INTRODUCTORY
The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for
a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, April 7, 2003, in the Council Chamber
of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results:
Council Members CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN and HINDMAN were
present. The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk and various Department
Heads were also present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting of March 17, 2003, as well
as minutes of the special meeting of April 2, 2003, were approved unanimously
by voice vote on a motion by Mr. Loveless and a second by Mr. Janku.
APPROVAL AND ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA INCLUDING CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Hindman noted that an additional street closure request
had been added to Report B.
The agenda, as amended, including the Consent Agenda, was
approved unanimously on a motion made by Mr. John and a second by Mr. Hutton.
SPECIAL ITEMS
None.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
Mayor Hindman welcomed two Boy Scouts from Troop 707
who were in the audience to observe the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
B74-03 Voluntary annexation of property
located on the west side of State Route 763, south of Brown School Road;
establishing permanent zoning.
The bill was read by the Clerk.
Mayor Hindman noted that a request to table B74-03 had been
received from the applicant.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
Mr. Janku made the motion that B74-03 be tabled to the April
21, 2003, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutton and approved unanimously
by voice vote.
B84-03 Voluntary annexation of property
located on the south side of Vawter School Road, approximately 1,750
feet east of Scott Boulevard; establishing permanent R-1 zoning.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained this to be an approximate 11-acre tract
located in south central Columbia. The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously
recommended approval.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B84-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:
VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B85-03 Amending the Stoney Creek C-P
Development Plan.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained the applicant was asking for an additional
468 square feet of wall signage on the southeast side of the hotel. Both staff
and the Planning and Zoning Commission felt the request was excessive and recommended
denial.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
Mayor Hindman agreed with the staff recommendation in that
the requested signage was too excessive.
Mr. John concurred and said a well placed sign on the one
wall would probably be acceptable, but not one as large as what is being requested
this evening.
B85-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:
VOTING YES: CRAYTON. VOTING NO: JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN.
Bill defeated.
B94-03 Authorizing construction of
improvements to Stephens Lake Park.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that in November of 2000, the park sales
tax ballot issue was passed which provided for the purchase of Stephens Lake
Park and the future development of the tract. He asked Mr. Hood to explain the
phases.
Mr. Hood reported that $670,300 in funding from the ¼ cent
parks sales tax was included in the FY 2003 budget. He noted that $2.5 million
had been set aside for the park's development and it was to be spread over four
budget cycles (budget years 2001 through 2004). In the past two years, a total
of $1,225,000 had been appropriated for the project.
Mr. Hood reported the 2003 allocation is proposed to be used
for improvements in seven different areas within the park. The largest expenditure
will be in the day camp shelter area with improvements including a closed shelter,
a sand volleyball court, playground and related amenities such as parking, utilities,
etc., at an estimated cost of $360,800. Approximately $133,500 will be spent
on improvements to the Broadway entrance area with plans for construction of
a medium shelter, a small shelter (will also function as a warming hut for the
sled hill), a playground and improvements to the roads and parking in the vicinity.
Mr. Hood indicated that $50,000 has been set aside for use in the aquatics area
to allow for the installation of utilities, sidewalks and site preparation for
the future water fountain or water play area. An additional $13,500 has been
budgeted for park amenities such as benches, signs, drinking fountains, lighting
and trash receptacles. He stated that $10,000 has been budgeted for landscaping
improvements throughout the park and $7,500 is set aside for site administration
expenses, including some architect/engineering fees and demolition costs. Mr.
Hood noted staff's recommendation that $95,000 be held in contingency. That amount,
with the small contingency set aside from FY01 and 02 funding, results in an
approximate 6% contingency for the project. He said they anticipate using contract
and force account labor to complete the project.
In order to proceed with the proposed improvements, Mr. Hood
related that staff needs Council approval on three unresolved Master Plan issues.
The first involves the restoration and location of the Pop Collins Cabin. Staff
proposes that the cabin be relocated to Nifong Park where it can be restored
and operated under the cooperation and direction of the Boone County Historical
Society. He added that the Society has expressed a strong interest in creating
a historical village in Nifong Park. Staff believes the cabin would be an excellent
start to that concept. Mr. Hood noted that the Society has also expressed interest,
and has the resources and experience, to assist in the restoration of the interior
of the cabin and to open it to public viewing. The City has set aside funding
to restore the exterior of the cabin. If it is relocated to Nifong Park, an agreement
would be established between the City and the Historical Society which would
outline all the responsibilities for the location, restoration, operation, maintenance
and public use of the cabin.
Mr. Hood reported the second issue concerns the location of
the amphitheater. Since the Master Plan was approved about a year ago, staff
has looked at three possible sites for such. He stated that it is staff's opinion
the best site to be north of the lake in the west end of the park. He said it
is a natural bowl area which has very attractive physical features for an amphitheater.
Staff believes, with the proper design, construction, berming and planting, that
they can mitigate much of the concern over noise. He noted that construction
of the amphitheater is not included in this phase of improvements; however, the
location needs to be confirmed so they can coordinate it with the earth work
going on at the swimming area.
Mr. Hood stated the final unresolved issue is the removal
of the cement block boathouse. He pointed out that a structural review of the
building found serious deterioration which would cost in excess of $100,000 to
repair. While the lake is drained, staff recommends installing a foot wall and
boat ramp next to the new boardwalk as it would be a potential site for a future
boathouse if it is determined a replacement should be built.
Mr. Coffman asked if he understood that money had been set
aside for the Pop Collins cabin. Mr. Hood replied that both the FY 2001 and 2002
budgets included funding for restoration of the cabin's exterior. He believed
the amount to be $75,000. Mr. Coffman assumed that approval of the ordinance
would include approval of the three department recommended issues. Mr. Beck said
that would be correct.
Mr. Hutton inquired about the trail on the far north edge
of the park and discussions that it be located as close to Walnut as possible
because it was going to serve as a sidewalk as well. Mr. Hood responded that
staff agreed to relocate the trail closer to Walnut Street. Mr. Hutton's recollection
was that the trail would be moved northward as much as possible, working with
the physical characteristics of the land without making drastic changes. Mr.
Hood concurred. He added that he believed there was some discussion about crossing
that trail in front of the parking lot and then swinging it up and having it
follow the tree line. Mr. Hutton asked about funding for the trail. Mr. Hood
replied the trail project would be included in the 2004 budget because they have
been working on the interior of the park first. Mr. Hutton questioned the schedule
for the trail project. Mr. Hood indicated this fall would be the earliest the
work could be undertaken.
Mr. Coffman sensed the community's opposition to moving the
Pop Collins cabin has a lot to do with the loss of Gordon Manor and the idea
the cabin is the last historic thing in the park. He asked if there is any plan
for a historical marker to commemorate the Manor. Mr. Hood explained that Stephens
College indicated an interest in working with the City to develop a historical
marker that outlined the entire history of the property. He mentioned that staff
has not been contacted recently by the College with respect to such, but they
believe such a marker would be appropriate. He said it could be included in the
final phase for funding.
Mr. Coffman asked about the boathouse and whether a replacement
would be in the final phase of park improvements. Mr. Hood responded that staff
had not included funding for a replacement structure in the 2004 budget funding.
However, they tried to identify a location where a boathouse could be added if
it becomes a priority so that the lake would not have to be drained again.
Mayor Hindman asked if the proposed facility would accommodate
self-launching of boats. Mr. Hood said there would be two places; one near the
boardwalk and one near the dam on the east end of the lake.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
David Sapp, 1025 Hickory Hill, President of the Boone County
Historical Society Board of Directors, explained that they have supported the
move of the Pop Collins cabin to Nifong Park for some time. He said they began
looking at ways to preserve and recognize the historical significance of the
cabin and the Manor prior to the City's acquisition of the property. Mr. Sapp
reported that the Society would like to work with staff on the relocation and
the restoration of the cabin. He noted they could provide volunteer docents so
the cabin would be open to the public, whereas now it is stranded and unavailable
to the public. He indicated the Society would also like to furnish the cabin
with some appropriate period pieces to add an educational component. Mr. Sapp
pointed out that they could provide significant security as well.
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
Mayor Hindman commented that the planning for the Stephens
Lake Park property has been a very thorough and participatory process.
B94-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:
VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
(A) Voluntary annexation of property
located on the west side of Providence Outer Roadway, approximately 100
feet south of Corporate Lake Drive.
Item A was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained this to be an approximate 19 acre tract
located in south central Columbia (current site of the Crestvale Mobile Home
Park). The applicant is requesting R-3 permanent zoning at the time of annexation.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
Bill Arendt, 3100 Brown Station, reviewed the existing conditions
of the tract. He said most of his lots are quite small and that it has been 20
plus years since a mobile home has been built that will fit on them. In order
to continue in its present use, the park needs to be completely redeveloped --
something he cannot afford to do. Mr. Arendt indicated that this proposal will
bring about redevelopment which will convey significant improvement to the property.
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
OLD BUSINESS
R59-03 Approving the preliminary plat
of Miles Manor Block 3; granting variances to the Subdivision Regulations.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that this issue had been continued from the
last meeting and that since then a letter was sent to the Council from the developers.
Mr. Dudark reported that the property has been zoned R-3,
multi-family, since 1971. He said the staff report indicated there are a couple
of variances necessary; one being the length of the cul-de-sac going into White
Oak Lane. He noted the City's limitation on cul-de-sacs being 750 feet. He said
there was some discussion as to whether or not Planter Road is a through street
which actually serves as a cul-de-sac as well as leading to Stadium. Staff believes
this to be subject to debate as to whether or not the measurement occurs at Planter
Road or Stadium. If measuring from Planter Road, Mr. Dudark said the length would
be within the limitation so a variance would not be necessary. The other issue
relates to the size of a tract in the final platting process. Property zoned
R-3 is limited to six acres, and Mr. Dudark reported this tract consists of 8.9
acres. However, there is a provision in that the applicant is including a greenspace
easement in the plat that would make less than half of the property developable.
Mr. Dudark stated there will be a note on the plat stipulating that the greenspace
easement cannot be counted toward any density credit. That would limit the number
of units that could be built on the buildable portion to no more than 65 dwelling
units. Mr. Dudark noted there are 34 R-1 zoned lots in the existing Miles Manor
subdivision, and with the 65 apartment units planned for this tract, the applicant
could meet the Subdivision Regulations limit on developments containing no more
than 100 units which have only one street access. Whether or not a variance is
required, he said one could argue both sides with the practical aspect being
that the preliminary plat does meet the ordinance's intent.
Mr. John asked if the 34 single family lots mentioned were
existing units or whether there are other vacant lots. Mr. Dudark thought there
are a couple of vacant lots, but did not know if these are buildable as they
are near a slope on the west side. Mr. John understood those lots are not part
of the City's ownership. Mr. Dudark said that was correct.
Jim Lowery, an attorney with offices at 111 S. Ninth, spoke
on behalf of the applicant. He reviewed the ordinance which stipulates no more
than six acres of R-3 zoned land that would permit more than 100 dwelling units.
He understood there to be 34 lots in the adjacent subdivision and said with the
60 units the applicant is planning, although they would be allowed 65, would
add up to 100 units. For that reason, they do not believe this variance is required.
Regarding the 750-feet terminal street issue, Mr. Lowery read the definition
of a through street as, "a public street which is not a cul-de-sac and which
provides vehicular access from an area internal to the subdivision to the City's
major thoroughfare system." They believed White Oak to be the cul-de-sac and
Planter Road a through street. Regardless of whether or not a variance is required,
Mr. Lowery said they believe they meet the spirit of the ordinance.
Mr. Lowery passed around a rendering of the project. He explained
the proposal to build 60 apartment units. Mr. Lowery reported on the applicant's
plans that this will be a very high quality development, and he would spend approximately
$1 million more than needed based on existing code requirements. He indicated
that architectural shingles will be used, stone and dryvit features will be employed
on the staircase columns, and the pool was intentionally placed deep into the
development so it would be away from the neighborhood. Mr. Lowery maintained
this will be an attractive, high quality development which would attract high
quality tenants. He displayed a site plan and pointed out the City-owned buffer
land. He identified 5.16 acres of permanent public conservation easement the
applicant will dedicate to the City. Mr. Lowery stated that nothing will be disturbed
on this site. In addition, the applicant will be dedicating a permanent, public
easement along the east edge of the development for public access to the MKT
Trail. He noted this property allows for in-fill development, therefore minimizing
urban sprawl. Everyone living in the development, as well as residents in the
adjacent homes, will have lawful access to the MKT Trail.
Mr. Lowery noted the applicant requested that the issue be
tabled at the last meeting because they learned of the neighborhood's concern
for the tract. Until then, they were not aware of any opposition. Mr. Lowery
further explained his client purchased the property from people who live in the
neighborhood, an association that formed and platted the R-1 lots. He respectfully
asked the Council to approve this preliminary plat.
Ms. Crayton asked about the traffic concerns. Mr. Lowery explained
the applicant has offered, at his expense, to install whatever traffic calming
device the City would approve and the neighbors believe to be necessary for the
area. He pointed out the people his client purchased the property from are the
same people that had the tract rezoned from R-1 to R-3 thirty-two years ago.
He noted there are some people who do not oppose the development and actually
support it. Ms. Crayton asked if those people are current residents of the subdivision.
Mr. Lowery responded affirmatively, and these people are also original members
of the neighborhood. He indicated that dozens and dozens of cars come out of
the MLK area every day which has similar access to what they have on Stadium
now. He has not seen MoDOT take any action to do anything that would be detrimental
to the neighbors. If the left turn were to be eliminated, he did not believe
that to be any undue imposition.
David Horrell, 1109 Chantilly, spoke in opposition of the
development. He explained their neighborhood to be unique having been developed
by a group of blacks in the 60's when they were not allowed to move into other
subdivisions. Mr. Horrell maintained that 95% of the original owners still live
in the neighborhood. He indicated that increased traffic created by a new development
would place a hardship on residents.
Pack Mathews, 1108 Chantilly, Co-Chair of the Miles Manor
Neighborhood Association, presented the Council with a petition signed by about
30 residents who are opposed to this development. He asked those who are present
in opposition to the proposal to stand. Approximately 30 people stood. Mr. Mathews
noted that this property is one of 20 in the city that is listed as having serious
access issues. He had a letter from the Forum Development Corporation, the property
contiguous on the west side, regarding their concern about the affect the traffic
would have on Forum Boulevard. For that reason, residents are fearful the developer
will have problems maintaining occupancy which could cause the property to decline,
bringing down the value of all properties in this area. Mr. Matthews reported
that the Council's decision tonight will also have an affect on how successfully
the City will be able to deal with other similar problem R-3 properties. In reference
to fire flows, he noted that a development of this size needs access to a water
line providing 1,500 gallons per minute. He said the existing water system cannot
provide such and the developer has asked for easements from the property to the
west so as to access another 8-inch pipe, which was subsequently denied. Mr.
Matthews believed it is questionable as to whether the developer would even be
able to get building permits to complete the project. He asked the Council to
deny approval of the preliminary plat.
Alma Muer, 1104 Chantilly, spoke about safety concerns of
the neighborhood. In addition, she stated there are no sidewalks in the neighborhood
to provide access to the MKT Trail.
Michael Cook, 1309 White Oak, noted that the people who originally
built Miles Manor subdivision spent a great deal of time bucking the system to
get the neighborhood established. In regard to Planter Road, he said it is not
a through street because just after it intersects with White Oak Lane it turns
into gravel, and about 15 to 20 feet after that it turns into mud.
Ken Midkiff, 1005 Bellview, commented on access to the MKT
Trail. He said there is currently a path leading down to the trail from Miles
Manor, which is too steep to ride a bicycle down. He said there are plenty of
access points to the trail and there is no need for another one along this section
of the MKT. Mr. Midkiff asked the Council not to be swayed by the developer's
acceptance of City staff's request that an access point be provided. Regarding
the variances, Mr. Midkiff said the two variances mentioned are not responsive
to the concerns about traffic and safety, in fact, he said they fly in the face
of those concerns.
Mary Ratliff, President of the NAACP, was in agreement that
Planter Road is not a through street. She asked the Council to deny this request.
Michael Adrian, 1104 Brookdale, explained that he owns a home
on White Oak. He asked the Council to leave the neighborhood as is.
Mr. Loveless commented that it would be hard to imagine a
more poorly placed development for 60 units.
Mr. Boeckmann pointed out that the proposal before the Council
is a preliminary plat which is different from a PUD or a zoning request. If the
tract had been zoned A-1 or R-1 and the applicant was asking for an R-3 zone,
the Council would have more discretion in whether or not to place that zoning
on the property. In this case, the Council is faced with a situation where there
is R-3 zoning on the property and the applicant has submitted a request for approval
of a subdivision plat. Mr. Boeckmann reported the Court of Appeals has clearly
said, on a number of occasions, that when a City is considering a subdivision
plat, their job is limited to determining whether all the rules have been followed.
The Council does not have the same discretion they have in zoning situations.
Mr. Boeckmann reported in this case, the applicant apparently
meets all Code requirements and the only issue is whether or not to grant the
variances. He said the question then is, does the applicant need the variances.
Mr. Boeckmann thought it was pretty clear that because the applicant has limited
the developable area, this particular variance is not necessary. He said that
leaves the issue of the cul-de-sac -- which hinges on whether or not Planter
Road is a through street. Mr. Boeckmann read the definition of a through street
as being, "a public street which is not a cul-de-sac street and which provides
vehicular access from an area internal to a subdivision to the City's major thoroughfare
system as shown on the Thoroughfare Plan." Mr. Boeckmann noted that based on
staff comments, they construe Planter Road as not functionally being a through
street. He thought that was the only legal issue for the basis of denial. Mr.
Boeckmann pointed out that five affirmative Council votes will be needed to approve
the preliminary plat.
Mr. John said the developer has gone through and ticked off
all the objections the City has to legally deny the plat. Although some may want
to deny the plat, he was not sure that was the best way to set policy and procedure
for the City of Columbia.
Mayor Hindman commented on an earlier statement that this
is a very unfortunate place to have an R-3 zoning district. Under no circumstances
could he imagine the Council approving an R-3 zone at this location due to safety
aspects. Although he appreciated what the developer has done, Mayor Hindman said
it was just too much for the area.
Ms. Crayton asked if the neighborhood would have any legal
recourse as it is already established. Mr. John pointed out that the rezoning
took place some thirty years ago.
Mr. Janku indicated that the developer must have come to the
same conclusion as staff in that the variances are required.
The vote on R59-03 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JOHN.
VOTING NO: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. Resolution defeated.
B86-03 Amending Chapter 13 and 22 of
the City Code as they relate to hauling garbage.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the proposed amendments would more
clearly define what is prohibited to be hauled under the City's waste haulers
license. He said the revisions would not necessarily change what is occurring
in the community at this time, but questions have come up recently under the
licensing ordinances and potential conflicts with other sections of the Code.
The City of Columbia hauls garbage whether it is in dumpsters or from residential
units, unless waived by the Director of Public Works.
Mr. John indicated that it appears the City is creating a
monopoly on hauling garbage and he wondered what problem these amendments would
solve. Mr. Beck thought there was a question between the way the licensing ordinance
is written and a section in the Code that deals with the handling of solid waste.
Mr. Boeckmann explained that another company wants to do some commercial garbage
hauling. Mr. John asked why that would be a problem. In viewing this division
as a financial entity, Mr. Boeckmann said Public Works did not think it was appropriate
to have another company come in and "cherry pick" some of its better aspects.
Mr. Beck added the City has the responsibility to ensure that all refuse is properly
collected, stored and disposed, even when not collected by our utility.
Mr. John spoke of his preference in tabling the issue until
the Council could get a further explanation from Mr. Patterson.
Judy Johnson, 1516 McKee, commented that she could see a problem
with people choosing who they want to pick up their garbage. She preferred the
City's refuse service and being billed for such along with her other utility
services.
Mr. Hutton did not have a problem with the amendment. He was
not an advocate of monopolies, but thought it was something fairly important
to the citizens of the City and to the City itself. He said the ordinance was
created many years back to solve a bunch of problems. If Columbia allows other
companies to come in and start hauling trash, he said "cherry picking" would
be the first thing to happen, but what it would eventually do is raise rates
for other people. Mr. Hutton commented that it is the customers that someone
could "cherry pick" off that keep the rates low for the entire utility. As long
as the City can demonstrate to rate payers that we do a decent job of refuse
collection and that our cost, in comparison to other cities or private vendors,
is in line, Mr. Hutton was supportive of the amendments.
Mr. Coffman understood Mr. John's point, but thought Mr. Hutton's
arguments were compelling as well. He said Mr. John's concept would eventually
make residential and small commercial rates higher. He was comfortable with the
ordinance.
Mayor Hindman agreed with Mr. Hutton and said the City has
a system based on the idea that everybody has to subscribe to it. This has resulted
in meeting the goals of a clean city and proper sanitation. He felt the City
has been very successful in its solid waste program. Mayor Hindman pointed out
that the recycling program is also included as part of this service. He said
this particular service is a money loser and is subsidized by solid waste rates.
If the City does not have control of waste hauling, it would create an attractive
opportunity for "cherry picking" by allowing other companies to provide service
and not have to worry about recycling. Mayor Hindman commented that he has heard
many positive comments from new residents to Columbia about this being the very
best they have seen as far as refuse collection.
Mr. Beck pointed out that Columbia's service is a complex
system, but it is working and is very competitive based on surveys and comments
staff has received.
Mr. Janku asked about the language regarding existing haulers.
Mr. Boeckmann said that would grandfather only one business who has been hauling
their own trash and compacting it for years. Mr. Beck noted this business has
said when their equipment is no longer usable, they plan to switch over to the
City.
B86-03 was given third reading with the vote recorded as follows:
VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B92-03 Amending Chapters 14 and 16
of the City Code as they relate to definition of cycles, public safety
and helmet regulations for persons under sixteen years of age.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Ms. Browning explained that the Safe Kids Coalition had asked
the Board of Health to look at the issue of bike helmets for youth in the community.
Over a long period of time, the Board met with a diverse group of people interested
in the overall health and safety of children which included bike shop owners,
the Columbia Bike Club, the Safe Kids Coalition, and hospital personnel. After
receiving recommendations, the Board also reviewed a number of ordinances from
municipalities around the country. Based on all of this information, Ms. Browning
reported the group came up with what they felt were some of the model things
to include in the ordinance. She indicated that after the draft ordinance was
prepared, a public hearing was held in February. Although the hearing was advertised
well in advance and there was a significant amount of media coverage, only seven
people were in attendance. All were in favor of the ordinance. Ms. Browning noted
that this ordinance would affect children under the age of 16 and helmets would
have to be worn when riding bicycles or scooters, skateboarding and when using
roller skates/blades.
Mr. Janku asked about three and four-wheel vehicles. Ms. Browning
responded the ordinance defines a cycle as, "any device upon which a person may
ride propelled by human power having two or more wheels." She said three and
four wheels would apply as well, excluding wheelchairs.
Mr. Coffman noted that legal guardians would be committing
an "offense of absolute liability" if a child is not wearing a helmet. He asked
about its significance. Mr. Boeckmann replied that meant there would be no defense
if a child was not wearing a helmet. He said the same language is used in trespass
which mirrors the State Statute.
Ms. Crayton wanted to ensure that low income children would
have access to helmets. Ms. Browning indicated that last year the Safe Kids Coalition
gave out nearly 1,500 free helmets. She said they were prepared to continue that
program.
Ted Groshong, 2600 Limerick Lane, a pediatrician and member
of the Board of Health, noted that head injuries are the most serious types of
injuries people can sustain from bicycle accidents. He said children are much
more likely to sustain serious head injuries than adults, and almost all the
fatalities with children in bicycle accidents are due to head injuries. Anywhere
from 85 to as much as 95% of these injuries can be prevented with appropriate
bike helmets.
Steven Sapp, 3501 Topanga, spoke on behalf of the Columbia
Safe Kids Coalition. He explained the Coalition believes that safety programs
have three major components. The first component involves engineering -- can
the program prevent injuries from occurring. In the case of helmets, it has.
There is an educational component which identifies the necessity for wearing
helmets, and both parents and children are included in this campaign. The last
component involves enforcement. Mr. Sapp indicated that enforcement can actually
be an educational component as well in that parents will be educated about local
ordinances and the necessity for helmets.
Robyn Remington, 503 Taylor, explained that her twin brother
received a head injury in an accident when he was a teenager. She said he died
40 years later in a mental hospital as a consequence of that brain injury.
Dr. Robert Harris, 2505 E. Broadway, explained that he has
been a practicing pediatrician for almost 40 years. During that time, seven of
his patients were permanently paralyzed and three died from head injuries that
would have been prevented by helmets. It was his opinion that this ordinance
will significantly increase the safety of kids and will also help decrease medical
costs.
Mr. Hutton commented that he is not a big supporter of legislating
such things and felt parents have a responsibility in the safety of their kids,
although he understood that does not happen in all cases. After hearing the speakers,
he believed the helmet ordinance could prevent permanent injury or even save
a child's life. Mr. Hutton thought the Council would be foolish not to pass the
ordinance. He was concerned the Police Department would not have a lot of time
to spend on the enforcement issue.
In regard to enforcement, Mr. Janku asked if there was a way
to achieve City policy without making it a crime -- a mechanism could be established
wherein an education campaign could be conducted. Mr. Boeckmann responded the
Council could defeat this ordinance and adopt a policy resolution instead that
urged people to wear helmets.
Mayor Hindman understood the enforcement provisions to be
the issuance of some form of citation or notice with the defense being to show
that a helmet has been acquired. He said that would be very different from the
typical enforcement situation.
Mr. Loveless asked Captain McCrary if he could envision a
scenario where the Police Department would enforce the ordinance. Captain McCrary
was hopeful people would comply because he said it would be very difficult to
enforce.
Ms. Browning interjected that enforcement was probably one
of the areas of greatest concern to the Board of Health. She said they did not
want to create the impression that law enforcement officials are going to look
for kids not wearing helmets. The Board was told at earlier meetings that warnings
would probably consist of officers telling kids they have to wear helmets. When
a citation is issued, Ms. Browning related that the Prosecutor's office will
send out a form letter with information about where parents can obtain a low
or no cost helmet. The letter will also let parents know when they bring in proof
of purchase or acquisition of a helmet, the ticket will be automatically dropped.
She said it would be a good tool for parents and would enable them to tell their
children it's the law.
Mr. Beck asked if the fine was discretionary. Mr. Boeckmann
said if someone is convicted of violating the ordinance, then the fine imposed
by the Judge has to be at least $5 and less than $25. A police officer has discretion
as to whether or not they are going to give someone a ticket and the Prosecutor
has discretion as to whether or not they proceed with prosecution. If a person
is tried and found guilty under this ordinance, the fine with range between $5
and $25.
Mr. Hutton wondered if a deal has been worked out in that
all charges will be dismissed if a parent presents proof of purchase. He noted
this stipulation is not in the ordinance before the council. Mr. Boeckmann replied
that was something the Health Department has worked out with the City Prosecutor.
Mr. Hutton asked about the effective date if the ordinance
passes. If passed tonight, kids riding their bikes to school in the morning would
be illegal without a helmet.
Mr. Janku was not comfortable with impounding the bikes.
Mr. Loveless suggested the City post signs on the trails,
bikeways and at the skate park indicating that all persons under the age of 16
must wear helmets.
Mayor Hindman thought that was a good idea and recommended
a publicity campaign. He agreed with the point made about the effective date
and suggested that it be changed to coincide with the Mayor's Challenge scheduled
for May 10th.
Mayor Hindman made the motion that B92-03 be amended to change
the effective date to May 10, 2003. The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman and
approved unanimously by voice vote.
B92-03, as amended, was given third reading with the vote
recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN,
HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B93-03 Amending Chapter 2 of the City
Code as it relates to the Environment and Energy Commission.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this ordinance had been prepared at
the request of the Council. It would eliminate representation from the Water
and Light Advisory Board and the Board of Health from the Commission. It would
also reduce the quorum necessary to conduct business from seven to six.
Mr. John suggested going with the third option, eliminating
all the liaison members, reducing the County membership by one and dropping the
quorum to six.
Mr. Loveless suggested making the quorum five. Mr. John concurred.
Mr. Janku recommended contacting the County before changing their membership.
Mr. John acknowledged they could be notified of the change, but assumed the one
County member would not be reappointed when their term expired. Mayor Hindman
asked about sending the County a letter telling them what was decided and asking
for their comments. Technically, they have had copies of the minutes and the
E&E Commission must know about this. Mr. Hutton asked if the Commission was
aware of the other alternatives that had been proposed since their initial report
to the Council. Mr. Boeckmann said he did not know. Mr. Coffman suggested eliminating
the three liaison positions and leaving the County representation as is. Mr.
John said it is preferred to have an odd number of members for voting purposes,
and also the City/County ratio would be off. Mr. Hutton pointed out that the
current chair is the Planning and Zoning liaison. He assumed that member would
go off at the end of his chairmanship. Mr. John concurred that as terms expire,
that would be the end of the appointment process for that particular position.
Regarding notification of the County, Mr. John said if the
Council makes a decision as to which way they want to go, this ordinance could
be passed pending notification or it could be tabled. Mr. Hutton indicated he
would be more comfortable if staff notified the County and the E&E Commission
as to what it is the Council is thinking about doing.
Mr. Loveless spoke of his preference of eliminating the P&Z
member when his chair term expires. Mr. Boeckmann stated that staff could check
with both the E&E Commission and the County Commission for their input. He
could also let them know when their terms would expire.
Mr. John made the motion that B93-03 be tabled to May 5, 2003,
and that notification of the Council's preference be sent asking for comments
from both the Energy & Environment Commission and the County Commission.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless and approved unanimously by voice vote.
CONSENT AGENDA
The following bills were given second reading and the resolutions
were read by the Clerk.
B87-03 Calling for bids for construction
of the Grindstone Creek Outfall Sewer Extension.
B88-03 Authorizing acquisition of easements
necessary for the construction of Garth Avenue Bridge and Garth Avenue from
Thurman Street northward 700 feet to the bridge.
B89-03 Authorizing acquisition of easements
necessary for the construction of Garth Avenue from Bear Creek northward
to Blue Ridge Road.
B90-03 Accepting easements for sewer,
drainage, street and utility purposes.
B91-03 Accepting easements for water
and electric purposes.
R63-03 Setting a public hearing: amendments
to the guidelines for the convention and Visitors Bureau Tourism Development
Fund Event and Festival Program.
R64-03 Setting a public hearing: landscape
improvements between Route B and the COLT Railroad south of the Brown Station
Road intersection.
R65-03 Setting a public hearing: special
assessments for the Spruce Drive Improvement Project.
R66-03 Setting a public hearing: special
assessments for the 2001 Annual Sidewalk Project.
R67-03 Setting a public hearing: amendments
to the FY 2003 Action Plan.
R68-03 Authorizing an agreement with
Boone County for contribution of funds for the design of Eighth Street.
R69-03 Authorizing Amendment No. 1 to
the agreement with the Missouri Department of Health for the WIC Program.
R70-03 Authorizing Amendment No. 4 to
the agreement with the Missouri Department of Health for HIV Prevention Services.
R71-03 Authorizing an agreement with
the Missouri Division of Highway Safety for a DWI Enforcement Grant.
R72-03 Authorizing an agreement with
Commerce Bank for subordination of CDBG loans for property located at 105
Ash Street.
R73-03 Authorizing an amendment to the
agreement with Rafael Architects, Inc. for architect services for the renovation
of the Health Facility.
The bills were given third reading and the resolutions
were read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON, JANKU,
HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bills declared
enacted and resolutions declared adopted, reading as follows:
NEW BUSINESS
R74-03 Approving the preliminary plat
of North Hampton Woods, Phase I.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Dudark explained the location of this 82 acre tract to
be in northeast Columbia, near State Route B and Oakland Church Road. The plat
would create 188 lots, most of which would be zoned R-1. There is one 15-acre
lot zoned R-3, and some lots will be dedicated to the City as part of the Bear
Creek greenbelt. Mr. Dudark noted that approval of the plat is recommended subject
to Woodstar Drive being moved to the west at the time of the final plat.
The vote on R74-03 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON,
JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution
declared adopted, reading as follows:
R75-03 Authorizing City membership
in the Mid-Missouri Regional Planning Commission; transferring funds.
The resolution was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that this was discussed at a Council work session
and would cost the City about $30,000 which would come from the contingency account.
It would authorize the Mayor, or his designee, to represent the City on the Commission,
and would authorize the City Manager to appoint representatives to the Transportation
Advisory and Economic Development Advisory Councils of that Commission. He pointed
out there is a City representative on the Board of Directors of the Regional
Planning Commission which is appointed by the Presiding Commissioner. Mr. Beck
explained membership is necessary in order for the University to apply for partial
funding of federal EDA grant money for their incubator project. This project
would not be eligible for such funding unless Columbia becomes a member of MMRPC.
Mayor Hindman commented that he felt the incubator project
was the best strategy for economic development in Columbia -- to commercialize,
on a practical basis, research that comes out of the University.
Mr. Loveless was bothered by the heavy weight of Boone County
money being put into this program. He noted it is assessed on 30 cents per capita
from the County and the same from the City. Mayor Hindman agreed and added that
the City would be in an organization where we have one vote. He said it does
not seem like a great step forward for us, but was something we would have to
do if we were going to have a chance to receive EDA funding.
The vote on R75-03 was recorded as follows: VOTING YES: CRAYTON,
JANKU, HUTTON, LOVELESS, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution
declared adopted, reading as follows:
The following bills were introduced by the Mayor unless otherwise indicated, and all were given first reading:
PR76-03 Amending the guidelines for the Convention
and Visitors Bureau Tourism Development Fund Event and Festival Program.
B96-03 Voluntary annexation of property
located on the west side of Providence Outer Roadway, approximately 100 feet
south of Corporate Lake Drive; establishing permanent R-3 zoning.
B97-03 Rezoning property located at
the southwest corner of the Smiley Lane and Providence Road intersection
from C-3 to R-3.
B98-03 Approving the final plat of Keene
Estates, Plat No. 17.
B99-03 Approving the final plat of Pratt's
Subdivision, Plat 4, a replat of part of Lot 6 of Pratt's Addition.
B100-03 Authorizing Change Order No. One; approving
the engineer's final report; levying special assessments; appropriating funds
for the Spruce Drive Improvement Project.
B101-03 Authorizing Change Order No. One; approving
the engineer's final report for the Park de Ville and Ash Street Sidewalk
Project.
B102-03 Authorizing Change Order No. One; approving
the engineer's final report; levying special assessments; appropriating funds
for the 2001 Annual Sidewalk Project.
B103-03 Amending Chapter 24 of the City Code as
it relates to depositing dirt and other material on city streets and sidewalks.
B104-03 Calling for bids for construction of the
MC-6 Sewer Extension, an 80-acre point sanitary sewer serving The Cascades
Subdivision.
B105-03 Amending Chapter 27 of the City Code relating
to the electric thermal storage rates.
B106-03 Authorizing Change Order No. Two to the
contract for construction of a water storage reservoir and high service pump
station.
B107-03 Confirming the contract of Combs construction
Company, Inc. for construction of water main along Oakland Gravel Road from
Starke Lane to Gregory Heights Subdivision.
B108-03 Accepting easements for water and electric
utility purposes.
B109-03 Accepting a grant from the State Emergency
Management Agency to establish a Citizens Corp; appropriating funds.
B110-03 Authorizing an agreement with the Missouri
State Safety Center for the Missouri Police Chiefs Association Step Grant;
appropriating funds.
B111-03 Authorizing landscape improvements between
Route B and the COLT Railroad south of the Brown Station Road intersection.
B112-03 Amending various chapters of the City Code pertaining
to city boards and commissions.
B113-03 Authorizing an agreement with Boone County
and Boone Electric Cooperative for support of the geographic information
system.
REPORTS AND PETITIONS
(A) Inter-department Transfer of Funds.
Report accepted.
(B) Street Closure Requests.
Mr. Beck noted that an addition to the report from downtown
churches who request the closure of streets for Palm Sunday activities on April
13th.
Mr. Coffman commented on the lack of street closures for the
Twilight Festival. He indicated that last year, the Twilight Festival planners
were told the Council was interested in them exploring the idea of at least some
limited street closure - both for safety and for enhancing the event. Along with
approving this request, Mr. Coffman asked that a letter be written expressing
the Council's desire that the group explore the idea of some limited street closures.
Mr. Coffman made a motion per his above statement. The motion
was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mayor Hindman was hopeful something could be worked out where
they would close a block or two for a couple of Twilight Festivals to see what
happens.
(C) War on Iraq - Initiative Petition
Mayor Hindman noted that those present to speak on this issue
would be allowed to do so at the end of the meeting.
Mr. Boeckmann explained that an initiative petition had been
filed dealing with the war in Iraq. He said it is not the type of matter that
is a legitimate subject of an initiative petition. He explained the Council options
outlined in the report.
Mr. Coffman pointed out that the charter stipulates, "the
elector shall have the power to propose any ordinance, except an ordinance appropriating
money or levying taxes." He said there is nothing in Columbia's charter or ordinances
that indicates how someone would need to draft an ordinance, or that one of this
type could not be done.
Mayor Hindman commented that he has consistently taken the
stand that the City Council is not in the position to represent the community
on national and international issues. He reported that is not what the Council
was elected to do.
(D) Housing Market Analysis.
Mr. Beck noted the cost of this analysis to be $45,000. The
question to the Council is whether or not staff should proceed toward making
the analysis, seeking out contributions from various community groups and considering
the use of CDBG funds.
Mr. Janku commented the issue is an important one, but thought
it seemed like an expensive price tag for a study. Mr. Dudark related that is
what staff had been told a comprehensive study like this would cost. Mr. Janku
asked if we have examples of what other communities have produced. Mr. Dudark
responded they have looked at one from Iowa City. Mr. Loveless questioned whether
it looked like it would be a useful document. Mr. Dudark thought it would be
a good start, but Columbia's proposal would have more information in it than
Iowa City's. Mr. Loveless indicated that he would like to see half the cost come
from somewhere other than City government.
Mr. Loveless made the motion that staff be directed to work
with local organizations to see what contributions can be solicited.
Mr. Hutton asked if staff could do further research to get
a more definitive estimate of the study's cost. Mr. Dudark thought they could,
although he felt it would be a shot in the dark until an RFP is actually issued.
Mr. Hutton concurred.
Mr. John suggested developing an RFP and directing the solicitation
of additional funding.
The motion made by Mr. Loveless, added to and seconded by
Mr. John, was approved unanimously by voice vote.
(E) Bike/Pedestrian Commission recommendations
- Rt. WW - Columbia Bicycle Map.
In reference to Route WW, Mr. Hutton thought the planning
process was pretty far underway. He asked if any of the Commission's recommendations
are being considered in the plan as it is being developed right now, and if not,
he thought the cost for such could be substantial. Mayor Hindman suggested a
work session. Mr. Beck thought a pedway was included in the estimate, but it
might be on the opposite side of the street from what is being recommended. Mayor
Hindman spoke of his preference for diagrams of the plan to assist in understanding
the situation.
Mr. Janku asked about printing the bike maps. Mr. Hutton thought
the Commission could print as many as they could afford within their budget.
Mr. Loveless asked about a public hearing. Mr. Dudark said
there would be a public hearing on the WW reconstruction, and these alternatives
could come out at that time. Mr. Loveless noted that the Broadway Corridor Sidewalk
group had looked at this particular section and came up with some recommendations.
Mayor Hindman asked if they were the same as these. Mr. Loveless thought they
differed somewhat. Mr. Dudark said they did differ, the Study Committee has suggested
seven foot walks on each side and this is nine and six.
Mayor Hindman made the motion that the Council consider the
issue at a work session or a pre-Council dinner meeting. He asked that they be
provided with maps and information as to what has happened.
Mr. Loveless suggested encouraging the Bicycle and Pedestrian
Commission to hold off on printing the bike maps until the Council has a chance
to look at this corridor. Mr. John pointed out the group is wanting to print
a general map for existing conditions. By the time this area of Broadway is improved,
more maps will need to be printed. Mr. John suggested letting the Commission
spend the $2,000 on maps.
Mayor Hindman wondered about soliciting advertising for the
bicycle maps. The Council was supportive of this idea. Mr. Janku said it would
be nice to have the maps available for the Mayor's Challenge on May 10. He suggested
they authorize the printing of the maps, using the funding they have.
Mr. Janku made the motion that the printing of the maps be
authorized with the intent of having them ready as part of the kick-off for the
Mayor's Challenge, using the funds available. The motion was seconded by Mayor
Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
(F) Energy & Environment Commission
Tree Ordinance Report.
Mr. Coffman asked about the maximum penalty under this proposal
if someone were to cut down 1,000 square feet of climax forest. Mr. John said
it would be $1,000 for individuals and $5,000 for corporations. Mr. Coffman did
not think that was a sufficient deterrent. Mr. Loveless explained there was a
potential for a $43,000 penalty for clearing off an acre, multiplied times five
for a corporation.
Mr. Coffman made the motion that a draft ordinance be prepared.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutton and approved unanimously by voice vote.
(G) Proposal to Rename a Segment of
Nifong Boulevard Located South of Grindstone Parkway (Rt. AC) to Nifong
Corridor.
If at some time Southampton is going to come around, Mr. Hutton
said his feeling was that the section should be named Southampton instead of
Nifong Connector. As pointed out, he said at least there would be two street
names instead of three.
Mr. Janku asked about a further extension south and what it
would be called. Mr. John said it was probably appropriate to call it the Nifong
Connector because he doubted there would be anyone with an address on the little
stretch of road. At such time there is a road bringing it from the south, he
said they may need to have it renamed.
Mayor Hindman made the motion that the unbuilt section of
roadway be named Nifong Connector. The motion was seconded by Mr. John and approved
unanimously by voice vote.
(H) Formal Acceptance of Fire Station
Location Study.
Mr. Beck noted the only question was whether or not the Council
wanted to discuss the report any further. Unless the Council decides otherwise,
he said staff would bring it up during the budget process.
Mr. Janku noted that they have already set aside some funds
for one site. He thought the Fire Chief had been actively looking for others
and he hoped that would continue. Mr. Janku wanted to see things move forward
quickly so the City can get a better price before the area develops.
Mr. John recalled that early last fall he had requested information
on what it would take to make the City's Fire Department first responder for
everything inside the City limits. He said staff requested that this study be
completed before looking further into his request. As a Council, he thought they
needed to discuss it as a policy. He said if they are going to have a work session
on the issue, they could discuss it at that time. If not, he would like staff
to move forward with this information now.
Mr. John made the motion that the Council acknowledge receiving
the report. The motion was seconded by Mr. Loveless and approved unanimously
by voice vote.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
None.
COMMENTS BY COUNCIL, STAFF AND PUBLIC
Mr. Coffman commented that he has enjoyed working with everyone
over the past six years.
Mr. John brought up lighting on Forum Boulevard. He had
spoken with the former Fifth Ward Councilperson who had directed that some
of the lights be removed, and now he has agreed they should be reinstalled.
One of the suggestions was that these be full cut-off type lights. Mr. John
stated that is not what is up there now. He wondered about the possibility
of Water and Light installing one block of regular lights and one block of
cut-offs so the Council can see what the difference is between the two types
of lighting.
Mr. John made the motion that the lights be replaced and the
next time the department give the Council a test bed to look at. The motion was
seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mr. Loveless had been asked if it would be possible to place the audio feed for the Council meetings on the City's web site. Mr. Beck said staff would check into it.
Mr. Loveless had been contacted by a resident who has to have kidney dialysis every other day. He was told the only place this can be done is at a clinic on LeMone Boulevard. This individual was told there is no Paratransit service to the LeMone area. Mr. Loveless asked for a report on what it would cost the City to provide the transportation. Mr. Beck said he would get the figures.
Mr. Hutton noted the Council had received a letter pointing
out a problem with feral cats. Without spending a great deal of time, he
asked that the Health Department respond to the letter.
Mr. Hutton made the motion that the Health Department report
back as to whether or not they think feral cats are a problem and something the
City should regulate. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously
by voice vote.
Ms. Crayton noted that a bus stop had been removed from the Mall Route across from Wal-Mart. She explained that passengers are being put out by some bushes. The driver told her the State made the City move the stop. Ms. Crayton asked that passengers be dropped off in a safe location.
Ms. Crayton reported that the safety poles at the One-Stop Shop on Vandiver have been knocked down. She asked staff to look into the situation.
Ms. Crayton announced a community meeting that will be held at Douglass School on May 3rd. She said that speakers would be there to explain how city, state and federal dollars are being spent.
Mr. Janku mentioned the need for traffic calming through
Derby Ridge Subdivision.
Mr. Janku made the motion that staff be directed to explore
some kind of traffic calming or stop signs to slow traffic through this residential
area. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutton and approved unanimously by voice
vote.
Mr. Janku stated a new motel was being built on Business Loop 70 West, adjacent to an automobile repair facility. He said the repair facility has been an eyesore for a long time and asked if there was something that could be done to clean it up under our existing ordinances. If not, Mr. Janku asked how ordinances could be modified to deal with the situation.
Mr. Janku noted new businesses on Rangeline, just north of Vandiver, with street frontage. He explained there is a particular business that has always been a problem in that they park cars for sale on the shoulder in continual violation of City ordinances. Mr. Janku indicated that this area is well-posted and that various enforcement efforts are being made. He asked staff to continue enforcement efforts and whether there was anything else that could be done to strengthen those ordinances.
Mayor Hindman said he has been receiving quite a few
complaints about Scott Boulevard. He has been asked that the City look into
stop signs on Scott at Gillespie Bridge Road and Chapel Hill. This area has
no shoulders and it is a dangerous situation for walkers and bikers. Mayor
Hindman asked about the prospect of improvements to this stretch of Scott
Boulevard in the near future. If road improvements cannot occur in the near
future, he thought the City should come up with a plan to get the cars and
bikes off the road, even if it is on a temporary basis. Mr. Beck reminded
the Council a design has been completed and the cost of improvements will
be substantial. The project is totally unfunded and he said the Council would
have to look at some alternative to widen the road short-term. Mayor Hindman
thought it should be looked into, including the intersections.
Mayor Hindman said he has been receiving calls about the removal
of a climax forest at the corner of Broadway and Silvey. He asked for a report
back.
Roy Hartley, 1308 Bass, explained that the Cities for Peace Campaign currently obtained resolutions from 163 cities and counties. He noted that over 1,300 Columbia voters signed their name to the Peace Cities Petition. These individuals have clearly made a statement in favor of international law and support peace.
Robyn Remington, 503 Taylor, also spoke in favor of peace and against the war.
Rita Preckshott, 1101 Parkridge, thanked the Council for setting aside the initiative earlier this evening. She spoke in favor of supporting the troops.
Elaine Hartley, 1308 Bass, spoke in favor of peace and against the war.
Rudy Mendez, 3005 Melody, spoke in favor of supporting the troops. He did not think the Council should be involved in national security.
William Perventure, 1901 McKee, commented that the petition does not represent the opinion of the entire community. He was concerned what such a message would mean to the people currently serving in the military.
Betty Acrey, 109 Miramar, spoke in favor of peace.
Judy Johnson, 1516 McKee, spoke in favor of a united front for the troops.
John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, discussed "stale zoning". He suggested that property should revert to some kind of neutral zoning if it is not used for the intended zoning within so many years. He suggested that the Planning and Zoning Commission should be directed to form a task force to collect the many perspectives on the issue. In regard to the housing market study, Mr. Clark said the proposed study would not do anything to address the problems associated with the Wyatt Lane issue. He believed the focus would be too narrow and maintained that those involved in the study would consist primarily of developers.
The meeting adjourned at 11:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Penny
St. Romaine
City
Clerk
© 2024 City of Columbia