JULY 21, 1997

    The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri, met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, July 21, 1997, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri.  The roll was taken with the following results:  Council Members COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, and KRUSE were present.  Mayor HINDMAN was absent.  The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also present.

    The minutes of the regular meeting of July 7, 1997, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Ms. Coble and a second by Mr. Janku.

    The agenda, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Kruse and a second by Mr. Janku.



B170-97     Rezoning from R-3 to C-P property on the southwest corner of Wilson Avenue and Lee
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this bill had been continued from the last meeting and understood the owner of the property and the neighborhood association had continued negotiations.
    Mr. Hancock noted that Mr. Boeckmann had prepared a memo that revised Exhibits A and B.
    Mr. Coffman made the motion that B170-97 be amended by adding Exhibits A and B.  The motion was seconded by Ms. Coble.
    Mayor pro-tem Campbell opened the public hearing.
    Janet Hammon, 1416 Wilson, President of the East Campus Neighborhood Association, noted that the Council had received the agreement reached by the Lee Street Store owners and the Neighborhood Association.  She said the Council had also received a signed letter reiterating combined support of the agreement.  She asked for Council support of this request.
    Gene Gerke, co-owner of the Lee Street Store, said a request for a zoning change had been submitted three months ago.  He said it had taken a considerable amount of time and many public hearings to get to this point.
    Bonnie Bourne, 1506 University, spoke in favor of the request.  She said the agreement was a very good example of people in a neighborhood concerned about the quality of life and infrastructure.  Ms. Bourne said she was very pleased with the agreements reached on the historic district portion of the ordinance.
    Mayor pro-tem Campbell closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Coffman commented that he was very much in favor of the proposed historic preservation ordinance and was hopeful it could be moved along.  He said this issue was a prime example of why such an ordinance was needed and why it would be a good thing for the City.
    The motion to amend B170-97 per amendment sheets one and two, made by Mr. Coffman, seconded by Ms. Coble, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
    B170-97, as amended, was read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSENT:  HINDMAN.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B186-97     Rezoning from R-1 and C-1 to C-P property on the west side of Providence Outer
                    Roadway, and approving the C-P development plan of Providence Village South.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this tract of land contains about 23 acres and the request had been recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
    Mr. Hancock explained that the request had been divided into six tracts with rezoning being requested on all six.  A plan was being proposed on only one portion of the property -- Tract A.  He noted the design parameters for the C-P development plan will control overall development on the property such as the height of buildings, setbacks, etc.  In addition, Mr. Hancock said there is an agreement included as Exhibit A between the adjoining property owner and this property owner.  The essence of the agreement includes the provision of a 25 foot setback along the south property line.
    Regarding Tracts B and C, where C-3 and C-1 uses would be permitted, Mr. Kruse understood that a special use permit from the Council would be necessary before any construction of a communications tower occurs.  He noted that the Council was in the process of considering an ordinance that would govern the location and design of communication towers.  Without the adoption of such an ordinance at this time, he asked what control the City would have over communications towers.  In C-3 zoning, Mr. Hancock said communication towers require a conditional use permit, which must be granted by the Board of Adjustment.  On this tract, however, only allowed uses in C-3 were being permitted.  At any rate, Mr. Hancock said it was his opinion that a plan would have to be submitted for Council review, unless there is some state or federal regulation which would allow it.
    Mayor pro-tem Campbell opened the public hearing.
    David Rogers, an attorney with offices at 813 E. Walnut, spoke on behalf of both the applicant and the contract purchaser.  If approved, Mr. Rogers said both parties would be agreeable to an amendment that would either prohibit communication towers or require a request for such to come to the Council for approval.  Mr. Rogers said it had also been agreed upon as a condition of the plan that the area designated for open space and no development (the southwest corner of the property which is reasonably close to the public access trail proposed along Hinkson Creek) would contain an easement to allow public access to Hinkson Creek.  Mr. Rogers reported that any remaining trailers on the tract are slowly being relocated and/or consolidated to one area.
    Mayor pro-tem Campbell closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Kruse said he had the opportunity to meet with the property owner over the weekend and is intending to support the request.  He said those persons who will be required to move their trailers will be compensated for their relocation expenses.  In the long-run, he thought this request would be an improvement to the neighborhood and to the Fifth Ward.  Mr. Kruse said he would like to take the owner up on the offer to limit communications towers or, at least, to condition this plan upon towers not being built, and to provide a public access in the area being left as open space.  He felt even a trail access would be most appropriate.  Eventually, perhaps a linkage from this area could be accessed on the Providence Outer Roadway extending through the valley to Hinkson Creek.  He said if there was a way to get across the Creek at some point in time, one could get on to the new Hinkson Trail that is going to be built over the next couple of years.
    Mr. Kruse made the motion that B186-97 be amended by adding the word permitted to all uses allowed in various districts listed in numbers one through five on page two of the ordinance, and by deleting the word allowed.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Referring to Tract F, Mr. Rogers said his intentions were for "a trail easement" - the most intense of the three.
    Mr. Kruse made the motion that B186-97 be further amended to reflect a trail easement connecting Tract F along the western border of the property to its northern terminus.  He said Tract F, on the recording of the plan for the six acres, will establish a trail easement connecting Tract F and then along the western border of the property to its northern terminus.  Motion by Mr. Kruse, seconded by Ms. Coble, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
    B186-97, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSENT:  HINDMAN.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B187-97     Rezoning from R-3 to C-P property at 1206 Lakeview Avenue.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that the Planning and Zoning Commission had voted 6-1 for denial of the request.  He also pointed out that the staff had suggested that it would be preferable to have a plan in place rather than permitting open zoning.
    Mayor pro-tem Campbell opened the public hearing.
    Stan Elmore, a consulting engineer, spoke on behalf of the management trustee for the Miriam Hackett trust, the tract owner.  Mr. Elmore distributed drawings of the site.  He noted that Mr. Stevenson, the management trustee, had purchased this tract in 1973 and had managed it well as a residential rental.  Because Mr. Stevenson has recently purchased the former barbeque business on Business Loop 70, if this rezoning request is approved it would give him two pieces of commercial property in the long block between Edison Street and Rangeline.  Mr. Elmore said Mr. Stevenson had discussed with Mr. Trimm, owner of Tiger Pawn, the possibility of blending their land together as the back half of pawn shop lot is vacant.  He reported that rezoning had been attempted once before and Mr. Stevenson felt he had been penalized because his property was in good shape.  Mr. Elmore said the property was kept in shape so rent could be obtained from it, and did not think that should be discouraged.  He said property should not be rezoned only after becoming dilapidated and unoccupied.  He reminded the Council what the old Magnolia Inn looked like after it was left sitting vacant for a couple of years.
    Mr. Elmore said Mr. Stevenson believed the entire tract should be commercial and that he had the resources to begin acquiring property in this location.  He said there were eight houses remaining between the power plant, Rangeline, Business Loop 70, and Lakeview.  Mr. Elmore said this property has been scheduled for commercial zoning on the Land Use Plan for quite some time, but the Commission still voted against the rezoning request.  He thought part of the reasoning for denial was because the property is still in good shape.  Mr. Elmore noted that the City has a large impact on this property with the garage and the power plant dominating the east and north sides of Lakeview.  He said the City was not a bad neighbor, but these facilities do not add to a residential tenor.
    Mr. Janku asked if anyone knew who owned the lots to the west.  Mr. Elmore said the residents had been contacted regarding the public hearing and did not appear in objection, so he assumed there was little interest in the rezoning request.
    Mr. Kruse asked if these homes were rental properties.  Mr. Elmore said the home immediately adjacent is single family owner occupied (Lot 83).
    Mayor pro-tem Campbell closed the public hearing.
    Mrs. Crockett questioned if the Land Use Plan was calling for commercial in this area, why the proposed C-P request was being met with opposition.  Mr. Hancock did not think the Commission had a problem with the C-P zoning request, but that their preference had been for a plan to come in at some future point when Mr. Stevenson was done assembling the properties.  Mrs. Crockett said if the Council approves the request for C-P zoning, the owner would still have to come in with a plan when something is done with the land.  Mr. Hancock said that was true.  In that case, Mrs. Crockett saw nothing wrong with granting C-P zoning at this time.
    Mr. Janku said a structure could be removed without submission of a plan, although it would not make sense to do that.  Mr. Kruse said that could happen now.  Mr. Janku supported the idea that the staff recommended planned development and that the developer agreed to it.  He thought it was important that any business along the Business Loop be planned.  He also agreed with the fact that the property had been kept in good repair should not be held against the applicant.  He said the question was whether or not the property would remain in good condition until there is some significant development in the area, or if piece meal development would be attempted.  Mr. Janku said he did not know how quickly the Business Loop would redevelop into a commercial area.  He said maybe it would be better to suggest that the area remain residential long-term, and that the commercial development continues to be minor in nature.
    Mr. Campbell said for several years he has had considerable concern about two issues in areas such as this.  The first was the maintenance of a significant stock of low income housing.  He said there was simply no way this type of housing could be replaced with prices being what they are today.  Mr. Campbell felt the Council owed it to low income residents of the City to maintain affordable homes of good quality wherever possible.  He said that appears to be the case in this situation.  Secondly, he asked where the line should be drawn.  He said if the Council permitted this property to be rezoned to commercial, it would put major pressure on the housing stock across the street.  Mr. Campbell felt that the existing buffer was probably more effective than establishing commercial businesses across the street from residential areas.
    Mrs. Crockett reminded everyone that the landscaping ordinance was in effect and, as a business is constructed, more landscaping is required.  It is even possible that sidewalks would be requested.  She said if the Council was not going to approve this rezoning request, the Land Use Plan needed to be changed to reflect this.
    B187-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, CROCKETT, KRUSE.  VOTING NO:  COBLE, JANKU, CAMPBELL.  ABSENT:  HINDMAN.  Bill defeated.

(A)     Annexation of the City's wastewater treatment plant, adjoining City land and other small tracts
          of privately owned property.
    Item A was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this 522 acre tract was primarily owned by the City.  He said there were a couple of other property owners involved which included BLG Inc., Jack and Doris Overton, and Fred and Cheryl Overton.  He said if this annexation request is approved, an island would be created involving Scottsdale Subdivision and all of the Meadowbrook West Subdivision.  Mr. Beck said that all 212 property owners had been notified and encouraged to be a part of this voluntary annexation program.  He said an ordinance would be introduced under New Business this evening to implement the annexation if the Council chose to go forward with the process.
    Mayor pro-tem Campbell opened the public hearing.
    There being no comment, Mayor pro-tem Campbell closed the public hearing.
    No further action was required.

(B)     Annexing property between Perche Creek and King's Meadow Subdivision.
    Item B was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this item follows the same voluntary annexation process.  He said an application had been received from the property owners involving 156 acres lying west of King's Meadow Subdivision.  It was his understanding that their proposal would be for approximately 135 R-1 lots on this tract of land.  This annexation would create an approximate five acre island, and information had been circulated to all interested parties.  As a result, Mr. Beck said a voluntary annexation request had been received for this area as well.
    Mayor pro-tem Campbell opened the public hearing.
    Craig VanMatre, an attorney with offices at 1103 E. Broadway, spoke on behalf of the voluntary petitioner.  He said only about 50 acres were currently anticipated for development at this time, but there were no definite plans.  He said it was contemplated it would be a residential, probably single family, development.  He said what was contracted to be sold, subject to working on a plat which will be presented to the Council next month, was Stoneridge Subdivision.  He said Don Stohldrier was the contract purchaser.  Mr. VanMatre knew of no controversies about annexing this property.  He understood the Church agreed to voluntary annexation of the island that would be created if this request is approved.
    Mr. VanMatre, however, did expect some controversy at the time of platting.  He displayed an overhead of the preliminary plat.  The problem lies with the differing opinions on the location of the proposed Louisville Drive.  It was Mr. Stohldrier's preference to have the street lead down and then up to the northwest where it would connect with West Broadway.  He displayed another drawing showing where staff expected to see Louisville Drive located.  This would have the proposed Louisville Drive come up to Smith Drive and then jog over to within 300 to 400 feet of Day Spring Drive, and then connect north to West Broadway.  Mr. VanMatre indicated when the preliminary plat is presented, the Council would be asked to allow the street to be located in a straight line along the western boundary of the property.  He said Mr. Stohldrier indicated that if the street had to be located where the staff was recommending it, this would kill the design and plat.  Mr. Stohldrier would not be interested in buying the property at that point.
    Mr. Janku noted that Perche Creek was part of the City's greenbelt plan.  He asked how that tied into what was being proposed.  Mr. VanMatre said if Louisville Drive is located where City staff suggests it to be, the street would destroy a substantial amount of trees.  Mr. Stohldrier did not concur with staff's opinion that the street relocation is necessary for traffic flow in the first place.  Mr. Janku said he was actually referring to the property along the creek.  Mr. VanMatre said that sounded like quid pro quo.
    Mr. Beck asked if the alternate alignment Mr. VanMatre was talking about was on his client's property, or on a different property to the west.  Mr. VanMatre said part of it was on the Smith Farm and part of it was on his client's property.
    Mayor pro-tem Campbell closed the public hearing.
    No further action required.

B175-97     Approving the final plat of Limerick Heights Commercial Subdivision.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained this request had received a tie vote by the Planning and Zoning Commission.  He thought the biggest concern had been how the lots looked because there were some with fairly irregular boundaries.  The fear was that a large stem might result for signage purposes.
    Jay Stewart, property owner, asked if he could answer any questions.  Mr. Campbell asked what kind of signage, if any, he was proposing on the site.  Originally, Mr. Stewart said he was not going to do any signage on Chapel Hill, only on Forum Boulevard.  Since the question has been raised, however, he may ask for a small directional sign as his office building would be located behind another building.  He said a small sign on Chapel Hill may help him a little.  Primarily, his signage would be on Forum Boulevard.  Mr. Campbell asked what type of signage he would have.  Mr. Stewart said it would be some type of small monument sign.
    Mr. Janku asked how the Council would control the sign on the stem, other than by the restriction on the sign on Forum.  Mr. Hancock said it would be subject to the Sign Regulations which provides that a sign on a collector street be no more than 64 square feet, with a 12 foot maximum height.
    Mr. Kruse said he was not uncomfortable with this request.  He said if there was a sign erected on Chapel Hill, he believed it would be a small directional sign like the little McDonald arches seen in their driveways.  He said he would be disappointed if it was more than that, but he believed Mr. Stewart.
    B175-97 was read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSENT:  HINDMAN.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B180-97     Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code to establish all-way stops at the intersections of
                     7th & Ash, 9th & Ash and 6th & Locust.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that the staff had been working toward making modifications to the traffic plan in the Central Business District area.  In discussions with Mr. Patterson, it was felt it would be best to do these changes in phases so that the project was not held up until the final portion of the overall plan had been worked out.  Before the Council this evening was to proceed with the four-way stops at 7th and Ash, 9th and Ash, and 6th and Locust.  At these locations there are currently signals in place.  Mr. Beck thought it would be desirable to get these changes in place before the students return.  He asked Mr. Patterson about proceeding with the engineering work on the other items.  Mr. Patterson explained that there were two other matters that staff felt would be useful to get direction on.  One was to proceed with the striping and painting in the downtown areas, and to do it in such a matter that it conforms with what the proposed traffic lanes would be.  Second was for direction to proceed on getting the plans sufficiently advanced to have a public hearing on the installation of the signal at 10th and Broadway, and the changes at 8th and Ash and 8th and Walnut.  He said those would require more time and a public hearing before implementation.
    B180-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSENT:  HINDMAN.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

    Ms. Coble made the motion that the staff be directed to proceed with painting and signal adjustments as described in the report to Council, and to proceed with plans to set a public hearing for the intersections of 8th and Walnut and Hitt and Broadway.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B182-97     Confirming the contract for construction of sidewalks along portions of State Route 763,
                     Blue Ridge Road, Katy Lane and Forum Boulevard.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck commented that there had been seven bids varying from $67,900 to $134,000.  The low bid of J. C. Industries was being recommended in the amount of $67,904.05.
    Mr. Kruse asked how this company could do the project for such a small amount, given the other bids and the resolution estimate.  Mr. Beck said J.C. Industries would be posting a bond and he added that they had done work for the City previously with no problem.  Mr. Kruse asked about the sidewalk on Forum and Katy Lane and whether it was to extend from the south edge of the new development at Forum and Chapel Hill to Katy Lane.  Mr. Patterson said the project being addressed tonight were those sidewalks that would go across the dam structure and connect to the south part of the Katy Estates development to Forum.  He said then sidewalks would be built from Katy Lane down to the MKT Trail.  He said temporary sidewalks would be installed in north of this location.
    Mr. Janku asked if the sidewalks would extend northward to Chapel Hill.  Mr. Patterson said that would not be part of this particular project, but would be occurring as part of the development the Council recently approved.
    B182-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSENT:  HINDMAN.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B188-97     Restoring on-street parking on a portion of Forum Boulevard and reclassifying the bike
                     route in that area to Class III.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said that this amendment to the ordinance was prepared at the request of some property owners who preferred to have parking returned in front of their homes.
    B188-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSENT:  HINDMAN.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B189-97     Approving the final plat of Wornel, Plat 2, and granting a variance.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this plat would create two R-1 lots.  He said it had been recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
    B189-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSENT:  HINDMAN.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B190-97     Authorizing renewal of a Temporary Revocable Utility Permit granted to DTI.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Some time ago, Mr. Beck had indicated to the Council that DTI's license would expire in the month of July.  He said he had met recently with the representative from DTI and a request was made to extend this license.  He said DTI wanted to work toward a more permanent solution during the upcoming year.  Mr. Beck said this ordinance would provide for a one year extension.  Originally, the consultant had recommended a franchise ordinance and, with new federal regulations, one issue to contemplate in the future was whether or not a city-wide vote would be required on each competitive company who desires to provide service to City residents.  In the meantime, Mr. Beck was recommending the extension of the permit for one year.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if this was the company that has the communication between St. Louis and Kansas City.  Mr. Beck said DTI has a permit from the State Highway Department.  He said they were building a substantial system in the state and were connected in Columbia to GTE.  He said the Council had given this company permission to use utility poles and do some undergrounding.
    Richard Brownlee, an attorney from Jefferson City, explained that his firm was general counsel for DTI.  He said the original temporary revocable utility permit was granted in July of 1995.  He said DTI was hopeful to enter into some type of a more permanent license arrangement, which has been accomplished with a number of other cities.  If the Council agrees to a more permanent arrangement, this would extend the license up to 10 years or longer.  He realized the City was considering some other options, but DTI would be happy to work with us.
    Mr. Janku asked if the agreement provided for payment of the gross receipts tax.  Mr. Brownlee said in the temporary revocable permit, DTI agreed to provide certain services and free conduit to the City.  He said the agreement did not provide for payment of the gross receipts tax.
    B190-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSENT:  HINDMAN.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B191-97     Amending Chapter 18 and 19 of the City Code to remove the police chief from coverage
                     under the Police Retirement Fund and to provide deferred compensation.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck pointed out that this amendment was somewhat of a technical change and would provide flexibility to the compensation package for the police chief.  He said the financial impact on the City is positive because the cost would be less.
    B191-97 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSENT:  HINDMAN.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

PR101-97     Establishing a policy on contracts for Cultural Affairs programs or services involving
                       $500 or less.
    The policy resolution was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that each year the Council allocates a certain level of funding for the Cultural Affairs programs in the City.  He said the use of these funds is determined by the Commission and recommendations are made to the Council.  He said smaller requests come up throughout the year and it had been suggested that a level of funding be set aside for these requests that would be processed through the Commission and would not have to wait for annual allocation of funding.
    The vote on PR101-97 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COFFMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  ABSENT:  HINDMAN.  Policy resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

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

B181-97     Calling for bids for the construction of a flood intake structure at Wetland Treatment Unit
                     No. 3 in the McBaine bottoms.
B183-97     Authorizing a right of use permit to allow the University to install chilled water lines under
                     Rollins and Virginia streets.
B184-97     Authorizing a right of use permit to allow the University to install phone line conduit under
                     Paquin Street.
B185-97     Accepting sanitary sewer, utility, street, drainage, trail and recreational conveyances.
R102-97     Authorizing an amendment to the 1996 Emergency Shelter Grant Program.

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

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

B192-97     Accepting utility conveyances.
B193-97     Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code to prohibit through truck traffic on a portion of
                    Oakland Gravel Road.  Introduced by Crockett
B194-97     Amending Chapter 19 of the City Code regarding vacation leave.
B195-97     Amending the 1996 Columbia Sidewalk Plan.
B196-97     Annexing the City's wastewater treatment plant, adjoining City-owned land and other
                    small tracts of privately owned property.
B197-97     Annexing property between Perche Creek and King's Meadow Subdivision.
B198-97     Approving the final plat of Belmont Village, plat 10.
B199-97     Appropriating funds for ballfield improvements at Douglass Park and memorial trees and

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

(B)     City Wide Clean Up August 23, 1997.
    Mr. Beck explained that this is a city-wide clean-up program organized by the City's Volunteer Coordinator working with Channel 8 TV and KBXR Radio.  The Public Works Department would support the operation by providing bags for cleaning-up areas already designated for Adopt-A-Spot litter control locations.  He said the group is also working with churches,  neighborhood associations, and the Highway Department and the Stream Team Partners.
    Mr. Kruse thought it was a great idea and he was glad the City was working on it.
    Mr. Janku was pleased to see the inclusion of the neighborhood associations because one of the items mentioned most in the report the Police Department did on Community Awareness for Public Pride was litter and trash in neighborhoods.  He hoped to see a strong effort at involving various neighborhood associations mentioned in the report.  Besides bags, he asked if dumpsters and like items could be provided in certain areas where there are very strong interests.
    Mr. Campbell thought it was a wonderful idea and was glad the City is seeing an immediate payoff on the new Volunteer Coordinator's position.

(C)     Truck Parking on Residential Streets.
    Mr. Beck explained that Mr. Campbell had received a substantial number of comments about a semi truck being parked on a certain residential street over a period of time. He said this problem had been addressed by amending current ordinances, but at the same time the Council had asked that the staff review the possibility of having a city-wide ordinance dealing with all large trucks on residential streets.  He said the Public Works staff had reviewed the situation and they were not suggesting an ordinance that would prohibit truck parking on every residential street all of the time because of the types of trucks that such a proposed ordinance would target, i.e., moving vans and the like.  Enforcement issues were also considered problematic.  Mr. Beck said staff suggested handling the issue on a case by case basis.  He thought perhaps more information from a public relations standpoint might be helpful.
    Mr. Campbell noted that complaints are also received about large recreational vehicles, but for the most part, tractor trailer vehicles pose the most problems.  He did not think there would be a time when these trucks would become acceptable on a residential street.  In considering the issue, he asked if the staff had considered trucks over a certain length, i.e., tractor trailer lengths, being prohibited where other types of trucks would be permitted.  Mr. Patterson said he thought they had.  He said moving vans had been considered as one item.  He said staff understood where the problem was and the only vehicles the City primarily deals with had been the over-the-road type trucks -- a driver who is coming in for a day or two leaves the rig parked on a residential street.   Mr. Patterson said staff felt in the past that the City had been very responsive to those situations with ordinances that were specific to the location.
    Mr. Kruse asked if he understood correctly that the options were to do nothing, or to have specific ordinances prohibiting certain kinds of trucks at certain locations.  Mr. Beck said the staff also calls the offender, and then if no voluntary action is taken, an ordinance is prepared.
    Mr. Janku said he had received calls about school buses parking on the streets.  He said they were rather large and some of them were not marked very well for night reflection.  He had noted several throughout the community.
    Mr. Kruse reported a site on Lynnwood where there are at times two tractor trailers parked in the same location.  He said he had received complaints about this situation.
    Mr. Campbell was somewhat dissatisfied with the case by case suggestion.  He thought it would be better to have an ordinance that specifies vehicles beyond a certain size would be prohibited in residential neighborhoods.  Without a warning type situation, Mr. Beck thought the City would have enforcement problems unless all vehicles were ticketed.
    Mr. Kruse asked if other communities had been consulted.  Mr. Patterson said in discussions with other counterparts, he had found that enforcement is generally dealt with on a case by case basis.  He had not specifically spoken to any community that had a blanket prohibition on truck parking.  He said most communities deal with the vehicles as the problem occurs.  Mr. Patterson said if the Council so wished, a blanket ordinance could be prepared.
    Mr. Janku suggested that the public let the City know if there is a broader, on-going concern.

(D)     False Alarm Ordinance.
    Until the enactment of the false alarm ordinance, Mr. Beck said there had been a fairly high percentage of false alarms.  At the time the ordinance was passed, it had been indicated that the staff would report back as to what the situation was.  Initially, warnings of violations had been sent to offenders and were then followed by actual enforcement if the false alarms persisted.  The staff reported a 10% decrease in the case of police calls, but most important was the 38% decrease in the fire calls.
    Mr. Beck said a financial penalty had been assessed on those businesses having false alarms.  He said the revenue thus far was $26,300, with an additional $8,200 in receivables.  It was Mr. Beck's opinion that the ordinance itself was having a positive affect, although he would like to see the false alarms reduced even further because of the unnecessary potential danger created when fire trucks respond to these emergencies.  He said it also ties-up the vehicles and man power when there could be an actual emergency.
    Mrs. Crockett asked where the collected funds were deposited.  Mr. Beck explained that they were placed in the City's general revenue account.
    Mr. Janku thought this report was further evidence that penalties can serve as effective deterrents.
    Mr. Campbell noted that he had been one of those people who had been somewhat skeptical of the whole issue.  He felt people who create false alarms should be warned and given some chance to correct this situation.  However, if false alarms continue, these offenders should not only be responsible for partial payment, but full payment of the cost of public services which are directed toward meeting that need.  He was pleased to see that the false alarms had been reduced, but said should the Council have another opportunity to review the penalty procedures, he would push for additional cost savings and/or more incentives to encourage further reduction in the number of false alarms.  Mr. Campbell thought many of the false alarms were just pure carelessness.

(E)     Revisions to the Land Use Plan.
    Mr. Beck said that the Planning and Zoning Commission had held several public meetings, work sessions, and several public hearings on proposed changes to the Land Use Plan.  He understood there were about 20 geographic areas addressed as possible changes to the Plan.  The Council now needed to determine whether or not to have an informal public discussion to talk about some of the reasoning behind the suggested changes before a public hearing is set on the proposed changes.  Mr. Beck suggested to delay the public hearings on the proposed changes until after completing the budget hearings.  He said those hearings would occur in August and a good part of September.  Mr. Beck said there had been discussions about setting a work session on the evening of September 22.  This would allow the Council to set the public hearing on the Land Use Plan for the first meeting in October.
    Mr. Janku said the Council had talked about some recommendations with respect to duplexes.  Although there were some recommendations included, the issue regarding the fragmentation of rental ownership had not been discussed.  Mr. Janku said he would like to see those things discussed if possible.
    Mr. Beck said the question had also been raised about when the Council would discuss zoning mixed uses.  He said this item had been discussed by the Commission and whether or not it should be combined with the land use issues.  Mr. Beck's suggestion was to discuss both issues at the public work session because of the potential effect on what type of recommendation is made on the Land Use Plan.
    Mr. Campbell said he had also suggested a neighborhood commercial zone, which is similar to a mixed use, be addressed at that time.  He said one of the issues discussed tonight, regarding Scott Boulevard, was likely to be submitted as a commercial request.  He said the Council would need guidelines in place by that time, otherwise there is the potential for a major controversy.

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

Pickerel, John M., 2408 Lloyd Ct., Ward 4 - term to expire 7/31/00
Silsby, Joe B., 206 Edgewood, Ward 4 - term to expire 7/31/00
Stevenson, Mark, M., P.O. Box 642, Ward 6 - term to expire 7/31/00
Sublett, James F., 301 Mumford, Ward 4 - term to expire 7/31/00

Carlson, Kas, K., 1110 Willowcreek, Ward 5 - term to expire 8/1/00 (Reg)
Fischer, Keith E., 3008 Hal Ct., Ward 4 - term to expire 8/1/00 (Alt)
Noordsy, Todd A., 3 Mumford Dr., Ward 4 - term to expire 8/1/00 (Reg)
Page, John W., 2701 Woodberry, Ward 5 - term to expire 8/1/00 (Reg)

Adams, Algalee P., 2604 Grant Lane, Ward 4 - term to expire 4/1/00

Ratchford, Charles B., 4855 Roemer, County - term to expire 8/1/00
Ratliff, Morton L., 1711 Doris, Ward 2 - term to expire 8/1/00

Cady, Neil D., 2714 Northridge Dr., Ward 3 - term to expire 5/31/00

Walther, Skip, 1703 Oakwood Ct., Ward 4 - term to expire 1/1/98

    In light of the recent murder which occurred in the First Ward, Ms. Coble said she had received a lot of calls from elderly individuals living alone in the neighborhood.  She was concerned about providing more information to those in the City, especially in the First and Second Wards, about the new community policing program.  Ms. Coble spoke about the Community Awareness for Public Pride program where different areas of the City are divided in sections, and officers are assigned primary authority over that location for community policing.  She asked Chief Botsford to speak to what could be expected from this program, and how people might be able to get in touch with officers who could make presentations to their neighborhood watch organizations or associations.
    Chief Botsford reported discussions had taken place regarding the start-up of the program.  He said the Police Department would execute a mapping procedure so neighborhoods could determine which watch group they were assigned to.  References to the Crime Prevention Unit will also be distributed.  He said staff would work with anybody regarding specific requirements.  Chief Botsford reminded those in attendance that this particular case was a perfect example of a crime of opportunity.  He said the suspect was an escapee from a work release prison in Kansas City.  From the fault of the criminal justice system, the biggest question was why that person was not held under tighter controls.  Chief Botsford said the suspect was a multiple, violent, narcotic offender who was placed in a work release program, and the tragedy was the resulting murder.  The suspect should still have been in prison.  He said this was another reason for the City to look closely into narcotics enforcement in our community.  The suspect came to Columbia looking for something to steal to buy narcotics with.
    Ms. Coble said she had received a request for a study regarding the possible installation of a four-way stop at 10th and Park.  She said there was apparently quite a few traffic accidents at that location.  Ms. Coble had also received a request about placing a trash can at 10th and Ash Streets.  This is becoming a high foot traffic area and there are no trash receptacles from this location to Columbia College.
    Regarding the safety concerns expressed by the neighborhoods, Mr. Janku said one of the most common comments was about the need for additional street lights.  He said the Water and Light Department had been responsive in the past to that type of request.  While driving the streets, Mr. Janku noted that the lights were in standard locations.  In older neighborhoods, there are a lot of large trees and this time of year when they are in full leaf, there really are a lot of dark spots.  He suggested surveying the streets in the evening when the lights are not performing up to expectations.
    Mr. Janku reported during the budget session last year, Mr. Beck had recommended that there be a crossing guard at Derby Ridge and Smiley Lane.  He said the area did not warrant a four-way stop and he thought that was Mr. Beck's reason for his recommendation.  Mr. Janku was hopeful that could be implemented this year.
    Mr. Janku said the Council had discussed the purchase of the property intended for Field School Park at pre-Council dinner.  He said he wanted it known that it was the Council's intent to move forward, even though someone else had purchased the property.
    Mr. Patterson asked if the Council wanted an ordinance brought back authorizing the acquisition.  Mr. Janku said he thought the Council had already given direction.  Mr. Patterson said staff did not have an ordinance that authorized the actual condemning of the property if staff was not able to negotiate a price.  Mr. Patterson said they had been given the direction to negotiate, but not authority to follow through with condemnation if required.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that the staff be directed to prepare the proper legislation for Council approval.  The motion was seconded by Ms. Coble and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. Kruse said he had shared with Mr. Beck some complaints he had received in the Fifth Ward regarding the general lack of maintenance on the Forum landscaped median.  He said one of the adopted islands had been in a state of semi-completion for about two months.  He said the center part of the median had become overgrown with ragweed and other vegetation that violates the City weed ordinance.  He said the other beds that have not been adopted, but do have some plantings in them,  have also become overgrown with crab grass on top of the mulch. He said it was generally looking pretty bad.  Mr. Kruse said he was aware that a person in the neighborhood had donated $500 to the City to ensure that it be kept in an attractive state this summer.  He saw it as a potential public relations problem and suggested getting it cleaned up.  Mr. Beck said he would follow-up on the situation.
    Mr. Coffman said he had received a request for street lights along Bearfield Road.  He asked that a staff report be prepared on the cost estimates.  Mr. Beck said he would get a staff report on it and, if the Council wanted to proceed, a motion would be in order.
    Mr. Coffman understood that 1409 Rosemary, the former Reality House, was being converted into 18 one-room apartments.  He said there was considerable concern in his neighborhood where every attempt is made to keep the density at a reasonable level.  He said residents wanted to make sure that there is appropriate parking and all City regulations were being complied with.  Mr. Coffman asked that the situation be reviewed.
    Regarding the R and U-Values the Building Construction Codes Commission and Energy & Environment Commission have been looking into, Mr. Coffman said it had become controversial and he assumed it would work its way to the Council in a few months.  He asked if the staff could provide him with some more information to help prepare him for the issue.  Specifically, he had been told a lot of conflicting things about whether or not the R-Value the City currently has in place is realistic and whether current homes are able to meet it.  Mr. Coffman had also been told that the compromise on the U-Value applying to window insulation is perhaps not set low enough and that it might only apply to aluminum framed windows.  He was receiving a lot of different information about what exactly the numbers apply to as far as building materials.  He hoped the inspection staff might be able to share some information about what types of materials relate to the numbers, and maybe some general sense about what is commonly being installed in new and older homes.  He also wanted to know how the City was going to determine whether or not certain building materials or buildings meet these values.
    Mrs. Crockett said she had received complaints from people living in residential neighborhoods whose property abuts schools.  She said some schools allow playgrounds to be open between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 12 midnight.  She said some people go to sleep with basketballs bouncing, and wake up to kids outside playing.  She wondered if the schools could change their hours to something more realistic in the summer time.
    Mr. Campbell said about a year ago the Council discussed the telecommunication subject and had received a consultant's report.  The consultant recommended a loop around the City and, at about the same time, there had been an upcoming election regarding various issues.  He said the Council at that point did not want to get too many things in front of them, so authorization was given for the City to proceed with the loop, a very important first step.  Mr. Campbell did not think the loop would be enough to keep Columbia competitive in the world of tomorrow's telecommunications.  He had distributed an article this evening to the Council dealing with Anaheim, California providing fiber optics to every house.  The article also noted that Madison, Wisconsin was installing fiber optic cable on every street.  Mr. Campbell did not have a preconceived notion of what the City of Columbia should have, but he was concerned that every business in the community should have access to fiber optics, as well as many or most of the homes.  He suggested that this be regarded similar to how a four-lane highway would have been perceived 20 to 30 years ago.  Mr. Campbell stated this issue should have the same degree of importance to the City.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that the staff, working with REDI, be directed to examine the feasibility of a joint public/private partnership that would extend the existing fiber optic loop into much of the Columbia community, in particular, the business community and many homes.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku.
    Mr. Campbell described the difference in speed between fiber optics and phone lines.  Mr. Campbell said if the City is going to have a medical community in the future that is as important to the economy as it is today, he thought they would need this access to maintain their competitive edge.  He realized this directive would take a considerable amount of time and resources and fully expected not to see a report back for at least six months.
    Mr. Janku said it may take a long time to realize what the impact would be on the community if it did not move forward progressively and try to participate in new technology.  He said 15 years from now people could look back and say that was when Columbia started to stagnate and lose its edge.  He thought working with private enterprise was an excellent idea.
    Mr. Campbell said there is a state statute that could require that the City be innovative in how such a partnership may develop.  He said that statute may stand the test of courts, but may not.  In the meantime, he said the City would have to live with it and deal with it.  He did not think that should be something to stop this project.
    Mr. Beck noted that when DTI was granted a permit from the City, what Mr. Campbell just mentioned had been part of the charge of the consultant.  He said the information that Mr. Campbell previously referred to, in addition to information from several other towns that operate a city system, had been given to DTI.  DTI has been asked to evaluate options for the City.  Mr. Beck's point was that information had already been gathered that could be tapped and revisited.
    Mr. Coffman said Columbia was well-suited economically and geographically to be part of the telecommunications future.  He said even though HB620 would become law, it would only be in effect five years -- if it is not struck down beforehand.  Mr. Coffman said similar laws have been struck down because they are barriers to competition and violate the federal law.
    The motion made by Mr. Campbell, seconded by Mr. Janku, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Betsy Horst, 712 Timberhill, spoke as a representative of the Shepard Hills Neighborhood.  She said the association was in support of the Planning and Zoning recommendation that there be no zoning changes to areas 3, 4, and 5 in regard to the Land Use Plan report.  She asked that those residents in favor of her request to stand.  Four people stood.
    Richard King, 109 W. Parkway, owner of the Blue Note, handed out a proposal to the Council concerning a music festival he wanted to have in Cosmo Park.  He had talked to Mr. Green about having the event in the park and had been referred to the Council.  The event would occur on one day in September from about 12 noon to sundown.  He had attended a similar event in Lawrence, Kansas last week and the operation had been incredibly smooth with over 4,000 in attendance.  He said there were several organizations in the City of Columbia, including the University, that were willing to help out with the event.  Mr. King said a budget was contained in his proposal and most of the money would be obtained from private sources.
    Mr. Campbell asked which portion of the park he was referring to.  Mr. King said it is the back part of the park that is adjacent to the rock quarry.  He said the location is basically an unused field.  Mr. Campbell asked if he had talked to the Parks and Recreation Commission about the festival.  Mr. King said he had not, and Mr. Green had not been crazy about the idea.  He said he had spoken with a couple of Council members and it had been suggested, because of the time constraint, that he bring the proposal before the Council this evening.  Mr. Campbell said most of the time events such as this require considerable planning.  He asked if most of the bands were already scheduled.  Mr. King said he had told most of the agents he works with about the proposed festival, and he had the names of several groups who would be willing to participate in this event.  Mr. Campbell understood this would be a profit making venture.  Mr. King said that was the idea, but did not know if it would be a very profitable experience the first time around.  He would like for the festival to be an annual event.
    Mrs. Crockett noted the proposal included the sale of food and beverages at their own expense, with proper licensing.  She asked if that meant alcoholic beverages would be sold.  Mr. King said that was correct.  Mrs. Crockett asked if insurance would be obtained.  Mr. King said there was a budget in the proposal for insurance.  Mrs. Crockett asked about police protection.  He said there is a security budget.
    Mr. Janku asked how the number of people attending the festival would be limited, and whether food and beverages could be carried in by participants.  Mr. King said the proposal asked that coolers not be permitted.  He said any of the things they could not offer themselves, Columbia merchants are welcome to step-up.  He said the point is to try and create a festival atmosphere.  Mr. Janku asked how access would be limited to the back of the park.  Mr. King said the park would be secured in all areas.   Mr. Campbell asked if the park would be closed during the event.  Mr. King said only certain entrances would be closed.  He said people coming to this event would need a ticket.  Mr. King said people would not be stopped from coming in to the park.
    Mr. Kruse asked about the impact on traffic.   Mr. King said in Lawrence, they used shuttle buses and there were no problems.  Mr. Kruse asked if the total number of people would be limited.  Mr. King said numbers would be limited.
    Mr. Campbell asked when the event in Lawrence, Kansas was held.  Mr. King said it was held last Tuesday.  Mr. Campbell said this was a time when the University was in summer school, but this proposal was for an event during a regular university session.  Mr. King said that was correct.  Mr. Campbell asked if he thought that would change the clientele attending.   Mr. King felt that the clientele was dictated by the bands brought in.
    Ms. Coble asked about the line item in the budget for the Office of Cultural Affairs.  Mr. King said he had discussions with Martha Hills because he wanted to have the City included in on the event.
    Mr. Campbell said he was in favor of such an event, but there were a lot of questions and a lot of policies needed that the City currently does not have in place.  A specific issue to address is the use of public land for commercial purposes.  He said the difficulty now is the very short time line in which to address these issues.
    Mr. Janku said Mr. King would obviously have to sit down and talk with the staff.  He was sure there would be a lot of concern from the Parks and Recreation staff and the Police Department.  He thought these departments would have to discuss it and have it brought back for a vote at the next meeting.  He said if there were concerns from the community about the festival, they should have an opportunity to voice their concerns.   Mr. Campbell said he was reluctant to have the Parks and Recreation Commission out of the loop because they are the policy recommending group for the parks.  He said this would be an important decision.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if Mr. King had looked at any other sites.  Mr. King said he had.  He had talked to the people at the Fair Grounds and everything was pretty much booked up out there.  He said they also did not allow private concessions there.  He said that made it that much harder to try to get an event of this type to work.  He said he talked to the people at Midway, but they were booked solid for the entire month of September and most of October.  Mr. Campbell asked if he had checked with the University.  He said he had, but once again they would get into an alcohol policy issue.
    Mr. Kruse said this does have policy implications and, if appropriate, the Council should have the Parks and Recreation Commission take a look at it, but he said the City closes down public streets all of the time for non-profit and for profit activities.  He said different groups use City parks for different activities.  Mr. Kruse was not sure how many of these activities were for profit activities, but that was a philosophical question he was not sure about.  He thought the proposal was an interesting one and had the potential of being of economic benefit to the community.  Mr. Kruse said if the Council could have a staff report back before the next meeting, and allow an opportunity for publicity about the festival so the public could comment on it, they should at least be able to give Mr. King an answer in that time frame.  He said his concerns would be traffic, security, and the alcohol issue.  Mr. Kruse said if the Police Department, Parks Department, and the City Manager's staff feel the festival would be workable, it should be given some consideration.
    In all due respect to Mr. King, Mr. Campbell said one of the problems he was most concerned with was time.  Mr. King replied if he were given approval to proceed from the Council within the next five or six days, then that would allow him enough time for scheduling purposes.  He said it would be hectic, but he could do it.  Mr. Campbell explained that the Council could only take action at formal meetings, so it would be the next meeting before any decision could be given.
    Ms. Coble asked if there could be a way in which staff could meet with the Parks and Recreation Commission during the coming week.  Mr. Janku said the Commission was not meeting in July, but regardless of that, the Council is asking for a staff report which meant Mr. Beck and his staff and Mr. King would be talking.
    Mr. Campbell told Mr. King, if by some chance things did not work out for this fall, he hoped he would not give up on the idea.
    D.C. Griffin, gave no address, voiced a complaint on behalf of himself and the students who rent properties in town.  He passed out copies of an affidavit that he said had been filed with the Missouri Real Estate Commission.  He asked that it be made a part of the record (filed with the reports of this meeting).  He explained that it was a signed, sworn statement concerning some activity that goes on in Columbia.  Mr. Campbell told Mr. Griffin the Council would discuss his concerns.
    Timothy Rich, Director of the Salvation Army Emergency Shelter Programs, and Co-Chair of the Boone County Homeless Coalition, commented that he had sent the Council a letter recently about some of the issues the Coalition is working on.   One issue is to try and secure nearly one-half million dollars in funding for homeless services in Columbia, funding that has not been obtained in Columbia before, by applying for HUD funds for their supportive housing program.  As a part of that application process, Mr. Rich explained that HUD requires the local community to organize a board of homeless providers who will review any applications, determine what the needs and services are, and what gaps in services exist in the community.  Then, based on applications submitted, these must be prioritized and HUD will honor requests with the funds available after allocations are made.  He said the Coalition had gone through this process and there are three programs that have applied for money.  He named the three groups and explained that if the Coalition does not participate in the continuum of care, 30 out of 100 points in the competition are lost.  Mr. Rich said that almost assures that the Coalition will not get any money from HUD.
    The second critical element is certification by the City's Consolidated Plan.  This establishes that the Coalition is on track with the needs of the community.  Mr. Rich said he had been working on certification since February because not only does HUD require it, but the Missouri Housing Trust Fund and Missouri Housing Development Corporation also requires some statement from the City that any homeless service is consistent with the Consolidated Plan.  He said last week the Coalition had been instructed to present the proposals to the Planning Department.  At that time, Mr. Rich said he had been told that the Planning Department did not know of any reason why it would not be put on the City Council agenda for tonight's meeting, if in fact an amendment had to be made.  Mr. Rich said he was called this morning and told that the request, unfortunately, would not be on the agenda and there was no way City staff could get an amendment done because the time frame was too small.  Mr. Rich explained that the Coalition is faced with an August 18 deadline.  He said without this certification, there is $400,000 to $500,000 worth of money that will not be available at all to Columbia service providers for homeless services.  He noted that it appeared that certification could be given because it had been given for another project in 1995.
    Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Hancock to respond.  Mr. Hancock said the staff had written a letter attempting to provide HUD some assurance that this was a priority in our community, although the City's Consolidated Plan does not have any numbers to substantiate that there is that kind of need.  He explained that the homeless count that the Census Bureau did in 1990 was fairly inadequate.  He said some providers in town had given the staff some numbers so these counts had been obtained.  He said these figures were used to compile the 1995 certification.  Apparently, Mr. Hancock said the letter that had been provided was not good enough for the person reviewing certifications.  He said staff had planned to try to introduce an amendment tonight to incorporate numbers obtained into the Consolidated Plan.  He said the problem was the deadline and the fact that procedures the City must follow requires a 30 day public comment period.  Mr. Hancock said staff would be happy to try to amend it, but he did not think the citizen participation process would meet the Coalition's deadline.  Mr. Hancock spoke with his staff this morning and it was decided they would attempt another route -- to simply accept whatever the state consolidated plan numbers are.
    Mr. Rich said one problem going with the state pan is that HUD requires, when there is a local consolidated plan, if any of the monies will be used in the local community, local certification is necessary.
    Ms. Coble asked what kind of action the Council could take this evening.  Mr. Hancock said the Council could direct him to certify that it is a need in the community.  Ms. Coble asked if that would serve the purposes for the HUD application.  Mr. Hancock said it would.
    Ms. Coble made the motion that because the Council felt there was such an extreme need for services and funding for the homeless programs, that the Planning Director be directed to certify each of the three applications.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman.
    Mr. Janku asked about certifying the applications.  Mr. Rich explained that the certification states that in fact it is a need in this community.  He said the Coalition has to have a statement that there is a need in this community for homeless services and programs in order for them to even compete for the money.  He said it was not a case of the City saying they support the individual agencies, but it does say they support there is a need for the funds.
    The motion made by Ms. Coble, seconded by Mr. Coffman, was passed unanimously by voice vote.
    Marcia Green, a Grindstone Road resident, explained that she lives near the intersection of Grindstone and Rock Quarry, the proposed Route AC.  One of the priorities for the project, she had been told, was to keep the Church happy.  She noted that she lives across the street from the Chinese Church.  Ms. Green said she was in favor of sparing the Church, but that meant they would be given far more consideration than the homeowners on the other side of the road.  She said these residents would be losing some land, if not their homes completely.  She suggested that the Church relocate their building on their three acres of land.  She explained that the Church was given the option of what they wanted to do, and they chose to stay put because they are fearful they will not have enough money for relocation because of potential unexpected costs.  She asked that the Council provide the Church some assurance of financial back-up in the event of cost overrides.  Ms. Green said if the Church would relocate on their property, everyone could remain reasonably happy on the corner.
    Mr. Campbell asked if decisions had been made.  Mr. Kruse said this was a very complicated issue and that there were many variables involved.  He said the consensus of the Advisory Committee at this point has been to choose a particular alignment that Ms. Green is not comfortable with.  He said it puts the road a little closer to her property.  Mr. Kruse said he had expressed his concern about the road being so close to the Church, which is 22 feet from the front of the roof.  Keeping the wish list in mind (the landscaped median, bike lanes, and sidewalks) Mr. Kruse said this was the alignment the Committee agreed upon.  He did not know that the Council could intervene in the process at this point.  He said he would hang tough on the Committee to keep the footprint of the road as narrow as possible.  Mr. Kruse commented that they were getting to the point in the discussions where the standards of the Department of Transportation are beginning to get very rigid.  Mr. Kruse reported there is not a lot of give and take.
    Regarding the Church, Mr. Janku asked about the standard policies in issues of relocation and what had been communicated to them.  Mr. Patterson said there is some relocation assistance.  He thought the terminology referred to displacement damages.  He said he had accompanied staff from the Highway Department both times they met with the Church.  One time, he took City building inspectors to try to give the Church some assurance of what they would run into if they wished to relocate.  Mr. Patterson said the Highway Department is limited in that they are using federal funding on this project, and federal laws specifically state the type of reimbursement compensation that can be given.  It was his feeling, if the Church went through the process of relocation, they would probably come out okay on it.   He explained that the process involves the state purchasing the church building and then selling it back to them at salvage value, which is usually less than 10% of what the government paid for it.  This is how the relocation funds are received on the property.  Mr. Patterson said it appeared the numbers mentioned would be adequate for the Church's relocation expenses.
    Myra Loyd, Welcome Home, a residential program for homeless veterans, spoke in support of Tim Rich's comments.  She thanked the Council for their support.
    The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
                                                                                             Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                             Penny St. Romaine
                                                                                             City Clerk