INTRODUCTORY
The City Council of the City
of Columbia, Missouri, met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday,
February 2, 1998, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The
roll was taken with the following results: Council Members HINDMAN,
COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, 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 20, 1998, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a
motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mrs. Crockett.
APPROVAL AND ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA INCLUDING
CONSENT AGENDA
Upon her request, Mr. Campbell
made the motion that Mrs. Crockett be allowed to abstain from voting on B19-98. The
motion was seconded by Ms. Coble and approved unanimously by voice vote.
The agenda, including the
Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by
Mr. Kruse and a second by Mr. Janku.
SPECIAL ITEMS
None.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
B342-97A Voluntary
annexation of property located east of Rock Quarry and south of Nifong
Boulevard;
establishing permanent PUD-8 zoning, rezoning property located on east
side
of Rock Quarry, approval of PUD Development Plan for Cambridge Place.
The bill was read by the
Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that there
had been a request received for tabling the bill to the second meeting in
February.
Mayor Hindman continued the
public hearing.
There being no comments,
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
Mr. Campbell made the motion
that B342-97A be continued to the February 16, 1998, meeting. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
B346-97 Rezoning
property owned by Godas Development, Inc. located on the east side
of
Ballenger
Lane, north of Clark Lane from R-1 to C-P.
The bill was read by
the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that a request
had been received from the owner to table this item indefinitely.
Mayor Hindman understood
if this item is tabled indefinitely, it would have to be readvertised prior
to the time of further public hearing.
Ms. Coble made the motion
that B346-98 be tabled indefinitely. The motion was seconded by Mrs.
Crockett and approved unanimously by voice vote.
B356-97 Amending
Chapter 25 of the City Code as it relates to plat submittal requirements
and
sidewalks.
The bill was read by the
Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the
primary issue of this ordinance concerns requirements for constructing sidewalks
along unimproved streets; either at the time the subdivision is being developed
or, in lieu thereof, putting up funds for a sidewalk to be constructed at
a later date -- possibly by the City. He said when this issue had been
discussed at a work session, consideration had been given to providing some
relief to through lots as the City does not encourage lots to front on collector
and arterial streets. In such cases, the developer would then have
to install sidewalks on both sides of an applicable lot. For that reason,
Mr. Beck said the Council asked the staff to look into what relief was given
when tax billing a street having two fronts. The way this particular
ordinance is written, it would give the same relief for sidewalks at a corner
lot and a through lot.
Under this proposal, Mr.
Janku understood that sidewalks installed along unimproved streets would
be similar as to what currently occurs along improved streets -- as a lot
is developed a stretch of walk is constructed. Mr. Janku thought conceivably,
that could be on a lot by lot basis. Mr. Hancock guessed that could
be the case, but said the idea was if there are several lots platted with
rear frontage along a street, the option would be available to either donate
money or construct a walkway of some sort. He said if this is enforced
as transpires now, it would be on a lot by lot process. Mr. Janku observed
if a subdivision develops from the interior out to the unimproved street,
a lot of time could elapse before a sidewalk is constructed.
Mr. Beck clarified that an
unimproved street is one that generally has ditches along both sides -- instead
of curbs and gutters. This is the differentiation between improved
and unimproved streets. He reported it is much easier to build a sidewalk
along an improved street because the grade of the street is already established. On
an unimproved street, Mr. Beck explained that there might be a lot of grading
required which makes it more difficult to build a sidewalk. Referring
to unimproved streets, Mr. Beck said it seemed to him it would be a little
more difficult to enforce on a house by house basis. He said if the
topography of the subdivision is fairly flat or the grade well-established,
there would be an opportunity for the developer to put in a sidewalk or pathway. He
asked Mr. Patterson if staff discussed how to handle a situation in which
a street requires a lot of cut and fill. Mr. Patterson said that had
been the concern before when the Council suggested that the construction
of sidewalks should be attempted at the time of platting. If an applicant
does not request a variance and does not offer to put a sidewalk in or pay
for it at the time of platting, and staff tries to enforce it the way it
is done currently, it would be very difficult to assure the collection of
money or that a sidewalk would be built along an unimproved street. Mr.
Patterson thought that was one of the arguments made at the Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting, whether to charge the costs of sidewalks as a
development fee or at the time a building permit is obtained to assure that
monies would be collected for sidewalks. He said there is no mechanism
in this ordinance to allow staff to do it any other way, unless it is simply
a requirement and not a choice.
Mr. Janku said the way the
ordinance is written, he was not sure the Council would be accomplishing
their goals.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
There being no comments,
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
Mr. Janku thought the goal
had been to somehow expedite the construction of sidewalks along unimproved
streets, and to get it done early in the process so those people moving in
to new subdivisions have access. Presently written, he did not think
the ordinance accomplished that, and thought it needed more work.
Mayor Hindman agreed. He
said safe pedestrian traffic should be provided for the entire subdivision,
and maybe it made more sense to think of it as something that should be paid
for by everyone in the development rather than doing it lot by lot. He
suggested another work session on the issue.
Mr. Campbell agreed. He
said it also needed to be recognized that there will be a substantial additional
cost in requiring preliminary sidewalks. He felt these walks are needed,
and did not suggest otherwise, but it should be realized that there is a
substantial cost when dealing with difficult terrains. Mr. Campbell
said when the street is improved at a later date, he did not feel it fair
to go back to the property owners and ask for another payment. That
meant someone would have to pick up the second time cost.
Mr. Kruse pointed out that,
in many circumstances, the temporary sidewalk may end up becoming permanent.
Mr. Campbell made the motion
that B356-98 be tabled to the March 2, 1998, meeting. The motion was
seconded by Mrs. Crockett and approved unanimously by voice vote.
B19-98 Rezoning
property located at 127 South Fifth Street and 415 Locust Street from
M-1 to C-2.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that the applicant
had indicated their intention to use this property for offices. This
request had been recommended by staff and approved by the Planning and Zoning
Commission on a 7-2 vote. He said there were some questions raised
during the Planning and Zoning meeting about the possibility of alcohol being
served within a certain distance of the church, located to the southwest
of this property. Mr. Beck explained that the ordinance limiting these
sales had been removed from the books some years ago.
Mr. Boeckmann noted that
the state statute is still on the books, and he believed that if the establishment
where liquor will be sold is located within 100 feet of a church or school,
no license can be granted unless the board of directors of that church or
school consents to it. He said it is not a problem if there is an ordinance
flatly prohibiting a liquor license to an establishment within so many feet
from a church, the problem is giving up that authority to the church or school.
Mr. Campbell noted that Columbia
has a pyramiding system of zoning. He said this property is currently
zoned M-1 and, under that district, all uses under commercial could currently
be used -- except housing. He said liquor sales could have been established
at this location in the past.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
Bill Crockett, an engineer
with offices at 1414 Rangeline, spoke on behalf of the owners. He pointed
out that the Land Use Plan of 1983 designated this area as commercial. He
said it was later designated for commercial as a downtown area by later adopted
plans. Mr. Crockett noted that several months ago, the Council authorized
a very similar type zoning one block north of this property -- at the
northwest corner of Fifth and Cherry. He felt a precedent had been
set when that request had been approved, and it is appropriate to continue
it. Mr. Crockett explained there are currently two residential structures
on the site, one of which will be razed. He said the house on the corner
will be incorporated into the proposed structure and would be completely
gutted and remodeled.
Nancy Galloway, 501 S. Glenwood,
spoke as co-owner of Callahan and Galloway, a property management company. She
said they were very excited about this project and the progression of the
Flat Branch area as a vital part of downtown. She said they plan to
spend a substantial amount of money turning the neglected house into an attractive
corner the neighboring property owners would be happy with.
Joe Callahan, co-owner, distributed
a sketch of the proposed building.
Tim Brockmeier, 211 Heather
Lane, explained that he and his wife operate an interior design business
called Designs by Brockmeier. He said they had been contemplating purchasing
a site to move their business to for some time. He said when the property
on the corner of Fifth and Locust became available, they had known right
away that it was just what they had been looking for. This is a circa
1910 home with graceful and charming features. He said a renovation
and architecturally correct addition will make this long-neglected dwelling
a real jewel in the revitalized Flat Branch area. Along with their
partners in this project, Callahan and Galloway, Mr. Brockmeier respectfully
asked for approval of the rezoning request.
Mr. Kruse asked if the addition
to the house would be to the west. Mr. Brockmeier said that was correct,
and added that the smaller house would be removed. Mr. Kruse thought
the plan looked great. He asked about trees on the lot and whether
or not they would have to be removed. Mr. Brockmeier said he was afraid
they would, but stated quite a bit of landscaping is planned.
Mr. Janku asked about parking. No
plan was shown.
Tom Schneider, an attorney
with offices at 11 N. Seventh Street, spoke on behalf of the Islamic Center. He
said the Center had no particular objection to this project, but the problem
was with what might be established in an unregulated C-2 zone in five or
ten years if this business relocates somewhere else and then rents out the
facility. He said types of uses the Islamic Center would greatly desire
to avoid at the location include bars and taverns. The Center has already
experienced problems with area bars and taverns. Other uses listed
that are opposed by the Center include liquor stores, adult video stores,
exotic dance clubs and night clubs. These are considered to be incompatible
uses for the area and, for that reason, Mr. Schneider said the Center requests
that the applicant consider planned commercial which does regulate offensive
uses. Regarding the 100 feet statute, Mr. Schneider said the state
has not enforced this law for some time because of constitutional problems. He
thought the statute was an unlawful delegation of government authority. Although
it is true that M-1 theoretically allows for the sale of liquor, Mr. Schneider
said the reason the applicants are requesting the rezoning is the property
cannot be used in an M-1 zoning district because of the off-street parking
requirement.
Mr. Campbell said C-2 is
a more restrictive zone than industrial, and thought the Center would be
gaining some in having a more restrictive statute. Mr. Schneider said
his point had been that the property was unlikely developable in M-1. He
said the applicant could not develop it with the off-street parking requirements,
which are waived in C-2.
Mr. Coffman asked Mr. Schneider
if the Center had discussed any other type of protection or restrictive covenants. Mr.
Schneider said something like that would work. He said not all of the
representatives of the applicant were present this evening, so they were
unable to resolve that issue this evening. He said his clients would
be willing to a 30 year restrictive covenant to exclude the various uses
mentioned earlier.
Aasim Inshirah, 407 Hickman,
spoke as a member of the Islamic Center since 1979. He distributed
pictures showing how close the proposed site is to the Center. He explained
that the Center is not just a place of worship, but is also used for educational
and social purposes. He said members gather at the Center five times
a day, from early morning until last prayer at sunset. He said there
is also a children's playground very close to the site, and the larger children
use the basketball goal in the back parking lot. He said there is no
other place for members to worship in Columbia. Mr. Inshirah said the
Center's concern is not about the proposed office uses, but the potential
future uses of the property that could disturb their peace and quiet.
Ms. Coble asked if there
had been any discussions amongst the leaders of the Center regarding restrictive
covenants. Mr. Inshirah said no one had discussed that specifically
with him. He said the President of the Center is present and may be
able to answer the question.
Mr. Campbell recalled the
mosque had been looking for additional parking a few years ago. He
asked if they had considered buying the property. Mr. Inshirah said
the Center did not need additional parking and, in fact, have so much parking
that some is actually leased to the University. He said what they do
need is additional property to build a school and expand the Center.
Mohammad El Deib, President
of the Islamic Center, said they had been interested in obtaining this piece
of property, but that had not worked out. He said the concern is not
with this proposal, but with possible future uses. Mr. El Deib reported
the Center is willing to work with the applicants on some
restrictive covenants.
If given more time, Ms. Coble
asked Mr. El Deib whether he thought he could work with the property owners. Mr.
El Deib said he would like to work with the applicants. Ms. Coble asked
if it was his preference to have a C-P zoning as opposed to an agreement
on restrictions. Mr. El Deib said they are hoping for both.
Regarding Mr. Schneider's
statement about the site being useless as M-1, Mr. Crockett said he did not
agree. He said there are a number of uses that could be put on this
particular tract of land where the parking requirements would not be substantial
enough to make a difference. He asked the Council to keep in mind that
the structures currently in place could be utilized without a rezoning request. The
reason for this application is to achieve compliance with the Land Use Plan,
and to use the site as a downtown development. He explained that the
house was built in the early 1900's, and neither Locust or Fifth streets
were improved at that time. With the improvement of those streets,
Mr. Crockett said the right-of-way remained the same; however, the street
widened and the house is now sitting within a few (10 to 12) feet from the
edge of the street. He pointed out that M-1 zoning has a 25 foot front
yard setback requirement, and the applicants are trying to eliminate that
with the C-2 zoning. He also reminded the Council that the mosque was
built when the entire area was zoned M-1. He said they had full knowledge
of what situations could develop. Mr. Crockett said any delays at this
point would create a hardship for the applicants at this late stage. He
asked for favorable Council consideration.
Mayor Hindman asked why it
would create a hardship. Mr. Crockett said time was of the utmost importance
on this project due to the investment that has already been made, and due
to the substantial amount of costs that are incurred daily. Mayor Hindman
asked if there was a reason the applicant had not requested C-P zoning. Mr.
Crockett said he had rejected the thought immediately because normally with
a C-P zone there are a number of setback requirements. He noted that
the lot was 45 feet by 120 feet. Mr. Crockett felt it was most appropriate
for the entire area to follow the Land Use Plan.
Mr. Schneider said the Planning
Commission expressly suggested to the applicant at the last meeting that
they look into restrictive covenants as a method of resolving this issue. He
said the Islamic Center's concerns did not come up at the last minute.
Mayor Hindman closed the
public hearing.
Ms. Coble said she had heard
about the discussion and the request both at the Planning and Zoning meeting
and subsequently about the desire of those from the Islamic Center to seek
some type of agreement -- if not through zoning, then through some type of
restrictive covenant for the property. She understood what the Land
Use Plan allows for and what the surrounding neighborhood has in terms of
existing businesses, but she also thought it is important for a central place
of worship in the community to be able to have a good relationship and assurances
from those surrounding businesses. Ms. Coble did not see that as a
hardship, but something actually beneficial. She was pleased with the
plan and thought it was important that the property be preserved with the
architectural details that had been shown. She said the property would
be saved and thought it would be a great use in the neighborhood. Ms.
Coble was hopeful the applicants could come to some type of agreement with
others in their neighborhood.
On the face of it, Mr. Campbell
said this plan is exactly what many of the Council members have called for. He
said it was one of the few times the Council has seen some of the architecture
being preserved. He noted that the property would be used for a relatively
low impact type of operation. In many ways, Mr. Campbell said this
is an ideal proposal. The only question is the "what if" question. He
was not as concerned about the "what if" associated with a down zoning as
compared to if it had been going the other way. In most cases, a property
is going from a more restrictive use to a less restrictive one. Mr.
Campbell said it would be nice if the applicants could work something out
with the neighborhood, but he thought the Council should approve the request.
Mr. Janku thought it looked
like an excellent project and did not see where two weeks was of the essence. He
thought both sides should talk to each other, and added that the applicants
should have gone to the mosque.
Mr. Coffman said he would
be uncomfortable voting on the issue until he knows there has been an opportunity
to negotiate and try to resolve the problems.
Mayor Hindman also thought
both sides should have a chance to talk. He recalled that when the
mosque was constructed, the area was pretty much neglected and run down. He
thought the Center had been encouraged to move in with the hope that it would
help turn the general neighborhood around. He thought the process was
pretty well underway. The Mayor noted he would not necessarily vote
against the proposal if an agreement is not reached.
Mayor Hindman made the motion
that B20-98 be tabled to the February 16, 1998, meeting. The motion
was seconded by Ms. Coble and approved by voice vote.
B20-98 Rezoning
property located at 209 and 213 Third Avenue from R-2 and O-1 to C-P.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck said when the request
had gone to the Planning and Zoning Commission they had voted unanimously
to deny it. Since that denial, the applicants have requested that the
application be changed to a planned office zone rather than planned commercial. He
said if the Council wished to proceed with this request, the ordinance would
have to be amended and then held over to the next meeting.
Mr. Kruse made the motion
that the Council amend B20-98 per the amendment sheet and table it to the
February 16, 1998, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman.
Mr. Campbell said he had
been a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission when this plan was drawn
up. He said the policy established at that time was that the commercial
zoning along Providence would be one lot, and one lot only, deep. He
said it would not be two lots because of the perceived intrusion into the
residential neighborhoods. He said that was a very strong statement
established at the time. Even as amended, he said this proposal would
intrude into a residential area. Mr. Campbell said the property is
located on a very difficult section of Providence Road in that there are
no lights or traffic control devices present at this intersection. He
said this would simply add to the congestion. Mr. Campbell's opinion
was that approval of this request would encourage an absentee owner to allow
a residential structure to deteriorate, and then ask for a change in zoning
so the building could be replaced. To reward this type of residential
maintenance is a detriment to the City. In addition, the City already
has a limited number of low-income housing available. Finally, Mr.
Campbell said this is an unimproved residential street not capable of handling
the type of traffic associated with this zoning.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
John Clark, spoke on behalf
of the North Central Neighborhood Association. He was supportive of
Mr. Campbell's statement and of the Planning and Zoning Commission's rejection
of the C-P approach. Mr. Clark was concerned about the "afternoon of
the hearing changes" being requested. He said if the Council were to
amend this bill and hold it over, that would serve the Association's needs
and sense of good process.
Mayor Hindman said from reading
the minutes of the Commission meeting, he recalled the North Central Neighborhood
Association had been very much in favor of a change to O-P zoning. Mr.
Clark said the Association was very much in favor of conforming with the
Land Use Plan, which favored office use in this corridor as opposed to a
more intense commercial use. He hoped the Council would not just take
that discussion as the entire guideline. Mr. Clark suggested the Council
either send this bill back to the Commission, or at the very least, hold
it for two weeks. He said probably what was most disturbing is that
there might be a vote on this issue tonight when, in fact, the change was
made this afternoon.
Mayor Hindman closed the
public hearing.
Mr. Janku asked how deep
the lots were off of Providence. Mr. Hancock said they were 36 1/2
feet by 135 feet.
The motion to amend B20-98,
and to table it to February 16, 1998, made by Mr. Kruse, seconded by Mayor
Hindman, was passed by voice vote.
B22-98 Authorizing
construction of an 8-inch water main on Chapel Hill Road.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this
is a routine request in accordance with City policy. He said staff
recommends approval.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
There being no comments,
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B22-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, COBLE,
JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
B23-98 Authorizing
construction of a 12-inch water main on Fairview Road and Ash Street.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that the estimated
cost of this project was $48,549. The new water main will be installed
along the west side of Fairview Road (in an existing easement) extending
to West Ash Street.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
There being no comments,
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B23-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, COBLE,
JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
B25-98 Authorizing
construction of improvements at Oakland Park.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Green explained that
this project is contained in both the FY 97 and FY 98 budgets. He said
plans call for a new playground, the renovation of fitness stations along
the trail, and renovation of at least two of the tennis courts. The
total project, including force account labor, would be $177,000. Mr.
Green noted that construction is expected to begin this season, and staff
anticipates the work should be completed by this fall.
Mrs. Crockett asked how staff
would decide how many tennis courts would be renovated. Mr. Green explained
that there currently are five courts in the park. He said the original
budget called for three of the courts to be improved, but then $14,000 was
taken from the project because the skateboard project had been moved from
Oakland Park to Cosmo Park. He said staff is determined to finish two
courts, but would go as far as the $66,000 would allow. Mr. Green said
the work would be contracted out and the courts would be completely renovated
from the ground up.
Mr. Janku asked what was
anticipated for the playground. Mr. Green said it would be similar
to what was done at Douglass Park. He said it would be located by the
two shelters and would have some landscape blocks and tires, but the majority
would be purchased playground equipment.
Mr. Kruse asked about the
use of the exercise equipment. He reported he seldom sees them being
used on the MKT Trail or in the park behind his home. Mr. Janku agreed,
but he thought they were not used very much because of the deteriorated condition. His
observation was that there is very limited work that needs to be done to
renovate the ones that cannot be used. Mr. Green said part of the reason
this equipment needs to be renovated is because they have been vandalized. He
did not think there was any signage either. Mr. Green pointed out that
the stations are 25 years old and do not meet all of the safety standards
that the new station standards must meet. He said the equipment could
certainly be removed, but staff had heard from several people that they would
like for the stations to be renovated. It was Mr. Green's opinion that
they either needed to be renovated or removed. Mr. Kruse pointed out
that the memo said the equipment would be replaced, not renovated. Mr.
Green said that was correct.
Mr. Campbell asked how much
the stations would cost. Mr. Green said it would be less than $20,000. Mr.
Campbell said that was a substantial amount.
Mr. Kruse said he was not
proposing that staff not repair the stations, but he did not think they are
used much. He wondered if the staff and Parks Commission had thought
about it in terms of the fact that there may not be the money available to
renovate three tennis courts.
Mr. Janku said that was an
excellent point and from comments made earlier, he understood there were
people who would be willing to defer, not eliminate, various improvements. He
said it may be a matter of priority and more input is needed.
Mr. Coffman asked if there
were any improvements to the disk golf course planned in the future. Mr.
Green said there were none in this budget. He did say that staff has
been talking to the disk golf players and knew they wanted to expand. Mr.
Coffman noted that the signs had deteriorated some.
Mr. Campbell asked how priorities
are determined. Mr. Green said in this particular instance, safety
was a factor that had been taken into consideration with the exercise stations. Regarding
the disk golf, he noted that there are already 18 holes. Mr. Green
said if that program is expanded, the trail might have to be crossed and
then again it would be a safety matter. He said priorities begin with
safety, followed by requests from the citizens and staff expertise.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
Diane Hughey, 1712 Sky Lane,
spoke on behalf of Oakland Manor Neighborhood Association. She expressed
their appreciation to the Council for proceeding with the needed improvements. She
also acknowledged the remarkable contributions made by Dick Green, retiring
Parks Director, through his leadership. She said the Parks and Recreation
Department was a real asset of the community. Ms. Hughey also recognized
the parks staff for their willingness to work in involving neighborhoods
in the improvements and decisions to the area parks. Regarding the
equipment, she said they realized choices would have to be made.
Paul Penn, 1811 Lovejoy Lane,
President of the Tanglewood Neighborhood Association, also thanked everyone
for their efforts toward the park improvements. Mr. Penn said the exercise
stations are being used, but are getting rough and unsafe. His opinion
was that the stations would get more use if they were in better shape. He
said residents understood there were constraints as far as budgeting, and
that they could not have everything done all at once. He said they
were hopeful that the tennis courts that would not be taken care of this
year would be put in next year's budget. Mr. Penn said residents would
like to be able to utilize all five tennis courts.
Mayor Hindman closed the
public hearing.
There was a discussion about
making modifications after passage of the ordinance. Mayor Hindman
asked if the plan would have to be followed exactly, or if staff would be
able to make adjustments as they saw fit in their professional capacity. Mr.
Beck said this last year he had included $177,500 for this particular improvement
plan. His opinion was that if with passage of this ordinance the exercise
stations would be replaced (among other things), that was what should be
done. Mr. Beck reported that was what he approved when the budget was
brought in. He said if the Council wanted to provide that flexibility
he thought they could, but he did not think the staff should just go off
and change what was presented to the Council.
Mr. Janku said there was
a lot of money involved for the improvements, and that it had been a significant
decision to put the $60,000 in for the tennis courts. He knew there
were competing needs for those funds, and that it is hard to get that significant
of an amount in each particular year. His concern was that if the three
courts are not renovated at this point, it would be hard to come up with
that amount of money in a future budget. Mr. Janku said there were
many parks around Columbia that would benefit from $60,000, as well as a
lot of neighborhoods that would like to have small parks established. As
the exercise stations would only cost $8,000, these could be replaced at
the end of this year if any money is left over from some other project. He
pointed out that there has not been as much support by civic groups for this
park as there has been for other parks. It seemed to him that a civic
group might be more interested in pitching in $8,000 for exercise stations,
or $10,000 to help with the playground, than they would be to resurface a
tennis court. He would rather see the three tennis courts renovated
now, and then budget next year for the exercise stations or finish the playground.
Mr. Kruse said the Council
knows there is a documented wish to have the tennis courts improved, and
he did not see exercise stations being used in other parks. Mr. Kruse
said if there are unsafe stations they should be removed.
Mr. Campbell felt that whatever
is approved in detail needed to be followed.
Mr. Green said staff met
with the neighborhood several times, but where the discrepancy comes in is
where some of the funding for this project went to the skateboard park. He
said before that happened, intentions had been to renovate three tennis courts,
build the playground, and replace the exercise station equipment. That
would be the priority as far as development is concerned. Mr. Green
reported if the Council really wanted to renovate three of the tennis courts
and establish the new playground, it was his opinion that was about all the
$177,000 would do. He said if the Council approved those two things
(three tennis courts and the playground), staff could be instructed to use
the remaining funding to repair some of the exercise stations as much as
possible.
Mr. Janku made the motion
that the plan be amended to reflect Mr. Green's suggestion. The motion
was seconded by Mrs. Crockett and approved unanimously by voice vote.
B25-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, COBLE,
JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
B26-98 Authorizing
construction of Westwinds Neighborhood Park.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Green explained that
this neighborhood park had been purchased about 13 years ago. He noted
that money had been included in the one-quarter cent sales tax approved by
the voters. In addition to the walking trail, Mr. Green said the park
would include a playground, basketball park, and a picnic shelter.
Mayor Hindman said he liked
the plan very much and thought it would be good for the neighborhood to have
the park developed in this way. He suggested that the staff think of
the possible interconnection of the trails as much as possible. He
said the north/south street would connect to a sizable neighborhood, although
there are no sidewalks in the area. Recently, he said the Council had
authorized the purchase of the property one lot to the west of this project. He
said there would be a walk light installed, and it would provide access to
residents crossing Stadium. He said if there could be a way found to
connect that access to this project it would be a very big improvement. If
the systems could be connected, it would involve all of the houses to the
west and would also allow people using the park access across Stadium. Mayor
Hindman would like to see that addition, if at all possible. He understood
the reason for passage of this ordinance tonight was so the playground equipment
could be ordered as part of a large package. He would be inclined to
vote favorably with the thought of asking the staff to see what could be
done to provide the above described interconnection. Mayor Hindman
reported the plan could be amended at a later date.
Mr. Campbell suggested that
the staff meet with the neighborhood again to get their input on the development
of the park. Mr. Campbell noted that the playground would be located
relatively close to Stadium Boulevard. He asked if fencing costs, or
the cost of other measures, had been included in the figures to keep children
from running out onto Stadium. Mr. Green said costs for fencing had
not been included, however, it was felt the topography of the park would
lend itself to preventing balls or other objects from rolling onto Stadium. He
said there was a rise from the park up to a berm before going over into Stadium. Mr.
Campbell said there was not much of a berm where the playground is being
proposed, and thought it was relatively flat at that location. Mr.
Green said perhaps staff would build a berm in that case. Mr. Campbell
said it was imperative that staff check into the safety of the design.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
There being no comments,
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B26-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, COBLE,
JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
B28-98 Approving
the engineer's final report, levying and assessing special assessments
for
improvements
to Richardson Street from Ripley Street to William Street.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Patterson explained that
the subject street had recently been reconstructed to improved residential
standards. Prior to the improvements, the street had been an unimproved residential
street approximately 22-feet in width in an existing 40-foot right-of-way. The
total length of the project is about 480 feet.
Mr. Patterson noted that
a public hearing authorizing the project was held June 17, 1996. The
total project cost was $72,555, and consisted of constructing a 28-foot wide
pavement with sidewalks along both sides. As the street is within a
Community Development Block Grant eligible area, Mr. Patterson explained
that City policies provide for levying special assessments against abutting
properties in an amount that is 50% of the normal assessment for a local
pavement portion cost of the street. The maximum tax bill assessment
was set at $14.64 at the time of the public hearing. If the assessments
are levied as proposed, Mr. Patterson said this would generate about $12,853
of the $72,000, with the balance being paid through CDBG funds. Also
in accordance with policy, property owners who meet income and residency
requirements are eligible for grants that would pay for the entire amount
of the tax bill.
Prior to making the assessments
this evening, Mr. Patterson said the Council would need to determine that
there are special benefits that have accrued to the properties as the result
of reconstruction of the street. He suggested the Council consider
that some of the benefits might be that the curb and guttering, which has
helped the overall storm water management in the area, has improved the appearance
and maintainability of the properties; new driveway approaches have been
built on all properties thus improving access; the improved street surface
will reduce the wear and tear on the vehicles of the property owners, resulting
in the reduction of maintenance costs; and the City will be able to provide
better street maintenance in the form of street cleaning and snow removal.
He also pointed out that once a street is improved, properties are no longer
subject to tax bill maintenance of the street which could be as much as $2.00
per foot per year.
Mrs. Crockett asked if the
property owners have been informed of this assessment. Mr. Patterson
said notices had been sent to all property owners at the time of construction
and at the time of tax billing. He said the last notice sent contained
information regarding this evening's public hearing.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
There being no comments,
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B28-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, COBLE,
JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
OLD BUSINESS
B361-97A Amending
Article III of Chapter 11 of the City Code pertaining to beverage containers.
The bill was given third
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this
issue had originated as a result of a pre-annexation agreement negotiation. He
said staff had been working with the property owners attempting to get an
agreement worked out. He understood now that these individuals are
willing to sign a pre-annexation agreement without this exemption.
Mayor Hindman noted that
no signatures had been acquired as of yet on the pre-annexation agreement.
Urban Wussler, Bluff Boulevard,
again gave the history of the deposit law and said if it was abolished a
lot of problems would be solved.
Mrs. Crockett said she could
not support this exemption because if the Council passed it for the deposit
law, the next time someone wants to annex into the City, these individuals
might want a variance to something else. She said there are retailers
who have been in business for many, many years and have had to deal with
the deposit law. She did not think it was fair to allow someone to
come into the City for five years, or even one year, and not have to abide
by the same rules as everyone else has had to. Mrs. Crockett said to
allow this would only set a precedent.
Mr. Campbell agreed with
Mrs. Crockett. He said the Council had passed an ordinance that gave
firework stands located in the County some protection for a limited time. He
thought that exemption is very different from this one as a product will
be sold year round to many more consumers, many of whom reside in Columbia. He
said fireworks are sold for a limited time for use outside the City. Mr.
Campbell indicated he cannot support this ordinance because it would make
for unfair competition within the City.
Mayor Hindman realized the
elements of unfairness, but thought of it like grandfathering. He said
the five year exemption would begin at the time of the signing of the agreement,
not at the time of actual annexation into the City. He said the Council
would be grandfathering a business' present product for what would probably
be significantly less than five years. There is also an amendment regarding
that a business is required to have been in operation for one year prior
to even signing an agreement. Mayor Hindman thought this exemption
is a reasonable balance, and perhaps it should be stipulated that the business
will be required to have been in operation for a couple of years to ensure
there is no subterfuge involved.
Assuming the ordinance passes,
Mr. Campbell reported there is a store located at a junction of I-70 and
asked what if someone else came along and builds another convenience store
next to the existing store. He said the message would be sent that
one business would have to follow the deposit ordinance, while the other
store will be exempt from these regulations. He said the old store
would have a definite price advantage over the new one. Mayor Hindman
agreed this is an element that poses a problem. Although as it is now,
there are stores at the edge of town that do not have to comply with the
deposit law.
Mayor Hindman said one thing
this exemption will encourage is annexation into the City and compliance
with all of the ordinances and, at the same time, will establish a sunset
on their business operations. He said the other choice an individual
could make would be to stay outside the City and then there would never be
a sunset on operations.
Mrs. Crockett asked about
all of the stores that have had to comply with this ordinance since the beginning. Mayor
Hindman said this would not change the behavior of their competition, but
would have the affect of eliminating it eventually.
Mr. Janku thought the public
is beginning to think the City is willing to do almost anything for annexation. He
was of the opinion the City has yet to adequately explain to the public why
annexation is of benefit to the broader community. Mr. Janku thought
this tarnishes annexation and diminishes the importance of it to the community.
Mrs. Crockett knows what
these particular people have in mind for this area, and it would be a big
benefit to the City. She said when she explained how she felt about
this issue, these individuals understood her concerns. Mrs. Crockett
thought they would agree to annexation without the exemption.
Mr. Coffman agreed with the
Mayor and although there may be times where there might seem to be some discrimination
or unfair relationships, it would be for a reasonably short period of time. He
said it also seemed to eliminate some unfairness that occurs along the City
boundaries. He said the benefits derived from this exemption would
be long-term, and any perceived unfairness would be for a short time. Mr.
Coffman felt it is a reasonable compromise.
Mayor Hindman made the motion
to amend B361-97A by changing the amount of time a business is required to
have been in operation to qualify for exemption from one year to two years. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman and passed by voice vote.
B361-97A was read by the
Clerk with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN,
KRUSE, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL. Bill
defeated.
B17-98 Approving
final plat of The Terebinths, Plat III, a major subdivision.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this
plat would create four lots and it met all subdivision regulations. The
staff report noted that the flood plain area is adjacent to the proposed
greenbelt for this area of the City, and staff had requested that the subdivider
work with the City in providing a greenbelt easement for the area. Mr.
Beck reported this had not been included in the plat.
Mayor Hindman asked about
the situation regarding the greenbelt easement. Mr. Hancock said the
greenbelt resolution covers Hominy Branch, so staff had pointed out to the
proponent that the City would like to see some form of easement on the property. Mr.
Hancock explained what easements had been obtained thus far in this area. He
said there was no one present in the audience to speak to this issue. Mr.
Hancock said staff had worked with this PUD several times in the past, and
had indicated the desire for some sort of green space, greenbelt access,
or non-access easement in this location to help fulfill the policy in the
area. He said the applicant has chosen not to dedicate an easement.
Mr. Janku understood the
Hominy Branch extends to the west and crosses under 63. Mr. Hancock
said that was correct. In terms of a future trail possibility, Mr.
Janku said it is an excellent transportation corridor that avoids the 63/I-70
interchange and the major traffic areas at Broadway and 63. Mr. Hancock
said staff is working on a plan for the Hominy Branch, but at this time he
cannot tell the Council which side might be more suitable for a trail. He
said a plan for the Council to consider will be submitted within the next
three to four months. Mr. Hancock reported there will be barriers created
by some of the roads, and this will have to be looked at some day if the
area is ever developed into something more than just a greenbelt. Mr.
Janku said the Council recently considered a big PUD development and, in
that discussion, it had been pointed out that is what PUD's are for -- allowing
increased density or opportunities to align the property in particular ways
on the plat that would not be normally permitted. He said there are
certain trade-off's, like greenspace, that are expected. Mr. Janku
said his personal preference was that this area be dedicated as part of the
greenbelt, including some sort of trail easement. This property is
located along St. Charles Road, and it would be an excellent site to construct
some sort of trail into Columbia.
Mr. Janku made the motion
that there be a greenspace trail easement.
Mr. Campbell pointed out
that this is the final plat, although he would be in favor of the motion. He
asked if the Council had the right to make those kinds of changes. Mr.
Boeckmann said the Council cannot amend the ordinance to dedicate an item
-- the dedication has to be included on the plat. He noted that the
staff report indicated the plat meets all of the subdivision regulation requirements,
and is in conformance with the approved PUD Development Plan. Mr. Boeckmann
reported the Council does not have solid legal grounds to reject the plat
because the applicant chooses not to dedicate something that is not required.
Mr. Janku withdrew his motion.
Mr. Kruse said it would be
a missed opportunity if an easement is not dedicated in this case. He
said perhaps the Council should table this issue to give it that chance.
Mayor Hindman asked if there
was space on the plan for the land to be dedicated outside of where the buildings
are shown. Mr. Hancock believed it to be outside of lot one. He
said it is a flood prone area and an area not necessarily developable. Mr.
Hancock said it contained a big drainage easement.
Mr. Campbell asked if he
understood the developers had been approached regarding this issue and chose
not to dedicate the easement. Mr. Hancock said that was correct.
Mayor Hindman asked if the
Council voted against the request, whether the developer would have to start
over again. Mr. Boeckmann suggested tabling the bill, and have the
developer explain why he does not want to dedicate an easement.
Mr. Kruse made the motion
to table B17-98 to the February 16, 1998, meeting. The motion was seconded
by Ms. Coble and approved unanimously by voice vote.
B27-98 Authorizing
agreement with Markey and Associates for engineering and design services
for
the renovation of the Oakland Park swimming pool.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that consultants
had been interviewed by a team, and they are recommending a firm that does
this type of work. The estimated cost for the renovations is $49,900.
B27-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, COBLE,
JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
B29-98 Accepting
the bid of C.L. Richardson Construction Company for construction of
Sanitary
Sewer
District No. 138 and appropriating funds.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck pointed out that
this is a major sewer project that the Council held hearings on earlier. He
said several bids had been received with the low bid being $86,819.25.
Mrs. Crockett asked about
the location of the project. Mr. Patterson explained that this is the
project that goes to Extrusion Technologies. He reminded the Council
that one of the things that really helped on this project was, since the
time of the resolution estimate, E.T.I. donated the pipe for the project
and it is being used as a pilot project for their material. He said
E.T.I. had been working very closely with the City to try to keep the costs
down.
B29-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, COBLE,
JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
B30-98 Amending
Chapter 22 of the Code or Ordinances to allow the assessment of the
cost of
construction
of local non-residential streets.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that a
situation has come up as to what the City's policy would be relating to participation
in the cost of a commercial-type street. This particularly involves
the extension of Conley Road. He said when the City's policy was developed
agreeing to pay for the extra width and thickness for collector-type streets,
the intent was for the City to pay the cost for that which could be attributed
to the community for using those streets, and then the property owners would
yet pay for a portion of the streets because they would also be using them.
In the Conley Road situation,
used almost 100% by abutting property owners, Mr. Beck said there is a real
question as to what the overall community use would be. Working with
the Public Works staff, he said they had come up with some language that
would allow streets of this nature to be tax billed without the City having
to pay a great percentage of the cost for the street. Mr. Beck reported
this amendment had been discussed with one of the owners who would like to
see Conley Road paved, and they are willing to pay their part of it. He
said this ordinance would apply to any other similar street that might be
affected in the future.
B30-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, COBLE,
JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
B31-98 Amending
Chapter 11 of the Code of Ordinances as it relates to storage of unlicensed
motor
vehicles.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this
ordinance had been prepared at the request of the Council. He said
it would remove the provision of a property owner being able to store a vehicle
under a tarp or opaque covering.
Robert Young, 4406 Mexico
Gravel Road, owner of an auto service, said that this ordinance had concerned
him for some time. There is a group of auto body shop owners that,
in some cases, do not have parking facilities to store all of the vehicles
they work on. These cars must, by necessity, be parked on City streets. Mr.
Young said some cars might not be picked up for long periods of time for
various reasons, and businesses are forced to store these vehicles. If
the cars are not picked up by the owner, the business either has to call
someone to haul them off as junk or have the City impound them. He
said if the car is repaired and the owner does not have the cash to pay for
the work, then the vehicle has to be stored to protect the investment that
has been made by the business. Mr. Young did not have a problem with
the ordinance as it relates to residential areas, but he did in commercial
and industrial zoned areas where these types of shops are located.
After much conversation,
it was noted that this particular ordinance does not deal with lawful motor
vehicle sales and junk yards, or service businesses. It was pointed
out that unlicensed cars are not allowed on public streets.
Ms. Coble said there were
areas in this community, and vast portions of the first ward, where it is
atypical to have a dwelling with a carport or a garage. She said there
are many individuals in the community who do not have the financial resources
to immediately have a vehicle repaired, and these persons need time before
this can occur. Ms. Coble felt it was over-reaching on the part of
the Council, for the purposes of aesthetic values, to tell these individuals
they have to completely get rid of the investment they have already made. She
said when the ordinance was originally passed and the Council added the exception
to allow the tarp covering over vehicles, she received a lot of calls from
people complaining about vehicles they had identified that did not have tarps
on them. She said as soon as the tarps went on, it has probably been
a year plus since she had received a call about this issue. She did
not find the tarps offensive, and thought the current amendment is a punitive
approach. Ms. Coble noted that this may not seem to be a very big deal
to some, but people's lives could be hurt very clearly as a result. She
thought the amendment to this ordinance is too severe and would vote against
it.
Mr. Janku said this had been
a difficult decision two years ago and the Council had struggled with it. He
saw it as a balancing act. In the paper today, he reported Mr. Sanford
was quoted as having said that 153 citations had been written since this
ordinance had gone into effect. Mr. Janku said that confirmed his observation
that the City has a serious situation developing where there are many abandoned
vehicles throughout Columbia, not just in one particular area. At some
point, a person has to take responsibility for what their impact is on neighboring
residents. Mr. Janku stated the appearance of the surrounding property
would affect his decision about whether or not to purchase a home in a neighborhood
if he saw one or more junk vehicles in someone's yard. He said the
City has an extensive Home Ownership Assistance Program and other programs
directed to try to help some of these neighborhoods. He said the City
encourages people to buy properties, fix them up, and be committed to their
neighborhood. Mr. Janku thought covered cars throughout the community
could adversely affect how people feel about the neighborhood they live in.
Mr. Janku explained that
the current ordinance allows an unlicensed vehicle to remain on private property
for 90 days, with an additional 30 days after a written notice has been sent
by the Health Department. He summarized that people would have a minimum
of 120 days to arrange financing for car repairs, and he thought that is
a reasonable amount of time. Mr. Janku said he spoke to someone who
works on cars and had been told that if a car sits for a long period of time,
it gets more and more difficult to repair. He said perhaps a motivation
to get it fixed could be beneficial. Mr. Janku thought about the expense
of having junk cars hauled away, and had found a company in the phone book
that hauls away junk cars for free. Again, he said the purpose of the
amendment to the current ordinance is to provide a balance, and he is trying
to shift the balance toward the responsible homeowner.
Ms. Coble asked what if the
issue to some area residents is not property ownership -- a person who would
never own property and currently lives in public housing. This is the
case of many people in the first ward. She said these individuals do
not own the property, and neighboring occupants do not own theirs either. In
these circumstances it is not an issue of the neighborhood property values
going down. Ms. Coble thought the proposed amendment had a class affect.
Mr. Janku agreed it is a
class affect. He said the rich people can live in neighborhoods where there
are restrictive covenants against this type of conduct, whereas the poor
people cannot afford to buy a nice home in a neighborhood with restrictive
covenants. He said a person may have bought a house years ago and has
tried to keep it up, or they may be looking at purchasing a home in a neighborhood
where property values are a little lower and there are no restrictive covenants. Mr.
Janku explained that is what he is attempting to support.
Mr. Kruse asked Mr. Janku
if he had received more complaints from people and that motivated him to
bring this issue up again. Mr. Janku said he has received complaints
and that he has personally observed this. He said if the Council were
to tour the City, they would be stunned to see the number of abandoned vehicles
on some of these properties. Mr. Kruse said he had seen a few recently,
probably in the first ward, where there were no tires on the vehicles and
the cars are sitting on the street with no tarp. Ms. Coble said those
are violations. Mr. Kruse understood that, and said most people in
his ward can afford to take care of their vehicles. He noted on his
street, however, there is a family with four unlicensed vehicles covered
by tarps that are in terrible condition. He said there is another family
with two vehicles in a similar condition. Mr. Kruse said he receives
complaints regarding these situations from his neighbors. He understood
Ms. Coble's point, but is very much of two minds on the issue.
Mr. Campbell said he did
not think many abandoned cars would be covered with opaque fabric. He
said if people are keeping vehicles covered, he doubted that they are abandoned.
Mr. Janku said this is a
particularly appropriate time to bring up this ordinance as the design of
license plates has changed, and it is easier to identify unlicensed cars. Currently,
when a complaint is received by the Health Department and a vehicle is found
to be noncompliant, the owner is notified that either the car must be removed
from the property or covered with a tarp.
Mr. Coffman thought the real
issue was the tarp. He said there is a big difference between a car
up on blocks in disrepair and one that has a covering on it. He supposed
there are tarps that are tattered and uglier than others, but said he was
happy with the status quo. Mr. Coffman thought a tarp is a reasonable
compromise.
Mayor Hindman said he was
persuaded by the problem of the neighbor who keeps their property up. He
has had several upset people talk to him about not being able to control
the quality of their neighborhood because of people taking advantage of the
situation. Many times cars are covered with tarps that become dirty,
and the vehicles just stay on the property. Regarding the class affect,
Mayor Hindman said to a certain extent that may be true. He thought
it may tend to happen in the lower income neighborhoods, which are perhaps
the neighborhoods that have the hardest time protecting themselves from the
deterioration. He also felt this amendment is a very reasonable compromise. Mayor
Hindman said it is not fair to neighboring residents when the situation never
improves, and added that this individual has just as many problems as the
person who is covering up the car. He is sure there are legitimate
hard luck stories, but he also felt that a lot of the cars are covered up
for all kinds reasons that have nothing to do with limited financial resources. Mayor
Hindman said the City needed to help these citizens, and thought 120 days
was plenty of time to deal with most situations. If a true hardship
situation exists, he expected the person could talk to his neighbor about
it and probably no complaint would take place.
Mr. Campbell said the Mayor's
points were well-taken, but said he was going to vote against this amendment
for other reasons. He thought the original ordinance that had been
passed was a reasonable compromise, and did protect some of the neighborhoods
because unlicensed vehicles are required to be covered with opaque material. Mr.
Campbell asked the Council to consider two points; one is the problems associated
with welfare reform. Many low income individuals will be forced to
find jobs, and these people need to have transportation. He said many
will not be able to afford good transportation, and the vehicles that will
be used will probably be limited -- sometimes running and sometimes not. He
pointed out that many employers in Columbia are not convenient to public
transportation. Secondly, the Council has discussed the affect on neighborhoods. Mr.
Campbell said it is vitally important that neighborhoods be kept up, but
at the same time, to most citizens the automobile is the American dream. It
gives people freedom when they own a vehicle. Mr. Campbell reported
the City would be sending a message that if people cannot afford to keep
their cars licensed, the City would take their dream away.
Mrs. Crockett said there
were a lot of cars covered in her ward. She questioned how far the
City could go in telling people what they can and cannot do on their own
property. She knew there are people who would eventually get their
vehicles running, but she had a problem telling someone who cannot afford
to get the car fixed then they must get rid of it. Mrs. Crockett reported
before the ordinance was passed mandating that unlicensed vehicles must be
covered, she had received a lot of complaints; but since then, she has only
received a couple.
B31-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, JANKU. VOTING
NO: COBLE, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN. Bill defeated.
B33-98 Authorizing
appropriation of $25,000 for a Comprehensive Community Child Care System.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck said the City's
portion for this project would come from the 1997 child care funds, which
had been obtained as a result of the City receiving more money from the state
than had been anticipated. He said the other $25,000 would come from
United Way.
Mr. Steinhaus explained that
this project is the culmination of two year's work of the child care team
of the Boone County Health Report Card Project. He reported that the
team proposes that a full-time child care coordinator be hired to work with
the Community Child Care Commission, which is comprised of child care professionals
and community business leaders, to develop a model for a comprehensive child
care system in the community.
Mr. Steinhaus listed the
duties of the coordinator would include working on developing partnerships
amongst employers and child care providers to improve accessibility, affordability,
and quality of pre-school and school age care in the community; working to
coordinate local, state and federal funding streams for child care in the
community in order to support a more coordinated and comprehensive child
care system; developing additional funding sources to create a comprehensive
child care system in the community to serve as a catalyst to encourage linkages
and coordination amongst existing child care programs and services for more
effective and efficient care and access to resources; and working with the
Community Child Care Commission to develop a model of this system for the
community. He said the team knew this is an important issue, and had
seen proposals from both the President and the Governor for increased funding
for child care in communities. From recent brain research, Mr. Steinhaus
said the importance of quality child care (especially for ages zero through
five) had been determined.
Ms. Coble asked if she understood
correctly that the annual salary of the person hired for this position would
be $34,000. Mr. Steinhaus said that was correct. She asked about
the relationships of the different agencies. She said there was the
Office of Community Services, and also working out of that office is a full-time
position from the Caring Communities project. Mr. Steinhaus said that
Caring Communities had moved into new office space. Ms. Coble understood
that Caring Communities is associated with the work done by the Office of
Community Services. Mr. Steinhaus said that was correct. Ms.
Coble asked if Caring Communities had been an aspect of the team that came
up with this proposal, she understood it had been a crossover membership
with Caring Communities, Community Partnership, Boone County Health Report
Card, and Child Care Consortium. Mr. Steinhaus said that was correct. Ms.
Coble asked how many of the groups had staff members. Mr. Steinhaus
did not believe any of them did. Ms. Coble asked if the team is seeking
to coordinate all of those identified different efforts through one single
staff person. Mr. Steinhaus replied that is not the case, and added
that the group is seeking to coordinate the child care efforts in the community. Ms.
Coble said those efforts involve each of the other agencies. Mr. Steinhaus
said the Community Partnership would be associated with it, as would United
Way and the City.
Ms. Coble explained that
her first impression of the project had been that a budget of $50,000 would
be allocated to talk about child care. She thought there had been a
lot of progress being made toward cooperative efforts at community levels,
especially in the realm of social services, but thought sometimes this community
can get a little dazzled by the models and seek to develop yet more structures
and more things that can be identified as catalysts to linkages. As
the specific job is described, Ms. Coble said she found it frustrating, given
that a government report last week reported the median income for child care
workers in this country is $13,000, that this person would "talk" about child
care with those who are working in child care, and yet would still not be
providing any services. She said considering just the $25,000 the City
would fund for this program, training could be provided for workers who now
have to pay for it. Given the little amount of income these individuals
receive, they very often cannot afford training. Ms. Coble said the
City could furnish actual services and resources to those who are trying
to provide infant care, but cannot do so because of the lack of equipment,
with a lend/lease program. She stated scholarships could be provided
to support the work to ensure that all of the issues identified as a need
in the community are fulfilled. She said there is a need for more accredited
day care. Ms. Coble said new materials need to be developed in the
community, and this is something the $25,000 could be spent on. The
City could also take advantage of the work that is already occurring to greater
involve employers in this community in creating more access to child care. She
said this is already being done through REDI, a member of the consortium. REDI
is undertaking surveys, that had been developed by private providers, to
determine what child care needs in the community can be served from area
industries and businesses.
Ms. Coble reported that there
are private providers in this community who are already being funded, insufficiently
through federal and other agencies, to provide child care resources and referrals. She
said these programs are significantly understaffed, but could be accomplished
with even half the money that will fund this entire project. Ms. Coble
said these providers would actually be doing the work, not having meetings
about the work. Ms. Coble noted her belief in the commitment of all
of the people that have been involved, and thought these individuals would
continue to meet and work on coordination of services. She did not
believe the most efficient use of $50,000 in this community is to do anything
other than to really provide child care and address the needs of those who
furnish it.
Mr. Steinhaus agreed those
were all needs in this community. He said a number of the team members
struggled with whether or not to just apply directly for a number of those
types of projects Ms. Coble mentioned. He said the team discussed what
it would take to move the community up to a higher level of child care, and
everyone felt there needed to be a commitment to someone who could really
follow through over the next year in bringing the business community on board
as well. Ms. Coble said that REDI was currently undertaking that effort. Mr.
Steinhaus replied it was the team's involvement that compelled REDI to do
so. Ms. Coble pointed out that this work had transpired without a staff
person, and it had been a coordination of resources that an existing entity
undertook. Mr. Steinhaus responded by saying this grant is seed money,
and the team realized there are a lot of direct services that could be provided
with this money. It was felt that this project would be an investment
that would pay off in long-term benefits.
Jill Graham, 3708 Dublin
Avenue, spoke as the co-chair of the Boone County Health Report Card Child
Care Committee. She thanked the Council for their strong commitment
to child care in the past. She said the Committee's goal is to develop
a comprehensive quality child care system. Ms. Graham said this system
would put the community in a position to respond to the initiatives recently
defined by the President and Governor. She said it is a capacity building
opportunity. She agreed that child care providers are not paid enough,
and said that would be a very important part of this system -- to work toward
improving the wages of the providers. Regarding training coordination,
Ms. Graham listed several organization that are offering training at no charge
or very reduced cost. She said even though these groups are offering
training, there are still providers that feel their training needs are not
being met. She said the community needs to work together to build a
system that will offer pre-service, in-service, and ongoing advanced training
opportunities for child care providers. Ms. Graham said that an effective
child care system would improve the accessibility of all income levels to
child care, and also improve the availability and quality of care.
Mr. Coffman saw the issue
as being how a child care coordinator would further the goals. He asked
why a coordinator would be better than the consortium itself in helping develop
this comprehensive plan. Ms. Graham said it was because all those who
are involved in the committee have other jobs and could only volunteer so
much time. She said a paid coordinator could bring everyone together
so gaps and any overlaps in services could be identified.
Ms. Coble understood all
of the different efforts involved, but knew from her own work that one person
cannot make that significant of a change. She also knew it was the
ongoing collaborative work and dedication of people like Ms. Graham who will
continue to meet to identify the issues, and work toward addressing them. Ms.
Coble thought it was the issue of service -- the service of training, the
service of resources, and the service of child care provision itself. Ms.
Graham believed this system would improve the various services for many years
to come. Mr. Janku said this project seemed to be missing specific
measures of performance. Ms. Graham said the number one recommendation
for the Governor's Commission on Early Child Care and Education is that systems
be in place in the communities. She felt with this system, the City
would be in a much better position to take advantage of the initiatives and
respond. Mr. Steinhaus said one of their goals had been to identify
at least ten businesses actively participating in the project.
Gloria Farnam, Director of
Head Start Program in Columbia, is a member of the Child Care Team and supports
the proposal because of the additional funding for activities that will raise
the collective consciousness of the Columbia community. Her biggest
concern is the rapidly growing need for quality child care. She is
also concerned about the growing number of low-income families who are looking
for child care, and for those who are just above the poverty guidelines that
make them eligible for Head Start. She saw this entity as additional
help to bring the businesses and the business community to the table.
Sara Gable, 1212 Paquin Street,
explained that she is employed by University Outreach and Extension and also
is an assistant professor on campus in Human Development and Family Studies. She
is a new member of the Child Care Team, and is especially excited about the
proposal because one of the areas of emphasis relates to standards. She
said service is extremely important, but service without standard does absolutely
nothing for the children of the state. She said one of the main goals
of this position would be building bridges and links between organizations
and agencies who are providing training to child care providers in the state. One
of the reasons child care providers are so poorly paid is because there is
a total lack of consumer education on what it takes. Ms. Gable reported
twelve clock hours of training that costs $5 for two hours does not make
a highly qualified professional person, who then can command a better pay
for their job. Ms. Gable said systems like this exist already all over
the state, and Columbia is one of the few communities that does not have
one. Kansas City and St. Louis both have very well-funded creative
systems that are supporting the delivery of quality child care in their communities. She
said these cities are working to meet the needs, not just service delivery. Ms.
Gable stated the cities have an accreditation facilitation program and a
scholarship program for the providers in their care. She said these
programs were not put in place by the kind-hearted people who are working
40, 50, and 60 hours per week. She said child care providers work significantly
more than 40 hours per week with no benefits. Ms. Gable said the kind
of work that needs to be done to improve quality is not going to happen out
of the goodness of our hearts. She pointed out that "the goodness of
our hearts" is supporting the system right now. Ms. Gable reported
a person who earns $5.53 per hour is the goodness of someone's heart, not
someone who recognizes what they can command in a market. She said
the system would be a move that would put Columbia in a position to have
greater alliances with communities across the state, to command greater funds
for the City.
Mr. Janku asked if the program
mentioned in the other communities was the model. Ms. Gable said it
was not "the" model, but "a" model. Mr. Janku asked if the programs
are very different in different communities. Ms. Gable said they were. She
said the Kansas City model has significantly more private funding from foundations,
but Head Start money is blended also. She said it is basically a community,
state, and federal system of funding that comes together to support a wide
variety of services for child care.
Marty Baker, 509 S. Cedar
Lake Drive, co-chair of the Child Care Committee, said the $25,000 in funding
the Council provides could go to direct services for a year. She said
that would be significant. However, what the committee had agreed on
was that the $25,000 opportunity, to be matched by United Way, could go a
long way toward opening doors for a lot more funding that will provide for
children for a long time to come. Ms. Baker reported $25,000 could
be spent on feeding kids, providing more day care slots, providing some training,
but when the funds are gone, so are the programs. She said the Committee
is hopeful that the incentive of the person who fills this position would
be to continue to access more funding to continue the program. She
knew more state money would be available, but if the community is not in
a position to step forward and show that progress has been made, the money
would go elsewhere. Ms. Baker saw this project as an investment in
the future, and an investment in maximizing the potential of this community.
Ms. Coble asked Ms. Baker
if she understood that this money had already been allocated for child care. Ms.
Baker said she knew it had been allocated for child care slots. She
felt it is a much more visioning appropriation to go for something that would
build for the future instead of taking care of the immediate. Ms. Coble
said part of the Governor's proposal, as well as the federal, is money to
fund these positions -- coordinated efforts at the community level. Ms.
Baker said that was when the communities already have something in place. She
said the Committee is hopeful this person would be in the position to write
the kind of grants and proposals that will allow for funding to come into
this community.
David Franta, Executive Director
of the Columbia United Way, said it is unusual for the United Way to support
this type of project. He said normally funds go to support direct services. The
United Way had been attracted to this project because of its value and the
pay off for the community. Mr. Franta said the United Way saw this
as the first step in accessing some of the government dollars that nobody
in this community has the time to seek. He said they believed this
was critical for the business community to become involved in providing leadership
for the development of this kind of comprehensive care system. He said
it takes time to meet with the business community, and it takes time to build
trust to see that this is something that will pay off for the business community. Mr.
Franta said the United Way also felt this funding will help toward filling
in the gaps in terms of infant, evening, weekend, and special care needs. He
said these needs take more time because they are more complicated. Finally,
the funding will assist in building government corporate capacity. Mr.
Franta said child care is just one of the building blocks to getting people
off welfare, getting them employed and, at the same time, providing child
care for these individuals. Ms. Coble said she is frustrated
by hearing how this person's job will be to raise more money. She did
not want to spend $50,000 in this community on a position whose job it is
to raise money to address issues that already need to be addressed. She
said it is a focus and a highlight of current systems within the Department
of Economic Development to redirect the usage of neighborhood assistance
tax credit programs to private employers to use for on and off-site day care
development. Ms. Coble stated that work is going through business communities
now, and the attention in education is going through state agencies who have
funded programs and have staff people to do it. She agreed someone
needed to be hired to do the work, but did not necessarily think it needs
to be a government employee. Ms. Coble thought the City could contract
with someone from within the community.
Leslie Ethington, 1012 Pheasant
Run, a retired early childhood educator, explained that she provides in-service
training for day care providers in different areas of the state. She
had mixed feelings about this program. Ms. Ethington had been very
disturbed to read that the first priority of this person would be to raise
funds to continue their job after a year. Basically, she supported
the project because she liked the idea of the community coming together to
support children, but she was concerned a year would be spent trying to raise
funds only to find that the children will not have been helped any. She
said some of the people that have already implemented some of these training,
resource, and referral kinds of things will not have the input to someone
who is just trying to raise money for their own salary. Ms. Ethington
would like the assurance, if the project is funded, that the City would be
very careful in who is selected, and that it be carefully coordinated with
the people who already know where the needs are. She did not want to
add another layer of bureaucracy.
Katharine Bozarth, 2000 S.
Deerborn, did not know how one person could in one year speak to all of the
needs of this community, and then concoct a whole new system. She said
this could risk more fracturing of the system without solid planning. Ms.
Bozarth would be in favor of the program, but would want to know how it would
be delivered.
Mary Ann Pabst, 807 Spencer,
a Child Care Connection employee, said any new funding dedicated to improving
child care services in the community is sorely needed. She thanked
the Council for their continued support. Ms. Pabst said the funding
the team is requesting could accomplish many wonderful things. She
said the position could generate significant funding and community support
for early care and education programs. She said the additional funds
could be used to address very specific unmet needs that have already been
identified. By increasing the available resources, Ms. Pabst said this
project would be of tremendous benefit to the children, working parents,
employers, the child care industry, and the community in general. While
she sees great potential, she also sees the possibility of duplication. Ms.
Pabst reported if some stake holders are excluded from the process, the coordinator
may spend precious time and resources reinventing the wheel by developing
materials, programs, and services that are already available. Together,
she said they must address unmet needs and not duplicate current activities. Ms.
Pabst said this is a temporary position and that was a concern. She
said the idea of having a year to write enough grants to generate your own
income was certainly something that needed to be examined carefully. Ms.
Pabst stated the outcome should be increased resources and support for the
child care community, and must not grow into a bureaucracy, but rather support
the cost effective community based efforts currently underway.
Tammy Byington, 3720 Southridge
Drive, explained that she had been a home day care provider for six years. She
is the mother of two children still in a day care situation. She said
she is very much in favor of the program. Ms. Byington said the City
could buy every three year old in Columbia a book with the $25,000, or they
could put someone in a position for a year that could do so much good for
the children of Columbia.
Mary Jo Herde, 602 Hardin,
said this program will not create competition among providers, but rather
support for the providers. She said such a system is not already in
place. There are a number of good starting places and a number of programs
that are very beneficial, but there is not a coordinated approach. Ms.
Herde reported this one person will not be the savior of child care, rather
this person will help develop some of the structures to establish a more
systemic approach to child care.
Mr. Campbell noted that Kathy
Thornburg, professor of early childhood education at the University, had
called him with her strong endorsement to the proposal. She had been
serving on the Governor's Committee on Early Childhood Education at the state
level. She said this was the exact type of program that is being recommended
for communities in the state. Ms. Thornburg thought Columbia had a
one to two year lead on many other communities if the City were to adopt
this program, which would help in securing resources for early childhood
education. Mr. Campbell noted that this project had also been endorsed
by the Community Partnership.
Mr. Kruse asked Ms. Coble
if she was in support of the goal as stated -- to develop a comprehensive
child care system in the community, and establish the structures for its
implementation. Ms. Coble responded she was in support of the goals. She
is not, however, in favor of the program being structured through a government
agency when there are private providers in the community. If given
an opportunity to have access through a grant process, these providers could
do the work without having to go through the identified struggles that these
professionals have already recognized. She said a private provider
could more likely dive right into service provision instead of having to
work to continue their own salary. Mr. Kruse asked if it was a difference
in opinion in terms of how to accomplish the goal. Ms. Coble said it
was, and had seen other collaborative, cooperative measures in this community
that involved government partners, administrators, and lots of people who
go to meetings. She explained that millions of state dollars have been
spent in this community with very few things to show for it. Ms. Coble
reported it is time to get down to action and put the money where the people
are actually doing the work. Mr. Kruse asked Ms. Coble if she would
support the appropriation of the money to house it in a non-governmental
office. Ms. Coble said she would.
Mr. Janku asked if the Council
is voting to create a position in a City office. Ms. Coble said it
would be a City employee. Mr. Steinhaus said the team had looked at
a number of options in the community, and the City had certainly not been
the first choice in which to place the employee. He said a great deal
of discussion had taken place amongst the team as to where the program might
be located, and two factors were taken into consideration. The first
factor is that the Office of Community Services had extra office space and
could provide some in-kind office space, which would decrease some budget
costs. The second factor had been that the transfer of the City funds
from the previous child care appropriation had been possible as well. When
the team discussed various options, this had been the option the team recommended. Mr.
Steinhaus reported he is certainly open to any other options.
Mr. Campbell said he had
listened to what people have said who are considered to be experts in the
field. He said this project has been explored for two years by a group
of very knowledgeable people in the field. He suggested that the Council
look very carefully at this group's recommendation as they have contemplated
this issue in great depth.
Mrs. Crockett asked if the
City's initial commitment for this program would be for one year. Mayor
Hindman said that was his understanding. Mrs. Crockett said if was
found at the end of the year the program is not working the way it is thought
it should, the City would no longer be obligated to fund it. Mayor
Hindman said that is correct. He understood it to be a one-time grant,
and added that he did not think the United Way is willing to fund the project
on an annual basis. Mrs. Crockett said she has been on the Council
for three years and had seen money spent on things that she thought could
have been put to better use. She said for $25,000, she can support
the program at this time to see if it would work.
Ms. Coble said this is an
issue of women and children, and $25,000 in that realm is a whole lot. She
said when money is finally being appropriated to issues that clearly affect
women and children, she did not think the funding should go to a bureaucratic
structure; rather to the people that have been doing the work for a long
time, and people who do not need to be "brought up to speed" on anything. She
said funding either needs to go to provide more services, to the people doing
the work, or to some structure that has nothing to do with a government office
being available.
B33-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, JANKU,
CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: COBLE, KRUSE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
B34-98 Authorizing
acceptance of a domestic violence enforcement grant and appropriating
funds.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that this
funding is supplied from the Department of Justice, sub-contracted through
the Department of Public Safety, to investigate domestic violence in a 13
county area. He said an additional position in the Police Department
will be established. This ordinance would authorize the City to accept
a grant in the amount of $44,289.
Chief Botsford explained
that the Columbia Police Department is the sub-contractor and the Missouri
Highway Patrol is the grantee. He said it will institute a domestic
violence enforcement unit. He is hopeful it will be used as the guide
for the entire state of Missouri. He pointed out that the unit would
consist of representatives from the Columbia Police Department, the Missouri
Highway Patrol, the Boone County Sheriff's Office, the Boone County Prosecutor's
Office, and the Shelter. He said it would be housed, supervised, and
managed by the Columbia Police Department. Chief Botsford said the
unit would investigate domestic violence primarily in Boone County, but with
some additional responsibilities for surrounding counties also within the
Missouri Highway Patrol's local jurisdiction.
Ms. Coble said this program
is a very big deal in the State of Missouri. She said for 25 years
those people involved in the battered women's movement have been working
to make sure there are increased responses to domestic violence through law
enforcement and court systems. She said this unit will provide a better
response to the women and children in this community, as well as being a
model for the state to use. Ms. Coble explained that the goal is to
increase protection for victims, and increase sanctions and successful prosecutions
of abusers.
B34-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, COBLE,
JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
CONSENT AGENDA
The following bills were
given second reading and the resolutions were read by the Clerk.
B18-98 Approving
replat of portions of Mataora and Charity Baptist Church Subdivisions.
B21-98 Approving
engineer's final report; authorizing payment of differential costs for an
8-inch
water
main serving Avalon Subdivision.
B24-98 Accepting
conveyances for water and utility purposes.
B32-98 Amending
FY 98 Pay Plan.
R31-98 Setting
a public hearing: street construction on Oakland Gravel Road.
R32-98 Setting
a public hearing: reconstruction of the north cargo apron and lead-out to
Taxiway
A
at Columbia Regional Airport.
R33-98 Setting
a public hearing: special assessments for the Fairview Avenue and Coats Street
project.
R34-98 Setting
a public hearing: construction of Hinkson Creek Trail Phase 1.
R35-98 Setting
a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property owned by Rangeline Properties,
L.L.C.
located on the east side of State Route 763.
R36-98 Setting
a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property owned by estate of George
Spencer,
et. al., located on the east side of State Route 763.
R37-98 Setting
a public hearing: annexation of property owned by the City located on the
east side
of
State Route 763, north of Smiley Lane.
R38-98 Setting
a public hearing: construction of water mains along Blue Ridge Road, Northland
Drive,
and Route 763.
The bills were given third
reading and the resolutions read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING
YES: HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. Bills declared enacted and resolutions declared
adopted, reading as follows:
NEW BUSINESS
R39-98 Approving
preliminary plat of Valley View South Subdivision, Plat 2, a major subdivision;
variance
to subdivision regulations regarding street width.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the
applicant submitted a letter earlier in the day requesting that this preliminary
plat be tabled. He said there was also a request to reconsider the
R-1 zoning application that had been defeated at the previous Council Meeting. Mr.
Beck explained that to reconsider a defeated bill, a Council member would
need to request the introduction of the R-1 zoning request at the next meeting. He
said the bill would then be readvertised and could be passed at the following
Council meeting. During that time, Mr. Beck said they would be looking
at some opportunities to try to determine how the connecting road could be
improved, and what could be done with the remaining part of this property
and how it might be buffered.
Mr. Janku made the motion
to table R39-98 to the March 2, 1998, meeting. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mr. Janku made the motion
to reconsider B10-98, which was defeated at the January 20, 1998, meeting,
with the request to be readvertised and reintroduced at the February 16,
1998, meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved
unanimously by voice vote.
R40-98 Authorizing
an agreement with Columbia Farmers Market, Inc. to operate a market
on the
Old
Fairgrounds property.
The resolution was read by
the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the
current agreement with the Farmers Market group will expire soon, and Mr.
Hargrove had been working on a new agreement. It is suggested that
the City enter into a new agreement, at the rate of $300 per month during
the months the group will be utilizing the property. Mr. Beck reported
if something should be worked out regarding construction of a new community
center, it was felt this agreement would give enough lead time to provide
notice and allow the details to be worked out. A question has come
up from time to time regarding the cost of hard surfacing the area. He
said the amount the Farmers Market has been paying had taken care of the
hard surface in the area this group is using. Mr. Beck said the area
is also being used by the School District.
The vote on R40-98 was recorded
as follows: VOTING YES: HINDMAN, COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL,
KRUSE, 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:
B35-98 Authorizing
right of use permit for subdivision entrance monument and sign on City
property
for Chapel Hill Estates 3.
B36-98 Authorizing
reconstruction of the north cargo apron and lead-out to Taxiway A at Columbia
Regional
Airport and calling for bids.
B37-98 Authorizing
amendment to the agreement with Burns & McDonnell, for engineering
services
for construction of Wetland Treatment Unit No. 4 and flood relief structures.
B38-98 Authorizing
Change Order No. 1; accepting and approving the work; approving engineer's
final
report; and levying special assessments for the Fairview Avenue and Coats
Street
project.
B39-98 Authorizing
Change Order No. 1; accepting and approving the work; approving engineer's
final
report for the Jackson Street Drainage project.
B40-98 Amending
Chapter 14 of the City Code relating to parking rates.
B41-98 Amending
Chapter 14 of the City Code relating to speed limits on Old 63 South.
B42-98 Voluntary
annexation of property owned by Raymond and Bertha Johnston located on the
southwest
corner of Vawter School Road and Old Mill Creek Road.
B43-98 Voluntary
annexation of property owned by SERR, L.L.C., located on the east side of
Thompson
Road and adjacent to Garden City Subdivision.
B44-98 Voluntary
annexation of property owned by Cavcey, et. al., located west of Bearfield
Road
and
south of Nifong Boulevard; establishing permanent R-2 zoning.
B45-98 Accepting
conveyance for water utility purposes from Lee H. and Joyce J. Thompson.
B46-98 Authorizing
construction of water mains along Blue Ridge Road, Northland Drive and
Route
763 and calling for bids.
REPORTS AND PETITIONS
(A) Neighborhood
Marketplace Zoning District.
Mr. Beck explained that the
Council had asked the staff to work on a neighborhood marketplace zoning
district, a new district designation for the City. He said the next
step would be to refer the issue to the Planning and Zoning Commission for
a public hearing. He said the new district would provide for neighborhood
oriented services and retail establishments that would be in close proximity
to residences. The development would be required to be compatible with
the surrounding residential area. He said the suggested acreage was
not indicated in the report, and could be left up to the Commission for their
recommendation. Mr. Beck asked Mr. Hancock if any of the areas reviewed
had any kind of general size. Mr. Hancock said they appeared to be
anywhere from four to ten acres.
Mr. Campbell said the staff
had suggested that the Council discuss the issue briefly before sending it
to the Commission. He thought the Council should do that at a work
session.
Mr. Campbell made the motion
that the issue be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their
review and recommendation after the Council has discussed it at a work session. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Kruse and passed unanimously by voice vote.
(B) Street Closure
Requests.
Mr. Beck explained the two
requests; one from the Columbia Public Schools and the other from the Earth
Day Coalition.
Ms. Coble made the motion
that the closures be approved as requested. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
(C) Parking on
Clarkson Road.
Mr. Beck noted that Mr. Patterson's
report indicated different feelings of the neighborhood based on a survey.
Mr. Patterson pointed out
that this report had been generated as the result of a single residence on
the street. In reviewing the situation, staff felt it is possible to
remove a section of parking along the south side of Clarkson without causing
a harmful affect in the neighborhood. He said this suggestion is supported
by residents of the area. Out of thirteen residents, nine were in favor
and four were opposed. Mr. Patterson said staff did not think it would
be wise to remove parking on a lot by lot basis.
Mr. Kruse said he was pleased
to see that so many residents had responded favorably to it. He thought
the City should move forward with staff's recommendation.
Mr. Kruse made the motion
that the proper legislation be prepared. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
(D) Proposed
Changes in Utility Billing Services.
Mr. Coffman said he was pleased
to see this coming about as he felt these were the kinds of services that
make the Water and Light Department a first rate utility. He has heard
lots of comments about budget billing from seniors and others that have a
need to budget closely month to month. Mr. Coffman said pro-rating
the base charge was not something that is well-known to a lot of people. Mr.
Coffman explained that it would require the minimum to be essentially a fraction
of the month that one started their service. He said this ensures that
people who are moving to town or just across town would not be hit with a
larger minimum than could be justified. Mr. Coffman thought this service
is a positive step and is anxious to see it initiated.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
None.
COMMENTS OF THE COUNCIL, STAFF, AND PUBLIC
Ms. Coble said it had been
brought to her attention that the City may be well-served if the informational
kiosks located in the downtown area were added to the Adopt a Spot program. She
said there is some work involved with keeping information current and removing
old staples and flyers. Also, the volunteer would need to make sure
that one item does not cover another because there have been recurring conflicts. She
said it might be well to have a business or someone with an interest to adopt
a kiosk. She asked for a staff report on whether or not it would be
a helpful or possible endeavor to undertake.
Ms. Coble asked for tree
trimming at the northwest corner of Douglass Park near the new playground. She
said the grounds looked great, but there are a couple of large evergreens
that have mulberry trees and weeds growing up through them.
Ms. Coble commented that
it had been a consistent approach of this Council to want to have developers
meet with neighborhood associations and nearby property owners when preparing
a plan. She wanted it known that was something the Council consistently
likes to see so that applicants will not be frustrated by having their measures
tabled until they undertake that kind of communication.
Mr. Janku noted that at the
next meeting the Council will be discussing the Oakland Road improvement
project. As this is something that should be moved forward quickly,
he asked that the staff contact the County to see if they would be interested
in working with the City to extend the road to include the gap between 63
and the City's portion. He said there were a lot of kids living in
that area that have to walk to school. Mr. Janku wanted to look at
the possibility of a joint project with the County to get sidewalks constructed.
Mr. Janku said at the last
meeting there was mention of the 9% interest rate charged by the City on
tax bills. Given the current interest rate, he suggested that it could
be lowered to something more appropriate with today's rates. He asked
for a staff report.
Mr. Janku asked for an update
from the Tree Task Force. He wanted to know what projects they are
working on and said he wanted to put in a plug regarding the big interchanges
on 63. He said many of them that do not have Adopt a Spots, both north
and south of 70.
Regarding groups getting
problems worked out before Council meetings, Mrs. Crockett said this could
possibly eliminate some of the tabling that has recently occurred.
Mr. Campbell thought the
Fairview soccer field situation had been resolved. Mr. Campbell, Mr.
Patterson, and the public works staff have been meeting with the neighborhood
association, and now a plan has been approved by the neighborhood for the
first traffic calming devices to be installed in the City. Plans include
a speed hump, bulbs, some raised sidewalks and other things that would be
innovative and, Mr. Campbell thought, effective. He reported the neighborhood
was desirous of having the project completed before the soccer season begins. Mr.
Janku said that was pretty quick.
Mr. Campbell made the motion
that the staff be directed to bring forth the needed legislation to move
the project forward. The motion was seconded by Mr. Janku and approved
unanimously by voice vote.
Mr. Campbell said many of
the Council members had been receiving calls regarding the tree trimming
being done on the MKT Trail. He asked Mr. Green to summarize briefly
what was going on.
Mr. Green explained that
about three years ago the City established a forestry department, and part
of the responsibility for the City Forester was to inventory all of the trees
in the City's parks as to which ones needed to be trimmed, removed, replanted
and replaced. A vegetative management committee had been appointed
and this group met with the City Forester to determine what was felt needed
to be removed along the MKT Trail. The City had contracted with Asplund
to remove the trees and vegetation. Mr. Green said the majority of
trees being removed along the trail are diseased or dead elm trees. These
need to be taken out so that a dead tree does not fall on a patron. He
noted that workers are also cutting a lot of vines on the trail because they
have a tendency to shade out any vegetation below them. Mr. Green said
after Council began receiving calls regarding the work, staff met with the
City Manager and the Mayor and the removal of the cuttings have been reduced
to some degree. However, there are still a lot of dead and diseased
elm trees that are going to have to come out at a later date. Mr. Green
said the decision had been made that if the trees are not dead or too far
gone now, these would remain for the time being.
Henry Lane, 1816 E. Broadway,
said he was also happy to hear about the pro-ration of the minimum monthly
charges mentioned by Mr. Coffman. He said the minimum sewer charge
also needs to be pro-rated. He said it was part of the agreement in
B34-97 that was passed in February of last year. Mr. Lane said that
would take care of the future, but he was also interested in the past. He
said people have been over billed in the past for the minimum monthly charges
for these three items, except for one person. He said it had taken
three months for that one person to get his $7.80 back. Mr. Lane said
he had brought this up a year ago and asked the Council if they would go
back and allow people to a refund of the overcharges. He had offered
to volunteer his services to accept applications and figure the amounts of
the overcharges. Mr. Lane asked the Council to reconsider the refunding
issue.
Mrs. Crockett asked Mr. Lane
if anyone had complained to him that they had been overcharged. Mr.
Lane said nobody knows about it, and most people probably would not understand
what the pro-ration of the minimum monthly charge is all about.
The meeting adjourned at
12:10 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Penny
St. Romaine
City
Clerk
© 2024 City of Columbia