FEBRUARY 4, 2002

    The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, February 4, 2002, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results: Council Members CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, 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 January 22, 2002, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Hutton and a second by Mr. Loveless.

    Mayor Hindman noted that R34-02 would be added under Old Business.
    The agenda, as amended, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. John and a second by Mr. Coffman.

    Mayor Hindman welcomed the fifth grade class from Grant School.

Columbia Police Department Special Recognition of Citizens.
    Police Chief Boehm asked James Downey to join him at the podium. He explained that Mr. Downey had reported suspicious activity on the morning of January 4th, 2002, and as a result, the Police Department apprehended the individual who held up the Bank of America facility at 5 Old Highway 63 South. Chief Boehm called this a perfect example of community policing wherein the community and Police Department partner together to solve problems. He thanked Mr. Downey for his commitment to the City of Columbia and for his help with their community policing efforts.
    Mayor Hindman congratulated Mr. Downey and thanked him for his efforts.


B406-01     Approving a revision to the C-P/O-P Development Plan of Village Square.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that information the Council requested at the last meeting had been included in their packets, and additional information was provided tonight.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Craig VanMatre, an attorney with offices at 1103 E. Broadway, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He reiterated that his client is willing to install three raised speed table sidewalks as shown on the drawing. It was his understanding the proposal is acceptable to Public Works. He said the applicant is also willing to build the median with the landscaping as shown on information provided to the Council. He believed that also to be acceptable by Public Works. Mr. VanMatre explained that more instruction is needed on the appearance of the two islands at the entrance of the streets that exit onto Nifong. The applicant believed that hardscape would be vastly superior for the islands due to the geometry of the intersections, but he is willing to landscape these if the Council so wishes. He thought it was inevitable that they would not look as attractive or last as long if landscaped because it is anticipated that vehicles would most likely run over the islands as they enter and exit this particular portion of the development. Mr. VanMatre pointed out his client is willing to post a letter of credit in lieu of a bond to assure the completion of all the improvements so an occupancy permit for Walgreens can be issued.
    Clifford Rea, 1326 Willowcreek, spoke about the pedestrian refuge on Forum and the speed bumps on Village Square Drive. He did not support the speed bumps but was in favor of raised crosswalks. He suggested that the developer build sidewalks on Nifong and Forum as he owns all of these lots. Mr. Rea reported many accidents since the lights have been installed at the Forum/Nifong intersection.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    In light of the original plan previously approved by the Council, Mr. John was in favor of the alternative to have landscaping at the Walgreens entrance; however, since part of the reason an island exists at the Village Square Drive entrance is due to staff input, it would be acceptable to him to allow hardscape materials with pavers to make it more attractive. Mr. John also supported the three raised crosswalks in lieu of speed humps designed to meet Public Works standards.
    Mayor Hindman agreed with Mr. John, but he personally preferred that both islands contain some landscaping. He noted that was presented at the time the plan was originally approved, and he thought that would be the more attractive arrangement. He was not opposed to having some kind of pressed concrete buffer to protect the landscaping from vehicular traffic.
    Mr. John asked the staff about their reasoning for suggesting that the islands be constructed of concrete. Mr. Patterson did not think the suggestion had anything to do with the landscaping not working, but rather the general feeling that there would be less long-term maintenance for the City.
    Mr. Janku noted that the staff report mentions widening Forum Boulevard to better accommodate southbound traffic and the bicycle mix at that location. He said there was no mention of northbound traffic and wondered if there was anything that could be done to alleviate the problem of northbound bikers being pushed to the curb.
    Before the island was constructed at this location, Mr. Patterson indicated this was a shared intersection by bicycles and automobiles. He said the "pinch point" really comes in on the west side, worse than on the east side. Mr. Patterson commented that it would be preferable if the entire intersection could be widened, but thought both lanes would be accommodated by addressing the west side right now. He noted that his department has not had any input as to the east side being a major problem, but staff could look into it if the Council so directed.
    Mr. Boeckmann reported that an amendment sheet was prepared based on the staff memo that went out with the packet on Thursday. He explained that numbers three and four under Section 3 are at issue.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that numbers three and four be amended to include that the islands shall have landscaping. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. John asked that the landscaping be consistent with the location -- not too tall and something requiring little water.
    B406-01, as amended, was read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B17-02     Authorizing Change Order No. 1; approving the engineer's final report; levying special assessments
                 for the Fourth Avenue Project; appropriating funds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this project involves both the use of CDBG money and tax bills against abutting property owners
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Mr. Patterson explained that this public hearing is for the purpose of determining special benefits resulting from the improvements made to Fourth Avenue, from Garth to Providence. The project consisted of reconstructing approximately 1300 feet of unimproved street to a 28-foot wide curb and guttered pavement with sidewalks on both sides. The replacement of landscaping in accordance with property owner wishes was provided following construction of the street. A public hearing authorizing the work was held in May of 1999.
    Mr. Patterson reported the resolution estimate for the project was $252,000 with the final actual cost being $215,239.45. Community Development Block Grant funds will provide funding for $159,292.48 and the sanitary sewer utility will provide $25,600 for upgrades and improvements to deteriorated sanitary sewer lines within the project limits. The remaining $30,346.97 is proposed to be tax billed to the adjacent properties, which in accordance with City policies, would be at a rate one-half the normal tax bill rate for local streets. Property owners meeting income requirements are eligible for grants to pay the entire tax bill amount. The tax bill rate for the project is $13.29 per abutting foot. A total of 37 different parcels of land for which assessments are being proposed range from $485 to $2,325.
    Prior to levying special assessments, Mr. Patterson noted that the Council must make a determination that special benefits have accrued to the properties in an amount at least equal to the amount being proposed for assessment. He suggested the Council consider the following when making that determination: the curb and guttering improves the overall stormwater management, the appearance and maintainability of properties has been enhanced, new driveway approaches will provide better access to properties, and the improved street surfaces will cause less wear and tear on private vehicles using the street as a primary access to the properties. Mr. Patterson noted that the City will also be able to better maintain the streets, particularly in the form of street cleaning and snow removal. He also reminded the Council that under current policies when streets are constructed to improved standards, property owners are no longer subject to tax bill maintenance which could be as much as $2.00 per foot per year.
    Mr. Patterson noted that an amendment sheet had been prepared to allow for the appropriation of sanitary sewer funds to be included in the ordinance.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that B17-02 be amended per the amendment sheet. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    B17-02, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B21-02     Calling for bids for construction of improvements to roadways and parking lots at Kiwanis Park and
                 Cosmo-Bethel Park.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that these two projects were included in the 2002 fiscal budget. The first is an entryway from Bethel Street into Cosmo-Bethel Park estimated at a cost of $50,000. The second project includes an entrance for Kiwanis Park and would upgrade the driveway off of College Park Drive at an estimated cost of $20,000. The funding will come from the community park development portion of the 1999 1/4% sales tax ballot issue for park purposes.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B21-02 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B22-02     Calling for bids for construction of improvements to Indian Hills Park.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this sizable park project has been budgeted in two fiscal years, 2001 and 2002. Community Development Block Grant monies will be used.
    Mr. Hood explained the proposed improvements to include the development of a new playground and soccer practice field area, as well as a ten foot wide, 1.25 mile long trail (gravel surface) around the perimeter of the park. In addition, fencing would be placed along the southern boundary of the park, and a new 18-hole disc golf course would be developed. The proposed improvements reflect planning efforts which have occurred over the last few months. Mr. Hood indicated that staff met with members of the Indian Hills neighborhood as well as representatives of the Columbia Disc Golf Club to discuss future improvements for the park. The improvements could begin late this spring or early summer with a combination of contract and force account labor. The site earth work would be done with contract labor and the remainder would be done with force account labor.
    Mr. Loveless asked about the fence on the south end. Mr. Hood replied that there has been an encroachment problem with the houses that back up to the park at this location. He remarked that old cars and trucks have been parked on the property and trash dumping has occurred as well. Staff believed that fencing (estate-type, split rail) in the area would simply define the boundary of the park.
    Mr. John asked if there was a need for another disc golf course in Columbia. Mr. Hood explained that the disc golf community has strongly communicated a need for an additional course. Mr. Janku commented that he sees a lot of people playing at the course in Oakland Park, and he thought it was a good activity for a park such as Indian Hills because it would spread people throughout the park. Mr. Coffman noted disc golf's compatibility with walking trails. Mr. Janku thought it could be used more throughout the year than a regular golf course.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Greg Willingham, 6416 Karen Court, spoke on behalf of the Columbia Disc Golf Club. He reiterated the need for a third course. He said this year the Club would be sponsoring a super tour event which will bring more people and income to Columbia. Mr. Willingham noted members have been helping to clean up the area for the last several weekends. He remarked that the Club has met with kids in the area and have introduced them to disc golf.
    Laurie Johnson, a resident of Indian Hills, spoke in support of the disc golfers and said residents are glad to have them there introducing their sport to the children. She thanked the Parks staff for meeting with the neighborhood group and including them in their deliberations.
    Dennis Smith, 15 Cherokee Lane, was in favor of the improvements, but was concerned about the amount of existing parking. He recommended that it be increased at some point. He wondered if that would affect the walking trail. Mr. Hood replied that the existing parking lot is located on the west side of the park and can accommodate 15 to 20 cars. At this point, there are no plans to expand this parking lot, but a previous plan has shown a new lot on the west side. In discussions with the community, Mr. Hood reported residents seemed to feel that the existing parking lot was adequate. If the need arises, he believed there would be an opportunity to expand the lot without substantially affecting the location of the trail.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Hutton was happy to see this project finally coming to fruition. He asked about the parking situation if a disc golf tournament is held in the park. Mr. Hood responded if there is a large tournament, staff may have to work with the Disc Golf Association to create a temporary parking area within the boundaries of the park just off the existing lot. As a long-term solution, he noted the Phase II improvements for the park include the parking lot on the east side of the park. He said that would become the main access for the disc golf course. Mr. Hood noted funding is not available at this point to pursue that, but they would anticipate budgeting the money in the next couple of years for the second phase. Mr. Hutton inquired as to whether CDBG monies would be a funding source for the Phase II improvements. Mr. Hood thought it to be one very likely source of funding. Mr. Hutton asked about the time table for the second phase. Mr. Hood said it was in the current five year plan, and the $75,000 needed to fund the project would probably be requested in the 2003 or 2004 fiscal budget. Mr. Hutton questioned whether the road into the park from the east was located outside the city limits. Mr. Hood believed this property had been annexed into the city. Mr. Hutton asked what road it would be extended from. Mr. John thought it would be Lake of the Woods down Rice Road. Mr. Hood said he would find out.
    B22-02 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B27-02     Rezoning property located on the south side of Monroe Street, approximately 135 feet west of Old
                 Highway 63, from R-3 to O-P.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck commented that this1.5 acre tract is being recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission subject to the property being limited to offices for professional and business use.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Jeff Crane, 1855 S. Range Line Road, explained that there is a car lot to the east of the property and a seven-plex on the southwest corner. He said the lot is located in a primarily industrial area. Mr. Crane guessed he would lease the building to a CPA and the appearance of the structure would not change significantly with the exception of modifying the front so it would look more like an office.
    Jay Hascheider, 1403 Windsor, spoke on behalf of the Benton-Stephens Neighborhood Association. He commented that the Association felt they did not receive adequate notification of the Planning and Zoning public hearing. He said they have not had a chance to talk to the developer and were not sure what his plans are. If this rezoning is approved, the Association does not want it to set a precedent that would encourage other property owners to request rezonings such as this.
    Mayor Hindman asked why the neighbors had not met with the developer between the time of the Planning and Zoning public hearing and now. Mr. Hascheider explained that the outgoing president had not arranged a meeting and the new president was working on the annual meeting so it got lost in the shuffle.
    Mr. Coffman asked if there are certain aspects of an office development the residents are particularly concerned about. Mr. Hascheider replied they are interested in knowing exactly what the limitations are for the use of the property if the current owner decides to sell it after the rezoning takes place. Residents are also concerned about what kind of building alterations are being planned. Mr. Coffman understood their general concern to be that the structure be compatible with the neighborhood. Mr. Hascheider concurred.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Hutton asked if the neighborhood was sent a letter of notification regarding the public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Dudark replied that the Association was sent a letter. Mr. Hutton noted a discussion at the Commission hearing regarding the overlay district and how it affects this request. He understood this property to be in the overlay district and that it would not affect it because office and commercial are exempt from the overlay. Mr. Dudark said that was correct, it only applies to residential properties. Mr. Hutton also understood the Council would have to approve the O-P plan for the property. Mr. Dudark said there is an O-P requirement for any alterations of the property. In addition, Mr. Hutton understood off-street parking would be required as part of the office zoning. Mr. Dudark replied affirmatively and said it would depend upon the use. Mr. Hutton asked if the landscaping would include a certain percentage of green space. Mr. Dudark said it would and possibly screening depending upon the impact. As far as architectural control, Mr. Hutton commented there would be none because if the applicant is simply going to remodel the structure, the O-P plan he brings in will show the existing structure footprint on the plan. Mr. Dudark said that was correct, any expansion of the footprint would be part of the plan but not the appearance of the building itself. Mr. Hutton noted that if the property is sold and the new owner wants to construct an addition, this would cause an amendment to the plan which would have to be approved by the Council. Mr. Dudark responded any change like that would require Council approval, no matter who owns it.
    Mr. Coffman inquired as to whether the Council would be approving the exemption of this property from the overlay district if the property is rezoned. Mr. Dudark replied yes. In a defacto way, Mr. Hutton remarked the Council would still have control over it in the sense that they could put the same requirements that the overlay district requires in the O-P plan. Mr. Dudark agreed that in this case, the exemption is replaced with another mechanism. Mr. Coffman understood the concern of residents in this fragile area of the City, but it is hard to argue that office would not be appropriate next to commercial.
    Mr. Hutton indicated he would normally be reluctant to approve any office or commercial encroachment in residential areas of the Benton-Stephens Neighborhood. However, this request is different from others. As proposed now, there will be minimal changes made to the structure and there will be some more parking. He said landscaping will be required as will a certain amount of green space and screening. Mr. Hutton noted that not much of an office could be built on .15 acre. He asked about the land use plan designation for the area. Mr. Dudark suspected it to be a neighborhood designation which would allow some mixed use on a case by case basis. Because of the safeguards, Mr. Hutton remarked he could support the request.
    Mr. Janku commented that the office would provide a buffer from the C-3 to the remaining residential. He saw it as the traditional way of buffering.
    B27-02 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

(A)     Construction of sanitary sewers in Sanitary Sewer District No. 144 (Mexico Gravel Road).
    Item A was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this $121,000 project involves nine parcels of land wherein the property owners have requested sewers. He pointed out that trunk sewers have been in this area for a number of years, but because of the size of the parcels, it was difficult for residents to pay the full cost under previous tax bill policies. Since there is now a $5,00 cap on tax bills, residents have found it to be more affordable.
    Mr. Patterson explained that the tax bills to be assessed to the individual properties range from $2,800 to $60,000, with the Sanitary Sewer Utility funding approximately $83,000 of the overall project cost. The project consists of about 1,300 feet of eight inch pipe that will provide sewer to nine properties. Five of the nine lots will trigger the $5,000 cap. He noted that another public hearing will be held to determine the benefits upon completion of the project if approved.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    If one of the larger lots gets subdivided, Mr. John asked how the City would get reimbursed for the differential cost. Mr. Patterson explained that prior to any of the three actions specified in the ordinance -- subdivision of the property, rezoning of the property or any increase in size of water meters to the property, additional tax bills will be issued. He said if it is simply a residential split, the second subdivision would also be limited to $5,000. As the property redevelops the City is reimbursed.
    Mr. Hutton made the motion that staff be directed to proceed with final plans and specifications. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(B)     Voluntary annexation of property located on the south side of State Route K, approximately 350 east of
           the intersection of State Route K and Old Village Road.
    Item B was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this one acre tract is located in south Columbia. The applicant would like to connect to the City's sewer system and have informally indicated a request for single family zoning if the property is annexed.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mayor Hindman indicated that no action is required at this time.

B28-02     Approving the final plat of Meadow Lane Estates, a replat of part of Lot 14 of Garth's Addition to the
                 City of Columbia.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Dudark displayed a drawing of the area showing the general location of the property. He noted that this large piece of land is made up of about 1.4 acres with the proposal being to subdivide it into two lots. The south portion of the property contains an existing single family home with a new accessory building and a detached garage to the north of that. He then displayed an overhead of the proposed subdivision. Lot 1 consists of 1.18 acres and Lot 2 as one-quarter of an acre. Access to Lot 2 would be off of Meadow Lane. Mr. Dudark displayed another drawing illustrating the layout of the tract which showed the building site on Lot 2 and dedication of additional right-of-way for Meadow Lane. He said the access is ten feet wide on Meadow Lane with the rest of the property abutting adjacent private property. Currently, Mr. Dudark noted that the Subdivision Regulations do not specify a minimum lot width at the street right-of-way line. He said the Public Works Department has adopted an administrative standard of 12-feet for residential driveway widths. He said staff would have to grant a variance should the Council approve the plat. Mr. Dudark stated the plat will comply with all Subdivision Regulations.
    Mr. Loveless asked why a variance would be needed if there is no standard in City codes. Mr. Dudark explained that it would be a variance to the administrative requirement of a 12-foot driveway width, which would be granted by staff.
    Mayor Hindman asked about Council discretion in this case. Mr. Boeckmann explained that unlike zoning issues, the Council has very limited discretion under Subdivision Regulations. He said their only discretion is to ensure that the plat meets all of the ordinance requirements and, if it does, as this subdivision apparently does, then the Council has to approve it.
    Fred Parry, 709 W. Broadway, explained that he and his wife, Melody, are the applicants for this subdivision. He said a tremendous amount of misinformation has been circulated around the neighborhood about their plans for this property. Mr. Parry explained once the property is subdivided, they plan to construct a duplex containing two, two-bedroom units. He said both units will have double car garages so no on-street parking will be required. They plan to work with an architect and designer to build the duplex in a Cape Cod architectural style so that it blends in with the existing homes in the neighborhood. The units will be designed to accommodate the needs of senior citizens as there are many amenities and services nearby for them.
    Mr. Parry spoke about the importance of making investments in the central city of Columbia. He commented that this community is susceptible to rotting from the core unless people are willing to make the kind of improvements and investments in the central city like that is what is being proposed tonight. He noted several real estate professionals have reviewed the project, and they are in agreement to the positive impact this project will most likely have on the area.
    Mr. Parry noted that the duplex will essentially be built in his back yard where his children play and where they entertain family and friends. Because of that, he said they will be very picky about the quality of construction, the upkeep of the structure, and in choosing the tenants who occupy the units. He passed around a handout showing rental units surrounding this property. Unlike any other rental unit in the neighborhood, the Parry's, as landlords, will be living right next door to the unit and would be constantly aware of what is happening with the units. He and his wife are familiar with the concerns of many of the neighbors who do not support the plan, and Mr. Parry pointed out that they have attended and hosted neighborhood meetings to discuss those concerns. He indicated they would not do anything to jeopardize the integrity of the neighborhood.
    Mr. Coffman commented that he liked the idea of Mr. Parry not being an absentee landlord. He asked how many people might reside within the unit and how much traffic might be generated. Mr. Parry responded their goal is to rent to seniors, so there would be one or two persons living in each unit. He thought there might be a total of four cars. He noted the other rental units in the neighborhood containing multiple tenants. Mr. Coffman asked if there were any safety concerns with such a small access. Mr. Parry explained that the driveway access is directly on Meadow Lane. He said large construction trucks have been using it for the last several months and very rarely has there ever been any congestion at the intersection.
    Marcia Muscrat, 119 Anderson, spoke in opposition to the request. She said most of the neighbors are not in favor of the subdivision, increased traffic and increased number of rental units. She indicated that most residents in the neighborhood are homeowners, not renters. Ms. Muscrat wondered how one could influence the administrators to deny the variance.
    Mayor Hindman explained that the Council sets policy but they do not instruct the administration on how to apply their own regulations.
    Allen Thiher, 105 Meadow Lane, distributed pictures of the neighborhood. He reported that approximately 30-40 residents met with Mr. Parry a few weeks ago to learn more about the proposal. Mr. Thiher stated the neighborhood is solidly against it. They felt there was nothing wrong with having green space in the middle of Columbia, and that the introduction of duplexes would start leading to the degradation of the neighborhood and to the continuing degradation of the center city. They were also concerned about the additional automobile traffic generated by the duplex. He reported most of the time it is next to impossible to have two-way traffic on Meadow Lane. Mr. Thiher also debated the administrative variance.
    Gary Martin, 111 Bicknell, explained that he spends most of his time taking care of his mother who lives at 121 Meadow Lane. He had taken the photos that were passed around and had also taken measurements of Meadow Lane. Mr. Martin disagreed with some of staff's figures. He also believed the Council could use their own discretion when they felt it was necessary.
    George Breting, 713 W. Broadway, explained that he is the next door neighbor to Mr. and Mrs. Parry. He spoke in favor of the request. From what he has seen in the Parry's plan, he felt the proposed structure would be compatible with the architecture in the area.
    Christine Gardner, 112 Anderson, asked the neighbors opposed to the plan to stand. Approximately 20 people stood.
    John Robinson, 117 Meadow Lane, spoke in opposition to the request.
    Robert Tucker, owner of the Taylor House Bed and Breakfast located across the street from the Parry's, spoke in favor of the request. Mr. Tucker pointed out that all neighborhoods need continual investing to keep desirability high and to increase property values. He noted that all of the improvements the Parry's have made to their property has been first rate.
    Laura Froese, 22 N. Glenwood, commented that she and her husband had moved out of the East Campus neighborhood because of the number of duplexes that had been constructed. She said they would probably be moving again, and most likely it would be out of town.
    Gail Ludwig, 200 E. Parkway, explained that her rental property borders on the western edge of the Parry's property. She is concerned about additional traffic and the ten-foot access. Currently, she reported the construction trucks using the drive are driving on her property. In order to get the access, she said the Parry's would have to cut down a huge pin oak tree. Ms. Ludwig asked the Council to preserve the integrity of the neighborhood.
    Bill Easley, 705 Cook, spoke in favor of the plan because seniors would be targeted as tenants.
    Mark McGivincy, 13 Anderson, spoke in opposition to the plan because he wanted to see the green space remain.
    Shelly Graby, 107 Meadow, spoke in opposition because of the traffic flow.
    Mr. Coffman questioned the administrative variance and the status of the permit granted as a temporary driveway. He asked if the project could be permitted without the variance. Mr. Boeckmann reiterated that before the Council tonight is the plat and not the driveway, although it is a related issue. He pointed out that 10-feet is wide enough to run a car through and the Fire Department reviewed the plat and found no problem with it because their trucks would not have to access the driveway. He said the same would be true with trash pick up. He thought the Council would be hard-pressed to deny access to a piece of property that is lawfully platted because of the driveway access.
    Mr. Patterson reported the design standards and specifications adopted by the Public Works Department are used as guidelines for construction purposes of driveways, the entrances to streets, street radii and those kinds of things. Unless it is codified in City Ordinances, staff follows those standards. He said they have the administrative authority to vary them according to specific purposes. Mr. Patterson pointed out that it is not uncommon for them to provide relief from those standards when people ask for a wider driveway then is shown as a standard, or a narrower driveway when it does not interfere with the function of such. He noted that staff reviews the functionality of the variance to determine whether it serves the purpose for which the intended standard was set.
    In this case, Mr. Patterson indicated staff would see no reason to deny a 10-foot driveway. He said once the plat is approved, the property would have a 20-foot access to the street and, therefore, they would not be in a position to request a variance from the City. He said the City becomes the one with the 10-foot "pinch point" in their right-of-way. Mr. Patterson commented that if that is found to be unacceptable, then the City would probably have an obligation to acquire enough right-of-way to supply the access. From a practical standpoint, Mr. Patterson stated staff did not think that would be necessary. The fact the applicant is dedicating 20-feet of right-of-way frontage makes the 10-foot question somewhat less of a factor.
    Ms. Crayton believed that neighborhoods should be reserved, but said she did not like vacant lots in her ward because it could set a precedent in blighting. She noted that if the Council has no discretion and Mr. Parry is following all regulations, then this request should be approved.
    Mr. John pointed out that the Council is not approving a rezoning. He reported that this property, as well as most of the property on the north side of Broadway, is zoned R-2. He noted the lot is big enough for the duplex, and the zoning is already in place. Mr. John remarked that the "meadow" referred to by many of the residents is actually Mr. Parry's private property and cannot be preserved for the use of others.
    Mr. Janku suggested that the neighborhood look at down-zoning or an overlay district in order to protect themselves from future development they feel is inappropriate.
    Mr. Hutton asked what discretion, if it applies in this case, would come from. Mr. Boeckmann said it is a matter of state law -- the state statutes pertaining to zoning and subdivisions. Mr. Hutton questioned if it would be unlawful for the Council to deny this request. Mr. Boeckmann replied that was true. In an effort to clarify the administrative variance question, Mr. Hutton pointed out that the variance does not apply to a subdivision regulation, but is a variance to a rule or policy established by City staff. Mr. Boeckmann concurred.
    Mayor Hindman thanked the neighbors for coming down and voicing their opinions. He congratulated Mr. Parry in his efforts to work with the neighbors.
    B28-02 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B31-02     Authorizing issuance of Water and Electric System Revenue Bonds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Ms. Fleming explained that at 11:00 a.m. today, bids were accepted from nine agencies. This is $16,490,000 in Water and Light bonds that were authorized by the voters in April of 1997. She noted that $22,760,000 were previously issued in March of 1998. Ms. Fleming reported this would finish out the bonding capacity authorized by the voters. She pointed out that these are 25-year bonds and she is very pleased with the rate. The winning bidder is Paine Webber, a firm the City has formerly done business with.
    Mr. Boeckmann noted an amendment sheet had been prepared with a substitute ordinance. As with all bond ordinances, he explained these are never introduced in complete form because the financial information comes in on the day of passage. He also noted that insurance provisions were added.
    Mr. Hutton motioned that B31-02 be amended per the amendment sheet. The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    B31-02, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

R34-02     Accepting the bid for the sale of $16,490,000 Water and Electric Revenue Bonds, 2002 Series A.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Ms. Fleming reported that adoption of this resolution would complete the transaction.
    The vote on R34-02 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

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

B18-02     Appropriating funds for the purchase of Paratransit scheduling software.
B19-02     Authorizing a right of use agreement with Chariton Valley Long Distance Corporation to install fiber
                 optic cable within city right-of-way.
B20-02     Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code to prohibit parking at the Nowell's building at Worley and West
                 Boulevard North.
B23-02     Accepting a deed of dedication; approving the engineer's final report; authorizing payment of differential
                 costs for construction of water main serving Vanderveen Crossing, Plat 4.
B24-02     Accepting a deed of dedication; approving the engineer's final report; authorizing payment of differential
                 costs for construction of water main serving Vanderveen Crossing, Plat 6.
B25-02     Accepting a deed of dedication; approving the engineer's final report; authorizing payment of differential
                 cost for construction of water main serving Vanderveen Plaza, Plat 2.
B26-02     Accepting easements for water utility purposes.
B29-02     Approving a replat of Lot 10 of Sedona Villas, Plat 1.
B30-02     Amending Chapter 7 of the City Code relating to Civil Defense and Emergency Operations.
R26-02     Setting a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property located on the west side of Old Village Road,
                 approximately 900 feet north of State Route K.
R27-02     Setting a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property located on the northeast and northwest
                 corners of the intersection of West Old Plank Road and Hickam Drive.
R28-02     Setting a public hearing: amendment to the FY 2002 Action Plan to allocate CDBG and HOME funds.
R29-01     Setting a public hearing: levying special assessments against property benefitted by Sanitary Sewer
                 District No. 155 (Marion and Medavista Drive) improvements.
R30-02     Authorizing a grant application to the Boone Electric Community Trust for support of the Community
                 Study Circles Program.
R31-02     Adopting and implementing the Department of Transportation Disadvantaged Business Enterprise
                 Program for MoDOT funding.
    The bills were given third reading and the resolutions were read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bills declared enacted and resolutions declared adopted, reading as follows:

R32-02     Establishing a City Employee Homeownership Assistance Program.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that money had been set aside in the Council reserve for this program. A total of $32,849 was set aside; however, that is all the funds remaining in the Council reserve, which is separate from the contingency fund. He questioned if the Council would like to earmark $30,000 for the remainder of this fiscal year. Another option was implementing the program in two stages. The suggestion is to offer up to a $5,000 loan and after five years it would become a grant if the employee lives in the home for five or more years.
    Ms. Crayton asked if these are exclusively City funds, or whether federal funds could be used for this purpose. Mr. Beck replied that the amount set aside is strictly City funds. Mr. Dudark commented that no federal funds are available for this program.
    Mr. Janku saw advantages to appropriating the entire $30,000. If the funding is not spent at the end of the year, he assumed it could be carried over to the next year. Mr. Beck said it could. Mr. Janku speculated this would be an employee benefit and would be part of the percentage figured every year in terms of how much money to be allocated to employee benefits. Mr. Beck thought this was something a little different from uniform allowance and that sort of thing. Mr. Janku asked if this could be made a revolving fund with recapture provisions so the money could be used for the program. Mr. Beck believed it could be a separate fund -- instead of going back to the general fund at the end of the year, it could be restricted and carried over.
    With regard to this being an employee benefit, Mr. Loveless assumed the recipient would see an additional $1,000 plus interest added to his taxable income from the City. Mr. Beck thought it would be a little different. He noted this would be a personnel cost that not all employees would receive. Mr. Beck needed to give some more thought to it. He agreed the program will be an employee/community benefit to help stabilize inner city neighborhoods.
    Ms. Crayton said there are already City employees living in the neighborhood who own their own home. She asked if these individuals would be eligible for rehabilitation funding. Mr. Dudark explained that there is an income limitation based on household size. He pointed out that those are federal funds.
    The vote on R32-02 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R33-02     Authorizing an agreement with Rafael Architects, Inc. for architectural services for renovation of office
                 space for the Health Department and a health clinic.
     The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that a joint committee, made up of City and County employees, has interviewed consultant firms for architectural work on the Nowell's Building. He noted the County has expressed in interest in using up to 20,000 square feet for clinic purposes. This legislation will authorize the City to administer the architectural agreement. Mr. Beck stated another joint committee, probably supervised by Stephanie Browning, would work on the design of the facility. He indicated the County will provide a team to work with the architect as it relates to the Family Health facility. Mr. Beck had not heard back from the County relating to some of the other issues brought up by the Council at a work session. He pointed out that the architectural agreement will need to be signed by both the City and the County.
    Referring to paragraph two of the introductory within the agreement where it mentions the approximate 33,542 square feet to the west of the building, Mr. Loveless asked if the phrase was written properly. Mr. Patterson said it was referring to the west part of the building. Mr. Loveless asked about the first paragraph where it mentions storm water management evaluation to address the existing neighborhood drainage problems. He asked if the City has documented drainage problems in this neighborhood. Mr. Patterson confirmed that statement. He remarked that the agreement refers to one portion of the Again Street drainage project. Staff will determine whether there is the potential for on-site detention.
    In figuring the cost of the contract, Mr. Hutton noted that a range is given. He questioned whether the architectural fee is based on construction costs or just the hourly rate multiplied by the number of hours that each level in the rate is going to put into the project. Mr. Patterson said it will be based on the hours documented by the architect. He indicated the City typically does not enter into contracts based on construction cost percentages. Mr. Hutton asked about the anticipated construction cost. Mr. Patterson replied that the budget is anywhere between two and three million, which is within the range of what would generally be used for percentages.
    Referring to page 2 of Exhibit A, Mr. Loveless asked if staff is certain that the County will buy part of the building. He asked what would happen if the County ended up just renting instead of buying and the effect it would have on this contract. Mr. John commented that if the County chooses not to sign this agreement, staff could simply amend the contract.
    The vote on R33-02 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, 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:

B32-02     Voluntary annexation of property located on the south side of State Route K, approximately 350 feet
                 east of the intersection of State Route K and Old Village Road.
B33-02     Rezoning property located on the west side of Rock Quarry Road, east of the easternmost part of
                 Seven Oaks Subdivision from A-1 to PUD-3.
B34-02     Approving the Grantwood Village PUD Site Plan.
B35-02     Approving the final plat of Grantwood Village.
B36-02     Approving the replat of Lot 16 of Country Club Villas.
B37-02     Vacating street right-of-way and easements within Bluff Creek Office Park, Plat 4-C.
B38-02     Approving the final plat of Bluff Creek Office Park, Plat 4-D, a replat of part of Bluff Creek Office
                 Park, Plat 4-C.
B39-02     Authorizing Change Order No. 1; approving the engineer's final report; levying special assessments
                 for the Sanitary Sewer District No. 155 project (Marion and Medavista Drive).
B40-02     Authorizing Change Order Numbers 1 and 2; approving the engineer's final report for the rehabilitation
                 of the airfield lighting control system at Columbia Regional Airport.
B41-02     Confirming the contract of C.L. Richardson Construction Company, Inc. for the construction of the
                 American Legion Post No. 202 Sanitary Sewer Project.
B42-02     Authorizing acquisition of land necessary for construction of an access to the Bear Creek Trail.
B43-02     Accepting easements for water main purposes.
B44-02     Authorizing a membership application and an agreement with Midwest Independent Transmission
                 System Operator, Inc.; appropriating funds.

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

(B)     Street Closure Request.
    Mr. Beck explained that this annual request is for the Partners in Education Week kick-off ceremony.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that the request be approved as written. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutton and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(C)     Farmers Market Issues.
    Mr. Beck asked if the Council wished to send a letter to the State Department of Economic Development requesting an extension to the proposal submission deadline on behalf of the Sustainable Farms group. The second part of the report pertains to the use of the Nowell's parking lot this summer for the Farmers Market. Mr. Beck remarked that he spoke to the Council relating to the zoning issue at the fairgrounds in that the City would need an overall plan for the property.
    Mr. Janku suspected there would be some kind of a public hearing on the fairgrounds lease occurring before a final decision is made on it. He suggested they think about when that might happen and what the process will be.
    Mr. Loveless made the motion that staff be directed to send the letter, as revised, to the State Department of Economic Development requesting the extension. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mayor Hindman asked about the zoning question on the Nowell's lot. Mr. Boeckmann explained that it is in a planned zone so the issue is whether or not the City will have to submit an amendment to the plan. He indicated staff will have to review it. Mr. Hutton did not think it unreasonable for the group to use the lot as long as it does not interfere with progress on the site.
    Mr. Hutton made the motion that the Farmers Market be allowed to use the parking lot for their market this summer with the stipulation that their activities not interfere with that of the building site preparation. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Ms. Crayton commented that she wanted the driveway at the back of the Nowell's lot closed. Mr. Beck said it is actually a street, but she made a good point. She noted neighborhood residents had asked for the closure last summer. Mr. Patterson thought the staff recommendation had been that the issues with this street be included as part of the development planning for the Nowell's lot. Staff will review the issue with the objective of cutting off through traffic, but develop something in the design of the land around the building. If something is desired before those plans are finished, Mr. Patterson said staff would need some direction. Mayor Hindman asked about a temporary street closure. Mr. Beck indicated staff could look into what needs to be done about a temporary closure.

(D)     Proposed Master Plan for the Development of Stephens Lake Park.
    The Council decided to set the public hearing on March 4, 2002. It was decided they would also discuss it at their work session on the 25th of February.


    Mr. John observed there were deficiencies in the process followed during the Village Square issue. He said procedures are not set in place to adequately ensure that what is passed by the Council becomes fully documented so that if a plan modification is submitted, staff has the proper tools to review the information. He noted the Council thought they closed the loophole five or six years ago on the buildings themselves. The plans before that were being reviewed by Protective Inspection, but reviewed to building codes. When a C-P plan involves more than just the buildings, Mr. John asked that staff review the planned district and the procedures on what needs to be where and who needs to have it to get it done correctly. He noted this problem has lead to a situation where the Council and staff are both at fault. Mr. John acknowledged there are times when staff is made to feel that they need to make policies or policy decisions. However, he has also heard that people have been told by staff members that the Council would never approve of certain things. He did not think that was right, but thought it was partly due to the Council stressing over tough decisions.
    Mr. John made the motion that staff report back as quickly as possible on identifying the needs to ensure planned developments have everything in place so all components within a plan will be properly implemented. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. Coffman asked about the status of discussions with MoDOT regarding the Bluff Creek neighborhood and concerns about a stop light on the new AC near Bluff Creek Drive. Mr. Patterson said he was aware of some of the meetings where concerns have been voiced by several of the commercial businesses on the new Nifong alignment. He reported that MoDOT is concerned the traffic light at Falling Leaf will not function with the new highway alignment. Mr. Patterson indicated the analysis and model study that has been done demonstrated that to be the case. However, he pointed out that the commercial interests do not want to see the light removed. He stated that MoDOT is receptive to a City interest in relocating the traffic signal to the next street to the west (Bluff Creek). Mr. Patterson commented that future meetings have been scheduled and staff would continue to stay informed of the situation. He said staff is in the process of getting a memo to the City Manager as MoDOT has asked for city input.
    Ms. Crayton commented that the new fencing the Housing Authority constructed at the corner of Oak and Worley creates a blind spot for drivers exiting from Oak. She thought it needed to be set back further. Mr. Patterson said staff would look into it.
    As part of the Mohr Subdivision approved at the last meeting, Mr. Janku noted that sidewalks would be constructed on the south side of Texas Avenue. Referring to the Capital Improvement Plan for next year, he wanted to see the sidewalk along Texas finished. Right now, there is a small stretch from Garth to Providence that is open with this new subdivision picking up part of the gap.
    Mr. Janku noted that this Sunday, Fire Station No. 8 will be dedicated. As part of the same ballot issue that funded it's construction, money was set aside to acquire sites in other locations in the City. Mr. Janku asked for an update on the other sites, particularly the one in northwest Columbia.
    Mr. Janku reported that recent discussions about the intersection of Primrose and Stadium have brought back comments about the second, right-hand southbound lane at Primrose being more dedicated as a deceleration right turn in/right turn out lane as opposed to what now begins as two through lanes at the top of the hill. He said there has been a lot of concern expressed about the speed of traffic behind the cars that are attempting to make the right turn out. Mr. Janku inquired as to the possibility of signage or striping to designate the lane as a right turn in/right turn out to correct this situation. He asked staff to determine whether anything could be done.
    Mr. Janku indicated he has received inquiries relating to Council abstentions affecting a protest petition in regards to the number of votes required for passage of the issue. He explained state law governs this and it requires that cities have the petition process in place. Mr. Janku asked for a report on the issue. In addition, a related question came up during the recent discussions with Columbia Commons on how public lands are included in the petition process since much of the property around this site was public property. He questioned whether Columbia's ordinances met the standards of state law.
    Mr. Janku motioned that staff be directed to report back on the above mentioned issues. The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mayor Hindman commented that the alignment planned for East Broadway, from Old Highway 63 to new Highway 63 would be the perfect opportunity to include the entire corridor, from the American Legion on the east to Scott Boulevard on the west, as a pedestrian/bicycle/wheeling route while these big projects are underway. He wanted to see a coordinated long-term plan developed for implementation.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that staff be directed to look at a long-term bicycle/pedestrian/wheeling plan for Broadway, including the new areas. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku.
    Mr. Janku noted that Broadway also intersects with the Hinkson Creek Trail and the Hominy Branch, which would actually open up a lot of northeast Columbia. As the Broadway issue moves forward, he was hopeful that staff would consider how these trails could interconnect with Broadway. Mr. Janku thought it would provide access to a large part of Columbia which is currently not served by trails or ped nets.
    The motion made by Mayor Hindman, seconded by Mr. Janku, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
    In light of the ice storm that affected Kansas City, Mayor Hindman reiterated his suggestion that staff should develop a 40-50 year program to bury, move or bundle overhead power lines. He thought the City should look at a long-term program designed to eliminate overhead lines.
    Mr. John commented on the University's undergrounded system and the fact that it also provides "cleaner" power.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that staff be directed to prepare a report on such a long-term program and what could be done to bury or otherwise eliminate the overhead lines. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. Beck said ultimately the Council would need to determine what annual amount should go into such a project.
    Mayor Hindman commented that he had received a call from an aggressive reporter pertaining to sewer charges being higher than the water charges. Mr. Janku said they had a report on that some time back because someone had complained about it at a meeting. At that time, staff had explained that sewer charges are based on a customer's prior history. In that particular case, the gentleman had a prior history so his rate was adjusted to reflect prior usage.
    Mayor Hindman mentioned a program several cities are working on where they help citizens entitled to earned income child tax credits. He said it is a good service because it helps people who need the money the most and it also puts money back into the local economy. Mayor Hindman asked staff to look into what other cities have done along those lines.
    Mr. Hutton noted an earlier speaker's comments about increased accidents at the corner of Forum and Nifong. He thought this was true probably because of a large increase in traffic volume at the intersection. Mr. Hutton asked Mr. Patterson if he had any data on annual comparisons of traffic volume at that intersection. He would be interested in the ratio between accidents per vehicle number or volume. In addition, if staff had any other ideas as to what might have attributed to the large number of accidents, he would be interested in receiving that information as well. Mr. Patterson responded that he too was curious about the numbers supplied by the speaker. He stated staff could do an analysis to see exactly what is out there. Although, he pointed out that traffic signals are accident generators because they move more vehicles through an intersection quicker. Mayor Hindman said a roundabout would improve the intersection.
    Mr. Loveless thanked the staff for the stop sign report on Stewart and West Boulevard.
    William Woodward, 200 A Unity Drive, reiterated the concern about the fencing at the corner of Oak and Worley. He also reported a large oak tree in the same location that is causing line of vision problems.
    John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, supported Mayor Hindman's ideas relating to long-range planning for Broadway. In regards to the Mayor's request for a report in reference to the undergrounding of power lines, he suggested that when the report is received, the Council should appoint a task force.
    Bill Easley, 705 Cook, spoke about sidewalk issues.
    Henry Lane, 1816 E. Broadway, commented that several people are concerned about the log cabin at Stephens Lake being moved. He asked that it be left where it is.
    The meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m.

                                                                                            Respectfully submitted,
                                                                                            Penny St. Romaine
                                                                                            City Clerk