APRIL 7, 1997

    The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri, met for a regular meeting at 7:40 p.m., on Monday April 7, 1997, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri.  The roll was taken with the following results:  Council members CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, and CROCKETT were present.  The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also present.

    The minutes of the regular meeting of March 17, 1997, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Ms. Coble.

    Mayor Hindman noted that Report F would be added under Reports and Petitions.
    The agenda, as amended, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Ms. Coble and a second by Mr. Janku.

A.     Community skateboard park report.
    Mr. Green noted that this had been discussed previously and that a public hearing had been held regarding the issue by the Parks and Recreation Commission.  He explained that the report gives some options if the Council desires to develop a skateboard park.  He said locations were also listed that might be considered.  Mr. Green noted that the report also mentioned the possibility of appointing an ad hoc committee to work with the staff on developing a recommendation.
    Mr. Green reported possible sites for a skateboard park were broken down into two categories:  Properties the City owns and properties the City does not own.  City owned properties mentioned were as follows: 1) the area behind the old Armory; 2) a location in the Cosmo Recreation area; 3) Oakland Park; and 4) an existing parking facility, including one of the ramps or garages.  Non-City owned locations were: 1) a couple of lots east of Columbia College (should the Council wish to purchase); and 2) the area adjacent to Field School.
    Mr. Janku noted that the report mentioned different options in terms of size or types of facilities.  He said one option had a cost of $350,000 with a 5 acre in-ground facility and parking.  He asked if there was a model for it somewhere else.  Mr. Green said there was one in Columbus, Ohio and they were in their second year of operation.  Mr. Janku asked if there was any city, comparable to Columbia, that has something similar that could be used as a model.  Mr. Green was not aware of any organized skateboard park close to Columbia.  He said there was a facility in Kirkwood that was dismantled.  Mr. Green said there were some areas in St. Louis that are privately used for skateboard purposes.  Mr. Janku asked if there had been any discussion with the University since the students would probably be frequent users.  Mr. Green said there had been discussions with the Recreation Director and the comment received was that  the University is trying to keep skateboarders off of their property.
    Mr. Kruse asked if the alternatives mentioned in the report were considered to be permanent locations or, if in some cases, they were thought to be temporary locations until some more permanent facility could be put together.  Mr. Green said he thought it could be either.  In order to have any of the locations, there would have to be some City expenditure to ensure that the park would be appropriate or suitable.  Mr. Green said a very smooth surface is needed and none of the existing parking facilities, parks, or roadways would sufficiently meet this requirement.  For approximately $10,000, the Armory area could be overlaid and fenced.  Mr. Green said then if users wanted to construct or purchase their own apparatus, that would be allowable.  Literature on commercial apparatus, half pipes, and obstacle courses has been obtained.  Prices for these items ranged from $15,000 to $50,000.  Mr. Kruse said a constituent suggested that one location for a temporary facility might be the old fairgrounds in the horse show arena.  He asked that this location be added to the list, probably as a temporary location.
    Mr. Janku asked if the facilities could be moved around.  Mr. Green replied that it would not be impossible to move them, but the equipment would need to be dismantled and put on the back of a truck to be taken elsewhere.  He said these items usually range from six to eight feet high and 20 feet wide.  The commercial structures are made out of wood and the half pipe is lined with stainless steel.
    Mayor Hindman thought the Council should appoint an ad hoc committee.  Ms. Coble felt there should be people on the committee who would be consumers and others that have expressed interest through the years.  The consensus was that a committee should not be hand-picked.  Mayor Hindman suggested that the committee be advertised so the Council could determine the interest, and then go from there.
    Mr. Campbell suggested that the committee not limit their findings to just a public facility.  He asked that the committee consider a public/private partnership, how it might be financed, as well as other aspects.
    Mayor Hindman noted that before any official action is taken, public hearings would be held.


B76-97     Amending Chapter 29 of the City Code relating to family day care homes.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that the purpose of this amendment was to have provisions similar to those that exist in the state regulations.
    Mr. Campbell said when he requested that this issue be referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission, he asked that the issue of privacy fences (at the option of the adjacent land owners) also be addressed.  He asked why that had not been included in the amendment.  Mr. Bondra said the Planning and Zoning Commission had discussed this at a work session along with the privacy fence issue.  He said one of the problems had been giving the neighbors the option of enforcing the privacy fence.  He said Mr. Boeckmann felt that would not be a workable procedure.  Mr. Bondra said his impression was that the Commission did not feel the privacy fence was necessary.  Mr. Boeckmann said it had been a legal issue of delegation of authority.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Mark Langworthy, 4412 Shoram Court, spoke in support of the amendments.  He has been very happy with home day care for his children and was concerned that if the amendment was not adopted, they would have to find other day care.  He said the cost would probably double.  Mr. Langworthy explained that he is employed by a local bank and noted that many of his fellow employees have their children in home day care.  He said a lot of those people would have to quit their jobs because they could not afford the increased day care costs.  He did not think privacy fences should be required.
    Mary Bowen, 504 Hulen Drive, a home day care provider, spoke in favor of the amendment.  She felt it would be in the community's best interest.
    In terms of the numbers of children and the restrictions on the number of employees, Mr. Janku asked Ms. Bowen if she was comfortable with the numbers.  Ms. Bowen said she felt comfortable with the numbers.
    Ms. Coble asked about the Department of Health and the ratio standard.  Ms. Bowen said the ratio for ages two and up was one worker for ten children.
    Carrie Watson, 2506 N. Garth, spoke in favor of the amendments.  She felt that smaller groups were better for her child.
    Laurie Menz, 1612 Jesse Lane, mother of two daughters ages four and six, also spoke in favor of the bill.  She felt strongly about quality day care and as a psychologist, she was familiar with the research on quality day care.  She said it shows that it enhances children's development in terms of social skills, cognitive development, self esteem, and math skills.  Ms. Menz said with home day care she was hiring a person who could talk to her about her children and their development, not an institution with changing staff members.
    Mr. Campbell asked how long the average home day care center operated.  He wanted to know if it was something these people did while their children were growing up, or if it was something they made a career out of.  Carrie Watson said her day care provider had been in the business for 15 years and waited  until her children were already in school before opening a day care.
    Lois Honeycutt, 628 Hunt Ridge Drive, said that she and her husband both were employed by the University and they had deliberately chosen home day care.  She said their day care provider had been in business eight years.  Mrs. Honeycutt said that her two children have a substitute family and they were together all day, which would not be possible in a center with age divisions.
    Christa Stone, 1305 Fairview Road, as a supervisor in a downtown business, said it was very difficult to locate quality candidates because of the low unemployment rate in Columbia.  Her concern was the number of employee candidates would be decreased if mothers were forced to stay home with their children.
    Mary Ann Pabst, 807 Spencer, is an employee of the Child Care Connection.  One of her duties is to help parents find child care.  She had a stack of petitions in support of the changes to the ordinance.  These were given to the City Clerk.   Regarding the longevity of providers, she said the average number of years they stay in business is 11 years.  Ms. Pabst said there were people at the Planning and Zoning meeting that have been providing service for 20 plus years.
    Mr. Janku asked if the restriction on the number of employees was too limiting.  Ms. Pabst said the cost for more than one full time equivalent employee would probably be prohibitive to most of the providers she knows.
    Regarding privacy fences, Mr. Campbell said complaints had been received three or four years ago about the noise and sight of some day care centers.  He said privacy fences had been built at some of the day care centers to help alleviate these problems.  He asked if many of the home day care facilities had privacy fences.  Ms. Pabst said a phone survey had been conducted and it was her opinion that of all the licensed day care providers in Columbia, about three already had privacy fences.  Most of those surveyed indicated it would be a financial hardship to erect such a fence.  A privacy fence would cost approximately $2500.  State regulations already require a chain link fence.  Ms. Pabst said about 30% of the licensed child care providers live in rental homes and they asked about fencing under these circumstances.
    Connie Seymour, an employee of Buckles and Bows, 1906 Rose Drive, spoke in support of the amendments.
    Kathy Wallace, 2905 Burrwood Drive, explained that her employer was EduCare Columbia, an educational program trying to raise the quality of care for home day care providers.  She spoke in favor of the amendment.  In an effort to raise the professionalism of day care providers, it was preferable for home day cares to be licensed and to work within the regulations.  She said if an agency exists that sets standards following state regulations and the City of Columbia does not replicate those standards, it lowers the respect for the licensing agency.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Campbell said he was very much in favor of the bill.  He said while privacy fencing would be preferable, he would not support this issue because of the cost involved.
    Mrs. Crockett was concerned about the fencing.  She said there was a possibility of having day cares with up to 13 children on both sides of a home.  She was aware of the great need for home day care providers and problems that would be experienced by those people who rent and also take care of children.  Because of those reasons, Mrs. Crockett is in favor of amending the ordinance.  Mrs. Crockett said if the noise got too unbearable, there was always the noise ordinance that could be enforced.
    Mr. Kruse said in his Ward there are four rental homes in a row that are all being used as in-home day care centers.  He had received major complaints from adjacent property owners.  The landlord eventually installed a privacy fence along the back property line and, when the fence was installed, the complaints ended.  He did not think the fence helped with the noise much, but thought the visibility issue had been a part of it as well.   Mr. Kruse did not feel the Council should push the fencing issue, but said if a lot of complaints are received, the issue should be reexamined.  Mr. Kruse said home day cares were not high revenue businesses, but as businesses they should be expected to respect the rights of adjacent property owners.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if the home day cares were required to have a business license.  Mr. Beck said they were not classified under the home occupations ordinance and they were not required to have a business license.  Mrs. Crockett asked why a license was not required.  Mr. Boeckmann said some home occupations were required to be licensed and they were listed in the code.  Mrs. Crockett suggested that it be looked into.
    Mr. Janku asked in terms of future activity, if the Council could at a later date require privacy fencing or if this would be grandfathered in.  Mr. Boeckmann said he did not think it would be.  Certain regulations could be imposed retroactively.
     Mr. Campbell said this was a very necessary and important occupation and he thought the Council should facilitate it.
    Mr. Janku thought the Council could be more flexible with the number of employees, but if the operators were comfortable with the language he would not propose an amendment.
    B76-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

R40-97     Approving FY 1996 CDBG and HOME Performance Report.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this was a required public hearing on the work that has been accomplished in the City using Community Development Block Grant funds as well as HOME funds during FY 1996.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    The vote on R40-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

B77-97     Authorizing an agreement with the Highway and Transportation Commission for sidewalk
                  construction on Route B from Route 63 to Business Loop 70.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this would provide for the construction of sidewalks that would be built along the east side of Route B from the 63 overpass to Business Loop 70 East.  He said the estimated cost had changed drastically from the original discussion.  Costs had been originally estimated at $60,000 and now had increased to $122,610.00.  The reasons for the increased cost was explained in the Council memo.
    Mr. Janku appreciated that there would be a bridge at I-70.  He asked if this would extend to or past Business Loop 70.  When coming from the north, Mr. Janku said one also had to cross the Business Loop and there was no sidewalk.  Mr. Patterson said it would stop north of Business Loop 70.  Sidewalks did not extend all of the way to the bridge because the project ends at that point.  Mr. Patterson said staff also had a concern about it.  Mr. Janku asked if the City was to try to address this issue separately from the project, whether the state would be supportive.  Mr. Patterson said he thought they would be, provided it was City money going in to it.
    Mayor Hindman asked how one would get across Interstate 70.  Mr. Patterson said a bridge was included in the project.  This was the additional cost for the separate sidewalk over the new bridge.  Mayor Hindman asked if he understood that the new bridge would be built by the Highway Department and that it would have a separate sidewalk on it.  Mr. Patterson said that was correct.  He said this was staff's estimation of the additional cost.  Mr. Patterson said what the Council was doing tonight was actually entering into an agreement for the entire sidewalk funding.  Mayor Hindman asked if there would be a new bridge on Business Loop 70.  Mr. Patterson said there would not, the project stops north of the Business Loop.
    Mr. Janku suggested that at some point the City should obtain some information on what the state's plans were for how the five lanes would terminate.  Mr. Patterson said staff had the designs and it was anticipated that quite a bit of the traffic would be directed to the Business Loop.  He said at some point staff would have to address the Paris Road needs south of the project, but at this time there were no funds for it.  Mr. Patterson said staff would get the drawings out and send them to the City Manager's office for the Council to see.
    Mr. Beck said it looked to him like the only other real ramp on to Paris Road, unless Paris Road becomes a more severely used road, would be just south of the bridge.
    Mr. Janku said he would support the ordinance because the project needed to be moved forward.  He thought eventually options should be explored for the bridge over Business Loop 70.  Mr. Janku said the usefulness of the expensive sidewalk would be lost if people are deterred from using it because of the high volumes of traffic on such a narrow bridge.
    B77-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

B78-97     Authorizing land acquisition for the Route PP improvement project.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this was the continuation of work on the project that will extend about one-half mile east of the US 63 connector.
    Mayor Hindman asked if this included right-of-way for sidewalks.  Mr. Patterson said a report had gone to the Council last summer about the problems of getting this project accelerated and the lack of desire on the part of the property owners in the area.  In order to keep this moving, staff indicated that they would come back and do the grading within the right-of-way, but any additional land necessary for sidewalks (sidewalks to be put in by donations of the property owners) would not hold up the project.  Mayor Hindman asked if anything had been done about the sidewalks.  Mr. Patterson said the property owners had been contacted, but there had been no response from them.  In negotiations, the City indicated its willingness to pay for a sidewalk if the property owners would donate the land for it.  Mayor Hindman assumed staff had not been overwhelmed by donations.  Mr. Patterson said that was a correct assumption.
    Mayor Hindman asked of the status on sidewalks.  Mr. Patterson said the City has the option of changing its position of requiring donations of right-of-way for sidewalk construction by enacting condemnation proceedings if the Council so wished.   He said staff was trying to separate the issues so as to not delay this project because of the sidewalks.  Mr. Patterson said that did not mean that the options for constructing sidewalks were changing.  At the time the report was submitted to the Council, Mr. Patterson understood direction to be to separate the projects.  The City would attempt to get the right-of-way donated by the residents and, if the homeowners did not agree to this, the sidewalks would not be built.
    Mr. Campbell thought he remembered a six figure amount for putting in the sidewalks.  Mr. Patterson thought the cost of sidewalks on one side of the street, assuming the grading was done and the right-of-way was obtained, was about $35,000.  He said that did not include the cost of obtaining the right-of-way, just construction.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if the City could tax bill the property owners for the sidewalk.  In accordance with policy, Mr. Patterson said it could be assessed if it was not on the Master Sidewalk Plan.
    Mr. Beck was hopeful this project would be underway this construction season, but he did not see it moving very fast if the right-of-way had to be acquired.  He understood that if the Council interjected sidewalk right-of-way acquisition as part of this project, it would have to go back through the Highway Department review channels.  Mr. Patterson said if the City included sidewalks in this project, that was what would happen.  Mr. Patterson said that was why the projects had been attempted to be kept completely separate.
    Mrs. Crockett said this project needed to be moved forward and sidewalks could be constructed at a later date.  Mayor Hindman guessed this was the only alternative, but it seemed the City never was able to build sidewalks as part of a project.
    Mr. Beck noted that funds for this project were being taken out of the ballot issue funds, but there was not a great deal of money for sidewalks in the last ballot issue.  He said just doing Route B would literally take up miles in other parts of the community where right-of-way exists.
    Mayor Hindman recognized the problem and was not in favor of stopping the Route PP project because of it.  Had the residents really wanted sidewalks in the first place and decided that this should be done as part of the project from the very beginning, Mayor Hindman asked if it would have been cheaper in the long run to have planned the sidewalks.  Mr. Beck said the grading would have been.  However, if there were a lot of driveways and that sort of thing constructed at a later date, it was not necessarily always the best to build a sidewalk before the development occurs.  As far as building sidewalks, Mr. Beck said it would probably be cheaper to complete a project all at once.  He said when driveway approaches are constructed, the sidewalk usually is not designed for the thickness needed to carry trucks and the like.  Mr. Campbell said oftentimes the problem is that the projects are planned by the Highway Department and the City tries to insert sidewalks after the fact.
     Mr. Janku thought Route B was in a CDBG eligible area and staff may want to look there for funding so options would be preserved in the rest of the community with the limited sidewalk funds from the ballot issue.  Mr. Janku originally thought that the north side of the street was the best side for the sidewalk, but acquiesced when the staff and Council decided otherwise.  Mr. Janku said if the south side home owners were going to be that resistant, he thought staff should look at the other side of the street to see if land acquisition would be cheaper and quicker.
    Mrs. Crockett said the City was in dire need of roads in this area and asked that nothing be done to keep this project from being built.
    B78-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B79-97     Calling for bids for street construction on Silvey Street from West Broadway to Worley
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that the estimated cost for this project was $468,000, with a large part coming from the one-quarter percent sales tax.  He said the tax bill rate would be approximately $10.25 per abutting foot.  Mr. Beck stated the project would extend the new roadway from Broadway to Worley.
    B79-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B80-97     Confirming the contract for storm drainage construction and improvements in the Jackson
                  Street area, and appropriating funds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck commented that nine bids had been received on this particular project.  The low bid of Aplex, Inc. from Linn, Missouri, of $59,403 was being recommended.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if the City had worked with this company before.  Mr. Patterson said this company had been doing work in the area and staff has not experienced any problems with them.
    B80-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B81-97     Confirming the contract for construction of the 4th and Cherry Streets parking lot, and
                  appropriating funds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck commented that the low bid had been Richardson and Bass Construction Company for asphaltic concrete pavement in the amount of $59,467.   Ms. Coble said she had been asked what types of public amenities there would be, either in this particular lot or in the plans for the Sixth and Cherry parking structure.  Mr. Beck said there would be none in this metered lot.
    B81-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B82-97     Confirming the contract for construction of the 6th and Cherry Streets parking structure,
                  and appropriating funds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said very good bids had also been received on this project, five in all.  The low bid of the Paric Corporation in the amount of $3,748,800 was being recommended.  Mr. Beck noted that the architect has had experience with this company.  The parking structure would provide 381 parking spaces and would be paid for by parking utility funds.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if this parking garage would have the same type of metered situation as the one on Tenth.  Mr. Patterson said it would have a single pay system which is similar, but this structure will have coin changing capabilities.  Mrs. Crockett had heard complaints about the Tenth and Cherry parking structure and was happy to see the instructions regarding the payment method included with her utility bill.  She suggested doing that several more times throughout the year to familiarize users with the method.  Mr. Patterson said staff would continue efforts to make it more user friendly.
    B82-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B83-97     Appropriating funds to purchase phone equipment for the new fire station.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this purchase would provide a direct connection between the City building and the new fire station.
    B83-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B84-97     Appropriating funds to develop a City web site on the Internet.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said this was the program the Council discussed with the staff during the last budget hearings.  He said funds had been set aside to develop this Internet program.
    Mr. Janku asked if the annual recurring costs were something that would be divided between the various departments.   Mr. Beck said it was budgeted in an internal revolving account and could be pro-rated.
    Mayor Hindman said several citizens had asked him for the opportunity to have some input into the design of the page.  He asked if staff was at that stage.  Mr. Pope said the Mayor had indicated he would supply him with a list of names.  Mayor Hindman said if staff was at that point, he would forward those names to Mr. Pope.
    Mr. Coffman asked who the City would be contracting with to develop the site and what the recurring services would be.  Mr. Pope said most of the work would be performed by City staff, but the service provider would be MoreNet.  Mr. Coffman asked if the $16,000 would be used for monitoring or maintaining the site, and if it would include regular updating.  Mr. Pope said funds would be used for monitoring and regular updating of the site in addition to the T-1 facility.  Mr. Coffman asked about the design.  Mr. Pope explained that several designs have been developed by his department.  In addition, there will be comments and suggestions received from the people the Mayor spoke of earlier who also wanted to have input into the design.  Mr. Pope said staff will meet with those folks and look at options.
    Mayor Hindman asked that anyone wanting to participate to contact him.  Mr. Campbell said he would also like to have an opportunity to review the site.
    Mr. Janku said it was great to have input, but his sense was that staff was ready to move forward and the Council should not hold things back.
    B84-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

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

B75-97     Approving the final plat of Thessalia, Plat 1.
R41-97     Setting public hearing regarding tax billing for improvements to Sanitary Sewer District No.
                  143 (Smiley Lane West).
R42-97     Setting public hearing regarding tax billing for improvements to Sanitary Sewer District No.
                  147 (Smiley Lane East).
R43-97     Setting a public hearing regarding landscape work on land north of the Daniel Boone
R44-97     Setting public hearing regarding improvements to parking lots at Nifong Park.

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

R45-97     Authorizing an agreement with Boone Electric Cooperative to provide underground cable
                  locating services.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that Mr. Malon worked on this program with Mr. Alderson of Boone Electric Cooperative.  He said it was felt this would help the customers in both jurisdictions.  Boone Electric would reimburse the City for doing underground locating within six miles of the central part of the City.  Mr. Beck reported there were a series of this kind of program staff was working on with different agencies around Columbia.
    The vote on R45-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R46-97     Approving the preliminary plat of Scottswood.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this proposed 27-acre plat had been recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission.  He said that 79, R-1 lots were shown on the plat.
    Mr. Campbell noted that there was no connection shown to the commercial shopping area in terms of walkways or automobile traffic.  He asked if that was usual policy.  Mr. Bondra said in this case the developer had not stubbed any streets into the commercial area.  Mr. Bondra said he had heard Mr. Hancock say that the owners were not entirely sure what they were going to do with the remainder of this property, which is presently zoned C-P.  He said it was possible the City could receive a request for a change in zoning.
    Mayor Hindman noted that there were many cul-de-sacs.  He was concerned that there did not appear to be any pedestrian access from the cul-de-sacs to Scott Boulevard.  Mayor Hindman asked if this had been discussed with the developer in that the Council passed a resolution encouraging vehicular and pedestrian connections.  He said since that suggestion had been made, the Mayor thought there had been only one developer to follow those guidelines.
    Mr. Patterson explained that he had been in a meeting with Mr. Hancock and the developer of the property, and Mr. Hancock did specifically ask about both vehicular and pedestrian connections.  He said the developer's response had been that due to the grade differentials, it would be necessary to grade the commercial area where it could be usable for development.  Mr. Patterson said staff requested that pedestrian access be considered, but it was not shown.
    Mr. Campbell had considerable difficulty accepting this explanation and approving this particular layout without some comprehensive plan.  He said if the developer was going to make this plat a residential area that would be fine, but if so, there should be access shown.  Mr. Campbell said if it was going to be a neighborhood commercial development, he felt it should be tied into the development process.
    Mr. Janku said he had reviewed the minutes where the Council approved the C-P zoning, and the issue of access from the residential area to the commercial area had been brought up at that time.  He said it was hard to speak for seven members, but thought it was the Council's intention that one reason the planned commercial zoning for this area had been approved was the idea there would be some type of access to the residential area.  At that time, Mr. Janku thought the regulations prohibited pathways between residential and commercial areas, but since that time it had been repealed.
    Mr. Kruse suggested that the Council may be at the point where pathways should be required.  He was not sure voluntary compliance was being attempted.  He recalled this rezoning clearly and said the Council urged increasing the numbers of acres to be rezoned to C-P because they were very interested in the notion of having a neighborhood commercial development in this area.  Mr. Kruse did not think it made any sense to not connect it in some way.
    Mayor Hindman agreed.  He said this was not good for school children or people who want to take the bus.  He said the City tries to provide a public transportation system, but developments like this discourage people from using such because it is not accessible.  He thought this was an extreme use of cul-de-sacs and said the Council should do what they could to ameliorate the situation.  Mayor Hindman said he could not support the request.
    Mr. Kruse thought the concern developers had was giving up a lot or two.  Mayor Hindman said the City should make sure that developers are not penalized for allowing access.
    Mr. Patterson said since this was a preliminary plat, the Council would have the option of putting a condition on it regarding the accesses rather than denial of it.  He said the Council could stipulate the number of pedestrian or vehicle accesses.
    Mr. Campbell said if the Council directed that vehicular access be provided to the new area, that would require some replatting.  In addition, the number of walkways the Council was contemplating would also require some adjustment of the lot lines.
    Mrs. Crockett said if there was not an ordinance in effect saying that there had to be a walkway to a commercial area, she did not see how the Council could deny this request.  Mr. Boeckmann said frequently when the Council sees a plat they do not like, they have worked with the developer to see if they could get what they do like.  Mr. Campbell pointed out that there was a policy in effect requiring circulation.  He said if the developer was considering rezoning, the Council could require circulation between the various elements.  Mayor Hindman said the developer was not requesting a change in zoning at this point.  Mr. Campbell said that was true, but Mr. Bondra had mentioned that the developer did not know what they were going to do.  Regardless, Mr. Campbell thought it was feasible for the Council to ask for circulation.
    There was a discussion about denying the plat or tabling it.  Mrs. Crockett suggested that the Council table it and let the developer know their feelings so it could be worked out.  The Mayor said he would be willing to do that.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that R46-97 be tabled to the April 21, 1997 meeting.  The motion was seconded by Mrs. Crockett and approved unanimously by voice vote.

R47-97     Approving the preliminary plat for a replat of Lot 5 of Columbia Industrial Development
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this was a proposed industrial subdivision on the east side of Brown Station Road south of Waco.  This almost 30 acre tract has been recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission.  Mr. Beck said it would provide for seven M-C and M-1 zoned lots.
    Upon her request, Mr. Campbell made the motion that Mrs. Crockett be allowed to abstain from voting on R47-97.  The motion was seconded by Ms. Coble and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    The vote on R47-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSTAINING:  CROCKETT.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R48-97     Authorizing an agreement with Boone County to make traffic counts in the Columbia
                  metropolitan area.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mayor Hindman noted that the Council had been given a substitute for Exhibit A.  He said it was a shorter list than the original one.
    Ms. Coble made the motion that R48-97 be amended by substituting the new Exhibit A for the original.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. Beck said this agreement would authorize traffic counts in the Columbia metro area.  He said it had been reviewed and recommended by the Columbia Transportation Coordinating Committee.
    The vote on R48-97, as amended, was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R49-97     Approving charter of Bedford Walk Neighborhood Association.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this sizable neighborhood was located in the Bethel, Nifong, and Southampton area.
    Mr. Kruse said he was glad to see this request.
    The vote on R49-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R50-97     Authorizing application to Missouri Department of Conservation for the "Branch Out
                  Missouri" program.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this application was for tree planting and said that the City would provide the 40% match for the program using force account labor.  The estimated project cost was $13,500.  He said the planting would occur in Nifong, Cosmo, and Rock Bridge Parks.
    Mr. Janku said the City was pursuing Tree City USA designation.  He reported if the City was close to achieving that designation, an additional 10% match could be obtained.  Mayor Hindman said that had been one of the reasons the Council had appointed the Tree Task Force.  He asked if the application for this designation had been sent to the appropriate agency.  Mr. Green said a Citywide tree plan was needed and he understood that was what the Task Force was working on at the present time.  Mr. Janku said the City would not be eligible this year in that case.  Mr. Janku understood the maximum share was higher than $8,000.  He asked why the full amount was not being requested.  Mr. Green said it was felt this was all his department could handle at this particular time with the amount of equipment and staff on hand.   Mayor Hindman asked Mr. Green if he had checked with the Volunteer Coordinator.  Mr. Green said he had not.  Mayor Hindman suggested that staff see if the Volunteer Coordinator could make up the difference.  Mr. Green said he did not think these were the type of trees for which the Volunteer Coordinator would be able to get too many volunteers.  Mr. Green reported no matter how many volunteers there were, there was only so much equipment and all of his people would have to be on-site when the volunteers plant trees.
    Mrs. Crockett asked what size the trees would be.  Mr. Green said they would be 1 1/2 to 3 inches.  Mayor Hindman thought staff should try to get the volunteers.
    Mr. Janku noted that if private contractors were used, the City could get an additional 10%.  He suggested that there be a combination of City staff, volunteers, and private industry involved.
    Ms. Coble interjected that as a person who writes grants all of the time, the Council would be asking City staff to wait while these things are figured out with an approaching deadline of April 30 for submission of a grant.  She said this would be $8,100 the City could get to plant trees.  Ms. Coble stated if the Council wants to develop and expand the use of volunteers, this should probably be done without delaying a grant that is desirable.
    Mr. Campbell agreed with Ms. Coble and suggested if the City could get volunteers to plant trees, that would save some force account labor that could be used for something else.
    Mr. Janku pointed out that the resolution did not specifically mention an amount, but location.  He said if the Council went ahead and approved it, the grant application could be prepared and if it reflected more than the amount mentioned in the memo, he thought everyone would be happy.  Mr. Janku said that would leave the possibility of it being expanded during the remaining days in April.
    The vote on R50-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R51-97     Authorizing grant applications to Missouri Department of Natural Resources to renovate
                  Oakland Pool and for playground surfacing at Worley Street Park.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Green commented that the Council should be aware that just because an application is made for a grant, it did not necessarily mean that the City would want to accept it.  Mr. Green explained that this material is three to four times as expensive as the material used at Cosmo Park.  He said staff had bid this particular material for that job, and it came back over four times more expensive than the material that was used.  He said if the City accepts the $5,000 grant and then has to pay $15,000 to complete the project, versus paying $7,000 or $8,000 for materials similar to what was used for the Cosmo Park project, it would be in the City's best interest to reject the grant.  Mr. Green stated staff would like to apply for the grant and then take bids on the surface at Worley Street Park.
    Mayor Hindman said the Council would count on the staff's good judgment.
    Mr. Campbell asked why the City would even apply for a grant if it was possible it would not be accepted.  Mr. Green said one of the reasons was that staff did not know how much material would be required.  He said if $5,000 was almost enough to complete the project, the City would accept the grant and then put in the small remainder.  He pointed out that the Council had urged staff to use recyclable materials whenever possible.  Mr. Green said that was another reason why staff was applying for the grant, this was 100% recyclable material.
    Mr. Beck said there were cities throughout the State of Missouri that are working with this material on playgrounds.  He thought the City should try it if it came in competitively on a project of this size.  Mr. Beck stated the City could see how it works while also participating in the recycling program of tires.
     The vote on R51-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R52-97     Designating the Convention and Visitors Bureau as a tourism destination marketing
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck commented that this was a technicality in that the City had to designate an agency in Columbia to seek tourism funding.
    The vote on R52-97 was recorded as follows;  VOTING YES:  CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT.  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:

B85-97     Amending Ch. 27 regarding water master meters.
B86-97     Accepting water utility conveyances.
B87-97     Authorizing acquisition of a water line easement on Route PP.
B88-97     Authorizing agreement with Public Water Supply District No. 2 to merge the District and
                  City water systems.
B89-97     Authorizing an agreement with Horner & Shifrin for engineering services for improvements
                  to Sunflower Street, and appropriating funds.  Introduced by Janku.
B90-97     Authorizing landscape work on land north of the Daniel Boone Building using City
B91-97     Appropriating engineer's report and tax billing for improvements to Sanitary Sewer District
                  No. 147 (Smiley Lane East).
B92-97     Approving engineer's report, Change Order No. 1 and tax billing for improvements to
                  Sanitary Sewer District No. 143 (Smiley Lane West).
B93-97     Establishing Sanitary Sewer District No. 142 along Anthony Street between College
                  Avenue and William Street.
B94-97     Authorizing land acquisition to construct Sanitary Sewer District No. 136 (Olive Street area).
B95-97     Appropriating funds to upgrade the HVAC system at the automated flight service station at
                  the airport.
B96-97     Appropriating funds for Cultural Affairs staff to attend two conferences.
B97-97     Approving the final plat of Crossroads West, Plat 3.
B98-97     Approving the final plat of Sidra East.
B99-97     Vacating two public alleys near Elm and Hitt Streets.
B100-97   Amending Chapter 9 and 16 regarding sale of fireworks.
B101-97   Amending Chapter 18 regarding firefighter pensions.
B102-97   Authorizing staff to construct improvements to parking lots at Nifong Park.
B103-97   Upgrading the corrections nurse position.

(A)     East Campus rezoning requests.
    Each year, according to a policy resolution, Mr. Beck said that property owners in the East Campus Neighborhood could bring in a rezoning request with the City paying the advertising costs.  He said this year five separate requests had been received.  Three requests were for rezoning from multiple family to single family and two were requesting a down zoning from R-3 to R-2 (duplex).  He said the next step would be to refer the requests to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that the requests be referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(B)     Street closure requests.
    Mr. Beck said the first request was from the Old Wheels Car Club for Sunday, October 5, 1997, and the second from Stephens College for Sunday, May 11, 1997.
    Ms. Coble made the motion that the requests be granted as written.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Kruse and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(C)     Dog running areas.
    Mr. Green said staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission had identified four areas it was felt would be suitable for dog running areas.  As noted in the report, he said they believed that a successful area for this type of activity would be one that is not populated by people.  He said they had not selected any neighborhood parks, athletic fields or the trails area.  The four areas were in the Grindstone Nature Area, the Bear Creek Nature Area, the Hinkson Woods Natural History Area and the natural area west of Garth Avenue.
    Mr. Green reported that he had received a few calls about the report, all of them commenting that it was a very poor idea to have any areas in the City where dogs can be off of a leash.  Mr. Green reported one of these callers was a Board of Health member.  This person indicated the reason the Board recommended the leash law was so that dogs off of their own property would be on a leash at all times.  This person also thought that more than one dog in an area was a dog fight waiting to happen.  He said this caller had asked if this matter would be referred to the Board of Health for their recommendation since they initiated the leash law.
    The Council consensus was that it would not be sent to the Board of Health for their recommendation.
    Mayor Hindman proposed that the Council ask staff to prepare an ordinance.  He had a suggestion for modifying it, but that could wait until the Council had the ordinance to vote on.
    Mr. Campbell received a call at his home and apparently the wording in the newspaper was not clear that this area does not include the MKT Trail.  He wanted it noted that this would not include the Trail.
    Mayor Hindman asked if staff checked with the Department of Conservation on the Hinkson Woods area as it was a wildlife area.  Mr. Green said contact had been made to inform the Department of Conservation about the report and no objections have been received.  Mayor Hindman requested consideration of the fishing lake at Twin Lakes with specific hours placed on it.  He knew a lot of people who took their water dogs to this area so they can swim.  Mayor Hindman stated one way to reduce conflict would be to allow dogs to be unleashed in this area from dawn until approximately eight in the morning.
    Mr. Janku thought that had been one of the areas mentioned early on as a possible considerations.  He asked if people accessed the lake from the non-trail side, whether then it would be feasible.
    Mr. Campbell hoped that wildlife experts would have a chance to react to this option because spawning fish are disturbed by animals jumping into lakes during certain time periods.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if the public used that lake to fish in.  Mr. Green said they did.  He said there was also the largest shelter in the system adjacent to the lake.  Mr. Green stated that was the reason this area was not included because it would allow for a mix of people and dogs.
    Mr. Kruse thought the areas mentioned in the report were good suggestions and he would probably support the Mayor's idea as well.  He did not think it would be a problem to include Rock Hill Park in the East Campus Neighborhood, and Oakwood Hills Park in his neighborhood.  Mr. Kruse said these were very rocky, rugged, wooded areas.
    Mr. Janku requested the staff evaluate an area in Cosmo Park as well.  As there is a lake between the softball fields and the soccer fields, people who like to be able to get their dogs in water would have that opportunity.  Mr. Janku said it was almost completely fenced and relatively isolated from most people.
    Mr. Green reminded the Council that the original ordinance had been introduced because of dogs attacking people.  He did not think there was a neighborhood park in town that people did not frequent, and there was no place in town frequented more than Cosmo Park.  Mr. Green said staff could include in the ordinance whatever the Council instructed.  He reported the Health Department would be enforcing the ordinance.
    Mr. Janku understood that the dog would have to be under voice control.
    Mr. Campbell reiterated his feelings about considering other species.  He was concerned about dogs disturbing nesting areas.
    Mayor Hindman suggested that an ordinance be prepared, incorporating suggestions made tonight into the list, and then amending it when it comes back for Council review.  He said the Council could also request that a wildlife expert look at other species in those areas to be included in the ordinance.
    Mrs. Crockett said the staff had done a great deal of work to get to this point.  Her feeling was that the Council should go with the four suggested sites to begin with and then if it was found to not be enough, additional areas could be added by amending the ordinance.
    Mr. Coffman agreed with Mrs. Crockett's suggestion.  He had some concern about the Rock Hill Trail in his neighborhood.
    Ms. Coble made the motion that the staff be directed to prepare an ordinance with the four sites included.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(D)     Intra-departmental transfer of funds request.
    Report accepted.

(E)     University banner request.
    Mr. Beck noted that the initial report indicated that this banner request would have to be referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission.  It had been determined that where there is a campus plan, it would not need to be referred.  Mr. Beck said the report recommended that the Council direct staff to work on an electric pole agreement with the University for putting up banners.
    Mr. Boeckmann noted that the ordinance would allow the banners, but there was an issue involving the City because some of the banners would be placed on City utility poles.  He said a pole attachment agreement is required and staff would need to negotiate it with the University.
    Mr. Janku asked if maintenance and upkeep requirements would be included in the agreement.  Mr. Beck said a note would be made to make sure that was included.
    Jeff Silen, offered to answer any questions on behalf of the University.
    Mr. Kruse asked why the University wanted to do this.  Mr. Silen felt that it directly related to the educational mission of the University.  The intent is to provide a high level of spirit and pride in the campus.  He said a number of items were planned in Brady Commons, as well as in the Union.  Mr. Silen said the banners would also compliment what is going in the Arts and Science Mall and Brady Park.  Regarding the maintenance issue, Mr. Silen said it had been brought up when the University looked at funding the initial project.  He said the project was being funded through several departments on campus and they planned an annual replacement of three to five years.  He said the size of the banners were approximately identical in size to the banners the City has.  Mr. Silen added that the hardware was the same.
    As a graduate of the University of Missouri, a former participant in the Campus Planning Committee, a person interested in signs, and a person who thinks the University Campus has become probably the most beautiful historic place in Columbia, Mr. Kruse was not really pleased with this idea.  He agreed to some of the banners, but this seemed to be a great deal of overkill.  Mr. Kruse stated there were 53 banners proposed in this area and, while there are already 27 on Ninth Street and six or seven at Columbia College, this would almost double the number of banners in the central Columbia area.  He said there had been a lot of banners hung in the gym which has triggered a lot of controversy.  Mr. Kruse said he could not support the request.
    Mayor Hindman said he was in favor of granting the request.
    Mr. Campbell said while he listened sympathetically to Mr. Kruse, he could remember a few years ago when it was difficult to identify the University campus.  He said perhaps this was going too far, but thought there was a feeling that these monument signs are unifying the campus.  Mr. Campbell would like to see the University try it.  He said the banners would not be placed around the Quadrangle or in the more historic parts of the campus.  Mr. Campbell did not think the banners would detract all that much.
    Mr. Janku had seen the University come a long way in terms of landscaping and added that it was a very attractive campus.  He was willing to leave it to the University's internal planning group.
    Mrs. Crockett agreed with Mr. Kruse in that there were banners all over town and she felt the City was beginning to get too many of them.  On the other hand, as Columbia College and the City of Columbia have banners, and the Council had apparently approved 150 Growing with Columbia signs, Mrs. Crockett did not think the Council should deny the request of the University at this point.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that the request be approved.  The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved by voice vote.

(F)     Tree cutting for billboard visibility.
    Mr. Kruse said this report had come about because of a request by Headrick Outdoor Advertising to remove several trees on I-70 to improve the visibility of two of their billboards.  He had indicated to MODOT the Council's concern about the request and was advised last Friday that this organization planned to issue the permits at some point to have the trees cut down.  He said the City had been provided with two options to consider; one was to cut the trees this spring with no replanting to be done, and the second was to cut the trees this fall and do the replanting at that time.  In a letter from the Department representative, it was also indicated that they were currently waiting to see if Headrick Outdoor would be willing to wait until fall.  Mr. Kruse said he had argued that with the Department, but to no avail.   He wanted to offer a motion that would be the sense of the Council on the issue.
    Mr. Kruse made the motion that the following letter be sent to the Missouri Department of Transportation:

    The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman.
    Mayor Hindman commented that the number of billboards between Columbia and St. Louis was embarrassing.  He said there had been a number of rather attractive plantings on Interstate 70 going through Columbia.  He said Columbia had done quite a bit to make the area attractive, yet it is still cluttered with billboards.  Mayor Hindman thought the City should have local control over them.  He said to cut down these beautiful trees so billboards could be seen better was just terrible.
    Mr. Campbell suggested a statement in the letter indicating that anything that had to be done, either through cutting or pruning, be kept to an absolute minimum.
    In addition to the scenic aspect of the trees, Mr. Janku said there also is an impact on screening the highway for those nearby residents from sounds created by traffic.  He thought the City's input into the placement and types of trees planted was extremely important because that would help reduce the impact from noise and air pollution.
    The motion made by Mr. Kruse, seconded by Mayor Hindman, was approved unanimously by voice vote.


    Mrs. Crockett commented that she was happy about the improvements that would be made in north Columbia.  She said the City would be repairing Oakland Pool, in addition to the construction on Route B, Brown Station Road, Route PP, and a stop light at Blue Ridge and 763.
    Mr. Janku asked the staff earlier for a report on the sidewalk across the Business Loop on Route B.  He indicated he would still like to have the information.  He would also like to receive information about the alignment.
    Ms. Coble said the Smithton Valley Neighborhood Association had asked her about the use of City owned vacant lots for community garden spots.  The association was interested in a lot on Clinton Street.   She asked that the staff report back to her so she could forward the information to the neighborhood group.
    Ms. Coble noted that parking is allowed on both sides of Switzler Street.  She has received complaints about the street being too narrow, especially since that at the intersection of LaSalle and Switzler it is apparently a great place to play for neighborhood children.  Ms. Coble asked if the staff could investigate what limiting parking to one side would do in terms of the impact to Switzler.  Mr. Beck said staff would take a look at it.  Mr. Beck had toured the Douglass area with Ms. Chiles and observed some of the concerns that were mentioned in addition to some street naming situations.  A memo will be sent to the Council regarding the situation.
    Ms. Coble noted that she received two Xeroxed copies of color photographs of some very serious violations of City Codes and ordinances with regard to dilapidated buildings, trash piles, and abandoned buildings in the first ward.  Mr. Beck said he had the photos and would be reporting back on that issue as well.
    Mr. Janku reported he read a newspaper article where Maryland Heights received a large federal grant to work on creek erosion through the planting of various plants.  He passed the article to Mr. Beck and asked that the staff look into it to see if Columbia might be eligible for any funding.
    Mr. Coffman noted that the intersection of Audubon and Stadium had been a continuing topic of concern during his campaign.  He said both the residents on Shepard Boulevard and in the East Pointe area would like to have a stop light at that location.  He said the homeowners had been told by the Department of Transportation that there was still not a high enough traffic count to justify a light.  Mr. Coffman said with the recent news of some movie theaters going in, he thought it was something that was inevitable and urged the staff to pursue it if possible.
    Mr. Kruse said that the Grindstone Rock Quarry Neighborhood Association had officially requested the scenic roadway designation for Rock Quarry Road.  They had asked him about the possibility of this being a pilot project for others to follow, and that the designation be one that would be done jointly by the Association and the City.  Mr. Kruse thought the ordinance provided that the nomination could be made by a neighborhood association or a certain number of property owners, or by the City Council.  He asked what would need to be done to pursue it as a joint project.  Mr. Kruse stated one of the main issues was the cost involved in the surveys and notifications.  Mr. Beck said he would report back on some of the estimated costs and the issues involved.
    Paul Albert, 2703 Parker, spoke about pine tree illnesses and said these types of trees should not be planted by the City.  He suggested Bradford pear trees.
    Henry Lane, 1816 E. Broadway, stated the City had begun 13 of the 30 projects covered on Proposition 2, even though no bond money would be available for at least six months.  He also commented that he was no longer being charged for two trash receptacles, trash bags, and a dumpster.  He thanked the Council for voting in favor of that bill.  He also welcomed Council member Coffman and thanked Mr. Harline for his past service on the Council.
    The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
                                                                                         Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                         Penny St. Romaine
                                                                                         City Clerk