The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Tuesday, September 5, 2000, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results: Council Members CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, and HINDMAN were present. The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting of August 21, 2000, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mrs. Crockett.
APPROVAL AND ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA INCLUDING CONSENT AGENDA
Upon her request, Mr. Campbell made the motion that Mrs. Crockett be allowed to abstain from voting on B272-00. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
The agenda, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Janku and a second by Mr. Campbell.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mayor Hindman asked that all of the budget related items be read at the same time. He noted that these bills would be held over until the next meeting, at which time they would be discussed again and voted on.
B281-00 Amending Chapter 20 of the
Code to establish Planning Department processing fees; amending
Chapter 29 of the Code relating to the processing fee for rezoning requests.
B282-00 Amending Chapter 27 of the City Code relating to water services size and installation fees.
B283-00 Amending Chapter 15 of the Code as it relates to warrant fees.
B284-00 Amending Chapter 5 of the City Code as it relates to animal control services fees.
B285-00 Amending Chapter 11 of the City Code as it relates to fees for public health services.
B286-00 Establishing Parks and Recreation fees.
B287-00 Amending Chapters 6 and 22 of the Code relating to fees of rental unit inspections and sign permits.
B288-00 Adopting the Columbia Special Business District FY 2001 Budget.
B226-00 Adopting the FY 2001 Budget.
All of the above bills were read by the Clerk.
When considering budget strategy with the Council, Mr. Beck reported that they discussed what percentage of services being rendered and expended should be recovered by the City. He noted the Council had asked that staff review fee schedules to determine if the amounts currently being charged are still applicable. He explained guidelines were established as to the amount of money it was believed should be recovered. As a result, Mr. Beck said a series of these ordinances deal with revenues that could be generated with adjusted service fees. It was estimated that approximately $350,000 would be generated for the General Fund if the proposed fee increases are approved by the Council. Mr. Beck briefly explained the amendments being recommended.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing on all of the above bills.
David Johnston, 2701 Chambray Road, Chair of the Community Development Commission, explained their recommendations and how these had been arrived at. He remarked that the Commission held two public hearings before making their recommendation. Mr. Johnston noted that this year they received the largest number of applications to date, which as in the past, far exceeded the estimated entitlement amount of $1 million.
Kathleen Cain, 603 Westwood, Chair of the Community Services Advisory Commission, explained that they received requests from 35 agencies for over 50 programs. She noted that the Commission's recommendations could be found in the report that had been sent to the Council. Ms. Cain thanked the Council for their support of social services in this community.
Mayor Hindman thanked the Community Development Commission and the Community Services Advisory Commission for all of the work they do throughout the year.
Fred Springsteel, 311 Longfellow Lane, thought health related fees should be kept to a minimum. He was in favor of raising fees, but asked that it be done fairly.
Tina Hubbs, 112 Anderson, spoke on behalf of the grant application from the NewWave Corporation, KOPN Radio Station. She asked that their proposal be considered very carefully. Ms. Hubbs noted that KOPN has been broadcasting for 27 years. For a vast period of that time span, she said they have had issues and allowed minority populations and other under-served populations access to the air waves that are not available elsewhere. Ms. Hubbs explained that this funding request would allow KOPN to upgrade their facility. Approximately 10 people stood in support of the request.
Mary Ann Holmstrom, 1201 Paquin, a member of the Columbia Housing Authority, spoke to CHA's request for CDBG funds to be used to install fire suppression systems in both Paquin and Oak Towers. She outlined the reasoning behind the request.
Doris Chiles, Executive Director of the Columbia Housing Authority, also spoke to the need for fire suppression sprinkler systems in both Paquin and Oak Towers. She noted that CHA receives grant funds from HUD for physical and management improvements, but because these buildings are so old, it takes the majority of these funds just to maintain the developments in a safe condition. Ms. Chiles indicated CHA had already obtained $600,000 in grant funding. If CHA does not receive the $200,000 being recommended by the Commission, a sprinkler system will only be installed in Paquin for now. She stated the Oak Towers project would be delayed a couple of years until the remaining funds can be obtained to install a system in this building. Ms. Chiles stated that if the Council approves the $200,000 recommended by the Commission, 100% of the funds will be used to assist elderly and disabled individuals.
Mr. Campbell asked about the total cost to install the suppression systems in both buildings. Ms. Chiles replied that the engineers had estimated the cost to be $800,000.
Dave Silverman, 304 Sanford, described a drive-by shooting which occurred in his neighborhood early yesterday afternoon. He asked about a budgetary allowance for speed limit reductions on his street. Mr. Silverman also said he would like to see some sort of citizen recourse against landlords who rent to known actively criminal elements.
Mr. John remarked that the Public Works Department has a program in place to evaluate streets with speeding problems. He suggested that Mr. Silverman call that office. Regarding the rental issue, Mr. John noted that the Police Department is working with many of the landlord and apartment owner associations to assist them in strengthening their leases. He spoke about the difficulty in evicting people.
Linda Rootes, 807 N. Eighth, President of the Board of Directors for the North Central Columbia Neighborhood Association, reported that this neighborhood has been the recipient of Community Development Block Grant funds that had been utilized for many improvements to this area. She noted Sixth Street is the last street left to be reconstructed in North Central, and added that it is obvious that their infrastructure needs are coming together. Ms. Rootes stated residents are now faced with removing the other barriers to redevelopment in the neighborhood. In order to develop an overlay ordinance, the neighborhood needs to arrive at a consensus on what kind of outcomes they are looking for in order to develop an ordinance. Part of this involves learning how to encourage private investment in the neighborhood. Ms. Rootes indicated that residents are appreciative of the support for their planning initiative.
Lois Shelton, Executive Director of the Boone County Council on Aging, spoke on behalf of the Senior Home Maintenance Project. Although the Council on Aging is the central agency, she noted this program is being administered with the participation of the Voluntary Action Center, the City Health Department, and the Human Development Corporation. Ms. Shelton reported this request involves funding for supplies used by volunteers to provide the labor for minor home repairs. She noted that they are in the process of applying to the Corporation for Public Service for a Vista Volunteer who would specifically work with this program.
Ms. Crayton asked how this organization targets lower income seniors who do not show up on any lists. Ms. Shelton said that is a problem, but if people know of someone fitting in that category, these individuals should be directed to their agency.
Reverend William Young, 3901 St. Charles Road, President and CEO of Columbia Enterlight Ministries, explained his request for CDBG funding and shared two Best Practice Awards his agency received from HUD. Reverend Young distributed to the Council a report pertaining to this issue.
Ben Orzeski, 507 High, a landlord, commented on the rental inspection fees proposal. He asked if the fee increase would be used to expand the level of services provided by Protective Inspection. Mr. Orzeski indicated that he had been told the level of service would remain the same. Mr. Beck replied the costs had been separated, other than for the construction industry, so additional revenues would not be subsidizing other inspections of homeowner housing. Mr. Orzeski remarked that his experience with the Protective Inspection Office has been positive with regard to his property. His only concern with the office was that he thought there are a lot of rental properties that do not comply with City code requirements. He wanted to see efforts made in identifying those properties being rented without proper certification.
Mr. John thought there was an effort being made to identify the properties, but he acknowledged there are some that slip through the cracks.
Mr. Coffman pointed out that the purpose of the proposed increases is to try to maintain a certain level of recovery of expenses with 75% being the goal. He said rental inspection fees are just a little over 50%. At the pre-Council meeting this evening, Mr. Coffman explained that they discussed the need for additional resources being used to support neighborhood response teams which would identify rental problems.
John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, Vice-President of the North Central Columbia Neighborhood Association, spoke to the $35,143 funding request for the Field North Central Community Renovation Project. He passed out informational data. The Association, on behalf of itself and its partner CMCHDC, requested that full funding be approved for Phase I of their project budget. Their preference was that the funds come from the 1999 reallocation. Mr. Clark explained the project.
Susan Roberts, 601 Westwood, spoke about the philosophy of giving a 25% discount to seniors playing golf. She maintained that seniors are shown to have more income in relation to the population of people with children. Ms. Roberts expressed concern about raising the junior fee for golf when considering the importance of recreation for children. As a member of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission, she reminded the Council that they were sent two memos last year recommending that the Police force be increased. The recommendation specifically related to traffic enforcement and establishing a traffic union. Ms. Roberts reported the Council had been resent the memo when the Commission forwarded their recommendation regarding the crossings policy.
Mayor Hindman continued the public hearing to the next meeting.
B263-00 Authorizing the installation
of water main along Parklawn Court, Texas Avenue, Sondra Avenue and
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this is an upgrade project in the Parkade Subdivision in which some of the older water lines are being replaced in conjunction with a storm sewer project. Mr. Beck noted the larger mains will enhance fire protection in the area.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B263-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B272-00 Rezoning property located on
the south side of Smiley Lane approximately 1,000 feet west of Rangeline
Street from C-3 to R-1.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the request on this 14.7 acre tract was recommended for approval by both the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
Bill Crockett, an engineer with offices at 2608 N. Stadium, spoke on behalf of Steve Herigon Construction Company, the owner and applicant. Mr. Crockett offered to answer any questions.
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B272-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSTAINING: CROCKETT. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B217-00 Amending Chapter 14 of the Code to restrict parking on the south side of Clarkson Road.
The bill was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the parking situation on this 32 foot street has been before the Council on several occasions. He noted that the Public Works staff is not recommending that parking be removed from the south side as was requested. Mr. Beck reported the current request is to prohibit parking on the south side of the street between the hours of 2:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.
Rod Stevens, an attorney with offices at 11 N. Seventh, spoke on behalf of Betty Wynfield, Ed Blaine, and Jane Young, all duplex owners on Clarkson Road. He reported that parking on the south side of Clarkson has been restricted from 2:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. for at least ten years, possibly twenty. In 1998, Mr. Stevens explained that the Council considered removing the restriction, but his clients were never advised that the matter was going before the Council. He believed the restriction was meant to apply to only duplexes, but ended up applying to the entire south side of the street. His clients did not have an opportunity to speak in opposition to this amendment. Mr. Stevens complained that his clients have a hard time accessing their property at times because of all of the students parking on the street. If the restriction is reimposed, he said the students living in the area can simply use their driveways.
Ed Blaine, 4E Clarkson Road, explained that he lives in half of his condo and rents out the other half. He spoke in support of reinstating the parking regulations. Mr. Blaine said the lease he uses requires that there only be two cars per unit -- one car can park in the garage and the other in the driveway.
Jane Young, 6E Clarkson Road, another duplex owner renting out the other side of her building, spoke in favor of restricting the parking regulations. She wanted the neighborhood to be rid of the trash, the profanity, and their driveways being blocked. Ms. Young believed the current parking situation has allowed the neighborhood to deteriorate.
Betty Wynfield, another owner living at 12E Clarkson Road, said that parking had been restricted for two decades on Clarkson, Burnham, and throughout the Grasslands area. For all those years, people have parked in their driveways and garages. She said the accommodation made in 1998 was made for non-residential owners and it has not worked. Ms. Wynfield stated those accommodations have impacted the people who live and own property in the area. She noted that it is difficult to entertain in her home as guests have no place to park. Ms. Wynfield believed the interests of the neighborhood should be paramount in that they have support from the Grasslands Association. She entered into the record a letter from former Council member Kruse asking that the parking be returned to what it was. Ms. Wynfield reported that residents are willing to wait until August 1, 2001, for the parking restriction to go into effect in an effort to be accommodating.
Dan Ruether, 811 Sycamore Lane, spoke on behalf of a duplex owner on Clarkson Road who lives out of state. He said that person also owns more undeveloped property on Clarkson Road that will be developed for multi-family residential use in the future. Mr. Ruether explained that the existing unit has a very steep driveway that complied with building codes at the time it was built. He said a resident of the dwelling in 1997 had written to Mr. Kruse requesting that the ordinance be addressed. Through the proper channels, Mr. Ruether said the residents were notified, a survey was performed, and in January of 1998 the Council voted to lift the ordinance. If suitable parking is not allowed, he explained that it will be difficult to find tenants for those units. Mr. Ruether asked that the Council follow the staff recommendation and make no changes to the current parking situation.
John Ott, 212 Bingham Road, President of the Grasslands Neighborhood Association, commented that this topic had come up a few weeks ago at a neighborhood meeting. He said the ordinance has created some problems for the owner-occupied residents in the neighborhood. Mr. Ott stated these individuals believe their property values are being deflated. He explained that the Association voted in favor of the previous ordinance with the parking restriction.
Steve Kellerman, 8A Clarkson Road, spoke about the steepness of the driveway at the duplex in which he lives. He said it is very hard on the cars that have to park there. He asked that the ordinance remain as is.
Jason Cloveno, 8E Clarkson Road, also said the steep grade of the driveway made parking almost impossible. He noted that icy conditions only worsen the situation. Mr. Cloveno pointed out that if two vehicles park in the driveway, the second one would block the sidewalk.
Ryan Burkhart, 8A Clarkson Road, reiterated the previous comments regarding the conditions of the driveway.
Robert Rogers, 8E Clarkson Road, spoke against changing the ordinance. He said he purposely parks on the street so as to not block-in his roommates.
Mr. John explained that the initial request submitted to the Council a couple of years ago involved prohibiting parking from in front of two of the residences. However, when Public Works reviewed the situation, they determined this would be hard to enforce and suggested removing parking from the entire side of the street. The neighborhood association was not aware of the change (from in front of two properties to the whole side of the street) so they did not speak in opposition. Therefore, the parties notified were told something different than what was actually passed. Mr. John noted that the original petitioners, except for one, were all renters and none of them still live in the neighborhood. He thought it was only fair to put it back to the way it had been for years. Mr. John indicated he would have no objection to allow a parking space in front of the two properties with steep driveways. He thought the owners' offer to make the effective date August 1, 2001, was more than fair.
Mr. Campbell noted that the driveways have been steep for a long time -- even when the parking was restricted. He was aware of a change in usage over time, but he did not think the Council should make their decision based upon the desire to maximize profits for a limited number of landowners.
Mr. Janku made the motion that B217-00 be amended by changing the effective date to August 1, 2001. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mrs. Crockett felt the date change was fair and she hoped the landlord will let the next tenants know that there will be no parking on that side of the street if this bill is passed.
B217-00, as amended, was read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B261-00 Conveying Southmark Development,
Inc. property to the City; authorizing dissolution of Southmark
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this is the site for Fire Station #8. He said this legislation would complete the transaction for the property.
B261-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B262-00 Authorizing an amendment to
agreement with Sverdrup Facilities to include the design of the larger
version of the Community Recreation Center.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that a public hearing had been held on this matter and noted that the architect is now in the process of working on final plans and specifications. The question came up as to whether or not it should incorporate a future gym/fitness area and the Council, committee and staff discussed that earlier. The feeling was that they should go ahead with the detailed plans and bid some alternatives with the thought that it would be more cost effective to design it all at the same time. The estimated cost to expand the design would be about $56,000. Mr. Beck reported the goal is to raise the funds for the alternatives privately.
B262-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B264-00 Amending Chapter 14 of the
Code to prohibit parking along the south side of Calvert Drive.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that a request had been received to remove parking off the south side of Calvert and on Nelwood. The staff recommended that parking be prohibited on only one side of Calvert and that Nelwood be left as is. Mr. Beck pointed out the commercial traffic on this dead end street created safety concerns.
Mr. Montgomery noted that when staff evaluated the parking situation on Calvert Drive, it was determined that the large commercial vehicles were having trouble maneuvering vehicles in and out of their driveways. He noted the south side of the street has several driveways on it, so the parking loss would not be as great as it would be if parking were removed from the north side. He summarized the staff's recommendation was to remove parking from the south side of Calvert and then to keep monitoring the situation. Mr. Montgomery noted that future action may be needed in relation to parking on Nelwood.
B264-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B266-00 Amending Chapter 22 of the
Code relating to refuse collection.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the City has a couple of drop-off points for yard waste that have been used for a number of years. He reported that it has been observed that some commercial landscaping and tree services are using the sites to avoid the tipping fee at the landfill. This amendment will allow staff to enforce what type of materials can be taken to the sites so it will be limited to residential use only.
B266-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B270-00 Authorizing change orders to
the contract with Prost Builders, Inc. for the renovation of the Armory
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that these change orders represent an increase of $208,032.34 to the contract. The additional work approved by the Council incorporated new windows, exterior repair and roof replacement. He noted a detailed report was provided in the agenda packet explaining item by item costs involved in the project. Mr. Beck reported that proposals for this work had been received from other contractors to ensure that the costs assessed to the City were appropriate.
B270-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B271-00 Voluntary annexation of property located
generally north of State Route K and southeast of Old Plank
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that this tract is approximately 20 acres in size. He explained there was a pre-annexation agreement and now the tract is contiguous to the City. Under the agreement, the property owners are obliged to annex into the City.
Gene Basinger, an engineer with offices at 300 St. James Street, spoke on behalf of the major property owner. He noted a subdivision has been developed on the property which was built to city specifications. Mr. Basinger offered to answer any questions.
B271-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B275-00 Approving the final plat of
Frank C. Barnes Subdivision, Plat 1; granting a variance from the
Subdivision Regulations; authorizing a performance contract.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that this issue had come to the Council on a tie vote from the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Mr. Dudark explained if the Council chooses to approve this plat, staff would suggest that a couple of conditions be made. The first condition involves the front yard setback from Smiley Lane so it would be comparable to the existing homes adjacent to these lots. The other condition applied to the common driveway for the two houses and that a turnaround must be provided for each lot to allow for a safer entrance and exit onto Smiley Lane.
Gene Basinger, surveyor with offices at 300 St. James Street, spoke on behalf of Mr. Turner, the property owner. He explained that the issue related to the front setback had been addressed in the restrictive covenants. He noted this condition can be included on the plat. In addition, Mr. Basinger said there would not be a problem stipulating the driveway turnaround on the plat as well. Regarding the driveway access for which a variance is being requested, Mr. Basinger said there is a driveway that is considered a grandfathered use which provides access to the tract. He reported the applicant is asking to have a common drive when dividing the tract into two lots. He commented on the neighbor's concerns about this project changing the character of the area. Mr. Basinger argued that the smaller lot would be over 11,000 square feet. It was his opinion that the character of the neighborhood has already changed tremendously with the commercial and industrial developments that exist in the area.
Frank C. Barnes, II, grandson of the man who developed the subdivision, explained that he lives on the remaining 26 acres of the family farm that adjoins the north side of the proposed lots. Mr. Barnes gave the history of the area. He believed what Mr. Turner wants to do is inconsistent with the existing structures. As far as the statement about residents being surrounded by commercial and industrial businesses, he noted there is buffer zoning running the entire length, east and west, in front of the houses. Regarding the restrictive covenants being proposed by Mr. Turner, he argued that they cannot be enforced by the City or by the current residents. Mr. Barnes commented if the City approves this request, it will require a variance to the City's ordinance to allow for access to a collector street.
Shirley Bishop, 1117 E. Smiley, explained that she lives on the west side of the property in question. She was concerned about the proposed appearance of the two homes and their lack of uniformity with the others in the neighborhood. Ms. Bishop also expressed concern that the development will devalue her property.
Mr. Janku responded that the Council could not deal with the uniformity issue; however, he thought the major issue to consider involves granting access to collector streets, and the standards and consistency set by this Council. He suggested that the plat be denied. When the applicant submits a variance request for a single driveway for one house, Mr. Janku said the Council could most likely support that.
Mr. Campbell noted that the lots being proposed would be relatively narrow and he did not believe a functional driveway turnaround would be possible.
B275-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CROCKETT. VOTING NO: CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. Bill defeated.
B276-00 Approving the Bearfield Meadows
PUD Site Plan; granting a variance to the Subdivision Regulations.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-4 in favor of the request. He also noted that an amendment sheet had been prepared and asked Mr. Boeckmann to explain it.
Mr. Boeckmann related that the project engineer had come to his office with proposed language to amend the Council bill dealing with two issues; detention ponds and the impervious area. The present design calls for four dry detention ponds. The proposal is to change the two larger ponds to wet cells. Mr. Boeckmann remarked the only change that he made to the project engineer's proposed amendment related to the wet ponds being built to Green County Storm Water Design Standards. He indicated that he added language reading, "or other appropriate standards as determined by the Director of Public Works." Mr. Boeckmann pointed out that the current plan calls for a maximum of 30% impervious area with the issue being how to make that enforceable. The proposal was that it be made the responsibility of the Public Works Department. After speaking to Mr. Montgomery, Mr. Boeckmann said Mr. Gebhardt's proposal was changed further to include that a plot plan must be presented when each of the lots are developed. Under the proposed amendment, the person seeking the building permit would have to state the square footage of impervious area. In addition, before a certificate of occupancy could be issued, the owner of the property must provide the Public Works Department with a statement of the actual amount of impervious area on the lot. Mr. Boeckmann reported this statement would have to be certified by a licensed professional engineer.
Regarding the plot plans, Mr. Janku asked what would happen if someone wanted to, at a later date, build or expand a deck or put in some sort of improvement that requires a building permit. He asked if the homeowner would have to go before the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Boeckmann indicated he did not believe that would have to occur, but he did think any additions to a lot would have to be calculated into the amount of impervious area for the entire development. He indicated that he could foresee that the person owning the last few undeveloped lots might find that all of the impervious area has already been taken.
Mr. Campbell made the motion that B276-00 be amendment per the amendment sheet. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman.
Mr. Janku asked if it would be a legislative determination by the Council to amend the plan if someone wanted to make improvements as opposed to going to the Board of Adjustment. Mr. John thought it would a revision of the PUD which would require approval by the Planning Director if it is a minor revision, or by the Planning Commission and Council if it were a major revision.
The motion to amend B276-00, made by Mr. Campbell, seconded by Mayor Hindman, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
Jay Gebhardt, civil engineer with Allstate Consultants, explained his interpretation of the impervious area. He explained that Public Works will be provided with the initial amount of impervious area from the builder when a permit prior to occupancy is acquired. He said a professional engineer will have to go out to the site and verify that what was actually built is what was shown on the plan. This individual would then certify to what was actually built and present it to Public Works so a certificate of occupancy could be issued. Mr. Gebhardt pointed out that it would be in everyone's best interest that all the lots be developed. Toward that end, he said they were going to limit the footprint in the restrictive covenants to be quite a bit smaller than what the average could be to allow for changes.
Mr. Gebhardt explained the detention ponds would be common areas to the subdivision with access from the neighborhood. He stated each lot will have a minimum of a 10-foot drainage easement along the side and back. Mr. Gebhardt noted that the drainage easements are an important element to give the City some control in how the lots are graded.
Mr. Gebhardt reported the PUD plan shows that the streets are being designed to be 28 feet wide, and they are asking for a variance from the subdivision regulations to allow for that. Also shown in the plan is a bulb which will be a permanent cul-de-sac bulb, but it will also have a stub on it. They believed this was a proper solution to the idea of having to provide a temporary turnaround. Mr. Gebhardt noted that some concern had been expressed about sight distance problems relating to ingress and egress from this development to Bearfield Road. He indicated that he checked into this issue and commented there is no serious problems with such.
Using a schematic, Mr. Gebhardt described the four-bay, pre-sedimentation basin. He explained where the water would enter first to enable the larger silt to drop out of suspension so as to not contaminate the rest of the pond. He showed the location of a structure inside the detention pond to be used for water quality control. Mr. Gebhardt noted documentation is available which verifies that wet detention provides better treatment for pollution removal than dry detention does. He said this type of system was not included on the two front detention areas because drainage to those areas will be very small. Mr. Gebhardt reported those cells would be susceptible to silting and maintenance problems if they were converted to wet ponds because they would dry up frequently.
Mr. Janku asked if it is known what percentage of drainage would go into which ponds. Mr. Gebhardt answered ten percent will go into each pond. Mr. Janku questioned how the grades would be maintained after the homeowner has moved in and puts in a garden or something similar. Mr. Gebhardt responded that by creating drainage easements, they are hoping to send a message that the lot was developed to include this drainage area and the homeowner should not be putting in a fence or a raised garden that could block the flow. He did not know how to address this problem because it is not associated with the water quality issues of this development, but a problem common to every single residential neighborhood that exists in the City of Columbia.
Regarding the statement of intent that was submitted at the time the rezoning request was approved, Mr. Gebhardt explained that they were supposed to meet the current discharge, or the pre-development discharge for the two, ten, and twenty-five year storms. The detention that has been designed meets and exceeds that intent in some cases by almost half of what was allowed. He noted that he cut the flow by making the detentions larger than what they need to be. Mr. Gebhardt believed every single condition set forth in the statement of intent has been met or exceeded.
Mr. Janku asked when the ponds would be built. Mr. Gebhardt responded these will be constructed first. At the time the certificate of occupancy is issued, Mr. Stohldrier will be responsible for installing the water quality structures inside the detention basin. The reason for not putting them in at the beginning is because construction sites have a lot of silt. Mr. Gebhardt stated there will be 128 homes in the subdivision, and between the time when the 86th and 100th certificate of occupancy is granted, they will be responsible for cleaning the ponds out and getting them approved by Public Works.
Mrs. Crockett asked if any consideration had been given to fencing around the wet cells. Mr. Gebhardt indicated these were designed so as to be more aesthetically pleasing. As far as keeping kids out of it, he noted there will be a very shallow area that extends ten feet around the edge of the water. Mr. Gebhardt reported that cattails or other such plants will be put in this area. He commented the thought behind this is that those types of water plants tend to keep pets and people out. Mrs. Crockett said with the number of homes planned for this subdivision, there are bound to be small children. Mr. Gebhardt agreed there are liability issues that need to be considered.
Don Stohldrier, the developer of the property, addressed some of the concerns mentioned in Mr. Patterson's memo. Regarding the impervious area and how to track it, he thought the amendment would guarantee that it will be done. He noted he would be responsible for preparing the restrictive covenants. Mr. Stohldrier indicated that the owner of the lots will have to submit plans to him prior to building a house. He said they would be tracking it along with Public Works to make sure they know where things are at any given time. Mr. Stohldrier assured the Council that he would make it his business to see that when the majority of the lots have been developed within the subdivision, that he would not have to donate five lots to the City as a park.
Regarding non-structural best management practices on education, Mr. Stohldrier spoke about two publications recommended by Jim Davis for education on household waste, pesticides, the use of such, etc. His plan to assist in the implementation portion of that is to provide each builder with a packet containing information relating to water quality in addition to a copy of the restrictive covenants. He indicated this information will be given at the time the lot is purchased. Through a recorded document, Mr. Stohldrier stated that each subsequent owner of the property will be given a copy of the same documents and required to sign a form stating that they have received such. He said the Title Company will pick that up on each title search as the houses are sold.
Mr. Stohldrier acknowledged that he had not given staff a copy of these documents yet. He reported that he could have a draft set sent to Public Works within two to three weeks. He remarked that he would ensure that the restrictive covenants and documents would be agreed upon prior to the sale of any lots. Mr. Stohldrier thought that doing this at the time of final platting would be too restrictive for him. He said if a separate document is required, he would agree that no lots would be sold until the agreement is worked out to everybody's satisfaction.
Relating to builder education and enforcement, Mr. Stohldrier felt those issues were best handled by Protective Inspection. He said if builders need to be educated, all of them should be, not just the one's that will be working in Bearfield Meadows.
In regards to the maintenance of the small swales and Mr. Patterson's suggestion that these be in place prior to construction of the houses, Mr. Stohldrier believed that would be next to impossible to do. He noted the swales are in permanent easements, and the City has all the tools and resources to maintain them and make sure nothing is built in them. Mr. Stohldrier remarked that he would be happy to file a document with the homeowners's association that advises residents that there are easements around their house, and the grading within these cannot be changed once the City has inspected it. In addition, the document could stipulate that no buildings or fences would be allowed within the easements.
About the concern of the long-term maintenance of the detention structures, Mr. Stohldrier said they have talked about adding to the restrictive covenants a requirement that would make the developer responsible for the construction and maintenance of the detention systems until the issuance of the 100th certificate of occupancy. He explained that should get the subdivision substantially complete and would also tie into the phase that he has in the construction scheduling that says when they would have all of the structures in. Mr. Stohldrier noted that would put the burden on himself to maintain the ponds until that point. After that, these would be inspected by the City, if necessary, so as to determine that they are fully operational and then the ponds would be turned over to the homeowner's association for their maintenance. During the construction phase, the ponds would be used as silt or detention basins. On the two wet cells, Mr. Stohldrier stated they would only be using the pre-sediment area to filter out some of the construction settlements. In the four-bay area, they discussed the possibility of constructing a couple of dams with two sets of rocks so as to ensure the sediment goes through several steps before going into the detention systems. Mr. Stohldrier reported the silt will be taken out of the smaller ponds after the 86th certificate of occupancy is issued. At this point, the small detention structures Mr. Gebhardt spoke about earlier would be installed.
Mr. Stohldrier indicated that Mr. Patterson's summary listed a recommendation that the entire site be graded. He assumed this referred to all easements, side yards, backyards -- everything graded and seeded. Mr. Stohldrier did not see a benefit to doing that. He noted this would disrupt a lot of the existing vegetation and create a worse sediment problem. When the builder comes in and begins constructing homes, much of this work will be torn up and the lot will have to be regraded. He did not know how anyone could possibly grade yards for 128 homes in advance of them being built. Mr. Stohldrier stated that every one of the yards will be inspected by Public Works prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. The second recommendation made by Mr. Patterson was that building permits be limited to ten at any given time. Mr. Stohldrier remarked that would be overly restrictive. He said it would drag the subdivision out over a development period of six to eight years which would take away any competitive edge he might have.
Mr. Campbell noted that Mr. Stohldrier had said several times that he would prepare documents before selling any lots. Mr. Stohldrier said that was correct -- it would avoid getting a third person involved in any problems that may arise. He said it would be between himself and the City and he would sign a separate document agreeing to that. Mr. Campbell asked if he would feel comfortable with another amendment stating that such a document would be prepared before any lots were sold and approved by City staff. Mr. Stohldrier said that is exactly what he will do, and he would not have a problem with a further amendment in that respect. He commented that he will try to get a packet of all of the documents he has talked about to Protective Inspection in about three weeks or less.
Tony Davis, 4655 Rock Quarry Road, said a lot of very good things have come about in the last year relating to this project, some of which are above and beyond what the residents expected when this whole process first started. He said the issues talked about this evening are very good if there can be contracts, agreements, and things put in writing that the engineer and the developer will agree to that are clearly understood. Mr. Davis did not think it was prudent to move ahead too quickly and approve this plan until everyone clearly understands those issues can be carried out. He admitted that he did not quite understand all of it yet.
Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Montgomery his feelings about the amendment.
Mr. Montgomery said the amendment prepared today responds, either partially or entirely, to a couple of concerns outlined in Mr. Patterson's report of last week. He thought the wet extended ponds would do a better job of filtering storm water run-off and come a lot closer to meeting their expectations as to water quality than the dry cells would have. He concurred that to keep the eastern small cells as dry cells would be appropriate. Regarding the enforcement of the 30% impervious area, Mr. Montgomery believed what was arrived at, and putting a good bit of the burden for the measurement and calculations on the builder and submitting it prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, would allow staff and the developer to keep a running total. He said it should be very accurate and the only room for changes would be if following the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, someone installed a small non-permanent out building, or added on to their patios or things that would not require a building permit. He said there would probably be a little of that occurring which might affect the overall sizing. Mr. Montgomery felt the plan was pretty well laid-out to address the 30% impervious are. He thought the staff could work with it and keep a running total.
In an attempt to respond to Mr. Davis, Mr. Montgomery said as you read Mr. Patterson's report, there were issues tied into the original letter of intent. He said there had been an unsettled feeling amongst the staff that they just really were not sure how this would fall together -- what the actual mechanics were and who is really going to be maintaining what during what period of time. He remarked for the staff to get out there and have a multitude of builders constructing homes, the City should have access to a contact person who is responsible for taking care of maintenance issues as the project progresses. Mr. Montgomery reported that by having those issues outlined in an agreement with the developer, or in a restrictive covenant, should be able to provide staff with that level of protection. He noted they need to have someone that can respond to the City both during construction and following it. He said the suggestion to have it prior to selling lots would probably be acceptable to staff. Mr. Montgomery stated staff should be sent something in writing as soon as possible so it can be reviewed by attorneys for both the City and the developer.
Mr. Campbell made the motion to further amend B276-00 by adding a Section 3 to read as follows: "The developer shall prepare and record covenants for the Bearfield Meadows P.U.D. acceptable to the City and shall enter into an agreement with the City concerning the building and maintenance of water control structures prior to the first lot being sold." The motion was seconded by Mrs. Crockett
Mayor Hindman asked Mr. Montgomery if that would satisfy the staff. Mr. Montgomery thought it would go a long way to describe the mechanisms of maintenance so that enforcement action can be taken and to assure that maintenance occurs during the construction phase, which is very critical.
Mr. Coffman said he had reservations and wished Mr. Patterson were here to enjoy the discussion with the Council. He felt there was a consensus that the Council was willing to accept what is in front of them, and perhaps compromise a bit further because they understand the developer has been put at a place in time where the City is trying to develop a policy for this watershed. It was his preference to table the issue to allow more time for digestion and thought.
The motion to further amend B276-00, made by Mr. Campbell, seconded by Mrs. Crockett, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
With respect to the suggestions made by Mr. Patterson, Mr. Janku commented that obviously if the standards adopted here do not work, although there is no expectation they will not, there are steps that could be identified for further development as it occurs in this area.
Mr. John noted this is a plan that addresses storm water management issues. He pointed out that Columbia is not similar to St. Louis or Kansas City where developers are of a size that would enable them to build 120 homes in a season or two. In addition, if that were to occur, Mr. John said all the homes would look the same. To try to restrict construction of homes to ten at a time would stretch the development way out. Furthermore, to require that all of the grading must be done in advance of construction would be counter to the stipulation that no more than 10 homes be built at any one time. Mr. John did not think either would be best for this development. He believed the best thing was to get the storm water retention in place in advance of construction, and then stage by stage add the infrastructure and make sure it is graded, seeded and strawed. Mr. John noted that the City has rules and ways of managing erosion control. He thought the silt retention ponds should protect the stream.
Mr. John believed this is a good plan and suggested that the Council realize that they have stepped off the abyss as a City. He reported that the Council has required storm water control and storm water management for this project, and the Public Works Department and Protective Inspection Division will ensure that those requirements are met and can be managed.
Mrs. Crockett agreed with Mr. John and said she thought the grading should be done lot by lot. She said this developer and his engineer have gone above and beyond what had been requested of them. Mrs. Crockett thought it was time to let the developer get on with his business.
Mayor Hindman was pleased about the progress that has been made. He felt a lot had been learned all the way around. Although the community still needs to consider the sensitive nature of the watershed, Mayor Hindman believed this plan was a step in the right direction. He remarked there will be a lot more challenges in this area.
B276-00, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B279-00 Authorizing antenna agreements
with various communications companies for lease of space on the
Shepard water tower property.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained being proposed is a 190 foot monopole that would allow for four cell phone companies to utilize the tower. He said these companies would be paying the City about $60,000 per year for lease of the ground. Mr. Beck reported these agreements are subject to approval of a height variance by the Board of Adjustment.
Mr. Janku asked in which fund the money would go. Mr. Beck said the money would go to the Water and Light Department because the tower would be located on Water and Light property. The antennas on Fire Department property go in the General Fund because the Fire Department is a general fund operation.
Don Mitchell, Devine Tower International with offices at 2810 LeMone Industrial Boulevard, explained that his company will be doing the infrastructure build out for TeleCorp, who is the lead carrier. Mr. Mitchell offered to answer any questions.
B279-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B280-00 Accepting a law Enforcement
Block Grant; appropriating funds.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Chief Boehm explained that this is a federal local law enforcement block grant. He noted this is the fourth year it has been available to the City. He reported it is one of the few grants that enables his department to purchase equipment. Chief Boehm indicated that most of the funding will go toward a scan print system that would primarily do away with the old fingerprint ink. He said fingerprints would be taken with a scan screen which would automatically read the prints to ensure they are identifiable. These would then be sent to the Missouri State Highway Patrol to be checked against other prints with a 24-hour turnaround.
B280-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B311-00 Amending the local parks sales
tax ballot language in Ordinance No. 016564.
The bill was given first reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Boeckmann explained that when the ballot language was prepared, he failed to include the words "for the municipality", which is the prescribed language in the statute. He said this ordinance would change the ballot language to include that and also change City of Columbia to "municipality of Columbia".
Henry Lane, 1816 E. Broadway, remarked that he thought the ballot language in its final form had to be submitted to the County Clerk by August 29. He asked if this change was legal. Mr. Boeckmann explained that ballot language has to be submitted 10 weeks before the election, but changes to such can be made up to six weeks before the election with a court order. He indicated that he would be pursuing a court order in the morning.
B311-00 was given second and third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
The following bills were given second reading and the resolutions were read by the Clerk.
B260-00 Amending Chapter 2 of the Code
to reestablish a procedure to disclose potential conflicts of interest.
B265-00 Confirming the contract of Don Schnieders Excavating Company for the construction of the Bear
Creek Trail Phase I Bridge project.
B267-00 Authorizing the acquisition of land necessary to construct Smith Drive from Windermere Drive west
B268-00 Authorizing an agreement with the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission for funding
associated with the construction of the Garth Avenue bridge over Bear Creek.
B269-00 Authorizing a right of use permit with the University of Missouri to install a sewer line in a public
easement on Parkade Boulevard.
B273-00 Vacating sanitary sewer easements located within McKee Estates, Plat No. 1.
B274-00 Approving the final plat of McKee Estates, Plat No. 1; authorizing a performance contract.
B277-00 Accepting easements for utility purposes.
B278-00 Authorizing the Cedar Oak Mobile Home Park to resell city water to the tenants of the mobile home
R174-00 Setting a public hearing: water main construction serving Spring Creek, Plat 1.
R175-00 Setting a public hearing: relocation and upgrade of water main along Route B from Vandiver Drive to
Business Loop 70.
R176-00 Setting a public hearing: the FY 2001 Action Plan and an amendment to the FY 1999 Action Plan.
R177-00 Setting a public hearing: repainting runway and taxiway markings at Columbia Regional Airport.
R178-00 Authorizing Amendment No. 3 to agreement with Horner & Shifrin, Inc. for engineering design
services in connection with the Police Building Renovation Project.
R179-00 Authorizing an adopt a spot agreement with Shelley Soligo.
R180-00 Renewing an agreement with the Central Missouri Humane Society.
R181-00 Renewing an agreement with the State of Missouri for the Maternal Child Health Program.
The bills were given third reading and the resolutions
were read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU,
CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bills declared
enacted and resolutions declared adopted, reading as follows:
R182-00 Authorizing application for FY 2000 STP Enhancement Funds.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that staff had previously discussed with the Council the application for enhancement funds. Staff's recommendations are for the MKT underpass at Providence and the Wabash Station Project.
The vote on R182-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. 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:
B289-00 Calling for bids for the repainting
of runway and taxiway markings at Columbia Regional Airport.
B290-00 Approving Change Order No. 1 and approving the engineer's final report for the construction of the
West Ash Street Sidewalk Project.
B291-00 Approving Change Order A to the contract with Huebert Builders, Inc. for the renovation of the Police
B292-00 Approving change orders to the contract with Huebert Builders, Inc. for the renovation of the Daniel
Boone Building lobby.
B293-00 Authorizing a right of use permit to allow the University of Missouri to install a storm sewer line within
the University Avenue right of way.
B294-00 Amending Chapter 14 of the Code to prohibit parking on portions of Waterloo Drive.
B295-00 Amending Chapter 14 of the Code to prohibit parking on both sides of Westwinds Drive near
B296-00 Calling for bids for the construction of sanitary sewer improvements known as the Cow Branch Pump
Station, force man and outfall, and trunk sewers CB-4 and CB-5.
B297-00 Authorizing application and execution of FTA grant documents for FY 2001.
B298-00 Approving the final plat of Russell Subdivision, Plat 2.
B299-00 Approving the final plat of Ewing Industrial Park, Plat 5; authorizing a performance contract.
B300-00 Approving the final plat of The Highlands, Plat 12-C, a replat of The Highlands, Plat 12-B.
B301-00 Approving the final plat of Victoria South, Plat 2; authorizing a performance contract.
B302-00 Rezoning property located on the south side of Clark Lane, east of Crump Lane from Districts A-1,
R-2, and O-P to Districts C-P and O-P.
B303-00 Authorizing construction of 12-inch water main serving Spring Creek, Plat 1; authorizing payment of
differential costs; appropriating funds.
B304-00 Calling for bids for the relocation and upgrade of water main along Route B from Vandiver Drive to
Business Loop 70; appropriating funds.
B305-00 Accepting grants of easements for electric utility purposes.
B306-00 Amending the agreement with the State of Missouri to receive additional funding for the HIV
Prevention Program; appropriating funds.
B307-00 Discontinuing the Computer Advisory Committee; establishing the Internet Citizens Advisory Group;
adopting a Statement of Purpose for the City's web page.
B308-00 Amending Chapter 18 of the City Code as it relates to pensions for firefighters.
B309-00 Appropriating funds collected from the sale of the Centennial History Book to offset publication costs.
B310-00 Accepting a Missouri Police Chiefs Association Step Grant; appropriating funds.
B312-00 Authorizing an agreement with Central Missouri Counties Human Development Corporation for the
purchase and lease of city-owned property located at Rangeline and Wilkes.
B313-00 Amending Chapter 19 of the Code relating to Personnel Policies, Procedures, Rules and Regulations.
B314-00 Amending the FY 2000 Classification Plan and adopting the FY 2001 Pay Plan.
REPORTS AND PETITIONS
A) Intra-Departmental Transfer of Funds
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
COMMENTS OF COUNCIL, STAFF, AND PUBLIC
Mr. Janku asked for a staff report on which provisions of the sign ordinance will be applicable to the potential extension of Providence Road north.
Mr. John had a question about large construction dumpsters that are allowed to be placed in the streets temporarily. He asked if they are to be put in the public right of way, and if so, should reflectors be required on them. Mr. John noted that with some of them not being square to the street, he said these tend to pose a hazard. Mr. Montgomery said he did not have all of the answers, but Mr. John's point was well-taken and the staff would look into it. He thought private dumpsters were also being put out that the City does not service. Mr. Coffman said he had received similar calls relating to two different subdivisions. He agreed it was a safety hazard and suggested the City have some sort of standard policy about them. He liked the reflector suggestion.
Mr. Coffman asked if there are sites people can take their commingled blue bag recycling items to if they do not have a place to put them on the curb. He had received a call from an apartment dweller. Mr. Campbell suggested Gerbes where there are two bins, one of which is for commingled recyclables. Mrs. Crockett suggested Civic Recycling as well.
Mayor Hindman commented that he has received several complaints regarding a dumpster in the alley between Eighth and Ninth Streets by the parking garage. The complaints are that it is ugly, dirty, and smelly. He asked the staff to look into the situation. Mr. Janku thought the Council had authorized the staff to make the necessary acquisition of property to relocate that dumpster. Mayor Hindman remarked that the dumpster needs to be serviced more frequently as well as needing to be relocated elsewhere. Mr. Beck said the staff is still pursuing the property purchase.
Fred Springsteel, 311 Longfellow, spoke about the status of the Metro 2020 Plan. He understood there was to be another public hearing on the current content of the plan. He also commented on the outdoor lighting report. Mr. Springsteel thought the Planning and Zoning Department should be the enforcer of such. He did not think it should be referred to a conference between the Planning and Zoning chair and a member of staff. Mr. Springsteel also noted that he had written to the Council suggesting a joint work session with the Energy & Environment Commission's Subcommittee on the lighting ordinance and some Planning and Zoning Commission members.
The meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m.
© 2016 City of Columbia