INTRODUCTORY
The City Council of the City
of Columbia, Missouri, met for a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday,
February 16, 1998, in the Council Chamber of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The
roll was taken with the following results: Council members COBLE, JANKU,
CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, and HINDMAN were present. The City
Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also
present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the regular
meeting of February 2, 1998, were approved unanimously by voice vote on a
motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mr. Campbell.
APPROVAL AND ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA INCLUDING
CONSENT AGENDA
Upon his request, Ms. Coble
made the motion that Mr. Kruse be allowed to abstain from voting on B11-98. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
The agenda, including the
Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by
Mr. Janku and a second by Mr. Campbell.
SPECIAL ITEMS
None.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
B342-97A Voluntary
annexation of property located east of Rock Quarry & 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 explained that the
Council had asked the staff to discuss two issues with the developer. The
first dealt with whether or not an east west collector should be considered
on or adjacent to this tract. The second was to discuss the possibility
of the developer participating in off-site improvements. Mr. Beck said
a collector street is not shown on the Major Thoroughfare Plan adjacent to
or on this tract of land -- a street is proposed to be located further to
the south, approximately one-half mile from AC. Regarding the off-site
improvements, Mr. Beck noted that the developer has pledged $50,000 in improvements
for Rock Quarry Road, which includes sidewalks, etc. Current policies
call for the property owner to be tax billed an amount equivalent to the
curb and gutter cost, which in this case is calculated at about $16,500. As
far as the sidewalk is concerned, he noted that the property has 750 feet
of frontage on Rock Quarry Road. A rough estimate for this cost is
$7,500. The curb and gutter figures combined with the sidewalk cost
amounts to $24,000 to be contributed by the developer toward improvements
along Rock Quarry Road, leaving an approximate $26,000 for off-site improvements. Mr.
Beck pointed out that Rock Quarry Road is not currently in the 5-year CIP;
however, there are some annual street funds set aside that are not specifically
earmarked.
Mayor Hindman noted an amendment
sheet had been prepared which includes the items to be contributed by the
developer.
Mr. Janku made the motion
that B342-97A be amended per the amendment sheet. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Coffman.
Mr. Janku questioned the
language included in the amendment sheet indicating that if the City determines
it is not necessary to improve Rock Quarry Road, no payment will be due by
the developer. He asked if that meant the initial payments would not
be due.
Mr. Beck explained that $2,500
would be paid at the time of final platting. After that, there would
be phasing of payments to the City.
Referring to Mr. VanMatre's
letter, Mr. Boeckmann said that had been his rewriting of subparagraph E.
Mayor Hindman said it seemed
the theory is that the payments are based on the benefits the lot will receive. He
said if the road is not put in, the benefits will not be there.
Mr. Janku said it could be
the City will receive payment prior to any improvements. He asked whether
the $50,000 would have to be repaid if the road is not improved.
Mr. Campbell said there is
no date line associated with this condition.
Mr. Boeckmann said if the
City Council votes at any time not to improve the street, the funds that
had been collected would have to be returned; although, he did not anticipate
that happening.
The motion to amend, made
by Mr. Janku, seconded by Mr. Coffman, was approved unanimously by voice
vote.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
Craig VanMatre, an attorney
representing the applicant, said an agreement had been successfully negotiated
with the neighbors.
John Blakemore, President
of the Clear Creek Neighborhood Association, withdrew their opposition to
the project. Some of the deed restrictions agreed to pertained to storm
water and storm drainage. He said that Mr. Royer had agreed to join
the neighborhood association in providing funds to establish a stream team
which will begin monitoring water in Clear Creek. Mr. Blakemore explained
funding for this four year project will also be provided by the EPA, through
the USDA and the Soil and Water Commission, for the purpose of monitoring
and tracking any problems that might arise in the creek. Mr. Blakemore
said residents are still concerned about the density of the development,
but that had been the trade-off in return for the restrictions. He
felt it is very obvious that Mr. Royer wants to be a good neighbor.
Mr. Coffman asked about the
storm water detention. Mr. Beck said at this time it is not known whether
detention is necessary. He said Public Works would be analyzing any
plans submitted.
Because this project is a
PUD, Mr. Blakemore understood that if storm water detention becomes a problem,
the staff would deal with it. Mr. Patterson said that was correct,
but wanted it understood that the City is limited by the ordinances and,
if after analysis it is found that detention is not desirable and could create
down stream problems, staff could not allow it to be installed on the site. With
regard to the agreement, Mr. Patterson also wanted it understood that the
City could not enforce the restrictive covenants. Mr. Blakemore assured
him that the association understood that. Mr. Coffman asked if
there had been any discussions in the negotiations about the fences themselves. Mr.
Blakemore said the association is pleased to see that fences are included,
and that the roads would be stubbed so as not to create through streets.
Mayor Hindman closed the
public hearing.
Mayor Hindman said this is
one of the better plans he had seen and congratulated Mr. Royer. He
also thanked the neighborhood association for their participation and interest.
Mr. Kruse thought this is
a very good plan, but is still not wild about it. It is his opinion
that the City does not have adequate growth management planning strategies
in place for the metropolitan area as a whole. He said what exists
is a leap-frogging into the County. There are hundreds of acres already
available within the City for this type of development, much of which is
right down the road to the north. Although he is troubled by these
issues, Mr. Kruse intended to vote in favor of this project because the neighbors
are comfortable with it. He suggested that the City continue
to work to develop more of a vision in terms of the management of growth
in the metropolitan Columbia/Boone County area.
Mr. Coffman agreed with Mr.
Kruse, and noted the Council is meeting with the County tomorrow evening. He
intended to promote the idea of a joint task force to look at the development
south of town as it is moving quite close to Rock Bridge State Park. He
stated a comprehensive plan is needed to determine what type of development
should occur in this region.
Mr. Janku appreciated that
this project is a planned development, and that there is green space incorporated
to preserve or limit the environmental impact as shown by the agreement. He
agreed with Mr. Coffman regarding the creation of a link between the City
and Rock Bridge State Park, and the development of some sort of trail system.
Mayor Hindman did not agree
with the leap frog theory. He felt that the whole area is currently
in the process of development. The City has infrastructure planned
in the area, and there should be no problem in providing the infrastructure
that is needed for this development. However, Mayor Hindman believed
in taking precautions because of the very sensitive area to the south.
Ms. Coble said it was a beautiful
plan, but it is in the wrong place. She is in opposition of the project.
Mr. Campbell said this is
a good plan and he felt there are acceptable safeguards in it. He is
in favor of higher density development, and felt that to be an environmentally
sound position to take. He thought this is needed along with lots of
green space to make a most desirable city.
Mrs. Crockett said she is
in favor of the development.
B342-97A, as amended, was
read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT,
CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: COBLE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
B343-97 Voluntary
annexation of property owned by Central MO Sheltered enterprises, Inc.
located
east
of Bearfield Road and south of Nifong Boulevard, establishing permanent zoning.
The bill was read by the
Clerk.
Mr. Beck said after the tract
was reviewed, it had been discovered that the lot did not contain public
road frontage. Therefore, the request for annexation is being withdrawn. He
said the applicant plans to file a future request for annexation when the
problem is resolved.
Request withdrawn.
B11-98 Approval
of revised PUD Plan for the Highlands, Phase 8, and variance to the
subdivision
regulations
relating to maximum cul-de-sac length, and street closure.
The bill was read by the
Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that both
the Planning and Zoning staff and the Planning Commission had recommended
denial of the request.
Mr. Hancock displayed a map
of the street system in the Highlands. He noted that it currently shows
Stonehaven extending to Old Plank Road. He said this section had been
platted several years ago, and is the piece the applicant is asking to abandon
and replace with a cul-de-sac and easement.
Mr. Hancock explained that
Stonehaven Road is approximately 3,000 feet long, with the maximum cul-de-sac
length under City regulations being 750 feet. From Dunbar, or from
any of the other nearby through streets, the length of that terminal street
is even longer. Mr. Hancock said he had looked at the staff notes from
1990 on this issue, and it had been indicated and recognized that people
like privacy and cul-de-sacs. He said it was obvious from this map
and others that residents had been accommodated throughout the community
in this regard. He said the City has tried to maintain capacity on
some of the collector streets as a result of an increasing number of cul-de-sacs. In
this particular case, it is thought this proposed 3,000 foot cul-de-sac might
be excessive and beyond what the City's standard might be in recognizing
people's desire for privacy and safety.
Mr. Hancock reported that
the street shown as Glasgow had not been part of the original PUD. The
original PUD was to have Highlands Parkway come down and eventually connect
to Old Plank Road. However, a house was built right in the path of
that particular collector street. Of the original plan, Mr. Hancock
said Dunbar is connected at the southern tip of existing Forum, and Forum
extends down to Old Plank Road. He said Forum would be designed to
carry through traffic from this area to Stadium Boulevard. Mr. Hancock
reported the plan is not necessarily designed to provide convenient movement
of traffic in this particular area. He said staff still felt the connection
was worthwhile as one to pursue. Mr. Hancock said presently there is
not a lot of traffic on Old Plank Road, but that is not to say there might
not be more. In addition, staff did not see the potential for through
traffic to be worrisome in the future. At the most, it would provide
for convenience and movement of emergency and service vehicles in the area. Staff
recommended that a connection be maintained and not abandoned at this point. Mr.
Hancock said the City is not pushing for this particular road to go through,
but did have Stonehaven Road platted. He said the road would have to
be in place once the two lots are developed and certificates of occupancy
are requested.
Chief Markgraf noted that
the Fire Department has a standard objection to cul-de-sac lengths. He
said when an emergency situation occurs and it is at the end of an excessively
long cul-de-sac, it only takes one tree to block the entrance. When
that occurs, he explained that both the hose and ladder have to be hand-carried
by the three man engine company to the scene, after which a search can begin
for people that might be in the structure.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
Bob Walters, 2704 Vale, spoke
on behalf of Highland Properties Company. He said this plat had been
reviewed eight years ago, and he displayed the substantial changes in infrastructure
that has occurred since then. He also wanted to elaborate on a comment
made at the Zoning meeting regarding the fact that it had been agreed to
extend and connect Stonehaven in 1985. At that time, the 56 acres to
the west was raw land and the Highland Properties Company did not own it. Therefore,
the company had not been able to negotiate, suggest, or comment upon future
access that would be permitted there. He said the point that had been
made since then was that Glasgow accomplishes what Stonehaven was meant to
do -- provide a back door and southern access point for the Highlands. He
pointed out additional streets put in since then, permitting a variety of
access points outside of the Highlands.
Mr. Walters said it was his
opinion, as well as the opinion of the 19 property owners living on Stonehaven,
that at this point Stonehaven is a non-essential through street. Mr.
Walters noted that thousands of people live on cul-de-sacs in Columbia, as
do millions in the United States, and all face the same danger. He
said there are many, many other examples in Columbia with far more residences
on the street than the 19 on Stonehaven. In this instance, he pointed
out that there has been a 10 year trial run without any instances. Mr.
Walters said the neighbors who are most likely to benefit from this connection
are unanimously opposed to it. He said their experience should speak
volumes about this connection. The policy resolution passed by the
Council six years ago had a list of criteria of what would be acceptable
if waivers were granted to excess cul-de-sac lengths. He believed those
had been met and exceeded by voluntarily offering to build a wider than normal
cul-de-sac -- one that would leave a small island that could be landscaped,
and would allow greater turning radius for long vehicles.
Mrs. Crockett asked if all
19 of the homeowners had signed the petition in agreement with the cul-de-sac
request. Mr. Walters said they had.
David Rogers, an attorney
with offices at 813 E. Walnut, spoke on behalf of the homeowners on Stonehaven
Drive. He displayed a petition which had been signed by all 19 homeowners
requesting that the variance be granted, and the replatting of the small
portion of Section 8 also be permitted. In considering matters of public
safety and cul-de-sacs, Mr. Rogers said the determining and most important
factor had been the number of units placed on a cul-de-sac. He said
these very same 19 homeowners that would supposedly be protected by a through
street are the same people that signed the petition asking that it not be
done.
Mike Nichols, 1300 Stonehaven,
said that he has lived in the Highlands since 1992. He spoke in support
of leaving Stonehaven a cul-de-sac. He said most people in Columbia
have not been on Stonehaven, and never would be because of its location. Mr.
Nichols reported the decision on the question would affect a very small number
of people, and those most affected are the residents living on the street. Mr.
Nichols said he travels in and out of the Highlands daily, at peak travel
times, and had never seen any evidence that there is a traffic congestion
problem into or out of the development. As a resident of the Highlands,
he felt adequately assured that residents have good access to the development
from both the front side and the back. With the Forum extension, that
would probably even improve.
Mrs. Crockett asked Mr. Nichols
where his house was located. Mr. Nichols said it was at the very end
of the street.
Mayor Hindman closed the
public hearing.
Mr. Janku remembered when
Blue Ridge Road was proposed to be extended from his subdivision to the west. He
explained he had been opposed to it at the time, but it had been constructed
and he has used it quite a bit since then. It is actually a great convenience. He
said the idea of interconnection of neighborhoods was one of the toughest
issues the Council has had to deal with in recent years. He could see
streets being held up for some reason and then not being developed as originally
proposed. He had concerns with the impact this could have on a lot
of other neighborhoods in the community. He wished something had been
done during the 10 years before the street was fully developed.
Mrs. Crockett felt that Stonehaven
should be a cul-de-sac. She said 26 or 27 houses could be put on a
750 foot cul-de-sac. She said there would be cars on both sides of
the street and emergency vehicles would have problems getting down the street. She
has been on the street many times and has never seen any cars parked on the
street. She noted that it had been agreed that the cul-de-sac would
be built oversized. Mrs. Crockett named several streets with a number
of homes on cul-de-sacs greater than 750 feet. She pointed out that
the Forum Boulevard extension was in the CIP for 2002.
Mr. Campbell commented that
he lives on a cul-de-sac and could understand the desire to live on one,
however, this street was not built as a cul-de-sac. When residents
constructed their homes, Stonehaven was platted as a through street. He
was concerned about the length of the cul-de-sac, even though there are only
19 residences on it. Although, it is a relatively wide street in the
sense of not having much parking on it. The argument that did not sway
him was the fact that the Council has already made some mistakes in the past
with a number of cul-de-sacs that have a considerable number of houses on
them. He did not think that was sufficient cause to do the same thing
in the future. Mr. Campbell found the Fire Chief's argument to be most
persuasive as public safety should always be the most important issue in
making a decision.
Mr. Coffman also found the
Fire Department's concerns to be fairly compelling. Given the layout
of the streets, he is not convinced that traffic would increase dramatically. Where
possible, Mr. Coffman thought the Council should encourage streets to go
through to connect the community together. He felt that making the
community more cohesive probably discouraged crime.
Ms. Coble said she had no
problem with granting the variance given the number of much more dense streets
throughout the City. She was also satisfied by the fact that other
accesses are planned for the future.
Mayor Hindman believed the
idea of through streets is pretty important. He thought the Council
had been enforcing that concept more and more and, if Stonehaven were to
be eliminated as a through street, it would make it much harder to justify
in future issues. However, he did understand the views of the people
currently residing on the street. Mayor Hindman was not sure how much
a through street would do for the circulation when Forum would carry the
bulk of the traffic out of the development. He said Glasgow did not
really lead anywhere, and one would have to know the neighborhood pretty
well in order for this street to do much good. He thought that would
probably be true of Stonehaven also. Mayor Hindman said if Stonehaven
is made a through street, he did not think it would attract a lot of through
traffic, but may attract some fairly fast traffic. He said this might
be the perfect location to set-up some traffic calming techniques.
Mr. Janku said the Council
has had tremendous battles over this issue, and if they could not hold the
line after all the precedent that was set by previous bodies, they might
just as well forget about it. He did not want to battle the issue meeting
after meeting. Mr. Janku reported a policy had been developed because
of mistakes that were made in the past.
Mrs. Crockett asked why then
there are so many cul-de-sacs with different lengths. Mr. Janku said
that was because of past mistakes. Ms. Coble said some of the cul-de-sacs
are new. Mr. Janku agreed, and said there were extensions planned for
Bluff Pointe when the bridge goes through. He said that would be the
Council's next big battle.
Mayor Hindman explained one
difference between this development and some of the others is that there
are other exits. With Glasgow and Forum, it is not a case where there
will be a subdivision with too few entrances and exits. However, he
is still bothered about how the Council would deal with standardization.
B11-98 was read with the
vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, CROCKETT. VOTING
NO: JANKU, CAMPBELL, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. ABSTAINING: KRUSE. Bill
defeated.
B19-98 Rezoning
property located at 127 South Fifth Street and 415 Locust Street from
M-1 to C-2.
The bill was read by the
Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that this
request had been recommended for approval by both the staff and the Planning
and Zoning Commission. At the last meeting, he explained the issue
had been tabled and the applicant had been asked to discuss the request with
their neighbors to the south to see if any type of agreement could be worked
out.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
Wally Bley, an attorney representing
the applicant, said the proposed zoning would be in conformance with the
Master Plan. He said the refurbishing of the site would help foster
the transition of the area to C-2, which is taking place now. Mr. Bley
said the parties attempted to reconcile their differences as the owners communicated
with Tom Schneider, the attorney representing the mosque. He said proposed
deed restrictions formulated by the Mosque had been forwarded to the property
owners. The Mosque asked that these restrictions be in place for 30
years. Mr. Bley reported the owners felt that was unreasonable and
too long, but did agree to the restrictions for a maximum of 15 years. The
Mosque had found that unacceptable, so neither side could reconcile their
differences.
Nancy Galloway, 501 S. Glenwood,
said those involved in the proposed project felt what they are trying to
do is to improve the location. She said at the same time, they are
trying to comply with the City's plan in down-zoning the properties to C-2,
and put an attractive office building on the corner that would have nothing
but a positive impact on the neighborhood, and for the other three corners
in the Flat Branch area. Ms. Galloway said those involved in the project
are sorry that the differences could not be reconciled with the board members
of the mosque; however, they felt a fair and reasonable offer had been presented.
Mr. Campbell asked about
the deed restrictions that were proposed. Ms. Galloway said the first
was the sale of beer, wine or liquor either by package or drink. Second was
the sale or rental of adult videos, publications or other media containing
or involving matters of a sexual nature. Third was clubs or other facilities
in which exotic dancers, nude or partially nude individuals are present. Lastly,
was clubs or other facilities in which live or recorded music is played which
can be heard from the exterior of any buildings on the undersign's property. Mr.
Campbell asked Ms. Galloway if those involved in the project are agreeable
to the restrictions for 15 years. Ms. Galloway said they are.
Mr. Coffman asked why the
owners felt 30 years was too onerous. Mrs. Galloway said they felt
that would be tying up the property too long, and they intend to occupy the
property. She said when she was too old to occupy the property, she
did not personally want to be the landlord of the property.
Tom Schneider, an attorney
with offices at 11 N. Seventh Street, spoke on behalf of the Islamic Center. He
stated the Center did not have a problem with the property being zoned commercial,
but that it would be zoned unrestricted commercial. He said the proposed
restrictive covenants basically provide for no loud music, no liquor, no
sex, and no gambling. He said the Islamic Center did not feel that
the types of uses being prohibited had been an unreasonable request, seeing
as this property is located directly across the street from a mosque. Ordinarily,
Mr. Schneider said this project would be approached with a planned commercial
development proposal. In the 1990's, it had been very rare for the
Council to allow open commercial zoning, certainly very rare outside of C-2. He
saw no distinction concerning C-2 that should cause that to be some sort
of safe haven and avoid a planned district approach that is ordinarily required. Mr.
Schneider said the Center simply wants to avoid those categories with offensive
uses for the time period the mosque is going to be at this location. For
that reason, the mosque proposes that the property in question be zoned planned
commercial, excluding those offensive uses. In a practical sense, Mr.
Schneider reported this request is not a down-zoning in as much as some of
those uses objected by the Center could be permitted in M-1, which is what
the property is currently zoned, but the property cannot be used in the existing
zoning due to off-site parking requirements.
Aree Swanee, spoke on behalf
of the Islamic Center, and welcomed the new owners to their neighborhood. She
said the type of business that will be established by their neighbors was
of great significance to the Center. She said they had no problem with
an office or shop, but strongly opposed any establishment where liquor or
sales and consumption would take place. She said the Center was truly
a family place where five times a day there are congregational prayers from
dawn until night. She said the Center has had many negative experiences
in the past with establishments where alcohol is being sold.
Ms. Coble asked about the
15 years and a period for renegotiations. Ms. Swanee said she
could not speak to that question.
Ms. El Dieb, a mosque member,
was concerned about the peacefulness of the area in which they worship.
An optamologist from the
Mexico area, who comes to Columbia to worship at the mosque, said the City
seemed to have a good respect for their Center. He asked that the area
around the mosque be made alcohol free. He suggested that the owners
sell the property to the mosque when they are ready to dispose of it. That
would guarantee things for the Center.
Mayor Hindman closed the
public hearing.
Mr. Campbell asked about
the laws restricting alcohol sales around churches. Mr. Boeckmann explained
there is no City ordinance, but there is a state law that declares in order
for a business to obtain a liquor license within 100 feet of a church or
school, a license will not be granted unless the board of a church or school
consents to it. He said this poses a legal problem as it is considered
an unlawful delegation of authority. In the instance of a church, it
is tied into the First Amendment -- the State would be delegating a governmental
decision to a religious body. On the other hand, there is no problem
with a city adopting an ordinance to the effect that a liquor license cannot
be issued within 100 feet of a church or a school, or making it a conditional
use so that individualized consideration can be given to the facts by the
Board of Adjustment. In other words, Mr. Boeckmann said there is not
a blanket prohibition of a city restricting sales of alcohol around a church. Mr.
Campbell asked how these laws have held-up in court. Mr. Boeckmann
said the laws had generally been upheld.
Mr. Kruse asked if there
could also be an ordinance that would restrict other activities as were suggested
in the agreement. Mr. Boeckmann said those issues arise in the First
Amendment context when referring to nude or semi-nude dancing, and that type
of thing. It is considered protected speech, but by establishing individualized
consideration, a city can have a zoning ordinance that restricts the location
of those types of businesses. He thought the distance from a church
or school would be the kind of a consideration that would be upheld.
If at some point the Council
would want to make alcohol sales in the central business district a conditional
use, Mr. Janku asked how that would affect existing uses of bars and restaurants. He
asked if it could be controlled for future licenses but not for existing
licenses. Mr. Boeckmann said he thought the existing businesses would
be grandfathered.
Mr. Kruse asked what would
happen if an existing grandfathered use were to be discontinued, i.e., a
bar across the street from a church went out of business. Mr. Boeckmann
said if a business is discontinued or abandoned, then it no longer has its
non-conforming use status and anyone else that wanted to operate that type
of business in that location would have to get a conditional use permit.
Mayor Hindman said the City
currently has no such ordinance and this application is before the Council. He
thought the offer had been reasonable and saw no reason to deny the request. He
said the present owners would not be putting in a bar, they would be putting
in a very nice building with a desirable business.
Mr. Janku thought the business
going in at this location would be a very attractive one and an improvement
to the neighborhood. For years, he thought the speculation had been
that these two houses would be torn down and become part of the parking area
for an existing bar and restaurant. He thought it was good that it
would be kept as an office use for a substantial period of time. He
said the Council is not making a decision about whether or not alcohol could
be served at that location, but making a decision about whether or not the
business that plans to be there can function more effectively. He said
nothing new is being added to this location in terms of alcohol use. Mr.
Janku felt a responsibility to try to accommodate any church, but did not
think the Council could establish particular religious beliefs of any type
in zoning decisions throughout the City. He said there may be other
concerns about alcohol use and noise that maybe the Council could deal with
in a more general ordinances. Mr. Janku felt the 15 year limitation
was reasonable.
Ms. Coble asked why the 15
year offer was not seen as acceptable, given a right to renegotiate. Mr.
Schneider said there would be no right to negotiate because there would be
no mechanism in place to cause that to happen. He said the property
owner would have no inducement whatsoever to do that. He said the consensus
was that the restriction should be for the duration of the Islamic Center. Mr.
Schneider said their thought had been that the Center would have outgrown
that site in 30 years and would perhaps move somewhere else.
Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Bley
if the 15 year offer was still open if the Council passed the ordinance. Mr.
Bley said when both sides could not come to an agreement, he had thought
the Council would not enforce restrictions when the owners thought they were
being reasonable to start with. He would not be inclined to say if
the Council were to pass the ordinance, that the owners would agree to any
restrictions placed on the property. He said it was really a question
of freedom of use of the property in the future, and none of them know what
will happen. Mr. Bley was hopeful the Council would not force restrictive
covenants on the property.
Mr. Kruse pointed out that
there could be some residential uses adjacent from the Islamic Center that
could be nearly as obnoxious as a bar or a club. He thought it was
a good development and said he was going to support it.
Mr. Coffman said he was also
disappointed that there was no agreement. He felt that 30 years for
uses that are not planned to be uses for the building was very reasonable,
and certainly 15 years was very reasonable. He said he would vote against
the proposal.
Ms. Coble thought this project
is a good plan, and it would provide a good buffer between an existing establishment
that does sell liquor and is loud. She thought there were possibly
some opportunities to continue negotiating uses over time to ensure that
development in the area is a good neighbor to the Islamic Center and to its
worship uses.
B19-98 was read with the
vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU, CAMPBELL,
KRUSE, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: COFFMAN. ABSTAINING: CROCKETT. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
B20-98A Rezoning
property located at 209 and 213 Third Avenue from R-2 and O-1 to O-P.
The bill was read by the
Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the
Council had asked the staff to review the plan as to how far back this type
of zoning would be shown on the general guide plan. He said Mr. Hancock
had researched it and found that the request is within the guidelines of
the Land Use Plan.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
Tom Schneider, an attorney
with offices at 11 N. Seventh Street, spoke on behalf of Tom and Pamela Kardon,
the applicants. He circulated a photo of the site. Mr. Schneider
responded to the concerns listed at the last meeting. With respect
to the issue of the depth of the intrusion into the residential area, he
said the lot is 135 feet north/south along Providence, and was laid out as
73 feet deep east/west. That was in 1904, and since then Providence
Road has been widened several times. He guessed there was now about
65 feet of depth. Mr. Schneider pointed out that both O-1 and O-2 zonings
have a 25 foot front yard setback, plus a 25 foot rear setback adjacent to
residential property. When taking 50 feet out of the 65 feet, 15 feet
of building space remains. He thought that was true all along the Providence
corridor. As a practical matter, Mr. Schneider said a one lot depth
of planned office is not feasible along Providence Road, certainly not on
this lot.
With respect to removal of
older housing stock, Mr. Schneider thought in general that is a valid objective
to pursue; however, in this particular application he would suggest that
principle would not apply because the front house had not been occupied for
about 5 years due to its state of repair. The back house had been looked
at by a contractor and had been found to contain sagging floors and a sagging
roof. According to the contractor, it would require an expenditure
of $38,000 to bring the house up to habitable levels. That would be
more than what the applicant paid for it, and was much more than what it
is worth. In the near future, both houses would be razed or simply
fall into disuse.
Concerning the traffic issue,
Mr. Schneider said this is a relatively flat stretch of Providence Road as
compared to farther north -- by Taco Bell. He said the egress would
be much better at this location. He said that same traffic entry and
egress issue would be true all up and down Providence.
With respect to the unimproved
status of Third Avenue, Mr. Schneider said if both lots are rezoned, that
will address some traffic circularity on-site -- thus reducing the need to
use Third Avenue. He said Third Avenue would not be desirable for ingress
or egress purposes and, with additional room on-site, Providence traffic
could be accommodated as there should not be any traffic coming to an office
complex from a residential area. If there was, that would be minuscule.
Mr. Campbell said he had
used the entrance onto Providence Road from Third Street. He explained
there is a site distance problem to the north where one cannot see traffic
coming up over the hill. He asked how the applicant would suggest preventing
traffic from going down Third to Grand. Mr. Schneider thought it was
a matter of making access from Providence itself more attractive. Mr.
Schneider asked if Mr. Campbell was suggesting that Third Street be used. Mr.
Campbell said he was suggesting that it should not be used because it is
a dangerous intersection. Mr. Schneider said he was not arguing that
Third Avenue will be used as an access. He thought the frontage along
Providence will be used as long as there is adequate area allowed on-site
to enable wide turning radiuses and the like.
Mr. Janku asked when the
applicant acquired the property. Mr. Schneider said it had been within
the last six or eight months.
Mr. Campbell asked if he
bought it with a residential zoning. Mr. Schneider explained that there
is some question as to the existing zoning on the front lot as it was listed
as commercial. He said the Land use Plan shows planned office. He
said it was one or the other. Regarding the back lot, Mr. Schneider
said it was acquired as residential.
Linda Roots, 807 N. Eighth
Street, spoke as a board member of the North Central Neighborhood Association. She
said although this property is across the road from the association, any
development that occurs is very important to the entire corridor. She
thanked the Council and the Planning Commission for being firm about adhering
to the Land Use Plan. She also thanked Mr. and Mrs. Kardon for amending
their application to planned office. Along this corridor, she would
personally like to see the buildings closer to Providence Road and the parking
behind, between the buildings and the neighborhoods. She said that
would necessitate access from Third Avenue. She suggested that might
be some sort of off-site improvement by the developer. Ms. Roots referred
to a misleading real estate ad she had read, and she thought that many people
through the years have invested in property along that corridor thinking
that when it became commercial property they would make a killing on it. She
said now when these individuals realize the Council is remaining firm about
sticking to planned office, they are looking for ways to bail out.
Tom Kardon, 1909 Jackson,
explained that after he had purchased the first house, he had found out the
lot was not deep enough to build anything. He said he had to buy the
second house for more than it was worth.
Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Kardon
if he would be willing to restrict the access to the lot only to Providence
Road. Mr. Kardon said he would like to have an exit from Providence
Road, Third Avenue, and possibly the alley. He said he wanted people
to be able to get in and out easily. Ms. Coble agreed.
John Clark, President of
the North Central Neighborhood Association, encouraged the Council to reject
the application on the basis that it is not in conformance with the Land
Use Plan. He said the Land Use Plan included the notion of one lot
deep into the neighborhoods as a part of a policy to protect the residential
character of the lots and the neighborhoods behind them. He thanked
Mr. Kardon for calling him and talking to him about what it was he wanted
to do at that location. Mr. Clark said he was confused because the
application is for C-P, but most of the discussion with Mr. Kardon had been
about ultimately building a foreign car parts store for one of his sons. He
thought that was probably a good idea for some place in Columbia, but not
in this particular place. He encouraged Mr. Kardon to work with the
owner of the third lot in order to buy part of it and maybe develop a plan
that could be shown to be really protective of the residential neighborhood
behind it. Mr. Clark said residents are concerned that the Council
would be setting a precedent for encroaching deeply into the neighborhood.
Mayor Hindman closed the
public hearing.
In terms of access to Providence
Road, Mr. Janku asked to what extent the state would be involved in permitting
it. Mr. Patterson said the Highway Department would have control over
any access. Where there is an existing driveway, he thought it was
likely the property owner would be allowed to keep it, unless it is part
of some condition the City imposes.
Mr. Campbell asked if Third
Avenue was slated for any reconstruction in the current plan. Mr. Patterson
said it as not. It is, however, one of the streets eligible for CDBG
funding, and there had been some discussion in past years of trying to get
it programmed.
Ms. Coble said she was confused
in that the packet of information the Council received it showed that the
two lot deep office zoning designation was in conformance with the Land Use
Plan. Mr. Hancock said that was the staff's opinion. Ms. Coble
said she did not think, in particular, that the traffic concerns here are
as big of an issue as ensuring that the commercial development does not go
any further. She thought it was reasonable to think that one would
have to have more than the one lot for any commercial construction given
the amount of land that has been lost with the expansion of Providence Road. She
said Third Avenue is not the kind of street one would "zoom down" to get
from one point to another.
Mr. Campbell agreed, but
said this is only one of several developments which are likely to occur in
this area as a result of this plan. He said there are 12 lots that
are marked for planned development. He presumed there are houses on
most of them. With low income housing being one of the most precious
kind of housing in the City, as it cannot be replaced in today's market,
he regarded the destruction to be very serious.
Ms. Coble said these houses
could not be lived in because it would cost more than what it is worth to
make them livable. She did not think the loss of two houses that nobody
can occupy right now, and the owners cannot afford to bring up to code, would
have a detrimental affect on the neighborhood.
Mr. Campbell said more of
the same kind of thing is possible if houses are allowed to deteriorate and
then the land owners are rewarded with a higher zone. Looking back
over the history of the area when it was developed, there was an idea that
Providence Road would become a major office area and that Business Loop 70
would become a major commercial area. He said that was the reason for
some of the zoning that was done. Mr. Campbell did not think that was
going to occur, and development has now moved to the suburbs. It is
likely what occurs in this area will be very spotty, marginal development
with some other deterioration around it. Mr. Campbell said the Council
needed to be very careful in this transition because this is a fragile neighborhood. He
felt directing traffic into those areas would be one thing that would make
it a less desirable area in which to live.
Mr. Janku shared the concern
about tearing down dilapidated housing after allowing it to get in bad shape. In
this instance, the applicant had not owned the properties for a long period
of time. As development moves northward in Columbia and one sees a
lot more population and traffic coming from that area through Providence
into the City, Mr. Janku thought these regions could be likely candidates
for good office/commercial areas.
B20-98A, was read with the
vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT,
KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: CAMPBELL. Bill declared
enacted, reading as follows:
B36-98 Authorizing
reconstruction of the north cargo apron and lean-out to Taxiway A at
Columbia
Regional
Airport and calling for bids.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this
project was included in the 1998 budget. He said that 90% of the project
would be paid for from federal funds, which amounts to $832,500. The
City's share in the cost of the project is $92,500. Mr. Beck said the
reconstruction will improve a 350 by 300 foot area that is being primarily
used by cargo-type aircraft.
B36-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU,
CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
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.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Patterson explained that
this project was authorized by the Council following a public hearing May
1, 1995. He said both streets were previously 20 to 22 feet in width
with an asphaltic pavement surface. Open ditches ran along both sides
of the streets, and sidewalks were located on the east side of the roads. The
streets were rebuilt to improved standards, but at a width of only 28 feet
to allow the construction of new sidewalks along both sides. The work
also included extensive storm drainage improvements and utility upgrades,
particularly with water lines and overhead electric lines.
In addition to the street
and utility work, Mr. Patterson noted that the staff had been directed to
work with the neighborhood to develop a landscaping plan to replace trees
that were removed by the project. He explained that there have been
meetings with the property owners and the neighborhood groups and it is believed
that a plan, acceptable to property owners, has been prepared. He said
the plan would utilize plantings from the Water and Light Department's Trade
A Tree Program, and trees will be purchased through these project funds. These
trees will be bid separately through Purchasing and planted this spring.
The total cost of the street
reconstruction work was $289,218.00. Since both Coats and Fairview
are in the CDBG eligibility area, Mr. Patterson pointed out that the tax
bill assessments (per City policy) are set at one-half of the normal amount
for the local pavement portion of the cost, which amounts to $13.06 per abutting
foot. Additionally, property owners that meet residency and income
guidelines can apply for and receive a Community Development Block Grant
to pay for the entire assessment.
Mr. Patterson reported if
the assessments proposed are approved by the Council, $43,800 of the total
cost would be generated. The remainder of the project funding will
be paid from CDBG funds in the amount of $217,800, and $27,510 from the sewer
utility for sewer upgrades that were conducted in conjunction with the project. Prior
to making those assessments, Mr. Patterson said Council will need to determine
that there have been special benefits that have accrued to the properties,
that are at least equal to the $13.06 per foot that is being proposed. He
suggested that the Council consider the following: curb and guttering
and the storm drainage improvement have provided for better storm water management
in the area, the curb and guttering also improves the appearance and maintainability
of the lots, new driveway approaches have been constructed thus improving
access, and new sidewalks have been constructed enhancing pedestrian traffic. Mr.
Patterson said the City would be able to better maintain the streets, particularly
in the way of street cleaning and snow removal. In addition, the new
smooth road surface will reduce the wear and tear on the vehicles owned by
the property owners. Now that the streets have been reconstructed,
he noted that the property owners would no longer be subject to a potential
$2.00 per foot for street maintenance.
Ms. Coble asked if there
was a distinct difference in the size of trees that would be purchased through
Water and Light funds and those that would be paid through City funds as
an aspect of the project. Mr. Patterson said there is some difference
in size. The Water and Light Department's Adopt A Tree Program has
a certain caliper tree that is somewhat smaller than the City's landscaping
requirements for Public Works specifications. He said staff has tried
to blend those together on the project and, if there is a problem, the City
would have to pay the additional cost for it. Staff felt everyone was
satisfied with this arrangement.
Mr. Kruse asked who would
be responsible for the immediate maintenance of the trees. Mr. Patterson
said trees are typically bid with one year maintenance on the plantings. After
that, they become the property owners responsibility. He said as soon
as trees are planted, the watering is the responsibility of the property
owner.
Linda Roots, 807 N. Eighth
Street, said she had personally passed around the petition regarding the
improvements on these streets. She said no one questions the benefits. The
streets are lovely and the trees will be great. Ms. Roots reported
that 50% of the houses on Fairview Avenue are now owner occupied. She
said several have been purchased since the street construction, and she had
been told by several people that they were attracted to the area because
the street looked so nice.
Jeff Barrow, 1007 Coats Street,
reiterated that the street looks great. He said residents liked the
idea that the entire street was being looked at as a landscape project instead
of just replacing trees one by one. Mr. Barrow thanked the Council
for amending the original plan from a 32 foot wide street to a 28 foot street. He
said that had gone a long way toward not only keeping the architectural integrity,
but also in preserving some of the trees that otherwise would have been destroyed. He
believed it also has had an affect on the speed of traffic on the streets
-- a narrower street is a safer street.
Betty Cook Rottman, 1200
Coats, thanked Mr. Janku for helping residents appeal to the Council for
the 28 foot width street. She also thanked Mr. Knipp for alerting homeowners
to the petition process. She was also grateful to the crews that worked
on the street. Ms. Rottman reported these individuals had been very
considerate and did their best to give the residents access during the construction
project.
Mayor Hindman closed the
public hearing.
B38-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU CROCKETT,
CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
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.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this
is a 20 acre tract of land with one single family residence on it. He
said the applicants have requested a connection to the City sewer system,
hence the application for annexation.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
There being no comments,
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B42-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU,
CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows;
B43-98 Voluntary
annexation of property owned by SERR, L.L.C., located on the south
side of
Thompson
Road and adjacent to Garden City Subdivision.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck said this annexation
request if for a 20 acre tract of land, also located in northeast Columbia. He
said a 57 lot subdivision is being proposed for single family use.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
There being no comments,
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B43-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU,
CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
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.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that this
approximate 35 acre tract of land located is in southeast Columbia. He
said the Planning and Zoning Commission had voted 9-2 to recommend denial
of the R-2 zoning request associated with the annexation.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
Tom Schneider, an attorney
with offices at 11 N. Seventh Street, spoke on behalf of the contract purchaser,
John Payne. He said the applicant did not have a signed agreement with the
Clear Creek Neighborhood Association. Mr. Payne tried to meet with
the association, but Mr. Blakemore (the President of the association) indicated
that although he appreciated the gesture, the association did not want to
schedule a meeting to address any such issues. Mr. Schneider took that
to mean that the association did not have the same concerns regarding this
property as had been associated with Cambridge Place.
Mr. Schneider reported that
earlier this evening, the Council approved the much denser plan for Cambridge
Place. In addition, about a year ago the Council approved duplex zoning
immediately west of Cambridge Place on the property formerly owned by Louise
Hunt. Mr. Schneider noted that the Council had approved a substantial
amount of multi-family, specifically duplex zoning, on the north side of
Nifong Boulevard. He said there is not a great deal to distinguish
or differentiate between those particular applications or developments from
this proposed project.
Mr. Schneider said the applicant
did not have a market study or a detailed plan to show what this development
would look like. He said the market place would determine what would
be built at this location, but said it would be a mistake to assume that
it would necessarily be for the maximum density. He pointed out that
if Mr. Payne wanted to do so, he could construct a similar development in
R-1 with a 7,000 square foot minimum lot size. Mr. Schneider stated
five small single family houses could be constructed in contrast to the density
being proposed for this project being no more than six units per lot. Mr.
Schneider saw the issue as being the incremental difference between R-2 and
R-1 zoning.
With respect to traffic,
Mr. Schneider said the new AC alignment should provide relief, as would the
construction of Grindstone. He said this project would take five to
ten years to develop, so it is not an immediate issue needing to be addressed. The
applicant felt the traffic issue would take care of itself. Mr. Schneider
said Mr. Blaylock would be addressing the affect, if any, of a duplex community
upon single family residential land values. In the event that the rezoning
as requested is not approved, Mr. Schneider said it is not the applicant's
desire to proceed with the annexation petition.
Jack Blaylock, a real estate
appraiser with offices at 802 E. Broadway, explained that he provides counsel
to lenders, developers, and investors on a regular basis on all types of
real property in the area. He said that requires him to keep abreast
of all of the development patterns of the area, which included keeping track
of building permits. Mr. Blaylock distributed some graphs and accompanying
text.
Mr. Janku asked if the statistics
provided to the Council are consistent with national trends, or if Columbia
is somehow different. He asked if Mr. Blaylock was familiar with any
national trends in multi-family versus single family dwellings. Mr.
Blaylock said he does not appraise nationally, but does some in other states. He
said there is great compatibility in one-family and two-family dwellings. He
said he would not deny that there will be some people who will choose not
to buy in areas that have both, but the price that is paid for that property
will not reflect a loss in value.
John Blakemore, 4807 Bearfield
Road, President of the Clear Creek Neighborhood Association, said they believed
there are several good reasons to deny Mr. Payne's request for zoning. He
asked the Council to consider the already inordinate number of duplex subdivisions
in this area. He said these developments are very high density, have
no green spaces, or any regard for environmentally sensitive areas. Mr.
Blakemore said denial would be in keeping with the City's and County's Land
Use Plans. He encouraged the joint City/County task force to begin
to look at this area.
Joe Bendbeuetel, 1701 E.
Gans Road, said residents believe the Cambridge project should be a model
of the way developments should move forward in Columbia. He said residents
are not completely happy with the density, but it happened. He said
this proposed development is everything Cambridge is not. The transition
between this area to the State Park is critically important, and the neighborhood
association urged the Council to give special consideration toward the type
of development that is going to transition into the park area. It is
thought this development would be the least compatible.
Mayor Hindman closed the
public hearing.
Mrs. Crockett did not like
the density or the traffic the proposed development would create. She
is going to vote against the request.
Mr. Campbell felt this would
be a bad development in the wrong place.
Mayor Hindman is opposed
to the request as well. He did not object to the density as long as
it is done right. Mayor Hindman observed this plan is just streets
and duplexes, no green spaces. In addition, the community is concerned
about the watershed for this area, and no mention had been made of it.
Mr. Janku said to some extent,
some of the older neighborhoods have had problems with rental properties
contributing to the decline of an area. He said one of his big concerns
about these massive duplex developments is that they have the potential for
diffuse ownership of rental property -- there is no potential for stability
of home ownership at all. In the long-term, developments such as this
have the potential for detriment to the community.
Mr. Coffman said enough is
enough, and thought the Sixth Ward had suffered enough. He said better
development than this one is needed.
B44-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: NO ONE. VOTING
NO: COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. Bill
defeated.
B46-98 Authorizing
construction of water mains along Blue Ridge Road, Northland Drive
and
Route
763 and calling for bids.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this
project had been included in this fiscal year's budget.
Mr. Malon noted that these
two water main projects were being combined into one bid. He said the
projects would tie dead ends of 8-inch and 12-inch water mains together,
would provide loop flows in the area, increase fire flows, and also increase
fire flows and pressure in the Prathersville Water District area. He
displayed a drawing on the overhead and explained the two CIP projects --
numbers 58 and 72. Mr. Malon explained the project would be bid
out as it would be much too large for City work forces to undertake.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
There being no comments,
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B46-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU,
CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
(A) Street construction
on Oakland Gravel Road.
Item A was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck commented that this
is a major street project and asked Mr. Patterson to describe the project.
Mr. Patterson explained that
this hearing is for determining the necessity of reconstructing Oakland Gravel
Road from the end of the existing improved pavement, approximately 200 feet
north of Smiley Lane northward 1,600 feet. This is a collector street
on the Major Thoroughfare Plan and one of the specific projects identified
in the 1995 1/4 cent sales tax ballot issue. The project was placed on a
high priority list primarily due to the construction of the new Lange Middle
School.
Mr. Patterson stated the
existing roadway is a 20 to 22-foot wide asphalt surface with roadside ditches
and no sidewalks. An existing bridge constructed by Boone County in
the early 1980's spans Bear Creek and is 28 feet wide. The southern
approximate 600 feet of Oakland Gravel Road is within the city limits. North
of Bear Creek, the City limit line runs down the center of Oakland Gravel
Road, with the eastern half being in Boone County and western half being
within the corporate limits of Columbia. The proposed project terminates
approximately 300 feet south of the intersection with Roger Wilson Drive.
This location had been established due to proposed changes in the alignment
of Roger Wilson Drive and construction of Brown School Road as part of the
development occurring in the area.
Mr. Patterson explained City
staff has been meeting with county representatives and with the developer
to assure a close coordination of the planning for the roadway north of the
proposed project limits. Due to the safety issues related to school
traffic, it is not felt the City should wait on the developer's schedule
to proceed with this first phase of work.
Mr. Patterson reported it
is proposed that Oakland Gravel Road be constructed 38 feet in width with
sidewalks along the entire east side of the project. The sidewalk will
most probably be constructed four feet behind the curb, recognizing the proximity
of the residential structures along the east side. He said a sidewalk
is proposed along the west side of Oakland Gravel Road, from the southern
terminus northward to and across the Lange Middle School property. No
sidewalk is proposed on the west side near the north end because it is anticipated
this sidewalk will be constructed by the developer as this property is developed.
Mr. Patterson said since
Oakland Gravel Road is classified as a Class II Bicycle Lane within the city
limits, and given the proximity of Lange Middle School, it is proposed that
parking be removed from the street and the bike lanes be striped and signed
to conform to Class II requirements throughout this project. The 28
foot wide bridge on Oakland Gravel Road will not accommodate pedestrians
nor bicyclists. The consulting engineer who designed this bridge has
performed a minor study for the City and has determined the existing bridge
can be widened to accommodate both pedestrians and bicyclists. The
bicyclists would share the widened bridge deck with motorists, and pedestrians
would be separated by a guardrail. The cost of this bridge upgrade
was included in the original project estimate when it was placed on the ballot
issue. Tree removal will be restricted primarily to fence row trees
along the west side. It appears approximately three significant trees
will be removed from the east side. During the finalizing of plans
and the acquisition of rights-of-way, individual discussions will occur with
property owners regarding tree impact. Trees will be saved where possible
and replacement trees will be provide where needed.
A neighborhood meeting was
held on February 18, 1997, at the Grace Evangelical Lutheran Church on north
Oakland Gravel Road. Approximately seven properties were represented
at this neighborhood meeting.
If Council gives staff direction
to proceed with the project, Mr. Patterson said construction plans will be
finalized and acquisition of the necessary easements will begin. Given the
technical nature of the redesign of the Bear Creek bridge and the time needed
in order to acquire all the necessary land rights, this project cannot be
constructed this summer. Considering the location of Lange Middle School
and the access onto Oakland Gravel Road from the school, it is recommended
that construction be delayed until the summer of 1999, at which time the
entire project can be finished during summer recess.
Mr. Patterson reported the
resolution estimate for the project is $611,000. As a collector street, adjacent
property owners may be assessed for the cost of curb and guttering, or its
equivalent, which by resolution has been set at a maximum of $12.00 per foot.
This assessment may be made only against those properties that are inside
the City limits and, unfortunately, the standard letter notifying property
owners of the public hearing and indicating the assessment of tax bills had
been sent to all parties, even those outside the City limits. He said
staff has since tried to contact those persons living outside the City limits
to advise them that the tax bill provisions do not apply to non-residents
of the City of Columbia.
Mr. Patterson noted that
before tax bills can be assessed, it will be necessary to have another public
hearing after construction is complete to determine if special benefits have
accrued to the properties. Some of the potential benefits Council may consider
at that time are as follows:
1. The new curbing
improves the appearance of adjacent property and provides for better storm
water runoff
control.
2. With the reconstruction
of the street, new driveway entrances will be provided improving the access
to the
properties.
3. The sidewalk will
provide improved pedestrian safety for residents and property owners in the
area.
4. The new street surface
will provide for more efficient snow removal and street cleaning.
Mr. Patterson said the staff
recommends proceeding with the project and, if after receiving public comments
tonight Council concurs with staff recommendation, Council should make
a motion directing staff to proceed with final plans and specifications
for the Oakland Gravel Road improvement project.
In terms of the timing of
Phase II, Mr. Janku asked what could be expected. Mr. Patterson responded
that Phase II would depend more on arrangements the developer will be making
with the County as far as some necessary trading of land. He said there
was no indication of when that was expected to happen, but staff did know
the County is interested in moving forward with it. He said the County
has been very cooperative in this matter, and they are trying to proceed
as though this were a joint project between the City and the County. Mr.
Janku asked if it was conceivable that it could occur in conjunction in 1999. Mr.
Patterson said that was possible, but he was reluctant to try to speak for
the County and the developer. Because of the safety issue, he said
staff felt the City should continue with this phase.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
Don Schuster, spoke on behalf
of the Grace Lutheran Church, 4540 Oakland Gravel Road, and strongly encouraged
that the project be moved along as quickly as possible. He is very
concerned about the safety of the school children in the area. Mr.
Schuster said there is quite a bit of speeding as well as a lot of semi truck
traffic. He said since February, a number of the County residents have
expressed an interest in annexation. Regarding any land trading, Mr.
Schuster said there is a triangular piece of land in Phase II that is of
great concern to the Church. He said the Church did not want to see
duplexes or something else placed in front of the property. He said
the pond owned by the Church had been taken out because it filled with sediment
and there is no provision for storm water protection at this point.
Mayor Hindman closed the
public hearing.
Mrs. Crockett made the motion
that the staff be directed to proceed with the project. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Janku.
Mrs. Crockett asked about
the truck traffic in the area. She said there is a sign that reads
no through truck traffic, yet this road is used as a shortcut to 763. She
asked if there was anything that could be done about it if the actions were
not witnessed by a police officer. Chief Botsford said if the officer
did not see the violation, there was probably nothing that could be done. Chief
Botsford said he could ask the officers to pay more attention to the situation. He
said there is a lot of police traffic on the road because of the trips back
and forth to the sheriff's office. Mrs. Crockett asked if the truck
terminals on 763 could be notified and reminded that trucks are not to travel
on this road. Chief Botsford said he would make sure that was done.
Mr. Janku said once the engineering
work is completed, the street lighting should be installed by next winter
if possible. He said there had been some discussion about not knowing
the alignment and not proceeding with the project until that is known. He
said it might be possible when that information is obtained, the existing
poles could be used.
The motion to proceed, made
by Mrs. Crockett, seconded by Mr. Janku, was approved unanimously by voice
vote.
(B) Voluntary
annexation of property owned by Rangeline Properties, L.L.C., located
on the east
side
of State Route 763.
Item B was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this
200 acre tract of land is located in north central Columbia. It is
proposed that the property be zoned a combination of M-C, C-1, and O-1. He
displayed the tract on the overhead.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
There being no comments,
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
(C) Voluntary
annexation of property owned by estate of George Spencer, et. al.,
located on the
east
side of State Route 763.
Item C was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck described this tract
as being about a 142 acre tract of land east of 763. He said it is
approximately a mile north of Smiley Lane, and the permanent zoning request
would be for a combination of M-1 and M-C. Mr. Beck noted that the
staff had been meeting with the property owners concerning this drainage
area and highway corridor to determine if there is any interest in annexation
before the City does infrastructure planning in the area.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
Scott Kelp, spoke on behalf
of Boone County Bank in representing the land owners. He offered to
answer any questions.
Mayor Hindman closed the
public hearing.
(D) Annexation
of property owned by the City located on the east side of State Route
763, north of
Smiley
Lane.
Item D was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck displayed the two
small tracts on the overhead. He said these tracts had been obtained
as part of the merger with Water District No. 1.
Mayor Hindman opened the
public hearing.
There being no comments,
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
OLD BUSINESS
B17-98 Approving
final plat of The Terebinths, Plat III, a major subdivision.
The bill was read by the
Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this
is a seven and one-half acre tract of land adjacent to St. Charles Road. Four
lots are being proposed. He noted that this item had been tabled from
the last meeting in order for the staff to review with the property owner
the possibility of dedicating a greenbelt easement on a portion of the lots. Mr.
Beck had not received a report back as to the status, although he had heard
there had been no proposal to dedicate the greenbelt. Mr. Hancock said
that was correct. He said staff had sent a letter to the property owner
on the 4th of February advising them of the current situation. He said
staff also spoke to the property owner and this individual's engineer, but
have had nothing come back.
Mrs. Crockett asked if the
plat met all City regulations. Mr. Hancock said it did, other than
something relative to a greenbelt.
Ms. Coble asked about the
City standard because the Hominy Branch has been identified as being part
of the City greenbelt easement. Mr. Hancock thought the policy resolution
and the language that accompanied the plan adoption indicates that certain
creeks served interest to the Council as preservation of greenbelt easements. He
said the staff was directed to encourage and work with developers to provide
these easements. He said they have been defined in the ordinance. Mr.
Hancock said there had been some opposition to this particular PUD, so staff
worked with Mr. McMurry at length trying to develop a PUD he could market
in exchange for some public usage of the property.
Mrs. Crockett asked if there
was an ordinance which states that the property owner must dedicate a greenbelt
easement. Mr. Hancock said there was not.
Mr. Janku asked if this request
was for the entire development, or whether there would be an additional plat
coming before the Council. Mr. Hancock said this was it. He said
it had been previously identified that a considerable portion of the Hominy
Branch greenbelt had been worked into the Richland Heights development. He
also pointed out a small portion at the E.D.I. Plant. He said Hominy
Branch would be a good creek to have a greenbelt along. Mr. Janku asked
if this development is immediately adjacent to St. Charles Road. Mr.
Hancock said it was. Mr. Janku said when the City improves the street,
they could then tax bill the adjoining property.
B17-98 was read with the
vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: JANKU, CROCKETT. VOTING
NO: COBLE, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. Bill defeated.
B35-98 Authorizing
right of use permit for subdivision entrance monument and sign on City
property
for Chapel Hill Estates 3.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck said staff had worked
with the subdivider, when the plat came in south of Chapel Hill Road and
adjacent to the Fire Station, to get a street aligned with a road directly
across Chapel Hill from the north. This will take a small corner off
the Fire Station property. Mr. Beck indicated the Council received
a report outlining all of the conditions the subdivider will need to meet
upon Council approval.
B35-98 was given third
reading with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE,
JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO
ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:
B40-98 Amending
chapter 14 of the City Code relating to parking rates.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck reminded the Council
that the parking meter rates had been adjusted some months ago in conjunction
with the parking study that was done. At that time, there had been
no adjustment made to a fairly long list of other kinds of parking, i.e.,
contractor hoods and utility hoods. He said this list had been provided
to the Council, along with a list of the proposed rates.
David Rogers, an attorney
with offices at 813 E. Walnut, spoke on behalf of Arnie Fagan, a downtown
merchant in opposition of reserving parking for specific types of businesses,
especially those spaces that banks can allocate for themselves. At
the present time, Mr. Rogers said that four of the six banking institutions
in the central business district purchase these hoods. One of the issues
being considered in this ordinance is raising the amount charged for those
hoods. He said the ordinance would raise it proportionately to other
parking rate increases. Mr. Rogers is hopeful that the Council will
consider directing the staff to prepare an ordinance that would address the
question as to whether this is a good idea at all. He said banks should
not be entitled to exclusive parking if other businesses do not have the
same privilege. Mr. Rogers reported by doing so, it cordons off a portion
of the public right-of-way that is supported by all tax payers for the benefit
of a small, select group of tax payers -- and that is not right.
B40-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU,
CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill
declared enacted, reading as follows:
B41-98 Amending
Chapter 14 of the City Code relating to speed limits on Old 63 South.
The bill was given second
reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck said a study had
been completed by the Public Works Department regarding these proposed changes.
B41-98 was given third reading
with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU,
CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. 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.
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.
B39-98 Authorizing
Change Order No. 1; accepting and approving the work; approving engineer's
final
report for the Jackson Street Drainage project.
B45-98 Accepting
conveyance for water utility purposes from Lee H. and Joyce J. Thompson.
R41-98 Setting
a public hearing: street construction on Alan Lane from McKee Street to eastern
terminus.
R42-98 Setting
a public hearing: street construction on Conley Road from I-70 Drive Southeast
to
the
northern terminus.
R43-98 Setting
a public hearing: sidewalk construction along Berrywood Drive, Worley Street
and
Business
Loop 70; a pedestrian bridge to north side of Smiley Lane bridge over Bear
Creek.
R44-98 Setting
a public hearing: voluntary annexation of property owned by Mike S. and Tammy
K.
Wulff located at 2711 Mill Creek Terrace.
R45-98 Setting
a public hearing: traffic calming improvements in Colonial Gardens Subdivision.
R46-98 Authorizing
a grant application to Missouri Department of Natural Resources for
replacement
of lighting in the Daniel Boone Building.
R47-98 Approving
preliminary plat of Garden City, Plat 8; a major subdivision.
R48-98 Authorizing
agreement with Missouri Department of Health to provide on-the-spot birth
and
death
certificates.
The bills were given third reading and the resolutions read with the vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE, COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bills declared enacted and resolutions declared adopted, reading as follows:
NEW BUSINESS
R49-98 Authorizing
agreement with Chinn & Associates Architects to develop a plan for
development
of the MKT Trailhead at the southwest corner of Fourth & Cherry.
The resolution was read by
the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the
staff and a representative of the Trailhead Committee had interviewed consultants
to work with the Committee in developing a plan. The firm of Chinn & Associates
is being recommended.
Mr. Janku asked if there
is a deadline for completion. Mr. Beck said a grant had been received
from the DNR, with the deadline for completion being the fall of 1998. He
said when more information on the clean-up in the area is obtained, the City
would discuss the possibility of an extension. Mr. Janku asked if the
consultant had a deadline. Mr. Beck said they would be working with
the Committee as the project moves ahead. Mayor Hindman said part of
the program is for the consultant to work with the Committee, and the Committee
is very anxious for this to occur. Mr. Beck said there is no reason
that the Committee could not proceed with work on the final plan. He
said staff felt it would be a good idea to have the plan submitted at the
same time the City requests an extension due to the clean-up.
Mr. Campbell said some time
ago the question had been raised about a walk light on Providence. He
said as this park is developed, there will be more and more pedestrians generated
on Stewart Road. He thought it would be wise to pursue getting a walk
light at this location.
Mayor Hindman said the State
is actually looking at going underneath Providence, using the tunnels. He
said there still needed to be a walk light at Stewart and Providence.
The vote on R49-98 was recorded
as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE,
COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared
adopted, reading as follows:
R50-98 Authorizing
a grant application to Boone County for improvements to the Bethel
at Nifong
and
Forum at Nifong intersections.
The resolution was read by
the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that each
year the County Commission distributes about $200,000 from their road sales
tax to various communities in the County. He said records indicate
that Columbia receives about $40,000 per year from those funds. The
recommendation this year is to apply for funding toward signals at the locations
indicated. Mr. Beck reported money for the signals had been received
last year, and this would add more to the amount needed to build them.
Mr. Kruse noted the grant
application read that it is expected that traffic signals will be installed
during the late summer or early fall months of this year. He had previously
asked for a staff report on the alternatives of round-abouts being used in
those locations, and was assuming this would not preclude that option. Mr.
Patterson said staff is about ready to bring a report back to the Council
on the studies of those intersections. He said a report would be submitted
to the Council before any final decisions are made.
Mr. Beck asked if the grant
request should show signals. Mr. Patterson said staff would make certain
that the application is flexible enough. Basically, monies are being
requested for the pedestrian amenities that go along with the intersection.
Mayor Hindman said he was
all for having the pedestrian facilities at those locations. He urged
that this be thought as an integral part of the project, rather than a separate
add-on item. He wanted pedestrian facilities included in projects,
not necessarily having to obtain a grant for these items. Pedestrian
improvements are just as much a part of a project as is the curbs and gutters. Mayor
Hindman reported this is a philosophy he would like to see develop.
Mr. Janku agreed, and said
what had struck him during the discussion of the new AC alignment was the
use of the word "amenities" to describe things like sidewalks. That
makes it sound like the sidewalk is a special item the City might receive
if lucky. Mr. Kruse said for a State highway, sidewalks are an amenity.
The vote on R50-98 was recorded
as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE,
COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared
adopted, reading as follows:
R51-98 Authorizing
application to Missouri Department of Social Services for Emergency
Shelter
Grant.
The resolution was read by
the Clerk.
Each year, Mr. Beck explained
that funding is allocated to Columbia for emergency shelter purposes. If
the Council approves this application, the funds would be used as follows: $31,000
for the Arbor House, $34,000 for Comprehensive Human Services, and $20,000
to Welcome Home. The report noted that there had been a 43% increase
in the funding the state receives from the federal government for this type
of housing.
The vote on R51-98 was recorded
as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE,
COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared
adopted, reading as follows:
R52-98 Authorizing
amendment to agreements with homemaker/personal care vendors to increase
hourly
rate from $10.86 to $11.94.
The resolution was read by
the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this
would raise the City's rates and bring them more in line to what the state
is paying. He said the recommendation had been made by the Community
Services Advisory Commission.
The vote on R52-98 was recorded
as follows; VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE,
COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared
adopted, reading as follows:
R53-98 Authorizing
the competitive public sale of water and electric system refunding
and
improvement
revenue bonds.
The resolution was read by
the Clerk.
In April of 1997, Mr. Beck
explained that the voters approved a $39,250,000 revenue bond issue. He
said the City has been utilizing funds from its reserve accounts to work
on some of the projects. He said the Water and Light Director, the
Finance Director, and the Water and Light Advisory Board have been meeting
to discuss the proposed plan regarding the schedule of projects that were
shown in the ballot issue. Staff felt it was time to go to market with
the sale of $26,745,000 in revenue bonds for public improvement and refunding
purposes. If authorized by the Council, Mr. Beck said the bids would
be opened and brought back for discussion at the next Council meeting. He
said before the meeting, the appropriate staff would meet with the Bond Counsel
to make a recommendation for Council consideration.
The vote on R53-98 was recorded
as follows: VOTING YES: COBLE, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, KRUSE,
COFFMAN, HINDMAN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. Resolution declared
adopted, reading as follows:
The following bills were introduced by the Mayor, unless otherwise indicated, and all were given first reading:
B47-98 Amending
Chapter 14 of the Code to remove existing parking restriction on the
west side
of
Clarkson Road.
B48-98 Accepting
conveyances for utility and street easement purposes.
B49-98 Authorizing
Change Orders; approving engineer's final report for the construction of
Tenth
& Cherry
parking garage project.
B50-98 Authorizing
acquisition of the Turner property for landfill buffer.
B51-98 Authorizing
installation of traffic calming devices in the Colonial Gardens Subdivision.
B52-98 Accepting
conveyance from Wilma Via for utility purposes.
B53-98 Approving
engineer's final report; accepting a conveyance; authorizing payment of
differential
costs for 12-inch water main serving Woods Mill, Plat 1.
B54-98 Approving
engineer's final report; accepting conveyance; authorizing payment of
differential
costs for 12-inch water main serving Boone Industrial Park N, Lot 5.
B55-98 Accepting
conveyances for water utility purposes from Bluff Ridge Partnership, REMM,
Ltd.,
and Boyce.
B56-98 Amending
Chapter 29 of the Code to clarify language pertaining to non-conforming uses.
B57-98 Voluntary
annexation of property owned by Rangeline Properties located on the east
side
of
763; establishing permanent zoning; amending land use plan.
B58-98 Voluntary
annexation of property owned by George Spencer, et. al., located on the east
side
of 763; establishing permanent zoning; amending land use plan.
B59-98 Annexation
of property owned by the City located on the east side of 763.
B60-98 Rezoning
property located at 701 W. Sexton Road from R-2 to O-P.
B61-98 Rezoning
property located on the north side of I-70 Drive NW and west of Garden Drive
from
A-1 to R-1.
B62-98 Authorizing
annexation agreements with owners of all lots in Haystack Acres Addition.
B63-98 Authorizing
acceptance of Law Enforcement Block Grant for purchase of police
equipment;
appropriating funds.
B64-98 Authorizing
agreement with Missouri Department of Health for HIV Prevention Services;
appropriating
funds.
B65-98 Authorizing
agreement with Missouri Department of Public Safety for support of the Sexual
Trauma
and Assault Response Team; appropriating funds.
B66-98 Authorizing
purchase of aerial photography; appropriating funds.
B67-98 Authorizing
sale of Water and Electric revenue bonds.
REPORTS AND PETITIONS
(A) Proposed Revision
to the Zoning Ordinance to Allow Bed & Breakfast establishments in a
PUD
District.
Mr. Beck said this amendment
would permit these types of facilities to operate in zonings other than R-3,
by obtaining a special use permit from the Board of Adjustment.
Mr. Kruse made the motion
that the issue be referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their
review and report back to the Council. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.
(B) Volunteer
Quarterly Report.
Mr. Beck explained that the
Council had requested a quarterly report regarding the Office of Volunteer
Services. He noted that 3,377 hours of volunteer time had been provided
during the last quarter of the previous year, and the total number of hours
contributed by local volunteers to the City had been 33,596.
(C) Transfer
of Funds.
Report accepted.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Upon receiving the majority
vote of the Council the following individuals were appointed to the following
Boards and Commissions:
C.A.R.E. ADVISORY BOARD
Collins, Nancy C., 1201 Paquin #1502, Ward 1
- term to expire 3/1/01
ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION
Hendrix, Rickey L., 1133 Ashland Road, Ward
6 - term to expire 6/1/98
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
Bass, Preston L., 2201 Garden Drive, Ward 2
- term to expire 3/1/01
Malley, Lynn M., 2015 Ridgemont, Ward 4 - term
to expire 3/1/01
WATER & LIGHT ADVISORY BOARD
Gaeth, Ernie K., 1106 Willowcreek Lane, Ward
5 - term to expire 6/30/99
COMMENTS OF THE COUNCIL, STAFF, AND PUBLIC
Mr. Janku complimented the
Columbia Housing Authority who had recently received a grade of 81, which
is an improvement over former grades in the 50's and 60's. He said
CHA had done a lot of hard work and had upgraded their performance.
Mr. Janku asked if the Council
is going to receive a report concerning the issue of when sidewalks are required. It
had been questioned whether walks are required at the time a building permit
is issued or at the time of platting. Mr. Beck said sidewalks would
have to be constructed at the time a building permit is issued. Mr.
Janku understood walks are not required if the street is not improved at
the time the plat is approved. Mr. Beck said platting was what required
sidewalks. Mayor Hindman thought the question had to do with approved
plats and the amount of time that might elapse before construction takes
place. Mr. Beck said he had asked for a staff report.
Mrs. Crockett thought the
Council needed to keep an open mind when considering duplex developments. She
said the projects that contain green spaces and that sort of thing can be
appealing, and the Council needed to be receptive when good plans are submitted. She
said at tonight's meeting, however, that had not been the case. Mayor
Hindman agreed, and said density could be very good if properly planned.
Regarding the Providence
Road and Stewart Road crossing, Mr. Campbell asked for the staff to discuss
with the Highway Department what would be involved to have crossing lights
established at that location. Mayor Hindman said that was only one
of the locations on Providence that needs crossing lights -- they are also
needed on Broadway and at Stadium. Mr. Janku agreed, but wondered if
the phased approach might work best. Mr. Campbell suspected that most
pedestrian traffic was at Stewart Road. Ms. Coble said the most pedestrian
traffic is concentrated between Worley, Rogers, and Broadway, and nothing
is in place to help alleviate problems at these intersections. Mayor
Hindman thought some mid-block islands are needed in those areas. Mr.
Janku said that had been discussed several years ago, and it had been decided
that Stewart Road would be the starting point. Mr. Kruse noted that
a crosswalk is being installed at Rollins, and thought that would help
Mr. Kruse said he had asked
for a staff report twice regarding landscaping and why it had not been included
in the plan for South Providence. He is primarily concerned about the
area on the east side, north of Green Meadows Road, between Green Meadows
and Carter Lane. Mr. Kruse had received another extensive report back
from the Arborist, and is having a difficult time understanding it as it
is very technical. Mr. Kruse asked if it would be possible for the
Arborist, or someone from the Public Works staff, to meet with him at the
site to explain the report. He failed to see why there could not be
some plan for landscaping in the area. Mr. Beck said he would get back
to Mr. Kruse regarding this issue.
Regarding the hooded parking
meters downtown, Mr. Kruse received a request from a downtown business person
who has a lot of quick walk-in business, and wanted to have a hooded parking
meter. Mr. Kruse had sent a memo to the staff, and received a response
indicating that this location is not an allowable use of a metered parking
space for either a hood or a loading zone. The memo said the City refers
all resources for changes in parking use to the SBD for recommendation, and
this specific use would not be supported by the staff. Mr. Kruse wanted
to know what the next step should be if the person wanted to pursue it. Mr.
Beck said the council could authorize hooded parking meters, and were the
only body that could. Mr. Kruse said he would like to refer this issue
to the Special Business District for their recommendation. He thought
it was certainly as legitimate as the bank requests. Mr. Kruse said
this particular case involves a gentleman who owns two coffee houses. Many
of his customers are double parking to come in for a cup of coffee to go. The
owner felt it would benefit the downtown to have access for that kind of
business. Mr. Campbell asked if the Council should review the total
policy. Mr. Kruse said that might be another way to go about it. Mr.
Coffman said that was what he would like to see done. Mr. Kruse asked
if the Council should add the issue to the work session list. Mr. Beck
said the current practice that is followed had been initiated by a Council
policy regarding financial institutions.
It was agreed the Council
would take the entire issue up at a work session.
Mrs. Crockett said she has
been told by people that have made a trip downtown for purposes of quickly
dropping off plats or related material, these individuals have trouble finding
a place to park in the back of the building because of all the City vehicles. She
asked if anything could be done about the situation. Mr. Patterson
explained that authorized City vehicles are directed to park in the spaces
against the garage when these are available, and if none are, employees are
directed to make certain they are to use the parking garage. He said
this issue had been discussed in a meeting this morning, and expects to see
some improvement.
Mr. Coffman asked about a
bridge the City had agreed to build behind Stadium Hollywood Theatres. He
asked about the current progress and when the bridge is expected to be constructed. Mr.
Beck said staff is trying to re-evaluate exactly where the City is with roadway
funding. He said staff has also had discussions with the County on
funds that might be available in this area. He said bridges had not
been included on the previous ballot issue. Mr. Beck reported staff
would be compiling a list of roads and other public improvements that need
to be addressed and evaluated for another ballot issue. Mr. Coffman
said there was a lot of discussion about whether the whole development should
have been C-P instead of a C-3. He asked if he was told correctly that
the property was granted a C-3 zoning because of the bridge and the promise
that it would be built at this location. Mr. Janku said he did not
think it was linked. Mr. Beck did not know of a single bridge in Columbia
that has ever been built by a developer because these are viewed as community
assets, not just an asset to a given area. Mr. Janku thought what happened
in this case was that the developer agreed to fund more of the street, and
the City agreed to put the bridge in. Mr. Campbell remembered that
the developer had not wanted to put in a bridge, and it was at the insistence
of the City that a through street was constructed at this location.
Mr. Janku recalled previous
discussions regarding whether or not the City was going to evaluate additional
areas for on-street parking meters. He thought the Public Works Department
was going to evaluate Orr Street. Mr. Patterson said this had been
done and it is a matter of getting a report back to the Council. Although,
staff wanted to submit the recommendations made in the report to the Special
Business District first.
Greg Willingham, 6416 Karen
Court, spoke on behalf of the Columbia Disc Golf Club about the desired expansion
of the course at Oakland Park. He said the Club wanted to add 12 more
baskets at the course, and would like the City to fund $6,500 now, and $3,500
later. Mayor Hindman said that would be a budget item. He recommended
that the Club present the request to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Mr.
Janku said there were mixed feelings about the course. He suggested
that a public hearing be held before the Parks and Recreation Commission. Mr.
Beck said typically, groups are advised to write a letter to the Council
as to what is proposed. At that point, the Council could officially
refer the issue to the Commission. He said the request could actually
be referred tonight if that was what the Council wanted to do.
Mr. Janku made the motion
that the request by the Columbia Disc Golf Club be referred to the Commission
for a hearing and staff report. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Crockett
and approved unanimously by voice vote.
Tony Drennan, another Disc
Golf Club member, said the safety of the people that use the walkways at
the park is very important to the Club.
The meeting adjourned at
11:20 p.m.
Respectfully
submitted,
Penny
St. Romaine
City
Clerk
© 2024 City of Columbia