APRIL 21, 2003

    The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, April 21, 2003, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results: Council Members JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, 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 April 7, 2003, as well as minutes of the special meeting of April 14, 2003, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion by Mr. John and a second by Ms. Crayton.

    Mayor Hindman noted that the scheduled public comment by Mr. Howe had been withdrawn.
    The agenda, as amended, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously on a motion made by Mr. Loveless and a second by Mr. John.



    Mayor Hindman welcomed Brian Ash to his first Council meeting. He also introduced Heather Hampton who is a Rock Bridge High School Senior. Mayor Hindman stated that Heather is an intern working with City Administration.

B74-03     Voluntary annexation of property located on the west side of State Route 763, south of Brown School Road; establishing permanent zoning.
    Mayor Hindman announced that B74-03 had been withdrawn by the applicant.

B96-03     Voluntary annexation of property located on the west side of Providence Outer Roadway, approximately 100 feet south of Corporate Lake Drive; establishing permanent R-3 zoning.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that this 18.85 acre tract is in south central Columbia and the Crestvale Mobile Home Park is located on the property. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval based on two conditions.
    Mr. Dudark explained the conditions as follows: that the easement documents for a cul-de-sac and pedestrian easement be provided to the City; and that the contract purchaser enter into a development agreement providing for the improvements of those facilities so a pedestrian connection would be possible. He said both conditions have been satisfied.
    Mr. Hutton asked if it would be possible to amend the performance contract to add a stipulation that the City's 120-day eviction notice be put into effect for the residents as opposed to the 60-day. Mr. Boeckmann understood that eviction notices had already been given to some of the residents. He thought if the Council approves the annexation request tonight, that City ordinances would apply and the property owner would be required to give the 120-day notice. To ensure that, Mr. Boeckmann said this stipulation could be added to the ordinance. Mr. Hutton indicated that he would make such a motion following public comment.
    Mr. John commented that he spoke to the applicant and he agreed to the 120-days.
    Mayor Hindman noted that an amendment sheet had been prepared regarding the performance contract.
    Mr. John made the motion that B96-03 be amended per the amendment sheet. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mayor Hindman asked about the width of the connecting pedestrian sidewalk. Mr. Dudark thought it was a four-foot walkway and a ten-foot easement. Mayor Hindman believed that to be too narrow. Mr. Dudark noted this walk is not along a street. He pointed out that four-feet is the residential standard.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Pat McKenzie, a resident of Crestvale Mobile Home Park, spoke on behalf of Crestvale tenants. She commented that she received a 60-day eviction notice last week, although she has been paying lot rent for the past 17 years. She thought there were others who have been paying rent that were also sent a 60-day notice. Ms. McKenzie asked that all tenants be given 120-days if the annexation is approved. She asked those present in favor of the 120-days to stand. Approximately 40 people stood.
    James Valdick, a resident of Crestvale Mobile Home Park, thought he had been treated unfairly, as had his mother and other relatives living in the Park. He said they would have no place to go and needed time to figure out what to do next.
    Bill Arendt, 4100 Brown Station, said one could get the impression that he had sent out mass eviction notices for reasons other than nonpayment of rent in the past few weeks. He reported that he gave out two notices and felt there were good reasons for doing so. Mr. Arendt said he was not opposed to granting 120-days, but was concerned about those not paying their rent. He did not think these residents should live in Crestvale free of charge for another 120-days, but he would respect the wishes of the City Council.
    Mayor Hindman noted that the ordinance specifically states that Mr. Arendt would have the right to exercise his normal landlord/tenant rights in the event of non-payment of rent.
    Jay Gebhardt, an engineer with The Civil Group, 1010 Fay, displayed a conceptual plan showing the intentions of the developer if the annexation is approved. Regarding the sidewalk issue, he said four-feet is shown, but he had no problem with a five-foot sidewalk. With the R-3 zoning, Mr. Gebhardt noted the developer could construct 329 units, however, 318 units are shown in townhouse type apartments. He indicated these would be very similar to what is being constructed on Broadway, just west of the D & H Drug Store.
    Mayor Hindman inquired if there would be a sidewalk on outer Providence Road. Mr. Gebhardt said there would be a five-foot sidewalk. Mayor Hindman asked what the apartment buildings would look like. Mr. Gebhardt replied that they are basically two-story, most would be eight unit townhouses where the two bedrooms are upstairs with the living/family room and kitchen downstairs. He related they are not stacked units, but attached horizontally. The buildings will have brick on the lower floor and hearty plank siding on the sides with hip roofs.
    Bill Easley, 705 Cook, asked that the residents of Crestvale Mobile Home Park be given six months to move.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Hutton made the motion to amend B96-03 as follows: add the following language to Section 7, "This zoning is subject to the condition that property owner provide all tenants to be evicted notice of such eviction at least 120 days prior to requiring such tenants to vacate the property due to a change in use of the property. Nothing in this section shall prohibit property owner from evicting a tenant with less than 120 days notice for a violation of a lease or as otherwise provided by law."; and further that Section 1-11.108 be changed to 1-11.106.
    Mayor Hindman asked that the performance contract be amended to include a five-foot sidewalk. The motion made by Mr. Hutton, added to by Mayor Hindman, was seconded by Ms. Crayton and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    B96-03, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B97-03     Rezoning property located at the southwest corner of the Smiley Lane and Providence Road intersection from C-3 to R-3.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this 10.5 acre tract is located in north central Columbia. Both staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Bill Crockett, 2608 N. Stadium, commented that the reason for this down zoning is due to the decrease in commercial demand.
    Mr. Janku asked about the plans for the R-3 tract to the south. Mr. Crockett responded that both this tract and the one to the south will be constructed as one development and the plat is presently being reviewed by staff. Mr. Janku inquired about the total number of units that will be developed on the two tracts. Mr. Crockett reported that 56 units are planned for both tracts.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Janku understood that duplexes could be constructed on the tract in question with the C-3 zoning. Mr. Dudark agreed with that comment, but at a non-residential street standard. The rezoning would apply a residential street standard.
    Mr. John noted discussion at the preliminary plat stage about the cut through on the corner street. He asked if that was being taken care of through the final plat. Mr. Dudark responded that the final plat shows a revision to correct this problem.
    Mr. Janku did not believe duplexes at this location is a good idea, particularly because of the size of the development. However, the City's pyramidal zoning would allow the development of duplex units on the property.
    B97-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B100-03     Authorizing Change Order No. One; approving the engineer's final report; levying special assessments; appropriating funds for the Spruce Drive Improvement Project.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Patterson explained Spruce Drive to be a local residential street approximately 1,200 feet wide. The improvements consisted of constructing a standard residential street at 32 feet in width within the existing 50-foot right-of-way. The project also included a sidewalk along the entire length of the south side of the roadway, landscaping and storm drainage improvements as well as other utility improvements that were necessitated by the project.
    Mr. Patterson reported a public hearing was held on March 6, 2000, with the project being initiated by petition of property owners abutting the street. The total project cost was $280,840.25 with funding to be from capital improvement funds appropriated for this purpose, special assessments against the abutting properties, and from utility funds based on the portion of work that has been done on behalf of those utilities. Under current ordinances, Mr. Patterson explained that abutting property owners along residential streets, outside developing subdivisions, may be tax billed in an amount equivalent to the local pavement portion of the street. That amount is based on the average cost for the two preceding years based on City contracts and construction cost for that work. At the time of the public hearing, he noted a maximum tax bill rate had been set at $30.00 per foot. The actual assessment being proposed is $26.92 per foot. He noted that no through lot relief is applicable to this project. The thirty separate parcels show tax bills ranging from approximately $2,400 to $3,500. Mr. Patterson noted that property owners have the option of paying off the assessments over a ten year period. Approximately $68,785 of the total cost would be generated by tax bills if assessed at the rate proposed.
    Mr. Patterson explained for the Council to determine whether special benefits have accrued to the properties, he suggested they consider that the new curb and guttering will provide for better overall stormwater management, the project improves the appearance and maintainability of the properties, the new driveway approaches provide for improved access to the properties, the sidewalks improve the pedestrian circulation and flow through the neighborhood, and there will be less wear and tear on the vehicles due to the improved street surface. Additionally, the City would be better able to maintain the street as far as snow removal and street cleaning.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Ruth Walters, 2611 Spruce, commented that the street was an improvement, but her property values went down because the City allowed a neighborhood to build behind her house which created stormwater problems. She reported that her patio was lowered, however, she still has a channel of water which attracts mosquitos in the summer. Ms. Walters asked that a water line be placed under the street. The construction company had told her they would reseed, but she said grass would never grow because of the constant water running through her backyard.
    Mr. Ash asked Ms. Walters if she was saying that her problems were created by the street improvements. Ms. Walters said no, it was because of the neighborhood that was allowed to go in behind her home.
    Alexandra Walters, her daughter, clarified that as part of the street improvement, some changes were made to her mothers house (a gutterway). She said the backyard was lowered so the water could flow easier into the gutters. Subsequent rains have eroded her mother's land into the gutter. Ms. Walters reported that the company came back to reseed by putting hay under a netting, which still keeps washing away.
    Mr. Ash asked Mr. Patterson if he was aware of this situation. Mr. Patterson indicated that staff sent letters to property owners asking if they had any remaining problems with the project work. He stated that no responses were received. However, he related that would not keep staff from going back to ensure that all problems are corrected. With regard to re-seeding or establishing regrowth of the grass, Mr. Patterson stated the work is under warranty for a year. Regardless of the cause of Ms. Walters' problems, staff will investigate the situation and report back to the City Manager.
    Mr. Hutton was uncomfortable to vote on the issue until more is known about the problems referred to by Ms. Walters. He asked whether staff would object to this being tabled for two weeks. Mr. Patterson replied there is no pressing time line. Mr. Hutton commented that Ms. Walters' problems may have nothing to do with the street construction, but he would like to know that for sure.
    Mr. Hutton made the motion that B100-03 be tabled to the May 5, 2003, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B102-03     Authorizing Change Order No. One; approving the engineer's final report; levying special assessments; appropriating funds for the 2001 Annual Sidewalk Project.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Patterson explained that last year's annual sidewalk construction program included nine segments of sidewalk. He noted that four segments are subject to tax bills. These include Dorothy Dean Drive, Chapel Hill Road, Portland Street and Smiley Lane.
    Mr. Patterson reported that property owners were given notification of the project and provided ample time to construct sidewalks on their own. A public hearing was held last year at which time the Council authorized the construction and the work was done by contract. Mr. Patterson pointed out there were several other segments of sidewalks where the property owners constructed their walks privately and are, therefore, not included in the construction project.
    Mr. Patterson stated that In August of 2001, a public hearing was held where a special assessment maximum levy was set at $5.00 per square foot. On Dorothy Dean and Portland, he noted the actual construction cost was greater than $5.00 but the City is paying the difference. Mr. Patterson indicated all of these walks are considered to be the total responsibility of property owners and subject to the maximum tax bill.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B102-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B111-03     Authorizing landscape improvements between Route B and the COLT Railroad south of the Brown Station Road intersection.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that the City's 1995 one-quarter cent sale tax includes a level of funding that would provide for landscaping each year. He said a priority list was put together and incorporated in the CIP. The Council asked staff to consider landscaping along Route B. The budgeted amount for this project is $14,000.
    Mr. Janku asked how far south the project would extend from Brown Station Road. Mr. Hood said it extends between Brown Station Road and Mexico Gravel Road. He said the planting would primarily be shrubs, oriental grasses and a few trees. Mr. Janku inquired if staff looked south of Vandiver. Mr. Hood did not believe so, he related staff was looking at what they could get for this amount of funding within the identified area. Mr. Janku asked about the amount of remaining funds. Mr. Hood believed the amount to be $20,396 before this expenditure.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Janku commented that this will be a nice improvement, but also wanted the strip south of Vandiver, towards the Business Loop, landscaped at some point.
    B111-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

PR76-03     Amending the guidelines for the Convention and Visitors Bureau Tourism Development Fund Event and Festival Program.
    The policy resolution was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Ms. Steiner explained a sub-committee from the overall Advisory Board had been formed to meet with festival organizers to address concerns about the process and guidelines for obtaining funding for their events. She said the group did a lot of work and made recommendations which are enumerated in the Council memo.
    Rod Gelatt, 1020 LaGrange Court, Advisory Board member, reported the group has tried to refine and improve the overall process. He reviewed the proposed changes. The first recommendation was to establish a $15,000 funding cap for any individual festival or event. The next change would eliminate the requirement to include the cost of advertising in applications submitted for funds. Instead, the C & VB will promote festivals and events through an extensive radio and print campaign. The third recommendation is that the Board will contract for professional surveys for each festival to get a better handle on the public's response to the various festivals and whether they are increasing overnight visitation. The last change would refine the scoring process by ensuring a more thorough review to establish an objective and equitable assessment of each application. Mr. Gelatt stated that the Board very much supports the funding of festivals and events as they consider them to be important to Columbia's tourism development. Although, the Board needs a better way to monitor the impact that funding has on the ability of festivals and events to generate more tourism and overnight stays.
    Mr. Janku asked about funding above $200,000. Ms. Steiner replied the Tourism Development Fund was created for the promotion/enhancement/development of festivals and events and attractions. She said that portion of the funds deals exclusively with festivals and events. Any money not allocated for this portion of the fund goes into a separate fund and will be used for attraction development or capital projects. Ms. Steiner indicated that this accrual has averaged about $125,000 for the last four years. Mr. Janku referred to the $20,000 reserve and understood it would come from the initial $200,000; therefore, a total of $180,000 in funding would actually be available. Ms. Steiner agreed with that assessment and said that the Board believes the professional surveying will be very important to determine the impact the festivals and events have on Columbia. She noted the festival/event coordinators can include their own questions in the surveys. Mr. Gelatt added that the $180,000 that would be left would be about the same as what was allocated last year.
    Carrie Gartner, spoke on behalf of the Central Columbia Association, 11 S. Tenth Street. She stated this organization supports several of the recommendations outlined, specifically the ones designed to make the process more objective. She said they do have serious concerns about the $15,000 cap per event. Ms. Gartner reported the Advisory Board has criteria which defines the various events. She maintained that based on this criteria some groups can submit multiple applications, whereas others are prohibited from doing so. This results in some organizations being able to circumvent the cap. The Central Columbia Association suggests setting aside a percentage of the total funding in separate accounts - one for festivals and one for events. Ms. Gartner stated the end result of doing such would mean that small, volunteer run festivals would not be competing head-to-head with large sporting events. It would also ensure that a certain amount of funding will actually be reserved for festivals. Breaking it down that way would also ensure that the Columbia tourism industry is varied and that there is a wide range of activities for people to participate in when they come to town.
    Mayor Hindman asked how much funding the Twilight Festival has received over the years. Ms. Gartner responded they received $15,000 in the first year, $10,000 the next year, and this coming year they received $9,000. Mayor Hindman questioned if this funding was for both the spring and fall festivals. Ms. Gartner indicated it was for all eight festivals. Mayor Hindman inquired if the group had been told they had to combine the spring and fall festivals. Ms. Gartner replied that had never come up until just recently at the meetings held with the Advisory Board regarding the new guidelines. She had specifically asked how Twilight Festivals could submit applications. She was told that Twilight Festivals should submit one application. Mayor Hindman noted that one of the changes is that the Board would be paying for advertising. He asked if any calculations had been made with respect to how valuable that might be. Ms. Gartner said they spent about 10% of their budget last year on advertising.
    Mr. Loveless asked if the different groups could still spend grant money on advertising. Mr. Gelatt replied that the budget request has to show an itemized listing of expenses. He said the groups are no longer required to include an advertising component. If the organization wants to spend their own money to advertise in addition to what is spent by C &VB, Mr. Gelatt said that would be acceptable.
    Mr. Hutton wondered how C &VB would determine how much money to spend on advertising. Ms. Steiner explained that they have an approximate $70,000 to be used in a three-state radio advertising campaign plan. She stated this would include the various festival and events through the fall. Last year they spent about $40,000 in print advertising for festivals and events. This would be an expanded campaign. Mr. Hutton did not feel advertising in a three-state area for the Twilight Festival made much sense. Ms. Steiner responded that the Bureau is trying to generate activity from outside the area and create interest in the market. She reported the advertisement would include information about the Katy Trail and downtown area. She said then there could be another spot that might just refer to the Twilight Festival.
    Mayor Hindman asked about local advertising for the Twilight Festivals. Ms. Steiner said they advertised in the Tribune last year and placed ads in a Mid-Missouri travel magazine. She noted they do not normally place ads locally as she thought that was something the Twilight Festival's local media sponsors handle. She stated that most festivals have a local television, newspaper, or radio sponsor. Ms. Steiner related that C & VB's focus needs to be on reaching people outside the market.
    Mr. Janku requested that Ms. Steiner address the policy in regard to multiple events. Ms. Steiner reported that the Board struggled with the definition of an event and multiple application issue. She said they finally decided it was more a matter of the changes that should be made in the process and not so much the multiple application issue. Ms. Steiner indicated that anyone can submit multiple applications. She believed it was stated that an event submitted a multiple application. She clarified that an organization submitted applications for different events. Ms. Steiner reiterated that anyone can submit multiple applications for different events and they all will be judged on individual merit based on the guidelines. She agreed that the process needs to be tightened up, and said they had worked very hard to do just that.
    Mr. Gelatt pointed out that $1,500 would be allocated from the Tourism Development fund for each applicant to contract for professional surveys to find out where people are coming from and whether it results in overnight visitation. He said that would give them a better data base in future years to gauge whether these events and festivals are indeed generating overnight visitation.
    Ms. Crayton noted that the guide did not contain events she was familiar with. Ms. Steiner explained that many events in the City do not make the guide. She said they have a calendar of events and an on-line calendar that touch on the hundreds of one or two-day events that take place in Columbia. Ms. Steiner suggested that Ms. Crayton let her office know about the events she was referring to so they can be included in the Bureau's informational venues.
    Greg Ahrens, 1504 Sylvan, a member of the First Night Board, explained they sponsor the only sanctioned foot race in the United States on New Year's Eve. He said they get a lot of people from different states and knew the race generated a lot of overnight stays. He supported the Bureau's advertising for the various events as long as it is applied equitably.
    Mr. John had no general problem with changing the guidelines, but he was a bit concerned about groups not bringing in a certain amount of overnight stays might not receive any funding. He did not want the focus to be on overnight stays to the point that the generalized idea of the tax -- to support festivals and events -- is lost.
    Mayor Hindman agreed with Mr. John and said overnight stays should be one criteria, but another thing is to ensure that we are recognized for our festivals and to make it more appealing to come to Columbia than to go elsewhere in the state. He thought the guidelines made a lot of sense, but felt in judging and funding these events, the overall community interest in them must also be taken into consideration.
    Mr. Hutton asked if he understood that Ms. Steiner's group was going to contract for the professional surveys during each event. Ms. Steiner said that was correct.
    Mr. Loveless inquired how the Bureau could ensure equitable advertising for each event. Ms. Steiner explained that the radio plan is very specific to the events themselves.
    The vote on PR76-03 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Policy resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R91-03     Approving amendments to the FY 2003 Action Plan.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that in March the City received notification of our allocation for the 2003 HOME and CDBG programs. He reported that HOME funding is $93,304 above what was expected while CDBG funding is $25,000 less. He also noted that money was left over from some projects and can now be reallocated. Mr. Beck stated of the funds being proposed for reallocation, staff suggests that $290,000 in additional CDBG funds be allocated to the Health Facility so those increased costs could be addressed. It is suggested that $96,000 of HOME funds be made available for housing units, primarily to the Boone County Group Home.
    Regarding the Garth/Business Loop crossing, Mr. Janku noted that the suggestion was that if it is not funded out of CDBG funds, that it could be funded out of unobligated 2002 sidewalk funds. He asked how the Council could make that happen. Mr. Dudark thought a list of projects would have to be submitted to the Council for the use of those funds. He believed there to be $75,000 available.
    Mr. Janku questioned where the $41,000 in funding proposed to be allocated to the Health Facility would come from, and whether the public improvement fund might be one source. Mr. Beck reported the City sold some bonds for the study of the Daniel Boone Building and for other public building work. Some of the funding for the Health Facility is from those special obligation bonds. Mr. Janku wondered if more than $41,000 could be funded if the Council elected to defer some projects. He noted there is $73,000 in left over contingency HOME funds. He inquired if it would be possible to free up some of the CDBG funds that are set aside for home ownership assistance since HOME funds can also fund that or housing rehabilitation projects. Mr. Dudark responded that home ownership assistance funds are being placed in the HOME account, but they have different requirements. He indicated there is $25,000 remaining to transition from the CDBG to the HOME Program. In the future, Mr. Dudark said staff plans on using HOME funds almost exclusively for home ownership assistance. He explained there has to be a deed of trust recorded when you use HOME funds and they have notified people of the transition period to switch over from CDBG to HOME funds. For that reason, staff did not want to implement that immediately.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Art Dyer, 2723 Pine Drive, Chairman of the Board of The Intersection, explained they are a non-religious charitable organization registered with the IRS as a 501 C (3) corporation with a mission of community development. He explained that Grace Covenant Church currently meets in property adjacent to the site of The Intersection, and a year from now they are hoping to convert that space into a neighborhood grocery store. At that time, The Intersection building will become the meeting place for Grace Covenant Church. The Church will be renting space from The Intersection until they have their own sanctuary built on their property at Garth and Sexton. The agreement The Intersection has with the state is to provide activities Monday through Friday. Mr. Dyer reported that over 110 separate individuals have donated over 700 hours of time to build the Center. He explained that the Community Development Commission voted 6-1 to give The Intersection their full request for CDBG funding. He said The Intersection could use any unprogramed money left over from previous years.
    Dana Battison, 7200 E. Highway WW, spoke on behalf of The Intersection. She noted that because of poor infrastructure at the corner of Garth and Sexton, The Intersection will need to replace the City's water line so that water pressure will be adequate to support fire plugs. The sidewalk will also have to be dug up since the water line is under such. Ms. Battison reported that The Intersection will be located in a low income neighborhood. Their goal is to bring as much vitality, life and interest to the area as possible. She suggested the Council reallocate the public infrastructure money from the Third and Fourth Avenue overage to The Intersection to be used to replace the water line. The replacement line would not just benefit her organization, it would allow for the installation of four fire plugs that would be placed on Sexton Road to the benefit of Ridgeway School. Ms. Battison noted that the sidewalk in this area is in very poor condition and contains gaps. She asked that unallocated sidewalk funds be used to replace the walk in this area. Ms. Battison pointed out that they have raised over $191,000 in 14 months in commitments, materials and cash donations to build their building. She said it was all privately funded, they received no government funding whatsoever. They now also have professional services that must be paid for and asked if there was any way that some of the capital funds they requested last spring could be reallocated. Ms. Battison reported they requested $50,000 toward the building, which is the amount also needed for professional services. Any portion that could be reallocated would be appreciated.
    James Peece, 301A Benton, said there was no need to cooperate with any type of development in this area.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Janku asked if the waterline could be replaced without tearing up the sidewalk. Mr. Patterson understood that it would tear up the sidewalk which is not in good condition to begin with. Mayor Hindman asked about the clay waterline and whether it was defective. Mr. Malon suspected it could be possible to put in a different water line rather than abandoning the one under the sidewalk. One way or the other, he said the waterline would have to be replaced. Mr. Malon related that his department has no plans to replace the line at this point, but because of this development, he understood the Fire Department is requesting that the fire hydrants be installed. In order to meet fire flow requirements to feed the hydrants, the water line would have to be increased. Mr. Malon spoke about the City's policy of those requesting the service have to pay for the upgrade.
    Mr. Hutton felt the Fire Department should pay for the hydrants. Mr. Loveless agreed. Mr. Hutton thought the basic question was the cause of the fire hydrant request, is it simply to provide fire coverage for this development or is it of benefit to the entire neighborhood. Mr. Janku noted that Oak Towers is across the street. Mr. Loveless pointed out that Ridgeway School is also nearby. Mr. Janku thought there was money in the ballot issue for reconstruction in older parts of town. Mr. Malon said there is approximately $140,000 left in the bond fund. The original item was to replace four-inch mains in the downtown area, and not all of them have been done yet.
    Ms. Crayton asked if there was adequate pressure for Oak Towers. Mr. Malon believed there to be adequate fire protection around Oak Towers from the time it was built. He said the Fire Department is asking that hydrants be added for this additional development. Mr. Beck said when someone comes in for a building permit for a change of use from single family to multi-family, they cannot obtain a permit until certain fire flows and standards are met. He said there is adequate pressure for what is there presently, but probably not for an assembly building.
    Mr. Janku asked if this was something required or just suggested by the Fire Department. Mr. Dudark replied that the Fire Department had said there needs to be 1,500 gallons per minute before the building could be occupied for fire protection purposes.
    Mayor Hindman said The Intersection was very appealing to the Council as a project because it was going to provide a community recreation center, after school programs, etc. He said the group has done well and raised a considerable amount of money. Mayor Hindman felt the City as a whole would benefit from this project. He thought it would be an appropriate use of CDBG money.
    Mr. Janku asked about tearing up the sidewalk to replace the water main. Mr. Malon said it could be difficult to dig a trench big enough to put in a good sized water main without damaging the sidewalk and staying within the right-of-way. Mayor Hindman thought The Intersection might be willing to give extra right-of-way for that purpose. Mr. Malon said that would probably work.
    At this time there was a discussion about which funds to reallocate and for which projects.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that R90-03 be amended by taking the $23,000 for the waterline out of the contingency fund, that $25,000 for the sidewalk, if needed, come out of the Ward 1 Sidewalk Improvements, and then reduce the Health Facility funds from $290,000 to $270,000 in order to fund The Intersection project request. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. Janku ascertained that the Garth/Business Loop project could come out of the 2002 sidewalk funds.
    The vote on R91-03, as amended, was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

B99-03     Approving the final plat of Pratt's Subdivision, Plat 4, a replat of part of Lot 6 of Pratt's Addition.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mayor Hindman noted a request to table this issue.
    Mr. Loveless made the motion that B99-03 be tabled to the May 5, 2003, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B103-03     Amending Chapter 24 of the City Code as it relates to depositing dirt and other material on city streets and sidewalks.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Patterson explained the purpose of this recommended amendment is to give staff another tool to try to deal with mud being brought out onto the streets from construction sites. Under the current ordinance, there are provisions where staff can declare it a safety hazard and City crews can be sent out to clean it up. But there is nothing to keep it from happening again an hour after the crew is gone. Mr. Patterson reported that it became a real problem this spring on Old 63 where the apartments were being built. He commented that this amendment would give the City the authority to issue stop work orders on construction projects until action is taken to mitigate the mud. He noted that could be done by putting down gravel pads or a foundation of some type before the equipment goes out onto the street.
    Mr. Hutton asked if someone doing fill work on a property is regulated by a land disturbance permit. Mr. Patterson replied that it is usually regulated by a clean fill permit that governs erosion and runoff. Mr. Hutton understood it would also regulate mud on the street. Mr. Patterson replied affirmatively.
    Mr. Ash asked if the City would still have the option of cleaning the street up and charging for the cleanup. Mr. Patterson said we would, this would simply be an additional tool in the event of no response. Mr. Ash questioned if there would be a number of times before a stop work order would be issued. Under current policy, Mr. Patterson explained that notification is hand-delivered. If staff gets a prompt response to it, no further action is taken. A stop work order would be issued as a last resort.
    B103-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B112-03     Amending various chapters of the City Code pertaining to city boards and commissions.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that late last year the attendance provisions were amended for three commissions. This bill would make similar changes to ordinances governing other boards and commissions.
    Mr. John asked if this would pretty well cover all of the other boards and commissions. Mr. Boeckmann thought it covered all except the fire and police pension boards. He indicated that staff is making comprehensive changes to those chapters and this same change will be made to those boards before too long.
    B112-03 was given reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, 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.

B98-03       Approving the final plat of Keene Estates, Plat No. 17.
B101-03     Authorizing Change Order No. One; approving the engineer's final report for the Park de Ville and Ash Street sidewalk project.
B104-03    Calling for bids for construction of the MC-6 Sewer Extension, an 80-acre point sanitary sewer serving The Cascades Subdivision.
B105-03     Amending Chapter 27 of the City Code relating to the electric thermal storage rates.
B106-03     Authorizing Change Order No. Two to the contract for construction of a water storage reservoir and high service pump station.
B107-03     Confirming the contract of Combs Construction Company, Inc. for construction of water main along Oakland Gravel Road from Starke Lane to Gregory Heights Subdivision.
B108-03     Accepting easements for water and electric utility purposes.
B109-03     Accepting a grant from the State Emergency Management Agency to establish a Citizen Corps; appropriating funds.
B110-03    Authorizing an agreement with the Missouri State Safety Center for the Missouri Police chiefs Association Step Grant; appropriating funds.
B113-03     Authorizing an agreement with Boone County and Boone Electric Cooperative for support of the geographic information system.
R77-03       Setting a public hearing: improvements to the Antimi Sports Complex.
R78-03       Setting a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property located on the north side of St. Charles Road, approximately 100 feet east of Upland Creek Road.
R79-03       Setting a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property located on both sides of Teton Drive, on the south side of Yosemite Avenue.
R80-03       Setting a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property located on both sides of Bethany Drive, east of Scott Boulevard.
R81-03       Setting a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property located on the northwest corner of Wyatt Lane and Opal Drive.
R82-03       Setting a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property located on the southwest corner of St. Charles Road and Grace Lane.
R83-03       Setting a public hearing: replacement of the Water Distribution Operations Building and related improvements.
R84-03       Consenting to an assignment of the lease agreement for PCS tower space at City Fire Station 6.
R85-03       Authorizing application to the Missouri Department of Social Services for an Emergency Shelter Grant.
R86-03       Renewing agreements with the Missouri Department of Corrections to provide tuberculosis screening, Hepatitis B and influenza vaccinations.
R87-03       Renewing an agreement with The Curators of the University of Missouri for undergraduate nursing student clinical opportunities.
R88-03       Amending existing city contracts with health and welfare benefit providers to comply with the Federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act privacy rules.
R89-03       Transferring funds from Public Works to Water & Light for extension of water line along Peabody Road; transferring fixed asset from Public Works to Water & Light.

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

R90-03     Authorizing an agreement with Black & Veatch Corporation for engineering services for the Sanitary Sewer Utility Master Plan, Flow Monitoring and Centrifuge Procurement.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that a committee interviewed consultants after proposals were taken. He asked Mr. Patterson to explain the three part engineering program.
    Mr. Patterson reported the last time a major study of the system, including infiltration inflow monitoring, was performed in the late 70's. Since then, the Facility Plan has been amended several times, but this particular plan is what they hope will be the blueprint for the next 20 years. He said it will provide direction on wastewater treatment and system expansion, funding options and probable costs. Mr. Patterson commented the Master Plan would also provide staff with a tool which will be very essential to Columbia in the future to provide a model to properly size and anticipate the impact of growth on the system in the City's treatment facilities. He mentioned that these parts are somewhat interdependent upon progress in that the Master Plan will address the preferred options and alternatives for wastewater treatment.
    Mr. Patterson reported the flow monitoring in the first part of the project will be done on the City's larger diameter sewers in order to determine the design parameters for wastewater treatment facility improvements, as well as calibrating the hydraulic model of the sewer system. The second phase will include additional flow monitoring so the consultant can make the hydraulic model more accurate and detailed. A second supplemental flow monitoring period will target areas in the sewer system that were identified as potential problem areas. Mr. Patterson indicated that part three of this project consists of professional engineering services associated with the procurement of a centrifuge. He noted that one centrifuge replacement has been budgeted for, but staff thought it should be held up until the Master Study is done to determine the options of whether an existing facility should be upgraded, a new treatment plant should be built, or a treatment plant should be upgraded and built in a separate location. Assuming the option will include upgrading, staff would then proceed with procurement of the sludge-thickening centrifuge. Mr. Patterson stated that each part has a separate task that follows one another and the contractor will not proceed without direction from the City.
    James Peece, 301A Benton, commented that he did not like it.
    B90-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

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

B114-03     Approving the final plat of Auburn Hills, Plat 3.
B115-03     Approving the final plat of Pippen Place, Plat 1.
B116-03     Approving the final plat of The Highlands, Plat 18, a replat of Lot 1703 of The Highlands, Plat 17.
B117-03     Approving the Auburn Hills Townhouses PUD Site Plan.
B118-03     Approving the Broadway Shops C-P Development Plan.
B119-03     Rezoning property located east of Hanover Boulevard, at the eastern terminus of Hidden Creek Court from R-1 to R-2.
B120-03     Amending Chapter 29 of the City Code as it relates to laboratories.
B121-03     Calling for bids for the construction of Heather Lane from Broadway north to the existing terminus south of Ash Street.
B122-03     Accepting privately constructed streets for public use and maintenance.
B123-03     Authorizing a right of use permit with The Curators of the University of Missouri to allow work within the Hitt Street and Rollins Street rights-of-way.
B124-03     Authorizing an agreement with Dana Corporation for backup generator service: appropriating funds.
B125-03     Calling for bids for the replacement of the Water Distribution Operations Building and related improvements.
B126-03     Authorizing an easement agreement on behalf of the City with Union Electric Company.
B127-03     Accepting a deed of dedication from Wilbur and Kim Gilmore.
B128-03     Accepting a deed of dedication; approving the engineer's final report; authorizing payment of differential costs for construction of water main serving Timberlane Subdivision, Plat 5.
B129-03     Appropriating fire equipment sale proceed funds and sales tax funds for the purchase of a ladder truck.
B130-03     Amending Chapter 22 of the City Code as it relates to deferred tax bills for sanitary sewer projects.
B131-02     Authorizing improvements to the Antimi Sports Complex.
B132-03     Authorizing an amendment to the lease for real property at Nifong Park to the Boone County Historical Society.

(A)     Inter-department Transfer of Funds.
    Report accepted.

(B)     Active Living by Design.
    Mr. Beck explained that this is a grant the PedNet Coalition is pursuing from the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation. He indicated that staff will need direction from the Council on whether to pursue an agreement with PedNet as it relates to City departmental coordination with this group.
    Mayor Hindman believed this is a great opportunity for the City of Columbia and said it actually capitalizes on the idea to encourage activity within the community.
    Mayor Hindman made a motion for the Council's endorsement of the program and directed staff to work on becoming an active, integral partner in this program. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(C)     Police Consultant Report.
    Mr. Beck explained that earlier this month Chief Boehm made a presentation to the Council on the department's strategic plan and the consultant's report. If the Council does not wish to discuss the plan further, Mr. Beck said his intention is to use the plan as a guide when future budgets are presented to the City Council. Each year the Council will have the opportunity to see how staff is doing in reference to the funding of such. It will also be used as a guide for police department requests during the budget process.
    Mr. John commented that the plan had been well-presented and thought the Council was advised on what the staffing situation is as well as understanding the policies and procedures. He suggested the Council accept the report and expect it to be used in the future. The Council agreed.
    Report accepted.

(D)     South Providence Outer Roadway Sidewalk - Nifong Boulevard to Southampton Drive.
    Mr. Beck reported the estimated cost to construct a five-foot sidewalk for a distance of approximately 3,150 feet, and a four-foot sidewalk for 100 feet is $324,000. He explained the policy as to who pays for sidewalks. It was felt the 50/50 sharing option would be applicable in this case. He needed direction from the Council as to whether they would like to further consider the project and have it brought in with the five-year CIP which would be discussed at the Council Retreat.
    Mayor Hindman asked if the development north of Rock Bridge would have to put in sidewalks under present policy. Mr. Patterson said they would unless there were specific variances granted by the Council at the time of platting that relieved the developer of that responsibility. If staff is directed to proceed with construction of sidewalks, the first part of the process would be to notify property owners and then allow them the opportunity to construct it themselves.
    Mr. Loveless asked why this sidewalk was so expensive. Mr. Patterson explained that a lot of money was included for the extension of storm drainage pipes and culverts. He also noted the need for retaining structures because of sloping at the south end in order to connect to the Southampton sidewalk.
    Mayor Hindman pointed out the students also referred to the danger of bicycling in this area. He did not think the sidewalks would solve this problem. He suggested a pedway that would go between the outer road and Providence Road. Mr. Patterson thought that was part of the Major Pedway Program. He said this project would actually be supplementary to that. His understanding was they were going to try to bring up a combined use trail in the area in between. Mayor Hindman thought that might be considerably cheaper, although he said it would be preferable to have both.
    Mr. John pointed out the School District would be most impacted by this proposed project due to the City's 50/50 building policy. He thought we should let them know what their cost might be before going much further. Mayor Hindman commented that all but one School Board member had signed the petition. Mr. John indicated those members did not know what the sidewalk would cost them at that time.
    Mr. Loveless preferred to building one or the other, a pedway or sidewalks. He would like to see cost estimates for the pedway.
    Mr. Ash asked if the property owners would also share in the 50/50 cost of a pedway. Mayor Hindman replied the City would probably pay the entire cost of a pedway, but there probably would not be the same drainage problems and driveway cuts. Mr. Ash wondered if the commercial properties would have to pay for their part of the sidewalk. It was ascertained that this would depend on what the policy was when the platting was done, these owners could possibly be responsible for the entire cost of the walk abutting their property.
    Mayor Hindman suggested there may be some sort of safety funds available from the Department of Transportation as Providence is a state road which goes by a high school where a student has to walk in the ditch to get to school. Mr. Beck indicated that staff could look into it.
    Mr. Loveless made the motion that the Council receive cost estimates on an eight-foot pedway for comparison purposes with the sidewalks. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(E)     Commercial Use of Religious Facility Parking Lots.
    Mr. Beck asked if the Council preferred a work session on this issue or whether they wanted to have the Planning and Zoning Commission work on some changes. Mr. Janku felt the Council should discuss it at a work session.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that the issue be scheduled for a work session. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(F)     Revisions to Planned Zoning District Regulations.
    Mr. Dudark said the Commission offered suggestions on how some things could be improved for both the City and developers in regard to C-P, O-P, M-R and the new M-P planned districts. These relate to the statement of intent at the time of the zoning application and having some general guidelines. He said that would then be used for the preparation of some of the site plans for individual parcels or lots within the development. Mr. Dudark outlined the report.
    Mr. John thought the disparity between a planned development and an open zoned development has always made it hard to convince a person of the value for such. By narrowing the gap and allowing the planned development to come forward more quickly and efficiently, he thought would hopefully open up the process a bit. With the PUD, the statement of intent has allowed them to be used fairly regularly and successfully. Mr. John recommended asking the Commission to proceed.
    Mr. Janku was concerned about deferring a stormwater plan until after the Council has approved the zoning. He noted that the Public Works Department would be responsible for basically making the final decision. He said stormwater has always been a major concern to the public and residents want to be assured that the plan is going to work. Mayor Hindman replied that the other side to that is developers not requesting planned zoning. Mr. John said there probably is not a person on the Council that can look at a stormwater plan and know if it is going to work. He said it is the engineers in Public Works that know whether or not it is going to work. He saw the only difference as not having a piece of paper to hold up when the public is there to ask about it. Mr. Janku understood that from the technical standpoint, but he was talking about the atmosphere and the confidence level in knowing that things are going to work. He said if the engineers have looked at it and they have an answer, it is better to tell the people then. Mr. John said when the plan comes through for the buildings, with the specific lots and buildings being specified, then all of those plans will have to be in place. Until then, he said they are not creating traffic, stormwater and other issues. He said that is when the staff will have to tell them the plans are approved. Mr. Janku said he would at least like to know if the plans are technically feasible. Mr. John felt the risk would be higher on the property owner because if they say they are going to do something and there is no technical way for them to do it, they will be stuck with an unbuildable lot.
    Mayor Hindman said there has been a huge reluctance from the development community to ask for planned zoning. If this is the preference of the Council, then the City needs a system acceptable to all the interests involved.
    Mr. Janku indicted he would like to see something that allows a developer to accept a restriction on his uses. He thought most people, when hearing about commercial zoning, were concerned about uses. If a developer would voluntarily restrict his uses and then go forward applying the regular standards that the City has come up with, i.e., landscaping, signage, etc. That would make it easy for them. Mr. John said he would go with that -- that would be 100% better. Mayor Hindman asked about the off-premise improvements the City needs. Mr. Janku related that he is proposing something in between a fully planned zone and open zoning. He thought the off-site issues were what Mr. Dudark was talking about strengthening.
    Mr. John made the motion that the issue be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission per the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Ms. Crayton and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(G)     Fourth Grade Swimming Program.
    Mr. Beck noted the program would cost between $30,000 and $40,000. He said the question is whether or not the Council wants to consider this during budget discussions. Before adding programs that need to be subsidized, he suggested the staff would need to review it carefully.
    Mr. Ash asked about the difficulty mentioned about scheduling part-time help. He wondered if the classes could be staggered so that someone would be there all day giving swimming lessons. Mr. Hood said that would be a possibility if the program is totally revamped. The report before the Council was based on what the school district currently offers in that each elementary school is kept on a two week schedule of their own. Mr. Hood pointed out that most of his department's instructors and life guards are full-time students themselves -- either high school or college students. For them to be available for an entire day would be improbable. Mr. Ash noted that the schools are set up to ship the students around, and suggested letting them figure out how to get the kids to the ARC and then let us teach them how to swim when they get there. If anything, he said this could be used as a marketing tool in recruiting future ARC members.
    Mr. John noted that the teachers have to be fully certified to teach elementary school. He asked if the budget figures took that into consideration. Mr. Hutton said it could be that the classroom teacher could accompany the students and provide supervision.
    Mayor Hindman thought staff should be asked to keep their eye on this program when considering next year's budget.
    Mr. Loveless pointed out that this is a school program and he is not so sure it should be the City's responsibility to subsidize a school swimming program. He agreed it is a desirable thing for every youngster to learn how to swim, but there are a lot of other places the City could spend the same amount in our own recreational programming. If the school could rework the scheduling so that the cost to the City would come down considerably, Mr. Loveless said he would be happy to entertain that thought.
    Mayor Hindman argued the Council should at least consider it for budgeting. He asked what would happen if Parks and Recreation decided they should try to give swimming lessons for survival type swimming. Mr. Hood said the schools offer the program to all the fourth graders and some of them have fairly high level swimming skills while some have absolutely no swimming skills. He said the goal is to get those with no swimming skills to at least have the basic survival skills. Those that are already reasonably talented swimmers will work on improving their skills. Mayor Hindman thought that teaching kids basic survival skills is a worthy community goal and working with the school would be the only way that could be done.
    Mr. Janku suggested there might be other entities that might want to make private donations to such a program.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that staff be directed to consider the program for budget purposes, looking at various options and asking the school district if they are interested in contributing at all. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(H)     Boone County Regional Sewer District - Request for Connection Agreement.
    Mr. Beck explained the Regional Sewer District has requested a sewer connection for customers currently served by a small treatment plant in Boone Industrial Park. The companies are outside the City limits, but contiguous to the City. Under City policy, they would have to be given a waiver to allow their connection without being annexed. Mr. Beck thought the Council may want to add the issue to their work session schedule. He said there has also been a request that the Regional Sewer District enter into a territorial agreement.
    Mr. Loveless asked if the City were to permit this, whether each of the individual companies would remain County rate payers. Mr. Patterson responded they would remain in the County and would also remain Sewer District customers. Mr. Loveless asked if the City would be reimbursed by the District. Mr. Patterson replied that was correct. Mr. Loveless questioned if the rate would be about the same. Mr. Patterson explained that the City has a wholesale rate we have used as a basis for the Sewer District contracts which is at 80% of what the existing City charge is. He said it is based on what staff calculated the City's cost to be for the trunk systems and the capacity at the treatment plant, overhead and administration. Mr. Patterson reported all that was taken out was the City's collection maintenance costs for the collection system itself -- staff was trying to isolate the City's actual cost for treating the wastewater.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that the issue be placed on the work session agenda.
    Skip Elkin, Boone County Commissioner and Vice-Chair of the Regional Sewer District Board, explained that they have had two requests for building permits in the past few months to expand businesses, one of them very significant that could add dozens of jobs to the community. He said Boone County has denied the applications because they do not have sewer capacity. Mr. Elkin remarked that they do not feel it is a wise use of public money to build or expand a plant when a City sewer trunk line is less than 25 feet away from their existing plant. He said there is a sewer line that was extended within 50 feet of the Gas Light Acres plant further north. Mr. Elkin agreed with the City Manager's recommendation that this be brought forward to a work session. He respectfully requested that the work session be scheduled as soon as possible because the private businesses are waiting to see what happens. Mr. Elkin pointed out that the Sewer District's mission is to eliminate discharge points. He said they are not looking for a territorial agreement, only a standardized connection agreement with their existing facilities. It is important that they maintain their customer base because they have 54 facilities throughout the county, which includes the City of Hallsville, Rocheport and the City of Hartsburg.
    For the work session, Mr. Ash said he would like to see the other situations where the City has made exceptions and what the general thought process is when exceptions are made.
    The motion to place the item on the work session schedule, made by Mayor Hindman, was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(I)     Philips Property.
    Mr. Beck gave an overview of his interim report. He pointed out that Mr. Sapp is interested in developing an environmentally sound development and a very attractive addition to the community.
    Mayor Hindman noted time pressure on this issue and asked that it be put on the work session schedule.

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

Campbell, Rex, 905 Edgewood, Ward 4 - term to expire 5/1/08

Cecil, Gregory A., 1700 Oak Cliff Place, Ward 4 - term to expire 5/16/07
Shapiro, Nicholas J., 4013 Newport, Ward 5 - term to expire 5/16/07

Ellis, Tonya King, 1107 Park De Ville Place, Ward 2 - term to expire 4/1/06

Sublette, Nancy J., 4810 St. Charles Road, County - term to expire 9/1/03

Doyle, Mary Kaye, 1006 W. Rollins, Ward 4 - term to expire 9/1/03

Battle, Eliot F., 2200 W. Rollins, Ward 4 - term to expire 9/30/03

    Mr. Janku noted a previous report on Foreign Trade Zones which recommended not pursuing the issue. He asked that another look be taken as he understood it facilitates companies doing business with foreign countries. He stated Columbia has a lot of new business that participate in foreign trade. He pointed out that Springfield has one at their airport and thought it might help our airport if we had one.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that staff be directed to report back on whether or not we should develop a foreign trade zone for Columbia. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.

    Mr. Hutton commented that this was the longest meeting the Council has had for there to be absolutely nothing on the agenda.

    Mr. Loveless was contacted by a constituent regarding tractor trailers going down the Stadium hill and using their "Jake brakes". He understood some cities have ordinances against using dynamic braking devices. Mr. Hutton said he can hear this noise off of I-70 as well. Mr. Loveless asked the staff to investigate the issue and report back.

    Mr. Loveless referred to the last meeting when a remark had been made about stale zoning. He said there was a controversial issue before them regarding a 20-year old plus zoning that should never have remained in place. He thought it would be advantageous for Columbia to know how other cities deal with a zoning put in place that is not used until many years later. The zoning may have been appropriate at one time, but not now. Mr. Loveless suggested perhaps there should be a sunset clause on zoning and if an R-3 piece of property is not developed within a certain period of time, it reverts to R-1 or something of that nature. Mr. Boeckmann interjected that under state statutes, zoning changes require a public hearing. He reported there cannot be reverter clauses in zoning ordinances. Mr. Loveless asked if there was anyway to deal with the issue. Mr. Boeckmann responded the Council could down zone the properties. Mr. Hutton commented that they would need a watch dog group of staff members to track them after "x" number of years. Mayor Hindman noted that the Council just received a set of maps showing the R-3 areas. He suggested they take the issue up at a work session. Mr. John said a Council enforced down zoning could be considered a taking. Mayor Hindman disagreed.

    Pat Wynd, 707 W. Worley, spoke about "cosmetic problems" in the First Ward. The problems she reported on included trash out early, cars parked on lawns, unlicensed vehicles, and cars parked over sidewalks.
    Mayor Hindman explained that the procedure for enforcement is complaint driven. Mr. Janku clarified that violations associated with unlicensed vehicles are enforced by the Police Department, but the Protective Inspection division enforces the violations of cars parked on lawns. He acknowledged that it is difficult for citizens to determine which department to call. Mr. Janku suggested Ms. Wynd contact the City Manager's Office so they could follow-up with a report back to the Council.

    The meeting adjourned at 11:25 p.m.

                                                                     Respectfully submitted,

                                                                     Penny St. Romaine
                                                                     City Clerk