INTRODUCTORY
The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for
a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Tuesday, January 18, 2000, in the Council
Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following
results: Council members HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, and
COFFMAN were present. The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various
Department Heads were also present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting of January 3, 2000, were
approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second
by Mr. Janku.
APPROVAL AND ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA INCLUDING CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Hindman noted that B23-00 would be removed from Introductions.
Upon her request, Mr. Campbell made the motion that Mrs. Crockett
be allowed to abstain from voting on B7-00 and R9-00. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
The agenda, as amended, including the Consent Agenda, was
approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second
by Mr. John.
SPECIAL ITEMS
Mayor Hindman welcomed the fifth grade classes from Grant
Elementary School along with their teachers, Linda Afdahl, Jim Hogan, and Annie
Bradley.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
B399-99 Approving the revisions to the
O-P Development Plan of The Environment.
The bill was read by the Clerk.
Mayor Hindman explained that another request had been received
to further table this bill to the first meeting in March.
Mr. Beck stated that this issue relates to the amendment of
the O-P plan to allow for the relocation of a free standing sign. He explained
if the Council approves the request to table, it would allow more time for the
applicant to work out an alternate site which would dismiss the need for the
revision to the plan.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman continued the public
hearing.
Mr. Campbell made the motion that B399-99 be tabled to the
March 6, 2000, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously
by voice vote.
B456-99 Voluntary annexation of property
located on the west side of Bearfield Road, approximately 500 feet
south
of Nifong Boulevard; establishing permanent PUD-6 zoning.
The bill was read by the Clerk.
Mayor Hindman noted than an amendment sheet was prepared for
this bill and a protest petition had been submitted. He explained that five affirmative
votes by the Council would be necessary for passage, assuming the petition was
valid. Mr. Boeckmann said it was.
Mr. Hancock explained staff received an amended statement
of intent that speaks to storm water issues that were raised at the previous
meeting. He reported the neighborhood also submitted a two page document relating
to the same type of issues that they would like to see incorporated into the
developer's statement of intent.
Mayor Hindman asked where the Council stood as far as the
statement of intent. Mr. Boeckmann explained the Council is free to express their
opinion to the developer on what it will take for them to approve the plan or
the zoning -- which could be added to the statement of intent. However, this
has to be agreed to and be signed by the property owner.
Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Montgomery to explain the guidelines
he talked about earlier relating to Springfield's storm water runoff limits.
Mr. Montgomery explained that Springfield passed a watershed protection policy
for the Fullerton Spring and Pearson Creek watersheds. This area serves as a
partial water source for the water system for the City of Springfield. He explained
Springfield's water quality protection plan includes structural and non-structural
practices. The structural practices are referred to as best management practices.
After reading this information, Mr. Montgomery said the report indicates that
a combination of non-structural and structural practices are necessary. Mr. Campbell
commented since this development could set a precedent in regards to storm water
management, he believed the Council should consider alternatives that have been
used by other cities.
Mayor Hindman reopened the public hearing.
Don Stohldrier, 4016 Glen Eagle, developer of the property
in question, reported he had been given specific guidelines as to what needed
to be added to the letter of intent. He noted that he reviewed the proposed suggestions
that were submitted by the homeowners, and he believed they have set some impossible
standards to meet. Regarding his provision that the PUD must address storm water
quality issues by implementing methods in a plan to maintain the water quality
as much as practical, Mr. Stohldrier explained why the term "practical" was used.
He said there is no way that anyone can guarantee that in a 100 year storm that
the runoff from that property is going to remain absolutely, exactly the same
as it is today. He related it is an impossible standard to meet. Mr. Stohldrier
pointed out that the code only requires meeting the 10 year storm, however, he
noted his design will meet a 25 year event. Regarding the quality issue, he indicated
detention systems are being designed to reduce the peak runoff. On the issue
of long-term maintenance, Mr. Stohldrier explained the plan they are working
on would establish a professional management company that would be paid out of
a required homeowners association fee.
Mr. Campbell stated that he has some concerns with Mr. Stohldrier's
statement that water quality would be maintained "as much as practical". He said
that could be interpreted from a variety of perspectives. Mr. Stohldrier responded
he would be happy to look at the wording, but the homeowners have suggested that
water quality cannot be changed at all. He said that is an absolutely impossible
criteria to meet. If someone is able to recommend wording that could be obtainable,
he would work with them on it.
With regards to the statement about decreasing the peak flow
from the proposed PUD, Mr. Janku asked if this is in connection with a 25 year
storm event. Mr. Stohldrier replied for up to a 25 year storm event, the peak
flow that currently runs off the property will be less when the development is
completed.
In respect to water quality, Mr. Coffman supposed everyone
understood it could not be expected to stay exactly the way it is now, but thought
they are looking for some type of assurance. He felt the residents wanted a guarantee
that could be measurable. Mr. Stohldrier said he would love to know how to do
that, and added that this project would meet or exceed any subdivision in town
in regards to water quality -- whether it was developed previously or not.
Susan Bingaman, 2179 Bearfield Subdivision, read from the
zoning regulations concerning planned unit development. She contended that the
development outlined in the statement of intent, dated 12/20/99, and revised
on 1/11/00, conforms only minimally to the letter of the law and not at all to
the spirit of either the PUD regulations or the desires of the majority of the
citizens of Columbia as expressed through the City Council. Regarding the procedure
for establishing PUD zoning and for review and approval of a PUD site plan, Ms.
Bingaman noted that once again only the strict letter of the law had been satisfied.
Janet Retmeyer, of the Orthopaedic Foundation for Animals,
2300 E. Nifong, explained this property is located immediately to the north of
the tract in question. She asked the Council to deny the zoning request because
of the density, and also because the developer has failed to adequately address
the concerns of the neighbors as well as those of the City Council.
Glen Ehrhardt, an attorney with offices at 401 E. Locust,
spoke on behalf of the Clear Creek Neighborhood Association. He reported that
residents believe that the proposal before the Council is too dense and that
the developer's amendments to his original statement of intent are inadequate
and do not go far enough to protect the neighbors. Nor does it address the detailed
concerns expressed by the City Council at the previous meeting. He said the neighborhood's
suggested items for the statement of intent do not include a 100 year storm event,
but it does include a five, ten, or twenty-five year storm event. Mr. Ehrhardt
noted at the last meeting Jay Gebhardt had stated that the developer would agree,
as a condition of approval, to bring forth a plan which would not increase the
quantity of the runoff in a five, ten, or twenty-five year storm event. He pointed
out the amendments to the developer's statement of intent include what he calls
a lot of "fudge" words. He was concerned about the language "as much as practical".
Mr. Ehrhardt felt the request to be inadequate. He noted that initially the developer
was talking about 150 units, but now he understood that figure to be closer to
170.
Mayor Hindman asked Mr. Ehrhardt what kind of contact he has
had with the developer. Mr. Ehrhardt responded that he personally has had no
contact with the developer, although several members of the neighborhood have
met with him.
John Blakemore, 4807 Bearfield Road, spoke about the Council's
resolution regarding the watershed, the lack of specifics in the developer's
statement of intent, and the neighborhood's response to it. He read from a proposal
submitted by the Clear Creek Neighborhood Association that would add certain
specific conditions to Mr. Stohldrier's statement of intent. Mr. Blakemore noted
the basis of these conditions and requirements had been obtained after meeting
with an MU Extension Agent and from information provided by NRCS, and the water
quality protection policy instituted by Springfield. Considering the Council's
policy regarding the Little Bonne Femme Watershed above Rock Bridge State Park,
Mr. Blakemore felt it hardly seems reasonable to accept the developer's request
for annexation and PUD-6 rezoning in its current state. He asked the Council
to vote down the request.
Bruce Young, Director of Central Missouri Sheltered Enterprises,
404 Bearfield Road, explained this facility is located directly across the road
from the proposed development. He reported that CMSE has approximately 105 employees
and they are very concerned about the traffic flow on Bearfield Road. Mr. Young
stated there are already traffic problems in the area.
Fred von Saal, 4679 S. Bearfield, spoke about the condition
of Bearfield Road. He pointed out that there are no curbs or gutters, nor is
there any potential drainage process in place. Mr. von Saal raised concerns about
additional storm water runoff and where this flow would go. He reported that
residents had been assured by people at the University that it is possible to
ascertain this kind of information.
Tony Davis, 4655 Rock Quarry Road, displayed a chart showing
how the water currently flows off the property in question. He noted the neighborhood's
opportunity to work with the development from the very beginning has been limited.
Mr. Davis pointed out that residents are asking for lower density because a more
permeable surface would allow for better management of the runoff. Until there
is a plan, Mr. Davis thought there needed to be much more detail in this sensitive
area.
Alan Easley, 8300 E. Turner Farm Road, explained that his
mother's farm lies directly south of the subject tract. He passed around pictures
of a limestone rock structure his grandfather built about 100 years ago to slow
down the water flow that comes off of the subject tract. Mr. Easley stated the
concern of water coming off of the site is a serious one, although his mother's
land does not take on any water from the subject tract right now.
Jay Gebhardt, civil engineer with Allstate Consultants, reported
that at the last meeting he had misstated that there would be no increase in
the quantity of runoff for the two, ten, and twenty-five year storm. He noted
that he should have said that the peak discharge would not be increased. Regarding
the standards for water quality issues, Mr. Gebhardt indicated that whatever
the requirements are in Springfield he was sure, between the University and himself,
they could figure out a way to do it here as well. He said Mr. Stohldrier agreed
to that condition if the Council wanted to make that change. In respect to Bearfield
Road and the surrounding drainage areas, Mr. Gebhardt stated that there will
be no increase in peak discharge for the two year, ten year, and twenty-five
year storm. He remarked that whatever runs off the grass field today is the baseline
for quantity. Mr. Gebhardt noted that a separate detention facility is planned
for the small areas along the road or around the perimeter that does not drain
off. In regards to Mr. Stohldrier's participation in improvements to Bearfield
Road, Mr. Gebhardt explained that he would prefer to do that as development occurs.
If possible, they would like to meet with City staff and figure out some way
to achieve this so the traffic issues could be addressed before the houses are
constructed.
Ms. Crayton remarked the neighbors are asking for a plan and
a study on storm water runoff. She asked why this cannot be provided. Mr. Gebhardt
responded studies will be done and a detailed plan will be submitted to address
those issues.
Mr. Janku asked if the development still calls for 167 homes.
Mr. Gebhardt said the plan that he has sketched has 167 lots on it. He commented
that it also contains six to eight acres of green space. Mr. Gebhardt stated
those numbers could go up or down depending on how this all evolves.
Mr. Campbell asked if good faith negotiations have occurred
with the surrounding neighborhoods. Mr. Gebhardt indicated that he has been as
straightforward with the neighbors as he could. He saw his job as being responsible
for fixing all of the problems.
Mrs. Crockett asked whether this land could be developed if
it was not annexed into the City. Mr. Gebhardt said it could. Mrs. Crockett asked
how many houses could be constructed. Mr. Gebhardt said this 35 acre tract is
currently zoned A-2 zoning, and the minimum lot size for this zoning is two and
one-half acres. Mrs. Crockett asked what would be done about a sewer system.
Mr. Gebhardt replied that it would consist of on-site treatments (lagoons). Mrs.
Crockett asked about the County's policies relating to storm water runoff. Mr.
Gebhardt replied there are no conditions that would address it in A-2 zoning.
Mayor Hindman asked about the developer working with the University
extension people. Mr. Gebhardt said they would work with them to come up with
an idea of how to treat the water quality. Mayor Hindman asked if they would
follow their recommendation on meeting the goals the Council is trying to establish.
Mr. Gebhardt reported they would, as well as what the staff thinks is important
also.
Mr. Coffman asked why the peak flow is so important. He asked
if it does more damage. Mr. Gebhardt said it is the point where the most water
is flowing, so it has the potential to do the most damage.
Regarding the original statement of intent (Item E), Mr. John
noted that Mr. Stohldrier cited that a certain percentage of the property would
be left in open space. He pointed out there were two numbers quoted, however,
the revised statement just has one number (50%). Mr. John asked if the figure
would be 50% of 35.4 acres. Mr. Gebhardt said it is 50% of 35.41 acres, minus
the right of way.
Regarding the off-site improvements, Mr. Coffman noted that
the revised statement indicated those items are negotiable. He remarked that
does not clearly state what Mr. Stohldrier would actually be willing to do. Mr.
Coffman noted that when the Council was considering the Cambridge Place development,
the developer had agreed to specific dollar amounts and contributions that would
be made given certain triggers. Mr. Gebhardt said that is exactly the model they
were thinking of when the statement of intent was drafted. He believed those
conditions need to be hashed out in agreement form. Mr. Gebhardt thought that
could be handled at the time when the plan is submitted. Mr. Coffman said he
would feel more comfortable knowing the dollar amounts up front. Mr. Gebhardt
said he thought Mr. Stohldrier had spoken with some of the Council members and
had suggested a number.
Carolyn Matthews, 4200 Rock Quarry Road, did not think a high
density development is appropriate for this area. She asked that the character
of the neighborhood be taken into account,
Joe Bindbeutel, 1701 E. Gans Road, reported the City staff
and the neighbors need objective, reasonable standards to go by and there are
none outlined in the statement of intent. From an environmental standpoint, he
said it is not the peak flow, but the first flush that comes off any contaminant
source that is of tremendous environmental concern. Mr. Bindbeutel pointed out
there is nothing in any of the statements heard tonight that even remotely control,
or pretend to control, the first flush. He asked the Council to direct the staff
to come up with objective criteria both for the engineering and for standards.
Burt Stoerker, 7907 W. Rollingwood, voiced his concern about
Rockbridge State Park.
Richard Royer, 1515 Woodrail Avenue, owner and developer of
the Cambridge Place development located to the west of this site, indicated he
had withdrawn his name from the protest petition after meeting with Mr. Stohldrier.
At the meeting he had reviewed a very detailed plan that outlined how storm water
runoff would be managed. He believed the plan to be a fair one that would do
a good job of controlling runoff. Mr. Royer reported he was not attempting to
speak on behalf of either side, but merely trying to explain his position on
the western boundary.
Mr. Coffman asked Mr. Royer what he has experienced as far
as runoff thus far. Mr. Royer responded that they have not measured anything,
but in the heavily wooded area that has been developed, a box culvert and other
suitable drainage had been installed. Mr. Royer reported when there is a three
inch rain, there is probably eight inches of water running through the box culvert
and down the gully. But within 30 minutes after the rain stops, so does the runoff.
He felt the runoff plan had been devised pretty well. Mr. Royer pointed out that
his property is much more severe than Mr. Stohldrier's property. He indicated
that tract is fairly level.
Tom Latta, 2194 E. Bearfield Subdivision, spoke about the
kind of housing that could result. He believed new subdivisions find it very
hard to market to first time home buyers.
John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, asked the Council to not approve
this or any other annexation request until they have revised the ordinances and
tested them in court with declaratory judgment requests. He said approving something
now and saying things will get worked out later only leads the developer on.
Mr. Stohldrier believed it would be beneficial to the City
for the Council to adopt the Springfield ordinance. He said if that would provide
for an acceptable substitution for the term "practical" in the water quality
standards section in his statement of intent, it could be inserted. Mr. Stohldrier
believed if developers can comply with those conditions in Springfield, we can
do it here.
Mr. Janku noted in the neighbor's first paragraph to the statement
of intent, they suggest the condition that some sort of engineering or other
professional study be done before issuance of various permits. He asked Mr. Stohldrier
his thoughts. Mr. Stohldrier replied that he would be obligated to do that in
order to document any kind of water quality or quantity changes. He saw no problem
with that condition.
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
Mr. Campbell reported he has no problem with many of the statements
made, but said he would like to see these written to greater specificity so there
is no misunderstanding. Mr. Campbell is uncomfortable and unwilling to vote in
favor of this request the way it has currently been presented. He did not believe
that the development's density should be a major concern. He felt it to be good
planning. Mr. Campbell reiterated that he is most troubled about the lack of
specificity in the statement of intent.
Mr. John noted that approval of this request would set the
stage for everything else that comes in. He said they have to be very careful
about who is going to manage the development and how. Mr. John felt the staff
was comfortable with the Council's concerns and understood them. When the staff
was asked if they could implement what the Council wanted under the statement
of intent, the answer had been that they could not.
Ms. Crayton was uncomfortable voting on the plan because nothing
was clear. She would like to see both sides get together.
Mayor Hindman said he was wanting to see specific standards
as well, but there needs to be room for creativity to occur. He said that is
one of the purposes of the PUD. Mayor Hindman was encouraged by several things
that had been said by the developer and was hopeful he would follow the independent
guidance of the University Extension, a third party, who he assumed would be
in the position to say what it will take in order to protect the water quality.
Mayor Hindman suggested that the Council delay action on the issue. A discussion
followed as to whether or not this bill should be tabled or voted on later in
the evening after both sides had worked something out. It was suggested that
the staff should be involved as well.
Mr. Ehrhardt suggested that the bill be tabled to the next
meeting. Mr. Stohldrier had no objections and said they would get together and
work it out.
Mayor Hindman made the motion that B456-99 be tabled to the
February 7, 2000, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved unanimously
by voice vote.
B2-00 Authorizing an 8" water main
upgrade along Hinkson Avenue from Ripley Street east to William Street;
appropriating
funds.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that this would be a 585 feet long water line
and would be constructed at an estimated cost of $59,750.00, which would be paid
out of the water and electric fund. He reported the new line would enhance fire
protection in the area as well as residential service.
Mr. John asked who pays into the water and electric fund.
He assumed this would include every water user, whether they have paid for water
for a few months or for many years. Mr. Beck said that was correct.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B2-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:
VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B3-00 Authorizing an 8" water main
upgrade along Hinkson Avenue from College Avenue to Ripley Street;
appropriating
funds.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this would replace some 4" and 6" line
along Hinkson and it is being done in conjunction with a street construction
project. The estimated cost of this project is $105,110. Again, this would be
paid from water and electric funds.
Mr. John asked if this work would be done before the street
construction. Mr. Beck said that was the plan. Mr. John pointed out that this
project as well as the previous project, at a combined worth of over $160,000.00,
are both in the older part of Columbia. He noted the new residents that have
moved into Columbia are helping pay for this reconstruction.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B3-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:
VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
(A) Voluntary
annexation of property located on the west side of State Route 763, north
of Smiley Lane,
extended.
Item A was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained this tract consists of 239 acres located
in north central Columbia, west of 763. He pointed out that the annexation request
is subject to portions of the property being zoned R-1, C-1, O-1, C-3 and M-C.
Mr. Beck reported this issue has been reviewed by the appropriate City departments
as well as by other agencies involved in and around Columbia.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
Bruce Beckett, 901 E. Broadway, spoke on behalf of the property
owner, Tom Bass. He said more discussion would take place when the zoning issue
comes up at the February 7, 2000, meeting. He offered to answer any questions
regarding the annexation request.
Mr. Campbell commented that this is a very large and important
development. He was hopeful to see a plan that includes suggestions from the
neighboring residents. Mr. Beckett reported this project has been an ongoing
one for the past two years and Mr. Bass has had contact with many of the neighbors.
He indicated the applicant has incorporated all of their ideas into this plan.
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing and noted that no
action was required at this point.
(B) Development
of Field Neighborhood Park.
Mr. Beck noted that this three-quarter acre tract that was
purchased by the City with Community Development Block Grant funds for park purposes.
He pointed out that the property is immediately adjacent to the Eugene Field
Elementary School. He stated that the City has been following a policy and philosophy
of trying to have parks located adjacent to schools so the equipment can be used
by both the school system and neighboring residents, which better utilizes City
funds invested in the overall program. Mr. Beck reported there are several alternatives
that have been prepared in regards to the development of the park and he asked
Mr. Hood to describe them.
Mr. Hood explained that staff has been working on a master
plan for this park for about a year. He said they have worked with the Columbia
Public Schools, Columbia College, the North Central Neighborhood Association,
and neighboring businesses and residents. Mr. Hood felt the process was very
positive as they worked through a number of issues and reached a consensus on
almost everything, except for one -- whether or not the existing building should
be retained on the site. For that reason, he said the staff prepared two options.
Mr. Hood reported the first option involved developing the
entire site as open green space with walkways, benches, seating areas, an outdoor
classroom area, and additional gathering space. This option calls for the removal
of the building and replacing it with a low berm, heavily landscaped seating
area. At the time the options were prepared, this was the staff's preferred option.
Mr. Hood explained the second option will retain the building with the remainder
of the park being developed almost exactly as previously outlined. This option
includes cost estimates for the renovation and restoration of the building.
Mr. Hood related that when these two options were presented
to the Parks and Recreation Commission last summer, they held a public hearing
and after input was received, they subsequently voted to recommend to the Council
that the building be retained. However, that included the recommendation that
no City funds be used to restore the building, and that the City consider either
leasing or giving the building to the neighborhood association or another community
agency to operate. The Commission supported development of the remainder of the
park as had been designed and planned.
As a result of that recommendation to the Council, Mr. Hood
reported that staff has developed a third option which would retain the building,
eliminate the detailed landscaping around the building and replace it with green
lawn space. He explained that would allow for the development of the park while
at the same time allowing the building to remain. It was felt that should the
Council concur with this recommendation, that would allow time for the neighborhood
association to try and raise the necessary funds to restore the building.
Mr. Hood mentioned additional issues he felt the Council may
wish to consider. He related that during the planning process, the need for additional
playground equipment was identified. It had been suggested that this equipment
should be located on school property so the park would be geared toward a more
passive orientation. As designed, he noted that all three options include funding
to add additional playground equipment on school property. The other issue of
concern relates to parking. The group consensus in the planning process was that
there should be no off-street parking allowed. However, under current zoning
if the building is retained, off-street parking would be required. He understood
that to meet this condition it would require either a variance or the property
would have to be rezoned.
Mr. Hood commented that the costs related to all three options
were similar with the only difference being in the amount of funds associated
with the building. The cost for option one was $82,578, and it included funds
for demolition of the building. The approximate cost for the second option totaled
$202,855, and it included estimates for the renovation of the building. The third
option at an approximate cost of $77,578 did not dedicate any funding to the
building at all. Mr. Hood pointed out that all three options include $10,000
in force account labor.
Mr. Janku asked what the progression would be if the Council
decided to proceed with option three this evening. Mr. Hood replied that staff
would be able to begin development of the park this spring. He indicated an ordinance
would be needed to authorize the action. Mr. Janku asked if the building has
any structural problems. Mr. Hood said he was not aware of any major roof problems,
but added that the building is not in good shape. He said it would require considerable
work.
Mrs. Crockett asked whether the building had to be brought
up to City code if it is retained. Mr. Hood responded it would have to be in
order to be utilized as a public meeting place.
Ms. Crayton asked if the neighborhood could apply for grant
money to renovate the building. Mr. Hood said if the Council chooses to proceed
with that option, there would have to be a formal agreement between the City
and whatever entity that is permitted to utilize the building. He believed the
interested parties would have the option to apply for grants, assuming they are
eligible under the guidelines of the grant program.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
Linda Rootes, 807 N. Eighth Street, spoke on behalf of the
Board of Directors for the North Central Neighborhood Association. She urged
the Council to support option three. While the green space would be good for
the neighborhood, Ms. Rootes felt the 2,600 square feet at the corner would be
much more valuable as indoor space. She reported the neighborhood has built a
collaboration between many partners who are willing to make this neighborhood
resource a reality.
David Thayer, 8 Blue Jay Way, Executive Director of the Central
Missouri Human Development Corporation, explained that they have sponsored various
programs that focus on the needs of low income families and individuals. He said
HDC would be providing a legal structure for the project and a charitable 501-C3
status in order to accomplish three things. The first issue would be to obtain
the title to the building, if there is some transfer mechanism from the City
to a group that would take responsibility for the building. Mr. Thayer reported
HDC would assist the group in applying for and receiving funding from public
and private sources which could be used to both renovate the structure, and then
in future years, to provide for operating expenses for activities that might
take place there. In addition, he said HDC would also act as the fiscal agent
for the project, at least through the development stage, and in the future as
a possible grantee for certain specific scheduled activities. The second issue
would be to oversee the formation of a community board, in cooperation with the
neighborhood association, that would set the governing policies and procedures
in terms of using the facility and assure it is open to all of the interests
and concerns of people in the neighborhood and community. Mr. Thayer stated the
third issue is that HDC would serve as the entity to execute various memoranda
of understanding with other partners in the project.
Mr. Janku asked Mr. Thayer if he anticipated that HDC would
operate any of their programs out of the building. Mr. Thayer commented they
might use the building to do some group work with parenting classes and things
of that sort, or they may station staff there to take applications for things
like utility assistance. In addition, it could be used as a satellite office
to provide some of their services. Mr. Thayer did not think HDC would be using
it on a full time basis, but he would like to see some activities take place
there.
Mr. John asked if once things are up and running, whether
Mr. Thayer would be dropping out of the project. Mr. Thayer thought HDC would
continue to be involved. Mr. John asked how long it would take to put together
a plan and get operations started. Mr. Thayer indicated another speaker is present
to address that question.
Brian Pape, an architect at 29 E. Stewart Road, said the condition
of the building is probably average for a 75 year old building that has had some
deferred maintenance. However, it is a basic, stable, commercial structure -
probably as good as any of the City's older downtown buildings. He noted it needs
maintenance and they are prepared to address immediate and long-term maintenance
needs. Mr. Pape believed it to be a good investment as it would be a suitable,
practical use for the building. He spoke about the layout of the building, pointing
out that because it is at street level, it could very easily address handicapped
issues. Of the three options, Mr. Pape said this would be the least costly.
Mr. Pape read a letter from Greg Olson, written on behalf
of the Historic Preservation Commission who supported the neighborhood association's
efforts to incorporate this building in the plans for the new City park.
Mr. Coffman asked if $104,000 seemed to be a reasonable sum
for renovating the building. Mr. Pape said that would be a reasonable sum taking
into consideration the constraints the City has to work under. As a neighborhood
association, they would attempt to obtain donated materials and seek out volunteers
to assist in painting and minor maintenance jobs. He noted there are lots of
ways to reduce costs.
Judith Retsema, Caring Community Site Coordinator for Field
School, read a memo from Michael Bloemke, the Executive Coordinator of the Columbia
Boone County Community Partnership regarding the development of a neighborhood
resource center. The letter stated one of the basic policy directions of Caring
Communities is to move closer to where families live and children attend schools.
Mr. Bloemke wrote that a neighborhood based center where families can access
a variety of services and information would certainly be a significant move in
that direction. Ms. Retsema noted that the Columbia Public Schools allowed Caring
Communities the use of one of their trailers out of which various resources,
information, pamphlets, parent meetings could occur. Since September, there are
a number of other community organizations that share this space. Ms. Retsema
reported the availability of this facility is now limited to after school hours.
Mayor Hindman asked if Caring Communities needed parking.
Ms. Retsema said they did not.
Jeannie Wiebel, 703 Wilkes, President of the North Central
Neighborhood Association and member of the Field School Caring Communities Site
Council, reported that she had been actively involved in the park planning meetings.
During those meetings, a number of proposed uses for the building were brought
forward. Some of the suggested uses for the site included it could be used for
neighborhood watch meetings, community organization meetings, bake sales and
other fund raisers for community organizations, a police mini-substation, after
school programs and activities, public access to the Internet, storage and staging
area for outdoor events, alternative location for planned activities that get
rained out, and exhibition space for local artists.
John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, explained that the neighborhood
is asking for three years to plan, fund and complete the restoration. At the
end of the first year they hope to have completed the formation of the community
board. Mr. Clark indicated the first renovation goal, to be completed within
three to six months, is to restore the exterior of the building. The preliminary
estimate cost for that is $5,000 to $6,000. Mr. Clark stated a complete assessment
of the building and its structural issues are planned. He said that would be
the basis for the funding request. Also by the end of the first year they expect
to have completed a fund raising plan (including the identification of specific
funding sources), a project case statement, preparation of grant proposals and
so forth.
Betty Cook Rottmann, 1200 Coats, reported this neighborhood
has needed a park for as long as she can remember. Mrs. Rottmann believes that
retaining the building in the park is a vital element in developing the neighborhood's
continuing vision to make this area stable and a friendly place for its residents.
Bob Hutton, who spoke on behalf of Columbia College, noted
that the proposed park adjoins the campus across the intersection. He said the
Council packet included a letter from him stating the College's position on this
issue. Mr. Hutton related that he wrote another letter on behalf of the College
in May of 1998 strongly endorsing the idea of the City buying this property and
developing a neighborhood park on the site. The assumption at that time being
that the building would be razed and the entire property would be developed as
green space. Had the College known about the possibility of retaining the building,
Mr. Hutton stated they would not have so strongly endorsed the concept because
of their selfish motivation to beautify this area. He pointed out that the appearance
of this area is an immediate and long-term concern of the College. Mr. Hutton
indicated they have fought, alongside the neighborhood association, several rezonings
that would increase the number of office areas on Rangeline, preferring to keep
this area residential. He thought it seemed paradoxical that the neighborhood
has opposed any conversions to office in this area, but given the chance to remove
this use and convert it to green space, they choose the opposite. Mr. Hutton
read a list of objections from his letter. He noted that the College's preference
is to raze the building to allow for the development of a traditional neighborhood
park. If the Council chooses to keep the building, Mr. Hutton contended that
with the approval must come concrete plans that guarantee funding for renovation
and maintenance of the building for the long-term and its management. He reported
Columbia College would also like to see the City satisfactorily address the other
issues that were outlined in the letter.
Ms. Rootes commented that the neighborhood has every intention
of making this site attractive - just as if it were grass and trees. She said
they plan to act quickly on their plan. Regarding the safety issues, Ms. Rootes
stated the building has been at this corner for 75 years and it would not be
more of a safety issue in the future than it has been in the past. She contended
if the building is removed and intensive landscaping planted, this would create
a horseshoe arrangement that people could hide behind. Ms. Rootes maintained
a safer atmosphere would be created if people could utilize the building.
Mr. Janku asked whether funding for the ongoing maintenance
of the building will be addressed. Ms. Rootes said if the Council chooses option
three, she assumed staff would proceed to negotiate a contract with HDC that
will include whatever they feel is necessary based on Council comments.
Mrs. Crockett asked what could be done about parking. Mr.
Janku felt that needed to be addressed as part of the plan staff brings forward.
He noted the Council recently passed an ordinance allowing modifications in parking
requirements for certain property. He pointed out the site has an extensive parking
lot and although it is used during the day, it is available during the evening
and weekends.
Mr. Campbell complimented the neighborhood and the fine work
they have done on this proposal. He felt the Council should proceed with the
third option. Mr. Campbell suggested that cautions be built into the lease, i.e.,
benchmarks as to when things will be completed. He also wanted to see some way
for the City to recover the building if it is not being taken care of properly.
Mr. John felt that the negotiations should include a very
detailed plan on when the organizations are going to be in place, when the money
is going to be raised, etc. He said these things can drag on for a long time
and he did not want to see that happen in this case. Mr. John wanted to make
sure the neighborhood group and HDC come forward with an agreeable plan to operate
and maintain the building to allow it to be functional in a relatively quick
period of time. He also commented that he is concerned about the parking situation,
even though the school has a parking lot and there is a lot of on-street parking
available, Mr. John noted that no one in the private sector would be able to
have a commercial building without allowing for parking. His concern was not
that this site needs parking, but the relative inconsistency of the Council relaying
the message that just because this is a community asset, the City does not have
to follow the rules. Mr. John did not want to set that precedent.
Ms. Crayton felt the group should be supported because it
would contribute to the revitalization of the neighborhood. She believed the
parking issue would probably be addressed by other solutions.
Mr. Coffman thought in this situation the parking issue was
consistent with the idea of neighborhood parks not requiring parking. In regards
to the building, he would like to see it have a chance to survive. Mr. Coffman
was sure it could be converted into a nice facility and thought it was worth
trying for.
Mayor Hindman said he is in favor of saving the building,
although he thought the park would look better without the building in some ways.
He personally would like to see the building used for after school recreation.
Mayor Hindman was hopeful the Parks and Recreation Department could provide some
recreational programming there. He suggested that if Parks and Recreation is
a participant in this venture, they could utilize the building. Mayor Hindman
commented this building could be used as a community center. Although, he strongly
advocated that as much of the remaining space should be used for the park. He
did not think there should be on-site parking, and asked that the recommendation
come back with a way to avoid it. In this instance, Mayor Hindman stated this
building will be designed to serve a very specific, relatively small neighborhood
and on-site parking will not be necessary. He suggested amending the ordinances
so this type of situation could be avoided in the future. Mayor Hindman thought
this could also apply to small neighborhood businesses to allow them the same
privileges.
Mr. Janku made the motion that the staff proceed with the
development of the Field Neighborhood Park utilizing option three. The motion
was seconded by Ms. Crayton and approved unanimously by voice vote.
OLD BUSINESS
B4-00 Amending Chapter 14 of the City
Code as it relates to reserved parking for police vehicles.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this is an approximate 25-foot section
of curb on the east side of Ninth Street, north of Broadway, next to the Boone
Savings and Loan driveway. He said there have been some safety problems with
cars parking there. The staff, working with the Special Business District and
the Central Columbia Association, believed the problem could be alleviated if
this area is reserved for police parking only. If this does not work, Mr. Beck
indicated staff would come back with another solution.
Mr. Janku noted that parking on the other side of the street
goes practically to the corner of the alley (the northern side of the alley).
He asked if it would be safe to have a metered parking space on the opposite
side of the street, where the yellow line is. Mr. John agreed that if a meter
is installed at this location, the City could make some money off of the space.
Mr. Campbell noted that several downtown groups have looked
at the situation and came up with the current proposal. He felt if the Council
gives approval to install a meter across the street, it should be done with some
degree of thought and caution.
Mrs. Crockett added that a lot of traffic comes out of Boone
National Savings.
Mr. Janku agreed with that assessment, but he was referring
to an area further up the street.
It was decided this issue would be forwarded to the downtown
business groups for their recommendation.
B4-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:
VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B6-00 Authorizing an agreement with
The Curators of the University of Missouri to allow the closing of
Maryland
Avenue and Rollins Street during construction of Cornell Hall.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that City staff has been working with representatives
from the University relating to the construction of Cornell Hall. This proposal
would allow for the temporary closing of two streets to accommodate construction
equipment. He noted this option provides for the least amount of pedestrian and
traffic impact.
Mayor Hindman understood that the intersection of Rollins
and Maryland would remain open. Mr. Beck said that was his understanding also.
Mr. Campbell pointed out this closing will divert a lot more
traffic on Missouri Avenue since it will be the only north/south street in the
area. He suggested that the staff prepare an ordinance establishing a temporary
stop sign at the junction of Rollins and Missouri because of all the traffic
that will be coming through this area.
Mr. Beck noted a "dip" in the street on Maryland. He said
that same kind of swail exists on Missouri Avenue as well. He explained the University
plans to provide a temporary treatment there to avoid buses bottoming out. Mr.
Campbell asked about a stop sign at that intersection. Mr. Beck said if an ordinance
is needed he would bring one back to the Council.
Mr. Beck asked Mr. Montgomery if the staff addressed Missouri
Avenue and on-street parking. Mr. Montgomery said the main problem on Missouri
Avenue that had been identified occurs at its intersection with Conley where
there is a significant dip. He reported the University has agreed to temporarily
fix the problem by laying some asphalt and installing a drain system so long
vehicles would not drag at the intersection. Mr. Montgomery stated they have
not really studied the intersection at Missouri and Rollins, although a stop
sign could be put in if warranted.
Mr. Coffman asked for assurance that Maryland and Rollins
would not be closed at the same time. Mr. Montgomery said that was correct.
A representative from the University agreed that a stop sign
at the intersection of Rollins and Maryland was a good idea.
Mr. Janku asked why the modification is temporary. The University
representative stated the permanent solution is a lot more expensive. The temporary
solution involved constructing a temporary ramp with asphalt, which would result
in the loss of the curbs in this area. He indicated they can look at it with
the City to see if it would be a good, permanent solution.
B6-00 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:
VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B7-00 Voluntary annexation of property
located south of St. Charles Road at the southern terminus of Charlie
Goff
Drive.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that a public hearing had been held previously
on this issue.
Mr. Boeckmann explained a suggested amendment which would
change section numbers.
Mr. Campbell made the motion that B7-00 be amended per Mr.
Boeckmann's suggestion. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved
unanimously by voice vote.
B7-00, as amended, was given third reading with the vote recorded
as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. ABSTAINING: CROCKETT. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
CONSENT AGENDA
The following bills were given second reading and the resolutions
were read by the Clerk.
B1-00 Accepting easements for utility
purposes.
B5-00 Authorizing Federal Transit Administration
operating and capital assistance grants.
B8-00 Approving a replat of a portion
of Lot 1 of Garth's Subdivision; authorizing a performance contract.
B9-00 Approving a replat of Lot 12 of
Country Club Villas; authorizing a performance contract.
B10-00 Calling a municipal election to be held April
4, 2000 to elect Council Members for Wards 2 and 6.
R7-00 Setting a public hearing: storm
drainage improvements in The Hamlet Subdivision.
R8-00 Renewing an agreement with the
Missouri Department of Health for the issuance of birth and death
certificates.
The bills were given third reading and the resolutions
were read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, CRAYTON,
JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bills declared
enacted and resolutions declared adopted, reading as follows:
NEW BUSINESS
R9-00 Approving preliminary plat no.
2 of Wellington Manor.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval of the request.
Comments were called for with none received.
The vote on R9-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN,
CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSTAINING: CROCKETT.
Resolution declared adopted, reading as follows:
R10-00 Approving the by-laws of the
Hunters Gate I Neighborhood Association.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that this proposal is in conformance with policy
and that it is ready for adoption.
Comments were called for with none received.
The vote on R10-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN,
CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution
declared adopted, reading as follows:
R11-00 Authorizing Supplement No. 2
to the agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration for leasing
space
at Columbia Regional Airport.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that there is vacant space in the north
terminal building that the FAA is requesting to lease from the City at an additional
cost of approximately $3,200 per year.
Comments were called for with none received.
The vote on R11-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN,
CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution
declared adopted, reading as follows:
R12-00 Authorizing an agreement with
the City of Sikeston for purchase of peaking capacity for summer of 2000.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Malon explained that due to the high temperatures we had
last summer, the City's peak load for the year was higher than what had been
forecasted. As a result, he said the conclusion was reached that it would be
prudent to change our load forecasts and assume that last year's load was repeatable,
with the addition of a small amount of growth. Mr. Malon noted that meant the
City would be short approximately 15 megawatts of capacity for the coming summer.
He stated that requests for proposals were sent out and seven responses were
received. Responses from two companies indicated they had no capacity available
for sale. Subsequently, Mr. Malon reported it was determined that the Sikeston
proposal would be the most economic.
Mr. Janku complimented the staff for their planning. He noted
that because of their long-range planning, the City has saved a considerable
amount of money.
The vote on R12-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN,
CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution
declared adopted, reading as follows:
R13-00 Authorizing an agreement with
Sverdrup Facilities, Inc. to provide architectural design services for
a
community
recreation center.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Following the election in November, Mr. Beck explained that
the Council directed staff to proceed with acquiring architectural services for
the Community Recreation Center. He explained what work would be included in
Phases I and II. Mr. Beck noted the contract amount is not to exceed $794,500.
Brad Simmons, manager of the St. Louis operations for Sverdrup,
explained that he is the project executive on this project. He reported that
Sverdrup is very pleased to be able to continue working with the City of Columbia
on this project. Mr. Simmons offered to answer any questions.
The vote on R13-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN,
CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution
declared adopted, reading as follows:
R14-00 Declaring the City's intent
to reimburse itself for capital expenditures in connection with projects
authorized
by the quarter-cent sales tax extension.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this is a technical procedure to meet
IRS requirements. Comments were called for with none received.
The vote on R14-00 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN,
CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN. 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:
B11-00 Authorizing storm drainage improvements
in The Hamlet Subdivision; authorizing an agreement with
Westbury
Joint Venture and Hamlet Homes Association; appropriating funds.
B12-00 Amending Chapter 14 of the City
Code to prohibit parking on both sides of Pannell Street from Wilkes
Boulevard
to its southern terminus.
B13-00 Authorizing an agreement with
Cunningham + Richards Johnson Architects to conduct a feasibility study
of
the use of the Wabash Station as a transportation hub.
B14-00 Accepting various easements and
quit claim deeds for sewer and utility purposes.
B15-00 Authorizing a promissory note
in connection with a Missouri Department of Natural Resources
energy-savings
project loan; appropriating funds.
B16-00 Authorizing application for membership
in the Western Systems Power Pool; appropriating funds.
B17-00 Appropriating funds for improvements
to the COLT highway-rail crossing signal system at Brown
Station
Road.
B18-00 Accepting easements for water
main purposes.
B19-00 Adding a new utilities engineer
position in the Water and Light Department; appropriating funds.
B20-00 Amending Chapter 11 of the City
Code as it relates to swimming pools; adopting the "City of Columbia
Guide
for Swimming Pool Design and Operation."
B21-00 Authorizing an agreement with
the Missouri Department of Health for HIV/STD prevention and
counseling
services.
B22-00 Voluntary annexation of property
located on the west side of State Route 763, north of Smiley Lane,
extended;
establishing permanent zoning.
B23-00 (Was pulled from the agenda per
the applicant's request.)
B24-00 Vacating an unused, 15-foot wide
public alley which runs in an east/west direction and is located
between
North Garth Avenue and Grand Avenue, and between Sexton Road and Fourth Avenue.
B25-00 Establishing permanent A-1 zoning
on property located on the south side of Vawter School Road,
between
Scott Boulevard and Old Mill Creek Road.
B26-00 Changing street names within
Quail Creek Subdivision as follows: "Coho Drive" to "Rainbow Trout
Drive" and "Rainbow
Trout Court" to "Coho Court."
B27-00 Approving the Final Plat of Thornbrook
Subdivision, Plat No. 4; authorizing a performance contract.
B28-00 Approving the Final Plat of Spring
Creek, Plat 1; authorizing a performance contract.
B29-00 Approving the Final Plat of Providence
Hill; authorizing a performance contract.
B30-00 Amending Chapter 8 of the City
Code to correct the boundaries of the 4th and 5th Wards.
B31-00 Granting a conveyance of water
line and water line easements to Consolidated Public Water Supply
District
No. 1.
REPORTS AND PETITIONS
A) Intra-Departmental Transfer of Funds
Request.
Report accepted.
B) FY 2000 CDBG Funding Allocations.
Mr. Beck explained that official notice was received last
week indicating the City would be receiving $1,039,000.00 in Community Development
Block Grant money. He noted that included $537,000 in HOME money. Mr. Beck stated
that a fairly detailed memo was included in the packet explaining where the money
has been allocated. He said the next step would be to prepare the paper work
to formally budget these monies. Mr. Beck suggested a work session to review
the recommended uses.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Upon receiving the majority vote of the Council the following
individuals were appointed to the following boards and commissions:
CONVENTION & VISITORS ADVISORY BOARD
Bank, Gail I., 1214 S. Fairview Rd., Ward 4 - term to expire
Filbert, Garvin P., 906 Wayne Rd., Ward 5 - term to expire
Jashnani, George V., 2708 Bluff Creek Dr., Ward 6 (O/O) - term to expire
Stockman, David M., 4180 E. Lang Dr., County (O/O) - term to expire
FIREFIGHTER RETIREMENT BOARD
Dykhouse, Charles James Jr., 1100 E. Rollins #52, Ward 1 - term to expire
12/31/01
LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Hostetler, Lynn D., 1204 Hulen Dr., Ward 4 - term to expire 6/30/00
There were no appointments made to the Finance Advisory
Committee as there was discussion about the possibility of abolishing the
Committee.
Mr. Campbell made the motion that the Finance Advisory Committee
appointment be tabled until a staff report comes back for the Council to act
on. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice
vote.
COMMENTS OF THE COUNCIL, STAFF, AND PUBLIC
Mrs. Crockett commented that she received a call from a woman
living in Creekwood Estates regarding 18 wheelers parking along Creekwood Parkway.
She said it has been reported before and it continues to be a problem. She explained
that the cabs are disconnected from the trailer, and the trailers can be left
for up to a week on the street. It was reported that at times the whole truck
is left for days. Mr. Montgomery said he would look into it.
Mrs. Crockett reported she also has received calls regarding
the tents that have been set up in the location of the southeast corner of Broadway
and Highway 63. She said the tents have been on state right of way for several
months. Acting Police Chief Boehm indicated his department would look into the
situation. He noted this particular situation is difficult to solve because the
homeless folks that are using the tents tend to relocate somewhere else in the
City. Up until now, he noted his department has not received as many complaints
as when these individuals were in the downtown area.
Mr. Coffman noted that he has heard from several people regarding
the traffic light at Rock Quarry Road and Nifong. He asked for a report on the
frequency of the light. Mr. Montgomery asked if the complaint was about a lengthy
red light for the north/south traffic. Mr. Coffman thought most of the complaints
were from people living south of Nifong.
Mr. Janku mentioned a sidewalk that is becoming overgrown
with grass located on Creasy Springs Road, north of Proctor Drive. He said there
is also a lot of trash in this area. He asked that the situation be corrected.
Mr. Janku asked about the progress of the intersection of
West Boulevard and I-70 Drive. He understood the state is working on a project
there and thought it would be good if information could be provided on both projects.
Ms. Crayton passed around an article regarding a program in
Oklahoma City where job skills are offered to kids -- basically targeting ages
16 to 24. She had learned that the high school drop-out rate in the first ward
is 32%, and she thought this program could help some of those young people. Ms.
Crayton asked that more information be obtained regarding the youth bill. Mr.
Campbell commented that funds are available from different sources that could
most likely be used for this sort of thing. He noted the need for an organization
to step forward and operate such a program in an efficient and effective manner.
Mr. Campbell stated that he was recently appointed to the Workforce Investment
Board and he knew they are very interested in getting this sort of thing started.
Mayor Hindman asked for a report relating to the possibility
of on-street parking on Locust and Elm Street, between Fifth and Providence.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku.
Mayor Hindman said that both streets are wide and he thought
there were some good opportunities there for parking. Mr. Campbell noted that
at certain times during the day cars are cued back to Fourth Street from Providence
Road in that location.
The motion made by Mayor Hindman, seconded by Mr. Janku, was
approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mr. Beck reported on the status of the Police Chief search
and related that it is still one of his highest priorities. He noted that Acting
Police Chief Boehm was doing an excellent job.
The meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Penny
St. Romaine
City
Clerk
© 2024 City of Columbia