FEBRUARY 16, 2004


The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, February 16, 2004, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results: Council Members HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON and JANKU were present. The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk and various Department Heads were also present.


The minutes of the regular meeting of February 2, 2004, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion by Mr. Ash and a second by Mr. Loveless.


Mr. John noted that he would be abstaining from B20-04.

The agenda, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion by Mr. Loveless and a second by Mr. John.






B1-04 Rezoning property located on the west side of Maryland Avenue, between Rollins Street and Kentucky Boulevard from R-3 to C-P; approving the Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity C-P development plan.

The bill was read by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck explained that another request to table this item was received.

Mr. Loveless made the motion that B1-04 be tabled to the March 1, 2004 meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B19-04 Voluntary annexation of property located on the south side of Clearview Drive, north of the present city limits; establishing permanent PUD-6 zoning.

The bill was read by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck noted that a proposed amendment had been given to the Council.

Mr. Dudark explained that since the last Council Meeting, the applicant had submitted a revised statement of intent. He limited the development to townhomes, a maximum of two attached units per building. There would be 20 units in 10 buildings. They also included garages in the units and added perimeter screening, landscaping, and fencing with 80% opacity. In addition, they added sidewalks on the south side of the units.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

John Payne, 10951 I-70 Drive NE, explained that with 20 units the density would be 5.3. In return, he stated, he would be giving a second access to the Clearview Subdivision and another way for the City to loop existing water mains in order to provide better water service.

Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

Mayor Hindman made the motion that B19-04 be amended per the amendment sheet. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutton and approved unanimously by voice vote.

Mr. Janku reiterated that he believed the zoning to be inappropriate at this location. He thought R-1 would be better and more consistent with existing zoning in both the County and the City. The benefit of the water loop, he noted, would also be recognized with R-1 development, as would improved access.

Because it was a small piece of property and basically infill development, Mr. Ash was not worried about it propagating out to other areas. He thought what negatives would result due to the higher density, more would be gained since it was planned and because it would provide an extra connection.

B19-04, as amended, was read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HUTTON, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON. VOTING NO: LOVELESS, JANKU. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B20-04 Voluntary annexation of property located on the southwest side of U.S. Highway 63 and on the north side of Gans Road; establishing permanent PUD-1, PUD-3, PUD-4, O-P, C-P and C-3 zoning.

The bill was read by the Clerk.

Mayor Hindman noted that the proponents provided a memorandum of understanding that involved substantial changes in the application and requested that the memorandum of understanding be attached to the ordinance. Because this was a substantial change, Mayor Hindman believed the issue should be continued.

Mayor Hindman made the motion that B20-04 be continued. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless.

Mr. Janku asked about comments from anyone on the issue. Mayor Hindman stated that he would ask Mr. Simon to explain the memorandum and afterward anyone interested would be allowed to comment. Anyone that had already spoken on the topic would be allowed to speak on any new issues.

Mr. Beck pointed out that the City received the memorandum late Friday and that the Council had not seen it until tonight. Mayor Hindman explained that they had not had time to read it.

Dan Simon, an attorney with offices at 203 Executive Building, explained that as they had moved forward with this issue, it had become apparent there were still a number of questions that had not been dealt with, at least satisfactorily in the minds of the Council and others. He enumerated the questions - Who was going to pay for various road improvements and by what percentage? What was the issue about the park? Would the park be acquired and what would it consist of? What was the price? Would the lake in the park, if acquired, be suitable for recreational purposes as well as stormwater purposes? How would it be protected? He said various water quality issues continued to be raised as did the issue about restricting the use of Tract 8. Mr. Simon reiterated that they would not change their request for C-3 zoning on Tract 8. He noted that they were trying to deal with the issue of restricting the use. He explained the memorandum was not just in the interest of dealing with matters of concern to the City and the public, but with matters that had become a concern to them as well. He did not believe Mr. Sapp could move forward with this development without some clear understanding about the policies and procedures. Mr. Simon made it clear that the memorandum was a draft and not set in stone. He also stated a component of the memorandum was missing. He pointed out the reference, in the last paragraph, to a report from the Public Works Department and indicated the Council did not have that. The Public Works Department, he explained, was studying the water quality issues and would hopefully provide a report both, the City and Mr. Sapp, could deal with. He noted that was just as much a concern for them as it was for the City.

Mr. Simon then listed other matters contained in the memorandum. With respect to traffic improvement, it outlined Mr. Sapp's share of the responsibility for the cost of the Gans Road overpass, the relocation of Gans Road, and the relocation and improvement of Ponderosa Street. The memorandum stated that his responsibility would be 50% of the cost of those improvements. It described a method whereby Mr. Sapp, the City, or anyone else providing funds to pay for the improvements, would, over time, recover the funds advanced, through a Transportation Development District, with each party expected to recover, pro-rata, a fractional share of any disbursement made until all of the improvements were paid for. Regarding the traffic impact study, he noted, the present ordinance stated that a traffic impact study would not be required for use of the property for up to 350 dwelling units. Due to an earlier understanding on their part, based on a meeting with the Staff, as to what that meant, this issue was also included in the memorandum. They extended the same requirement (350 units) to Tract 9, a C-P tract. They did that because they were told the City did not want to acquire Tract 9 as a park, but the park would be immediately adjacent to Tract 9 and would require access from a substantial street or some other improvements through Tract 9, which Mr. Sapp would have to provide. In order to do that, they would need to be able to use Tract 9, and therefore extended the traffic impact study exemption to Tract 9. With respect to the park itself, they had been told the City wanted to acquire 140 acres to include the lake. It would also extend in a truncated form, as shown on the memorandum, to connect to Gans Road. Therefore, if the City were to acquire any part of the Crane property, there would be connectivity to the Crane property. He noted that 63 acres would be donated to the City. The rest of the property could be acquired at a cost of $16,000 per acre. He also stated that Mr. Sapp would make substantial improvements to the lake so it would be suitable for use as a regional stormwater facility and as a public recreational facility. The nature of those improvements was generally described, but would ultimately be determined by agreement between Mr. Sapp's engineers and the Public Works Department. Mr. Sapp would advance the entire cost of the improvements, but would be allowed to recover a fairly allocated portion of the cost from the City's stormwater utility, since he would be upgrading the lake to make it suitable as a regional stormwater detention facility, not only for the Philips property, but for another 120 acres upstream. Mr. Simon proposed 50%, although, he said, it was not engraved in stone. With respect to Tract 8, he explained the proposal to be that the land the City acquired as a park, by donation and by deed, would have running in its favor a declaration of restrictive covenants, enforceable by the City as a property owner of the park. It would restrict the use of Tract 8 to the same uses permitted on Tract 5, a C-P tract, it would run with the land of both parcels, it would obligate any owner of Tract 8, and it would run in favor of any owner of the parkland.

Mr. Simon asked the Council to table the issue this evening if they felt these were items that could be resolved. Their hope was that the issues raised in the memorandum could be reviewed by City Staff, discussed with Mr. Sapp and his representatives, put final form, presented to the Council, and discussed at a work session before the March 1 meeting. If the approach suggested was unacceptable to any Council Member, Mr. Simon asked that they be told as quickly as possible. If there appeared to be a workable solution, Mr. Simon indicated, they would be willing to talk with the understanding that something could be worked out, introduced at the March 1 meeting as an amendment to the proposed ordinance, and voted on at the March 15 Council Meeting. If in the meantime, it was concluded they were going nowhere, he noted, they would step aside.

Mayor Hindman restated his motion to table the issue to March 1, 2004 and that a work session be set to deal with the issues. The motion, seconded by Mr. Loveless, was approved by voice vote.

Mayor Hindman re-opened the public hearing.

John Blakemore, 4807 Bearfield, explained that Mr. Sapp and his consulting staff were proposing to develop a sensitive area with the largest development in the City's history, and had made a very public statement on how it would be done. He believed Mr. Sapp intended on doing everything he said he would do. The language of protection was in line with what everyone wanted from this developer. He suggested the Council be fair to the developer and the community by making certain the pledges that had been made in the 10 page document be reflected in the ordinance. Mr. Blakemore asked that base performance standards be included in the ordinance, giving assurances to the Council, the City Staff, and the citizens of Columbia that there was a bottom line standard that would be met. The standards which had been developed by many of the concerned citizens in the community were clear and fundamental guidelines that could be used in this watershed as it was developed, regardless of who came along later to develop in the Bonne Femme watershed. He stated developers would not have to go through this process over and over again and the public would not have to come forward time after time. Mr. Blakemore noted that these were standards that should have been added in 2000 when there was a pledge there would be no development in the Little Bonne Femme Watershed until a Watershed Plan was put in place. These standards, he noted, were similar to those of other communities. Regarding roads and things mentioned by Mr. Simon being worked out between Staff and Mr. Sapp's group, Mr. Blakemore thought citizen involvement should be included on the stormwater issues because of all the good, knowledgeable, expert advice and science out there.

Mayor Hindman pointed out that the last paragraph of the memorandum referred to standards.

Tom Moran, 413 W. Walnut, encouraged further citizen input on the issue. He indicated people would like for the process to be much more transparent. An input group on this issue, he said, would be wonderful.

Dana Watts, no address given, stated his concern for the environment and Rock Bridge State Park. He commented that he was appalled by the push for development in the City.

Dan French, 1004 Hulen Drive, commented that after listening to the developers present their material at the last meeting, it had become clear to him that it was a presentation of only a fraction of the facts and science. In a competitive situation, he said, he could not expect both parties to present facts that were contrary to their position and that it was normal for them to provide only support for their cause. He remarked that the group of concerned citizens had neither the financial resources nor the coordinational capacity of the developer. Competition between the developer and a citizens group almost always goes to the developer and he could hardly say the decision was based on an objective appraisal of all of the facts. Mr. French felt that a major decision such as this rezoning request deserved more consideration than the treatment it had been given to this point. In order to make an informed decision, he believed the Council needed an objective assessment of the impact any development would have on the natural environment, the wildlife, and the human occupants of the community involved. When considering a major proposal such as this, he believed it should require an independent study funded by an application fee paid by the developer. He felt this would result in the Council being able to make a more informed decision than it could with the process available at this time.

Mayor Hindman pointed out that the Council had the benefit of a study that was done at the City's expense as well as the information they received from the opponents of the development.

Fred Springsteel, 4200 Merchant Street, stated his concern regarding public hearing procedures. He was also concerned about the cost for the park and the fact this information was not disclosed to the citizens of Columbia.

Matt Williams, 1609 Windsor Street, stated he understood the financial impact of business versus the environment, but asked the Council to consider the truth of what had been said by the environmentalists in addition to the truth of what the developer was saying.

Jane Lavender, 115 Anderson, commented that she had moved to Columbia for the parks. She stated she was from Kansas City and all of the parks there were surrounded and unsafe. In addition, she said, all the development around town was unsettling to her.

Bob Cook, 112 Ripley, asked the Council to not be stampeded by the developer's attorney, especially in regards to time frames and cost sharing issues. He asked the Council to protect the environment and to vote for what the people wanted.

Mariel Stephenson, 2111 Rock Quarry Road, believed the Council understood the people who oppose development had a long history of concern, care, and a great love for the City of Columbia and for the environment in regards to how it developed, both within the City and externally. She said there was a great deal of the City that hungers for the preservation of certain areas and the maintenance of those areas for the benefit of everyone.

Alyce Turner, 1204 Fieldcrest, stated that if this development was approved, the City would be saying the development plan would protect us from the affects of stormwater under the Phase II EPA Stormwater Clean Water Act. Regarding the purchase of 150 acres at $16,000 per acre, including a possible regional stormwater facility - the lake, Ms. Turner explained there was data stating you could not have recreational uses in a stormwater facility. She said there were potentially too many toxins in it, even for ice skating. She encouraged the Council to look into that before the March meeting. She also noted that the Crane property borders Rock Bridge State Park and suggested the Council revisit the plan and look into purchasing more of the Crane property and less of this development.

Carolyn Mathews, 4200 Rock Quarry Road, pointed out that a lot of students who might not keep up with Council issues live in her area, run on Rock Quarry, and enjoy Rock Bridge State Park very much. She said it was really important to a vast number of people in the area to include herself and her family, and that we should not underestimate the importance to look into all of the environmental ramifications of watershed drainage - not just stormwater, but the entire impervious surface issue. She asked the Council to take their time with deliberations, especially for such as sensitive area.

Elizabeth Bergman, 8301 Guinn Lane, encouraged the Council to limit development on the Philips tract. She asked why such a massive development would even be considered on such a sensitive area. Ms. Bergman talked about protecting the watershed and Rock Bridge State Park. She noted that she was from Chicago and would have to drive two hours to enjoy a park like Rock Bridge State Park. She indicated how lucky those of us in Columbia were. She was also concerned about businesses that may leave the central city to move to the fringes and about tax payers having to pay to widen roads.

John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, believed this huge project could generate lots of jobs and money. Things this size were also opportunities for real smart growth, which, he explained, went beyond environmental protection. He said it was an opportunity to address a number of social inequities in terms of people who were already here who had non-living wage jobs. He asked the Council to look at how that could be done and how they might require the developer to make sure it was done. He suggested the Council ask how they would provide transportation from the north side of town to this area for work, during and after construction, and for shopping after things were developed. If done right, Mr. Clark indicated it could be a very beneficial project. Regarding tax revenues, he thought the figures given earlier were good. He suggested the Council do an extremely sophisticated return on investment analysis, beyond anything contemplated. This would take into account up front costs, who was going to pay them, maintenance costs, and the time value of money.

Mayor Hindman continued the public hearing to March 1, 2004.

B39-04 Voluntary annexation of property located on the northeast corner of Scott Boulevard and Bethany Drive; establishing permanent R-3 zoning.

The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck described this as an approximate .03 acre tract being recommended for approval by both the Staff and Commission.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

B39-04 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B40-04 Rezoning property located on both sides of Wren Wood Drive, extended, from R-2 to R-1.

The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck commented that this 8.9 acre tract was being downzoned from R-2 to R-1 by the property owner at the City Council's request. The Planning and Zoning Commission as well as the Staff recommended approval.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

B40-04 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B41-04 Rezoning property located on the northwest corner of Gray Oak Drive and Buttonwood Drive from O-1 to C-P.

The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck described this property as 1.32 acres recommended for approval by both the Staff and the Commission for C-P zoning subject to O-1 uses and stores, shops, and markets for retail trades.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

Tom Schneider, an attorney with offices at 11 N. Seventh Street, spoke on behalf of the contract purchasers, the principals of Putnam Interiors, D/B/A A. N. E. LLC. He said they had outgrown their successful location on Seventh Street and wanted to build a 10,000 to 12,000 square feet two story building on the subject site. Because the property was submitted as planned commercial, they would come back at some time in the foreseeable future to address such things as stormwater runoff and etc. Mr. Schneider noted open C-1 on the south, a strip mall and vacant land to the west, Social Security Administration building and Hawthorne Educational Services to the east, and a church to the north.

Dana Watts, address unknown, stated his concern regarding development within the City.

Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

B41-04 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

(A) Sidewalk construction on the north side of Business Loop 70 from Creasy Springs Road to Garth Avenue.

Item A was read by the Clerk.

Since this project would partially be funded under the Federal Surface Transportation Program Enhancement funds, Mr. Patterson pointed out it would be necessary to enter specific statements into record. The hearing tonight was for the purpose of determining the necessity of building a sidewalk along the north side of the Business Loop from Creasy Springs Road to Garth Avenue. This project had been identified as STP2116-504. All applicable federal guidelines would be followed during the design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of the project. Plans would be subject to Federal Highway Administration review and standards. Federal funds used for right-of-way acquisition or construction would be spent in accordance with all applicable federal regulations. The right-of-way acquisition process to be followed would include the right of the property owners to obtain appraisals for their property. The proposed project had been identified as having no significant impact on the environment and a categorical exclusion from the need to prepare an environmental impact statement was requested. Due to the various state and federal review schedules and the anticipated right-of-way acquisition timetables, Mr. Patterson noted it was expected that if Council authorized the project to proceed, a contract for the construction would be let in Spring 2005. He stated they were also required to have a verbatim transcript prepared of the hearing, which would be submitted to the Department of Transportation as a permanent record. Any person desiring to be heard was required to state their name and address in order to make the record complete. Interested parties must also submit written comments, evidence, or recommendations with respect to the project to the Office of the Director of Public Works for the City of Columbia, Post Office Box 6015, Columbia, Missouri, 65205. This must be done within the ten days of the closing of the public hearing. That information would also be made part of the transcript along with the affidavits of publication for this public hearing. After receiving the public comments on the project, the hearing would be closed and the City Council would direct Staff to proceed in the manner desired by Council. Subject to approval of the project by the City Council, the City would proceed with project design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction in accordance with the timetable outlined.

The project description included the construction of a five foot sidewalk on the north side of Business Loop from Creasy Springs Road eastward to Garth Avenue. The project would provide improved pedestrian access to businesses and services in the vicinity. One property particularly identified as receiving benefit would be the Rusk Rehabilitation facility, a destination point for many pedestrians, wheelchairs users, and bicycle riders. The total estimated project cost was $295,000. Funding sources were from the Federal Surface Transportation Program Enhancement funds, Local Transportation Sales Tax funds, and tax bills to the adjacent properties. Tax bills proposed and set by this hearing would be levied at a rate not to exceed $36.50 per abutting foot. The balance of the funding was for that portion of the sidewalk from Creasy Springs to the east side of the overpass on Business Loop 70, an area along State right-of-way that would not be tax billed and would be entirely at the expense of the City. The sidewalk would be approximately five feet from the back of the pavement, curb to gutter, and would be adjacent to the existing MoDOT right-of-way. Permanent and temporary easements would be required from adjacent property owners. The University of Missouri owned approximately 1300 feet of frontage along the Ellis Fischel Cancer Center and the Rusk Rehabilitation Center. The project was being coordinated with the Water and Light to underground the electric line on the north side of Business Loop from I-70 to Parkade Boulevard. The Water and Light Department would be acquiring a ten foot wide electric easement and the plan was to have the line placed under the proposed sidewalk in order to minimize the corridor of disruption. The electric line relocation would be completed prior to the sidewalk project. Although, for the most part, the sidewalk itself would be on existing right-of-way, Mr. Patterson said there would be some private property required for permanent easements and there would be construction and reconstruction of driveways and retaining walls in order to minimize disruption of private property. There would also be some impact on parking where they were currently utilizing some right-of-way for private parking. The project length, from Creasy Springs to Garth, was about 4,000 feet in length and of that, approximately 700 feet was the property referenced from Creasy Springs to eastbound I-70 ramp. The Staff had solicited input from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission and other interested parties on the project, notice of the public hearing was sent out as well as being advertised publicly, and an interested parties meeting was held in November of last year at the Parkade Center where 12 persons were in attendance. He stated there was general support for the project at that time.

Mr. Ash asked if there had been a business group that wanted to be involved. Mr. Beck replied that they were not successful getting the petition signatures necessary to formulate what they planned to do. He said Staff had attended meetings trying to encourage programs to do more than the sidewalk. Now, he said, we needed to move forward to meet the deadlines for the grant.

Mr. Loveless asked about a landowner that would not provide an easement. Mr. Patterson said that was for the power pole and that he had objections to the tax bills and the electrical project. He said he would not presume, at this point, that all of the easements necessary would be donated. He felt they had included a fairly generous allocation for acquisition of right-of-way. The actual cost would be tax billed and could be cheaper than the maximum that was set tonight if we were fortunate enough to get the right-of-way donated or at a low cost.

Mayor Hindman asked if we would be able to tax bill the University. Mr. Boeckmann said Staff would work with them. Mayor Hindman asked if that had been taken into consideration in the estimate. Mr. Patterson replied that the total cost includes the tax bill against all properties. In their discussions with the University, he said, they did recognize this was a valuable project even though no one was looking forward to the expenditure. He stated that they did not foresee an effort on the part of the University to block it in any way. He thought they would work with Staff.

Mayor Hindman asked if trees could be planted in the five foot strip. Mr. Patterson explained that the Department of Transportation regulated what went in there and added that they were reluctant to allow plantings that close to the curb. He thought there might be some opportunities as they got into the design. What Staff would like to see, particularly along the Rusk Rehabilitation Center, was to be able to get further away from the property and actually on property where they would have some opportunities for landscaping. Mayor Hindman asked if there would be utilities buried underneath that would prevent planting. Mr. Patterson said there would be planting possibilities, but noted that the project estimate did not include landscaping. There were landscaping plans down by the West Boulevard area, which the Parks and Recreation Department developed. Generally speaking, the cost estimates and monies available did not include extensive landscaping along the sidewalk itself.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

Greg Ahrens speaking for Kathleen Weinschenk, a member of the Disabilities Commission, both of 1504 Sylvan Lane, explained that the Commission recommended a six foot sidewalk with a five foot buffer. They would like the Council to consider safe access across the busy intersection at Business Loop and Garth and recommended improving sidewalks along both sides of Garth, creating a corridor to the Library and downtown. Ms. Weinschenk was concerned about a car dealership letting their cars hang over where the sidewalk would be.

Speaking for himself, Mr. Ahrens thought it was important to allow some "shy space" when there were retaining walls. He said it would also be a good idea to have the sidewalk a little wider so wheelchair users did not rub against the wall. He noted having seen children riding their bikes against traffic coming from Cosmo Park. The use of sidewalks for bicycles was allowed everywhere, except downtown. Mr. Ahrens pointed out that when using public transportation, part of the trip was still as a pedestrian. He indicated it would be useful for all kinds of people to have the sidewalk along the Business Loop for access to businesses, to the park, and to just get back and forth. He asked the Council to proceed with the project.

Amahia Mallea, 211 Alexander, spoke as a board member of the PedNet Coalition. She stated that they had been working hard to make Columbia a more walkable, bikable and wheelable city to live in. As a pedestrian and cyclist, the Business Loop was one of the black holes of the City and a very difficult place to get across to have access to any place along the Business Loop. There were lots of paths worn by people forced to walk next to the curb in the grass or through the parking lots. PedNet saw this project as one piece of a larger plan to make this a more accessible location. Ms. Mallea thought we had previously established, maybe in the Model Street Standards discussion, six feet being preferred to five for the standard for wheelchairs. Because of the proximity to Rusk Rehabilitation, she felt, six feet would be more amenable in this area.

Steve Kuhlman, 205 S. Garth, a member of the Track Club, the multi-sport club and Chair of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission, spoke as an individual to the issue. He saw nothing wrong with the project and thought it was a good use of public resources. He agreed that six feet would be better if the budget and right-of-way would allow for it. Mr. Kuhlman suggested integrating the transit facilities by building a couple of bus stop pads for shelters and benches where needed. He noted that was something not addressed in previous Public Works projects. Although it would be a budget problem because of federal funds coming out of different departments, he said, it would be the most efficient time to add those facilities.

Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

Mr. Janku said the crossing at Garth and Business Loop had been mentioned and thought it was something we were planning to address to make it a more pedestrian friendly crossing. He was hopeful that would occur in conjunction with this project. He thought eventually there would be a sidewalk on the other side of the street, but that this was the first step. When attending the interested parties meeting, there were properties on the other side of the street actually asking why this side was selected first. Once this precedent was set, Mr. Janku was hopeful the entire length of the Business Loop would be addressed.

Mr. Janku asked about the retaining walls. Mr. Patterson stated there had been areas identified where they were anticipating retaining walls, but that they were talking about one foot to eighteen inches. There would be some work on driveway entrances, taking them back a little further or replacing them in those locations. With respect to the six versus the five feet, Mr. Patterson explained that the additional width would be toward the street, which would change it from a five foot separation between the curb and the sidewalk to a four foot separation. That was a general template. He estimated the extra cost to be $16,000 to $20,000 for the entire 4,000 feet.

Mr. Ash thought the extra foot made sense given the location of Rusk Rehabilitation Center.

Mr. Janku noted a fair amount of bicycle traffic on the Business Loop and said that was where one needed a little more space where people on bikes were intermingling with pedestrians. Given the destination of Cosmo Park, which the City was trying to make more accessible, Mr. Janku said, it would have some benefit.

Mayor Hindman suggested Staff look carefully at the six feet. Mr. Patterson responded they could provide a report before the bid call.

Mr. Loveless made the motion that Staff be directed to proceed with final plans, specifications, and documents for federal approval, looking at both, the five and six foot, options. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

(B) Voluntary annexation of property located on the southwest corner of Old Mill Creek Road and Old Field Road.

Item B was read by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck explained that this voluntary annexation involved 20.6 acres with a request for R-1 zoning on one tract and A-1 on the other tract. Currently the site was developed with a single family home and some out buildings. This was a Boone Electric Service territory, with an eight inch sewer line to the northeast of the property. Presently the property was served by Consolidated Public Water Supply District 1. The property was in the Boone County Fire Protection District. If annexed to the City, Mr. Beck said it would receive City Police services as well as solid waste services.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.

(C) Voluntary annexation of property located on the n orth side of Old Field Road, east of Vineyard Way.

Item C was read by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck explained this ten plus acre tract to lie south of the existing City limits. The property contained a single family home with a barn. The request was for A-1. The property was within the Boone Electric territory, had an eight inch 540 feet sewer line, was served by Consolidated Water District 1, and was located in the Boone County Fire District. If annexed, it would be served by City Police and solid waste services, unless waived.

Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.

There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.


B46-04 Authorizing an annexation agreement with Nichols Properties, L.L.C.

The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck explained that currently the property contained a service station and a small grocery type store. It was located on the southeast corner of Route B and Route HH in northeast Columbia. The property was not contiguous with the City and under a previous agreement the City was running a trunk sewer in that general direction. If they were allowed to hook on to the City's sewer line, he noted, they would have to sign a pre-annexation agreement. If brought into the City, the zoning request would be for C-3.

Mayor Hindman noted that the present zoning was County C-GP. He asked why we would not want them to have the comparable zoning, C-P. Mr. Ash thought it was strange to have less restrictive zoning in the City than there was in the County. Mr. Dudark explained that Staff had provided that information to the applicant - that it would be a change from the equivalent zoning, which was planned commercial.

Mr. Janku understood because it was an already developed site they would not have to submit a plan. Mr. Dudark replied that was correct, unless they had an expansion or something similar.

Mr. Hutton inquired as to the age of the development on the site. Mr. Dudark thought it had been there a few years. Mr. Hutton felt there was not an eminent possibility of it being redeveloped, but pointed out that the zoning would be forever.

Mr. Loveless asked for clarification of paragraph 11 of the agreement. Mr. Boeckmann explained that if the Council approved the agreement as it was, with the C-3, when the property became contiguous and the issue of zoning was before the Council, and if they refused to zone it C-3, they could stay outside of the City and still receive sewer service. If the Council approved the pre-annexation agreement, Mr. Hutton pointed out, sewer service would probably be in place by the time it became contiguous.

Mr. Beck asked what the Public Works Staff thought. Mr. Patterson replied that the department felt this should not even be a condition of agreement or zoning. He explained that they had an ordinance to acquire this easement. He pointed out that they had filed condemnation on it and never felt they should be negotiating zoning for a sewer line easement. Mr. Boeckmann added that they had told the property owner's attorney that the Staff felt the Council would have a problem with the C-3 zoning. He said the property owner had held firm to the request and indicated that was what he wanted presented to the Council.

Mr. Loveless made the motion that B46-04 be amended to read C-P rather than C-3. The motion was seconded by Ms. Crayton and approved unanimously by voice vote.

Chris Sander, Crockett Engineering, 2608 N. Stadium, stated the owner was willing to work with C-P zoning with C-3 uses.

Mr. John asked what uses would be assigned under County C-GP. Mr. Sander was not sure. Mr. John thought they would be establishing the same uses that were already in the County's C-GP, but not all C-3 uses because they did not know if he would be allowed to have tractor sales and that sort of thing.

At this point there was a discussion about having the same restrictions on uses as in the County's C-GP zoning. Mr. Boeckmann suggested they amend it to C-3 with uses allowed in the County's current zoning or CP with uses allowed in the County's C-GP. That way, when they came in for the actual zoning, they could see what was comparable. Mr. John noted that they were making the assumption, at this point, that what the County approved was something the Council would want to approve also - without knowing what they approved.

Mr. John made the motion that B46-04, as amended, be further amended to read - similar restrictions as in the County C-GP zoning ordinance as they exist today for this particular property. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.

B46-04, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU. 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.

B42-04 Vacating street right-of-way in conjunction with the proposed Final Plat of Eastport Village Plat 3-A.

B43-04 Approving the Final Plat of Eastport Village Plat 3-A, a Replat of Lots 310, 311 and 312 of Eastport Village Plat 3.

B44-04 Approving the Final Plat of Woodland Springs Plat 1; authorizing a performance contract.

B45-04 Approving the Final Plat of Greystone Subdivision - Plat 1; authorizing a performance contract.

B47-04 Calling for bids for the construction of Garth Avenue from Bear Creek to Blueridge Road.

B48-04 Calling for bids for the construction of Garth Avenue from Thurman Street to Bear Creek and the reconstruction of the Garth Avenue bridge over Bear Creek.

B49-04 Confirming the contract with Ken Kauffman & Sons Excavating, Inc. for sanitary sewer improvements at Columbia Regional Airport.

B50-04 Accepting easements for drainage, sewer, sidewalk, street and utility purposes.

B51-04 Authorizing Amendment No. 3 to the contract with Jacobs Civil Inc. relating to engineering services for water system improvements.

B52-04 Authorizing an agreement with Boone County for JCIC clerical services.

B53-04 Amending Ordinance No. 016011 in connection with certain outstanding bonds of the City.

B54-04 Amending Ordinance No. 016262 in connection with certain outstanding bonds of the City.

B55-04 Amending Ordinance No. 016647 in connection with certain outstanding bonds of the City.

R28-04 Setting a public hearing: construction of improvements to Highpointe Park.

R29-04 Authorizing acceptance of Townson™ Law Enforcement Trauma Shooting Kits from the Columbia Police Foundation.

R30-04 Authorizing a contract with the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services for the HIV Prevention Project.

R31-04 Accepting an Emergency Management Performance Grant from SEMA.

R32-04 Accepting grants from SEMA for Community Emergency Response Team training.

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


R33-04 Authorizing an Adopt A Spot beautification agreement.

The resolution was read by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck commented the Staff was pleased that the Columbia Garden Club chose to take over the responsibility for bed eight on Forum Boulevard.

Mayor Hindman, on behalf of the Council, thanked the Garden Club for their interest.

The vote on R33-04 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R34-04 Officially recognizing the Smithton Ridge Neighborhood Association.

The resolution was read by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck explained that the request was in conformity with the established guidelines.

John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, commented that he was pleased to see another neighborhood had applied for recognition by the City.

Mr. Ash felt people were confused and thought neighborhood associations and homeowners associations were the same thing. He pointed out that only neighborhood associations were notified of issues coming up in their respective areas.

The vote on R34-04 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R35-04 Certifying a local organization as a community housing development organization; amending the 2003 Action Plan; authorizing agreements for allocation of CHDO funds.

The resolution was read by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck explained this would allocate $25,000 of Federal HOME funding to Columbia Enterlight Ministries and $28,846 of the 2003 funds to the Central Missouri Counties Human Development Corporation. It also formally designates Columbia Enterlight Ministries Community Development Corporation as a CHDO for funding received during the 2003 and 2004 program years.

Mr. Ash asked about CMCHDC's building two houses for $190,000. He was hopeful more than two homes could be built for that amount. Mr. Janku replied that other entities should apply to qualify as a CHDO so more cost estimates would be available. Ms. Crayton noted that many times the land needed to be purchased with some of the money. Mr. Ash had no problem with this and noted it looked like they were having a hard time finding people who were qualified to do these types of projects. Mayor Hindman pointed out the overhead involved. Mr. Hutton noted the projected sales price to be $95,000. Mr. John commented that the average sales price for a home in 1991 had been under $80,000. Today's average sales price was over $125,000. It was the cost of land, materials, and labor. Although $65.00 per square foot might be not the cheapest, Mr. John knew of no builders doing it under $60.00 per square foot. In this case, he noted, they were being built one at a time and in isolated areas. The logistics, he explained, made it difficult because they would not be able to bring in a train load of lumber and set it on site to build four houses moving the crews back and forth. He said it became very labor intensive. Mr. John also explained that the YouthBuild people went to a class to learn from teachers before they went out and built something. He did not see a whole lot of "fat" in this instance. Depending upon where the houses were located, they may or may not have problems selling them.

Mr. Ash stated that it might not be that anyone was trying to charge more than they should, but that it might just be that when it was done this way it was more expensive.

Mr. Dudark noted a $25,000 cap per house that came from the HOME funds for all uses. If they went over that, they were required to find the saving within their own budget. He also noted the $25,000 included the amount the homeowner would get for the down payment and the subsidy.

John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, commented that this was not about inefficiency, not-for-profit housing developers, or about government. He reiterated what Mr. John had reported. He said the HOME money was being used by the not-for-profit housing developer, the CHDO, so they could lower the price they had to charge the homeowner. The vote on R35-04 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R36-04 Approving the Preliminary Plat of Hawks Ridge.

The resolution was ready by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck explained that this 5.30 acre tract in northeast Columbia would create five R-1 zoned lots and two PUD-7 lots.

Mr. Dudark noted that the Commission recommended approval with two conditions. One was that the wooded area in the northwest part of lot 6 be a green space conservation easement on the final plat, restricting any development. The other was that a note be placed on the plat indicating the five R-1 zoned lots had the same restrictions and covenants that applied to Eastland Hills. That note was already added to the plat.

Mr. Hutton noted a homeowner concern in the report about stormwater. He asked about the stormwater plan. Mr. Patterson replied that it would have to be approved at the time the final plat came in. It would be needed before any building permits would be issued. Mr. Hutton asked about the problem. Mr. Patterson said he had not heard about any significant problems.

Mayor Hindman asked about the reference to a reactive pedway. He assumed that meant it would be put in when the street went in. Mr. Dudark replied that it meant if there was a construction project on St. Charles Road the plan would show the pedway as part of the project. At this point, he noted, there were no plans for St. Charles.

Chris Sander, Crockett Engineering, 2608 N. Stadium, commented that in revising the preliminary plat to add the notes regarding the covenants, they also added a label saying the wooded area would be shown as a green space conservation easement. As part of the development of the PUD plan that would be discussed in a few weeks, a stormwater management plan had been developed and approved.

The vote on R36-04 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:

R37-04 Endorsing a master plan for the development of the Boone County Fairgrounds/Atkins property.

The resolution was read by the Clerk.

Mr. Beck explained that a presentation had been made jointly to the Council and the Commission regarding options for development of the property. At the Council work session, the options were discussed and Staff was asked to draft a resolution indicating City support for option 3 - building a ballfield on the Atkins property. The Council specifically indicated they did not want to commit to any financing for construction or maintenance at this point in time. Another condition was that the Council and staff be given an opportunity for input on any detailed plans and specifications for the use of the jointly owned property. The Council had not ruled out joint participation in the future with regard to maintenance and operation. He informally indicated to the Commission that the Council would be acting on a resolution this evening, and if adopted, he would forward a copy to them along with the Staff's report.

Mayor Hindman felt that since it was jointly owned, the City should be willing to do their part, but thought timing issues might come into play. He gave the Philips tract as an example - should the Philips tract proposal be approved, there would be an opportunity for them to decide whether or not they wanted to purchase the park. When things like that come along, it might make it more difficult for them to go forward and help with a joint venture. Since it was a joint project, however, he felt, they needed to think of it as part of park planning.

With Council endorsement of option three, Mr. Beck said the County Commission felt there would be a better chance of receiving the grant they were pursuing and raising private funding, at least for the capital portion of the ballfields.

The vote on R37-04 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, ASH, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU. 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:

B56-04 Voluntary annexation of property located on the southwest corner of Old Mill Creek Road and Old Field Road; establishing permanent A-1 and R-1 zoning.

B57-04 Voluntary annexation of property located on the north side of Old Field Road, east of Vineyard Way; establishing permanent A-1 zoning.

B58-04 Approving the PUD site plan for Hawks Ridge.

B59-04 Approving the Final Plat of Timber Ridge Subdivision Plat 2; authorizing a performance contract.

B60-04 Accepting a conveyance from the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission in connection with the Grindstone Parkway project.

B61-04 Authorizing acquisition of easements for the West Boulevard-Marygene Street drainage improvement project.

B62-04 Confirming the contract with C.L. Richardson Construction Company, Inc. for the construction of sewers in Sanitary Sewer District No. 157 (Rollins and Burnam Avenue); appropriating funds.

B63-04 Accepting conveyances for utility purposes.

B64-04 Authorizing construction of improvements to Highpointe Park.

B65-04 Authorizing a PCS antenna agreement with US Cellular.

B66-04 Granting an extension of the cable television franchise held by Charter Communications Entertainment I, L.L.C.

B67-04 Authorizing a grant agreement with the March of Dimes for the Latino Home Visiting Expansion Project; appropriating funds.


(A) Intra-departmental Transfer of Funds.

Report accepted.

(B) Neighborhood Improvement Districts (NIDs)

Mayor Hindman commented that there was another type of district, a community improvement district, and suggested they receive a report on that also for comparison purposes. Mr. Beck noted a listing of the different types and said he would report back on them.

With respect to the people coming forward about problems in the fringe areas of the City, Mr. Ash suggested the Council ask them to consider setting up a district. He felt this would at least give them an option. He stated it looked as though the boundaries had to be within either the City or the County, but noted a lot of the problems that come up were on the edge. He suggested setting up a County NID and a City NID next to each other. Mayor Hindman agreed. May Hindman commented that if one could get the neighborhood to contribute to parks, then perhaps the City could partner with them. Another issue that came up frequently where he thought this would work was traffic calming. If enough of the neighborhood was unhappy, they could form a NID and ask the City to partner with them. Mr. Ash commented that he had been contacted by someone aware that an area was in need of work and who was willing to put in their fair share. If there were other people like her, he felt, they should be encouraged to organize.

Report accepted.


Upon receiving the majority vote of the Council the following individuals were appointed to the following Board and Commission:


Collins, Nancy C., 1201 Paquin #1502, Ward 1 - term to expire 3/1/07


Glasgow, Glenn G., 1210 S. Bridgewood, Ward 5 - term to expire 3/1/07

Glaze, Marie A., 2209 A Creasy Springs, Ward 2 - term to expire 3/1/07


Regarding a report received from the Planning Department, Mr. Janku noted the Council would have to make some recommendations regarding a CDBG issue. He asked that it be put on their work session list.

Also related to CDBG, Mr. Janku was hopeful the Commission would take into account bus access to new facilities for which they were requesting funds. He asked that the Commission impress upon the applicants the importance of these facilities being accessible to City bus lines, if at all possible. Mr. Ash asked if he was asking them to pick the projects based on the bus line. Mr. Janku said he was. Mr. John asked about types of projects. Mr. Janku stated he was referring to any kind of facility people would need to access. Mr. Ash suggested some type of check list for the Commission. Mr. Janku liked the idea. He recalled when the Employment Office was built at Bluff Creek, points being available for it being on a bus line. He noted it was a state contract and a state award, but that was one of the items on their list. Even though it was not on a bus line, the project received enough points. Ms. Crayton commented on how far out the Greyhound Station was - by the Ice Chalet. She said people were making decisions that affected Columbia although they did not live here.

Mr. Janku made the motion that the CDBG Commission be asked to consider this for evaluating requests for funding for establishing facilities. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.

Regarding the Broadway Improvement Project report discussed at the last meeting, Mr. Janku said he had not brought up the access issues at the intersection of Old 63 and Broadway. Before the concrete was poured, he asked that the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission and Disabilities Commission take a look at it to make sure nothing was overlooked. Mr. Loveless reminded him that there was a Broadway Sidewalk Committee working on the issue and that they might have received input from that group. Mr. Janku said he would still like to hear from the other two entities. He said there were certain points at that intersection where the light could not be seen so there was no way of knowing when to cross.

Mr. Janku made the motion that the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission and the Disabilities Commission be asked to review the issue and report back. The motion was seconded by Ms. Crayton and approved unanimously by voice vote.

Ms. Crayton commented that she had received information regarding her request on trimming trees at the intersection of Hirth and Worley. She asked everyone to be conscientious about keeping the intersections clear so people did not have to pull out into traffic. She said she would also like to see the pot holes taken care of on Worley.

Regarding the one stop shop on Vandiver, Ms. Crayton reported that the yellow sticks had been knocked down again.

With respect to comments made earlier this evening, Mr. Ash commented that he was open to hearing logical and reasonable input, but said if anyone was trying to sway Council opinion and thought that yelling and criticizing them would do that, it was not the best logic.

Regarding the memo from Public Works about the downtown sidewalk beverage container recycling pilot program, which basically said they were going to discontinue it because the Downtown Association was not going to pay for it, Mr. John thought we should try to keep as many recycling programs going as possible. He asked if the Council could budget the monthly fee per container until The District's next budget was discussed. At that time, the Council could make sure it was in their budget to continue the program. Mr. Ash did not think it seemed like much money, especially from a PR perspective, and thought they should keep them. Mr. Janku asked if anything was being put in them. Mayor Hindman asked how long they had been there. Mr. Patterson replied that they had been there more than six months and were not doing very well. He said they were getting quite a bit of contamination in them and the SBD was not in favor of continuing it. He pointed out that the containers had already been removed, but said they could be reinstituted if the Council so desired. He said they had indicated it would be a trial project and The District was supposed to evaluate whether or not they wanted to keep them. He noted they were also promoting the individual recycling at businesses. Mr. Janku asked if he planned to put the containers in use throughout the City in general. Mr. Patterson said trash was predominantly being put in them. He stated they were getting a much better use of on the ones at the Break Times and other service station locations. Mr. Beck asked if they were talking about taking it out of the general solid waste utility budget. Mr. Patterson said he had not suggested that. Mr. Janku thought Mr. John had suggested that. Mr. Patterson said they could determine it to be a public benefit and take it out of the general fund. Mr. Beck suggested a separate rate on the dumpster. Regarding rates for recycling, Mr. Patterson noted they were maintaining rates for the recycling of commercial material to keep it below the commercial disposal rates. If they tried to incorporate it into the general collection rate, they would be in competition which would inflate the cost because that was not included in the cost of private competitors.

Mr. John commented that they received a Staff report regarding fire responses and other background information so the Council could start discussing any changes that could be made. Mr. Beck asked the Council to forward any specific requests to him so they could be looked into.

Mayor Hindman suggested a pamphlet that could be distributed to perspective home buyers that would tell them about the services they would be getting before they purchased a home. Mr. John pointed out that realtors generally suggest that people refer to the source, such as City, School Board, etc. Mayor Hindman suggested that the information be made available through the Web page. Several suggestions were made as to how it could be done.

Mayor Hindman made the motion that Staff be directed to report back on the issue with alternatives. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously by voice vote.

Mayor Hindman understood credit cards would soon be used on parking meters. Mr. Patterson replied that this had been one of the items talked about at budget time. It was included as a pilot project for this year in selected areas downtown. He said they were looking at an implementation time in March with press releases going out before too long. Mr. Janku asked where they would be. Mr. Patterson replied that some would be on Ninth Street and Broadway. He said they worked with the SBD to determine the most appropriate locations.

Mayor Hindman understood the YouthBuild Program was not going to be funded. Ms. Crayton commented that she had talked with someone who had said they would make sure that Columbia was reinstated. If we could not get federal funding, Mr. Janku suggested there might be a way to obtain funds through the HOME CDBG process.

Mayor Hindman commented about Parks and Recreation running out of scholarship money for the ARC last year. He asked how it was going this year. Mr. Hood responded that in FY 03 they actually utilized all of the scholarship money by the latter part of July. They then placed anyone applying on a waiting list. As soon as they began the fiscal year in October, those people on the waiting list received consideration. At this point, he reported, no one on the waiting list. Mr. Hood stated they were beginning to process some renewal requests for scholarships and at this point they were not sure what their demand would be over the next few months as the renewals came in along with new requests. Ms. Crayton commented that another fund raising drive might be in order. She offered to help solicit businesses for donations. Mr. Hood noted that they have set aside some scholarship funding for summer, but would be open to recruitment of additional donations to the scholarship fund. Mayor Hindman asked that the Council be kept apprized of the situation.

With the possibility of acquiring a park in connection with the Philips Tract, Mayor Hindman stated he thought the Parks and Recreation Commission should be involved as early as possible. Mr. Hood noted that they met the third Thursday of each month. Mayor Hindman suggested they receive information as to what the park might look like so they could comment on it as best as they can. Mr. Janku agreed and was hopeful they could be shown the schematic the Council had at the public work session two weeks ago. Mr. Hood said they could add the issue to the Commission's agenda.

Mayor Hindman made the motion that the issue be added to the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting agenda. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.

Regarding the standards for stormwater runoff, Mayor Hindman thought the services of CH2M Hill should be utilized. He stated he would also like to see us look at what Austin, Texas had done around Barton Spring.

John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, introduced himself as one of the three Mayoral candidates and said he would like to have several forums organized for the three candidates to discuss the future of Columbia.

Arch Brooks, 3414 Bonny Linn, also introduced himself as a Mayoral candidate and suggested that the Philips issue be tabled and a new location be considered.

Mayor Hindman suggested putting the CH2M Hill report on the Web page.

The meeting adjourned at 10:38 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Sheela Amin

City Clerk