FEBRUARY 21, 2000

    The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, February 21, 2000, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results: Council members JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, and CRAYTON were present. The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also present.

    The minutes of the regular meeting of February 7, 2000, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mrs. Crockett. .

    Upon their requests, Mr. Campbell made the motion that Mr. John be allowed to abstain from any vote that may be taken on Report D and Mrs. Crockett be allowed to abstain from voting on R34-00 and R35-00. The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman and approved by voice vote.
    The agenda, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mrs. Crockett and a second by Mr. Coffman.

Proclamation - 20th Birthday of McGruff the Crime Dog.
    Sergeant Danny Grant and Crime Dog McGruff came forward and Mayor Hindman read and presented them with a proclamation.
    Acting Police Chief Boehm thanked the Mayor and Council for taking the time to recognize the program. He thanked Sergeant Grant and the Crime Prevention Unit for their work relating to crime prevention and the McGruff Campaign.


B32-00     Authorizing construction of a 12-inch water main serving Vanderveen Plaza, Plat 2; authorizing
                 payment of differential costs; appropriating funds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck said this approximate 700 foot long water main project was submitted in accordance with City policy. He explained that the City would pay the difference between an eight inch main and a twelve inch main at an estimated amount of $6,335. He noted that payment for the differential cost would come out of water and electric funds.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B32-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B33-00     Authorizing construction of an 8-inch water main serving Breezewood Estates, Plat 1; authorizing
                 payment of differential costs; appropriating funds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that with this project the City would be paying the difference between a six and eight inch water main. This 1,000 foot project was estimated to cost the City $4,270. Again, payment for differential costs would come from the water and electric fund.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B33-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B39-00     Approving the final report and authorizing the issuance of special assessments for the 1999 street
                 maintenance work.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck commented that this work has been done under the City's annual street maintenance policy.
    Mr. Patterson explained that work was done on six street segments consisting of drainage work on roadside ditches, straightening driveway pipes, and leveling street surfaces with asphalt and finishing with a single seal coat. He further explained that this work is usually done every eight to ten years, depending on the traffic and the condition of the street. Mr. Patterson listed the six streets as follows: Ballenger Place, Elm Grove Drive, Fair Haven Drive, Martha Drive, Pioneer Drive, and Walcox Drive. Mr. Patterson noted that the work affected 62 parcels of property and represented approximately 11,000 feet of abutting property along the aforementioned streets. He reported the work was authorized by the City Council in July of 1999. The total cost of the work is $63,222.11, and in accordance with current policies, he explained that the property owners can only be assessed a maximum of $2.00 per abutting foot, although the centerline cost for the work ranged from $7.00 to $27.00 per foot. Mr. Patterson stated the tax assessments, if approved by the Council, will total $21,950.28, with the remaining $41,271.83 coming from the operating budget of the street division. He explained that property owners and residents were notified of this public hearing by letter. Mr. Patterson indicated his staff received some telephone inquiries, but most individuals were satisfied with the explanation of the work and the cost involved.
    In order to assess tax billing, Mr. Patterson noted that the Council would have to make the determination that the properties have benefitted in an amount at least equal to the proposed assessments. He suggested the Council consider that generally there has been better drainage from the ditch work, and that the smoother streets have reduced wear and tear on vehicles which also enhances snow removal efforts in the winter.
    Mrs. Crockett asked if there were any plans for these streets to be curbed and guttered. Mr. Patterson said the property owners are notified every year about the policy on street improvements. He reported residential streets are not included in the Capital Improvement Plan. Under current policy, residents would have to bring forth a petition requesting curbs and gutters.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Laura Lowe, 2221 Walcox Drive, stated she is appreciative of the improvement. She noted that three houses are being built on her street and she thought the street work should have been delayed until those homes were completed. Ms. Lowe remarked that she had never been informed the improvements were going to be done.
    Mr. Patterson explained notices had been sent out and he could not explain why Ms. Lowe did not receive notification. He said he would check into it.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B39-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B44-00     Authorizing construction of improvements to Again Street Park.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this project involves replacing the fencing around the ballfield and the addition of an ADA approved drinking fountain. He noted that CDBG funds can be used for a portion of the project. The cost for the improvements will be approximately $17,000. He related that some of the work will be done by City forces and some will be contracted out.
    Mr. Hood displayed the proposed plan on the overhead.
    Mr. Janku spoke about the need for a temporary second soccer goal during the soccer season. Mr. Hood indicated staff would check into it.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B44-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B49-00     Rezoning property located on the south side of Clark Lane, across from Ballenger Place from
                 Districts A-1, R-2 and O-P to District C-P.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mayor Hindman noted that the proponent made a request to table the matter. He also noted the applicant is considering a different configuration of proposed uses and most likely an amended petition will be submitted.
    Mr. Beck reported that the plan displayed on the overhead had been recommended for denial by both the staff and the Commission.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman made the motion that B49-00 be tabled to the March 20, 2000, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote. The public hearing was continued to March 20, 2000.

B50-00     Rezoning four tracts of land located west of Scott Boulevard, along both sides of Smith Drive, from
                 Districts R-1, A-1, and PUD-10 to Districts C-P, O-P and PUD-12.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Hancock explained the request and referred to documents in the packet relating to proposed uses and the statement of intent.
    Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Patterson how storm water management would be handled under current City ordinances. Mr. Patterson explained that a storm water permit would be required before any grading could occur on the site. He said that would consist of a storm water management plan that not only addresses the erosion control issues, but pre and post-development run off. Under current ordinances, Mr. Patterson reported staff would primarily be dealing with the quantitative analysis of a site. In this case, he said they would be looking at the downstream conditions to assure the development did not increase any existing problems. He felt there has been enough discussion on this site to determine there will be a need for some detention facilities in order to assure that post-development peak discharge is not any greater than pre-development discharge. Mr. Patterson explained that did not mean there would not be more water leaving the site, but the ordinances will allow the City to control the velocity of that water.
    Mayor Hindman noted that an amendment sheet was presented to the Council and he asked that it be explained by the proponent. He also noted that a valid protest petition had been received -- which meant an affirmative two-thirds vote of the Council would be required for passage.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Craig VanMatre, an attorney with offices at 1103 E. Broadway, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He distributed a letter and suggested that it be attached to the enabling ordinance adopting the zoning for this parcel with the understanding that any plan which comes forward in the planned portions of this development must be consistent with each item set forth on this addendum. He said each of the items on the addendum represents elements the applicant has pledged to utilize in the development of this project in order to give residents the protection they felt they needed for their property and their quality of life. Mr. VanMatre noted the other items were things they believe to be necessary to assure the public, as a whole, that this will be a very high quality development. He commented the applicant expects to be held to this when the development plan is submitted.
    Glen LeRoy, an architect with offices in Kansas City, Missouri, explained this is an approximate 45.2 acre tract, and a four lane arterial street and two collector roads would serve the proposed development. He explained the new urbanism concept which is sweeping across the United States, but is just starting to be seen in the Midwest. Mr. LeRoy related the criteria involved in these new developments consisted of compact, walkable neighborhoods, public space providing a pedestrian atmosphere, streets typically on a modified grid pattern, and a diverse mix of housing options with shops, work places, and open spaces.
    Mr. LeRoy commented that the Metro 2020 Plan has set forth some very laudable goals for the City. He said the goals are to contain urban development while maintaining environmental quality, motorized and non-motorized mobility, and aesthetic quality. In each case, he believed the Westbury concept plays right into what is being suggested by the 2020 Plan. Mr. LeRoy noted that the plan calls for a community marketplace. That marketplace is to have access to an arterial street system and should have an anchor tenant, such as the 40,000 square foot grocery store that is being proposed for this development. He indicated the 2020 Plan suggests the primary tenant should preserve a separation of two miles from other community marketplaces. Mr. LeRoy noted the proposed grocery store in this case would be 2.6 miles away from the closest existing store. He indicated the community marketplace also calls for other specialty retail service stores and multi-family residential. Mr. LeRoy stated that Westbury Village calls for a mixed use complex. He disagreed with the recommended size for the community marketplace as he thought it should be somewhere in the range of twelve to twenty acres, depending on how many other uses are to be incorporated into the development. Mr. LeRoy asserted Westbury Village falls within that range.
    Wayne Feuerborn, an architect with Gould Evans Goodman of Kansas City, explained the design concept. He explained the design has evolved after a lot of input from the City and the residents of the area. He believed it was truly a multi-use village. Mr. Feuerborn reported the unifying element throughout the development plan is the central boulevard coming off of Scott Boulevard. He noted that it is central to the plan within itself and provides easy community access for those residents who will live within the community itself. He commented that the public park and open space are convenient to use and are connected to the plan by bike trails, sidewalks, and other open space amenities. In accordance with the 2020 Plan, he pointed out opportunities to provide residential or other office uses on the second floor of some of the buildings. Depending upon how the market assessment goes, Mr. Feuerborn said one or a combination of those uses would be located on the second floor of the storefronts lining the main village boulevard. Parking is also divided up within the plan so it will be convenient to the users, but does not become the dominant design element within the plan.
    Mr. Feuerborn explained that the previous proposal for Tract A was for a much higher density. However, the plan now calls for townhouse units, that can be individually owned, along Smith Drive and on Stone Valley Parkway. He noted it would provide a buffer to the commercial development. Mr. Feuerborn reported that Tract B was formerly designated as a parking area to serve the commercial development, but now some residential uses have been included to assist in buffering the service area (grocery store) from adjoining property uses. He said that change led them to contemplate how to locate the grocery store in such a way so that it could serve the entire community, while also being screened from the adjacent residential homes. Looking at the center of the site, Mr. Feuerborn pointed out the store was situated along the village drive, which can be accessed from both Smith Drive and Scott Boulevard, so shoppers do not have to travel through the residential neighborhood to get to it.
    Mr. Feuerborn reported the existing drainage way would be maintained so as not to impact the storm water detention pond that will be developed to serve this project. In addition, along the King's Meadows boundary they are matching uses to uses so that duplexes are backed by duplexes, single family would abut single family, etc., to provide a transition from existing neighborhoods to the development site.
    Jeff McKerrow, a transportation and planning engineer from Kansas City, explained that they have completed their initial study of the project site. He commented that it appears that the intersection of Scott Boulevard and Smith Drive will likely have to be signalized at some point in the future. With this and other improvements (i.e., turn lanes), Mr. McKerrow reported the traffic generated from this site can easily be accommodated with the existing infrastructure. Throughout this process, he indicated they would continue to ensure that the safety, both for the motoring and non-motoring public, is always held up to the highest standards and is not compromised.
    Dave Bennett, Engineering Surveys and Services, lll3 Fay Street, explained that he has seen several conceptual plans on this project, and as the plans have evolved, they have gotten better in terms of storm water management, infrastructure, and those types of things. He noted that a storm water evaluation of this site was conducted in 1996, and at that point the development included 28 acres of C-P property and 17 acres of open zoned R-3. In terms of storm water management, Mr. Bennett related he had every confidence in 1996 that they could handle the storm water run off to meet the City's requirements. At this point in time, he believed they have an even better plan in terms of storm water management. Mr. Bennett explained on the north side of Smith Drive, they plan to install an underground storm water detention facility. On the south side of Smith Drive, there will be a wet weather storm water impoundment. The dam and everything for the impoundment will be constructed first, before any of the commercial development occurs to the north of Smith Drive. Not only will it serve to control storm water run off, but it will also help in the sediment and erosion control for the site. Mr. Bennett noted that it can be converted at a later time, once everything is developed and vegetation is established, to a permanent wet weather impoundment. In addition, he reported underground storage is very valuable to the commercial property which generally consists of a series of large diameter pipes. Mr. Bennett explained the pipes have the same purpose as a storm water detention facility in that it collects the water and the volume is slowed so it can be expelled at a controlled rate.
    Mr. Janku asked about the permanent wet weather impoundment and whether it would consist of detention rather than retention. Mr. Bennett said that was correct. During a dry period there would be no water in it. Mr. Janku observed if the plan works, it really in affect would appear as open space most of the year and then during certain periods it will retain water. Mr. Bennett said that was correct.
    Jack Blaylock, a commercial real estate appraiser, 802 E. Broadway, addressed the Council regarding trends he is seeing in land use and development within the greater Columbia area. He spoke about the volume of shoppers creating a tremendous strain on the major thoroughfares that lead to these centers. He said that, in part, can be alleviated through this concept of neighborhood and village centers. Mr. Blaylock explained when commercial areas are not moved to the outer periphery of Columbia, that decreases the City's tax base. He noted the high cost of infrastructure improvements in the outlying areas, but stated there is not the offsetting sales tax revenue and real estate taxes that would be gained through commercial development being done simultaneously with the "leap frogging". Mr. Blaylock believed this is a way of curing the problem of urban sprawl. He said it would be a good move on the City's part to allow it. Mr. Blaylock passed out a letter with a study attached. The study showed that in Columbia, commercial developments do not adversely affect property values of the adjacent residential neighborhoods.
    Michael Levin, owner/partner, Smithtown, New York, said he was privileged to be part of the team working with Joseph Tosini to make Westbury Village a reality. He said the team has spared no expense in hiring an award winning architectural firm and a host of top shelf collateral professionals to ensure the integrity and soundness of their project. He said they are looking for pride of ownership and are about pride of retention. Mr. Levin said they believe in providing value and quality and are committed to building Westbury Village as an easily distinguishable paragon of excellence in real estate development.
    Ardith Kirchhoff, 5712 Sundance, explained that she does not live in the immediate neighborhood, however, she and her husband have invested in properties in The Hamlet. She further explained that they have one finished home for sale and two undeveloped lots. Ms. Kirchhoff related they are concerned that any future development near The Hamlet is positive. She is in favor of Westbury Village saying that its addition to the west side of Scott Boulevard would actually increase their property values as well as the surrounding property values.
    Oliver Adams, 4705 Manhasset, spoke in favor of the Westbury project. Mr. Adams said he believed in diversity and would like to see a grocery store and other amenities that residents could walk to.
    Philip Gill, 4302 Christian Fellowship Road, explained that this 45 acre tract is located immediately adjacent to his property, and he is looking forward to the proposed amenities.
    Dick Purcell, 4405 Sussex, explained that his property immediately abuts Tract A. He reported that he had been attending meetings related to this development for over four years. Mr. Purcell said they worked through a number of issues and he believed a number of significant concessions have been made so that this development is acceptable to himself as well as to a number of other people living nearby. He felt it would provide needed services. Mr. Purcell believed the diversity in housing to be a definite need in his neighborhood. Regarding Tract A, he noted that only approximately 50% of it would actually be developed as the other half will consist of a retention basin. Mr. Purcell related that he had also asked the applicant about screening, landscaping, and the possibility of preserving some of the larger trees on the property. He was under the impression that this request would be honored. Mr. Purcell said he is in support of the zoning change, but noted that this is a planned development. He would continue to participate as the plans move forward to ensure the plan is developed in accordance to the issues already agreed upon.
    Ben Francisco, 4308 Christian Fellowship, spoke in favor of the rezoning proposal. He had also been involved in the meetings for about three years. He has seen the plan come a long way and was excited about this newest proposal. Mr. Francisco stated there is a need for commercial development in this area, and this proposal provides a buffer and a balance. In addition, he was confident that the quality of the development will be above average. Mr. Francisco submitted a letter to the Clerk signed by four neighborhood residents who are not opposed to this development. He stated he found no one that was alarmed or upset about this proposal.
    Tony Prato, 212 Dayspring Drive, President of the King's Meadow Neighborhood Association, reported there are a number of residents opposed to this project. He noted there had been several meetings arranged by the developer to discuss Westbury Village. He commented that he had attended some of them, and yet there is still a considerable discrepancy between what the developer wants and what is acceptable to most of the neighbors. Mr. Prato pointed out that it was not because the neighbors currently oppose all forms of non-residential development on this property. He believed that they have yielded ground to Mr. Tosini. He said residents have demonstrated their willingness to accept higher density housing, and even commercial development, just not to the extent desired by Mr. Tosini. Mr. Prato stated that Mr. Tosini has been unwilling to change the overall design concept for Westbury Village. He noted that high density in a large commercial area have been non-negotiable features of the plan. Mr. Prato acknowledged the applicant has made a few changes which made the plan more acceptable, but the two sides never reached common ground because of the unwillingness of the developer to significantly reduce the overall density of housing in the commercial area. He explained in one instance the commercial area actually increased 23%. Mr. Prato reported residents held their own meetings where they could control the agenda and a couple of things came out of those meetings. He displayed a plan that the neighborhood worked out and asked that the Council consider it.
    Mr. Prato related that Mr. LeRoy chose the community marketplace, the largest and densest type of development allowed. He believed it was simply not appropriate in this location. He said the neighborhood center would better fit the property because it is not to contain more than 24,000 square feet in retail and office space. The rezoning request under consideration contains approximately 208,000 square feet of such. Mr. Prato commented that is five times more than what is suggested in the Metro 2020 Plan. He stated that Mr. Tosini's plan not only conflicts with the Metro 2020 Plan, but also with the current Land Use Plan.
    In reference to the grocery store, Mr. Prato noted that many of the neighbors are opposed to having one that is 35,000-40,000 square feet, and potentially expandable to 50,000 square feet. He said a grocery store in this area is not necessary because Gerbes and Schnuck's are just a few minutes away. Mr. Prato read from the Business Times that a Kansas City developer is planning to open three Hy-Vee grocery stores in Columbia, with one being located at the corner of West Broadway and Fairview. He said that location is about one mile from the subject property. In addition, Mr. Prato related that residents are opposed to having 22 acres of PUD-12 and 15 acres of C-P in the middle of a predominantly residential community. He said this rezoning would change the character and aesthetic qualities of the neighborhood in ways that most residents find unacceptable. He noted this development would also increase traffic congestion and cause safety problems. Mr. Prato explained that the plan developed by the residents contains a large buffer of comparable housing between the existing neighborhoods and the high density and commercial areas. The plan also limits the density of the PUD to 10 and contains no more than seven acres of commercial area.
    Mr. Prato disagreed with Mr. LeRoy in that this development is part of the new urbanism. He reported that such a development is supposed to contain public buildings like libraries, churches or community centers, as well as open public spaces such as parks, playgrounds, and squares. He noted that most of these features are absent in the Tosini plan. He felt in this case, commercial sprawl is being substituted for urban sprawl. Finally, Mr. Prato asked those people to stand who were present in opposition of the proposed rezoning request. Approximately five to six dozen people stood representing the following neighborhoods: The Hamlet, Rothwell Heights, King's Meadow, and Stoneridge. Mr. Prato urged the Council to reject this rezoning request.
    Trisha Brillheart, 4402 Shorum, Vice-President of The Hamlet Homes Association, explained that they had held a special meeting on February 17 to discuss this proposed rezoning request. The association unanimously decided to oppose the request for reasons due to lack of need, size, location, and the potential for increased traffic problems. Residents felt a major focus of the request is aimed at commercial and office development, and Ms. Brillheart said the neighborhood did not see a need for this much commercial and office zoning on the west side of Columbia. Ms. Brillheart pointed out that nearly 100 acres zoned commercial and office already exist between Fairview and Vawter School Road on Broadway and Scott Boulevard. She noted vacancies in the nearby Broadway Shopping Center, Crossroads Shopping Center, Biscayne Mall and various other churches and buildings. She said the vacancies define a lack of need for this particular zoning in their area. Ms. Brillheart noted major differences between the Westbury Village Plan and the Metro 2020 draft plan. She also noted that the expansion plans for Scott Boulevard is not to occur until after 2007.
    Ms. Brillheart reported to the Council that signatures were gathered on a petition-like form that would indicate people in The Hamlet were not opposed to this development or rezoning request. She said residents understood from Mr. Tosini that members of the City Council requested the action. She explained that two young ladies went from door to door in The Hamlet neighborhood stating that they were working for the City Council to gather signatures from people who support a zoning change in Westbury Village. Residents were told the property would be down zoned from high density housing to R-1, and many people did not question that, they just signed the petition without reading it. Ms. Brillheart asked that the record indicate that the verbal message delivered to the homeowners was not consistent with the intent of the written petition. She asked that the Council disregard the misrepresented petition.
    Mr. Campbell noted that the Council had not been presented with the petition in favor of the request. He said he knew what happened and added that he would comment on it later.
    Herbert Reminez, 4809 Castlewood Court, noted the differences between this development and the Cherry Hill development. He said that new urbanism is not about dropping large commercial developments into established residential neighborhoods. Mr. Reminez asked the Council to follow the Commission's recommendation.
    Mark Burton, 4701 Sussex, said this is a plan being developed and derived from community consensus. As such, he felt it should have significant weight when looking at issues that affect Columbia. Mr. Burton sensed that the approval of the plan rests on whether or not it would be good for Columbia as a whole. He noted that the Metro 2020 Plan is based on Columbia as a whole. He explained that the largest commercial development that plan would allow at this location would be 20 acres, and only if it is located on two arterial streets and is done as separate developed areas of ten acres or less. He also agreed that this is not new urbanism. Mr. Burton stated the proposed 2020 Plan encourages the walkable community concept, where this proposal has over 900 commercial parking spaces and a store which needs to survive by drawing from a multi-mile radius.
    Peter Wilden, 4311 Sussex, explained that his lot is immediately adjacent to Tract A. He spoke in opposition because of the lack of need and support from the surrounding area.
    Bob Avali, 408 Parkwood Court, noted that a park is not planned in the proposed development. After the second rejection by the Planning and Zoning Commission, he said the developer had not held another meeting with the neighbors. If the Council were to approve this rezoning request, Mr. Avali noted the City's and resident's input would be limited to the content of the plan. He said most of the opposition is based upon the size. Mr. Avali asked the Council to reject this request.
    Kelly Mescher, 308 Stalcup, President of the Rothwell Heights Neighborhood Association, explained that they also opposed this development. In addition, she reported her neighborhood was also petitioned by someone representing Westbury Village, with the representation being different from what was described to The Hamlet residents. Ms. Mescher explained they were shown a picture of the multi-family housing and were told it had been approved, but the design of it had been rejected and they needed to be in favor of the "pretty picture". If she was in favor of the picture she was to sign the petition. She said if there are signatures in favor from Rothwell Heights residents, she felt they misunderstood what the issue was.
    Mr. Campbell noted again that the Council had not been given a petition in favor of the development.
    Dan Borrocco, 4414 Smith Drive, stated his house is located directly south of the proposed development. He stated although there have been some changes made within the development, he was still in opposition to this project. Mr. Borrocco's main concern was that the commercial area is too large.
    John W. Lee, 4307 Sussex, presented Mr. Campbell with a letter from another Hamlet resident. Mr. Lee was in opposition because of the large commercial area.
    Mr. Campbell read the letter from Alma Kneisel. Ms. Kneisel wrote she was opposed to the project because of increased density which she felt would increase traffic congestion which, in turn, would increase air pollution. She also felt it would lower the property value of their homes in The Hamlet Subdivision. Ms. Kneisel stated that she was very much opposed to the project and was hopeful the Council would vote against it.
    Katy Burton, 4701 Sussex, said she had researched new urbanism at Mr. Campbell's request. She explained one criteria for new urbanism involved the return of the corner store. Ms. Burton argued that a 40,000 square foot grocery store did not qualify for such. She said another concept involved the reduction in parking areas, which again, this plan does not do. Ms. Burton urged the Council to defeat this issue.
    Tim Neds, 808 Windemere, read an e-mail he sent earlier to the Council which Mr. Campbell responded to. His concern related to storm water runoff. Mr. Neds felt the developers were glossing over the fact that a large amount of water will be generated from this site. He stated he is personally concerned about the previous mistakes made by Mr. Tosini and his engineer's within The Hamlet. Mr. Neds was hopeful the current engineer would not make the same shoddy mistakes in Westbury Village.
    Amy Jadryev, 1514 Pickford Place, spoke in opposition to the plan. She related that the amount of commercial zoning requested is not in keeping with the character and quality of the surrounding neighborhoods and would devalue their properties. She felt that smaller businesses or offices that are more capable of blending in with existing housing would be more suitable and less disruptive to the surrounding neighborhoods than a 40,000 square foot grocery store. Ms. Jadryev indicated she likes the concept of a walkable community, but Scott Boulevard is more or less a highway with a speed limit of 45 mph -- which more often then not is exceeded.
    Cliff Grantham, 114 Dayspring Drive, explained that after he retired, he placed all of his savings into his home. He stated he cannot afford to pay a lawyer to help him fight this project. He said the traffic is already atrocious and by adding more multi-family dwellings will only make it worse. Mr. Grantham asked the Council to reject the proposal.
    Mr. LeRoy responded to the concerns about traffic. He said the traffic signal that will be required for this development will improve the traffic situation as well as making it safer for the pedestrians. Mr. LeRoy said they have done an extensive pro forma on this project that secures a modest amount of profit for the developer, but on the other hand, pays for all of the improvements being talked about.
    Regarding the debate about neighborhood centers and the community marketplace, Mr. LeRoy related that a neighborhood center is identified as a unifying element within a neighborhood. In addition, community marketplaces with retail uses serving several neighborhoods may be appropriate if developed at a scale compatible to the surrounding area. He counted only four neighborhoods surrounding Westbury Village. Mr. LeRoy compared the neighbor's plan to theirs. He said the six acres of commercial along Scott Boulevard has only one design option -- and that is for strip commercial. He noted the Council has the choice tonight of perpetuating sprawl through strip commercial and associated development, or the community marketplace as proposed. Mr. LeRoy reported the applicant has agreed to a number of stipulations included in the document Mr. VanMatre distributed earlier. He explained these stipulations will ensure quality and a new model for Columbia.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Janku asked Mr. Patterson if he felt the traffic would be manageable with the improvements that have been proposed. Mr. Patterson responded all staff could do is use past experiences as a model. In this case, the development will be located on a four-lane arterial road. He stated staff would need to look at the applicant's projections, verify this information and then develop the criteria for the turn lanes, acceleration lanes and signals that would be needed. Mr. Patterson felt this would be manageable. One concern he had pertained to the impact this project would have on local collectors in the area.
    Mayor Hindman asked about the storm water issue that had been raised. Mr. Patterson said the plan would have to be very detailed and would have to show the calculations the design is based on. As far as the peak discharge from the site, the velocity of the water running off at any given time could not exceed the pre-development condition. Obviously, Mr. Patterson said there will be an increase in run off, but their goal in reviewing the plan would be to assure it is not running off any faster and creating velocity problems downstream. Regarding the question of whether or not the downstream detention system can handle this discharge, Mr. Patterson explained that when staff designed the improvement in The Hamlet, it was designed based on the upstream development at that time. Therefore, whatever is done upstream is going to have to be handled as though it were being developed at that land use for the channel downstream. He reported the developer will probably be held to a higher design standard as they are essentially changing the land use, thus creating a higher level of run off than previously existed.
    Mr. John asked how far north of this site, based on the Major Thoroughfare Plan, the future extension of Broadway would be. Mr. Hancock said it could be a quarter of a mile.
    Mr. Campbell noted that his normal reaction is to side with the neighborhoods, but in this case, he said there have been instances where he felt he was being used to settle old scores. He has tried to look objectively at every issue and had done his homework by researching the issues involved. He felt The Hamlet drainage issues have clouded the discussion of the proposed development. Mr. Campbell observed the Stoneridge neighborhood to the west is the newest entrant to the discussions, where in the past the primary issues seemed to be who was told what and when. He did not know when the various home owners were told about the proposal for this tract, but he did know that Mr. Stohldrier, the developer of that subdivision, was aware of the proposal for higher density residential and commercial areas across Stone Valley Parkway before he started his development. Mr. Campbell noted the King's Meadow neighborhood to the north has had the longest relationship with Mr. Tosini, and there are old, personal animosities that influenced discussions here. However, he said changes were made to meet some of their concerns.
    Regarding issues raised about the distance to other commercial areas, Mr. Campbell said the question regarding the need for another grocery store as close as Scott Boulevard is natural. He explained the model for grocery stores is moving away from having a few big, boxy grocery stores toward smaller neighborhood outlets spread out at more frequent intervals. In recent weeks, Mr. Campbell has heard about at least six locations in the city being considered for new grocery stores. He acknowledged that although 40,000 square feet does not sound small, it is one-half the size of the Gerbes store on Broadway. Mr. Campbell believed a grocery store located on Scott Boulevard will reduce some of the arterial traffic, especially on Broadway.
    In reference to the size of the commercial development on the tract, Mr. Campbell commented that the literature on new urban developments is very clear. He said there is no clear maximum size or number of square feet for new urban commercial centers. Nor is there a magic size for a neighborhood center. Mr. Campbell related that a 1999 study of successful neighborhood centers reviewed 28 commercial developments ranging in size from 15,000 square feet to 600,000 square feet of commercial development.
    On the issue of buffering to the other neighborhoods, Mr. Campbell said it has been an accepted practice for this Council, and most other cities, to place higher density residential areas next to single family areas. In this case, he noted there are townhouses across from single family units. Mr. Campbell said the single family residences, with the exception of the one to the south, do not face this development. He noted the sketches of the townhouses appear to be attractive and compatible with single family units. Therefore, Mr. Campbell saw no reason why a townhouse development would have any adverse impact on single family units. He felt most people have accepted the idea that the City would have to go to higher density in residential areas to reduce urban sprawl.
    With respect to the impact on housing values, Mr. Campbell pointed out that for most people, their home is their largest single investment. He said it is natural that all of us are concerned about the impact of any proposed development on the resale values of our homes. Referring to a 1999 study by George Washington University that compared newer urbanism projects to conventional suburbs, it concluded that these have consistently demonstrated higher real estate values. Other research has found that most people would prefer to reside in such neighborhoods. Mr. Campbell suspected that within a very few years, residing in an integrated community will become like the MKT Trail, an asset. He noted that the MKT Trail was strongly opposed at first. Mr. Campbell recognized a strong consensus that integrated communities should include, wherever possible, housing, retail establishments, places of employment, and community services. He said new urbanism will not stop the urban sprawl that is challenging Columbia and almost all other metropolitan areas in the United States. He said it may slow the rate down, however. Mr. Campbell wished the proposal, which he felt includes many of the elements for new urbanism, did not come with so much baggage. He also wished there was one already built the Council could point to as an example.
    Regarding the neighborhood concerns on complete packages, Mr. Campbell agreed it would be much better if entire tracts, large acreages, were planned at one time. He said Columbia is still a relatively small market and the possibility of doing a complete package, including large tracts, would be very unusual in the Columbia housing market. If the Council were to insist on complete packages, he did not think it was likely that we would have very much new urbanism in Columbia.
    Mr. Campbell said the Council has before them a request for rezoning, which includes detailed plans that discloses building locations, architecture, lighting, and landscaping, all of which the developer is willing to make a part of the conditions for rezoning. He stated while he does not like the idea of voting against many of the residents who are opposed to the proposal, he could not find factual information to support their points. Mr. Campbell reported the primary concerns about impact on values of housing and size of the commercial tract are not supported by the academic research on these types of developments. On balance, he believed the plan to be worthy of approving, although it was far from perfect, but no plan is. Mr. Campbell said if the City is serious about implementing a plan such as the Metro 2020 Plan, the Council must move ahead with proposals such as this. He related that he would vote for the proposed rezoning.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion to amend B50-00 per the amendment sheet. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman.
    Mr. Boeckmann explained that the amendment would impose restrictions on the developer and also pertains to issues of what will be permitted in the development. He said restaurants would be permitted to operate outdoor cafes on sidewalks, including areas within the public right of way, and in courtyards provided that pedestrian circulation and access to exterior building entrances will not be impaired. Awning signs will also be permitted, and businesses located in corner buildings will be permitted one sign for each street frontage.
    Mr. Boeckmann reported that Exhibit D deals somewhat with the proposed uses of the property and a lot of it is further restrictions. He noted a difference from the original ordinance in that the O-P zoned area would allow all residential uses. In addition, Mr. Boeckmann noted a number of references to items presented at the hearing which he said would be pretty meaningless to anyone in the future looking at it. He pointed out a reference on Page 2 of Exhibit D that stated, "buildings will reflect a continuity of treatment obtained by maintaining the building scale or by subtly graduating changes that would be consistent with the illustrations and types shown to the City Council on February 21, 2000". It also says that "sidewalks shall be generally consistent with the pedestrian and bike plans submitted to the City Council on February 21, 2000". The letter also stated that "lighting must be consistent with the lighting plans submitted and presented to the City Council on February 21, 2000". Mr. Boeckmann indicated there are also a few things the City might have trouble enforcing. He gave as an example, "no office or activity will be permitted to have hours of operation for delivery or business operations when open to the general public except during the hours of 6 a.m. through 11:30 p.m. on the same day".
    Mr. Campbell asked if the Council passed the amendment understanding these things to be restrictions, whether they would have the option of making changes to the plan when it is presented to the Council for approval. Mr. Boeckmann responded the Council would be able to make changes.
    Mr. VanMatre said his client intends to be bound by the restrictions, but if the Council wants further modifications in the restrictions or standards when the plan is brought forward, they did not consider the Council bound by the restrictions. He said this is a one way restriction on them, not the City. Mr. VanMatre related that they did not intend on tricking the Council into approving a plan that either does not meet current ordinances or does not meet with Council approval.
    When the plan comes forward, Mrs. Crockett asked if the restrictions could be placed on the plat itself. Mr. Boeckmann said he was sure the appropriate restrictions could be placed on the plat. Mrs. Crockett felt that would make them more enforceable.
    The motion to amend, made by Mr. Campbell, seconded by Mayor Hindman, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. John observed on the one side of the tract it looks very nice, all organized and laid out, but there are concerns. He noted that uses are matched with uses against the King's Meadows boundary because residents demanded such. However, that pushed the density against the Stoneridge Subdivision. Although the Council has been shown a plan with an overall density of 12, in one neighborhood it went six to seven, and against the other neighborhood it increased to 17. He did not like playing one group against the other. Eventually, Mr. John noted there will be a major arterial intersection one-quarter of a mile or so north of this site. He said the road will be in place and that will be a more conducive area for either the community marketplace or some sort of commercial zone.
    Mr. John reported there are 30 acres of commercial property located at the intersection of Fairview and Broadway, extending down the hill toward Silvey Lane. He was not as concerned about the vacancies at Crossroads and Biscayne because he said the owners want them that way. Mr. John commented that to look at an urban village in Columbia, Missouri, one has to look at an urban village that meets the scale of Columbia, Missouri. He stated it could not be "one size fits all". The scale must be consistent with the community, and he did not see this scale as being consistent with the community. Mr. John indicated that he has serious reservations about this development after listening to the testimony from both sides. When looking at the current land use plan and the design criteria, he reported this proposal does not compare to The Village of Cherry Hill at all. Mr. John stated he could not support this rezoning request.
    Although it is a difficult situation, Mr. Janku felt the plan had a lot of positives. He was not particularly troubled by the commercial area, and he thought it would be a very strong benefit to the area. He also believed the traffic improvements that would go along with the development would allow it to work fine. Mr. Janku shared Mr. John's concerns about the way the density is arranged on the site, saying it was over-weighted in one direction. He suggested that could be modified when the plan moves forward. Mr. Janku thought the townhouse style development was relatively attractive. He concluded there was a need for this type of development in the area.
    Mr. Coffman questioned whether or not the commercial area is too large. He said the grocery store is the toughest part as it seemed a little big. Although, he felt he could go along with the entire package.
    Mr. Campbell interjected that if Columbia is to have a walkable community, there must be stores that supply some of the daily needs of the individuals living in the area.
    Mayor Hindman liked the plan, although he agreed there are things he would like to see done slightly differently. He was concerned about the size of the grocery store and said he would not want to give the impression to the developer that he would approve of anything over 40,000 square feet. When the plan comes in, he wanted to see a true mix of residential uses in the commercial area. Mayor Hindman believed this project would add to the neighborhood and he would support the request.
    B50-00, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: JOHN. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

(A)     Voluntary annexation of property located on the west side of Lake of the Woods Road, north of Evergreen
          Acres Subdivision.
    Item A was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this tract of land consists of approximately 4.13 acres. He explained that the request is being made so that the property owner can extend City sewers to the site.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mayor Hindman noted that no action is required and that an ordinance will be given first reading this evening.

B37-00     Authorizing an agreement with Show-Me Power Technologies, L.L.C. to lease a dark fiber pair on the
                 City's fiber optic cable system.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Malon explained that Show-Me Electric Coop is actually a G & T cooperative in the southwest part of the state and they are trying to interconnect several universities together. He said they have asked to rent a dark pair on the City's fiber optic cable system to connect the Central Electric system to Towner Communications. Mr. Malon noted they understand the restrictions and the kind of services we are able to provide.
    B37-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B38-00     Authorizing a right of use permit with the University of Missouri for the installation of bus benches and
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this would authorize the City to place a one passenger shelter and two benches on property owned by the University at the Rusk Rehabilitation Center. He noted that the Greyhound Bus Lines are located across the Business Loop from this location.
    B38-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B41-00     Amending Chapter 14 of the Code to prohibit parking along portions of Creekwood Parkway.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this would remove parking on the west side of the street from Clark Lane to Penn Terrace, and on the east side from Clark northward 340 feet. He said complaints were being received about trucks parking in the area.
    Mrs. Crockett said she had received a number of calls on this problem and the initial feeling had been to have parking prohibited on both sides of the street, but at this point she suggested that parking be removed from one side and then if problems still continue, it could be removed from the other side as well. Mrs. Crockett asked if Creekwood Parkway was a 38 foot wide street. Mr. Patterson said that was correct. He reported that staff looked into this situation and they believed that from a traffic standpoint, parking could be limited to one side of the street without interfering with the movement of traffic or visibility at the intersection. However, he said it may be necessary to come back and remove parking from both sides if the problem continues.
    B41-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B42-00     Authorizing change order to the contract with Prost Builders for the Armory Building renovation project.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted there are about 16 items totaling approximately $83,000 relating to the Armory renovation project. He noted the project is still within the overall budgeted amount. Mr. Beck pointed out that the change order does not include painting the exterior of the building that had been discussed a few weeks ago. He said information relating to that issue would be brought back to the Council after the Historic Preservation Commission looks at it. Mr. Beck explained that most of the funds being used for this project are from Community Development Block Grant monies.
    Mayor Hindman noted that he had walked through the building and said the contractors seemed to be making significant progress.
    B42-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B51-00     Appropriating hotel/motel gross receipts tax funds for advertising and marketing.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this bill would allow for the appropriation of funds that had been set aside for the marketing program.
    Lorah Steiner explained the allocation would consist of approximately $176,000 anticipated from the proceeds of the increased lodging tax for the period of January 1 through September 30th. After the allocation of the $176,000, the remainder of the funds will go into a festivals and events account. She noted a portion of the monies will be used to bring the fund balance in compliance to fund balance percentages.
    Mr. Janku commented that mention had been made about the need for some software for convention lodging. He asked if that had been addressed in last year's budget. Ms. Steiner responded it had been.
    B51-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. 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.

B34-00     Approving engineer's report; accepting a conveyance; authorizing payment of differential costs for
                 water main project in Richland Heights, Plat 2.
B35-00     Accepting easements for water utility purposes.
B36-00     Authorizing an agreement with the Columbia School District for use of a portion of the City's fiber
                 optic cable system.
B40-00     Calling for bids for the construction of the Bear Creek Recreation Trail, Phase III.
B43-00     Authorizing an agreement with the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission to provide
                 funding for the bridge over Bear Creek Trail Phase 1; appropriating funds.
B45-00     Vacating a portion of a utility easement located within The Village of Cherry Hill, Plat 3.
B46-00     Approving the final plat of Eastland Hills, Plat XI; authorizing a performance contract.
B47-00     Approving the final plat of Heritage Estates, Plat No. 1; authorizing a performance contract.
B48-00     Approving the final plat of Vanderveen Crossing, Plat No. 4; authorizing a performance contract.
R28-00     Setting a public hearing: installation of a 12-inch water main along Scott Boulevard from Beach
                 Pointe Drive to the south side of the Katy Trail.
R29-00     Setting a public hearing: installation of an 8-inch and 12-inch water main along Business Loop 70 at
                 Creasy Springs Road.
R30-00     Setting a public hearing: street construction on Spruce Drive.
R31-00     Authorizing an agreement with the City of Fulton to provide transmission service for peaking capacity.

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

R32-00     Approving the preliminary plat of The Park at Arcadia, Phase 7.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this 23 acre tract is located in north central Columbia on the east side of Derby Ridge, north of Smiley Lane. He said it would create 99 R-1 lots. Both the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval.
    Mr. Janku commented that there has been a lot of new development in this area and he noted the lack of a neighborhood park. Mr. Janku was hopeful staff could work with the school to accommodate that.
    The vote on R32-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R33-00     Authorizing an agreement with Regional Economic Development, Inc. for lease of the Walton Building.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that the City and the Chamber jointly own the Walton Building. For a number of years, he explained that they have been leasing space to the REDI Corporation. This proposal is to extend the lease an additional five years at a rate of $17.75 per square foot.
    Mr. Janku felt the amount was high. Mr. John noted that the price includes utilities, janitorial service, parking lot maintenance and other things that are not included in normal leases. Mr. Campbell was concerned that the amount was well above the commercial rate and asked if it could be reduced. Mr. Beck responded that staff had done some comparisons and with everything that is included, it was not much out of line, if at all. Mr. John felt there was a few dollars worth of utilities per hour at least. He said it would be another couple of dollars per square foot for the janitorial services. Mr. Beck pointed out that REDI would also have use of the meeting rooms that are not included as part of the square footage being leased.
    Mr. Coffman asked how the five year term was arrived at. Mr. Beck said that is how it has been handled in the past.
    The vote on R33-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R34-00     Providing relocation assistance loans to the residents of Walnut Woods Mobile Home Park.
R35-00     Providing relocation assistance grants to the residents of Walnut Woods Mobile Home Park.
    Both resolutions were read by the Clerk.
    Mayor Hindman asked that the bills be read and discussed at the same time. He noted that they would be voted on separately.
    After substantial testimony at the last meeting, Mr. Beck commented that the Council asked the staff to prepare a report outlining alternatives in regards to relocation assistance and the use of Community Development Block Grant money. He pointed out that one resolution would allow for loans and the other grants. Mr. Beck noted that information was supplied to the Council regarding other social service programs that residents of Walnut Woods could apply for, and a report from a local bank that established a trust to assist the residents in relocation expenses.
    Mr. Campbell related that the Council briefly discussed a third alternative -- wherein the City would provide more support to the Voluntary Action Center, assuming they would run out of funds if these monies were used for relocation assistance. He asked how the City could provide CDBG funds to a second agency. Mr. Hancock replied that staff could look into that. He said it is very difficult to work within the regulations and take CDBG money, the City's money, and simply provide it to another agency to then administer. Mr. Hancock reported it would be difficult to monitor and difficult to ensure another agency will comply with federal regulations when using those funds. Mr. Campbell noted that since there are already other agencies that could help, the Council could simply allow additional support for those agencies to prevent the City from working on a mechanism.
    Mr. Coffman agreed it might be more appropriate and easier to administer if the City were somehow able to lend financial assistance to another organization that has more expertise in qualifying people for social services. However, he pointed out that timing in this case is a real problem. Mr. Coffman understood that HUD has cleared the City to utilize CDBG funds and we would be able to, under a grant program, administer the monies fairly quickly.
    Mr. Hancock reminded the Council that this is money in the contingency fund. Mr. Coffman understood that qualifying people and paying money out is something the staff could have ready to go this month. Mr. Hancock said that was correct. He felt his staff has put together the necessary paper work. Mr. Hancock pointed out that this process could be facilitated if each applicant did their own leg work in obtaining the necessary clearances from employers and savings institutions, for example, and supply that information to the City. Mr. Coffman asked if staff could also handle monies that had already been paid out. Mr. Hancock said he thought they could for the grants.
    Mr. Campbell asked what were the qualifying terms. Mr. Hancock said the resolutions establishing either of the programs state that applicants would have to become current on any past due utility bills before assistance could be provided. Mr. Campbell asked if that included lot rent. Mr. Hancock said it did not, only monies owed to the City.
    Mr. Janku asked about the number of trailers yet to be moved and whether there was any information on the fund being established by Union Planters Bank. Mr. Hancock replied that as of Friday, staff had been told 62 trailers still remained. The only information he had regarding the trust fund was that the applications had been sent to residents and some responses have been received. He believed the trust fund contained approximately $26,000.
    If it is the will of the Council to provide additional assistance for social service needs, Mr. Coffman asked what a realistic timetable would be to put something together. Mr. Hancock replied if the Council instructs staff which agency to work with, they could contact this organization to determine whether they would be able to provide the necessary funds. He said if they have enough information, this could possibly be forwarded to the Council by the next meeting. Mr. Hancock noted staff would have to check with HUD to make sure this was acceptable.
    Ms. Crayton stated these people need to move now. She asked how much longer residents would have to wait if the City supplied additional funding to the Voluntary Action Center. Mr. Campbell responded the Voluntary Action Center already has some funds available, so residents could apply for such immediately. He explained the question is, if the VAC runs out of funds, could the City step in and provide more funding so they could continue to disperse these monies.
    Larry Rice, Director of the New Life Evangelistic Center, 901 Wilkes Boulevard, explained that his organization is the one that the Voluntary Action Center and other agencies frequently refer people to when they need help with energy assistance. He noted that Mr. Coffman brought out a very good point in that residents of Walnut Woods are being forced to move and they need help now.
    Wesley Coats, #42 Walnut Woods, did not think it was possible to move 62 trailers by April 1. He commented that no one is doing anything to help residents, and a loan was certainly not going to help him. Mr. Coats stated residents need to be given more time to move.
    Mary Hussmann, a third ward resident on Rice Road, felt the Walnut Woods people have been treated unjustly by JPI as well as by the former owners. She asked Mrs. Crockett, because of a perceived conflict, to abstain from any discussions or votes on this issue. Mrs. Crockett assured Mrs. Hussmann that she would be happy to abstain. When the JPI development begins, Mrs. Crockett stated she would automatically abstain because her husband would be directly involved in the project.
    Thunder Falcon, a Walnut Woods resident, reported that the original request of residents of Walnut Woods was for the Council to write a letter of condemnation to JPI, or for someone from the City to contact JPI on their behalf to encourage the company to assist with relocation costs. She wondered if anyone had been able to contact JPI. Ms. Falcon noted JPI made a donation to the trust fund, but residents knew very little about it or what kind of requirements are expected in order to receive the funds. In addition, she questioned what legislation is in the works to protect future mobile home owners who live on rented property.
    Mayor Hindman explained that he had talked to the attorney for JPI and it was suggested, as was mentioned when Mayor Hindman visited the site, that the residents write him letters stating their particular cases, and he in turn would forward these to the JPI attorney. That attorney would then look into what they might be willing to do. Mayor Hindman pointed out JPI has contributed $25,000 to the trust fund, and he felt they had responded in a significant way to the public demand which has arisen from this situation.
    Regarding future legislation, Mayor Hindman explained the right to terminate leases is a state law matter. He understood one of the legislators is looking into the situation.
    Lisa Shields, #52 Walnut Woods, reiterated the resident's situation of having no place to go and not knowing what to do. She said they have 30 days left to move their home and no money to do it. Ms. Shields felt JPI should be held accountable.
    Shelly Shields, #49 Walnut Woods, spoke in opposition of the eviction.
    Dan Atwill, an attorney with offices at 609 E. Broadway, spoke on behalf of the former owners of the property. He explained that his clients are permanent residents of the City and are proud of their community. Mr. Atwill added that his clients are taxpayers, law abiding citizens and employers of numerous people in the community. He assured the Council that they have always had the best interest of the City at the core of their business plans. Mr. Atwill reported his clients have no position on the pending legislation before the Council.
    Mr. Campbell asked if Mr. Atwill's clients would be willing to help in the process of seeing this transition through. Mr. Atwill said he thought they have helped in some ways. Although, he could not recommend that they offer money at this time. Had it not been for the actions taken against his clients and their businesses, Mr. Atwill thought their attitude might be a little different.
    Mayor Hindman commented as far as any interference with the evictions, he said the new owners have absolutely complied with the law. He noted the former owners had nothing to do with that process. They, as the City Council, have no right to override that state law and cannot stop the evictions. In reference to the community attitude toward JPI's actions, Mayor Hindman said he tried to make it clear that he felt, as did others in the community, the notice was simply too short and it should not have been handled in that manner. However, that did not give the City any legal power to do anything about it. He said the project is something that will happen regardless of what the Council's feelings may be. Mayor Hindman felt the real injustice to be the length of time given for the resident's to move, and he believed it would have been more humane of JPI to allow for a substantially longer notice.
    Mayor Hindman reported the most significant thing the Council can do at this point is to ensure the proper social services are provided. He noted that the City provides about $650,000 annually to various social service agencies. Mayor Hindman related that staff had done some research pertaining to the availability of monies from the various social service agencies, and he explained the situation with respect to that issue. In addition, Mayor Hindman read that a community fund has been established at the Union Planters Bank to assist in relocation costs. He reported that Consumer Debt Counseling will work with Union Planters Bank to determine the financial needs of the residents, assist in the allocation of funds, and provide financial counseling services.
    Mayor Hindman explained the Salvation Army can also provide cash assistance with lot rent or other housing deposits, as well as their usual shelter, food, and support services. He reported the Voluntary Action Center has limited funds to assist with up to half of the cost of utility deposits, which could help if one is experiencing problems getting reconnected after a move. He noted there are also some utility assistance funds available through the Health Department, the Division of Family Services, and the Human Development Corporation. In addition, he stated there are vacant units in the public housing area if the residents of Walnut Woods meet the eligibility requirements. Mayor Hindman also mentioned the Community Harvest Food Pantry can provide food boxes for families with financial needs and the United Way considers requests for emergency funds from local agencies. If there is an extra load put on the local agencies as a result of this situation, applications can be made to the United Way, which the City supports in a substantial way.
    Mayor Hindman related that the City does contribute in a significant way to various social service agencies in the community, and he noted the information he was reading from did not even mention the HOME funds and down payment assistance programs the City has. He felt staff should make certain that a complete list of the social services that would be available to residents of Walnut Woods be widely distributed to those families.
    Mayor Hindman suggested that the City allow Consumer Debt Counseling and the United Planters Bank deal with this issue from the financial point of view, and if additional help is needed because of this situation, the City should then consider what else could be done to help.
    Mr. Coffman agreed with the Mayor in that the eviction time did not seem right, especially in the winter. However, he also did not think it is the proper role of government to try to impose morality on a private party that is playing by the rules. He felt it would be inappropriate for the City to apply any pressure to JPI. Mr. Coffman believed there would be a benefit to the City in assisting the Walnut Woods residents in this emergency because by making public funds available right now, it could save the City higher social service costs down the road. He also noted that utility assistance is one of the biggest problems when looking at social service costs to a state or a community. Mobility, he said, is particularly a problem for children. Mr. Coffman thought it was appropriate for the City to assist these residents to the extent that it could possibly help these individuals avoid ending up in a homeless situation. He pointed out contingency funds have been set aside for situations such as this. Mr. Coffman asked the Council to help the working poor of Walnut Woods.
    Mr. John said while it is true this is a community issue, there has been a trust fund set up at Union Planters Bank that could probably be a greater help in this crisis than the City could. He called upon the community to donate to the fund like he has personally. Mr. John agreed with the Mayor in that certain agencies may get tapped because of extra needs at this time, and if so, the City should come back and consider supporting them with more funds.
    Mr. Janku was hopeful the fund would continue to grow to meet most of the needs. He wanted to assure some degree of coordination between the applicable agencies so that a full package of the available benefits can be made easily accessible to the residents. Mr. Janku was also hopeful the community will continue to respond to this crisis.
    Mr. Campbell said his students had questioned the difference between people living in low income housing receiving an eviction notice because the structure was going to be torn down to build a shopping center versus this situation with the residents of Walnut Woods. He noted that the magnitude may be different, but it could be just as devastating. Mr. Campbell's position was that he did not want to see another bureaucracy created and see these folks being shuffled from one agency to another. He believed the City should be supportive. He did not think the fund would be adequate and that the City should be prepared to step forward and provide additional monies if necessary.
    Mayor Hindman suggested that staff should continue to monitor what is going on to ensure that information is disseminated to the affected residents. In addition, he wanted staff to help with the coordination of the services in such a way that it ends up being, as much as possible, a one-stop deal. He noted that people are evicted regularly for one reason or another, and the City's social service agencies have been dealing with these situations over the years. Mayor Hindman pointed out that the same hardship will apply to other people who are evicted on a smaller scale.
    Mrs. Crayton asked that the City do whatever possible to help the residents of Walnut Woods.
    In the event the resolutions do not pass, Mayor Hindman said he would like to make a motion asking the staff to work on the coordination of benefits.
    Mr. Campbell said he would urge that staff do much more than coordinate. He indicated if there is a need, the City should be prepared to address it.
    The vote on R34-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: NO ONE. VOTING NO: JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. ABSTAINING: CROCKETT. Resolution defeated.
    The vote on R35-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN, HINDMAN. ABSTAINING: CROCKETT. Resolution defeated.

    Mayor Hindman made the motion that staff be asked to coordinate with all of the service providers, and that they try and do everything they can to get information about the services available to the affected people, and that they monitor the situation and find out if the present services and the trust fund will be adequate to meet the needs as determined by the agencies. If the funds are not adequate, the staff is directed to report back to the Council, as soon as possible, with a proposed resolution on how to deal with additional funding options. The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.

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

B52-00     Calling for bids for the development of Field Neighborhood Park.
B53-00     Calling for bids for the development of the MKT Trailhead Park; appropriating funds.
B54-00     Calling for bids for construction of sidewalks along West Ash Street.
B55-00     Approving Change Order No. 3; approving the engineer's final report for the 8th and Cherry parking
                 garage project; appropriating funds.
B56-00     Approving Change Order No. 1; approving the engineer's final report for the Glen Eagle drainage
B57-00     Authorizing the acquisition of easements necessary to construct the Parkade Heights storm water
                 drainage improvement project.
B58-00     Amending Chapter 22 of the Code relating to landfill rates.
B59-00     Authorizing a cooperative agreement with Boone County relating to 2000 revenue sharing funding for
                 improvements to Vandiver Drive.
B60-00     Rezoning property located on the south side of Southampton Drive on both sides of John Garry Drive
                 from District O-1 to District C-P; approving the "Corporate Lake" C-P Development Plan.
B61-00     Establishing permanent R-1 zoning on property located south of St. Charles Road, at the southern
                 terminus of Charlie Goff Drive.
B62-00     Approving the final plat of McAlester Plaza; authorizing a performance contract.
B63-00     Approving the final plat of Vanderveen Crossing, Plat No. 3-A, a replat of part of Vanderveen Crossing,
                 Plat No. 3; authorizing a performance contract.
B64-00     Approving the final plat of a replat of Lot 2 of Sedona Villas, Plat 1.
B65-00     Vacating portions of a street right-of-way and easements located within Plat No. 3 of Vanderveen
B66-00     Voluntary annexation of property located on the west side of Lake of the Woods Road, north of
                 Evergreen Acres Subdivision.
B67-00     Authorizing installation of a 12-inch water main along Scott Boulevard from Beach Pointe Drive to the
                 south side of the Katy Trail.
B68-00     Authorizing installation of an 8-inch and 12-inch water main along Business Loop 70 at Creasy Springs
B69-00     Accepting easements for water utility purposes.

A)     Street Closure Request.
    Mr. Beck explained the request to be the closure of Walnut Street, between Seventh and Eighth Streets, on Monday, May 8, from 4:30 to 7:00 p.m. for the Partners in Education Program. He noted that this is an annual event.
    Mr. Campbell made the motion that the request be approved as written. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B)     Intra-Departmental Transfer of Funds Request.
    Report accepted.

C)     Food Code Ordinance.
    Mr. Beck explained that staff is requesting to proceed with an update of the food service ordinance using the national codes and state standards and guidelines.
    Ms. Browning explained that on October 30, 1999, the new Missouri rule went into effect regarding sanitation of food establishments. She noted her department is currently working under an ordinance that has been around since 1962. It took about two years for the Missouri Rule to go through a review process, and her staff would like to move forward with a review of the City's ordinances. Ms. Browning explained since her department is under contract to provide food inspection services for Boone County, the new guidelines for retail food inspection apply, however, the older standards still must be used within the city limits.
    Ms. Browning explained she would like to use the Board of Health as the vehicle for the review process. She proposes to establish a food safety advisory council, or something similar, consisting not only of public health people, but individuals from retail food establishments, restaurant owners, consumers, and those who have a vested interest in the process. Ms. Browning indicated she would also like to include some people from Protective Inspection on the committee since they facilitate all of the plan reviews. She reported this group would forward their findings to the Board of Health, and then their suggestions would be referred to the City Council for consideration.
    Mr. John said he has been asked about soda machines where customers can serve themselves. He noted the situation in which a used cup comes in contact with the dispenser. He was hopeful this process could also be reviewed.
    Mr. John made the motion that the Board of Health be authorized to proceed with the plan to review the existing Food Service ordinance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

D)     Proposal to Develop COLT Rail Terminal.
    Mayor Hindman said he wanted to ensure that space is left for the trail. He stated he would like to have more time to review the material. Mayor Hindman asked about a deadline.
    Mr. Malon was not sure there was a deadline, but said what staff is concerned about is that the federal budget cycle is starting up again, and the state budget cycle is underway, and they were hoping to try to get into the stream. He noted there are a couple of different funding sources available. Mr. Malon spoke about approaching the City's congressional delegation as other states have been allocated funds for the same purposes. He remarked that his staff felt it would be worthwhile to try to do the same.
    Mr. Janku pointed out that the State Director of Transportation just recently made a specific reference about trying to increase rail transport to reduce truck traffic on I-70. He suggested this might be something staff may want to look at. Mr. Janku indicated he wanted to see the City move forward with the process, but he thought the Council would still need to look at the issue. He was hopeful a work session could be scheduled fairly quickly.
    Mr. Janku made the motion the staff be directed to schedule a work session and pursue grants. The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved by voice vote.

E)     New Office Space Downtown.
    Mayor Hindman noted this issue had been discussed at the pre-Council dinner. The Council agreed to request that staff continue to review options and report back with their findings.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that staff be directed to further investigate options and report their findings back to the Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.

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

Dunn, Michael W., 1225 Sunset Drive, Ward 4 - term to expire 9/30/00

Echternach, Timothy R., 3605 Woodland Drive, Ward 2 - term to expire 6/1/01

Glaze, Marie A., 2209-A Creasy Springs Road, Ward 2 - term to expire 3/1/03
Naylor, Monica R., 3805 Frontenac Place, Ward 4 - term to expire 3/1/03

    Mrs. Crayton explained that she was having problems getting to work at the Woodhaven facility due to bus schedules. She said as businesses move further out, people who do not drive have trouble getting back and forth to work. She asked what could be done about it. Mr. Patterson explained that it is simply a matter of funding. Anything that is done without additional funding would be taking a bus from one place to put it in another place. Unfortunately, he said businesses do not always consider the transit system and the location of buses when they locate their facilities.
    Mr. Janku noted a report the Council received from the Disabilities Commission. He related that last year, the Commission had received an award of funds due to their work, and they would now like to organize a pedestrian awareness campaign with this money. One of the requests in their memo was for permission to spend up to $350 to participate in the Business Expo.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that the Disabilities Commission be authorized to spend up to $350 to participate in the Business Expo. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. Janku explained that he had been contacted by a person owning a tree trimming service in town and this individual was concerned about restrictions wherein those types of businesses are not allowed to take their brush to the City's mulch sites. The caller adheres to those restrictions, but this person has observed his competitors not following the laws. Mr. Janku said if the rules could be enforced, it would give this individual a level playing field. Mr. Patterson said any time staff observes commercial haulers bringing in limbs, they do divert them to the landfill. He said sometimes he was sure they slip in, but they do try to enforce it.
    Mr. Coffman asked about the reason for the rule regarding commercial haulers. Mr. Patterson responded because it is an additional cost to the City, while the hauler is making money on it. He noted there is a provision that limbs can be brought to the landfill compost site at half price if processing is not required.
    Another question the caller had was whether or not the City requires people operating such services to be covered by worker's compensation. Mr. Janku thought most businesses were required to have worker's compensation coverage in order to get a City license. He asked for a report.
    Mr. Coffman said he had received an e-mail from a gentleman living in Southridge Subdivision who spoke about the need for additional lighting on Old 63. The man wrote that he walks in this area at night (between Ponderosa and Stadium) and he did not feel safe. Mr. Coffman thought the man was concerned particularly about the asphalt deviation area. He asked for a report on the lighting as to what is there and what is not, including costs. Mr. Coffman noted the gentleman also had complimentary things to say about the Grindstone Nature Area and was interested in when the entrance to the parking lot might be repaved.
    Henry Lane, 1816 E. Broadway, spoke with concern about the Walnut Woods residents and their current plight. He wished the Council had more compassion and had approved the loans or grants to assist those folks in their relocation expenses.
    The meeting adjourned at 11:55 p.m.

                                                                                            Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                            Penny St. Romaine
                                                                                            City Clerk