider alternatives that have been used by other cities.
    Mayor Hindman reopened the public hearing.
    Don Stohldrier, 4016 Glen Eagle, developer of the property in question, reported he had been given specific guidelines as to what needed to be added to the letter of intent. He noted that he reviewed the proposed suggestions that were submitted by the homeowners, and he believed they have set some impossible standards to meet. Regarding his provision that the PUD must address storm water quality issues by implementing methods in a plan to maintain the water quality as much as practical, Mr. Stohldrier explained why the term "practical" was used. He said there is no way that anyone can guarantee that in a 100 year storm that the runoff from that property is going to remain absolutely, exactly the same as it is today. He related it is an impossible standard to meet. Mr. Stohldrier pointed out that the code only requires meeting the 10 year storm, however, he noted his design will meet a 25 year event. Regarding the quality issue, he indicated detention systems are being designed to reduce the peak runoff. On the issue of long-term maintenance, Mr. Stohldrier explained the plan they are working on would establish a professional management company that would be paid out of a required homeowners association fee.
    Mr. Campbell stated that he has some concerns with Mr. Stohldrier's statement that water quality would be maintained "as much as practical". He said that could be interpreted from a variety of perspectives. Mr. Stohldrier responded he would be happy to look at the wording, but the homeowners have suggested that water quality cannot be changed at all. He said that is an absolutely impossible criteria to meet. If someone is able to recommend wording that could be obtainable, he would work with them on it.
    With regards to the statement about decreasing the peak flow from the proposed PUD, Mr. Janku asked if this is in connection with a 25 year storm event. Mr. Stohldrier replied for up to a 25 year storm event, the peak flow that currently runs off the property will be less when the development is completed.
    In respect to water quality, Mr. Coffman supposed everyone understood it could not be expected to stay exactly the way it is now, but thought they are looking for some type of assurance. He felt the residents wanted a guarantee that could be measurable. Mr. Stohldrier said he would love to know how to do that, and added that this project would meet or exceed any subdivision in town in regards to water quality -- whether it was developed previously or not.
    Susan Bingaman, 2179 Bearfield Subdivision, read from the zoning regulations concerning planned unit development. She contended that the development outlined in the statement of intent, dated 12/20/99, and revised on 1/11/00, conforms only minimally to the letter of the law and not at all to the spirit of either the PUD regulations or the desires of the majority of the citizens of Columbia as expressed through the City Council. Regarding the procedure for establishing PUD zoning and for review and approval of a PUD site plan, Ms. Bingaman noted that once again only the strict letter of the law had been satisfied.
    Janet Retmeyer, of the Orthopaedic Foundation for Animals, 2300 E. Nifong, explained this property is located immediately to the north of the tract in question. She asked the Council to deny the zoning request because of the density, and also because the developer has failed to adequately address the concerns of the neighbors as well as those of the City Council.
    Glen Ehrhardt, an attorney with offices at 401 E. Locust, spoke on behalf of the Clear Creek Neighborhood Association. He reported that residents believe that the proposal before the Council is too dense and that the developer's amendments to his original statement of intent are inadequate and do not go far enough to protect the neighbors. Nor does it address the detailed concerns expressed by the City Council at the previous meeting. He said the neighborhood's suggested items for the statement of intent do not include a 100 year storm event, but it does include a five, ten, or twenty-five year storm event. Mr. Ehrhardt noted at the last meeting Jay Gebhardt had stated that the developer would agree, as a condition of approval, to bring forth a plan which would not increase the quantity of the runoff in a five, ten, or twenty-five year storm event. He pointed out the amendments to the developer's statement of intent include what he calls a lot of "fudge" words. He was concerned about the language "as much as practical". Mr. Ehrhardt felt the request to be inadequate. He noted that initially the developer was talking about 150 units, but now he understood that figure to be closer to 170.
    Mayor Hindman asked Mr. Ehrhardt what kind of contact he has had with the developer. Mr. Ehrhardt responded that he personally has had no contact with the developer, although several members of the neighborhood have met with him.
    John Blakemore, 4807 Bearfield Road, spoke about the Council's resolution regarding the watershed, the lack of specifics in the developer's statement of intent, and the neighborhood's response to it. He read from a proposal submitted by the Clear Creek Neighborhood Association that would add certain specific conditions to Mr. Stohldrier's statement of intent. Mr. Blakemore noted the basis of these conditions and requirements had been obtained after meeting with an MU Extension Agent and from information provided by NRCS, and the water quality protection policy instituted by Springfield. Considering the Council's policy regarding the Little Bonne Femme Watershed above Rock Bridge State Park, Mr. Blakemore felt it hardly seems reasonable to accept the developer's request for annexation and PUD-6 rezoning in its current state. He asked the Council to vote down the request.
    Bruce Young, Director of Central Missouri Sheltered Enterprises, 404 Bearfield Road, explained this facility is located directly across the road from the proposed development. He reported that CMSE has approximately 105 employees and they are very concerned about the traffic flow on Bearfield Road. Mr. Young stated there are already traffic problems in the area.
    Fred von Saal, 4679 S. Bearfield, spoke about the condition of Bearfield Road. He pointed out that there are no curbs or gutters, nor is there any potential drainage process in place. Mr. von Saal raised concerns about additional storm water runoff and where this flow would go. He reported that residents had been assured by people at the University that it is possible to ascertain this kind of information.
    Tony Davis, 4655 Rock Quarry Road, displayed a chart showing how the water currently flows off the property in question. He noted the neighborhood's opportunity to work with the development from the very beginning has been limited. Mr. Davis pointed out that residents are asking for lower density because a more permeable surface would allow for better management of the runoff. Until there is a plan, Mr. Davis thought there needed to be much more detail in this sensitive area.
    Alan Easley, 8300 E. Turner Farm Road, explained that his mother's farm lies directly south of the subject tract. He passed around pictures of a limestone rock structure his grandfather built about 100 years ago to slow down the water flow that comes off of the subject tract. Mr. Easley stated the concern of water coming off of the site is a serious one, although his mother's land does not take on any water from the subject tract right now.
    Jay Gebhardt, civil engineer with Allstate Consultants, reported that at the last meeting he had misstated that there would be no increase in the quantity of runoff for the two, ten, and twenty-five year storm. He noted that he should have said that the peak discharge would not be increased. Regarding the standards for water quality issues, Mr. Gebhardt indicated that whatever the requirements are in Springfield he was sure, between the University and himself, they could figure out a way to do it here as well. He said Mr. Stohldrier agreed to that condition if the Council wanted to make that change. In respect to Bearfield Road and the surrounding drainage areas, Mr. Gebhardt stated that there will be no increase in peak discharge for the two year, ten year, and twenty-five year storm. He remarked that whatever runs off the grass field today is the baseline for quantity. Mr. Gebhardt noted that a separate detention facility is planned for the small areas along the road or around the perimeter that does not drain off. In regards to Mr. Stohldrier's participation in improvements to Bearfield Road, Mr. Gebhardt explained that he would prefer to do that as development occurs. If possible, they would like to meet with City staff and figure out some way to achieve this so the traffic issues could be addressed before the houses are constructed.
    Ms. Crayton remarked the neighbors are asking for a plan and a study on storm water runoff. She asked why this cannot be provided. Mr. Gebhardt responded studies will be done and a detailed plan will be submitted to address those issues.
    Mr. Janku asked if the development still calls for 167 homes. Mr. Gebhardt said the plan that he has sketched has 167 lots on it. He commented that it also contains six to eight acres of green space. Mr. Gebhardt stated those numbers could go up or down depending on how this all evolves.
    Mr. Campbell asked if good faith negotiations have occurred with the surrounding neighborhoods. Mr. Gebhardt indicated that he has been as straightforward with the neighbors as he could. He saw his job as being responsible for fixing all of the problems.
    Mrs. Crockett asked whether this land could be developed if it was not annexed into the City. Mr. Gebhardt said it could. Mrs. Crockett asked how many houses could be constructed. Mr. Gebhardt said this 35 acre tract is currently zoned A-2 zoning, and the minimum lot size for this zoning is two and one-half acres. Mrs. Crockett asked what would be done about a sewer system. Mr. Gebhardt replied that it would consist of on-site treatments (lagoons). Mrs. Crockett asked about the County's policies relating to storm water runoff. Mr. Gebhardt replied there are no conditions that would address it in A-2 zoning.
    Mayor Hindman asked about the developer working with the University extension people. Mr. Gebhardt said they would work with them to come up with an idea of how to treat the water quality. Mayor Hindman asked if they would follow their recommendation on meeting the goals the Council is trying to establish. Mr. Gebhardt reported they would, as well as what the staff thinks is important also.
    Mr. Coffman asked why the peak flow is so important. He asked if it does more damage. Mr. Gebhardt said it is the point where the most water is flowing, so it has the potential to do the most damage.
    Regarding the original statement of intent (Item E), Mr. John noted that Mr. Stohldrier cited that a certain percentage of the property would be left in open space. He pointed out there were two numbers quoted, however, the revised statement just has one number (50%). Mr. John asked if the figure would be 50% of 35.4 acres. Mr. Gebhardt said it is 50% of 35.41 acres, minus the right of way.
    Regarding the off-site improvements, Mr. Coffman noted that the revised statement indicated those items are negotiable. He remarked that does not clearly state what Mr. Stohldrier would actually be willing to do. Mr. Coffman noted that when the Council was considering the Cambridge Place development, the developer had agreed to specific dollar amounts and contributions that would be made given certain triggers. Mr. Gebhardt said that is exactly the model they were thinking of when the statement of intent was drafted. He believed those conditions need to be hashed out in agreement form. Mr. Gebhardt thought that could be handled at the time when the plan is submitted. Mr. Coffman said he would feel more comfortable knowing the dollar amounts up front. Mr. Gebhardt said he thought Mr. Stohldrier had spoken with some of the Council members and had suggested a number.
    Carolyn Matthews, 4200 Rock Quarry Road, did not think a high density development is appropriate for this area. She asked that the character of the neighborhood be taken into account,
    Joe Bindbeutel, 1701 E. Gans Road, reported the City staff and the neighbors need objective, reasonable standards to go by and there are none outlined in the statement of intent. From an environmental standpoint, he said it is not the peak flow, but the first flush that comes off any contaminant source that is of tremendous environmental concern. Mr. Bindbeutel pointed out there is nothing in any of the statements heard tonight that even remotely control, or pretend to control, the first flush. He asked the Council to direct the staff to come up with objective criteria both for the engineering and for standards.
    Burt Stoerker, 7907 W. Rollingwood, voiced his concern about Rockbridge State Park.
    Richard Royer, 1515 Woodrail Avenue, owner and developer of the Cambridge Place development located to the west of this site, indicated he had withdrawn his name from the protest petition after meeting with Mr. Stohldrier. At the meeting he had reviewed a very detailed plan that outlined how storm water runoff would be managed. He believed the plan to be a fair one that would do a good job of controlling runoff. Mr. Royer reported he was not attempting to speak on behalf of either side, but merely trying to explain his position on the western boundary.
    Mr. Coffman asked Mr. Royer what he has experienced as far as runoff thus far. Mr. Royer responded that they have not measured anything, but in the heavily wooded area that has been developed, a box culvert and other suitable drainage had been installed. Mr. Royer reported when there is a three inch rain, there is probably eight inches of water running through the box culvert and down the gully. But within 30 minutes after the rain stops, so does the runoff. He felt the runoff plan had been devised pretty well. Mr. Royer pointed out that his property is much more severe than Mr. Stohldrier's property. He indicated that tract is fairly level.
    Tom Latta, 2194 E. Bearfield Subdivision, spoke about the kind of housing that could result. He believed new subdivisions find it very hard to market to first time home buyers.
    John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, asked the Council to not approve this or any other annexation request until they have revised the ordinances and tested them in court with declaratory judgment requests. He said approving something now and saying things will get worked out later only leads the developer on.
    Mr. Stohldrier believed it would be beneficial to the City for the Council to adopt the Springfield ordinance. He said if that would provide for an acceptable substitution for the term "practical" in the water quality standards section in his statement of intent, it could be inserted. Mr. Stohldrier believed if developers can comply with those conditions in Springfield, we can do it here.
    Mr. Janku noted in the neighbor's first paragraph to the statement of intent, they suggest the condition that some sort of engineering or other professional study be done before issuance of various permits. He asked Mr. Stohldrier his thoughts. Mr. Stohldrier replied that he would be obligated to do that in order to document any kind of water quality or quantity changes. He saw no problem with that condition.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Campbell reported he has no problem with many of the statements made, but said he would like to see these written to greater specificity so there is no misunderstanding. Mr. Campbell is uncomfortable and unwilling to vote in favor of this request the way it has currently been presented. He did not believe that the development's density should be a major concern. He felt it to be good planning. Mr. Campbell reiterated that he is most troubled about the lack of specificity in the statement of intent.
    Mr. John noted that approval of this request would set the stage for everything else that comes in. He said they have to be very careful about who is going to manage the development and how. Mr. John felt the staff was comfortable with the Council's concerns and understood them. When the staff was asked if they could implement what the Council wanted under the statement of intent, the answer had been that they could not.
    Ms. Crayton was uncomfortable voting on the plan because nothing was clear. She would like to see both sides get together.
    Mayor Hindman said he was wanting to see specific standards as well, but there needs to be room for creativity to occur. He said that is one of the purposes of the PUD. Mayor Hindman was encouraged by several things that had been said by the developer and was hopeful he would follow the independent guidance of the University Extension, a third party, who he assumed would be in the position to say what it will take in order to protect the water quality. Mayor Hindman suggested that the Council delay action on the issue. A discussion followed as to whether or not this bill should be tabled or voted on later in the evening after both sides had worked something out. It was suggested that the staff should be involved as well.
    Mr. Ehrhardt suggested that the bill be tabled to the next meeting. Mr. Stohldrier had no objections and said they would get together and work it out.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that B456-99 be tabled to the February 7, 2000, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B2-00     Authorizing an 8" water main upgrade along Hinkson Avenue from Ripley Street east to William Street;
               appropriating funds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this would be a 585 feet long water line and would be constructed at an estimated cost of $59,750.00, which would be paid out of the water and electric fund. He reported the new line would enhance fire protection in the area as well as residential service.
    Mr. John asked who pays into the water and electric fund. He assumed this would include every water user, whether they have paid for water for a few months or for many years. Mr. Beck said that was correct.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B2-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B3-00     Authorizing an 8" water main upgrade along Hinkson Avenue from College Avenue to Ripley Street;
               appropriating funds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this would replace some 4" and 6" line along Hinkson and it is being done in conjunction with a street construction project. The estimated cost of this project is $105,110. Again, this would be paid from water and electric funds.
    Mr. John asked if this work would be done before the street construction. Mr. Beck said that was the plan. Mr. John pointed out that this project as well as the previous project, at a combined worth of over $160,000.00, are both in the older part of Columbia. He noted the new residents that have moved into Columbia are helping pay for this reconstruction.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B3-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

(A)         Voluntary annexation of property located on the west side of State Route 763, north of Smiley Lane,
    Item A was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained this tract consists of 239 acres located in north central Columbia, west of 763. He pointed out that the annexation request is subject to portions of the property being zoned R-1, C-1, O-1, C-3 and M-C. Mr. Beck reported this issue has been reviewed by the appropriate City departments as well as by other agencies involved in and around Columbia.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Bruce Beckett, 901 E. Broadway, spoke on behalf of the property owner, Tom Bass. He said more discussion would take place when the zoning issue comes up at the February 7, 2000, meeting. He offered to answer any questions regarding the annexation request.
    Mr. Campbell commented that this is a very large and important development. He was hopeful to see a plan that includes suggestions from the neighboring residents. Mr. Beckett reported this project has been an ongoing one for the past two years and Mr. Bass has had contact with many of the neighbors. He indicated the applicant has incorporated all of their ideas into this plan.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing and noted that no action was required at this point.

(B)         Development of Field Neighborhood Park.
    Mr. Beck noted that this three-quarter acre tract that was purchased by the City with Community Development Block Grant funds for park purposes. He pointed out that the property is immediately adjacent to the Eugene Field Elementary School. He stated that the City has been following a policy and philosophy of trying to have parks located adjacent to schools so the equipment can be used by both the school system and neighboring residents, which better utilizes City funds invested in the overall program. Mr. Beck reported there are several alternatives that have been prepared in regards to the development of the park and he asked Mr. Hood to describe them.
    Mr. Hood explained that staff has been working on a master plan for this park for about a year. He said they have worked with the Columbia Public Schools, Columbia College, the North Central Neighborhood Association, and neighboring businesses and residents. Mr. Hood felt the process was very positive as they worked through a number of issues and reached a consensus on almost everything, except for one -- whether or not the existing building should be retained on the site. For that reason, he said the staff prepared two options.
    Mr. Hood reported the first option involved developing the entire site as open green space with walkways, benches, seating areas, an outdoor classroom area, and additional gathering space. This option calls for the removal of the building and replacing it with a low berm, heavily landscaped seating area. At the time the options were prepared, this was the staff's preferred option. Mr. Hood explained the second option will retain the building with the remainder of the park being developed almost exactly as previously outlined. This option includes cost estimates for the renovation and restoration of the building.
    Mr. Hood related that when these two options were presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission last summer, they held a public hearing and after input was received, they subsequently voted to recommend to the Council that the building be retained. However, that included the recommendation that no City funds be used to restore the building, and that the City consider either leasing or giving the building to the neighborhood association or another community agency to operate. The Commission supported development of the remainder of the park as had been designed and planned.
    As a result of that recommendation to the Council, Mr. Hood reported that staff has developed a third option which would retain the building, eliminate the detailed landscaping around the building and replace it with green lawn space. He explained that would allow for the development of the park while at the same time allowing the building to remain. It was felt that should the Council concur with this recommendation, that would allow time for the neighborhood association to try and raise the necessary funds to restore the building.
    Mr. Hood mentioned additional issues he felt the Council may wish to consider. He related that during the planning process, the need for additional playground equipment was identified. It had been suggested that this equipment should be located on school property so the park would be geared toward a more passive orientation. As designed, he noted that all three options include funding to add additional playground equipment on school property. The other issue of concern relates to parking. The group consensus in the planning process was that there should be no off-street parking allowed. However, under current zoning if the building is retained, off-street parking would be required. He understood that to meet this condition it would require either a variance or the property would have to be rezoned.
    Mr. Hood commented that the costs related to all three options were similar with the only difference being in the amount of funds associated with the building. The cost for option one was $82,578, and it included funds for demolition of the building. The approximate cost for the second option totaled $202,855, and it included estimates for the renovation of the building. The third option at an approximate cost of $77,578 did not dedicate any funding to the building at all. Mr. Hood pointed out that all three options include $10,000 in force account labor.
    Mr. Janku asked what the progression would be if the Council decided to proceed with option three this evening. Mr. Hood replied that staff would be able to begin development of the park this spring. He indicated an ordinance would be needed to authorize the action. Mr. Janku asked if the building has any structural problems. Mr. Hood said he was not aware of any major roof problems, but added that the building is not in good shape. He said it would require considerable work.
    Mrs. Crockett asked whether the building had to be brought up to City code if it is retained. Mr. Hood responded it would have to be in order to be utilized as a public meeting place.
    Ms. Crayton asked if the neighborhood could apply for grant money to renovate the building. Mr. Hood said if the Council chooses to proceed with that option, there would have to be a formal agreement between the City and whatever entity that is permitted to utilize the building. He believed the interested parties would have the option to apply for grants, assuming they are eligible under the guidelines of the grant program.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Linda Rootes, 807 N. Eighth Street, spoke on behalf of the Board of Directors for the North Central Neighborhood Association. She urged the Council to support option three. While the green space would be good for the neighborhood, Ms. Rootes felt the 2,600 square feet at the corner would be much more valuable as indoor space. She reported the neighborhood has built a collaboration between many partners who are willing to make this neighborhood resource a reality.
    David Thayer, 8 Blue Jay Way, Executive Director of the Central Missouri Human Development Corporation, explained that they have sponsored various programs that focus on the needs of low income families and individuals. He said HDC would be providing a legal structure for the project and a charitable 501-C3 status in order to accomplish three things. The first issue would be to obtain the title to the building, if there is some transfer mechanism from the City to a group that would take responsibility for the building. Mr. Thayer reported HDC would assist the group in applying for and receiving funding from public and private sources which could be used to both renovate the structure, and then in future years, to provide for operating expenses for activities that might take place there. In addition, he said HDC would also act as the fiscal agent for the project, at least through the development stage, and in the future as a possible grantee for certain specific scheduled activities. The second issue would be to oversee the formation of a community board, in cooperation with the neighborhood association, that would set the governing policies and procedures in terms of using the facility and assure it is open to all of the interests and concerns of people in the neighborhood and community. Mr. Thayer stated the third issue is that HDC would serve as the entity to execute various memoranda of understanding with other partners in the project.
    Mr. Janku asked Mr. Thayer if he anticipated that HDC would operate any of their programs out of the building. Mr. Thayer commented they might use the building to do some group work with parenting classes and things of that sort, or they may station staff there to take applications for things like utility assistance. In addition, it could be used as a satellite office to provide some of their services. Mr. Thayer did not think HDC would be using it on a full time basis, but he would like to see some activities take place there.
    Mr. John asked if once things are up and running, whether Mr. Thayer would be dropping out of the project. Mr. Thayer thought HDC would continue to be involved. Mr. John asked how long it would take to put together a plan and get operations started. Mr. Thayer indicated another speaker is present to address that question.
    Brian Pape, an architect at 29 E. Stewart Road, said the condition of the building is probably average for a 75 year old building that has had some deferred maintenance. However, it is a basic, stable, commercial structure - probably as good as any of the City's older downtown buildings. He noted it needs maintenance and they are prepared to address immediate and long-term maintenance needs. Mr. Pape believed it to be a good investment as it would be a suitable, practical use for the building. He spoke about the layout of the building, pointing out that because it is at street level, it could very easily address handicapped issues. Of the three options, Mr. Pape said this would be the least costly.
    Mr. Pape read a letter from Greg Olson, written on behalf of the Historic Preservation Commission who supported the neighborhood association's efforts to incorporate this building in the plans for the new City park.
    Mr. Coffman asked if $104,000 seemed to be a reasonable sum for renovating the building. Mr. Pape said that would be a reasonable sum taking into consideration the constraints the City has to work under. As a neighborhood association, they would attempt to obtain donated materials and seek out volunteers to assist in painting and minor maintenance jobs. He noted there are lots of ways to reduce costs.
    Judith Retsema, Caring Community Site Coordinator for Field School, read a memo from Michael Bloemke, the Executive Coordinator of the Columbia Boone County Community Partnership regarding the development of a neighborhood resource center. The letter stated one of the basic policy directions of Caring Communities is to move closer to where families live and children attend schools. Mr. Bloemke wrote that a neighborhood based center where families can access a variety of services and information would certainly be a significant move in that direction. Ms. Retsema noted that the Columbia Public Schools allowed Caring Communities the use of one of their trailers out of which various resources, information, pamphlets, parent meetings could occur. Since September, there are a number of other community organizations that share this space. Ms. Retsema reported the availability of this facility is now limited to after school hours.
    Mayor Hindman asked if Caring Communities needed parking. Ms. Retsema said they did not.
    Jeannie Wiebel, 703 Wilkes, President of the North Central Neighborhood Association and member of the Field School Caring Communities Site Council, reported that she had been actively involved in the park planning meetings. During those meetings, a number of proposed uses for the building were brought forward. Some of the suggested uses for the site included it could be used for neighborhood watch meetings, community organization meetings, bake sales and other fund raisers for community organizations, a police mini-substation, after school programs and activities, public access to the Internet, storage and staging area for outdoor events, alternative location for planned activities that get rained out, and exhibition space for local artists.
    John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, explained that the neighborhood is asking for three years to plan, fund and complete the restoration. At the end of the first year they hope to have completed the formation of the community board. Mr. Clark indicated the first renovation goal, to be completed within three to six months, is to restore the exterior of the building. The preliminary estimate cost for that is $5,000 to $6,000. Mr. Clark stated a complete assessment of the building and its structural issues are planned. He said that would be the basis for the funding request. Also by the end of the first year they expect to have completed a fund raising plan (including the identification of specific funding sources), a project case statement, preparation of grant proposals and so forth.
    Betty Cook Rottmann, 1200 Coats, reported this neighborhood has needed a park for as long as she can remember. Mrs. Rottmann believes that retaining the building in the park is a vital element in developing the neighborhood's continuing vision to make this area stable and a friendly place for its residents.
    Bob Hutton, who spoke on behalf of Columbia College, noted that the proposed park adjoins the campus across the intersection. He said the Council packet included a letter from him stating the College's position on this issue. Mr. Hutton related that he wrote another letter on behalf of the College in May of 1998 strongly endorsing the idea of the City buying this property and developing a neighborhood park on the site. The assumption at that time being that the building would be razed and the entire property would be developed as green space. Had the College known about the possibility of retaining the building, Mr. Hutton stated they would not have so strongly endorsed the concept because of their selfish motivation to beautify this area. He pointed out that the appearance of this area is an immediate and long-term concern of the College. Mr. Hutton indicated they have fought, alongside the neighborhood association, several rezonings that would increase the number of office areas on Rangeline, preferring to keep this area residential. He thought it seemed paradoxical that the neighborhood has opposed any conversions to office in this area, but given the chance to remove this use and convert it to green space, they choose the opposite. Mr. Hutton read a list of objections from his letter. He noted that the College's preference is to raze the building to allow for the development of a traditional neighborhood park. If the Council chooses to keep the building, Mr. Hutton contended that with the approval must come concrete plans that guarantee funding for renovation and maintenance of the building for the long-term and its management. He reported Columbia College would also like to see the City satisfactorily address the other issues that were outlined in the letter.
    Ms. Rootes commented that the neighborhood has every intention of making this site attractive - just as if it were grass and trees. She said they plan to act quickly on their plan. Regarding the safety issues, Ms. Rootes stated the building has been at this corner for 75 years and it would not be more of a safety issue in the future than it has been in the past. She contended if the building is removed and intensive landscaping planted, this would create a horseshoe arrangement that people could hide behind. Ms. Rootes maintained a safer atmosphere would be created if people could utilize the building.
    Mr. Janku asked whether funding for the ongoing maintenance of the building will be addressed. Ms. Rootes said if the Council chooses option three, she assumed staff would proceed to negotiate a contract with HDC that will include whatever they feel is necessary based on Council comments.
    Mrs. Crockett asked what could be done about parking. Mr. Janku felt that needed to be addressed as part of the plan staff brings forward. He noted the Council recently passed an ordinance allowing modifications in parking requirements for certain property. He pointed out the site has an extensive parking lot and although it is used during the day, it is available during the evening and weekends.
    Mr. Campbell complimented the neighborhood and the fine work they have done on this proposal. He felt the Council should proceed with the third option. Mr. Campbell suggested that cautions be built into the lease, i.e., benchmarks as to when things will be completed. He also wanted to see some way for the City to recover the building if it is not being taken care of properly.
    Mr. John felt that the negotiations should include a very detailed plan on when the organizations are going to be in place, when the money is going to be raised, etc. He said these things can drag on for a long time and he did not want to see that happen in this case. Mr. John wanted to make sure the neighborhood group and HDC come forward with an agreeable plan to operate and maintain the building to allow it to be functional in a relatively quick period of time. He also commented that he is concerned about the parking situation, even though the school has a parking lot and there is a lot of on-street parking available, Mr. John noted that no one in the private sector would be able to have a commercial building without allowing for parking. His concern was not that this site needs parking, but the relative inconsistency of the Council relaying the message that just because this is a community asset, the City does not have to follow the rules. Mr. John did not want to set that precedent.
    Ms. Crayton felt the group should be supported because it would contribute to the revitalization of the neighborhood. She believed the parking issue would probably be addressed by other solutions.
    Mr. Coffman thought in this situation the parking issue was consistent with the idea of neighborhood parks not requiring parking. In regards to the building, he would like to see it have a chance to survive. Mr. Coffman was sure it could be converted into a nice facility and thought it was worth trying for.
    Mayor Hindman said he is in favor of saving the building, although he thought the park would look better without the building in some ways. He personally would like to see the building used for after school recreation. Mayor Hindman was hopeful the Parks and Recreation Department could provide some recreational programming there. He suggested that if Parks and Recreation is a participant in this venture, they could utilize the building. Mayor Hindman commented this building could be used as a community center. Although, he strongly advocated that as much of the remaining space should be used for the park. He did not think there should be on-site parking, and asked that the recommendation come back with a way to avoid it. In this instance, Mayor Hindman stated this building will be designed to serve a very specific, relatively small neighborhood and on-site parking will not be necessary. He suggested amending the ordinances so this type of situation could be avoided in the future. Mayor Hindman thought this could also apply to small neighborhood businesses to allow them the same privileges.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that the staff proceed with the development of the Field Neighborhood Park utilizing option three. The motion was seconded by Ms. Crayton and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B4-00     Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code as it relates to reserved parking for police vehicles.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this is an approximate 25-foot section of curb on the east side of Ninth Street, north of Broadway, next to the Boone Savings and Loan driveway. He said there have been some safety problems with cars parking there. The staff, working with the Special Business District and the Central Columbia Association, believed the problem could be alleviated if this area is reserved for police parking only. If this does not work, Mr. Beck indicated staff would come back with another solution.
    Mr. Janku noted that parking on the other side of the street goes practically to the corner of the alley (the northern side of the alley). He asked if it would be safe to have a metered parking space on the opposite side of the street, where the yellow line is. Mr. John agreed that if a meter is installed at this location, the City could make some money off of the space.
    Mr. Campbell noted that several downtown groups have looked at the situation and came up with the current proposal. He felt if the Council gives approval to install a meter across the street, it should be done with some degree of thought and caution.
    Mrs. Crockett added that a lot of traffic comes out of Boone National Savings.
    Mr. Janku agreed with that assessment, but he was referring to an area further up the street.
    It was decided this issue would be forwarded to the downtown business groups for their recommendation.
    B4-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B6-00     Authorizing an agreement with The Curators of the University of Missouri to allow the closing of
               Maryland Avenue and Rollins Street during construction of Cornell Hall.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that City staff has been working with representatives from the University relating to the construction of Cornell Hall. This proposal would allow for the temporary closing of two streets to accommodate construction equipment. He noted this option provides for the least amount of pedestrian and traffic impact.
    Mayor Hindman understood that the intersection of Rollins and Maryland would remain open. Mr. Beck said that was his understanding also.
    Mr. Campbell pointed out this closing will divert a lot more traffic on Missouri Avenue since it will be the only north/south street in the area. He suggested that the staff prepare an ordinance establishing a temporary stop sign at the junction of Rollins and Missouri because of all the traffic that will be coming through this area.
    Mr. Beck noted a "dip" in the street on Maryland. He said that same kind of swail exists on Missouri Avenue as well. He explained the University plans to provide a temporary treatment there to avoid buses bottoming out. Mr. Campbell asked about a stop sign at that intersection. Mr. Beck said if an ordinance is needed he would bring one back to the Council.
    Mr. Beck asked Mr. Montgomery if the staff addressed Missouri Avenue and on-street parking. Mr. Montgomery said the main problem on Missouri Avenue that had been identified occurs at its intersection with Conley where there is a significant dip. He reported the University has agreed to temporarily fix the problem by laying some asphalt and installing a drain system so long vehicles would not drag at the intersection. Mr. Montgomery stated they have not really studied the intersection at Missouri and Rollins, although a stop sign could be put in if warranted.
    Mr. Coffman asked for assurance that Maryland and Rollins would not be closed at the same time. Mr. Montgomery said that was correct.
    A representative from the University agreed that a stop sign at the intersection of Rollins and Maryland was a good idea.
    Mr. Janku asked why the modification is temporary. The University representative stated the permanent solution is a lot more expensive. The temporary solution involved constructing a temporary ramp with asphalt, which would result in the loss of the curbs in this area. He indicated they can look at it with the City to see if it would be a good, permanent solution.
    B6-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B7-00     Voluntary annexation of property located south of St. Charles Road at the southern terminus of Charlie
               Goff Drive.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that a public hearing had been held previously on this issue.
    Mr. Boeckmann explained a suggested amendment which would change section numbers.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that B7-00 be amended per Mr. Boeckmann's suggestion. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    B7-00, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSTAINING: CROCKETT. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

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

B1-00     Accepting easements for utility purposes.
B5-00     Authorizing Federal Transit Administration operating and capital assistance grants.
B8-00     Approving a replat of a portion of Lot 1 of Garth's Subdivision; authorizing a performance contract.
B9-00     Approving a replat of Lot 12 of Country Club Villas; authorizing a performance contract.
B10-00   Calling a municipal election to be held April 4, 2000 to elect Council Members for Wards 2 and 6.
R7-00     Setting a public hearing: storm drainage improvements in The Hamlet Subdivision.
R8-00     Renewing an agreement with the Missouri Department of Health for the issuance of birth and death

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

R9-00     Approving preliminary plat no. 2 of Wellington Manor.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the request.
    Comments were called for with none received.
    The vote on R9-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSTAINING: CROCKETT. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R10-00     Approving the by-laws of the Hunters Gate I Neighborhood Association.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this proposal is in conformance with policy and that it is ready for adoption.
    Comments were called for with none received.
    The vote on R10-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R11-00     Authorizing Supplement No. 2 to the agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration for leasing
                  space at Columbia Regional Airport.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that there is vacant space in the north terminal building that the FAA is requesting to lease from the City at an additional cost of approximately $3,200 per year.
    Comments were called for with none received.
    The vote on R11-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R12-00     Authorizing an agreement with the City of Sikeston for purchase of peaking capacity for summer of 2000.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Malon explained that due to the high temperatures we had last summer, the City's peak load for the year was higher than what had been forecasted. As a result, he said the conclusion was reached that it would be prudent to change our load forecasts and assume that last year's load was repeatable, with the addition of a small amount of growth. Mr. Malon noted that meant the City would be short approximately 15 megawatts of capacity for the coming summer. He stated that requests for proposals were sent out and seven responses were received. Responses from two companies indicated they had no capacity available for sale. Subsequently, Mr. Malon reported it was determined that the Sikeston proposal would be the most economic.
    Mr. Janku complimented the staff for their planning. He noted that because of their long-range planning, the City has saved a considerable amount of money.
    The vote on R12-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R13-00     Authorizing an agreement with Sverdrup Facilities, Inc. to provide architectural design services for a
                 community recreation center.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Following the election in November, Mr. Beck explained that the Council directed staff to proceed with acquiring architectural services for the Community Recreation Center. He explained what work would be included in Phases I and II. Mr. Beck noted the contract amount is not to exceed $794,500.
    Brad Simmons, manager of the St. Louis operations for Sverdrup, explained that he is the project executive on this project. He reported that Sverdrup is very pleased to be able to continue working with the City of Columbia on this project. Mr. Simmons offered to answer any questions.
    The vote on R13-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R14-00     Declaring the City's intent to reimburse itself for capital expenditures in connection with projects
                 authorized by the quarter-cent sales tax extension.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this is a technical procedure to meet IRS requirements. Comments were called for with none received.
    The vote on R14-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

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

B11-00     Authorizing storm drainage improvements in The Hamlet Subdivision; authorizing an agreement with
                 Westbury Joint Venture and Hamlet Homes Association; appropriating funds.
B12-00     Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code to prohibit parking on both sides of Pannell Street from Wilkes
                 Boulevard to its southern terminus.
B13-00     Authorizing an agreement with Cunningham + Richards Johnson Architects to conduct a feasibility study
                 of the use of the Wabash Station as a transportation hub.
B14-00     Accepting various easements and quit claim deeds for sewer and utility purposes.
B15-00     Authorizing a promissory note in connection with a Missouri Department of Natural Resources
                 energy-savings project loan; appropriating funds.
B16-00     Authorizing application for membership in the Western Systems Power Pool; appropriating funds.
B17-00     Appropriating funds for improvements to the COLT highway-rail crossing signal system at Brown
                 Station Road.
B18-00     Accepting easements for water main purposes.
B19-00     Adding a new utilities engineer position in the Water and Light Department; appropriating funds.
B20-00     Amending Chapter 11 of the City Code as it relates to swimming pools; adopting the "City of Columbia
                 Guide for Swimming Pool Design and Operation."
B21-00     Authorizing an agreement with the Missouri Department of Health for HIV/STD prevention and
                 counseling services.
B22-00     Voluntary annexation of property located on the west side of State Route 763, north of Smiley Lane,
                 extended; establishing permanent zoning.
B23-00     (Was pulled from the agenda per the applicant's request.)
B24-00     Vacating an unused, 15-foot wide public alley which runs in an east/west direction and is located
                 between North Garth Avenue and Grand Avenue, and between Sexton Road and Fourth Avenue.
B25-00     Establishing permanent A-1 zoning on property located on the south side of Vawter School Road,
                 between Scott Boulevard and Old Mill Creek Road.
B26-00     Changing street names within Quail Creek Subdivision as follows: "Coho Drive" to "Rainbow Trout
                 Drive" and "Rainbow Trout Court" to "Coho Court."
B27-00     Approving the Final Plat of Thornbrook Subdivision, Plat No. 4; authorizing a performance contract.
B28-00     Approving the Final Plat of Spring Creek, Plat 1; authorizing a performance contract.
B29-00     Approving the Final Plat of Providence Hill; authorizing a performance contract.
B30-00     Amending Chapter 8 of the City Code to correct the boundaries of the 4th and 5th Wards.
B31-00     Granting a conveyance of water line and water line easements to Consolidated Public Water Supply
                 District No. 1.

A)     Intra-Departmental Transfer of Funds Request.
    Report accepted.

B)     FY 2000 CDBG Funding Allocations.
    Mr. Beck explained that official notice was received last week indicating the City would be receiving $1,039,000.00 in Community Development Block Grant money. He noted that included $537,000 in HOME money. Mr. Beck stated that a fairly detailed memo was included in the packet explaining where the money has been allocated. He said the next step would be to prepare the paper work to formally budget these monies. Mr. Beck suggested a work session to review the recommended uses.

    Upon receiving the majority vote of the Council the following individuals were appointed to the following boards and commissions:

Bank, Gail I., 1214 S. Fairview Rd., Ward 4 - term to expire
Filbert, Garvin P., 906 Wayne Rd., Ward 5 - term to expire
Jashnani, George V., 2708 Bluff Creek Dr., Ward 6 (O/O) - term to expire
Stockman, David M., 4180 E. Lang Dr., County (O/O) - term to expire

Dykhouse, Charles James Jr., 1100 E. Rollins #52, Ward 1 - term to expire 12/31/01

Hostetler, Lynn D., 1204 Hulen Dr., Ward 4 - term to expire 6/30/00

    There were no appointments made to the Finance Advisory Committee as there was discussion about the possibility of abolishing the Committee.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that the Finance Advisory Committee appointment be tabled until a staff report comes back for the Council to act on. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.

    Mrs. Crockett commented that she received a call from a woman living in Creekwood Estates regarding 18 wheelers parking along Creekwood Parkway. She said it has been reported before and it continues to be a problem. She explained that the cabs are disconnected from the trailer, and the trailers can be left for up to a week on the street. It was reported that at times the whole truck is left for days. Mr. Montgomery said he would look into it.
    Mrs. Crockett reported she also has received calls regarding the tents that have been set up in the location of the southeast corner of Broadway and Highway 63. She said the tents have been on state right of way for several months. Acting Police Chief Boehm indicated his department would look into the situation. He noted this particular situation is difficult to solve because the homeless folks that are using the tents tend to relocate somewhere else in the City. Up until now, he noted his department has not received as many complaints as when these individuals were in the downtown area.
    Mr. Coffman noted that he has heard from several people regarding the traffic light at Rock Quarry Road and Nifong. He asked for a report on the frequency of the light. Mr. Montgomery asked if the complaint was about a lengthy red light for the north/south traffic. Mr. Coffman thought most of the complaints were from people living south of Nifong.
    Mr. Janku mentioned a sidewalk that is becoming overgrown with grass located on Creasy Springs Road, north of Proctor Drive. He said there is also a lot of trash in this area. He asked that the situation be corrected.
    Mr. Janku asked about the progress of the intersection of West Boulevard and I-70 Drive. He understood the state is working on a project there and thought it would be good if information could be provided on both projects.
    Ms. Crayton passed around an article regarding a program in Oklahoma City where job skills are offered to kids -- basically targeting ages 16 to 24. She had learned that the high school drop-out rate in the first ward is 32%, and she thought this program could help some of those young people. Ms. Crayton asked that more information be obtained regarding the youth bill. Mr. Campbell commented that funds are available from different sources that could most likely be used for this sort of thing. He noted the need for an organization to step forward and operate such a program in an efficient and effective manner. Mr. Campbell stated that he was recently appointed to the Workforce Investment Board and he knew they are very interested in getting this sort of thing started.
    Mayor Hindman asked for a report relating to the possibility of on-street parking on Locust and Elm Street, between Fifth and Providence. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku.
    Mayor Hindman said that both streets are wide and he thought there were some good opportunities there for parking. Mr. Campbell noted that at certain times during the day cars are cued back to Fourth Street from Providence Road in that location.
    The motion made by Mayor Hindman, seconded by Mr. Janku, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. Beck reported on the status of the Police Chief search and related that it is still one of his highest priorities. He noted that Acting Police Chief Boehm was doing an excellent job.
    The meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m.

                                                                                                Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                                Penny St. Romaine
                                                                                                City Clerk