INTRODUCTORY
The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for
a special meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, July 10, 2000, in the Council Chamber
of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results:
Council members CAMPBELL, JOHN, COFFMAN, HINDMAN, JANKU, and CROCKETT were present.
Member CRAYTON was absent. The City Manager, City Counselor, City Clerk, and
various Department Heads were also present.
PUBLIC HEARING
(A) Proposed Metro 2020 Plan.
Item A was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this proposed plan is an update of
the Land Use Plan.
Mr. Bondra reported that in the late 60's the City had a very
general Land Use Plan that had been prepared by consultants and was used for
a guide until about 1980. After that time, the City took a different approach
and produced a very specific plan that was to be used as a guide for future development
of the city. He noted this plan had been updated at five year intervals. Mr.
Bondra described the current zoning map as being very specific with many categories
of land use. He explained that it has not worked very well because it is very
difficult to anticipate what is going to happen on every street and every intersection
in the City.
Mr. Bondra related that in 1998, staff began the process of
updating the detailed Land Use Plan, and the Planning and Zoning Commission came
up with a recommendation to make roughly 20 changes to this plan. When this information
was forwarded to the Council, they decided to try a different approach and directed
the staff to look at other forms of land use planning to come up with something
different and more innovative. At that time, he said staff obtained example plans
from cities throughout the nation and ended up reviewing 12 to 15 of them. It
was found that many of the plans were similar to Columbia's -- they were on the
rigid side. However, staff did find several plans that had taken a more general
approach to land use planning and that is the basis for the Metro 2020 plan.
Mr. Bondra explained the new version of the plan has about
five categories and groups many kinds of land uses together into those categories.
He said it is very general in nature, but does include a document which is the
2020 Community Structure Plan that outlines guidelines for development. Mr. Bondra
pointed out another significant change is that this plan goes outside the City
limits to encompass the metro study area. He noted that the culmination of this
work has been a joint effort between the City and the County. Mr. Bondra indicated
staff obtained quite a bit of input from the County and had incorporated the
County's adopted general plan as the outlying area from the City.
After several Council work sessions regarding the proposed
Metro 2020 plan, Mr. Bondra explained that the Council directed staff to make
several changes to this document. Those changes have been incorporated in the
latest version dated June 6, 2000. One significant change had been the elimination
of Appendix A, which contained a list of potential issues that had caused quite
a bit of consternation and confusion. He explained that staff took parts of Exhibit
A and incorporated them into the plan document. In addition, some other controversial
issues will be sent back to the Planning and Zoning Commission to be considered,
but not in the context of the plan. In addition to the changes directed by the
Council, Mr. Bondra noted that the staff had met with Craig VanMatre, an attorney
representing various entities in the development community. He commented that
the Council had been sent a report detailing these recommendations at their last
meeting. Mr. Bondra summarized the extent of Mr. VanMatre's proposal which made
suggestions to clarify some of the confusion between the 2020 Plan and existing
ordinances relating to density, and a perception as to whether the plan might
supercede existing ordinances and regulations. Mr. Bondra reiterated that the
plan document will be a guide for growth, annexation and zoning decisions. He
said it will not override existing subdivision and zoning regulations, nor will
it change zoning in existing neighborhoods.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, noted in the objective section of
the transportation section that the first item still reads "street system" rather
than "transportation system". He stated the Planning and Zoning Commission had
changed that wording before adopting the plan that was sent to the Council. Mr.
Clark suggested that the proposed Metro 2020 plan be sent back to the Commission
after receiving comments this evening. He asked that they be directed to facilitate
joint meetings of representatives of the core constituencies that have indicated
a big stake in the plan (the environmental community, the neighborhood association
community, the Boone County Commission and people who live in the 200 square
miles that are part of the proposed Plan). Mr. Clark asked that the Commission
also be instructed to review the proposed plan with the objective of implementing
the following: using performance standards and statements of purposes instead
of specific rules; ensure that the implementation of the plan begins with a joint
Columbia/Boone County assessment of the watersheds as a basis for meaningful
planning for storm water control and sanitary sewers; and that the assessment
specifically evaluate the potential impact of any I-70 expansion or bypass around
Columbia. He believed the plan should identify areas that should be "off limits" to
any development, or to minimal development. Mr. Clark asked that a time and date
be set for a meeting when the plan will be thoroughly reviewed. He suggested
that the Commission report back at the second Council meeting in October.
Barbara Hoppe, 607 Bluff Dale, spoke on behalf of the Coalition
to Save the Stephens Lake Area. The group is in support of the designation of
the Stephens Lake area as open space/greenbelt in the proposed plan. She noted
the group is thankful the plan recognizes that as Columbia continues to grow,
preserving park land and open green space is crucial to enhance the quality of
life that has been experienced in this community. Ms. Hoppe asked everyone in
support of the open space designation for the Stephens Lake area to stand. Approximately
seven dozen people stood.
Davika Thomas, 1506 Wilson, spoke on behalf of a newly formed
citizens group concerned about preserving the water quality of Gans Creek and
Clear Creek. The group believed that designating Gans Road as an arterial roadway
would create the same type of problems that are now being experienced on Nifong.
Ms. Thomas said it would increase sprawl at citizens expense, both to their pocketbooks
and to their quality of life. The group is in opposition to the planned commercial
and employment zone shown on the proposed plan at the intersection of Gans Road
and US 63, now part of the Phillips Farm. She explained that plans for the area
include about 200 acres of commercial development surrounded by high density
housing. The zone is located next to Gans Creek and any development would seriously
degrade the water quality in this area.
In addition, Ms. Thomas explained that Gans Creek has been
designated by the State as an outstanding state resource water, and that the
Outstanding State Resource Waters Act gives extra protection to this area. She
commented that the Act states that the water quality of the stream shall not
be degraded any further than at the time the measure passed. Ms. Thomas said
any future development of this area could lead to ground water contamination.
She asked those in support of the group's views to stand. Approximately six dozen
people stood. The group requested that the Phillips Farm be designated as planned
green space, to remove Gans Road as an arterial roadway, and for the map to show
a second tier of greenbelt connecting the State Park, the Phillips Farm, and
area streams.
Michael Goldschmidt, a northern Boone County resident, spoke
on behalf of The Friends of Rockbridge Memorial State Park regarding their concerns
with the Phillips Tract. He said it is still unknown what the affect a commercial
and employment district will have on Rockbridge Memorial State Park. He commented
the group would rather see a philosophy that encourages developers to produce
a really good plan that will ensure a very low environmental impact on the area.
Dan Simon, an attorney with offices at 203 Executive Building,
spoke on behalf of Stephens College, with respect to the Stephens Lake property.
He noted that the proposed Metro 2020 plan calls for open space/greenbelt at
this site, and added that the College strongly objects to that designation. Mr.
Simon reported Stephens has asked that this area be placed in an undesignated
status until such time as discussions with the City and the land use people over
the possible acquisition of the property culminates satisfactorily to everybody.
He noted that the College requested that this property be placed in a commercial
and employment district if it has to be designated at all. Mr. Simon indicated
that it is understood it would place the City in a difficult position to change
the classification at this point in time (to commercial and employment), so the
College is willing to accept a compromise that would place it in an undesignated
status. He said they cannot accept the status of greenbelt and open space because
the property will not be a greenbelt or open space unless the City or another
entity chooses to acquire it for that use.
From the College's point of view, Mr. Simon stated the property's
future as vacant, recreational land are numbered. He related that Stephen's representatives
are now in the process of initiating discussions with the City about the College's
current Master Plan for its campus. He commented the master plan was filed last
Friday, and the Stephens Lake tract was found to be in excess, surplus, and no
longer necessary to the College's academic purpose. However, the recommendation
was that the property be maximized and its use be held for future commercial
development purposes.
Mr. Simon stated the City was given the first opportunity
to discuss the acquisition of the property in good faith, and the College intends
to abide by that agreement. However, in order to act in good faith, they need
reciprocal good faith. One of the conditions set forth was that the property
not be placed in a classification that would be totally contrary to the College's
stated goals for its future use. Mr. Simon indicated the College views the greenbelt/open
space status as being a breach of that condition. He reported that Stephens representatives
cannot negotiate in good faith with people who hold the power to control the
use of their land if they are not going to receive reciprocal good faith treatment.
He asked that everyone keep an open mind and that they be permitted to go forward
with the discussions which they are very hopeful will culminate successfully.
Mr. Simon asked that the Stephens Lake property be placed in an undesignated
status so the discussions can proceed.
Mike Shirk, 3000 Shoreside, spoke on behalf of the Columbia
Chamber of Commerce. He assured the Council that the Chamber's perspective is
and will always remain to encourage the responsible growth of business and business
opportunities in the Columbia area. Mr. Shirk said additional regulations, no
matter how well intended, will always have the affect of reducing competition.
As these issues are listed in the proposed Metro 2020 plan, the Chamber believed
the regulations would cause such an increase in cost that potential new businesses
might conclude that their operations would be better located elsewhere. Mr. Shirk
reported the Chamber also concluded that regulations that are based more on aesthetics
than any other purpose cause a cost increase in doing business without a corresponding
benefit. He requested that the City focus on the purpose of what is to be achieved
with the Metro 2020 plan, and the impact it will have on business outside of
aesthetics.
Mr. Shirk commented the Chamber also thought if the Council
wants to view the plan as primarily a guide or a generalized vision of the future,
that it be marked so on every page -- a statement saying that the document is
meant as a guide and is not meant as regulation or law. He said the consensus
is that the proposed plan comes off as both anti-growth and anti-business. He
reminded the Council that the City cannot function based on tax revenues it derives
from property taxes on residential properties -- business plays a large part
into what goes on in Columbia. Mr. Shirk listed examples of regulations the Chamber
felt to be tedious, which were outlined in the statement he distributed to the
Council. He reported that the Chamber members are asking that the Council not
adopt the plan in its current form, to send it back to allow for more study,
more meetings with individual groups, and more study with the Boone County Commission.
David Robinson, 2009 Elliot, spoke on behalf of the East Walnut
Neighborhood Association. He related that residents are concerned about the impermeable
surfaces on the surrounding parking lots. Mr. Robinson reported this neighborhood
is a balanced one with some high density housing, lots of rental properties,
and homeowners like himself. He stated the neighborhood association is opposed
to changing the designation of the Stephens Lake area as suggested by Mr. Simon.
He said they are prepared to work with the City staff, Stephens College representatives,
and other coalitions to keep Columbia the great place it is.
Thomas Moran, 413 W. Walnut, voiced his concern about Stephens
College and the Lake area. He spoke in favor of condemning the property and taking
it for parkland. On behalf of the Osage Group of the Sierra Club, he commented
that members are also concerned about the Stephens Lake Area because it is a
prime spot for a greenbelt. In addition, the Osage group is concerned about the
potential for sprawl as well. Mr. Moran also spoke about the group's concern
regarding the Phillips tract.
Steve Willey, a realtor with offices at 312 Guitar Building,
asked that the City proceed very cautiously with the plan if it is perceived
to be really needed. He noted the City has regular zoning and subdivision regulations,
in addition to the Transportation, Housing, Parks and Utility Plans. Mr. Willey
pointed out that the current Land Use Plan was established years ago. He reported
these plans have served Columbia fairly well. Mr. Willey acknowledged the building
and housing codes have also served the City adequately. He believed the enforcement
of this "guide" would be something very nebulous. Mr. Willey asked if the city
really needed additional plans in order to ensure the growth of Columbia. He
presumed the proposed Metro 2020 plan would add greatly to the workload of the
City staff and would create an onerous situation for the administrators of it.
He theorized that a citizen who is trying to make an application is going to
get snagged along the way because of all of the paperwork required as well as
all of the rules and regulations that they must meet. Mr. Willey stated the application
time would be extended, which would raise costs for both the City and the applicant.
Ken Midkiff, 1005 Belleview Court, spoke as a citizen and
as the Missouri Director of the Sierra Club. He said the Club has worked very
hard to get Gans Creek placed on the Outstanding State Resources Waters list,
as well as assisting in the passage of the State parks and soils tax that supports
the maintenance of Rockbridge State Park. Mr. Midkiff reported the group deems
the arterial street and commercial and residential designation for this area
completely and totally unacceptable. He asserted the Sierra Club will adamantly
oppose through every legal means possible any attempt to carry out that portion
of the plan.
Mr. Midkiff believed the proposed Metro 2020 plan begins with
a flawed premise -- that Columbia needs to continue to grow. He stated the Sierra
Club thinks that infinite growth in a finite space limits and impedes progress,
and will ultimately harm the economic, aesthetic, environmental and other quality
of life principles in this community. Mr. Midkiff commented if the plan is to
represent a true community view, it should ascertain how to limit population
growth, while simultaneously protecting the viability, vitality and dynamism
in this community. Mr. Midkiff speculated that the citizens of this County do
not want economic growth, and said there is no reason the City should be trying
to protect the business interests of people who do not live here. He believed
a plan should be developed that recognizes Columbia's interests. Mr. Midkiff
asked how this document would prevent the sprawling developments that are intruding
into the county, how it will protect local businesses from competing with outside
interests who operate on a large scale, how it could have prevented the commercial
mess around the Highway 63/I-70 junction, how it will encourage a viable, livable,
bikable, hikable community if commercial developments are to be allowed over
four miles from the City's center. Mr. Midkiff urged the planners to look at
a secondary premise -- how big should Columbia be and at what point will it cease
to be non-viable, non-dynamic and non-vital.
Sharon Lynch, 2708 Lacewood Drive, spoke on behalf of The
Boone County Citizens for Good Government. She acknowledged it is true that there
are some big corporate companies in Columbia, but we also have small, local businesses
that are possible because of the vital, economically feasible community in which
we live. She observed this community's only shortfall is the low one percent
employment rate in Columbia. Ms. Lynch postulated the Metro 2020 Plan will have
the most impact in affordable housing. Not only will engineering and legal fees
be excessive when trying to determine exactly what this 84-page document says
and how it specifically addresses development, she said it will affect housing
values as well. Ms. Lynch reported there is currently a shortage of affordable
housing in Columbia. She maintained the proposed Metro 2020 plan will only add
to the cost of development and housing.
Ms. Lynch explained the group is also concerned about the
shortage of City employees who are willing and able to address the specific issues
shown in the proposed document. She reported the Boone County Citizens for Good
Government group requested that the plan be sent back to the Planning and Zoning
Commission for public hearings to include all of the interest groups. She stated
there are too many private conversations going on that the public is not aware
of, and the group believes that good government is open government.
Vernon Forbes, 1007 Grand, spoke on behalf of the Bicycle/Pedestrian
Commission. According to The Oil and Gas Journal, he said that by the
year 2020 60% of the oil reserves on the planet will be gone, and by 2090 all
of it will be gone. Mr. Forbes indicated that he has reviewed the Bicycle Master
Plan, and he commented that the current conditions of the bike routes are so
deplorable and dangerous that officers in the Columbia Bicycle Club will not
ride it. He said the City is not prepared for the future that is coming without
oil. Mr. Forbes read the proposed changes the Commission would like to see made
to the transportation goals (information was distributed to the Council).
Annie Pope, who spoke on behalf of the Home Builders Association,
pointed out that the Land Use Goals of the Metro 2020 plan are to contain urban
development within an area that can be economically and efficiently serviced
by the City of Columbia, to guide and encourage high quality commercial and industrial
development, and to promote high standards of environmental quality as it relates
to water, air, and green space. Ms. Pope asked why it was not one of the goals
of the plan to provide for the housing needs of the citizens of the City of Columbia.
She noted that housing issues appear in only one objective under land use. The
fact that providing for the housing needs of the citizens of Columbia is not
one of the goals of this document is such a profound oversight that it is quite
shocking and it is reflected in the entire plan. Ms. Pope believed the impact
of the plan on housing in the City of Columbia is basically going to be twofold;
it will substantially increase the cost of housing, and it will reduce home buyer
choice in housing features. She asked that the plan be revised to reflect the
importance of housing in the lives of every citizen living in this community.
Paul Land, a commercial real estate broker, pointed out inconsistencies
on the Metro 2020 map. One involved the Woodrail Centre, located at the southwest
corner of Nifong and Forum and containing 18 acres, was shown on the map as a
neighborhood district. The other was Boone Industrial Park, located one-half
mile outside the City limits on 763 North and currently containing over 300,000
square feet of industrial users on 30 acres of industrial zoned land, was also
shown as a neighborhood district. Mr. Land asked how those uses could be shown
in neighborhood districts when they are already in place as employment districts.
In addition, he was concerned that the plan contains too many specifics, and
words like "encourage", "should", "ideally", and "desirable" translate into must
and expectations. Mr. Land maintained the document could be used to extract things
not contemplated by current zoning ordinances. He enumerated items which were
included in his letter sent to the Council. Mr. Land also passed out additional
comments on behalf of the Columbia Board of Realtors.
Leslie Altemeyer, 2245 Bluff Boulevard, spoke on behalf of
the Shepard Boulevard Neighborhood Association. She was happy to see the Stephens
Lake property designated as green space on the Plan and asked that it remain
that way.
Fred Springsteel, 311 Longfellow, spoke as a private citizen
and as a member of the Energy and Environment Commission. He wondered what happened
to Appendix A and indicated the E&E Commission had asked for a separate hearing
on this section in regards to the environmental issues. Mr. Springsteel stated
the Commission recognizes the value of the Metro 2020 Plan. In addition, he believed
the mixed use idea of planning in communities and providing neighborhoods access
to commercial uses was a great leap forward for Columbia. Mr. Springsteel went
on to say that in Appendix A there had been 21 small sections about environmental
issues, some of which are addressed already in chapters one through ten. Regarding
street trees, landscaping, and tree preservation, he suggested that staff obtain
input from Ken Midkiff. In addition, Mr. Springsteel suggested that PedNet representatives
could furnish information relating to greenbelt and trail issues, and Cliff Balmer,
of the USDA, could speak to storm water management, creeks and open space issues.
In regards to Stephens Lake, Mr. Springsteel felt the Council has overriding
concerns to protect the environment. He maintained that not developing the lake
area would be the highest and best use of the 111 acres. He suggested that the
City buy this tract from the College.
Kitty Rogers, 504 N. William, spoke as President of the Benton-Stephens
Neighborhood Association, asked that the City continue efforts to save Stephens
Lake.
Clyde Wilson, 1719 University, spoke in support of preserving
the green space shown on the proposed Metro 2020 Plan. In particular, he is interested
in Stephens Lake not being developed. Regarding growth, Mr. Wilson noted it is
unavoidable and desirable because that is the way people get employed. When growth
stops, he explained that the first people not employed are those at the bottom
of the economic ladder. He spoke about the number of parks and open spaces that
have built up over the last 30 years, and said people are attracted to Columbia
because we have developed certain conditions people look for. Mr. Wilson said
while development and business is important, they are not the only issues that
are important. He urged keeping the green spaces as designated on the Metro 2020
plan, and specifically the Stephens Lake area.
Matt Harline, 301 McNab, did not think there should be an
undesignated area on the proposed Metro 2020 plan. He thought that would be too
obvious of a special favor to a particular special interest. Mr. Harline did
not think that would be appropriate in a comprehensive planning document. He
believed the designation that is placed on the Stephens Lake area is very important,
and he personally thought the most obvious one would be a neighborhood district.
Mr. Harline acknowledged that does not preclude the purchase of the property,
and it is also not an indication that the City will pay any price for the acquisition
of such. He observed this area is clearly not the City's center, nor will it
be the future site for an institution of higher learning. Mr. Harline remarked
that the tract should obviously not have a commercial or industrial designation.
Rhonda Carlson, 1110 Willowcreek, said she had visited with
Jeff Barrow and John Clark because the North Central Neighborhood Association
had written a very interesting editorial. After reading the article, she realized
the two groups were not that far apart. Ms. Carlson agreed with much of what
Mr. Clark had said earlier, and agreed that the issue set forth in the proposed
Metro 2020 plan needs to be revisited. If there are specific ordinance changes
needed, these should be referred directly to the Planning and Zoning Commission
and dealt with one at a time.
Ms. Carlson reported that she had appeared before the Council's
last special meeting in February pertaining to the proposed Metro 2020 document
and spoke to the issues addressed on Page 30 relating to uses and densities.
She followed up with a letter sent in mid-March to the Council which specifically
addressed single family and single family attached housing. Ms. Carlson noted
that a density of 12 is being shown on Page 30 of the document. She asked if
that is what will now be identified as condo's. She pointed out they have disappeared
completely out of the plan. Ms. Carlson also wondered about the meaning of garden
apartments. She requested that the Council review her letter of March 15 as her
comments have not changed. She said if this is to be an advisory document, it
should follow the current zoning ordinances or those ordinances need to be amended.
Ms. Carlson spoke about affordability issues. She commented that she is not a
builder of big, expensive homes in Columbia, and something she has struggled
with is the cost of affordable housing. She said this document is full of items
that will add to the affordability of homes in Columbia.
Becky Sterling, 4605 Apple Tree Lane, a realtor, noted that
Columbia has become a hub for retirees and affordability is a key issue. When
costs increase to small businesses, those costs are then passed along to the
consumer -- the same as occurs in the housing industry. She asked if there would
be a fiscal impact statement to go along with the implementation of the plan.
If there is not, Ms. Sterling strongly urged, along with revisiting the plan,
that some sort of fiscal impact study be done as well.
Larry Grossman, 3205 Westcreek Circle, was afraid that someone
may have left the impression that area businesses support unrestricted growth.
He explained the opposite is true -- the business community would definitely
like to see a plan implemented. Mr. Grossman reported that business owners want
fair and reasonable rules to govern the way they conduct their business. He asked
if it is reasonable to dictate the number of feet of landscaping that should
surround a building. He thought that could be addressed in a landscaping plan,
and assumed it was. Mr. Grossman spoke about his preference for cul-de-sacs.
He wondered why the number of cul-de-sacs in the community needs to be decreased.
Becky Wagner, 3210 Gazelle, explained that she has been a
realtor in Columbia for 23 years and is also concerned about affordable housing.
Since 1990, she noted that the average sale price of a home has gone up 49%,
while incomes have not increased by that much. It has been estimated that Columbia's
population in 2020 will increase by 28,920 people. If the average sale price
of a home is presently $132,600 and increases 49% every decades, she estimated
the average sale price in 2020 will be approximately $295,000. As Ms. Wagner
interprets the plan, she said growth is so restricted that many landowners and
rural subdivisions that might elect to be incorporated into the City of Columbia
will no longer want to do so. She stated that additional tax revenues which the
City hopes to generate will not be forthcoming, and the bedroom communities that
the Metro 2020 plan seeks to evade will become a reality because these districts
will offer affordable housing plus the trees, the green space, city services,
good schools, and less taxes. Ms. Wagner related that bedroom communities will
have the local grocery, dry cleaner, café, bank, etc., and for larger
items people will continue to travel to St. Louis, Kansas City or Columbia as
they do now.
Ms. Wagner reported that various groups have tried to provide
verbal input to the staff in regards to the proposed document, but they have
been met with limited success. In order to meet the need for projected housing
and jobs in the year 2020, Ms. Wagner asked that the plan be sent back to the
drawing board for more revamping.
Beth Hartley, 1620 Bold Ruler Ct., CEO of the Columbia Board
of Realtors, encouraged those who draft documents and legislation such as this
to use the members of this group as a resource. She reported that had not occurred
with the drafting of the proposed Metro 2020 plan, and she believed for 18 months
the communication has been pretty much one-way.
John Pascucci, 3104 Timberhill Trail, suggested that input
be solicited from the school district as the proposed Metro 2020 plan should
be coordinated with them.
Linda Rootes, 807 N. Eighth, spoke as President of the North
Central Columbia Neighborhood Association. She said the recent course of development
in Columbia in the last few years has been to drain resources and vitality from
the central city out to the suburbs. Ms. Rootes indicated her neighborhood is
interested in any kind of plan that would reverse that trend and would keep the
central city vital as one of the plan's goals. She noted that residents are also
concerned that people in the community are not interested in buying homes in
the central city because there is the perception that it is too big of a risk
to purchase a home in an area where the future is not very certain. Ms. Rootes
remarked that the NCCNA had a few concerns about the plan map as well.
Dennis Knudson, 2100 Southwood, spoke on behalf of the Hinkson
Creek Valley Association. He suggested leaving the Stephens Lake property as
an open space and greenbelt area until the purchase of such is decided. He believed
changing it to an undesignated area would throw a whole different light on the
situation.
Alyce Turner, 2194 E. Bearfield, spoke as a resident and as
a County representative of the Energy and Environment Commission. She applauded
the City and the Planning Department for attempting to create a planning document
for growth that promotes the environmental quality in the City of Columbia. She
said the Commission had been aware that Appendix A was a concern among many people
in the environmental community, but it has since been noted that a number of
the issues (i.e., tree ordinance and lighting aspect) outlined in that section
have been referred to the Planning Department. Ms. Turner acknowledged these
points have not been dropped from the document.
David Davis, a realtor for 18 years in Columbia, said the
Council is at the threshold of a great opportunity of coming together with all
of the groups represented this evening as a citizen's advisory group or task
force to work with the Council to develop a document for the future. He did not
think anyone was opposed to having a plan, and asked the Council to take that
as a consideration of appointing some kind of panel to work on the issue.
Bob Walters, 2704 Vail, spoke as a realtor developing residential
property in town. He asked that the compatibility guidelines outlined on Page
20, in Section 3.3 of the plan document be stated more clearly. Mr. Fleck explained
these guidelines would not apply if a subdivision plat has been submitted. In
addition, he noted the language was modified and that the preliminary plat reference
had been eliminated. Mr. Walters pointed out the change had been omitted in the
draft copy.
Jeff Barrow, on behalf of the Greenbelt Coalition of Mid-Missouri,
thanked the staff and Council for incorporating some of their suggestions into
the document. He emphasized that greenbelts and creek corridors should be perceived
as more than just a place to build trails; although where trails are appropriate,
the Coalition supports and commends the City for seeking funds and outside sources
to pay for such. He stressed the value these areas have to provide storm water
control and quality, in addition to providing a habitat for plant and wildlife.
Mr. Barrow reported the Coalition believed the plan can be an important document
for clarifying the importance of these greenbelts for the City. He remarked that
this group would like to see all of the streams in the City designated as greenbelts
and open space. The Greenbelt Coalition also thought that the Metro 2020 plan
should set guidelines for riparian vegetation and Mr. Barrow recommended that
staff contact the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the U.S. Department
of Agriculture Forestry Service for their guidelines. He noted that the Coalition
is also in support of seeing the Stephens Lake area protected as green space.
He said that Hinkson Creek is already an impaired waterway deserving of special
attention. Mr. Barrow also spoke about the concern relating to the proposed LeMone
Boulevard extension over Grindstone Creek, as well as the Stadium Boulevard extension,
and the possible affects these projects will have on the Creek.
Janet Hammen, 1416 Wilson, spoke as the Chair of the East
Campus Neighborhood Association. She explained that the Association voted months
ago to encourage the open space/greenbelt designation for the Stephens Lake property.
Ms. Hammen encouraged the Council to do whatever is necessary to purchase this
tract for the greater good of the community.
Cindy Sheltmire, 1908 Tremont, explained that she has been
a realtor in Columbia for 16 years. She perceived the thrust of the Metro 2020
plan to be geared toward a smaller, more condensed and compact pedestrian community.
In her 16 years selling real estate, Ms. Sheltmire reported that she had very
seldom received a customer complaint about home lots being too big. She stated
people want more space, more privacy, more room, a bigger yard -- they do not
want smaller lots. While the idea of a pedestrian community sounds very nice,
Ms. Sheltmire said she was not sure that was what the consumer wants, nor was
she sure that it will enhance the property values. Regarding cul-de-sac lots,
she commented these tracts are more marketable and usually have a little higher
value. She believed this document discourages cul-de-sac lots, or in the alternative,
the establishment of pedestrian walkway easements through these lots. Ms. Sheltmire
remarked that individuals who purchase homes on cul-de-sacs want privacy, they
do not want people traipsing through their lots. She asked that the cul-de-sac
situation be readdressed before adoption of the plan.
Tom Lotta, 2194 E. Bearfield, noted that Gans Creek is one
of few creeks that does not have a greenbelt. He also spoke about affordable
housing and noted with a one percent employment rate, the City probably needs
more affordable housing and less commercial development. Mr. Lotta believed the
proposed plan has an excellent neighborhood concept that would provide small
commercial establishments in residential areas. His final suggestion was closing
Rock Quarry Road through Rockbridge State Park, particularly if Gans Road is
going to be made into an arterial street. Mr. Lotta indicated if this road is
closed, he would like to see it be converted to a bike trail.
Chip Cooper, 500 Longfellow, spoke on behalf of the PedNet
Coalition. He stated this group's common interest is to make Columbia one of,
if not the most, bicycle/pedestrian/wheelchair friendly community in America
in the next 20 years. Mr. Cooper remarked the plan is in great part an attempt
to visualize the kind of community PedNet wishes to create over the next 20 years.
He reported that the Steering Committee requested that the Council incorporate
the recommendations made by the Bicycle/Pedestrian Commission which included
an additional transportation goal in Section 2.1 to direct the City "to encourage
biking, walking, skating, and wheeling in order to accommodate increasing population
density to reduce urban sprawl, to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, and to
enhance public health, fitness, and well-being."
John Pekkala, 4350 N. Route E, a realtor, suggested getting
rid of the plan altogether and then slowly dismantling the hoops that one must
jump through. He believed that planning is good for roads, but he did not see
any point to the proposed Metro 2020 document except for the purpose of land
grabbing.
Elaine Kaputacrouch, 109 Westwood, said a way must be found
to save the downtown district. She believed one way to save this area is by creating
greenbelts. Ms. Kaputacrouch asked that the Council pursue the purchase of Stephens
Lake and that it be made into an affordable recreational area for the entire
city. She also noted that if the City is going to be made more livable, it needs
a more usable public transportation system.
Tony Davis, 4655 Rock Quarry Road, vice-president of the Clear
Creek Neighborhood Association, stated for the last seven or eight years this
group has been involved in developments that are occurring in the upper Little
Bonne Femme Creek Watershed. He reported the Association would like to see the
Council continue to focus on the upper Little Bonne Femme Creek Watershed as
it relates to development, while also carefully considering density and the importance
of this geographical area. Mr. Davis remarked that the group suggests that the
document should encourage developers to work with area residents prior to plans
coming before the City for approval.
Joe Bindbeutel, 1701 E. Gans Road, described himself as a
veteran of a few modest land use wars in the southern part of the City. He suggested
that the areas on the proposed map designated as neighborhood districts will
not, in fact, be all residential developments. Mr. Bindbeutel stated there will
be considerably more green space when the area is all filled in. He believed
the map is terribly biased toward development pressure. He observed the designation
of commercial districts are mainly along high traffic corridors where infrastructure
is in place; however, the property known as the Phillips tract in the southeast
area of Columbia has also received such a designation. Mr. Bindbeutel noted there
is no transportation or sewer infrastructure in place at this location, but for
some reason the process in making land use decisions over the last decade to
ensure that commercial areas are viable and workable has been bypassed in this
case. In addition, he pointed out that there is more budding commercial development
along south Highway 63. Mr. Bindbeutel commented this is a problem along the
entire corridor to Ashland. He suggested a process where builders must meet with
developers and local citizens to preview these matters before proposals can be
presented to the City for approval.
Hindman closed the public hearing.
Mayor Hindman thanked everyone for their input and explained
that further work sessions would be held on the issue. Whatever direction the
Council may decide to take, Mayor Hindman noted that another hearing will be
held at which time further public comment will be encouraged.
The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Penny
St. Romaine
City
Clerk
© 2024 City of Columbia