FEBRUARY 16, 1998

    The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri, met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, February 16, 1998, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri.  The roll was taken with the following results:  Council members COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, and HINDMAN were present.  The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also present.

    The minutes of the regular meeting of February 2, 1998, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mr. Campbell.

    Upon his request, Ms. Coble made the motion that Mr. Kruse be allowed to abstain from voting on B11-98.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    The agenda, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Janku and a second by Mr. Campbell.



B342-97A      Voluntary annexation of property located east of Rock Quarry & south of Nifong
                        Boulevard; establishing permanent PUD-8 zoning, rezoning property located on east
                        side of Rock Quarry, approval of PUD Development Plan for Cambridge Place.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that the Council had asked the staff to discuss two issues with the developer.  The first dealt with whether or not an east west collector should be considered on or adjacent to this tract.  The second was to discuss the possibility of the developer participating in off-site improvements.  Mr. Beck said a collector street is not shown on the Major Thoroughfare Plan adjacent to or on this tract of land -- a street is proposed to be located further to the south, approximately one-half mile from AC.  Regarding the off-site improvements, Mr. Beck noted that the developer has pledged $50,000 in improvements for Rock Quarry Road, which includes sidewalks, etc.  Current policies call for the property owner to be tax billed an amount equivalent to the curb and gutter cost, which in this case is calculated at about $16,500.  As far as the sidewalk is concerned, he noted that the property has 750 feet of frontage on Rock Quarry Road.  A rough estimate for this cost is $7,500.  The curb and gutter figures combined with the sidewalk cost amounts to $24,000 to be contributed by the developer toward improvements along Rock Quarry Road, leaving an approximate $26,000 for off-site improvements.  Mr. Beck pointed out that Rock Quarry Road is not currently in the 5-year CIP; however, there are some annual street funds set aside that are not specifically earmarked.
    Mayor Hindman noted an amendment sheet had been prepared which includes the items to be contributed by the developer.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that B342-97A be amended per the amendment sheet.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman.
    Mr. Janku questioned the language included in the amendment sheet indicating that if the City determines it is not necessary to improve Rock Quarry Road, no payment will be due by the developer.  He asked if that meant the initial payments would not be due.
    Mr. Beck explained that $2,500 would be paid at the time of final platting.  After that, there would be phasing of payments to the City.
    Referring to Mr. VanMatre's letter, Mr. Boeckmann said that had been his rewriting of subparagraph E.
    Mayor Hindman said it seemed the theory is that the payments are based on the benefits the lot will receive.  He said if the road is not put in, the benefits will not be there.
    Mr. Janku said it could be the City will receive payment prior to any improvements.  He asked whether the $50,000 would have to be repaid if the road is not improved.
    Mr. Campbell said there is no date line associated with this condition.
    Mr. Boeckmann said if the City Council votes at any time not to improve the street, the funds that had been collected would have to be returned; although, he did not anticipate that happening.
    The motion to amend, made by Mr. Janku, seconded by Mr. Coffman, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Craig VanMatre, an attorney representing the applicant, said an agreement had been successfully negotiated with the neighbors.
    John Blakemore, President of the Clear Creek Neighborhood Association, withdrew their opposition to the project.  Some of the deed restrictions agreed to pertained to storm water and storm drainage.  He said that Mr. Royer had agreed to join the neighborhood association in providing funds to establish a stream team which will begin monitoring water in Clear Creek.  Mr. Blakemore explained funding for this four year project will also be provided by the EPA, through the USDA and the Soil and Water Commission, for the purpose of monitoring and tracking any problems that might arise in the creek.  Mr. Blakemore said residents are still concerned about the density of the development, but that had been the trade-off in return for the restrictions.  He felt it is very obvious that Mr. Royer wants to be a good neighbor.
    Mr. Coffman asked about the storm water detention.  Mr. Beck said at this time it is not known whether detention is necessary.  He said Public Works would be analyzing any plans submitted.
    Because this project is a PUD, Mr. Blakemore understood that if storm water detention becomes a problem, the staff would deal with it.  Mr. Patterson said that was correct, but wanted it understood that the City is limited by the ordinances and, if after analysis it is found that detention is not desirable and could create down stream problems, staff could not allow it to be installed on the site.  With regard to the agreement, Mr. Patterson also wanted it understood that the City could not enforce the restrictive covenants.  Mr. Blakemore assured him that the association understood that.   Mr. Coffman asked if there had been any discussions in the negotiations about the fences themselves.  Mr. Blakemore said the association is pleased to see that fences are included, and that the roads would be stubbed so as not to create through streets.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mayor Hindman said this is one of the better plans he had seen and congratulated Mr. Royer.  He also thanked the neighborhood association for their participation and interest.
    Mr. Kruse thought this is a very good plan, but is still not wild about it.  It is his opinion that the City does not have adequate growth management planning strategies in place for the metropolitan area as a whole.  He said what exists is a leap-frogging into the County.  There are hundreds of acres already available within the City for this type of development, much of which is right down the road to the north.  Although he is troubled by these issues, Mr. Kruse intended to vote in favor of this project because the neighbors are comfortable with it.   He suggested that the City continue to work to develop more of a vision in terms of the management of growth in the metropolitan Columbia/Boone County area.
    Mr. Coffman agreed with Mr. Kruse, and noted the Council is meeting with the County tomorrow evening.  He intended to promote the idea of a joint task force to look at the development south of town as it is moving quite close to Rock Bridge State Park.  He stated a comprehensive plan is needed to determine what type of development should occur in this region.
    Mr. Janku appreciated that this project is a planned development, and that there is green space incorporated to preserve or limit the environmental impact as shown by the agreement.  He agreed with Mr. Coffman regarding the creation of a link between the City and Rock Bridge State Park, and the development of some sort of trail system.
    Mayor Hindman did not agree with the leap frog theory.  He felt that the whole area is currently in the process of development.  The City has infrastructure planned in the area, and there should be no problem in providing the infrastructure that is needed for this development.  However, Mayor Hindman believed in taking precautions because of the very sensitive area to the south.
    Ms. Coble said it was a beautiful plan, but it is in the wrong place.  She is in opposition of the project.
    Mr. Campbell said this is a good plan and he felt there are acceptable safeguards in it.  He is in favor of higher density development, and felt that to be an environmentally sound position to take.  He thought this is needed along with lots of green space to make a most desirable city.
    Mrs. Crockett said she is in favor of the development.
    B342-97A, as amended, was read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  COBLE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B343-97     Voluntary annexation of property owned by Central MO Sheltered enterprises, Inc. located
                    east of Bearfield Road and south of Nifong Boulevard, establishing permanent zoning.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said after the tract was reviewed, it had been discovered that the lot did not contain public road frontage.  Therefore, the request for annexation is being withdrawn.  He said the applicant plans to file a future request for annexation when the problem is resolved.
    Request withdrawn.

B11-98     Approval of revised PUD Plan for the Highlands, Phase 8, and variance to the subdivision
                  regulations relating to maximum cul-de-sac length, and street closure.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that both the Planning and Zoning staff and the Planning Commission had recommended denial of the request.
    Mr. Hancock displayed a map of the street system in the Highlands.  He noted that it currently shows Stonehaven extending to Old Plank Road.  He said this section had been platted several years ago, and is the piece the applicant is asking to abandon and replace with a cul-de-sac and easement.
    Mr. Hancock explained that Stonehaven Road is approximately 3,000 feet long, with the maximum cul-de-sac length under City regulations being 750 feet.  From Dunbar, or from any of the other nearby through streets, the length of that terminal street is even longer.  Mr. Hancock said he had looked at the staff notes from 1990 on this issue, and it had been indicated and recognized that people like privacy and cul-de-sacs.  He said it was obvious from this map and others that residents had been accommodated throughout the community in this regard.  He said the City has tried to maintain capacity on some of the collector streets as a result of an increasing number of cul-de-sacs.  In this particular case, it is thought this proposed 3,000 foot cul-de-sac might be excessive and beyond what the City's standard might be in recognizing people's desire for privacy and safety.
    Mr. Hancock reported that the street shown as Glasgow had not been part of the original PUD.  The original PUD was to have Highlands Parkway come down and eventually connect to Old Plank Road.  However, a house was built right in the path of that particular collector street.  Of the original plan, Mr. Hancock said Dunbar is connected at the southern tip of existing Forum, and Forum extends down to Old Plank Road.  He said Forum would be designed to carry through traffic from this area to Stadium Boulevard.  Mr. Hancock reported the plan is not necessarily designed to provide convenient movement of traffic in this particular area.  He said staff still felt the connection was worthwhile as one to pursue.  Mr. Hancock said presently there is not a lot of traffic on Old Plank Road, but that is not to say there might not be more.  In addition, staff did not see the potential for through traffic to be worrisome in the future.  At the most, it would provide for convenience and movement of emergency and service vehicles in the area.  Staff recommended that a connection be maintained and not abandoned at this point.  Mr. Hancock said the City is not pushing for this particular road to go through, but did have Stonehaven Road platted.  He said the road would have to be in place once the two lots are developed and certificates of occupancy are requested.
    Chief Markgraf noted that the Fire Department has a standard objection to cul-de-sac lengths.  He said when an emergency situation occurs and it is at the end of an excessively long cul-de-sac, it only takes one tree to block the entrance.  When that occurs, he explained that both the hose and ladder have to be hand-carried by the three man engine company to the scene, after which a search can begin for people that might be in the structure.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Bob Walters, 2704 Vale, spoke on behalf of Highland Properties Company.  He said this plat had been reviewed eight years ago, and he displayed the substantial changes in infrastructure that has occurred since then.  He also wanted to elaborate on a comment made at the Zoning meeting regarding the fact that it had been agreed to extend and connect Stonehaven in 1985.  At that time, the 56 acres to the west was raw land and the Highland Properties Company did not own it.  Therefore, the company had not been able to negotiate, suggest, or comment upon future access that would be permitted there.  He said the point that had been made since then was that Glasgow accomplishes what Stonehaven was meant to do -- provide a back door and southern access point for the Highlands.  He pointed out additional streets put in since then, permitting a variety of access points outside of the Highlands.
    Mr. Walters said it was his opinion, as well as the opinion of the 19 property owners living on Stonehaven, that at this point Stonehaven is a non-essential through street.  Mr. Walters noted that thousands of people live on cul-de-sacs in Columbia, as do millions in the United States, and all face the same danger.  He said there are many, many other examples in Columbia with far more residences on the street than the 19 on Stonehaven.  In this instance, he pointed out that there has been a 10 year trial run without any instances.  Mr. Walters said the neighbors who are most likely to benefit from this connection are unanimously opposed to it.  He said their experience should speak volumes about this connection.  The policy resolution passed by the Council six years ago had a list of criteria of what would be acceptable if waivers were granted to excess cul-de-sac lengths.  He believed those had been met and exceeded by voluntarily offering to build a wider than normal cul-de-sac -- one that would leave a small island that could be landscaped, and would allow greater turning radius for long vehicles.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if all 19 of the homeowners had signed the petition in agreement with the cul-de-sac request.  Mr. Walters said they had.
    David Rogers, an attorney with offices at 813 E. Walnut, spoke on behalf of the homeowners on Stonehaven Drive.  He displayed a petition which had been signed by all 19 homeowners requesting that the variance be granted, and the replatting of the small portion of Section 8 also be permitted.  In considering matters of public safety and cul-de-sacs, Mr. Rogers said the determining and most important factor had been the number of units placed on a cul-de-sac.  He said these very same 19 homeowners that would supposedly be protected by a through street are the same people that signed the petition asking that it not be done.
    Mike Nichols, 1300 Stonehaven, said that he has lived in the Highlands since 1992.  He spoke in support of leaving Stonehaven a cul-de-sac.  He said most people in Columbia have not been on Stonehaven, and never would be because of its location.  Mr. Nichols reported the decision on the question would affect a very small number of people, and those most affected are the residents living on the street.  Mr. Nichols said he travels in and out of the Highlands daily, at peak travel times, and had never seen any evidence that there is a traffic congestion problem into or out of the development.  As a resident of the Highlands, he felt adequately assured that residents have good access to the development from both the front side and the back.  With the Forum extension, that would probably even improve.
    Mrs. Crockett asked Mr. Nichols where his house was located.  Mr. Nichols said it was at the very end of the street.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Janku remembered when Blue Ridge Road was proposed to be extended from his subdivision to the west.  He explained he had been opposed to it at the time, but it had been constructed and he has used it quite a bit since then.  It is actually a great convenience.  He said the idea of interconnection of neighborhoods was one of the toughest issues the Council has had to deal with in recent years.  He could see streets being held up for some reason and then not being developed as originally proposed.  He had concerns with the impact this could have on a lot of other neighborhoods in the community.  He wished something had been done during the 10 years before the street was fully developed.
    Mrs. Crockett felt that Stonehaven should be a cul-de-sac.  She said 26 or 27 houses could be put on a 750 foot cul-de-sac.  She said there would be cars on both sides of the street and emergency vehicles would have problems getting down the street.  She has been on the street many times and has never seen any cars parked on the street.  She noted that it had been agreed that the cul-de-sac would be built oversized.  Mrs. Crockett named several streets with a number of homes on cul-de-sacs greater than 750 feet.  She pointed out that the Forum Boulevard extension was in the CIP for 2002.
    Mr. Campbell commented that he lives on a cul-de-sac and could understand the desire to live on one, however, this street was not built as a cul-de-sac.  When residents constructed their homes, Stonehaven was platted as a through street.  He was concerned about the length of the cul-de-sac, even though there are only 19 residences on it.  Although, it is a relatively wide street in the sense of not having much parking on it.  The argument that did not sway him was the fact that the Council has already made some mistakes in the past with a number of cul-de-sacs that have a considerable number of houses on them.  He did not think that was sufficient cause to do the same thing in the future.  Mr. Campbell found the Fire Chief's argument to be most persuasive as public safety should always be the most important issue in making a decision.
    Mr. Coffman also found the Fire Department's concerns to be fairly compelling.  Given the layout of the streets, he is not convinced that traffic would increase dramatically.  Where possible, Mr. Coffman thought the Council should encourage streets to go through to connect the community together.  He felt that making the community more cohesive probably discouraged crime.
    Ms. Coble said she had no problem with granting the variance given the number of much more dense streets throughout the City.  She was also satisfied by the fact that other accesses are planned for the future.
    Mayor Hindman believed the idea of through streets is pretty important.  He thought the Council had been enforcing that concept more and more and, if Stonehaven were to be eliminated as a through street, it would make it much harder to justify in future issues.  However, he did understand the views of the people currently residing on the street.  Mayor Hindman was not sure how much a through street would do for the circulation when Forum would carry the bulk of the traffic out of the development.  He said Glasgow did not really lead anywhere, and one would have to know the neighborhood pretty well in order for this street to do much good.  He thought that would probably be true of Stonehaven also.  Mayor Hindman said if Stonehaven is made a through street, he did not think it would attract a lot of through traffic, but may attract some fairly fast traffic.  He said this might be the perfect location to set-up some traffic calming techniques.
    Mr. Janku said the Council has had tremendous battles over this issue, and if they could not hold the line after all the precedent that was set by previous bodies, they might just as well forget about it.  He did not want to battle the issue meeting after meeting.  Mr. Janku reported a policy had been developed because of mistakes that were made in the past.
    Mrs. Crockett asked why then there are so many cul-de-sacs with different lengths.  Mr. Janku said that was because of past mistakes.  Ms. Coble said some of the cul-de-sacs are new.  Mr. Janku agreed, and said there were extensions planned for Bluff Pointe when the bridge goes through.  He said that would be the Council's next big battle.
    Mayor Hindman explained one difference between this development and some of the others is that there are other exits.  With Glasgow and Forum, it is not a case where there will be a subdivision with too few entrances and exits.  However, he is still bothered about how the Council would deal with standardization.
    B11-98 was read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  JANKU, CAMPBELL, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  ABSTAINING:  KRUSE.  Bill defeated.

B19-98     Rezoning property located at 127 South Fifth Street and 415 Locust Street from M-1 to C-2.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this request had been recommended for approval by both the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission.  At the last meeting, he explained the issue had been tabled and the applicant had been asked to discuss the request with their neighbors to the south to see if any type of agreement could be worked out.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Wally Bley, an attorney representing the applicant, said the proposed zoning would be in conformance with the Master Plan.  He said the refurbishing of the site would help foster the transition of the area to C-2, which is taking place now.  Mr. Bley said the parties attempted to reconcile their differences as the owners communicated with Tom Schneider, the attorney representing the mosque.  He said proposed deed restrictions formulated by the Mosque had been forwarded to the property owners.  The Mosque asked that these restrictions be in place for 30 years.  Mr. Bley reported the owners felt that was unreasonable and too long, but did agree to the restrictions for a maximum of 15 years.  The Mosque had found that unacceptable, so neither side could reconcile their differences.
    Nancy Galloway, 501 S. Glenwood, said those involved in the proposed project felt what they are trying to do is to improve the location.  She said at the same time, they are trying to comply with the City's plan in down-zoning the properties to C-2, and put an attractive office building on the corner that would have nothing but a positive impact on the neighborhood, and for the other three corners in the Flat Branch area.  Ms. Galloway said those involved in the project are sorry that the differences could not be reconciled with the board members of the mosque; however, they felt a fair and reasonable offer had been presented.
    Mr. Campbell asked about the deed restrictions that were proposed.  Ms. Galloway said the first was the sale of beer, wine or liquor either by package or drink. Second was the sale or rental of adult videos, publications or other media containing or involving matters of a sexual nature.  Third was clubs or other facilities in which exotic dancers, nude or partially nude individuals are present.  Lastly, was clubs or other facilities in which live or recorded music is played which can be heard from the exterior of any buildings on the undersign's property.  Mr. Campbell asked Ms. Galloway if those involved in the project are agreeable to the restrictions for 15 years.  Ms. Galloway said they are.
    Mr. Coffman asked why the owners felt 30 years was too onerous.  Mrs. Galloway said they felt that would be tying up the property too long, and they intend to occupy the property.  She said when she was too old to occupy the property, she did not personally want to be the landlord of the property.
    Tom Schneider, an attorney with offices at 11 N. Seventh Street, spoke on behalf of the Islamic Center.  He stated the Center did not have a problem with the property being zoned commercial, but that it would be zoned unrestricted commercial.  He said the proposed restrictive covenants basically provide for no loud music, no liquor, no sex, and no gambling.  He said the Islamic Center did not feel that the types of uses being prohibited had been an unreasonable request, seeing as this property is located directly across the street from a mosque.  Ordinarily, Mr. Schneider said this project would be approached with a planned commercial development proposal.  In the 1990's, it had been very rare for the Council to allow open commercial zoning, certainly very rare outside of C-2.  He saw no distinction concerning C-2 that should cause that to be some sort of safe haven and avoid a planned district approach that is ordinarily required.  Mr. Schneider said the Center simply wants to avoid those categories with offensive uses for the time period the mosque is going to be at this location.  For that reason, the mosque proposes that the property in question be zoned planned commercial, excluding those offensive uses.  In a practical sense, Mr. Schneider reported this request is not a down-zoning in as much as some of those uses objected by the Center could be permitted in M-1, which is what the property is currently zoned, but the property cannot be used in the existing zoning due to off-site parking requirements.
    Aree Swanee, spoke on behalf of the Islamic Center, and welcomed the new owners to their neighborhood.  She said the type of business that will be established by their neighbors was of great significance to the Center.  She said they had no problem with an office or shop, but strongly opposed any establishment where liquor or sales and consumption would take place.  She said the Center was truly a family place where five times a day there are congregational prayers from dawn until night.  She said the Center has had many negative experiences in the past with establishments where alcohol is being sold.
    Ms. Coble asked about the 15 years and a period for renegotiations.   Ms. Swanee said she could not speak to that question.
    Ms. El Dieb, a mosque member, was concerned about the peacefulness of the area in which they worship.
    An optamologist from the Mexico area, who comes to Columbia to worship at the mosque, said the City seemed to have a good respect for their Center.  He asked that the area around the mosque be made alcohol free.  He suggested that the owners sell the property to the mosque when they are ready to dispose of it.  That would guarantee things for the Center.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Campbell asked about the laws restricting alcohol sales around churches.  Mr. Boeckmann explained there is no City ordinance, but there is a state law that declares in order for a business to obtain a liquor license within 100 feet of a church or school, a license will not be granted unless the board of a church or school consents to it.  He said this poses a legal problem as it is considered an unlawful delegation of authority.  In the instance of a church, it is tied into the First Amendment -- the State would be delegating a governmental decision to a religious body.  On the other hand, there is no problem with a city adopting an ordinance to the effect that a liquor license cannot be issued within 100 feet of a church or a school, or making it a conditional use so that individualized consideration can be given to the facts by the Board of Adjustment.  In other words, Mr. Boeckmann said there is not a blanket prohibition of a city restricting sales of alcohol around a church.  Mr. Campbell asked how these laws have held-up in court.  Mr. Boeckmann said the laws had generally been upheld.
    Mr. Kruse asked if there could also be an ordinance that would restrict other activities as were suggested in the agreement.  Mr. Boeckmann said those issues arise in the First Amendment context when referring to nude or semi-nude dancing, and that type of thing.  It is considered protected speech, but by establishing individualized consideration, a city can have a zoning ordinance that restricts the location of those types of businesses.  He thought the distance from a church or school would be the kind of a consideration that would be upheld.
    If at some point the Council would want to make alcohol sales in the central business district a conditional use, Mr. Janku asked how that would affect existing uses of bars and restaurants.  He asked if it could be controlled for future licenses but not for existing licenses.  Mr. Boeckmann said he thought the existing businesses would be grandfathered.
    Mr. Kruse asked what would happen if an existing grandfathered use were to be discontinued, i.e., a bar across the street from a church went out of business.  Mr. Boeckmann said if a business is discontinued or abandoned, then it no longer has its non-conforming use status and anyone else that wanted to operate that type of business in that location would have to get a conditional use permit.
    Mayor Hindman said the City currently has no such ordinance and this application is before the Council.  He thought the offer had been reasonable and saw no reason to deny the request.  He said the present owners would not be putting in a bar, they would be putting in a very nice building with a desirable business.
    Mr. Janku thought the business going in at this location would be a very attractive one and an improvement to the neighborhood.  For years, he thought the speculation had been that these two houses would be torn down and become part of the parking area for an existing bar and restaurant.  He thought it was good that it would be kept as an office use for a substantial period of time.  He said the Council is not making a decision about whether or not alcohol could be served at that location, but making a decision about whether or not the business that plans to be there can function more effectively.  He said nothing new is being added to this location in terms of alcohol use.  Mr. Janku felt a responsibility to try to accommodate any church, but did not think the Council could establish particular religious beliefs of any type in zoning decisions throughout the City.  He said there may be other concerns about alcohol use and noise that maybe the Council could deal with in a more general ordinances.  Mr. Janku felt the 15 year limitation was reasonable.
    Ms. Coble asked why the 15 year offer was not seen as acceptable, given a right to renegotiate.  Mr. Schneider said there would be no right to negotiate because there would be no mechanism in place to cause that to happen.  He said the property owner would have no inducement whatsoever to do that.  He said the consensus was that the restriction should be for the duration of the Islamic Center.  Mr. Schneider said their thought had been that the Center would have outgrown that site in 30 years and would perhaps move somewhere else.
    Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Bley if the 15 year offer was still open if the Council passed the ordinance.  Mr. Bley said when both sides could not come to an agreement, he had thought the Council would not enforce restrictions when the owners thought they were being reasonable to start with.  He would not be inclined to say if the Council were to pass the ordinance, that the owners would agree to any restrictions placed on the property.  He said it was really a question of freedom of use of the property in the future, and none of them know what will happen.  Mr. Bley was hopeful the Council would not force restrictive covenants on the property.
    Mr. Kruse pointed out that there could be some residential uses adjacent from the Islamic Center that could be nearly as obnoxious as a bar or a club.  He thought it was a good development and said he was going to support it.
    Mr. Coffman said he was also disappointed that there was no agreement.  He felt that 30 years for uses that are not planned to be uses for the building was very reasonable, and certainly 15 years was very reasonable.  He said he would vote against the proposal.
    Ms. Coble thought this project is a good plan, and it would provide a good buffer between an existing establishment that does sell liquor and is loud.  She thought there were possibly some opportunities to continue negotiating uses over time to ensure that development in the area is a good neighbor to the Islamic Center and to its worship uses.
    B19-98 was read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  COFFMAN.  ABSTAINING:  CROCKETT.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B20-98A     Rezoning property located at 209 and 213 Third Avenue from R-2 and O-1 to O-P.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that the Council had asked the staff to review the plan as to how far back this type of zoning would be shown on the general guide plan.  He said Mr. Hancock had researched it and found that the request is within the guidelines of the Land Use Plan.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Tom Schneider, an attorney with offices at 11 N. Seventh Street, spoke on behalf of Tom and Pamela Kardon, the applicants.  He circulated a photo of the site.  Mr. Schneider responded to the concerns listed at the last meeting.  With respect to the issue of the depth of the intrusion into the residential area, he said the lot is 135 feet north/south along Providence, and was laid out as 73 feet deep east/west.  That was in 1904, and since then Providence Road has been widened several times.  He guessed there was now about 65 feet of depth.  Mr. Schneider pointed out that both O-1 and O-2 zonings have a 25 foot front yard setback, plus a 25 foot rear setback adjacent to residential property.  When taking 50 feet out of the 65 feet, 15 feet of building space remains.  He thought that was true all along the Providence corridor.  As a practical matter, Mr. Schneider said a one lot depth of planned office is not feasible along Providence Road, certainly not on this lot.
    With respect to removal of older housing stock, Mr. Schneider thought in general that is a valid objective to pursue; however, in this particular application he would suggest that principle would not apply because the front house had not been occupied for about 5 years due to its state of repair.  The back house had been looked at by a contractor and had been found to contain sagging floors and a sagging roof.  According to the contractor, it would require an expenditure of $38,000 to bring the house up to habitable levels.  That would be more than what the applicant paid for it, and was much more than what it is worth.  In the near future, both houses would be razed or simply fall into disuse.
    Concerning the traffic issue, Mr. Schneider said this is a relatively flat stretch of Providence Road as compared to farther north -- by Taco Bell.  He said the egress would be much better at this location.  He said that same traffic entry and egress issue would be true all up and down Providence.
    With respect to the unimproved status of Third Avenue, Mr. Schneider said if both lots are rezoned, that will address some traffic circularity on-site -- thus reducing the need to use Third Avenue.  He said Third Avenue would not be desirable for ingress or egress purposes and, with additional room on-site, Providence traffic could be accommodated as there should not be any traffic coming to an office complex from a residential area.  If there was, that would be minuscule.
    Mr. Campbell said he had used the entrance onto Providence Road from Third Street.  He explained there is a site distance problem to the north where one cannot see traffic coming up over the hill.  He asked how the applicant would suggest preventing traffic from going down Third to Grand.  Mr. Schneider thought it was a matter of making access from Providence itself more attractive.  Mr. Schneider asked if Mr. Campbell was suggesting that Third Street be used.  Mr. Campbell said he was suggesting that it should not be used because it is a dangerous intersection.  Mr. Schneider said he was not arguing that Third Avenue will be used as an access.  He thought the frontage along Providence will be used as long as there is adequate area allowed on-site to enable wide turning radiuses and the like.
    Mr. Janku asked when the applicant acquired the property.  Mr. Schneider said it had been within the last six or eight months.
    Mr. Campbell asked if he bought it with a residential zoning.  Mr. Schneider explained that there is some question as to the existing zoning on the front lot as it was listed as commercial.  He said the Land use Plan shows planned office.  He said it was one or the other.  Regarding the back lot, Mr. Schneider said it was acquired as residential.
    Linda Roots, 807 N. Eighth Street, spoke as a board member of the North Central Neighborhood Association.  She said although this property is across the road from the association, any development that occurs is very important to the entire corridor.  She thanked the Council and the Planning Commission for being firm about adhering to the Land Use Plan.  She also thanked Mr. and Mrs. Kardon for amending their application to planned office.  Along this corridor, she would personally like to see the buildings closer to Providence Road and the parking behind, between the buildings and the neighborhoods.  She said that would necessitate access from Third Avenue.  She suggested that might be some sort of off-site improvement by the developer.  Ms. Roots referred to a misleading real estate ad she had read, and she thought that many people through the years have invested in property along that corridor thinking that when it became commercial property they would make a killing on it.  She said now when these individuals realize the Council is remaining firm about sticking to planned office, they are looking for ways to bail out.
    Tom Kardon, 1909 Jackson, explained that after he had purchased the first house, he had found out the lot was not deep enough to build anything.  He said he had to buy the second house for more than it was worth.
    Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Kardon if he would be willing to restrict the access to the lot only to Providence Road.  Mr. Kardon said he would like to have an exit from Providence Road, Third Avenue, and possibly the alley.  He said he wanted people to be able to get in and out easily.  Ms. Coble agreed.
    John Clark, President of the North Central Neighborhood Association, encouraged the Council to reject the application on the basis that it is not in conformance with the Land Use Plan.  He said the Land Use Plan included the notion of one lot deep into the neighborhoods as a part of a policy to protect the residential character of the lots and the neighborhoods behind them.  He thanked Mr. Kardon for calling him and talking to him about what it was he wanted to do at that location.  Mr. Clark said he was confused because the application is for C-P, but most of the discussion with Mr. Kardon had been about ultimately building a foreign car parts store for one of his sons.  He thought that was probably a good idea for some place in Columbia, but not in this particular place.  He encouraged Mr. Kardon to work with the owner of the third lot in order to buy part of it and maybe develop a plan that could be shown to be really protective of the residential neighborhood behind it.  Mr. Clark said residents are concerned that the Council would be setting a precedent for encroaching deeply into the neighborhood.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    In terms of access to Providence Road, Mr. Janku asked to what extent the state would be involved in permitting it.  Mr. Patterson said the Highway Department would have control over any access.  Where there is an existing driveway, he thought it was likely the property owner would be allowed to keep it, unless it is part of some condition the City imposes.
    Mr. Campbell asked if Third Avenue was slated for any reconstruction in the current plan.  Mr. Patterson said it as not.  It is, however, one of the streets eligible for CDBG funding, and there had been some discussion in past years of trying to get it programmed.
    Ms. Coble said she was confused in that the packet of information the Council received it showed that the two lot deep office zoning designation was in conformance with the Land Use Plan.  Mr. Hancock said that was the staff's opinion.  Ms. Coble said she did not think, in particular, that the traffic concerns here are as big of an issue as ensuring that the commercial development does not go any further.  She thought it was reasonable to think that one would have to have more than the one lot for any commercial construction given the amount of land that has been lost with the expansion of Providence Road.  She said Third Avenue is not the kind of street one would "zoom down" to get from one point to another.
    Mr. Campbell agreed, but said this is only one of several developments which are likely to occur in this area as a result of this plan.  He said there are 12 lots that are marked for planned development.  He presumed there are houses on most of them.  With low income housing being one of the most precious kind of housing in the City, as it cannot be replaced in today's market, he regarded the destruction to be very serious.
    Ms. Coble said these houses could not be lived in because it would cost more than what it is worth to make them livable.  She did not think the loss of two houses that nobody can occupy right now, and the owners cannot afford to bring up to code, would have a detrimental affect on the neighborhood.
    Mr. Campbell said more of the same kind of thing is possible if houses are allowed to deteriorate and then the land owners are rewarded with a higher zone.  Looking back over the history of the area when it was developed, there was an idea that Providence Road would become a major office area and that Business Loop 70 would become a major commercial area.  He said that was the reason for some of the zoning that was done.  Mr. Campbell did not think that was going to occur, and development has now moved to the suburbs.  It is likely what occurs in this area will be very spotty, marginal development with some other deterioration around it.  Mr. Campbell said the Council needed to be very careful in this transition because this is a fragile neighborhood.  He felt directing traffic into those areas would be one thing that would make it a less desirable area in which to live.
    Mr. Janku shared the concern about tearing down dilapidated housing after allowing it to get in bad shape.  In this instance, the applicant had not owned the properties for a long period of time.  As development moves northward in Columbia and one sees a lot more population and traffic coming from that area through Providence into the City, Mr. Janku thought these regions could be likely candidates for good office/commercial areas.
    B20-98A, was read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  CAMPBELL.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B36-98     Authorizing reconstruction of the north cargo apron and lean-out to Taxiway A at Columbia
                  Regional Airport and calling for bids.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this project was included in the 1998 budget.  He said that 90% of the project would be paid for from federal funds, which amounts to $832,500.  The City's share in the cost of the project is $92,500.  Mr. Beck said the reconstruction will improve a 350 by 300 foot area that is being primarily used by cargo-type aircraft.
    B36-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B38-98     Authorizing change order No. 1; accepting and approving the work; approving engineer's
                  final report; and levying special assessments for the Fairview Avenue and Coats Street
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Patterson explained that this project was authorized by the Council following a public hearing May 1, 1995.  He said both streets were previously 20 to 22 feet in width with an asphaltic pavement surface.  Open ditches ran along both sides of the streets, and sidewalks were located on the east side of the roads.  The streets were rebuilt to improved standards, but at a width of only 28 feet to allow the construction of new sidewalks along both sides.  The work also included extensive storm drainage improvements and utility upgrades, particularly with water lines and overhead electric lines.
    In addition to the street and utility work, Mr. Patterson noted that the staff had been directed to work with the neighborhood to develop a landscaping plan to replace trees that were removed by the project.  He explained that there have been meetings with the property owners and the neighborhood groups and it is believed that a plan, acceptable to property owners, has been prepared.  He said the plan would utilize plantings from the Water and Light Department's Trade A Tree Program, and trees will be purchased through these project funds.  These trees will be bid separately through Purchasing and planted this spring.
    The total cost of the street reconstruction work was $289,218.00.  Since both Coats and Fairview are in the CDBG eligibility area, Mr. Patterson pointed out that the tax bill assessments (per City policy) are set at one-half of the normal amount for the local pavement portion of the cost, which amounts to $13.06 per abutting foot.  Additionally, property owners that meet residency and income guidelines can apply for and receive a Community Development Block Grant to pay for the entire assessment.
    Mr. Patterson reported if the assessments proposed are approved by the Council, $43,800 of the total cost would be generated.  The remainder of the project funding will be paid from CDBG funds in the amount of $217,800, and $27,510 from the sewer utility for sewer upgrades that were conducted in conjunction with the project.  Prior to making those assessments, Mr. Patterson said Council will need to determine that there have been special benefits that have accrued to the properties, that are at least equal to the $13.06 per foot that is being proposed.  He suggested that the Council consider the following:  curb and guttering and the storm drainage improvement have provided for better storm water management in the area, the curb and guttering also improves the appearance and maintainability of the lots, new driveway approaches have been constructed thus improving access, and new sidewalks have been constructed enhancing pedestrian traffic.  Mr. Patterson said the City would be able to better maintain the streets, particularly in the way of street cleaning and snow removal.  In addition, the new smooth road surface will reduce the wear and tear on the vehicles owned by the property owners.  Now that the streets have been reconstructed, he noted that the property owners would no longer be subject to a potential $2.00 per foot for street maintenance.
    Ms. Coble asked if there was a distinct difference in the size of trees that would be purchased through Water and Light funds and those that would be paid through City funds as an aspect of the project.  Mr. Patterson said there is some difference in size.  The Water and Light Department's Adopt A Tree Program has a certain caliper tree that is somewhat smaller than the City's landscaping requirements for Public Works specifications.  He said staff has tried to blend those together on the project and, if there is a problem, the City would have to pay the additional cost for it.  Staff felt everyone was satisfied with this arrangement.
    Mr. Kruse asked who would be responsible for the immediate maintenance of the trees.  Mr. Patterson said trees are typically bid with one year maintenance on the plantings.  After that, they become the property owners responsibility.  He said as soon as trees are planted, the watering is the responsibility of the property owner.
    Linda Roots, 807 N. Eighth Street, said she had personally passed around the petition regarding the improvements on these streets.  She said no one questions the benefits.  The streets are lovely and the trees will be great.  Ms. Roots reported that 50% of the houses on Fairview Avenue are now owner occupied.  She said several have been purchased since the street construction, and she had been told by several people that they were attracted to the area because the street looked so nice.
    Jeff Barrow, 1007 Coats Street, reiterated that the street looks great.  He said residents liked the idea that the entire street was being looked at as a landscape project instead of just replacing trees one by one.  Mr. Barrow thanked the Council for amending the original plan from a 32 foot wide street to a 28 foot street.  He said that had gone a long way toward not only keeping the architectural integrity, but also in preserving some of the trees that otherwise would have been destroyed.  He believed it also has had an affect on the speed of traffic on the streets -- a narrower street is a safer street.
    Betty Cook Rottman, 1200 Coats, thanked Mr. Janku for helping residents appeal to the Council for the 28 foot width street.  She also thanked Mr. Knipp for alerting homeowners to the petition process.  She was also grateful to the crews that worked on the street.  Ms. Rottman reported these individuals had been very considerate and did their best to give the residents access during the construction project.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B38-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B42-98     Voluntary annexation of property owned by Raymond and Bertha Johnston located on the
                  southwest corner of Vawter School Road and Old Mill Creek Road.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this is a 20 acre tract of land with one single family residence on it.  He said the applicants have requested a connection to the City sewer system, hence the application for annexation.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B42-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows;

B43-98     Voluntary annexation of property owned by SERR, L.L.C., located on the south side of
                  Thompson Road and adjacent to Garden City Subdivision.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said this annexation request if for a 20 acre tract of land, also located in northeast Columbia.  He said a 57 lot subdivision is being proposed for single family use.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B43-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B44-98     Voluntary annexation of property owned by Cavcey, et. al., located west of Bearfield Road
                  and south of Nifong Boulevard; establishing permanent R-2 zoning.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this approximate 35 acre tract of land located is in southeast Columbia.  He said the Planning and Zoning Commission had voted 9-2 to recommend denial of the R-2 zoning request associated with the annexation.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Tom Schneider, an attorney with offices at 11 N. Seventh Street, spoke on behalf of the contract purchaser, John Payne. He said the applicant did not have a signed agreement with the Clear Creek Neighborhood Association.  Mr. Payne tried to meet with the association, but Mr. Blakemore (the President of the association) indicated that although he appreciated the gesture, the association did not want to schedule a meeting to address any such issues.  Mr. Schneider took that to mean that the association did not have the same concerns regarding this property as had been associated with Cambridge Place.
    Mr. Schneider reported that earlier this evening, the Council approved the much denser plan for Cambridge Place.  In addition, about a year ago the Council approved duplex zoning immediately west of Cambridge Place on the property formerly owned by Louise Hunt.  Mr. Schneider noted that the Council had approved a substantial amount of multi-family, specifically duplex zoning, on the north side of Nifong Boulevard.  He said there is not a great deal to distinguish or differentiate between those particular applications or developments from this proposed project.
    Mr. Schneider said the applicant did not have a market study or a detailed plan to show what this development would look like.  He said the market place would determine what would be built at this location, but said it would be a mistake to assume that it would necessarily be for the maximum density.  He pointed out that if Mr. Payne wanted to do so, he could construct a similar development in R-1 with a 7,000 square foot minimum lot size.  Mr. Schneider stated five small single family houses could be constructed in contrast to the density being proposed for this project being no more than six units per lot.  Mr. Schneider saw the issue as being the incremental difference between R-2 and R-1 zoning.
    With respect to traffic, Mr. Schneider said the new AC alignment should provide relief, as would the construction of Grindstone.  He said this project would take five to ten years to develop, so it is not an immediate issue needing to be addressed.  The applicant felt the traffic issue would take care of itself.  Mr. Schneider said Mr. Blaylock would be addressing the affect, if any, of a duplex community upon single family residential land values.  In the event that the rezoning as requested is not approved, Mr. Schneider said it is not the applicant's desire to proceed with the annexation petition.
    Jack Blaylock, a real estate appraiser with offices at 802 E. Broadway, explained that he provides counsel to lenders, developers, and investors on a regular basis on all types of real property in the area.  He said that requires him to keep abreast of all of the development patterns of the area, which included keeping track of building permits.  Mr. Blaylock distributed some graphs and accompanying text.
    Mr. Janku asked if the statistics provided to the Council are consistent with national trends, or if Columbia is somehow different.  He asked if Mr. Blaylock was familiar with any national trends in multi-family versus single family dwellings.  Mr. Blaylock said he does not appraise nationally, but does some in other states.  He said there is great compatibility in one-family and two-family dwellings.  He said he would not deny that there will be some people who will choose not to buy in areas that have both, but the price that is paid for that property will not reflect a loss in value.
    John Blakemore, 4807 Bearfield Road, President of the Clear Creek Neighborhood Association, said they believed there are several good reasons to deny Mr. Payne's request for zoning.  He asked the Council to consider the already inordinate number of duplex subdivisions in this area.  He said these developments are very high density, have no green spaces, or any regard for environmentally sensitive areas.  Mr. Blakemore said denial would be in keeping with the City's and County's Land Use Plans.  He encouraged the joint City/County task force to begin to look at this area.
    Joe Bendbeuetel, 1701 E. Gans Road, said residents believe the Cambridge project should be a model of the way developments should move forward in Columbia.  He said residents are not completely happy with the density, but it happened.  He said this proposed development is everything Cambridge is not.  The transition between this area to the State Park is critically important, and the neighborhood association urged the Council to give special consideration toward the type of development that is going to transition into the park area.  It is thought this development would be the least compatible.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mrs. Crockett did not like the density or the traffic the proposed development would create.  She is going to vote against the request.
    Mr. Campbell felt this would be a bad development in the wrong place.
    Mayor Hindman is opposed to the request as well.  He did not object to the density as long as it is done right.  Mayor Hindman observed this plan is just streets and duplexes, no green spaces.  In addition, the community is concerned about the watershed for this area, and no mention had been made of it.
    Mr. Janku said to some extent, some of the older neighborhoods have had problems with rental properties contributing to the decline of an area.  He said one of his big concerns about these massive duplex developments is that they have the potential for diffuse ownership of rental property -- there is no potential for stability of home ownership at all.  In the long-term, developments such as this have the potential for detriment to the community.
    Mr. Coffman said enough is enough, and thought the Sixth Ward had suffered enough.  He said better development than this one is needed.
    B44-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  NO ONE.  VOTING NO:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  Bill defeated.

B46-98     Authorizing construction of water mains along Blue Ridge Road, Northland Drive and
                  Route 763 and calling for bids.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this project had been included in this fiscal year's budget.
    Mr. Malon noted that these two water main projects were being combined into one bid.  He said the projects would tie dead ends of 8-inch and 12-inch water mains together, would provide loop flows in the area, increase fire flows, and also increase fire flows and pressure in the Prathersville Water District area.  He displayed a drawing on the overhead and explained the two CIP projects -- numbers 58 and 72.   Mr. Malon explained the project would be bid out as it would be much too large for City work forces to undertake.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B46-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

(A)     Street construction on Oakland Gravel Road.
    Item A was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck commented that this is a major street project and asked Mr. Patterson to describe the project.
    Mr. Patterson explained that this hearing is for determining the necessity of reconstructing Oakland Gravel Road from the end of the existing improved pavement, approximately 200 feet north of Smiley Lane northward 1,600 feet.  This is a collector street on the Major Thoroughfare Plan and one of the specific projects identified in the 1995 1/4 cent sales tax ballot issue. The project was placed on a high priority list primarily due to the construction of the new Lange Middle School.
    Mr. Patterson stated the existing roadway is a 20 to 22-foot wide asphalt surface with roadside ditches and no sidewalks.  An existing bridge constructed by Boone County in the early 1980's spans Bear Creek and is 28 feet wide.  The southern approximate 600 feet of Oakland Gravel Road is within the city limits.  North of Bear Creek, the City limit line runs down the center of Oakland Gravel Road, with the eastern half being in Boone County and western half being within the corporate limits of Columbia. The proposed project terminates approximately 300 feet south of the intersection with Roger Wilson Drive. This location had been established due to proposed changes in the alignment of Roger Wilson Drive and construction of Brown School Road as part of the development occurring in the area.
    Mr. Patterson explained City staff has been meeting with county representatives and with the developer to assure a close coordination of the planning for the roadway north of the proposed project limits.  Due to the safety issues related to school traffic, it is not felt the City should wait on the developer's schedule to proceed with this first phase of work.
    Mr. Patterson reported it is proposed that Oakland Gravel Road be constructed 38 feet in width with sidewalks along the entire east side of the project.  The sidewalk will most probably be constructed four feet behind the curb, recognizing the proximity of the residential structures along the east side.  He said a sidewalk is proposed along the west side of Oakland Gravel Road, from the southern terminus northward to and across the Lange Middle School property.  No sidewalk is proposed on the west side near the north end because it is anticipated this sidewalk will be constructed by the developer as this property is developed.
    Mr. Patterson said since Oakland Gravel Road is classified as a Class II Bicycle Lane within the city limits, and given the proximity of Lange Middle School, it is proposed that parking be removed from the street and the bike lanes be striped and signed to conform to Class II requirements throughout this project.  The 28 foot wide bridge on Oakland Gravel Road will not accommodate pedestrians nor bicyclists.  The consulting engineer who designed this bridge has performed a minor study for the City and has determined the existing bridge can be widened to accommodate both pedestrians and bicyclists.  The bicyclists would share the widened bridge deck with motorists, and pedestrians would be separated by a guardrail.  The cost of this bridge upgrade was included in the original project estimate when it was placed on the ballot issue.  Tree removal will be restricted primarily to fence row trees along the west side.  It appears approximately three significant trees will be removed from the east side.  During the finalizing of plans and the acquisition of rights-of-way, individual discussions will occur with property owners regarding tree impact.  Trees will be saved where possible and replacement trees will be provide where needed.
    A neighborhood meeting was held on February 18, 1997, at the Grace Evangelical Lutheran Church on north Oakland Gravel Road.  Approximately seven properties were represented at this neighborhood meeting.
    If Council gives staff direction to proceed with the project, Mr. Patterson said construction plans will be finalized and acquisition of the necessary easements will begin. Given the technical nature of the redesign of the Bear Creek bridge and the time needed in order to acquire all the necessary land rights, this project cannot be constructed this summer.  Considering the location of Lange Middle School and the access onto Oakland Gravel Road from the school, it is recommended that construction be delayed until the summer of 1999, at which time the entire project can be finished during summer recess.
    Mr. Patterson reported the resolution estimate for the project is $611,000. As a collector street, adjacent property owners may be assessed for the cost of curb and guttering, or its equivalent, which by resolution has been set at a maximum of $12.00 per foot. This assessment may be made only against those properties that are inside the City limits and, unfortunately, the standard letter notifying property owners of the public hearing and indicating the assessment of tax bills had been sent to all parties, even those outside the City limits.  He said staff has since tried to contact those persons living outside the City limits to advise them that the tax bill provisions do not apply to non-residents of the City of Columbia.
    Mr. Patterson noted that before tax bills can be assessed, it will be necessary to have another public hearing after construction is complete to determine if special benefits have accrued to the properties. Some of the potential benefits Council may consider at that time are as follows:

1.     The new curbing improves the appearance of adjacent property and provides for better storm water runoff
2.     With the reconstruction of the street, new driveway entrances will be provided improving the access to the
3.     The sidewalk will provide improved pedestrian safety for residents and property owners in the area.
4.     The new street surface will provide for more efficient snow removal and street cleaning.

    Mr. Patterson said the staff recommends proceeding with the project and, if after receiving public comments tonight Council concurs with staff recommendation, Council should make a motion directing staff to proceed with final plans and specifications for the Oakland Gravel Road improvement project.
    In terms of the timing of Phase II, Mr. Janku asked what could be expected.  Mr. Patterson responded that Phase II would depend more on arrangements the developer will be making with the County as far as some necessary trading of land.  He said there was no indication of when that was expected to happen, but staff did know the County is interested in moving forward with it.  He said the County has been very cooperative in this matter, and they are trying to proceed as though this were a joint project between the City and the County.  Mr. Janku asked if it was conceivable that it could occur in conjunction in 1999.  Mr. Patterson said that was possible, but he was reluctant to try to speak for the County and the developer.  Because of the safety issue, he said staff felt the City should continue with this phase.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Don Schuster, spoke on behalf of the Grace Lutheran Church, 4540 Oakland Gravel Road, and strongly encouraged that the project be moved along as quickly as possible.  He is very concerned about the safety of the school children in the area.  Mr. Schuster said there is quite a bit of speeding as well as a lot of semi truck traffic.  He said since February, a number of the County residents have expressed an interest in annexation.  Regarding any land trading, Mr. Schuster said there is a triangular piece of land in Phase II that is of great concern to the Church.  He said the Church did not want to see duplexes or something else placed in front of the property.  He said the pond owned by the Church had been taken out because it filled with sediment and there is no provision for storm water protection at this point.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mrs. Crockett made the motion that the staff be directed to proceed with the project.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku.
    Mrs. Crockett asked about the truck traffic in the area.  She said there is a sign that reads no through truck traffic, yet this road is used as a shortcut to 763.  She asked if there was anything that could be done about it if the actions were not witnessed by a police officer.  Chief Botsford said if the officer did not see the violation, there was probably nothing that could be done.  Chief Botsford said he could ask the officers to pay more attention to the situation.  He said there is a lot of police traffic on the road because of the trips back and forth to the sheriff's office.  Mrs. Crockett asked if the truck terminals on 763 could be notified and reminded that trucks are not to travel on this road.  Chief Botsford said he would make sure that was done.
    Mr. Janku said once the engineering work is completed, the street lighting should be installed by next winter if possible.  He said there had been some discussion about not knowing the alignment and not proceeding with the project until that is known.  He said it might be possible when that information is obtained, the existing poles could be used.
    The motion to proceed, made by Mrs. Crockett, seconded by Mr. Janku, was approved unanimously by voice vote.

(B)     Voluntary annexation of property owned by Rangeline Properties, L.L.C., located on the east
          side of State Route 763.
    Item B was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this 200 acre tract of land is located in north central Columbia.  It is proposed that the property be zoned a combination of M-C, C-1, and O-1.  He displayed the tract on the overhead.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

(C)     Voluntary annexation of property owned by estate of George Spencer, et. al., located on the
          east side of State Route 763.
    Item C was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck described this tract as being about a 142 acre tract of land east of 763.  He said it is approximately a mile north of Smiley Lane, and the permanent zoning request would be for a combination of M-1 and M-C.  Mr. Beck noted that the staff had been meeting with the property owners concerning this drainage area and highway corridor to determine if there is any interest in annexation before the City does infrastructure planning in the area.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Scott Kelp, spoke on behalf of Boone County Bank in representing the land owners.  He offered to answer any questions.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

(D)     Annexation of property owned by the City located on the east side of State Route 763, north of
          Smiley Lane.
    Item D was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck displayed the two small tracts on the overhead.  He said these tracts had been obtained as part of the merger with Water District No. 1.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

B17-98     Approving final plat of The Terebinths, Plat III, a major subdivision.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this is a seven and one-half acre tract of land adjacent to St. Charles Road.  Four lots are being proposed.  He noted that this item had been tabled from the last meeting in order for the staff to review with the property owner the possibility of dedicating a greenbelt easement on a portion of the lots.  Mr. Beck had not received a report back as to the status, although he had heard there had been no proposal to dedicate the greenbelt.  Mr. Hancock said that was correct.  He said staff had sent a letter to the property owner on the 4th of February advising them of the current situation.  He said staff also spoke to the property owner and this individual's engineer, but have had nothing come back.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if the plat met all City regulations.  Mr. Hancock said it did, other than something relative to a greenbelt.
    Ms. Coble asked about the City standard because the Hominy Branch has been identified as being part of the City greenbelt easement.  Mr. Hancock thought the policy resolution and the language that accompanied the plan adoption indicates that certain creeks served interest to the Council as preservation of greenbelt easements.  He said the staff was directed to encourage and work with developers to provide these easements.  He said they have been defined in the ordinance.  Mr. Hancock said there had been some opposition to this particular PUD, so staff worked with Mr. McMurry at length trying to develop a PUD he could market in exchange for some public usage of the property.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if there was an ordinance which states that the property owner must dedicate a greenbelt easement.  Mr. Hancock said there was not.
    Mr. Janku asked if this request was for the entire development, or whether there would be an additional plat coming before the Council.  Mr. Hancock said this was it.  He said it had been previously identified that a considerable portion of the Hominy Branch greenbelt had been worked into the Richland Heights development.  He also pointed out a small portion at the E.D.I. Plant.  He said Hominy Branch would be a good creek to have a greenbelt along.  Mr. Janku asked if this development is immediately adjacent to St. Charles Road.  Mr. Hancock said it was.  Mr. Janku said when the City improves the street, they could then tax bill the adjoining property.
    B17-98 was read with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT.  VOTING NO:  COBLE, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  Bill defeated.

B35-98     Authorizing right of use permit for subdivision entrance monument and sign on City
                  property for Chapel Hill Estates 3.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said staff had worked with the subdivider, when the plat came in south of Chapel Hill Road and adjacent to the Fire Station, to get a street aligned with a road directly across Chapel Hill from the north.  This will take a small corner off the Fire Station property.  Mr. Beck indicated the Council received a report outlining all of the conditions the subdivider will need to meet upon Council approval.
     B35-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B40-98     Amending chapter 14 of the City Code relating to parking rates.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck reminded the Council that the parking meter rates had been adjusted some months ago in conjunction with the parking study that was done.  At that time, there had been no adjustment made to a fairly long list of other kinds of parking, i.e., contractor hoods and utility hoods.  He said this list had been provided to the Council, along with a list of the proposed rates.
    David Rogers, an attorney with offices at 813 E. Walnut, spoke on behalf of Arnie Fagan, a downtown merchant in opposition of reserving parking for specific types of businesses, especially those spaces that banks can allocate for themselves.  At the present time, Mr. Rogers said that four of the six banking institutions in the central business district purchase these hoods.  One of the issues being considered in this ordinance is raising the amount charged for those hoods.  He said the ordinance would raise it proportionately to other parking rate increases.  Mr. Rogers is hopeful that the Council will consider directing the staff to prepare an ordinance that would address the question as to whether this is a good idea at all.  He said banks should not be entitled to exclusive parking if other businesses do not have the same privilege.  Mr. Rogers reported by doing so, it cordons off a portion of the public right-of-way that is supported by all tax payers for the benefit of a small, select group of tax payers -- and that is not right.
    B40-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B41-98     Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code relating to speed limits on Old 63 South.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said a study had been completed by the Public Works Department regarding these proposed changes.
    B41-98 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO: NO ONE.  Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

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

B37-98     Authorizing amendment to the agreement with Burns & McDonnell for engineering
                  services for construction of Wetland Treatment Unit No. 4 and flood relief structures.
B39-98     Authorizing Change Order No. 1; accepting and approving the work; approving engineer's
                  final report for the Jackson Street Drainage project.
B45-98     Accepting conveyance for water utility purposes from Lee H. and Joyce J. Thompson.
R41-98     Setting a public hearing: street construction on Alan Lane from McKee Street to eastern 
R42-98     Setting a public hearing: street construction on Conley Road from I-70 Drive Southeast to
                  the northern terminus.
R43-98     Setting a public hearing: sidewalk construction along Berrywood Drive, Worley Street and
                  Business Loop 70; a pedestrian bridge to north side of Smiley Lane bridge over Bear
R44-98     Setting a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property owned by Mike S. and Tammy
                  K. Wulff located at 2711 Mill Creek Terrace.
R45-98     Setting a public hearing: traffic calming improvements in Colonial Gardens Subdivision.
R46-98     Authorizing a grant application to Missouri Department of Natural Resources for
                  replacement of lighting in the Daniel Boone Building.
R47-98     Approving preliminary plat of Garden City, Plat 8; a major subdivision.
R48-98     Authorizing agreement with Missouri Department of Health to provide on-the-spot birth and
                  death certificates.

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

R49-98     Authorizing agreement with Chinn & Associates Architects to develop a plan for
                  development of the MKT Trailhead at the southwest corner of Fourth & Cherry.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that the staff and a representative of the Trailhead Committee had interviewed consultants to work with the Committee in developing a plan.  The firm of Chinn & Associates is being recommended.
    Mr. Janku asked if there is a deadline for completion.  Mr. Beck said a grant had been received from the DNR, with the deadline for completion being the fall of 1998.  He said when more information on the clean-up in the area is obtained, the City would discuss the possibility of an extension.  Mr. Janku asked if the consultant had a deadline.  Mr. Beck said they would be working with the Committee as the project moves ahead.  Mayor Hindman said part of the program is for the consultant to work with the Committee, and the Committee is very anxious for this to occur.  Mr. Beck said there is no reason that the Committee could not proceed with work on the final plan.  He said staff felt it would be a good idea to have the plan submitted at the same time the City requests an extension due to the clean-up.
    Mr. Campbell said some time ago the question had been raised about a walk light on Providence.  He said as this park is developed, there will be more and more pedestrians generated on Stewart Road.  He thought it would be wise to pursue getting a walk light at this location.
    Mayor Hindman said the State is actually looking at going underneath Providence, using the tunnels.  He said there still needed to be a walk light at Stewart and Providence.
    The vote on R49-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R50-98     Authorizing a grant application to Boone County for improvements to the Bethel at Nifong
                  and Forum at Nifong intersections.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that each year the County Commission distributes about $200,000 from their road sales tax to various communities in the County.  He said records indicate that Columbia receives about $40,000 per year from those funds.  The recommendation this year is to apply for funding toward signals at the locations indicated.  Mr. Beck reported money for the signals had been received last year, and this would add more to the amount needed to build them.
    Mr. Kruse noted the grant application read that it is expected that traffic signals will be installed during the late summer or early fall months of this year.  He had previously asked for a staff report on the alternatives of round-abouts being used in those locations, and was assuming this would not preclude that option.  Mr. Patterson said staff is about ready to bring a report back to the Council on the studies of those intersections.  He said a report would be submitted to the Council before any final decisions are made.
    Mr. Beck asked if the grant request should show signals.  Mr. Patterson said staff would make certain that the application is flexible enough.  Basically, monies are being requested for the pedestrian amenities that go along with the intersection.
    Mayor Hindman said he was all for having the pedestrian facilities at those locations.  He urged that this be thought as an integral part of the project, rather than a separate add-on item.  He wanted pedestrian facilities included in projects, not necessarily having to obtain a grant for these items.  Pedestrian improvements are just as much a part of a project as is the curbs and gutters.   Mayor Hindman reported this is a philosophy he would like to see develop.
    Mr. Janku agreed, and said what had struck him during the discussion of the new AC alignment was the use of the word "amenities" to describe things like sidewalks.  That makes it sound like the sidewalk is a special item the City might receive if lucky.  Mr. Kruse said for a State highway, sidewalks are an amenity.
    The vote on R50-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R51-98     Authorizing application to Missouri Department of Social Services for Emergency Shelter
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Each year, Mr. Beck explained that funding is allocated to Columbia for emergency shelter purposes.  If the Council approves this application, the funds would be used as follows:   $31,000 for the Arbor House, $34,000 for Comprehensive Human Services, and $20,000 to Welcome Home.  The report noted that there had been a 43% increase in the funding the state receives from the federal government for this type of housing.
    The vote on R51-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R52-98     Authorizing amendment to agreements with homemaker/personal care vendors to increase
                  hourly rate from $10.86 to $11.94.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this would raise the City's rates and bring them more in line to what the state is paying.  He said the recommendation had been made by the Community Services Advisory Commission.
    The vote on R52-98 was recorded as follows;  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R53-98     Authorizing the competitive public sale of water and electric system refunding and
                  improvement revenue bonds.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    In April of 1997, Mr. Beck explained that the voters approved a $39,250,000 revenue bond issue.  He said the City has been utilizing funds from its reserve accounts to work on some of the projects.  He said the Water and Light Director, the Finance Director, and the Water and Light Advisory Board have been meeting to discuss the proposed plan regarding the schedule of projects that were shown in the ballot issue.  Staff felt it was time to go to market with the sale of $26,745,000 in revenue bonds for public improvement and refunding purposes.  If authorized by the Council, Mr. Beck said the bids would be opened and brought back for discussion at the next Council meeting.  He said before the meeting, the appropriate staff would meet with the Bond Counsel to make a recommendation for Council consideration.
    The vote on R53-98 was recorded as follows:  VOTING YES:  COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.  VOTING NO:  NO ONE.  Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

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

B47-98     Amending Chapter 14 of the Code to remove existing parking restriction on the west side
                  of Clarkson Road.
B48-98     Accepting conveyances for utility and street easement purposes.
B49-98     Authorizing Change Orders; approving engineer's final report for the construction of Tenth
                  & Cherry parking garage project.
B50-98     Authorizing acquisition of the Turner property for landfill buffer.
B51-98     Authorizing installation of traffic calming devices in the Colonial Gardens Subdivision.
B52-98     Accepting conveyance from Wilma Via for utility purposes.
B53-98     Approving engineer's final report; accepting a conveyance; authorizing payment of
                  differential costs for 12-inch water main serving Woods Mill, Plat 1.
B54-98     Approving engineer's final report; accepting conveyance; authorizing payment of
                  differential costs for 12-inch water main serving Boone Industrial Park N, Lot 5.
B55-98     Accepting conveyances for water utility purposes from Bluff Ridge Partnership, REMM,
                  Ltd., and Boyce.
B56-98     Amending Chapter 29 of the Code to clarify language pertaining to non-conforming uses.
B57-98     Voluntary annexation of property owned by Rangeline Properties located on the east side
                  of 763; establishing permanent zoning; amending land use plan.
B58-98     Voluntary annexation of property owned by George Spencer, et. al., located on the east
                  side of 763; establishing permanent zoning; amending land use plan.
B59-98     Annexation of property owned by the City located on the east side of 763.
B60-98     Rezoning property located at 701 W. Sexton Road from R-2 to O-P.
B61-98     Rezoning property located on the north side of I-70 Drive NW and west of Garden Drive
                  from A-1 to R-1.
B62-98     Authorizing annexation agreements with owners of all lots in Haystack Acres Addition.
B63-98     Authorizing acceptance of Law Enforcement Block Grant for purchase of police
                  equipment; appropriating funds.
B64-98     Authorizing agreement with Missouri Department of Health for HIV Prevention Services;
                  appropriating funds.
B65-98     Authorizing agreement with Missouri Department of Public Safety for support of the Sexual
                  Trauma and Assault Response Team; appropriating funds.
B66-98     Authorizing purchase of aerial photography; appropriating funds.
B67-98     Authorizing sale of Water and Electric revenue bonds.
(A)     Proposed Revision to the Zoning Ordinance to Allow Bed & Breakfast establishments in a PUD
    Mr. Beck said this amendment would permit these types of facilities to operate in zonings other than R-3, by obtaining a special use permit from the Board of Adjustment.
    Mr. Kruse made the motion that the issue be referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their review and report back to the Council.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(B)     Volunteer Quarterly Report.
    Mr. Beck explained that the Council had requested a quarterly report regarding the Office of Volunteer Services.  He noted that 3,377 hours of volunteer time had been provided during the last quarter of the previous year, and the total number of hours contributed by local volunteers to the City had been 33,596.

(C)     Transfer of Funds.
    Report accepted.

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

Collins, Nancy C., 1201 Paquin #1502, Ward 1 - term to expire 3/1/01

Hendrix, Rickey L., 1133 Ashland Road, Ward 6 - term to expire 6/1/98

Bass, Preston L., 2201 Garden Drive, Ward 2 - term to expire 3/1/01
Malley, Lynn M., 2015 Ridgemont, Ward 4 - term to expire 3/1/01

Gaeth, Ernie K., 1106 Willowcreek Lane, Ward 5 - term to expire 6/30/99

    Mr. Janku complimented the Columbia Housing Authority who had recently received a grade of 81, which is an improvement over former grades in the 50's and 60's.  He said CHA had done a lot of hard work and had upgraded their performance.
    Mr. Janku asked if the Council is going to receive a report concerning the issue of when sidewalks are required.  It had been questioned whether walks are required at the time a building permit is issued or at the time of platting.  Mr. Beck said sidewalks would have to be constructed at the time a building permit is issued.  Mr. Janku understood walks are not required if the street is not improved at the time the plat is approved.  Mr. Beck said platting was what required sidewalks.  Mayor Hindman thought the question had to do with approved plats and the amount of time that might elapse before construction takes place.  Mr. Beck said he had asked for a staff report.
    Mrs. Crockett thought the Council needed to keep an open mind when considering duplex developments.  She said the projects that contain green spaces and that sort of thing can be appealing, and the Council needed to be receptive when good plans are submitted.  She said at tonight's meeting, however, that had not been the case.  Mayor Hindman agreed, and said density could be very good if properly planned.
    Regarding the Providence Road and Stewart Road crossing, Mr. Campbell asked for the staff to discuss with the Highway Department what would be involved to have crossing lights established at that location.  Mayor Hindman said that was only one of the locations on Providence that needs crossing lights -- they are also needed on Broadway and at Stadium.  Mr. Janku agreed, but wondered if the phased approach might work best.  Mr. Campbell suspected that most pedestrian traffic was at Stewart Road.  Ms. Coble said the most pedestrian traffic is concentrated between Worley, Rogers, and Broadway, and nothing is in place to help alleviate problems at these intersections.  Mayor Hindman thought some mid-block islands are needed in those areas.  Mr. Janku said that had been discussed several years ago, and it had been decided that Stewart Road would be the starting point.  Mr. Kruse noted that a crosswalk is being installed at Rollins, and thought that would help
    Mr. Kruse said he had asked for a staff report twice regarding landscaping and why it had not been included in the plan for South Providence.  He is primarily concerned about the area on the east side, north of Green Meadows Road, between Green Meadows and Carter Lane.  Mr. Kruse had received another extensive report back from the Arborist, and is having a difficult time understanding it as it is very technical.  Mr. Kruse asked if it would be possible for the Arborist, or someone from the Public Works staff, to meet with him at the site to explain the report.  He failed to see why there could not be some plan for landscaping in the area.  Mr. Beck said he would get back to Mr. Kruse regarding this issue.
    Regarding the hooded parking meters downtown, Mr. Kruse received a request from a downtown business person who has a lot of quick walk-in business, and wanted to have a hooded parking meter.  Mr. Kruse had sent a memo to the staff, and received a response indicating that this location is not an allowable use of a metered parking space for either a hood or a loading zone.  The memo said the City refers all resources for changes in parking use to the SBD for recommendation, and this specific use would not be supported by the staff.  Mr. Kruse wanted to know what the next step should be if the person wanted to pursue it.  Mr. Beck said the council could authorize hooded parking meters, and were the only body that could.  Mr. Kruse said he would like to refer this issue to the Special Business District for their recommendation.  He thought it was certainly as legitimate as the bank requests.  Mr. Kruse said this particular case involves a gentleman who owns two coffee houses.  Many of his customers are double parking to come in for a cup of coffee to go.  The owner felt it would benefit the downtown to have access for that kind of business.  Mr. Campbell asked if the Council should review the total policy.  Mr. Kruse said that might be another way to go about it.  Mr. Coffman said that was what he would like to see done.  Mr. Kruse asked if the Council should add the issue to the work session list.  Mr. Beck said the current practice that is followed had been initiated by a Council policy regarding financial institutions.
    It was agreed the Council would take the entire issue up at a work session.
    Mrs. Crockett said she has been told by people that have made a trip downtown for purposes of quickly dropping off plats or related material, these individuals have trouble finding a place to park in the back of the building because of all the City vehicles.  She asked if anything could be done about the situation.  Mr. Patterson explained that authorized City vehicles are directed to park in the spaces against the garage when these are available, and if none are, employees are directed to make certain they are to use the parking garage.  He said this issue had been discussed in a meeting this morning, and expects to see some improvement.
    Mr. Coffman asked about a bridge the City had agreed to build behind Stadium Hollywood Theatres.  He asked about the current progress and when the bridge is expected to be constructed.  Mr. Beck said staff is trying to re-evaluate exactly where the City is with roadway funding.  He said staff has also had discussions with the County on funds that might be available in this area.  He said bridges had not been included on the previous ballot issue.  Mr. Beck reported staff would be compiling a list of roads and other public improvements that need to be addressed and evaluated for another ballot issue.  Mr. Coffman said there was a lot of discussion about whether the whole development should have been C-P instead of a C-3.  He asked if he was told correctly that the property was granted a C-3 zoning because of the bridge and the promise that it would be built at this location.  Mr. Janku said he did not think it was linked.  Mr. Beck did not know of a single bridge in Columbia that has ever been built by a developer because these are viewed as community assets, not just an asset to a given area.  Mr. Janku thought what happened in this case was that the developer agreed to fund more of the street, and the City agreed to put the bridge in.  Mr. Campbell remembered that the developer had not wanted to put in a bridge, and it was at the insistence of the City that a through street was constructed at this location.
    Mr. Janku recalled previous discussions regarding whether or not the City was going to evaluate additional areas for on-street parking meters.  He thought the Public Works Department was going to evaluate Orr Street.  Mr. Patterson said this had been done and it is a matter of getting a report back to the Council.  Although, staff wanted to submit the recommendations made in the report to the Special Business District first.
    Greg Willingham, 6416 Karen Court, spoke on behalf of the Columbia Disc Golf Club about the desired expansion of the course at Oakland Park.  He said the Club wanted to add 12 more baskets at the course, and would like the City to fund $6,500 now, and $3,500 later.  Mayor Hindman said that would be a budget item.  He recommended that the Club present the request to the Parks and Recreation Commission.  Mr. Janku said there were mixed feelings about the course.  He suggested that a public hearing be held before the Parks and Recreation Commission.  Mr. Beck said typically, groups are advised to write a letter to the Council as to what is proposed.  At that point, the Council could officially refer the issue to the Commission.  He said the request could actually be referred tonight if that was what the Council wanted to do.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that the request by the Columbia Disc Golf Club be referred to the Commission for a hearing and staff report.  The motion was seconded by Mrs. Crockett and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Tony Drennan, another Disc Golf Club member, said the safety of the people that use the walkways at the park is very important to the Club.
    The meeting adjourned at 11:20 p.m.

                                                                                             Respectfully submitted,
                                                                                             Penny St. Romaine
                                                                                             City Clerk