MAY 19, 1997

    The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri, met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, May 19, 1997, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri.  The roll was taken with the following results:  Council Members JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, and COBLE were present.  The City manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also present.

    The minutes of the regular meeting of May 5, 1997, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Ms. Coble.

    Ms. Coble asked about Report A being moved up to Scheduled Public Comments because of a request to speak by the Garden Coalition.  After discussion, it was decided the report would remain under Reports and Petitions; however, Guy Clark, representing the Garden Coalition, would be added as a speaker under Scheduled Public Comments.
    The agenda, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mr. Janku.


1.     William Easley - Loud Radios
    William Easley, 705 Cook, was concerned about loud car radios.  Ms. Coble said she had talked with Mr. Easley and understood that he had encountered difficulty in getting police response regarding cars with loud radios he thought to be in violation of the noise ordinance.  Mr. Easley said that was correct.  He said the loud radios are blaring at all times of the day and night.

2.     Garden Coalition regarding a community garden on Clinton Street.
    Guy Clark, Garden Coordinator, said the Coalition wanted to establish a garden on the back portion of the lot on Clinton Street.  He said their main concern was getting water to the site because one could not garden without it.  He said many of their gardeners were elderly or people with disabilities and could not easily transport water to the site.  Another concern was who would pay for the main and the water bills.  Mr. Clark said the Garden Coalition hoped the City would pay for the main and then this group would gladly pay the water bills.  Mr. Clark estimated the water would be on for about six months of the year and turned off in October.  The bills, he said, were relatively minor.  Less urgent concerns was lighting in the area and two trees he assumed the City had planted.  He said if this lot was established as a garden, the two trees needed to be removed.
    Mr. Janku asked if there were other locations where water would not have to be transported, or where trees would not have to be removed.  Mr. Clark said the Garden Coalition was always looking for garden spaces and, if the City had something available that already has water, they would be more than happy to look into it.  He said this was an ideal site because there is interest in the neighborhood for a community garden in the area.  Mr. Clark reported a water line would not have to be run very far.  He also said that if a water line could not be installed, a hose could be used.  He thought a hose would be considerably cheaper than 100 feet of water line.

B126-97     Annexing property at 1126 West Old Plank Road and establishing R-1 zoning.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said this was a small tract of land and the property owners were wanting to connect to City sewers.  As part of that request, the owners had been asked about annexation, which is the Council policy.  The staff was recommending approval of the R-1 zoning classification request.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B126-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

(A)     Construction of sanitary sewers in Sewer District No. 138 (Route B/Waco Road).
    Item A was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said the Council had discussed running sewers into this drainage area in northeast Columbia.  He said there is a policy in place as to what portion of the cost of a trunk sewer is to be paid for by the City and what part is to be paid for by the property owners.  Because this is a proposed tax bill district wherein the property owners would be tax billed for a portion of the project cost, Mr. Beck asked Mr. Patterson to give a more specific description of what the Public Works Department was proposing.
    Mr. Patterson displayed a map on the overhead showing the area of the sewer district and explained that this public hearing was to determine the necessity for construction of sanitary sewers within Sewer District 138.  The sewer district was formed by ordinance on May 2, 1994. The sewer district consists of 97.53 acres and is located north of Waco Road and east of Paris Road. The area is a combination of developed and undeveloped properties.
    If construction is authorized by Council, Mr. Patterson explained that the proposed work will consist of constructing approximately 2,900 feet of 15 inch sewer line, and 650 feet of 8 inch sewer line. The existing public sanitary sewer is in place on the north side of Waco Road, just east of Route B, and is shown as station 0+00 on the map. The sanitary sewer line will be extended to the southern portion of the Extrusion Technology, Inc. property and the Rheochem Manufacturing property at the upper end of the sanitary sewer district.  He said it will eliminate a joint-use mechanical plant which is currently discharging into the roadside ditch along Peabody Road.  This mechanical plant is currently operating above its capacity and is in need of immediate replacement.  Septic tanks will also be eliminated for the other properties along Chateau Road.  Mr. Patterson noted that the staff also received a letter from the Millman Lumber Company indicating problems with their septic tank and requested the city pursue the sewer district at this time.  Additionally, property development along the north side of Peabody Road will be able to pump into the upper end of this district line and eliminate temporary on-site sewage treatment facilities designed for those properties.  The sewer line will essentially follow the natural drainage northward through the property. During preliminary design prior to establishing the sewer district, staff evaluated several district configurations and options for locations of sewer lines. It is believed that the proposed alignment will be the least disruptive to the property and have minimum impact on inevitable development.
    As a result of comments at the April 18, 1994, public hearing, Mr. Patterson said the staff evaluated placing the sewer line along the west property line of the Henrikson and Robinson tract. He displayed the alignment on the overhead.  A report was forwarded to City Council on May 2, 1994, responding to this question in considerable detail.  A sewer line can be constructed along this alignment, but it would have to be potentially 8 to 12 feet deeper in some areas in order to serve the eastern portion of the sewer district area. This will naturally increase the costs of construction and would require a change in the assessment, which Mr. Patterson said would require re-advertising.  If the pipe was constructed at a depth to serve only the property on the west side of the drainage, it would cost approximately the same as the sewer line being proposed; however, the sewer district boundaries would have to be revised and a new assessment rate set or the entire eastern portion of this district would have to put in pump systems or run a parallel line up the east side of the drainage.  It was determined that if the district boundaries were reduced to reflect this option, it would increase the assessment per square foot by approximately 64% and leave approximately 43 acres unserved by the sewer line.  For these reasons, Mr. Patterson said the staff feels that the proposed alignment remains the best option.
    It was contended at the previous public hearing that this alignment would sever and render useless a substantial portion of the Henrikson-Robinson tract, but staff does not feel that is the case. As can be seen, Mr. Patterson noted there is a relatively major drainage way on this property.  He said it would not even be reasonable to expect the site to be graded to make the entire tract developable as a single piece of property.  A much more reasonable expectation would be that the tract will be subdivided with internal streets and contoured to minimize the grading necessary for development.  Storm drainage systems will have to be installed and these also generally will follow the original natural drainage system.
    After these extensive reviews, Mr. Patterson said staff feels the project as described is in the most appropriate location and recommends approval of the project as shown.  The total cost of the project is estimated to be $177,000.  In accordance with current city "80 acre point" policy, the City would bear the cost of constructing a 15 inch sewer line up to the point in this drainage basin above which 80 acres of the property drains into it.  Mr. Patterson said that was about 920 feet of 15 inch line that would be paid for by the sewer utility.  He said the utility would also pay for the difference in cost between an 8 inch line and a 15 inch line for another approximate 2,000 feet above the 80 acre point area.  The estimated cost of the city's responsibility is expected to be $57,000, leaving a total of $120,000 as a responsibility to the property owners.
    The $120,000 may be assessed against property owners in the district on a charge per square foot.  Mr. Patterson said this is a traditional procedure allowed by state law to equitably distribute the costs of public sewers where need has been determined.  However, the primary issues at the time of the public hearing appeared to be related to the tax bills that would be assessed against undeveloped land.  Questions were raised about how the sewer line could be built to serve the developed lands, charging area residents their share, and deferring assessments against the undeveloped land until a need for the sewer occurred, at which time assessments would be made against the property.  At issue, Mr. Patterson said was the fact that apparently a large tract of land was still being used for agricultural purposes and this land use would not support the assessment for the sewer. It was indicated that the practice of tax billing could actually "force" development of land to pay for the assessments.  This is a legitimate issue in some instances, however, he said it is suggested that the argument would no longer apply in this case because since the original public hearing, the property has been actively marketed for industrial purposes which would indicate the desire to develop the land.  For development of the property, the sewers must be extended. Constructing the proposed sewers as shown will substantially decrease the amount of sewers that will have to be constructed by the developer and will increase the value of the property.
    If Council authorizes the construction of the project as described, Mr. Patterson said the maximum assessment rate would be 2.8 cents per square foot.  The tracts range in size from 1.43 acres to 58.4 acres with assessments from $1,759 to $71,854.  While these are large numbers, he pointed out that the assessment per square foot is extremely reasonable based on historical assessments in sewer districts which show that special assessments have averaged more than 10 cents per square foot.
    Mr. Patterson said it should also be noted that the Henrikson-Robinson property is additionally benefitted in that only the land that can drain to the sewer line, based on existing topography, has been included in the district.  With the expected grading of the eastern side of the property, it is likely that several more acres will be able to use the sewer line without being assessed.
    Mr. Patterson emphasized that this hearing does not levy assessments, but would set a maximum rate for assessments if they are levied.  Prior to any special assessments, he said the Council will have to conduct another hearing to determine if benefits have accrued to the properties.  In the interim, Council may examine and select other funding options if deemed appropriate.  If special assessment are considered, he said some of the expected benefits to the properties in the district are as follows:
    1. Elimination of environmental and potential health hazards created by on-site treatment such as septic tanks and the overloaded treatment facility presently discharging into an open ditch.
    2. Elimination of the financial responsibility for maintaining those on-site treatment facilities.
    3. Increased property values resulting from access to public sewers. Before and after appraisals can verify the values of the properties to document this as fact.
    Mr. Patterson said the staff would recommend that, after receiving public comments, Council approve a motion directing staff to proceed with plans and specifications to construct the project as described.
    Mr. Janku asked if he understood that if the Council decided to proceed tonight, there would be some flexibility in determining the amount and timing of payments.  Mr. Patterson said that was correct.  He said the Council would have considerable latitude in that area.  Mr. Patterson said staff felt this was a rather urgent matter based on the correspondence and communications with ETI and Rheochem.
    Mr. Janku referred to a letter the Council had received and a reference made to a 16 acre portion.  Mr. Patterson said the letter was referring to the property between the sewer line and the west side of the property.  He said it was a rather substantial drainage area with more than 25 feet of fall.  He said it would require a lot of grading if the City tried to develop it straight across and eliminate the drainage.  He said it did not make sense to grade the entire area flat.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Bobby Robinson, owner of a portion of the ground in question, said she was in favor of this overdue sewer line, but thought it should go along the fence line so it would not destroy the rest of her property.  She did not know why she should spend $71,000 to serve the people beside her and above her.
    Mayor Hindman asked Ms. Robinson if she thought the sewer line would add value to her property.  Ms. Robinson said she did not think it would make it any more valuable than it is  currently.  She said if the sewer line goes along the property, she could afford to build a sewer to it.
    Mr. Beck asked if Ms. Robinson had an engineering plan developed.  Ms. Robinson said she had not.
    David Straus, spoke on behalf of Uponor, formerly Extrusion Technologies, Inc., a PVC pipe manufacturing facility located at 6500 Brown Station Road.  He said when this project was proposed in 1994, Uponor applauded the measure and completed preparations on-site to abandon their small wastewater treatment plant and connect to the City sewer.  To date, City sewer service has still not been established.  He said the company had experienced continued growth of water use and despite their good faith efforts to meet all of Missouri's clean water laws and regulations, this facility had been notified by the DNR that permit violations exist.  The primary cause of the violations were determined to be excessive demand on the wastewater treatment plant.  He said it had been estimated that the plant had been operating at 196% of the designed capacity.  Mr. Straus said his company was confident the Council and staff could resolve issues and expeditiously proceed with plans, specifications, and construction to provide Uponor with the sanitary sewer service it needs.  He said Uponor was willing to provide, without cost to the City, a portion of the PVC pipe required to complete the project.
    Mrs. Crockett asked how long the facility had been in the City limits.  Mr. Strauss replied that it had been in the City limits at least since 1972.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Janku asked if the City agreed to the proposal suggested by the property owner to run the sewer along the property line, whether it would still be in the sewer district and subject to assessment.  Mr. Patterson said that was correct, unless staff redefined the district for assessment.  He said staff had a breakdown on the cost of that option with the total being $224,000, as opposed to the current estimate of $177,000.  He said the $224,000 was to put the sewer line on the west side and in deep enough to serve the entire area.  He said that would increase the sewer utilities share up from $57,000 to $79,000, but more importantly, it would increase the assessments to each of the different properties from 2.8 cents to 3.4 cents.  Mr. Patterson said that would increase the minimum assessment from around $1,700 to $2,100, and the maximum assessment from about $71,000 to $86,000.  He explained another option that would remove 43 acres from the area for assessment.  He said that would increase the individual assessment cost by over 64%.
    Mrs. Crockett felt that the Public Works Department had done an outstanding job to come up with all of the different scenarios and estimated project costs.  She said there were several businesses in the area that have been brought into the City and have not been brought up to City standards.  She said these businesses would be paying their fair share of the cost.
    Mrs. Crockett made the motion that staff be directed to proceed with final plans and specifications for Sewer District No. 138.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B106-97A     Rezoning from R-3 to C-P property on the east side of College Avenue south of
                       Business Loop 70 East.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck commented that this bill had been amended at the last Council meeting to C-P instead of open zoning.  He understood that Mr. Hancock had received a plan.  Mr. Hancock said he had, but had not reviewed it yet.
    B106-97, as amended, was read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B116-97     Amending Chapter 5 of the City Code regarding confinement of dogs.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this request was initiated by the Council asking staff to look at some areas where dogs might be exercised yet under the command of the owner.  He pointed out that the ordinance would exclude police dogs.
    Mayor Hindman said he had an amendment that would add Twin Lakes fishing area, including the fishing lake, from dawn until 9:00 a.m. when the swimming lake is open for swimming, and from dawn to dusk when the swimming lake is closed in the off-season.  He did not want to interfere with the swimming activities.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion to amend B116-97 per the amendment sheet.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Kruse.
    Ann Martin, 101 E. El Cortez, spoke in favor of public open space for their nine month old labrador.
    Tom Witte, 2500 W. Rollins, said he and his 11 year-old black lab had been walking in the Twin Lakes area for a number of years.  He was in favor of having the area included as an open running area for dogs.  He was hopeful it could be open during the summer at all times.  He said the swimming area was fenced off and he had never seen a problem with the people that frequent the area.
    Rayona Nichols, 705 Mt. Vernon, spoke in favor of the amendment.  She has lived in the City for nine years and had always kept her dog on a leash unless they were in an area where there was absolutely no one else around.  She had not been aware that by doing this she was in violation of the ordinance.  She was hopeful the Council would consider allowing dog running areas in the City.
    Laura Hacquard, 804 Ridgeway, also a labrador owner, said in her 15 years in Columbia she had always had one or two sizable dogs for companionship and personal safety.  She was also content with the leash law as it was before.  She said people like herself who use areas like the ones being set aside to run their dogs are not the problem and do not allow their dogs to run up and down the streets.  She said they were responsible pet owners and want to ensure that their pets have a healthy life.   Ben Schwarz, 1324 Weaver, spoke in favor of the amendment.  He and his dog walk in Twin Lakes often and he would like to have it open for the health of his dog as well as his own health.
    Charles Saylor, 1212 Jake Lane, spoke in support of the amendment.  He would like to see Twin Lakes open in the afternoon as well.  He said there was nobody fishing there during those hours.
    Fran Reynolds, 902 E. Sunset Lane, spoke in favor of the Twin Lakes amendment.  She has walked her dog there for four years and her dog plays with the others that are there.  She was hopeful the hours could be extended to year-round all day in the fishing lake area.  She said it was not good for walking on the east side, but was great for dog walking.
    Marion Mace, spoke on behalf of the Greenbelt Coalition.  She explained that this group consists of 15 businesses and neighborhood associations, as well as approximately 75 individuals and families.  She said the Coalition had not taken an official position on the proposed amendment, but were concerned about a couple of issues.  Part of their mission was to protect and preserve green, open areas in and around Columbia.  She asked the Council to take into consideration the impact on the wildlife in the various areas being recommended for dog running.  She said there is diminishing habitat for the current wildlife so it was very important for the remaining habitats to be protected.  She said if the areas are opened up for dog running, the Council might want to consider closing these locations during the breeding season for the wildlife.  She said the Coalition was hopeful the Council would get input from the neighborhood associations that are in or adjacent to the areas in question.  Ms. Mace said if the Council went ahead with the ordinance, the Coalition would like for it to be established on a six month trial basis and then re-evaluated for the impact on the wildlife, possible danger to individuals from dogs, and the impact on citizens who wish to enjoy these areas in quiet and serenity.
    Mayor Hindman asked Ms. Mace if she and her group were aware of the provisions that the dogs were to be in the control of a competent person and obedient to the command of the person.  Ms. Mace indicated the Greenbelt Coalition was aware of those facts.
    Jerry Wade, 1221 Bradshaw, spoke in opposition to all of the amendments.  He said a variance to the leash ordinance would be poor public policy for a number of reasons.  He was concerned about the violation of the ecological and scenic integrities of some of the areas selected.  Mr. Wade said to own a dog was a personal choice, carrying with it the assumption of responsibility for the proper care of that dog.  He said that included meeting the need of the dog to run.  He did not believe that the right of citizenship included the right of one's dog to run free and unleashed on public land.  If the Council decides to provide dog runs, Mr. Wade suggested that a procedure be established to collect fees to pay for the costs of a new public service.  He thought the dog run opportunity should be left to the private sector.
    Mary Kay Wade, 1221 Bradshaw, spoke in opposition to the ordinance.  Mrs. Wade explained that she had worked as a national park ranger and now volunteers in state parks.  She has also worked as a naturalist for private enterprises and as a volunteer with Girl Scouts and Columbia's school system.  In none of these places was it public policy to have dogs running loose in natural areas.  She said the key criteria was safety.  She said this would be setting up a situation where someone would be seriously injured and the City would be liable.  Mrs. Wade said nobody could keep control of a dog if it was out of sight.  She reported she had written a letter to Mr. Beck regarding incidents that had happened to her and incidents she had observed in the natural areas.  These included episodes of dogs running loose and out of control, attacking or jumping up on people, and other behavioral problems.  She said if the City felt an area must be provided, she suggested Twin Lakes as it was an open area.  She said natural areas were not the place to let the dogs run out of control.
    Mariel Stephenson, 2111 Rock Quarry Road, said she had the misfortune of observing dogs that have become out of control.  She said they run across Rock Quarry Road and enter her property, usually chasing wildlife.  Ms. Stephenson was concerned about the diseases by the tick population that exists in all of the natural areas, and the transmission of diseases through feces.
    Mr. Coffman said he was in favor of the present leash law and was generally in favor of the dog running areas.  He shared the concern expressed about the definition of trails at the last meeting.  He said the City staff interprets trails to mean trails that have been developed by the City.  Mr. Coffman had heard from several patrons of Grindstone Park that are particularly concerned about the trails or paths because they consider them to be developed trails.  He thought the way the ordinance was worded, the exception of trails in these natural areas was good.  He said he would like to see that interpreted as the trails or paths that are in place now.
    Mayor Hindman said his concern was that if the Council eliminated all the areas in Grindstone where there are trails, the entire Grindstone area would be eliminated since it has many trails.  He said the Council may want to give the Parks Department the authority to say that a dog must be on a leash on a particular trail.
    Mr. Janku said the perspectives in this discussion were interesting.  He said when the ordinance was first brought up, there had been a perception in this community that there was already a leash law and people were somewhat surprised to find the City did not have an absolute leash law and voice command was sufficient.  He said the Council then passed the true leash law.  Mr. Janku said the amendment to the current ordinance would again allow, in certain areas, what existed prior to the new ordinance.  He suggested that the Council amend this ordinance somewhat to say within the areas listed, areas may be designated for use by a dog under voice control off of a leash.  He said that would make it clear that it was not these broad areas that are being outlawed, even though the term "trails" would be used as an exception.  He referenced the concern mentioned about the parking lot at Twin Lakes and said he did not think the Council was suggesting that dogs would be running free in the parking lot.  Mr. Janku thought what the ordinance should say was that within certain areas, which would be listed, that there may be areas clearly designated where dogs could be run without a leash.  He said that way the concerns about the dogs being beyond the vision of the owner would be addressed.  He thought these kinds of decisions could be determined by the Parks and Recreation staff.
    Mayor Hindman said if it was necessary to make this amendment, he would do it the other way.  He would say that they would do it for Grindstone, except in those areas where it is designated dogs must be on a leash.
    When the Grindstone area was established in 1970, Mr. Campbell said there had been considerable public discussion about how it should be open to the public.  He said one consensus had been that it was to be a natural area where wildlife would have some protection.  He felt the City would be violating the spirit of this perspective by allowing free running dogs within the Grindstone Natural Area.  He said wildlife and dogs are not the most compatible.  He thought Grindstone should be excluded from the list.  Regarding Twin Lakes, Mr. Campbell said that he and his wife visited this area and had seen some geese and goslings.  They had been told that the geese are frequently chased by dogs.  He said his wife had also stepped in "dog droppings" while walking across the grass.  He said when people let their dogs run, he doubted that they would follow behind them with bags to pick up after them.  He said that would make some of these areas less attractive to other people.  He said while making it convenient for one relatively small group, the Council would make it inconvenient for a relatively larger group.  He said the Council was supposed to be watching out for the larger group, not the smaller.
    Ms. Coble said from what had been said previously, it would prove that dogs have been allowed to run free for 27 years within the Grindstone Nature Area.  She said all of the other areas listed also would require that dogs be under voice command and that was, in essence, what the amendment proposes.  The amendment would allow responsible dog owners to take advantage of the areas listed while still complying with City ordinances.  She said these were the people who obey the leash law, the pooper scooper law, and were most likely the people who have trained dogs to be under true voice command.  Ms. Coble said there will always be exceptions to the rule, but that is always true.
    Mr. Kruse asked about the state rules regarding dogs on leashes in state parks.  He takes his dog to Three Creeks and lets him run and had never seen a sign that says dogs must be leashed.  Mayor Hindman pointed out that Three Creeks was not actually a state park.  He said it was state-owned property run by the Department of Conservation.  He thought people were allowed to let their dogs run loose in these areas.
    Mr. Coffman said he had read about other cities where dog related issues have resulted in City Council's making so many exceptions that it has created a dog code with pages and pages of exceptions.  He thought the City may be in danger of going down the road of excessive regulation.
    Mr. Kruse was interested in the suggestions made by one of the speakers regarding an evaluation period.  He asked how it  would be evaluated.  Mayor Hindman said there was always an evaluation period and if an ordinance was not working, people will indicate this.  Mr. Kruse said to have something in the ordinance that would force the Council to re-evaluate the amendment in three or six months would be a different approach.  He said additional input could be obtained at the end of that period.
    Mr. Janku said it would have been preferable to address this issue as part of the original ordinance.  He said the implementation of the ordinance had been delayed to May 1st, and now the Council may pass this amendment somewhat after the fact.  He was concerned there would be more confusion.
    The motion to amend B116-97, made by Mayor Hindman, seconded by Mr. Kruse, further amended by Mayor Hindman to make the non-swimming lake at Twin Lakes available for running dogs between dawn and dusk, was seconded by Mrs. Crockett.
    Mr. Janku asked if the motion would include the trail adjacent to the non-swimming lake.  Mayor Hindman said that had been his intention.
    Mr. Kruse pointed out that Twin Lakes would actually be a dog running and swimming area.
    The motion to amend the amendment to B116-97, made by Mayor Hindman, seconded by Mr. Kruse, further amended by Mayor Hindman, seconded by Mrs. Crockett, clarified by Mr. Janku, was approved by voice vote.
    Mr. Boeckmann asked if the amendment was to read Twin Lakes fishing lake area, including the fishing lake, from dawn until dusk.  Mayor Hindman said that was correct.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that the Council further amend B116-97, by adding the words to Paragraph E as follows:  the following areas shall include designated dog running areas.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Kruse.
    Mayor Hindman spoke in opposition to the proposed amendment.  He suggested an amendment that stated "these areas except for areas designated as leash areas".  He said there may be some small areas that should not be dog areas.
    Mr. Campbell asked for a definition of trails and trail.  Mr. Green said the lady who spoke at the last Council meeting made a strong point concerning trails.  The trails in Grindstone could be considered public trails which have been developed by volunteers, not by the City.  He said when this issue was originally discussed, contention was to try to keep dogs and people separated as much as possible for safety reasons.  He said if the Council desires, Mr. Green did not think it would be unreasonable to include the trails in Grindstone, the trail in the Bear Creek Nature Area, and the trails in the Hinkson Woods Area.  He said then the City would be obligated to sign those particular trails, just as has been done with the MKT Trail, indicating that dogs on the trail must be on a four foot leash.  Mr. Campbell said that would meet some of his objections and asked if that was Mr. Janku's thought as well.  Mr. Janku said to some extent it did.  He said what the Mayor was suggesting seemed to be closer to what Mr. Green was suggesting.  Mr. Coffman said he did not see much distinction either way.  He thought either would work equally well.
    Mr. Boeckmann said Mr. Janku's motion did not state who was going to do the designating and did not establish standards for designation.  Mr. Janku said the designation could be done by the Parks and Recreation staff.  He said the ordinance could be amended to say that, but did not see how he could incorporate standards.
    Mayor Hindman said people had been taking their dogs out to these areas to run for years and years.  He did not understand what the big deal was about.
    Mr. Campbell said the difference was that the Council would be designating certain areas which would increase the density of the use.  Mayor Hindman did not think there would be a significant change.
    Mr. Janku withdrew his motion.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion to further amend B116-97 by adding "except that the Parks Department may designate leash areas within the area".  The motion was seconded by Mr. Kruse and approved by voice vote.
    Ms. Coble felt that this would be passing the buck on to the staff.
    B116-97, as twice amended, was read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES: JANKU, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  CROCKETT, CAMPBELL.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B117-97     Amending Chapter 2 of the City Code to establish a Disabilities Commission.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that the City has had a Committee in the past that worked with the staff on disabilities.  He said quite a few improvements have been made throughout the community and particularly on City property.  He said the group requested that a permanent Commission be established by the Council consisting of 12 members, seven with significant disabilities, three business owners in the Columbia area, and two who have particular knowledge in providing services to individuals with disabilities.  Mr. Beck pointed out that it had been tabled from the last meeting because of questions the Council had regarding the appointments to the Commission.
    Mayor Hindman explained that while working towards creating this Commission, he discovered a lot of varying interests within the disabilities community and felt he had become very familiar with them.  He thought it might be a good idea, in the first round of appointments, for him to make the appointments subject to the consent of the Council.  He said he would be in favor of an amendment that would establish ordinary appointing procedures in the future in which the entire Council would make the appointments.
    Mr. Janku suggested that the Council pass the ordinance as is and come back at a later time to change the appointment procedure.
    B117-97 was read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B119-97     Accepting the donation of a tract of land on the northeast corner of Blue Ridge at the Bear
                    Creek Bridge.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said the donation of this tract of land was reviewed by the staff and it was felt that it could be of benefit to the City.  He said at some point in time there would probably be some type of pedestrian walkway over the bridge, or widening of the bridge, to accommodate bikes and pedestrians.  Secondly, this donation was part of the overall greenbelt program that was established in this area.  He said it was a very generous offer on the part of the property owners.
    Jane Addison, 2407 Shepard, a member of the Greenbelt Coalition, said this groups was always delighted to hear of any donations that go toward the greenbelt.  She thanked the Council and staff for continuing work on the greenbelt.  She also thanked the Rawson's for the donation.
    Mr. Janku asked that the City Manager and Mayor express the City's appreciation to the land owners at the appropriate time.  Mr. Beck said the staff would typically draft a letter for the Mayor's signature.
    Mayor Hindman said donations were the best hope for establishing the greenbelt.  He thanked the donors.
    B119-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B120-97     Authorizing an agreement with GTE Midwest, Inc., for parking.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that staff had been proceeding with the purchase of a tract of land at the northwest corner of the "focus block".  In return for GTE relinquishing their lease rights to the surface parking lot, this agreement would authorize the assurance of up to 31 spaces in the new parking garage.  He said GTE would be paying the same rate as others would for the garage. Mr. Beck said the proposal was a fair one and he recommended approval.
    Ms. Coble asked what the 31 designated spaces was proportionately with the open spaces for public.  Mr. Beck said there would be approximately 375 parking spaces total.
    B120-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B121-97     Authorizing an agreement with Boone County Regional Sewer District regarding
                     purchasing the Juvenile Justice Center pump station and force main, and appropriating
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said this agreement would authorize the City to purchase a small pumping station from the Regional Sewer District that serves the Juvenile Justice Center area.  He said there was a mobile home park in the area that has been experiencing problems with their lagoon.  After quite a bit of discussion, Mr. Beck said staff was suggesting approval of the arrangement.   Mayor Hindman asked if it was true that the mobile home park was not within the City limits.  Mr. Beck said that was correct, as was also true with the Juvenile Justice Center and some of the other area.  Mayor Hindman asked if the City had the right to request annexation.  Mr. Beck said the biggest question was how the City would deal with the mobile home park because of the many ownerships.
    B121-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B124-97     Confirming the contract for the Forum Boulevard improvement project, and appropriating
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said four very competitive bids had been received ranging from about $1.277 million to $1.392 million.  The low bid was from Central Bridge in the amount of $1,276,366.46.  He explained that the project would be paid in part by federal funds, state funds, from the City's 1/4% sales tax, and from the City's development fund.  Mr. Beck explained that the development fund was something the developers pay into over and above their other costs toward road work.
    Mr. Campbell asked about the construction timeline for the project.  Mr. Patterson said staff hoped to have the contractor begin work within the next 30 days.  He said it was not likely that everything would be finished this construction season, but they did feel that the paving would be done.  He said it would be a usable street before the end of the year.  Mr. Patterson said staff planned to have a meeting with area property owners after the pre-construction meeting.  The contractor will meet with homeowners and listen to their concerns, and explain what the process and procedures will be for construction.
    Mayor Hindman asked if there would be a pedestrian crossing put in later.  Mr. Patterson said that was correct.  He said all of the wiring would be put into the project to accommodate it.  He said the actual crossing will be constructed in conjunction with getting the break in access for the connection to Westwinds.
    Mr. Kruse asked how one might have any additional input into design issues at this time.  He was specifically referring to the retaining wall.  Mr. Beck said any plan changes done after the contract was awarded would be handled through change orders.  Mr. Kruse said he was not thinking about anything major.  He had a few ideas that he will put in memo form to Mr. Beck.  Mr. Beck said it could be reviewed with the contractor.
    B124-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B125-97     Confirming the contract for street construction on Silvey Street from West Broadway to
                     Worley Street.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this construction would create a collector street on the west side of the new middle school.  He said the six bids received on this project ranged from $387,000 to about $459,000, depending upon the materials used.  The low bid of Emery Sapp & Sons was being recommended in the amount of $387,745.30.  He said this project, as well as the last one, were both under the engineer's estimate.
    Mr. Kruse asked if the amount included the landscaping.  Mr. Beck said it did.
    B125-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B127-97     Annexing property south of Nifong Boulevard.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck commented that the property in question was about 19 acres of City-owned land adjacent to the Woodhaven property.
    B127-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B128-97     Authorizing the sale of several City-owned lots along Aztec Boulevard.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that when the City worked on improvements to the Indian Hills area, new street work had been completed.  He said it was discussed at that time that the City would declare a certain number of those lots, that were not to be utilized as part of the Indian Hills Park area, as surplus and would be sold competitively.  He said this proposal would allow for the sale of nine lots, with the City retaining four lots for the Park.  Staff proposed advertising for sealed bids after the appraisal work is completed.  Mr. Beck explained different ways the City could dispose of property.  Mr. Beck received several calls relating to a couple of the lots.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if it would be possible for people who own lots adjoining the City lots to be given first option of buying them at the appraised value.  Mr. Boeckmann said the ordinance reads, "any real property deemed by the Council to have the unique or enhanced value to any person because of its accessibility, configuration, location, size, or use may be sold, traded, or leased to such person".  He said the Council would have to make that finding if the City wanted to sell the lots to adjacent property owners.  He said the ordinance could be amended by simply deleting those restrictions and then requests could be processed on a case by case basis.  Mr. Boeckmann said there were some constitutional restraints which include not being able to sell property for less than what it is worth to a private person, or sell it at reduced value to anyone.
    Mrs. Crockett would like to see the lots offered for sale to the adjacent property owners at the appraised value and if these residents did not want them, the lots could go out for sealed bids.  She asked if the adjoining property owners had been contacted regarding sale of the lots or whether they had been posted for sale.  Mr. Hancock said staff had not been authorized to do so.
    Mr. Janku asked which lots people were interested in.  Mrs. Crockett thought one of the adjoining property owners, Mr. Stell, was present.
    Jim Stell, 4901 Aztec, explained that four lots had been maintained for many years by the Parks and Recreation Department.  He said two of the lots have a significant number of trees on them and could not be built upon without losing trees.  He said residents wanted to keep these lots as green space.
    There was a discussion about what process the Council should follow and whether or not this issue should be tabled.  It was suggested that an ordinance be drafted for introduction at the next meeting which would amend the present code and would enable sales to adjoining land owners at the appraised value.
    Mrs. Crockett made the motion that B128-97 be tabled to June 16, 1997.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Kruse and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. Janku suggested that the City Manager be authorized to obtain appraisals on the property.

B130-97     Approving the Final Plat of East Pointe, Plat 2-C.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this plat creates one C-3 zoned lot.  The plat meets all subdivision regulations and is in conformance with the approved preliminary plat.
    Jane Addison, 2407 Shepard, vice-chair of Shepard Boulevard Neighborhood Association, said documentation on this plat had been distributed to the Council at the last meeting.  She said the Council received a petition with over 400 signatures from the three different neighborhood associations involved with the intersection of Stadium Boulevard, Audubon Drive, and East Pointe Drive.  She said residents have had problems with the intersection since 1993.  Ms. Addison said the homeowner associations were still waiting for a response from the Department of Transportation.  She said approval of this plat does not take into account the increased traffic that would be encountered by people who live around the intersection.  With an increase of possibly thousands of cars generated by the movie theater, residents were still very concerned about safety and access.  If at all possible, homeowners wanted plat approval delayed in hopes that would spur the Department of Transportation to look again at the intersection.
    Elvin Sapp, 2313 Deer Creek Court, owner of the property, felt the plat was in order.  He had met with the neighborhood associations a couple of times and had discussed their traffic concerns.  Mr. Sapp said he had done his best to work out the problems and representatives were present from Hollywood Theater.  He reported that Hollywood Theater indicated they would pay for half of the stop light at the intersection.  As the developer, Mr. Sapp said he was willing to pay the other half.  He said they realized that state approval must first be acquired.
    Mayor Hindman asked Mr. Sapp if he would cooperate with the City in asking for approval.  Mr. Sapp said he would like for the City to prepare the request.  Mayor Hindman said the City would do that, but would expect him to be in favor of it.  Mr. Sapp said he would cooperate.
    Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Sapp if he thought there was any need for right or left turn lanes at the intersection.  Mr. Sapp said he was not a traffic engineer, but had been at the intersection on several occasions.  His company would have to hire professional people to make that determination.  Mrs. Crockett asked if that should be decided by the Highway Department.  Mr. Campbell said that was probably true.  However, if changes are to be make in the area, perhaps it should be part of a package of improvements in which all are done at one time.
    Mr. Patterson said an additional turn lane would be subject to Highway Department approval.  He reminded everyone that it would be similar to the intersection at Conley Road and 63 -- a package.  He said any geometrics that are necessary would have to be part of the signal approval.  He said if turn lanes were required, that would be part of the condition of approval.  At this point, Mr. Patterson said he did not know that the Highway Department could answer the question about turn lanes being required because they have obviously taken the position that at this time signals are not warranted.  Based on traffic projections from the new theater, he said the Highway Department would use this information to calculate whether or not improvements were deemed necessary.  Mr. Patterson said if the plat is approved by the Council, staff would work with the developer and forward this information to the Highway Department.  He said the basic question was whether or not the Highway Department would even permit a signal there.  Mr. Patterson thought if the traffic projections are what is anticipated, a signal would be permitted.  At this point, the intersection could be designed.  Mr. Patterson recommended that an agreement be developed at a later time establishing commitments.
    Mr. Campbell realized that Mr. Sapp had offered to pay for the light, but asked who would pay for any pavement that would be needed.  Mr. Patterson said his understanding was that the pavement would be part of the signal to be installed.  He asked Mr. Sapp if he understood that to be part of the project.  Mr. Sapp said he did not understand that to be part of it.  He said they agreed to pay for the signal, which is what he thought the neighbors wanted.  Mr. Sapp said Hollywood Theater had offered the letter of commitment, but he was sure that was contingent upon the construction of the building.   Mr. Sapp said he would pay for half of the signal light and the theater would pay for half.  Mr. Patterson said the Highway Department would not issue a permit if they felt traffic lanes were warranted or needed and these were not included as part of the project.  He said the Highway Department would expect all of it to be locally funded.   Mayor Hindman asked if he understood correctly that if the Council approved the final plat, the developer and the theater agreed to pay for the stop light.  However, if the stop light is going to require lane widening, the developer and theater were not obligating themselves to pay for the widening.  He understood it would be up to the City to pay for it.  Mrs. Crockett pointed out that the theater would not be the only ones using the stop light.  She said the residents would be using it as well.  She said at least the stop light would be paid for.  Mr. Sapp said as far as he knew, there was nothing in the subdivision regulations that even requires them to install a stop light.
    If the traffic count justifies signalization and widening, Mr. Kruse asked if the Highway Department would be responsible for it.  Mr. Patterson said the Highway Department's policy is that the only way there would be any money available would be if this intersection was classified as a safety project.  He said the intersection itself had not demonstrated itself to be an unsafe intersection.  He said it would be very difficult to expect the Highway Department to volunteer funding for it.  Mr. Patterson said the Highway Department has projects that have already been promised that they do not have money for.
    Pete Peterson, Director of Construction for Hollywood Theaters, said they have traffic studies available for similar size projects.  He said common sense would signal the need for a light in that location.  He said whether or not the state determines that turn lanes are needed remains to be seen.  He said it may or may not happen and he understood Mr. Sapp's reluctance to agree to it.  Mr. Peterson said his company proposes to build a state of the art complex at that location -- one that would preclude the possibility of another theater chain coming to town.  Time being of the essence, Mr. Peterson said he needed to open this project by the first of the year.  He would not let the turn lane stop him and would be more than willing to supply the state and city with the traffic studies.  He thought the state would be a tremendous help and said he would be really surprised if they did not jump on this.  Mr. Campbell asked if he meant "jump on" in terms of approval, but not funding.  Mr. Peterson said that was precisely what he meant.  He said the Highway Department would not have the same motivation the theater has.  He said his company has a responsibility to their customers, not only while they are in the building, but when they leave.  He said part of their obligation as a good neighbor and a business in the community was to do what they need to do to ensure life safety.  He said Hollywood Theater would do whatever they needed to.
    Mr. Coffman asked how many screens were planned.  Mr. Peterson anticipated there would be 14 screens.  Mr. Coffman asked if a stop light would increase their potential revenue.  Mr. Peterson said there was no doubt about it and added that it would be good for the people in the subdivision as well.  Mr. Coffman asked if there were rough figures as to what the traffic flow would be.  Mr. Paterson said assuming every show was sold out, which does not happen, some 700 cars would be generated.
    Mr. Kruse reminded Mr. Peterson, in addition to the traffic safety issues, that the community really likes this particular entryway into their city.  He said citizens would like for the theater to be a state-of-the-art facility visually as well.  Mr. Kruse would like to see as many of the trees, if not all, preserved.  Mr. Peterson was aware of these concerns and visibility was not as important to them as location is.  This company is not going to spend $8 million on a popcorn stand and turn it into a barren wasteland.  He said the landscaping was a very important part of it.  Mr. Kruse added that the architecture was also important.  Mr. Peterson said they had a very capable architect.
    Mr. Janku suggested making the request to the state a high priority.  He said if it came from the City Manager and the Mayor, he thought it would get done a lot quicker.  He said the Highway Department needed to know it was a very important issue to the community.
    Mike Holden, 2200 Bushnell Drive, said he had spoken with the Department of Transportation on May 6th following a homeowners association meeting.  He was informed that this was a tabled issue until more information is received.  He said the Highway Department had not done anything further because they were waiting for the site study or some sort of estimate as to what kind of traffic was anticipated.  Mr. Holden thought it was just a matter of getting that information to them so they could re-evaluate it.  He said it did not seem like any big deal at all.  He suggested approving the plat and making it a priority to get the approval from the state.
    Leslie Trogdon, 2402 Case Pointe, President of the East Pointe Property Owners Association, thanked Mr. Sapp and the Hollywood Theater owners for their input in helping the residents with this existing safety hazard at the intersection.  She said her group had worked very hard to get over 400 signatures which were presented at the May 5th meeting.  She said something needed to be done to the intersection before the theater opens.  She had also been told by the state that it was just a matter of getting the needed documentation together so they could sit down and talk about the issue.
    Mayor Hindman asked if Mr. Patterson would gather all of the information, including the petition, and go to the Highway Department with it.  Mr. Patterson said that was correct.  He said staff would get the information in writing from the developer so the Highway Department could be informed of what exactly was being proposed.  Also provided would be the traffic information for a determination of whether the projections would indicate a signal.  He did not anticipate that being a problem with the Highway Department, but said it was difficult to promise what the Highway Department would do.  He said it may take two or three months to get the permit, but once that was obtained, the developer could begin on the work.
    Mr. Coffman told Ms. Trogdon that he knew she had been in contact with a lot of the East Pointe neighbors and wondered if there were any other additional concerns about the theater development in regard to traffic, lighting, or anything else.  Ms. Trogdon said residents were interested in having some conversations with Hollywood Theaters, as well as with Mr. Coffman, to discuss the lighting of the parking lots.  She said homeowners wanted something that would not interfere with the wonderful living conditions that exist in their neighborhood.  Mr. Coffman volunteered his help.
    Suzanne Barner Kitchen, 1901 Bluff Pointe, said she and her husband were quite concerned about the traffic situation.  They were especially concerned about coming from Audubon going south over to East Pointe Drive.  Because of the median, some cars could not be seen at all and they have had several close calls.  She said the light was definitely needed and added that she felt turn lanes would be needed as well.  Other concerns included tree removal, lighting, and the noise pollution that might occur.   Mr. Kruse reminded everyone that when the Council voted on this plat a couple of years ago, he had voted against the C-3 request because he thought it should be a C-P.  He was now encouraged by the comments of the construction supervisor that this will be a high quality development.  He was hopeful that everything would be first class.  Mr. Kruse was appreciative of the offers to help with the cost of the intersection.
    As the project goes forward with the stop light, Mr. Janku asked that they take into account a pedestrian crossing.  He said movie theaters attract young people who may be walking or riding.  Mayor Hindman agreed.
    Mrs. Crockett thanked Hollywood Theaters and Mr. Sapp for their kind offers.  She pointed out that the plat meets all City regulations and said they technically would not have to participate in the improvements in order to get the plat approved.  She commended them for going the extra mile.
    Mayor Hindman said Mr. Sapp's developments have been very good.  He said this was an important entrance into the City of Columbia and development that occurs would have a long-term impact on what people think of Columbia as they enter and leave.  He thanked Mr. Sapp for his special attention to the matter.
    Mr. Coffman thanked Mr. Sapp and Mr. Peterson for their offers to pay for the light.  He said it was of the highest priority in his ward.  He offered to meet with the developer and construction people regarding the concerns of the neighborhoods.
    B130-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

PR70-97     Establishing a Percent for Art program.
    The policy resolution was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this was a new program similar to what quite a few other cities around the country have been adopting.  The purpose of the program is to set aside one percent of City public improvement projects for the Arts. This policy resolution defines the "art" and also establishes a mechanism as to how projects would be administered and what projects would be eligible for involvement.  Mr. Beck said it would not include underground projects, or projects less than $100,000.  There have been City staff meetings to try to address questions as to how this program might affect the implementation of future public improvement projects.  After several meetings, Mr. Beck said staff felt the program could be administered and projects could be planned and properly budgeted with the guidelines contained in this policy resolution.
    Ed Vought, 4511 Fallwood Court, Chair of the Cultural Affairs Commission, recognized Commissioners present in the audience.  He said the Cultural Affairs Commission had examined similar legislation across the country and the results were before the Council in the form of this resolution.  He thanked the Council for their support of the Arts.
    Bo Frasier, 1601 Stonehaven, Chair of the Policy Committee, thanked the Council for putting the issue before the Commission.  This is a tremendous opportunity enhancing the public environment of the City as well as enhancing civic pride.  This program will improve and expand the value and use of public buildings and facilities, and enrich the lives of Columbia residents.  He said the Council would have total control over the project.  Mr. Frasier explained the make-up of the committee.
    Mayor Hindman expressed the Council's appreciation for the tremendous amount of work put into this policy resolution.
    Mr. Campbell said when he was first elected to the Council, the City had a relatively low ranking by Money Magazine.  He said the reason given was that the City was not supporting the arts as much as it should.  He said the City has shifted its focus greatly since that time and this was another significant step forward.
    Mr. Janku pointed out that the process for selection was set-up to include the public.  He said a lot of input will be obtained as the program moves forward.
    Mr. Beck said a lot of cities dedicate two and three percent to the arts, although this one percent is not necessarily a big number, it is a good starting point.
    The vote on PR70-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

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

B122-97     Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code regarding parking west of 13 North Eighth Street.
B123-97     Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code to set the speed limit on the US 63 Connector.
B129-97     Approving the final plat of Emerald Ridge, Plat 1.
B131-97     Approving a replat of Lot 5 of Columbia Industrial Development Corporation, Plat 2.
B132-97     Vacating a street easement for Goodwin Pointe Drive.
B133-97     Vacating a utility easement and the utility portion of a drainage and utility easement in
                     Boone Industrial Park East, Plat 1.
B134-97     Accepting electric and water utility conveyances.
R72-97       Setting a public hearing regarding construction of a flood intake structure at Wetland
                    Treatment Unit No. 3.
R73-97       Setting a public hearing regarding construction of sanitary sewers in Sewer District No.
                    142 (Anthony Street area).

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

R74-97     Authorizing an agreement with Maplewood Barn Association.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said staff is recommending approval of continuing this ongoing agreement with Maplewood Barn Association.  He said $3,500 had been budgeted for it this fiscal year.
    The vote on R74-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R75-97     Authorizing a right of use permit for landscaping the Daniel Boone Building parking lot.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that the staff had been actively pursuing the Adopt A Spot program throughout the City with good success for its first year.  He said this particular permit was for the City's Public Works Department, administration and engineering employees requesting to adopt the planter north of the Daniel Boone Building.
    Mrs. Crockett asked about the cost of putting in the planters at this location.  Mr. Patterson said it had been around $14,000 total.
    On behalf of the Council, Mayor Hindman said they appreciated the department taking on this project and the demonstration of the employee's pride in the City.  Mr. Patterson said he was proud of the employees also.  He said it had been initiated by the employees, and as their efforts on Bear Creek last week prove, it was a demonstration that there are City employees that do care about the environment.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if there would be small Adopt A Spot signs posted as had been discussed at one time.  Mayor Hindman also thought signs should be posted.  Mr. Janku thought that had been left up to the discretion of staff.  Mr. Watkins reported that the signs were on order.  Mrs. Crockett asked if the person who adopted a particular spot would be named on the sign.  Mr. Watkins said this was correct.
    The vote on R75-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R76-97     Accepting an emergency shelter grant from the Department of Social Services and
                  authorizing agreements with three social service agencies.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that the City's allocation of funds from the State Department of Social Services was $60,000.  He said $15,000 was being recommended for each of the four different agencies.
    Ms. Coble understood that New Horizon bought-out THA and all of the other agencies had continued their contracts.  She asked what the staff was waiting for.  Mr. Steinhaus said they were waiting for a copy of New Horizon's audit, certification with DMH, and certification that they will provide the services outlined in the proposal submitted by THA.  He said New Horizon was also going to submit a revised proposal to the Community Services Advisory Commission for City funding.  Staff will need to come back to the Council to address the issue of revising the current contract with THA and have it transferred.  Mr. Steinhaus said he should be provided with the information soon and then he will move forward with the recommendation.  He spoke with other mental health providers in the community and they had all said this was a top-notch organization.  Ms. Coble agreed with this statement.
    Ms. Coble asked how long it had been the policy that the City does equivalent grant awards on Stewart McKinny Act monies.  Mr. Steinhaus said that was started prior to his coming into the office.  Ms. Coble asked about a ballpark figure for the number served by the Welcome Home agency.  Mr. Steinhaus said they have beds to serve nine persons at a time, and they report to serve about 24 to 36 men over a period of a year.  He said Welcome Home has been in operation almost three years and this agency has served a little over 40 people so far in those three years.  Ms. Coble said that was where she had a problem.  She said when the client loads, the bed space, and the number of other non-residential services provided by each of the other three agencies are examined, these agencies provide those total services in one week at every one of these facilities.  Mr. Steinhaus agreed.  He said Welcome Home was dealing with a specialized population.  If it is the desire of the Council, Mr. Steinhaus said staff could develop a process to look at these agencies on a more equivalent basis and have the Commission review it.  For $15,000, Ms. Coble found the numbers to be significant.
    It was the agreement of the Council that Mr. Steinhaus should look into this issue for the next year.
    The vote on R76-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R77-97     Authorizing transfer of funds for Daniel Boone Building renovation.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that as various floors are being renovated in the Daniel Boone Building, additional furniture and equipment is needed.  He said this information had been unknown at the time the budget was discussed.  His recommendation was a transfer of funds out of the contingency account.  The furniture for the mezzanine conference rooms will be budgeted in the next fiscal year.
    The vote on R77-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, COBLE.  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:

B135-97     Engineer's report and authorizing partial payment of differential costs for an 8-inch water
                     main in the Timberland Subdivision.
B136-97     Engineer's report, accepting conveyances and authorizing payment of differential cost for
                     a 12-inch water main serving Hunters Gate, Plat 2.
B137-97     Accepting water and underground electric utility conveyances.
B138-97     Authorizing acquisition of an easement along State Route 763 for construction of an
                     8-inch water main to serve Phenora Subdivision.
B139-97     Calling for bids for sidewalk construction along portions of State Route 763, Blue Ridge
                     Road, Katy Lane and Forum Boulevard.
B140-97     Authorizing land acquisition for the Sewer District No. 142 (Anthony Street area) project.
B141-97     Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code to include the municipal parking lot at Fourth and
                     Cherry in the four-hour parking zone.
B142-97     Vacating a sewer easement on Lot 1 of Itschner Hill.
B143-97     Approving a replat of Lot 81, Country Club Villas III.
B144-97     Approving a replat of Lot 82, Country Club Villas III.
B145-97     Approving the final RMH development plan of Richland Heights, Phase 2.
B146-97     Approving the final plat of Creek Pointe, Plat 1.
B147-97     Authorizing an agreement with Jack and Doris Overton pertaining to Chapel Ridge Road,
                     and approving the final plat of Chapel Hill Estates, Plat 3.
B148-97     Rezoning five parcels of property in the East Campus area.
B149-97     Authorizing a right of use permit allowing Boone County Regional Sewer District to
                     construct a sewer line across a portion of Lake of the Woods Recreation area.
(A)     Garden Plots.
    Mr. Beck said that Mr. Green had provided a fairly detailed memo regarding the City's garden plot program. He said 73 of the 74 City spaces available had been rented at $17.50 per plot.  This report had been submitted as the result of a request at the last meeting for the use of surplus City-owned land for a community garden.  He pointed out that as the Council starts examining these kinds of programs mid-budget year, it was very easy to get off track as to prioritizing.  He said this request may not be a large amount for one lot, but there could be requests throughout the City.  Mr. Beck said he was in favor of gardening, but if the City was going to run water lines to these community gardens, the Council needed to determine what fund account the work should be paid from.  He suspected every neighborhood park has an area that might be suitable for some gardening, but funding would need to be established if a water line is to be provided.
    Mr. Janku stated in regard to the scheduled comments earlier relating to the Clinton Street garden request, there might be an area at the Again Street Park which might work better and already have water adjacent to it.  He said there may be other areas throughout the community, like the Indian Hills Park, that might work well.  Depending upon where the plots are situated, he said there may already be water at these locations and the Community Garden Coalition has agreed to pay for the cost of the water.  Ms. Coble said this group has agreed to pay the cost of the water at the sites where it has been decided to join forces with others who will use the garden.  She did not understand Mr. Clark to be saying that the Community Garden Coalition would pay for water anywhere around the City.
    Mr. Beck said to establish a community garden would first require a water line, then a water meter, someone to pay the water utility, and someone to collect from the gardeners, unless the $17.50 program covered the water.  He did not think it did.  Ms. Coble thought Mr. Clark's statement had been that the Community Garden Coalition would be willing to even have a garden hose run from some type of above-ground metered access point.  She also thought the testimony was that the trees on the lot might cause a problem, but tree removal was not asked for right now, nor were they talking about a shed.  Ms. Coble agreed a policy was needed, but did not want to see this request singled out.
    Mr. Campbell said he was in favor of making the land available wherever possible for garden plots, but thought the Council should be very cautious about investments because it had been his experience that some of the costs can quickly become more than the yield of the produce.
    Ms. Coble noted that the minutes reflected that she had requested a report on how the City achieved the arrangement on the Ninth Street garden spot where a water line had been run.  She said this information could possibly help in creating a policy that would assist in getting this issue resolved.  Mr. Green asked if there was still a garden on Ninth Street.  Ms. Coble said it had been moved up a block.  Mr. Green asked who owned the property.  Ms. Coble did not know, but it was part of the Community Garden Coalition's work.  Mr. Green asked where this group received their funding.  Ms. Coble said they were a United Way funded agency.  Mr. Green said the lot on Clinton Street could be made available to residents with an agreement that it be part of the City's arrangement with the Community Garden Coalition.  Ms. Coble suggested this issue be further discussed at a work session.  Again, Ms. Coble asked for information regarding the City granting access to water and a meter that was paid for by the Community Garden Coalition.  She wanted to know how this arrangement had been arrived at so that the City may possibly do it again.

(B)     Rock Quarry Road Scenic Roadway Designation Request.
    Mr. Beck said staff suggested that this designation request be Council initiated.  He said if that was what the Council wished to do, he wanted the Planning and Zoning Commission to be aware of it.
    Mr. Kruse said when he brought this issue up, he had suggested that this first scenic road designation program be a collaborative effort between the neighborhood association and the City.  The neighborhood association would not be asked to be the petitioner for the rezoning.  He said the report implies that it would be a City initiated rezoning which is fine.  Mr. Beck said the zoning would have to be initiated by either the property owner or the City.  It was decided it would be quicker to have the City initiate the zoning.  Mr. Kruse said the neighborhood association would be interested in helping with the cost in the interest of moving the process along.
    Mr. Janku suggested that before hearings are scheduled, a letter be sent to affected residents and some initial discussions held.  He did not think everyone was going to want this designation and thought it might be a good idea to have a neighborhood meeting or two before bringing it forward.  Mr. Kruse said it was his impression that this has been discussed by most, if not all, of the property owners and that there was maybe one property owner that might have a problem with it.  He thought Mr. Janku's idea was a good one, but did not think in this case it was going to be a problem.
    Mr. Kruse made the motion that the staff be directed to proceed with establishing a scenic roadway overlay along Rock Quarry Road.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(C)     Intra-Departmental Transfer of Funds Request.
 Request approved.

(D)     City-Owned Property to Purchase Ice Rink.
    Mayor Hindman said the idea of selling a portion of Cosmopolitan Park to private developers for the purpose of developing an ice rink had already received considerable media coverage.  He was very much in favor of having an ice rink in Columbia, but believed it should be a recreational ice rink rather than a spectator facility.  Mayor Hindman said the proposal received would be a commercial venture which would require not only admissions, but probably the ability to hold crowds.  He said the rink would be, at least in part, a spectator facility which would not be as good as just a recreational facility as far as he was concerned.
    Mr. Janku agreed with Mayor Hindman.  He said the Mayor's concerns were valid about the nature of the facility and how much it would actually be used by youth.  He said it was similar to how much the Hearnes Center is used for intramural basketball.  Mr. Janku said if the rink has professional or semi-professional hockey and other events that would tie-up the facility, the City would not really get the type of youth activity center that has been sought.  He agreed the City should begin looking at other options, including joint ventures with private enterprise, and whether or not it should be situated on public property.  Different options need to be examined because the City would probably not be able to rely solely on public dollars.  Also, Mr. Janku said anyone that drives through the intersection at West Boulevard/Creasy Springs/West Boulevard knows that it presently is a very bad intersection without the types of demands that a facility like this would place on it.  Mr. Janku thought the Council should explore all options and that there should be a heavier emphasis on youth recreation.
    Mayor Hindman said the idea of selling part of the park property was probably not the only possibility.  He said there might be a long-term lease or something in which the City would not relinquish the property title.
    Mr. Campbell thought this was something that should be directed to the Parks and Recreation Commission and ask for their input.
    Mr. Janku suggested the possibility of developing a request for proposals so information could be compiled on what citizens might be interested in, and determine what other groups were out there and willing to come forward to assist in funding such a project.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if Cosmo Park had been donated to the City or if it had been purchased.  Mr. Campbell said part of the land was purchased for an airport and part for a park.  Mr. Green thought this particular area had been purchased for an airport in the 20's or 30's.
    Mr. Campbell strongly recommended that the Parks and Recreation Commission hold hearings on this issue because of the considerable sensitivity about what might happen at Cosmo Park.
    Mr. Coffman asked if the Commission would be looking at this specific proposal, or just an ice rink in general at other locations.  Mr. Janku said he would suggest the broader approach.
    Mayor Hindman asked if he understood the Council wanted the Parks and Recreation Commission to use this report as a starting point to investigate community interest in an ice rink, including this proposal.  Mr. Janku suggested broadening it to include groups, individuals, or private companies that want to approach the City about a rink.

(E)     Forest Releaf Grant.
    Mr. Beck explained that grant funds are available through this organization out of St. Louis.  He said the proposal was for the City to apply for funds to purchase tools for the voluntary tree planting program and maintenance projects.  The estimated amount to be applied for would be $4,000.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that the staff be authorized to apply for the grant through Forest Releaf of St. Louis.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

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

Davis, J. Christopher, 4504 Ria Street, Ward 2 - term to expire 6/1/00
Jones, Graham D., 2017 Martinshire, Ward 4 - term to expire 6/1/00

McCollum, Mary Anne, 601 N. William, Ward 3 - term to expire 5/31/01

Bhullar, Hardeep S., 703 Hilltop, Ward 6 - term to expire 5/31/00
Glasgow, Susan M., 410 N. 9th , Ward 1 - term to expire 5/31/00
Kloeppel, Terry L., 4308 Watertown Place, Ward 5 - term to expire 5/31/00

Barrow, Jeffrey C., 1007 Coats, Ward 2 - term to expire 5/31/02
Lamb, Charles G., 1202 Cinnamon Hill, Ward 6 - term to expire 5/31/02

Watson, Paul D., 3910 N. Locust Grove Church, County - term to expire 5/31/99

Anderson, Terri A., 1100 Falcon Drive - Ward 6
Delwood, Donald M., 1442 Mesa - County
Glasgow, Susan M., 410 N. Ninth - Ward 1
Husar, Hunter F., 319 Laws Hall - Ward 5
McConnell, Paul B., 2257 Alamos Place - County
Smith, Aaron T., 4601 Akeman Bridge Road - County
Smith, Patricia N., 4601 Akeman Bridge Road - County

    Mr. Kruse mentioned at pre-Council dinner his interest in attending a growth management conference in July.  He encouraged others to attend it as well.  He suggested a contingent of people including representatives of REDI, the Chamber, the Citizens for Responsible Growth, the City Council, and the City staff as well.  He said participants could learn about innovative techniques that are going on around the country in terms of growth management.
    Mr. Kruse said he had read an article in the City/County Magazine about a site plan point system review process in Colleyville, Texas.  He asked the staff to get some information on it and report back to the Council on it.
    Ms. Coble asked about the progress toward a bus shelter to be placed on Garth in front of Oak Towers.  She said the bus route has been changed and instead of residents being picked-up under the canopy, they have to be picked-up in the street.  Ms. Coble said there had been a lot of concern about getting any kind of comment back to the tenant association regarding the bus shelter.  Mr. Patterson said he would get her a report on it.
    Ms. Coble said a proposal had been discussed regarding the possibility of the City enacting a system to have an on-call American sign language interpreter to assist and be notified by joint communications when there is an emergency.  This would involve any type of public safety crisis emergency involving a deaf member in the community.  She said there was a very good plan proposed for how it might be established.  Ms. Coble said there were those who are certified interpreters who also are EMT's and fire fighters.  Ms. Coble will forward the information she received to City staff so a formal proposal could be developed.
    Mr. Campbell said there has been a continuing problem with a large tractor trailer parked on Loch Lane.  He would like to see an ordinance drafted that would prohibit this from occurring.  Mrs. Crockett asked if this would be just on Loch Lane, or would affect any residential street.  Mr. Campbell said he would prefer that it read residential street, but thought that should be up to the staff.  He said in most cases, these large trailers do not fit on residential streets very well.  Mayor Hindman asked if there was some kind or ordinance regarding large motor homes.  Mr. Janku said there were no ordinances that addressed this issue either.  Mayor Hindman suggested looking into both issues.
    Regarding the earlier discussion about a skating rink, Mr. Janku reported that Maryland Heights had created some sort of corporation issue bonds in order to finance a recreation center.  He asked the staff to check into why this alternative had been used and whether Columbia should emulate them.
    Kenneth Kavanaugh, 3810 Clark Lane, explained that the City would be entering into negotiations with him for obtaining right-of-way for an 18 inch water trunk line which is proposed to run along the edge of his property.  He reported his family has owned the property since 1933 and he was going to be given no choice but to sell the land to the City for this public purpose.  He said it was like selling a family heirloom to the public.  Mr. Kavanaugh said it has a value that far exceeds the market value.  He explained that the water trunk line would run the full distance from the Hampton Inn to the Pine Grove Trailer Court and that the proposal was striking down a swath of trees, three-eighths of a mile long, and 25 feet wide.  Mr. Kavanaugh said once the trees are removed, the appearance of his property will be destroyed.
    Mr. Campbell suggested that the Council address the question of when right-of-way is obtained through timbered areas, and whether it is necessary to get a maximum of 25 feet.  He thought it could be reduced in some cases.
    Mayor Hindman asked that the Water and Light Department provide the Council with more information regarding this situation so the Council could better understand what is going on in the area.
    Mr. Patterson noted that the ordinance to acquire the easement had been approved on April 21st.
    The meeting adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
                                                                                                 Respectfully submitted,
                                                                                                 Penny St. Romaine
                                                                                                 City Clerk