The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Tuesday, September 2, 2003, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results: Council Members ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS and JOHN were present. The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk and various Department Heads were also present.

    The minutes of the regular meeting of August 18, 2003, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion by Mr. Loveless and a second by Ms. Crayton.

    Mayor Hindman noted that B282-03 would be removed from the Consent Agenda and moved under Old Business and R189-03 would be added under New Business.
    The agenda, as amended, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion by Mr. Hutton and a second by Mr. Loveless.



B268-03     Adopting the FY 2004 Budget.
    The bill was read by the Clerk.
    Rod Gelatt, 1020 LaGrange, a member of the Convention and Visitors Advisory Board, explained their recommendations for Tourism Development Fund allocations. Mr. Gelatt addressed the process the Board followed in reviewing and amending the TDF guidelines. He summarized the amendments as follows: individual applications were capped at $15,000; the Board initiated a first and second reader program; funds will be provided for an advertising campaign for each funded event with this being on top of, not instead of, the allocation made directly to the organization; each funded event will be provided professional surveys and assessments; and, the Board revised the reviewing and scoring process. Mr. Gelatt spoke about their criteria as it applies to those funds that were not granted. He pointed out that the TDF is first and foremost a tourism fund, and each year the Board tries to refine the guidelines to better reflect that mission. The group always considers whether an application is better suited for an arts fund or a tourism fund. Mr. Gelatt indicated the Board recognizes there may be events with elements in both categories.
    Mayor Hindman thanked Mr. Gelatt for all of the efforts of the Board.
    Lisa Scribner, 3605 Teakwood, spoke on behalf of the City/County Community Services Advisory Commission. She noted the Commission is recommending increases for 18 programs, and level funding for 21 programs. Three programs received decreases, one being very small. After a discussion with the representatives, Ms. Scribner explained the Commission decided to provide no further funding for the AIDS/HIV housing deposits as it constitutes a small amount of money and the program has become unnecessary. Ms. Scriber reported the Commission recommends that this funding be shifted into emergency dental services. She stated the other decrease is for the Teen to Teen InterAct Theatre with their recommendation actually being an increase, but a decrease from funding the group received last year.
    Mayor Hindman thanked Ms. Scribner and the Commission for their work.
    Mayor Hindman re-opened the public hearing.
    David Rogers, an attorney with offices at 813 E. Walnut, reiterated his thoughts on how the Municipal Court might be set up. He believed it advantageous for the City to hire two, half-time Municipal Court judges as opposed to having one full-time judge. Mr. Rogers explained how it would save the City a significant amount of money.
    Jean Sachs, 1904 W. Fenton Road, a representative of the City/County Energy and Environment Commission, spoke in support of the purchase of hybrid cars. Additionally, the Commission would like the City to expand the budget to include the possible purchase of energy efficient trucks and SUV's when they become available after the first of the year.
    Lucille Salerno, Director of the John William Boone Rag Time and Early Jazz Festival, spoke in support of the recommendations made by the Convention and Visitors Advisory Board. She explained their event has a great opportunity to grow.
    Eleanore Goodge,1017 S. Glenwood, spoke on behalf of The League of Women Voters. The League strongly endorses the proposed purchase of gas hybrid vehicles for use by the Water and Light and Parking Utility departments.
    John Poses, Executive Director of the We Always Swing Jazz Series, 218 N. Eighth, reiterated his full statement sent to the Council earlier. He explained their reservations about the Tourism Development Fund and the funding application process. The group was awarded no funding for the Herbie Hancock performance.
    Paul Sturtz, on behalf of the True-False Film Festival, expressed appreciation to the Convention and Visitors Advisory Board for their recommendation of full funding. He noted this will be the first year for their festival and they see it as an ongoing, annual event.
    Chris Hatie, 106 Rockingham, spoke on behalf of the Sierra Club OSAGE Group, in support of the proposal to add hybrid cars to the City's fleet. He explained the cost efficiency of such vehicles.
    Carrie Gartner, Downtown Columbia Association, 11 S. Tenth, spoke in favor of the full funding recommendation for the Twilight Festival from the Tourism Development Fund. She noted that attendance has increased from a few thousand to 10,000 people per night. Regarding downtown sidewalks, the Association asked that the Council allocate $50,000 in Community Development Block Grants for the reconstruction and repair of downtown sidewalks. She noted that 25% of these sidewalks were rated as poor in 2000 by the Public Works staff -- only 22% were rated as good.
    Jill Stidham, Director of the Columbia Art League, 111 S. Ninth, spoke in support of their Tourism Development Fund recommendation for Art in the Park. She noted that the event generated $384,000 in revenue for Columbia last year alone.
    Mayor Hindman continued the public hearing to the September 15, 2003 meeting.

B269-03     Adopting the Special Business District FY 2004 Annual Budget.
B270-03     Amending Chapter 27 of the City Code relating to water rates.
B271-03     Amending Chapter 27 of the City Code relating to the installation of water service lines.
B272-03     Amending Chapter 27 of the City Code relating to the testing of back flow prevention devices.
B273-03     Amending Chapter 22 of the City Code relating to solid waste rates.
B274-03     Amending Chapter 22 of the City Code relating to sewer utility fees.
B275-03     Amending Parks and Recreation fees.

    The above bills were given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing on all bills listed above.
    Comments were called for with none received.
    Mayor Hindman continued the public hearing on the above bills to the September 15, 2003, meeting.

B276-03     Authorizing voluntary annexation of property located on the north side of St. Charles Road, approximately 100 feet east of Upland Creek Road; establishing permanent zoning.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that this bill is being reconsidered by the Council. He noted the changes in the proposal.
    Mr. Dudark explained that the earlier plan showed three duplexes on the north side and now four single family homes are shown, which is a net reduction of two dwelling units. The remainder stays the same with single family homes, duplexes and four-plexes.
    Mr. Hutton noted that the map is unchanged, showing PUD-8 instead of PUD-7 on Tract B.
    Mayor Hindman asked about the vacant land. Mr. Dudark understood it would be a conservation area between the two development tracts.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    David Rogers, an attorney with offices at 813 E. Walnut, spoke on behalf of the applicant and explained the request had originally been recommended by staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission. When it came to the Council it failed on a 4-2 vote because a protest petition had been filed which required five affirmative votes. Mr. Rogers indicated he then spoke with Mr. Janku, who voted against the request due to the placement of four duplexes along the northern edge of the property because these could set a precedent for the development of the vacant tract to the north. The suggestion was made that if the four duplexes could be reduced to single family dwellings, Mr. Janku could support the application. Mr. Rogers reported the applicant agreed to Mr. Janku's suggestion.
    Mr. Janku noted that the sketch reflects the single family change, but it did not reduce the amount of parking shown. Mr. Rogers agreed that not as much parking will be required with the single family dwellings.
    In reference to the vacant land, Mr. Rogers stated this will remain a natural area and provides a 300-400 foot buffer to the nearest existing residential home. He said the concept sketch uses up all the units they have and nothing more will be added.
    Doug Eckhoff, spoke on behalf of the Eastland Hills Homeowners Association, and asked the people present in opposition to stand. Approximately 18 people stood. He reiterated safety concerns with the proposed development having its entrance and exit at an already dangerous section of St. Charles Road. He said the proposed PUD-7 zone will be the highest density in a two mile radius and will set a precedent for this area. Mr. Eckhoff said while this appears to be a reduction of two units, it is simply a numbers game. If the proposal were to pass, he said the developer could come back with his final drawing showing 27 units. He speculated it could be increased by two over what was originally voted down. Mr. Eckhoff reported the homeowners contacted the developer and offered to accept a PUD-5 zone and four R-1 lots on the Cherry Blossom cul-de-sac. He indicated that residents were told by the developer that he had the support of the Planning and Zoning Commission and he was going to proceed with his current proposal. Mr. Eckhoff stated that the developer has done nothing to address their concerns. He also spoke about the neighborhood's concerns pertaining to storm water run-off and traffic. He listed the inconsistencies of the proposed PUD-7 zone with City ordinances. Mr. Eckhoff commented that the developer told residents he would adopt the Eastland Hills covenants for the R-1 homes. He related the subdivision would like the developer to respond publicly about his plans for establishing covenants as part of this project.
    Fred Overton, 2712 Chapel Wood View, developer of the property, pointed out the 300 foot plus buffer between the existing Eastland Hills Subdivision and the nearest four-plex. He noted a new street will be constructed as part of this project off of St. Charles Road to accommodate the duplexes and single family homes. He reported there will be only R-1 traffic going through the Eastland Hills Subdivision. Mr. Overton noted there is no buffer between the duplexes and the single family homes in the Eastland Hills subdivision. He stated that there will be traffic issues in any part of the City that is growing, and this development will not affect it one way or another.
    Regarding the covenants for the five houses on the cul-se-sac, Mr. Hutton recalled Mr. Overton committing to that at the last hearing. Mr. Overton replied that was correct and he intended to follow that through.
    Mike Will, 612 Aidens Woods Court, felt the development would create too great of an increase in density. He commented that residents are concerned that the traffic from the development will use Upland Creek as a cut through thus creating safety issues.
    Vanessa Palmer, 106 E. Stewart, voiced concern for the neighbors living in the area that will have to deal with the traffic and safety issues on a daily basis.
    Mayor Hindman asked about the impact trafficwise if this was developed entirely as single family. Mr. Dudark explained that an R-1 zone would permit about 3.5 units per acre, but that is assuming the entire property is buildable. In reference to this project, staff has not determined the net acreage.
    Ms. Crayton asked about the volume of traffic in an R-1 versus duplex development. Mr. Dudark explained that depends upon occupancy. Ms. Crayton spoke about the nearby commercial development. Mr. Dudark noted ongoing road improvements in this area due to the commercial development anticipated at the interchange.
    Mr. Ash remembered at the last hearing, four Council members supported the zoning request because they believed the proposed plan provided an adequate buffer from the existing neighborhood. He thought the main reason it was defeated was because of the duplexes shown on the northern edge, which could cause further propagation on the large vacant tract to the north.
    Mr. Janku agreed that had been his primary concern when he voted against the request. He wanted to ensure that the Council could justify that the zoning on the tract to the north would be single family. He noted that duplexes have been built on part of Upland Creek, and he wanted to have R-1 abutting R-1.
    Mr. Hutton assumed the protest petition remained valid. Mr. Boeckmann replied that was correct, five affirmative votes are required for passage.
    Mr. Hutton believed that nothing has changed in this new application, there are four single family rental houses as opposed to three duplexes. He said the density could have been seven instead of eight and changing the number has not actually done anything. Mr. Hutton hoped the new plan would have shown an R-1 zone along the northern boundary. When the A-1 land immediately north of this tract is presented for rezoning, he thought that developer would feel the need to provide a PUD buffer, even though there will be four single family houses along the boundary. Mr. Hutton thought that these single family houses will be used as rental property. He did not feel this application is accomplishing the goal intended, and he did feel it will set a precedent for the area. Mr. Hutton expressed concern that this area will develop into another Clark Lane. He pointed out there are no immediate plan for a major thoroughfare in this area to control traffic flow. Mr. Hutton stated he still cannot support this request.
    Mr. John argued that other roads are being built. He noted that Richland Road will be connected to Grace Lane to take traffic off to the south. He stated that long-range plans call for more roads in the area, which may be coming sooner than anticipated. In order to zone this tract R-1, Mr. John maintained the applicant would have to build a street to connect the four houses, or the homes would have to be on tier lots -- which the City does not like. The new street will increase impervious surfaces, more trees will have to be removed from the property, and bigger lots will be pushed down the valley further. Mr. John thought the plan was good before, but it is better now because the single family homes will be used as a buffer.
    As part of the PUD process, Mr. Ash pointed out that off-site improvements will be allowed. He suggested the applicant could make some changes to St. Charles Road to help improve the traffic situation. He did not see anything in the revised plan making him like it less.
    Mr. Janku thought they were asking for the four-plexes up against St. Charles Road because of the fairly intense commercial development across the street. He did not think it was the type of development that one would necessarily want a single family home backing up to. Mr. Janku noted that the previous statement mentioned that the various rental properties could be split off as single lots, and now it says the single family properties can be split off. He explained that meant they could be sold for rental or for owner-occupied. The other part of the property will remain as one common lot, which he felt to be valuable because it meant it would be a major investment by one property owner. Mr. Janku believed the amended plan will create a precedent that future Councils can implement. He noted the single family homes on the northern boundary will serve as a marker.
    B276-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, JANKU, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: CRAYTON, HUTTON. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B277-03     Authorizing voluntary annexation of property located on the north side of Mexico Gravel Road (State Route PP), approximately 375 feet east of Spring Cress Drive; establishing permanent zoning.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck pointed out that the request on this three acre tract had been recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission as well as by staff.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B277-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B278-03     Authorizing voluntary annexation of property located on the east side of Strawn Road (State Route ZZ), north of West Worley Street, extended; establishing permanent zoning.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained this approximate 19 acre tract to be located in west Columbia. The applicants are requesting R-1 zoning. Both the Commission and staff recommend approval.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Jay Gebhardt, a civil engineer, A Civil Group, 1010 Fay, offered to answer questions.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    B278-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B279-03     Authorizing voluntary annexation of property located at the western terminus of Smith Drive; establishing permanent zoning.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained this 60-acre tract is located in west Columbia. Both staff and the Commission recommend approval of the request.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Jay Gebhardt, an engineer with A Civil Group, 1010 Fay, offered to answer any questions.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mayor Hindman mentioned a letter the Council received regarding the high speed traffic on Rainbow Trout Drive. He agreed this proposed development will increase the amount of traffic on this street. He spoke of the inadequacies of Scott Boulevard and remarked that adding more single family homes will make even more of an impact. Mayor Hindman also expressed concern about the lack of commercial development in this area. He suggested that the Council should rethink their policy of allowing large residential areas where there is no interconnection between cul-de-sacs and there are no commercial areas.
    Mr. John pointed out that Louisville Road, which comes out of Georgetown Subdivision on the south, will connect through to Smith Drive. He explained that Louisville is shown to curve around the park land. Mr. John stated this street will allow traffic to flow from north to south within the subdivisions so that cars will not have to access Scott Boulevard or Rainbow Trout Drive. He noted commercial at the corner of Smith and Scott, which also could be accessed without getting on Scott. As Louisville is connected to the south, Mr. John related that The Village of Cherry Hill commercial development is at the south end -- barely a mile apart. He felt the interconnectivity will be in place by the time this development is completed. In addition, the next subdivision to the south will complete this link to Gillespie Bridge and/or Chapel Hill as Chapel Hill is built.
    Mayor Hindman suggested the Council think in terms of there not being more than a certain amount of residential development without at least some neighborhood commercial in it.
    Mr. Ash understood the point about adding subdivisions back to back, but if the property is not annexed, it will not stop it from being developed. Regarding neighborhood commercial, Mr. Ash, speaking as a business owner, said it is difficult for any business to survive because of expenses involved. He reported that businesses have to draw from the entire city, not just from the neighborhood in which they are located.
    Mayor Hindman acknowledged the City cannot force people to put businesses in, but thought they could at least provide for the zoning. He indicated that he is not proposing that this request be modified.
    B279-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B280-03     Authorizing voluntary annexation of property located on the north side of Brown School Road, approximately 3,000 feet west of Range Line Street (State Route 763); establishing permanent zoning.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck noted that these two tracts consist of 87 plus acres. The applicant is requesting R-1 zoning for the 59 acre tract, and PUD-7 for the 28.5 acre tract. Both staff and the Commission recommend approval.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
    Bruce Beckett, an attorney with offices at 111 S. Ninth, spoke on behalf of PGS Development, the contract purchaser of the property. He explained the dividing line between the two parcels to be the preferred route of Providence Road as it proceeds across this property. Included in the packet given to the Council was a schematic showing the route of Providence Road through the property. Mr. Beckett reported the R-1 tract will contain 150 single family residential lots and there will be 66 lots on the PUD-7 tract. The applicant's intent is to place duplexes on the 66 lots for a total of 132 units. On this 87 acres, Mr. Beckett said there will be about 282 units, which translates to a gross density of about 3.5 units per acre. He explained the property is currently zoned R-S in the County, which would also allow for about 3.5 units per acre. If left in the County, it could reasonably be anticipated there would be 305 units or single family lots on this property.
    Mr. Beckett explained through the process, PGS has, in addition to the required elements of the Statement of Intent accompanying their PUD-7 request, added several very specific elements which they believe should address many of the concerns that staff and the neighbors had, and also constitutes a significant contribution to the City in exchange for favorable consideration of the application. More specifically, he said there was some question about whether the R-2 units on the PUD-7 tract would be properly maintained. To address that, PGS has added to their Statement of Intent an element that requires the developer to organize an owners association for the entire development. The declaration of covenants will empower the association to enforce maintenance standards (draft set of restrictive covenants were given to the Council). The developers have also agreed to dedicate an additional 53-feet of right-of-way along the north side of Brown School Road. If matched on the south, this will result in a full 106-feet dedicated right-of-way for an arterial street as Brown School is presently planned. In addition, Mr. Beckett stated the developers have agreed to dedicate a full 106-feet of right-of-way for the entire length of Providence Road as it proceeds through this property. As part of that agreement, the developers have offered to build the west half of Providence Road, as the subdivision is built, according to arterial street standards. He remarked this is a major concession on the applicant's part, adding additional road costs of about $300,000. The additional right-of-way for the east half of Providence Road will remain in place so the City could potentially construct this portion of roadway should circumstances dictate the need for such.
    Mr. Beckett reported the developer has also agreed to dedicate to the homeowners association a 20 to 30-foot common area buffer along the north side of Brown School Road and along both the east and west right-of-way lines of Providence Road. The result along Providence Road would be a 20 to 30-foot buffer on the west, 106-feet of right-of-way, and a 20 to 30-foot buffer on the east. They believed that would serve as an adequate division between the R-2 duplex development on the PUD-7 tract and the R-1 development on the west side of Providence Road. The Statement of Intent requires the developer to provide landscaping along the common area corridors, which Mr. Beckett said would be planted with landscaping designed to achieve 50% opacity. He noted that all duplex units would have no less than a two-car garage. The developer has agreed that no more than 50% of the duplexes in the PUD-7 tract will contain four bedrooms. The remaining units will have three bedrooms or less. Mr. Beckett indicated the applicant believes these new components in the Letter of Intent addresses virtually all the concerns that have been expressed.
    Mr. Beckett spoke about the concerns expressed by residents in Crestwood Subdivision in which a street between this development will connect to Crestwood. The residents fear that traffic will come from this development and go through Crestwood to connect to some western route. The neighborhood also expressed concern about Brown School Road currently having a low water crossing that gets closed from time to time. If that low water crossing floods west of where this subdivision would be, Mr. Beckett reported this development will provide an alternative route to Brown School Road for both the Crestwood and Clearview Subdivisions. He said PGS has also worked with Mr. Benton to the east, developer of Shalimar Gardens, and have designed a connector street which the applicant intends to stub off at his property. Mr. Benton has indicated that he favors this development and he intends to develop his property to the east and connect up to the stub street. Mr. Beckett relayed the point that further routes could still be provided out of this development to Highway 763.
    Jay Gebhardt, an engineer with A Civil Group, 1010 Fay, pointed out that Providence Road through this proposed development is similar to Brown School Road in the Auburn Hills and Vanderveen subdivisions. He reported that Providence will contain two, 28-foot lanes separated by 16-foot landscaped medians. Construction of the west two lanes would be the first step and the developer's obligation and then the other half would be the City's obligation whenever it is deemed necessary. Mr. Gebhardt noted the traffic impact is a big concern and said the County has a problem with the Clearview neighborhood only having one access point. He said there have been some recent attempts at getting additional access and this new development would allow that. Mr. Gebhardt pointed out that the Auburn Hills developer is constructing a traffic signal at the intersection of Brown School Road and 763 which will be a benefit to the whole area, including this development. He explained they agreed to work with Public Works regarding their concern about Brown School Road's intersection with Providence relating to sight distance. Mr. Gebhardt indicated they are going to look into deceleration lanes and possibly left turn lanes at this location.
    Mr. Janku asked about commercial zoning in the area. Mr. Gebhardt replied they looked at that in the very beginning and found there is 65 acres of C-P a half mile away in Auburn Hills. There is also over 40 acres of C-3 a half mile south on Smiley Lane. Mr. Gebhardt remarked that they felt the surrounding neighborhoods would not appreciate any more commercial areas, and if they did provide such, it would sit vacant for a long period of time before there is any demand for it.
    Mr. Janku inquired if the development agreement addresses the issue of a sidewalk on one side of Providence and a pedway on the other side. Mr. Gebhardt said it does. He stated the developer is required to build a five foot sidewalk on both sides of Providence Road. He said they are literally required to construct 10-feet of sidewalk, but they could combine the two sidewalks on one side and have a ten-foot pedway and then when the City comes through they could do the other side with a five-foot sidewalk. Mr. Janku was hopeful it could match up with what has already been developed south. Mr. Gebhardt replied they were open to the idea.
    Pat Fowler, 4995 N. Sandker, commented that her neighborhood is not getting the kind of information about this issue that would make them more comfortable and supportive. She cited traffic counts from the last several years and voiced concern about how much traffic is increasing without this addition.
    Janie Osburn Harmon, spoke on behalf of her mother, Alma Osburn, 600 W. Brown School Road. She reiterated traffic and safety concerns voiced in a letter from her mother to the Council last week. She maintained that the 282 residential units would produce at least 1,128 trips per day on a road that is currently marginal at handling existing traffic. She understood a better road system is planned, but residents have never seen dates or budgets to go with the plans. Ms. Harmon spoke about storm water runoff as Cow Branch traverses their property. She remarked there continues to be property damage on their farm due to issues upstream and added this development will exacerbate the problem.
    Jay Wilson, 5300 Tessa Way, owns property at 544 E. Clearview. He supported the annexation of Clearview Subdivision because the County lacks any kind of code enforcement. He remarked that there are a lot of storm water problems in this area and the house next door floods constantly. In reference to traffic flow on Brown School Road, Mr. Wilson thought all residents will benefit from the extension of Providence Road.
    Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mr. Ash understood the neighbors were not in favor of any more development in the area, but reminded them that even if the tracts are not annexed, the property could still be developed under County regulations. By annexing into the City, he told them the regulations would be better.
    Mr. Janku pointed out that development in this part of Boone County is very strong and he thought it was likely the tract would be developed regardless of annexation. He felt clearly the R-1 development is appropriate and believed the developer would work with the neighbors to help address some of their concerns about cut through traffic, although he thought most of the traffic would move east to access the Providence Road extension and the new stop light at Brown School Road. Regarding the duplex development, he thought the two car garage component would attract a better level of tenant. Mr. Janku appreciated the limitation on some of the units to three or less bedrooms. He pointed out that the existing single family homes would be bordered by R-1.
    Mr. Janku made the motion that B280-03 be amended by substituting a new Exhibit A (Statement of Intent). The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    B280-03, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B281-03     Rezoning property located on the north side of Grindstone Parkway, between Green Meadows Road, extended and Rock Quarry Road from A1 to C-P; approving a C-P Development Plan.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing and noted that a request had been received to table the item.
    There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that B281-03 be tabled to the September 15, 2003, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Ash and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(A)     Construction of improvements to Stearman Street.
    Item A was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that the Public Works staff met with residents along the street and the suggestion was made that it be held over to the October 6th meeting.
    Mr. Hutton made the motion that Item A be tabled to October 6, 2003. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B282-03     Approving the final plat of Rock Quarry PUD.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Ash explained there had been some concern about a utility easement on the southern portion of the property. He received a copy of the revised plat showing there is no longer a need for the easement.
    Mr. Patterson explained that approval this evening would be approval of the revised plat which does not show the easement.
    Mr. Ash made the motion that B282-03 be amended by changing Section 1, the March 2003 date to August 8, 2003. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. Janku asked about the south property line. Mr. Patterson explained that they do not typically allow separation of property that cannot be considered a lot between the two properties. He said staff tries to assure that the right-of-ways, when adjacent to properties, have connectivity. In this case, it would provide connection between a property to the south and the street.
    B282-03, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B285-03     Approving the final plat of Model Bakery Subdivision, a replat of part of J.C. Conley's Subdivision.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained this small plat is being replatted in order to allow for a small addition to an existing structure. He noted the request for sewer and street right-of-way waivers. Both staff and the Commission recommend approval.
    B285-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B286-03     Vacating a portion of street right-of-way along the northern boundary of Northwest Highlands Second Addition.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Dudark explained this to be a half street right-of-way that has never been opened. The Public Works Department has requested this vacation to be relieved of any maintenance responsibility. If vacated, the responsibility would go back to the abutting property owners. Mr. Dudark said there are no prospects of constructing a street at this location any time in the future.
    Mayor Hindman asked about the width of the right-of-way. Mr. Patterson replied that it is 25-feet wide. Mayor Hindman thought this may be an opportunity for connectivity between neighborhoods. Mr. Loveless questioned the purpose of the connection. He noted that one side fronts West Boulevard and the last two lots have two small businesses on them. Next to that is the restaurant and the motel to the north. He agreed with the connectivity philosophy, but in this case it would serve no purpose.
    Mr. Janku commented that no one knows what might happen in this area and he thought it may be better to retain this small piece of property. He indicated that one of the I-70 proposals is to bring Creasy Springs under I-70. Mr. Janku indicated that if the City has to acquire property in the area to facilitate a street being adjusted, this parcel could come in handy.
    Mr. Ash pointed out that with City ownership comes the responsibility of maintenance. He suggested the Council weigh the cost of maintaining this small strip against the probability that something fruitful could come of it. Mr. Ash commented that if there was more residential in this area, the notion of connectivity would make more sense.
    Mr. Beck questioned the City's responsibility for maintaining a paper street. Mr. Boeckmann explained the court ruling in that cities have legal liability for public property, including rights-of-way, even if they are not built on. He indicated there are tort cases holding cities liable, but maintenance is a separate issue.
    Mr. John said to add another 250 feet of sidewalk for five people to walk between neighborhoods did not sound very cost effective. He suggested we let someone else take care of the property.
    B286-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B288-03     Calling for bids related to the 2003 Annual Sidewalk Gap construction Project.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Patterson noted that this is in accordance with a recent public hearing at which time the Council directed which sidewalks could be omitted from the list and which ones should be constructed at a width of five-feet. Since the public hearing, he pointed out that permits have been issued on a few of the segments. He said if these walks are constructed prior to the contractor beginning work, they would be omitted from the contract.
    Mr. Ash asked about the time frame for individuals preferring to construct their own walks. When the contractor is given the notice to proceed, Mr. Patterson said that is when the staff would no longer issue a permit for the property owner to do it themselves.
    B288-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B295-03     Authorizing an agreement with Trans States Airlines, Inc. to provide financial incentives to continue providing an early morning departure and late evening flight from Columbia Regional Airport; appropriating funds.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck spoke about the correspondence sent to the Council from various groups who supported the incentives due to the importance of retaining morning and evening airline service. This proposal calls for continuing evening and morning flights for a 90-day period, and the City would provide financial assistance in regard to hotel accommodations for the flight crew. The airline would also receive a reduced rate for counter/office/baggage space at the Airport. At the end of the 90-day period, Mr. Beck suggested the Council could evaluate the results of the airline's operations.
    B. J. Hunter, Chair of the Airport Advisory Board, assured the Council that they thoroughly considered the proposal to offer this subsidy to a private enterprise. He said Trans States has been a good partner for the Airport, and the Board believed their operations were headed in the right direction until American Airlines reduced their service route to St. Louis. The Board feels the proposed schedule changes by Trans States are not conducive to keeping any kind of airline service. Mr. Hunter reported the group thought by offering the subsidy to retain early morning and late night flights, the business travelers would continue to utilize the Airport and hopefully get the airline's interest back into Columbia.
    Mayor Hindman thanked Mr. Hunter and the Board for all of their work.
    Bill Boston, Airport Manager, commented that almost nobody likes the idea of the subsidy, but most of them feel that the economic development aspect of what the City might lose without the subsidy overrides the issue. His recommendation was that the Council proceed with this interim fix to improve the number of enplanements and the City's working relationship with the airline.
    Mr. Janku asked if this 90-day period is the right one to use as a measuring stick. Traditionally, Mr. Boston said it is a low period, not the best time of year. By the end of the 90-day period, the number of enplanements will have to be evaluated to see whether Trans States can sustain itself without the subsidy. It that is the case, the City will need to enter into an agreement with the airline to continue the schedule but not the subsidy. If it looks like the service is recovering but the airline still needs the subsidy, his recommendation might be to come back and ask for another 90-day subsidy. At the end of the second 90-days, he said they would have to do something different, but was not sure what that might be. Mr. Boston explained that the airline can vacate the station after giving the FAA 90-days notice. He reported that could trigger a number of things, one of which is essential air service, i.e., the federal government bids out the service for Columbia and subsidizes it, but the contract would be awarded to the low bidder with low bidder's airplanes and service schedule. He said it would still probably connect to American Airlines in St. Louis, but would not be the 30 passenger planes we have currently. Fairly typical of that would be one or two flights per day.
    Mr. Janku noted that the morning and evening return flights are not the highest level. He asked why they felt it so important to preserve them as opposed to mid-day flights with higher passenger levels. Mr. Boston replied in June, there were four flights per day with a 6:00 a.m. flight and no late evening return. In July, an evening return was added from St. Louis, departing there at 9:15 p.m. and arrived in Columbia shortly after 10:00 p.m. In order to do that, he said they had to stage two flights overnight in Columbia. So right now, Mr. Boston indicated they are actually staging six crew members, two aircraft every night in Columbia. To accommodate that, Trans States also had to fly that airplane out in the morning so they added a second morning departure, around 9:00 a.m. Mr. Boston stated that those two flights together generate something on the order of 800 of the 2,000 enplanements a month, so these are very well-used flights. He believes that if the Airport does not serve the business traveling group, these individuals will drive to St. Louis and start flying Southwest. He did not think we would get them back.
    Abe Hiam, 615 Morningside, spoke in opposition to the subsidy proposal. He felt private corporations should not be given public subsidies. If the businesses feel the flights are necessary, they should pay for them.
    Mr. John stated that he is not a fan of subsidies, but suggested looking at the fact that all of our transportation has been subsidized, i.e., the rail lines, highways, airlines and buses. He said the question is how to balance the subsidies so that everyone is on a level playing field. Mr. John is willing to give it a shot and said he would like to see what they could come up with in the way of advertising. He thought it was going to take a lot of hard work in policy with state legislators, the University of Missouri and state employees to get the business travelers to fly out of Columbia.
    Mr. Ash thought the subsidy was not that large and noted it is for a short period of time for something a lot of people feel to be very important to the community. During the 90-day period, he would like to see some sort of data showing the indirect economic benefit.
    Mr. Janku is not optimistic of the outcome, but felt an effort should be made. In the interim, he was hopeful the airline could come up with a plan that does not depend upon public funding.
    Mayor Hindman spoke in favor of the issue. He said the City and the airline are victims of the dramatic change by American Airlines. He thought it was appropriate for the City to subsidize it until we know what the outcome will be.
    B295-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B296-03     Authorizing Change Order No. 6 to the contract with Curtiss-Manes-Schulte, Inc. relating to construction of The Activity and Recreation Center.
    The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck was hopeful this would be the last change order for The ARC. With this change order, the total amount of the project is $9,094,399.20. He noted that the City is still under what had been budgeted for overruns. Once the work is completed, Mr. Beck explained that a final report will be brought to the Council.
    Mr. Hutton made the motion that B296-03 be amended per the amendment sheet. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    B296-03, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. 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.

B283-03     Approving the final plat of Eastport Plat 1, a replat of Lake of the Woods South Subdivision, Plat 1.
B284-03     Approving the final plat of Oakland Junior High Subdivision Block 2.
B287-03     Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code relating to the speed limit on Richland Road.
B289-03     Authorizing a development agreement with CenterState Properties, LLC and Central Concrete Company for contribution of street right-of-way for Lake Ridgeway Road.
B290-03     Confirming the contract of Aplex, Inc. for the construction of Sixth Street from Wilkes Boulevard to Hickman Avenue.
B291-03     Appropriating FAA grant funds for the purchase of an aircraft rescue fire fighting vehicle.
B292-03     Accepting conveyances for water utility purposes.
B293-03     Authorizing an agreement with B & B Agricultural, LLC for conveyance of land; accepting conveyance for water utility purposes.
B294-03     Appropriating funds for the D.A.R.E. Program.
R183-03     Setting a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property located at the southeast corner of the intersection of State Route KK and Crabapple Lane, extended.
R184-03     Setting a public hearing: construction of water main serving Smithton Ridge, Plats 5 and 6.
R185-03     Setting a public hearing: construction of water main along Kircher Road.

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

R186-03     Appointing City representatives for a visit to Kutaisi, Republic of Georgia.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that Kutaisi, our Sister City, will be celebrating their 1000 year anniversary. The delegation will be going at their own expense.
    The vote on R186-03 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R187-03     Amending the FY 2000 CDBG Action Plan.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained the proposal to utilize an additional $30,000 in CDBG monies for the Sixth Street project. He reported that staff believes it appropriate to use these funds on the project for spend down reasons.
    The vote on R187-03 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R188-03     Authorizing a settlement agreement with CenturyTel of Missouri, LLC.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck reported that CenturyTel filed a suit against the City after we allowed the Landrum Company to utilize our fiber optic network. This agreement will postpone the issue until after the Supreme Court ruling. He indicated that the Missouri Municipal League has taken on the issue because it not only involves Columbia, but several other cities.
    Mr. Boeckmann explained that the Supreme Court will probably send it back to the FCC with some instructions and once the FCC issues its final order, if it is in favor of the City, the suit will go away forever. If the City loses, he said we are back to square one and the settlement agreement is over at that point.
    The vote on R188-03 was recorded as follows; VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R189-03     Expressing support for the re-authorization of TEA 21 funding.
    The resolution was read by the Clerk.
    Mr. Beck explained that a sub-committee of the U.S. House of Representatives Transportation Committee voted to discontinue the enhancement funding under the Transportation Act. The City of Columbia has received substantial funding under this program for many years and Mr. Beck said this resolution would provide support for continuing the enhancement program.
    Mayor Hindman pointed out that the City has used these enhancement monies very effectively for the benefit of the City, and added that we are counting on it in the future to extend the trail system.
    The vote on R189-03 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. 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:

B297-03     Approving the final plat of Bluff Creek Estates Plat 7; authorizing a performance contract.
B298-03     Approving the final plat of Elk's Lodge No. 594; authorizing a performance contract.
B299-03     Rezoning property located on the southeast corner of Creasy Springs Road and Prairieview Drive from A-1 to R-1.
B300-03     Authorizing application for FY 2004 transit operating and capital assistance grants.
B301-03     Calling for bids relating to the construction of sidewalk ramps and cross walks at the intersection of Fifth Street and Cherry Street.
B302-03     Accepting conveyances for drainage, sewer, street, sidewalk and utility purposes.
B303-03     Authorizing an Electric Energy Sales Agreement with Ameren Energy Marketing Company.
B304-03     Authorizing construction of water main serving Smithton Ridge, Plats 5 and 6; providing for payment of differential costs.
B305-03     Calling for bids for the construction of water main along Kircher Road, between Dusty Rhodes Lane and Mount Hope Road.
B306-03     Accepting conveyances for water and electric purposes.
B307-03     Amending Chapter 4 of the City Code pertaining to alcoholic beverages.
B308-03     Amending Chapter 19 of the City Code relating to personnel policies, procedures, rules and regulations.
B309-03     Amending the Classification Plan and adopting the FY 2004 Pay Plan.
B310-03     Establishing new medical and dental premium rates for the Employee Health Care Plan.

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

(B)     Street Closure Request.
    Mayor Hindman made the motion that the closure be approved as requested. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(C)     Commercial Use of Parking Lots Located in the R-3 Zoning District.
    Mr. Dudark noted that the Commission voted against any amendments to the R-3 district. The majority felt that C-P zoning is working satisfactorily.
    Mr. John remarked that the C-P may be working adequately for the church that first raised this issue, but he said there are other churches renting out their parking lots to students, downtown workers, and various other people in lots not zoned commercially. He said the reason one church went to renting out the spaces was so they could control the parking situation and to ensure the vehicles were out of the lot on Saturdays if there were any weddings and on Sunday for church services. Since these churches enacted a rental program, people who park in the lots are aware of the rules and obey them. Mr. John related if this rental situation becomes a conditional use in an R-3 zone, the churches will have to obtain a permit for using the lot for multiple purposes. In reference to landscaping being submitted and implemented which complies with City ordinances, he suggested grandfathering existing lots from this requirement. Mr. John stated if it is a new lot or an addition is made to an existing lot, then the church would have to comply with landscaping requirements.
    Mayor Hindman thought there should be some plan wherein all lots will have to eventually be landscaped. Mr. Janku spoke of his preference for some landscaping, but maybe not to current standards. Mr. Loveless proposed requiring it over a period of time.
    In reference to the proposed revision relating to landscaping , Mr. John suggested adding to the last "or": "be subject to the following: All paved areas be more than 50 feet......be landscaped."
    Mr. John made the motion that staff be directed to prepare an ordinance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(D)     Cable Television Commission.
    Mr. Loveless made the motion that staff be directed to prepare legislation for a task force.
    Mr. Ash was leaning toward a commission rather than a task force because he thought some of the issues were more than short-term problems. Mr. Janku suggested creating a task force which could evolve into a commission if it proves to be needed.
    The motion made by Mr. Loveless was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(E)     Third Party Review of the Philips Tract Stormwater Plan Proposal.
    Mayor Hindman thought all three groups should be part of the selection committee in choosing a consultant -- the City, the developer and the Bonne Femme Watershed Partnership. Mr. Hutton felt this was a City prerogative and that the City should protect our interests. He was not so sure the developer or the partnership should be brought into it. Mr. Janku pointed out the City has used consultants in other complicated issues before. As in any part of the process, he noted that the public will have input. He said when the City is ready to hire a consultant, the Council will vote on it and there will be an opportunity for public input. Mr. Janku saw it as a question as to how early the Council should get comments from the other groups. Mr. Hutton said his fear was that one group or the other would be adamantly opposed to whoever was selected. He said they would not buy into the plan from day one in that case. Mayor Hindman agreed.
    Regarding the focus of the report, Mr. Janku asked if it would be a quantitative report on impacts, or it would be an evaluation of whether the plan will work. Mr. Patterson explained the intent was to take the plan as presented and get a third party, unbiased review and analysis as to its effectiveness and workability.
    Mr. Ash was concerned about setting a precedent for every big project that comes before the Council. Once the City starts authorizing outside reviews, he was concerned people would claim if an outside analysis is not performed, the Council would be biased in their approval. Mr. Janku did not see this as being a bias on anybody's part. He believed staff wanted the review in this case because of the magnitude of the project and they feel it is something they cannot assume at this time. Mr. Janku did not think it was going to be common for staff to say they cannot handle an analysis.
    Mr. Ash felt the Council should consider how much this will slow the project down. He said if the Council feels this is a one time, unusual, massive project, he will support an independent review. But if it is just to try and get a neutral analysis, he did not think the Council should set that precedent. Mr. Ash maintained the Council is the neutral analysis body.
    Mr. Loveless held up a large notebook containing the plan and said he did not know how many of them are actually capable of understanding it completely. He said this is a very complex issue and he thought it was a fine time for the Council to step back and let someone else with more expertise and more time to look at it and advise them.
    Mr. Beck reported that based on the size of the project, he considered this outside review as an extension of staff. He agreed that the City could not start hiring a consultant every time there is something controversial.
    Mr. Patterson pointed out that the cost estimate in the report limits itself to a review and analysis of this plan, it does not allow them to go in and study alternatives and do a lot of "what if" scenarios. He said it is to be an analysis of what the developer presents, not the creation of different scenarios.
    Mr. Janku asked if there is a consultant already identified that could do this review. Mr. Patterson replied that the City has a list of consultants in various fields of expertise that are annually pre-qualified for contracts up to $20,000. He was certain there are people on the list who could do this review. At this point, he related that staff has not selected a particular firm because they wanted Council input on the direction in which to proceed. He said the real advantage in using a pre-qualified consultant is that they would be able to respond quickly to the situation whereas the RFP process takes several months and could very likely end up as not being affordable.
    Mr. Hutton made the motion that staff be directed to select a consultant. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless and approved by voice vote. (Mr. John abstained.)


    Ms. Crayton spoke about a problem in her neighborhood that she witnessed and reported on previously. She related that a trailer full of garage sale items was being brought into her ward. The trailer owner resides in a different neighborhood, but owns property in various sections of town. When confronted about the sale, the property owner replied that it was her stuff and that she lived there. She had a three-day sale which increased traffic in the neighborhood and this individual left trash behind when the sale was over. Ms. Crayton expressed concern about the timeliness of the response she received from staff. She commented that she is not able to rectify these problems if staff does not respond to complaints in a timely manner.
    Mr. Beck commented that the question still remains as to how to enforce that particular problem. Mayor Hindman said it appeared there is no ordinance that prevents this type of sale from occurring. Mr. Beck suggested the Council discuss the issue further at the work session on Thursday.

    Regarding the expansion of Trattoria Strada Nova (B285-03), Mr. Loveless remarked that there had been a staff note that the City should remove the designation of local non-residential central traffic zone because it does not fit anything existing now. He asked that staff get the ball rolling on the issue.

    Mr. Loveless reported that he continues to hear complaints about the noise from the pan drums on Medavista. He said it is particularly bad in the summer because of windows being open. He understood Mr. Froeschner was to make some home modifications. Mr. Loveless asked staff to report back on what is required to run a home business as Mr. Froeschner would like to see a resolution to the problem.

    Mr. Loveless received a call about white crosses being placed along roadways. The call had been about the cross in front of Hy-Vee. Mr. Loveless said because it is on highway right-of-way, he doubted the City could remove it. He asked staff to report back.

    Mr. Loveless was told by a landowner owning a significant amount of property outside the city limits that he would be willing to voluntarily annex his property if the zoning ordinances were revised so that he would not lose some of the privileges he maintains as a county resident. This person primarily was speaking about the ability to hunt. Mr. Loveless asked staff to report back on how it could be made more amenable for people to annex into the city voluntarily and still be able to maintain certain county rights. He said changes were made for voter annexed property, but not for voluntarily annexed tracts. Mr. Ash related that he would like to see some size definition between where the hunting is going on and where the next adjacent person lives. As a property is replatted and the lots are reduced in size, he thought the privileges should be taken away. Mr. Loveless agreed and thought staff could come up with several options. Mr. Janku suggested the two issues be discussed together.
    Mr. Loveless motioned that staff be directed to prepare a report on what options are available for a person to voluntarily annex their property while not losing all county privileges currently being enjoyed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
    Mr. John spoke about complaints he received in the last several weeks about the deer population. Mr. Loveless remarked that in two months hunters will reduce the deer population in Missouri by about 300,000. Mr. John also noted they will be discussing this situation with DNR and the Conservation Department in the near future and he is hopeful they can come up with something that will be amenable.

    In reference to trash rates, Mr. Ash recalled a discussion about increasing the rate for special pick-ups. He related ongoing problems with students in the East Campus area putting out large quantities of trash before they leave town. He suggested that the City pick-up the trash and then bill whoever is on the utility bill. Mr. Patterson explained staff's recommendation that the $15 fee be raised to $25 for a first time violation of trash out early. If there is a second violation within a 12-month period, this will increase to $45. Mr. Ash asked about picking up cans and charging extra for it. Mr. Patterson indicated staff could look into it, but the refuse collectors generally do not pick-up cans due to the possibility of injury. He also noted it is very difficult for UAB to administer two different types of billing procedures. Mr. Patterson commented that it was a policy decision to go to bags because there is nothing left on the streets after they are collected. Mr. Ash clarified that he is referring to someone who does not care about the rule, but just wants to put a bunch of stuff out because they are moving out. Mr. Patterson replied that sometimes the refuse collectors will pick-up the entire can and leave nothing behind.
    Mr. Janku recalled a special response being implemented in the East Campus area. Mr. Patterson verified that statement and added that he was under the impression that it was working pretty well. He reported that dumpsters were being put out and the refuse collectors were doing advance patrols at the end of each semester. He thought they were making progress, but if there are certain areas that need further attention, he will ensure this is addressed.
    Mr. Ash wanted to stop erring on the side of giving people additional chances. He suggested a change in philosophy by just picking up the trash and charging for the service. Mr. Janku related that the East Campus area is a particular problem because it is difficult to identify what belongs to whom when trash is thrown in one big pile. He agreed it is a consistent problem in the area. Mr. Hutton added there might be five different residences in one of the houses with five different accounts. Another point was made about some of the students not paying their last bill and not caring what additional charges might be added to it.
    Mr. John agreed with the general philosophy of the City picking up the trash, but was not sure about the billing.

    Mayor Hindman made the motion that the Council hold a closed meeting on September 4, 2003, in the fourth floor conference room, following the Council work session beginning at 6:00 p.m. to discuss personnel matters. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Motion passed.

    Norbert Schumann, 205 E. El Cortez, read a letter which he gave to the Council. He asked that a Council member sponsor a zoning change that would require any big box store, appropriately defined, to be located not more than one-quarter mile from the right-of-way of either I-70 or Highway 63 if located within the City limits. The purpose is to assure major road access for the associated high volume of traffic that these facilities generate. Mr. Schumann noted it would also separate large commercial tracts from areas of lower density. He indicated that he did not want a large commercial area in his neighborhood like what exists on Conley Road.

    The meeting adjourned at 11:35 p.m.

                                                                 Respectfully submitted,

                                                                 Penny St. Romaine
                                                                 City Clerk