BOONE COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION

BOONE COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER

801 E. WALNUT ST., COLUMBIA, MO.

Thursday, November 15, 2001

Chairperson Smith called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., with a quorum present. Roll Call was taken by Commissioner Caruthers.

Present: Pat Smith, Chairperson Perche Township

Michael Caruthers, Vice-Chairman Centralia Township

Mary Sloan, Secretary Rocky Fork Township

Mike Morgan Bourbon Township

Keith Neese Columbia Township

Carl Freiling Cedar Township

Kristen Heitkamp Missouri Township

David Mink, Director Public Works

Also present: Stan Shawver, Director Bill Florea, Staff

Thad Yonke, Staff Paula Evans, Staff

Chairperson Smith read the procedural statement and stated all applicable items will go before the County Commission on November 27, 2001

Commissioner Caruthers made and Commissioner Smith seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the October 18, 2001 meeting with no corrections.

Motion passed by acclimation.

 

CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS

 

  1. Request by Rollie and Patsie Pierceall on behalf of Louie and Judy Yow for a permit for a 2-lot mobile home park on 7.35 acres located at Wagon Trail Rd., Columbia.

Planner, Bill Florea gave staff report stating that this property is located north of Columbia. The 7.35 acres involved in this request are situated at the southwest corner of Wagon Trail Road and Highway 63. The property does not have access to Highway 63. The zoning for this tract and the surrounding area is R-M (Moderate Density Residential). The property is currently vacant, except for a large pond and two boat sheds. This request is for a conditional use permit for a two-lot mobile home park. In addition, the applicants may locate their own home to the property at a future date. County zoning regulations define a mobile home park as a parcel of land, which is developed for the placement of two or more mobile homes. Each mobile home will have an individual lagoon to serve it. This site is located within the area previously receiving water service from Public Water District No. 1, which has now merged with the City of Columbia. Electric service is provided by Boone Electric Cooperative. It is also located within the Columbia Public School District. The master plan designates this area as being suitable for residential land uses. Staff notified 41 property owners about this request. The proposed use is consistent with the master plan. Staff notes that the applicant has proposed to place 3 dwellings on this tract, which is substantially below the density available under R-M zoning. Staff recommends approval of this request, with the following condition:

 

Present: Louie & Judy Yow, 1775 E. Prathersville Road, Columbia.

Mr. Yow stated that they currently live about 1-Ĺ miles from the property in question. As staff indicated, on the southern part of the land they would like to put two trailers. It is the only accessible place, without doing a lot of dirt work, and would be on the ground that is level to Wagon Trail Road. Applicants would like to put the two mobile homes at that site and find out where the sewer lines are going to come through at some time so the lagoons can be placed. As soon as sewer comes in it would be advantageous to go ahead and turn the lagoons down and hook in to the sewer lines. That will really determine where the trailers would be placed. The applicantís own home is currently on Prathersville Road. They also would like to have it moved on to a walkout basement as soon as the sewer comes in.

Chairperson Smith asked applicant when the sewer would be coming in.

Mr. Yow stated he didnít know and would like to have an answer to that himself. Unless they can get an answer, applicant stated he really didnít want to put another lagoon in but would rather have the sewer lines in and bring their own home over there then.

Mr. Yow stated he and his wife have a business on Prathersville Road and live directly behind it. Eventually, if it is five years, applicants would like to move over there and live on the property.

Commissioner Caruthers asked if the other two trailers would be occupied.

Mr. Yow stated there are no trailers there at the present time. Applicants thought there would be two employees that were going to move there with their trailers and photographs have been submitted. Mrs. Yowís mother may be moving in to one of the trailers. So it may be Mrs. Yowís mother and one employee.

Commissioner Morgan asked what sewer lines the applicant was referring to, the City or County.

Mr. Yow stated the County sewer line. Mr. Yow stated they connected to it before when the sewer line was brought in for Tower Industrial Park. The store and the house were connected to that. Right now there are forty-one homes within the 1000 feet of the proposed site, these people are all on lagoons and septic tanks. Applicant would like to hook up to the sewer as soon as it comes through. If not there will be lagoons there.

Open to public hearing.

In favor of the request:

Jennifer Arnold, 6448 N. Wagon Trail Road, Columbia. Ms. Arnold stated she lived just north of the proposed area. Ms. Arnold stated she had no objections to the Yowís putting a home there and an additional two mobile homes especially since they now live near and will be able to keep an eye on things. It seems perfectly logical that they have bought the place and want the home situated there. Ms. Arnold stated she is happy to have local people who own and live on the land. As opposed to people who own land and live far away.

No one spoke in opposition to the request.

Closed to public hearing.

Commissioner Caruthers asked the applicants if they understood the staff condition that there be no more than three dwellings, one which is the owners home, that will be placed on this Conditional Use Permit.

Mr. Yow stated yes they are agreeable to that condition. Applicants are not looking for a mobile home park, only for the additional two trailers.

Commissioner Heitkamp made and Commissioner Morgan seconded a motion to approve the request by Rollie and Patsie Pierceall on behalf of Louie and Judy Yow for a permit for a 2-lot mobile home park on 7.35 acres located at Wagon Trail Rd., Columbia, subject to the following condition:

Pat Smith Y Mike Morgan Y

Mike Caruthers Y Keith Neese Y Mary Sloan Y Carl Freiling Y

David Mink Y Kristen Heitkamp Y

Motion to approve request carried unanimously.

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

  1. Request by Loren Gene Nichols on behalf of Hinton Sewer Co. for a permit for a mechanical wastewater treatment plant located at 331 E Hinton Rd., Columbia.

Planner, Thad Yonke gave staff report stating that this property is located 5 miles north of Columbia at the intersection of Hinton Road and Highway 63. The tract is part of a 38-acre parent parcel. The south 270 feet of the parcel indicated on the plot map submitted with the application is zoned C-G. The north 130 feet is zoned A-R. Property to the north and west is A-R. Land to the south is zoned C-G, as is land located on the east side of Highway 63. This request is to install and operate a mechanical wastewater treatment plant that will serve the apartments and the convenience store in the area. A wastewater lagoon currently provides wastewater treatment for these units. The Missouri office of the Attorney General has signed a settlement agreement with the applicant and others requiring that the existing lagoon be retired from service due to repeated violations of the Missouri Clean Water Law. That agreement required that the existing facility be brought into compliance with Missouri law. The proposed treatment plant will do so.

The original zoning for the south part of this property is C-G. The original zoning for the north 130 feet was REC (Recreation). That zoning was changed at the ownerís request in 1978. Staff generally supports the installation of wastewater systems that are designed to reduce or eliminate substandard wastewater discharge points, however, staff has concerns with this proposal. The application appears to indicate intent to privately maintain and operate this facility. Staff has concerns in this regard, as the applicant has not demonstrated the ability to properly maintain wastewater facilities, as evidenced by the settlement agreement issued by the Attorney Generalís office. Further, the subdivision regulations require that wastewater facilities be operated by a governmental entity authorized to maintain such facilities. The Boone County Regional Sewer District has the ability to operate the proposed facility and insure that it complies with all facets of the Clean Water Law. The Board of Trustees of the Boone County Regional Sewer District has passed a resolution opposing this request, unless the permit can be issued with very strict controls. As a CUP the proposal must meet the following criteria from the zoning ordinance to be eligible for approval.

1. The establishment, maintenance or operation of a conditional use permit will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare.

2. The conditional use permit will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted by these regulations.

3. The conditional use permit will not substantially diminish or impair property values of existing properties in the neighborhood.

4. All necessary facilities will be available, including, but not limited to, utilities, roads, road access and drainage.

5. The establishment of a conditional use permit will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the zoning district.

6. The establishment of a conditional use permit will not hinder the flow of traffic or result in traffic congestion on the public streets. This will include the provision of points of access to the subject property.

7. The conditional use permit shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the zoning district in which it is located. The County Commission shall find that there is a public necessity for the conditional use permit.

The staff concerns are related to criteria 1,2 and 5. If the proposed system is not properly constructed, maintained, and operated, the facility would be a detriment to the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, which is criteria number 1. Without proper operation the facility proposed will likely be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and can be expected to impede the normal and orderly development of the area, which are criteria 2 & 5. It is incumbent upon the applicant to show to the satisfaction of the Commission that the proposed Conditional Use Permit will meet all 7 criteria. As indicated above the applicant has not demonstrated the ability to properly maintain wastewater facilities, as evidenced by the settlement agreement issued by the Attorney Generalís office in 1998. Furthermore, it is our understanding that provisions of the settlement agreement have not been honored by the applicant. There needs to be a solution to the sewage problems of the area. However, if the proposed Conditional Use Permit is to be that solution, the CUP must have the conditions of the staff recommendations to give assurance that the issuance of the CUP will meet the CUP criteria. Obviously, the sewage problem existed prior to the settlement agreement in 1998, it is now 2001 and the problems have not been remedied so a timely solution of assured quality is needed. The addition of Hinton Sewer Company to the application does not in and of itself give any assurance that the public health safety and welfare will be maintained. Some of the principals in the Hinton Sewer Company are the same individuals who are responsible for the failing system that endangers the public heath safety and welfare currently. The accountability of a private sewer company is no more reliable than the accountability of the individuals operating a private system that is not functioning properly. The enforcement action against a private sewer company with a failing or deficient system would effectively be similar to the exact situation and time frame that has led to a failing system not being brought into compliance for at least 4 years. It would appear that the inclusion of the Hinton Sewer Company is more an effort to limit liability for the operation of the system than it is to assure greater accountability and proper operation of the facility. The State provisions for private sewer companies function adequately in areas that have no recognized local public authority to operate and maintain collector sewage systems, this is not the case here. Additionally, a CUP in general and without specific conditions otherwise, is not specific to the applicant but rather runs with the land or can be transferred to other parties once issued. So in order to assure the highest possible level of protection of the public health safety and welfare and to minimize adverse potential impact to the area and its continued development the proposed system needs to be constructed to the specifications of, and operated and maintained by the Boone County Regional Sewer District. Staff notified 38 property owners about this request.

Staff recommends that the permit be issued, with the following 3 conditions as suggested by the Regional Sewer District resolution:

 

Present: Loren Gene Nichols, 311 Hinton Rd., Columbia

Diana Farr, legal council for Hinton Sewer Company, 2009 Winchester Drive, Columbia

Ms. Farr stated that she believed all the necessary information for the Commission to approve this request is contained within the application. However, Ms. Farr stated she would like to address the staff report.

Ms. Farr stated there seems to be no reasonable basis for the concerns expressed by the staff. The Boone County Regional Sewer District, for some reason unknown to Ms. Farr, seems to want to be involved in this matter. The best Ms. Farr can tell it is only for monetary concerns as opposed to health and safety concerns. One of the statements by the staff is that the accountability of a private sewer company is no more reliable than the accountability of any particular individual operating a private sewer system. It is also the same for the Boone County Regional Sewer District. Every entity that operates a sewage treatment facility is subject to the same rules, regulations, and guidelines, whether it be the Boone County Regional Sewer District or the Hinton Sewer Company. This is a completely different application than the one previously filed. The Hinton Sewer Company is a non profit sewer company formed pursuant to specific statutes of the State of Missouri. Former Senator Joe Maxwell authored the bill and the entire section that is now our law, chapter 393. One of the particular statutes, 393 829, states that a non-profit sewer company shall have the power to provide wastewater disposal and wastewater treatment services to its members. Once you are formed pursuant to this chapter and you comply with the rules of that chapter as a non profit sewer company, you do not need a continuing authority such as the Boone County Regional Sewer District. There is nothing in any law, there is nothing in the Countyís own zoning regulations or ordinances that gives any credence to the fact that the Boone County Regional Sewer District needs to be involved. Staff points to subdivision regulations, which obviously have nothing to do with this as well, Ms. Farr stated that she guessed this was the closet thing staff could find to show that there should be some governmental or quasi-governmental entity involved. There is no reasonable basis for the Boone County Regional Sewer District to be involved.

Ms. Farr stated as far as health and safety concerns are related, of course that is something applicants need to address. If there were any reason to believe that the Hinton Sewer Company would not be able to operate this sewer treatment plant as requested, then the Commission would need to be concerned. However, as the application states, it is not like the members of the sewer company, without any training, are going to go and put a plant in. It specifically states in the application that a professional, trained in this area, will be the one relocating the plant, installing it and bringing it up to operation. And a professional trained in the area will be actually operating the treatment plant. The members, who must by law, form this sort of non-profit sewer company are just that, they are members, they are the ones who will be receiving the services they will not be providing the services. A professional who runs the treatment plant will be providing the services. The treatment plant will be owned by a non profit sewer company. The Hinton Sewer Company will be subject to the exact same rules as the Boone County Regional Sewer District, DNR, and the rest of the agencies in the State of Missouri, will be there all the time. There will be no permit issued if the plant isnít safe. That permit, if it is issued, will be immediately pulled as soon as the plant is out of operation, as soon as there are any health or safety concern. Just the same as if the Boone County Regional Sewer District were operating that plant, there will be no difference.

Ms. Farr stated staff pointed to the settlement agreement, which has nothing to do with the Hinton Sewer Company, although it does have to deal with some of the members who will be served by the Hinton Sewer Company. If you speak with the Attorney Generalís office, they will indicate that those people who entered in to the settlement agreement are in compliance. Although things took too long, there seems to be fault on both the Attorney Generalís side and applicantís side. No one is in breach of the agreement. The Attorney Generalís office doesnít consider there to be a breach. Everyone is in compliance and the Attorney Generalís office, although hesitant to do so originally, sees no reason why the Hinton Sewer Company can not operate this treatment plant. If the Boone County Regional Sewer District wanted to serve this area and serve these people, they could. They donít want to. They donít want to come in and spend their own money to put a plant in. They donít want to extend the lines. If they did, the Hinton Sewer Company would not be granted a permit from the State of Missouri. However, the Boone County Regional Sewer District wants the Hinton Sewer Company to pay for everything. Many thousands of dollars to put the plant in, get it up and running and then give it, there is a gift, Boone County Regional Sewer District an entire treatment plant and Hinton Sewer Company will not get to make the money off of the plant. The Hinton Sewer Company will put the plant in and Hinton Sewer Company would get the revenues. That is all they are asking for. The Boone County Regional Sewer District wants the Hinton Sewer Company to put the plant in and Boone County Regional Sewer District gets all the revenues, the sewer district wants the money from the operation of the plant, but they donít want to pay to put the plant in.

Ms. Farr stated that if the Boone County Regional Sewer District wanted to serve these people, then they would be serving these people. They donít want to. They want to wait for someone else to put the plant in and then have it turned over to them free of charge to collect the revenue. Any sort of safety concerns certainly could be addressed by the condition on the permit. The Conditional Use Permit is yanked or not granted unless, and until DNR and other State agencies review the plans. Until the Hinton Sewer Company is granted a permit for operation, which will be based on every single State safety concern being met. Any legitimate concern of the staff can be addressed without involvement from the Boone County Regional Sewer District.

Ms. Farr stated she could not find any legitimate reason why Boone County Regional Sewer District should have any involvement in this matter. Any sort of safety concerns will be addressed by the State, the Clean Water Commission, the Attorney Generalís office who is involved with this; everything will be taken care of. Any health, safety, or welfare concern will be taken care of through the State. Ms. Farr stated she could not understand why the staff of the Commission even brings up the Boone County Regional Sewer District. There is no basis and law for continuing authority in this case. There is nothing that anyone can point to why continuing authority would be required in this case A non profit sewer company is entitled, privately, to operate this sewer system.

Open to public hearing.

No one spoke in favor of the request.

In opposition to the request:

Tom Ratermann, General Manager, Boone County Regional Sewer District, 1314 N. 7th Street, Columbia

Mr. Ratermann stated that the Board of Trustees of the Boone County Regional Sewer District opposes the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit to Loren Gene Nichols and Hinton Sewer Company for the construction and operation of a mechanical wastewater treatment plant and has adopted a position statement and resolution to that effect. A position statement was sent to the Commission at the last Planning and Zoning Commission work session. This position statement and resolution are based upon a history of the Hinton area dated October 17, 2001, which was also sent to the Commission. The Sewer District recommends denial of this Conditional Use Permit because the applicants are not qualified to construct and operate a wastewater treatment plant. The applicants do not have the staff and equipment to operate and maintain a wastewater treatment and collection system. In fact, in their application, Nichols and the Hinton Sewer Company acknowledge that they will have to hire a trained professional to assist with the operation and maintenance of the plat. Furthermore, the applicants have a history of not operating a wastewater treatment lagoon in compliance with the Missouri Clean Water Law. The settlement agreement that the Nichols signed with the Attorney General of Missouri is proof of their inability to operate a wastewater treatment facility in compliance with the law. The Nichols are the incorporators of and are on the first board of directors of Hinton Sewer Company. Their past performance can not be separated from their current positions.

In contrast the sewer district is qualified to construct and operate mechanical wastewater treatment plants. The sewer district has managed the design and construction of several mechanical wastewater treatment plants. In terms of operation and maintenance, the sewer district currently has on its staff four operators who have "A" licenses from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources to operate wastewater treatment facilities. The district always has two of its staff on call to respond to emergencies and its telephones are answered after hours by an answering service that forwards emergency calls to the on call staff. The district owns over $175,000 worth of specialized equipment for the operation and maintenance of wastewater treatment and collection systems.

Due to these facts and the information that was provided to the Commission earlier, the Board of Trustees of the Boone County Regional Sewer District opposes the issuance of the conditional use permit to Nichols and Hinton Sewer Company. The Board supports the denial of the conditional use permit and appreciates the Commissionís consideration of the sewer districtís view in this matter.

Commissioner Morgan asked if there are any private companies in the Boone County area that operate wastewater treatment plants in Boone County.

Mr. Ratermann stated yes.

Commissioner Morgan asked how many do the private companies operate.

Mr. Ratermann stated he knows of one company in that business, but does not know of any facilities that they are operating in Boone County. They were operating the City of Rocheport and in the City of Harrisburg facilities. They no longer operate those because they couldnít make money doing it and the sewer district is now operating the facilities in Rocheport and Harrisburg.

Commissioner Morgan asked what the name of the company was.

Mr. Ratermann stated Alliance Water Resources.

Commissioner Morgan asked if they had anything to do with the ones that ran the Boone County Regional Sewer District for 18 months about ten to fifteen years ago.

Mr. Ratermann stated yes. Alliance Water Resources at one time was Mid-Missouri Engineers Incorporated. They did operate the Boone County Regional Sewer District facilities under contract about ten years ago.

Commissioner Heitkamp stated that Ms. Farr indicated that the Regional Sewer District is unwilling to build a plant in this area and asked Mr. Ratermann if this was correct.

Mr. Ratermann stated that is correct. It would not be fair to the sewer districtís existing customers to use sewer district revenues to fix a private problem. To elaborate on that, typically, the way real estate development works is that a real estate developer buys a piece of land and subdivides it and puts in the infrastructure. The water, sewers, and roads, and conveys all that infrastructure to the appropriate government agency. The County water lines go to the water districts, the streets go to County Public Works Department and the sewer lines and treatment collection systems go to the sewer district. What the developers are trying to accomplish here is a way around that, basically due to the fact that they have a pre-existing development. If this were a brand new development this wouldnít be a question. But for some reason, the developers think that because they have a ten or twenty year old development, they can try and correct their private problem and recover their cost by a non-profit sewer company.

Commissioner Heitkamp stated to Mr. Ratermann that the according to the position statement, that in their judgement, the current collection and treatment facilities in the Hinton area, does this mean all facilities or this facility in particular, are substandard, inadequate and in violation of Federal and State laws. Ms. Farr just indicated that the lagoons are in compliance. Or do we still have non-compliance of these lagoons.

Mr. Ratermann stated that he didnít believe they have operating permits for their existing lagoons. Whether those lagoons are meeting their discharge limits, Mr. Ratermann stated he was not privy to that information. DNR would be the one that would have their discharge monitoring reports. The applicants have to submit reports periodically to the Department of Natural Resources.

Commissioner Heitkamp asked Mr. Ratermann if he was stating that geographically, this region is substandard, there is a problem with discharge in to Rocky Fork.

Mr. Ratermann stated there are two existing lagoons there. One of them is on the north side of Hinton Road and it serves some multi-family housing and single family homes on the north side. On the south side of the road there is an existing lagoon that Mr. Ratermann stated he believed was the subject of the settlement agreement. It serves a convenience store on the south side of Hinton Road and a development of duplexes and four-plexes just to the west of the convenience store. Mr. Ratermann stated that he believes prior to the development of the duplexes, there was a mobile home park there. The sewer lines were used to serve the mobile home park and were re-used when the duplexes were developed. The collection system in that development is what the Attorney Generalís settlement agreement is asking to be replaced.

Commissioner Mink stated that there is a program set up called Neighborhood Improvement Districts, and asked if this neighborhood would qualify for that and if applicants have pursued that option.

Mr. Ratermann stated applicants would qualify, but Mr. Ratermann doesnít think applicants wouldnít apply. Applicants have not pursued that but the cost of the improvement would be assessed back to the landowners. Mr. Ratermann stated he believed the Nichols would be the majority landowners in this case. In which case they would still have to pay to fix the system and they wouldnít be able to recover their costs by billing their tenants.

Commissioner Mink stated that is a program that a lot of these situations try to take advantage of.

Mr. Ratermann stated that was true.

A letter from the City of Columbia in opposition to the request is entered in to the record.

Commissioner Smith stated she would not read the letter, but the letter basically states that the City of Columbia is concerned and is against the request.

Ms. Farr stated that first, this is an existing subdivision, it is not a new subdivision and different rules and regulations do apply. That is a fact of our laws. It is no one taking advantage or trying to circumvent anything that is the status of our law. This is an existing subdivision and new subdivision rules and regulations do not apply. It isnít a subdivision that should be viewed as something negative against the Hinton Sewer Company just because they happen to be a non-profit sewer company coming in to an existing subdivision attempting to serve itís members.

Ms. Farr stated the majority of the argument that the Boone County Regional Sewer District would apply to each and every new company as far as not having existing money and a staff already in place. That would be the case with anyone who tries to serve new members. Ms. Farr stated she believes the sewer district would probably argue they donít want anyone else coming in and they donít want anyone else serving people. By law other people are allowed to come in and non profit sewer companies are allowed to be formed and by law, allowed to serve their members, whether or not the Boone County Regional Sewer District would prefer it wasnít so. New companies donít start the same as established County agencies that have been around for some time. Obviously there will be differences and capital that is stored up in existing facilities. That is, however, no reason to think that the company can not be up and running. All regulation will come from the State. The same concerns and everything will be taken care of through the State; this should not be a concern to Boone County Regional Sewer District. If the State government feels that the Hinton Sewer Company is not capable of operating this treatment plant, they wonít give them a permit. Boone County Regional Sewer District did their best with the State government to try and prevent this process from going through. The Boone County Regional Sewer District did the same thing they have done here and tried to stop it at the State level and they were consistently told they have no right to be the continuing authority, by law. They are not involved with this process; they do not get to serve as the continuing authority for a non-profit sewer company.

Ms. Farr stated she believed there was a misunderstanding regarding meeting compliance. The people who signed the settlement agreement, according to the Attorney Generalís office are in compliance with the settlement agreements. That is not necessarily to say that the sewage lagoons are up to all rules and regulations currently in place with the Water Commission and other State agencies. The Attorney Generalís office was hoping this could all go through and the applicants could get the treatment facility up and going and the lagoon could be closed. There would be no need to put the money in to fixing the lagoons if the treatment plant could be operational. The lagoons could be closed. Obviously it would be much better for the entire area to get rid of the three cell sewage lagoon and put in a nice mechanical treatment plant, which is much more environmentally friendly and it is much more conducive to development and improvement in the area as opposed to an outdated sewage lagoon.

Ms. Farr stated she would like to address a couple of the other conditions the staff wanted imposed. As far as it being an unused and newly manufactured plant, Ms. Farr stated she didnít know what the purpose of that would be. The proposed plant is a used plant and is currently serving a much larger area and far exceeds the capacity that would be needed to serve the members in this area. All DNR requirements will be met, it will be overseen by DNR, there should be no need for it to be a new plant as opposed to one that is already up and going. As far as the gravity sewer collection lines, Keith Foeck the engineer with the State of Missouri stated that the existing gravity sewer lines are of an adequate size and adequate material and they do no need to be replaced, they are relatively new and the State would however like applicants to scope them, where they go through and look at all the lines and if there are any areas that need to be replaced, then pursuant to the agreement with DNR, those areas would be replaced. According to the State, as suggested by the staff, the gravity sewer lines do not need to be replaced in order to preserve the area.

Commissioner Morgan asked applicants that this proposed sewer treatment facility that applicants are talking about using, how much larger is it than the one being required to put in. For example, the one applicants are going to use is designed to treat 400 families versus the one the applicants actually need to treat wastewater for 40 families.

Ms. Farr stated that Chris Sander with Crocket Engineering is present, and is more qualified to answer this question. Mr. Sander is the one who has been handling the project.

Present: Chris Sander, 2608 N. Stadium Blvd, Columbia

Mr. Sander stated the treatment is rated as a 60,000-gallon per day treatment plant the load applicants are expecting to have with this development is in the neighborhood of 25,000 gallons per day. It is more than twice the size of the minimum requirement for this site.

Commissioner Morgan asked if you had a treatment plant that is set up and designed to handle twice the amount of wastewater, will it operate efficiently?

Mr. Sander stated yes. A sewer treatment plant is designed on items like detention time and settling time. How much time is spent in the plant for the activity to take place. By having a larger plant, youíre going to have a situation to get more space, more time for the process to take place, you will get better treatment that way.

Commissioner Morgan asked if applicants would have to add anything to it to re-seed it or add more load to get the proper process.

Mr. Sander stated no.

Commissioner Freiling stated he assumed that reason for the not-for-profit status corporation is because the individuals who are required to correct the situation want to retain the new system for economic reasons and asked applicants if that were a correct assumption.

Ms. Farr stated yes, in that applicants would like to remove the three cell sewage lagoon and the people in that area certainly not just the Nichols, but the people to be served by that area would like to get a treatment plant. A treatment plant is very expensive, the initial investment is quite high and they would like to recoup their investment. There is no profit motive; it will probably take more than five years to recoup the initial investment off general monthly fees.

Commissioner Freiling asked if the applicants were currently operating under the Attorney General. They are under a requirement to replace the existing three-cell system with a DNR approved wastewater system. In other words, the developer of this development, because they have been in violation of discharge regulations, it has been required by the Attorney Generalís office to replace the existing system with a system that will meet discharge requirements. Commissioner Freiling asked if this was correct.

Ms. Farr stated not exactly. There is not a mandate in place that states the entire sewage lagoon has to be eliminated, they just have to close a certain area and do another one. If the conditional use permit is not granted, the lagoon will stay.

Mr. Nichols stated that the lagoon on the south side of the road is a three-cell lagoon. Three years ago DNR came by and checked the lagoon. Applicants are trying to eliminate that lagoon plus the lagoon on the north side of the road. Of course DNR likes to get rid of lagoons, the Boone County Regional Sewer District does too.

Ms. Farr stated that would certainly be the preference that the mechanical treatment plant be put in, however it is not a requirement. If that canít be worked out with the County, then it canít be worked out, then applicants will have to do something else.

Mr. Sander stated that the problem with the lagoon now is that one of the three cells is leaking, so repairs to that would be required.

Commissioner Freiling stated that the current directive that applicants are under from the Attorney Generalís office only requires that the leak in one cell of this system be repaired.

Mr. Sander stated that was correct.

Mr. Nichols stated he didnít believe there is a leak. The young man DNR sent out said there must be a leak because it was wet. Mr. Nichols told him no, that is where the water goes in. Applicants waited until August and it dried up and there was no leak. But DNR is sticking with their first assumption, so applicants either have to repair the existing system or go in this direction.

Ms. Farr stated that the State as a policy would like to eliminate lagoons and have treatment facilities put in their place. They would certainly prefer that the lagoons be closed and put the mechanical treatment facility in. However, it is not a requirement at this point.

Commissioner Neese asked the number of owner occupied properties this will serve and the number of owners of rental property.

Ms. Farr stated she could not give an exact number, to start with, how this works, you are not allowed to be a member of a non profit sewer company unless you agree to accept the services of that non profit sewer company. So who is and who is not a member will likely change anytime property changes hands. Right now there is a convenience store and group of apartments, Mr. Nicholsí private residence, Pearl Shern, who is also one of the original incorporators who also happens to have her personal residence out there also. Ms. Farr stated she believed they only have five property owners at the time this was formed and they were the five incorporators. That may change once the applicants are allowed approval to go forward.

Commissioner Neese asked applicant if they have considered a neighborhood improvement district to be able to issue bonds.

Ms. Farr stated no, this is the first she has heard of it. It had not been brought up, so it hasnít been considered.

Commissioner Neese stated that would place the responsibility for building it back on the developers, that is why he asked about the number of owner occupied properties. Commissioner Neese stated he believed Ms. Farr has done a very adequate job of representing the applicants, but is not sure of the effect this will have on the other people who are renters and families out there. There is concern about that; it seems to be an end run to shift the money from the developers back to the renters.

Ms. Farr stated that again, there are no developers. There may be new businesses that come in and new people who come in and build residences there. The same as any other area in the City or County anyone who uses will have to pay a monthly fee. With it being a non profit sewer company they are regulated in that respect. Their fees are regulated; their by-laws are obviously what they have to hold to. They have to be reviewed, the State checks on that to be sure there is no price gouging or anything of the sort, it must be the same for every member, based on the units. Ms. Farr stated she doubted that the people in the area would want to absorb the expenses. Ms. Shern, for example, Ms. Farr believes Ms. Shern is happy with the lagoon and is happy without paying for a convenience store and an apartment complex to have a more modern facility. Ms. Farr stated they have not explored that as an option. As far as why the Hinton Sewer Company was formed, as everyone knows, when you create any sort of entity, there is some protection there. In this case it is a non profit entity in which any money that comes in has to be returned to the members at the end of the year, it is not required for operating the facility. It certainly is not as if anyone will be making money off of it. The true motivation for it was new laws were enacted for this exact purpose. When a County or City doesnít want to serve a certain area and the residents want to have a better facility, something that is better for the environment and better for the residents, they can form a non profit sewer company and serve themselves. Liability wasnít the concern, in fact the Nicholsí had started the process in their own name already and in talking with Lieutenant Governor Maxwellís office about this and the changes in the laws, this seemed appropriate for the area since no one else wanted to provide service out there, that a non profit sewer company be formed to take care of the need.

Commissioner Heitkamp asked who would be the professional to operate the plant.

Ms. Farr stated that Dale Nichols, President of the Hinton Sewer Company is not here tonight, but he had made arrangements with two people. They own a company already in place.

Mr. Sander stated that these applicants have had operate a couple of the lagoons that they own. Two individuals who work for the Boone County Regional Sewer District and have a business on the side operate treatment facilities. Mr. Sander stated he is not positive.

Ms. Farr stated she is positive it is a current employee of Boone County Regional Sewer District who would be doing the daily type operation. It is a different company that would be actually moving the plant and installing it, but she doesnít know the names off hand.

Commissioner Caruthers stated that the applicants said it would take about five years to recoup the initial cost under a non profit status, what then?

Ms. Farr stated it hasnít been decided. Applicants have been talking with the Attorney Generalís office at that time if the Boone County Regional Sewer District were still interested, it could be given to them if they wanted to step in, otherwise, it is a perpetual entity that would be maintained by the people living in that area if they wanted to keep it going. In order to operate the facility, it has to stay as non profit sewer company, so we know the entity wonít be changing unless and until the Boone County Regional Sewer District would like at that point to step in and take over the area. Or for that matter, it may be the City of Columbia wanting to serve that area within five years. It is hard to tell.

Commissioner Caruthers stated that basically, applicants have no objection to the oversight part of the Boone County Regional Sewer District once they recoup their costs.

Ms. Farr stated she didnít believe so. Ms. Farr stated she hates to make any commitments for anyone, that has previously been discussed through the State, that if the Boone County Regional Sewer District were willing to allow the Hinton Sewer Company to recoup their original cost, the Hinton Sewer Company would be more than willing at that point to turn it over to the Boone County Regional Sewer District if they wanted to at that point. It is on a piece of property not owned by the Hinton Sewer Company, so the land would not go with the plant. The Hinton Sewer Company would be leasing the property that it is on.

Commissioner Caruthers asked if the applicants had any documentation of the Attorney Generalís current position.

Ms. Farr stated no, but she believed that the Boone County Regional Sewer District does. Ms. Farr stated she has spoke with Deborah Neff repeatedly but didnít get a chance to talk with her today, but believes the Boone County Regional Sewer District had been sent a letter.

Mr. Ratermann stated he didnít know if he had it with him or not.

Ms. Farr stated there was a status report done at the request of the Boone County Regional Sewer District.

Commissioner Sloan stated it concerns her that the State, County, City and the Boone County Regional Sewer District are all on record as saying they are concerned about this facility. It sounds as if the people who are going to be running it, in looking at the compliance agreement, four of the six people who are listed as incorporating this non profit sewer district are the same people. Have things changed so dramatically that the people who didnít comply three years ago are currently not compliant arenít going to do a great job of running it just because itís different.

Ms. Farr stated that one, it is a settlement agreement and anyone who has entered in to one, knows thatís not the same as someone finding you guilty of something and going forward. There has been no penalty imposed, it was a settlement agreement.

Commissioner Sloan stated there are dollar amounts shown.

Ms. Farr stated yes, but it was waived by the Attorney General s office. It is a settlement agreement and it should be taken as that. Also, again the incorporators are the members, those are the people that were currently involved and presently involved and they will be served by the non profit sewer company. Ms. Farr stated she seriously doubts that any of them will be out there doing whatever it is you do to a mechanical treatment plant to make it work. Again, professionals will run it, just like to Boone County Regional Sewer District referred to their four operators on staff.

Commissioner Sloan stated that concerns her, not that she doesnít expect them to be professionals, but that is a concern, if you are going to turn all this responsibility over to someone else who is a professional to deal with and already an employee of the Boone County Regional Sewer District they have little accountability, applicants have little accountability, Commissioner Sloan stated that bothers her.

Ms. Farr asked accountability for what.

Commissioner Sloan stated accountability for how it is run and whether it is in compliance.

Ms. Farr stated they would have the same accountability as the Board of Trustees at the Boone County Regional Sewer District, only it is a Board of Directors. Ms. Farr stated she assumed the Board of Trustees are not the same four operators that Mr. Ratermann is speaking of for the Boone County Regional Sewer District. You have a Board of Directors you have a Board of Trustees, you have the people handling the business end, then you have your trained professionals who are hired for the hands on end to make sure things are working and operating properly. It is exactly the same as the Boone County Regional Sewer District in terms of regulations and oversight and accountability.

Commissioner Sloan stated she understood that, but the Boone County Regional Sewer District is a bigger entity than these four people. Commissioner Sloan stated she may be wrong, but has more believability in what the Boone County Regional Sewer District is prepared to do versus what the applicants are prepared to do because they havenít been in compliance on other things.

Ms. Farr stated she didnít want this to be such a difficult idea for everyone. The non-profit Hinton Sewer Company has yet to do anything wrong and the people that are a part of that settlement agreement are not the ones doing the technical operation.

Commissioner Neese stated that is where he was going with his question. How many members are there going to be, because how many people own property and how many people are renters. The other question he would have is who owns the land that the Hinton Sewer Company would be leasing.

Ms. Farr stated Loren Gene Nichols is the owner of the real estate where the plant would actually be located.

Commissioner Neese stated the non profit aspect isnít not for profit from the standpoint of who is going to be establishing the rents on the land that the treatment plant will be located.

Ms. Farr stated the members and bylaws of the sewer company; every tenant will be a member of the sewer company if they choose to.

Commissioner Neese stated the land that the sewer treatment plant is going to be built on is going to be owned by the people who are the four entities that had trouble with DNR.

Ms. Farr stated yes, it is personally owned by one of those individuals. Again, Boone County Regional Sewer District has put a nice spin on it. The State isnít upset with anyone right now. They think applicants have done what they need to do and would like it to get better by getting this treatment facility in there. There were problems in the past, Ms. Farr stated she imagines that there have been problems with Boone County Regional Sewer District in the past as with any other business and any other service industry, problems come up, regrettably so, but they do.

Commissioner Freiling stated to Mr. Nichols that it causes considerable concern that applicants are sitting here three years after the compliance agreement was reached that really required this to be resolved well over two years ago. Commissioner Freiling stated that part of his skepticism about the proposed project is that it is possible to stall your way through regulatory issues sometimes. Commissioner Freiling stated that it seems to him that is what happened.

Mr. Nichols stated that he is tired of hearing non-compliance, there has never been non-compliance. The one on the south side of the road has had a leakage problem that is the main thing and DNR said applicants needed to do something. Applicants decided to get rid of all the lagoons and put a treatment facility in.

Commissioner Freiling asked who currently owns the three-cell system.

Mr. Nichols stated that he and Dale Nichols own the convenience store. The lagoon is owned by Daleís son, Greg Nichols, and he owns all the apartment buildings.

Commissioner Freiling stated if there was a small or imaginary problem, why did it take three years past the 1998 agreement to address the problem.

Mr. Nichols stated applicants have been working on this problem for three years. Theyíve been working on this for about a year and have dealt with DNR and theyíve had to come out during the summer. Basically, applicants have had to go by what DNR required.

Ms. Farr stated that the Commission has missed an entire stage of the process that has been nothing but fighting with Boone County Regional Sewer District, applicants have done nothing but fight with them through the stage. The Sewer District has complained to each and every person you can think of to try and keep this from being granted, as well as the City writing a letter. Ms. Farr stated she is not sure what the City would have to do with anything involved with this. Ms. Farr stated it is very concerning to her that the County and the City wouldnít recommend this, because the best she can tell, they have no involvement with it other than wanting to get the revenues out of the plant once it is put in place. All the applicants have done is fight and it has taken a long time to fight for the Boone County Regional Sewer District to drop it with the State. The Sewer District finally dropped it with the State and now they are here fighting with the County.

Commissioner Sloan asked where it says the Boone County Regional Sewer District has dropped something with the State.

Ms. Farr stated that one; they have no formal involvement because they have nothing to do with that as well. The Sewer District has been told now from the Attorney Generalís office that there is no argument for the Boone County Regional Sewer District to be a continuing authority.

Commissioner Sloan asked who has been told that.

Ms. Farr stated the Boone County Regional Sewer District.

Commissioner Freiling asked if there has been a communication from the Attorney Generalís office.

Commissioner Sloan stated that neither Ms. Farr nor Mr. Nichols had this communication from the Attorney Generalís office that says this is okay.

Commissioner Smith stated to address why the City of Columbia and some of these people are in opposition is because in order for applicants to be granted a conditional use permit, of the seven criteria, the very first one states that the establishment, maintenance or operation of a conditional use permit will not be detrimental or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. For that reason anyone involved with the general welfare of the public has a right to address this issue.

Ms. Farr stated she understands that. Any sort of safety concern can be addressed through DNR. Boone County Regional Sewer District will have to get the same permits as the Hinton Sewer Company.

Commissioner Freiling stated that one of his concerns is that this is sort of true. But to take three years to comply with what seems should have taken months indicates to Commissioner Freiling that the next problem that comes up may take three years to resolve. Whether it is real or the product of having hired some engineer out of college because that is all you can afford. The time frame between the identification and the agreement that there was a problem and would be fixed, the three year time frame that has transpired between here is puzzling.

Ms. Farr stated that she agrees and applicants should have asked Ms. Neff with the Attorney Generalís office to attend the meeting to address some of the concerns. Ms. Farr stated she had at least four letters in a row to Keith Fork, the Stateís engineer, begging him to respond. There certainly have been delays on the Nichols side and on the Attorney Generalís side as well as the various other agencies from the State that are involved. There have been delays across the board. Some of them certainly being on the applicants end, Ms. Farr stated she doesnít disagree with that. The basis for the concern in that area, Ms. Farr doesnít understand why it is any different for anyone else.

Commissioner Freiling stated it is different, because this is part of the obligation under a conditional use permit. The Boone County Regional Sewer District is a highly public body that has both an established track record, established expertise, a broad base of expertise is not dependant on one persons presence at any given time to maintain the system and malfeasance on their part, non compliance on their part, is really almost impossible for them to sustain, because they are a public entity. The public pressure is too great. Obviously, a private company has much greater ability to stall, delay, argue, and dispute, because they do not have that same kind of public pressure. All other issues aside, in considering the granting of a permit to a private individual to maintain a wastewater system on Rocky Fork drainage, where the Commission has evidence before them a history of violation, it is clear that it has taken an extremely long period of time to even come to a proposed resolution of that.

Ms. Farr stated it was an agreement voluntarily entered in to, to try and resolve the situation faster than making the State go through the entire process of proving it. There was this one problem, Ms. Farr stated that she is not saying that the State didnít think there was a problem, Ms. Farr stated she doesnít see how that could possibly be fatal to an entire organization being allowed to operate a treatment facility. If it is, then you shouldnít grant the conditional use permit.

Commissioner Sloan stated this may not be a fair question, but if the Commissionerís vote for approval of this recommendation with the staff conditions, one of them is that the applicantís shall successfully negotiate in to a contract with the Boone County Regional Sewer District, it is obvious this is not what the applicants want.

Ms. Farr stated it can not financially be done.

Commissioner Sloan asked Ms. Farr if she would like the Commission to approve this request with the recommendations or would the applicants rather the Commission not approve it.

Ms. Farr asked if those were her only two choices.

Commissioner Sloan stated probably.

Ms. Farr stated that obviously there was no point in having the Boone County Regional Sewer District involved. No one is going to do that, they canít financially say here is a 30,000 dollar gift to the Regional Sewer District. The applicants arenít this wealthy.

Commissioner Freiling stated that the staff recommendations did not require that applicants give the plant to the Boone County Regional Sewer District.

Ms. Farr questioned the continuing authority of the Boone County Regional Sewer District.

Commissioner Freiling stated that his reading of this is that the staff required the applicants to enter in to a contract with the Boone County Regional Sewer District to be the manager of this facility, it doesnít state that the individual who installs the facility can not enter this contract arranging for repayment of this investment.

Ms. Farr stated that the Boone County Regional Sewer District has said they will not do anything to compensate the people who put the plant in. Also serving as a continuing authority generally means they collect the monthly service fees.

Commissioner Heitkamp stated that is not the case in Rocheport. The Boone County Regional Sewer District is operating the plant but the City of Rocheport is still collecting the sewer fees.

Ms. Farr stated there was an offer to the Boone County Regional Sewer District to let them do whatever they wanted as long as applicants could recoup the costs. Applicants were told no.

Commissioner Freiling asked if there was any middle ground sought.

Ms. Farr stated that they have been trying for quite some time before they came to the Commission with a conditional use permit request. Applicants wanted to get things established with the State before going forward with the conditional use permit. Ms. Farr stated that the permit from the State would only be a five year permit and it would have a specific re-opener clause that if there is any change in the law they could immediately step in, so the permit would be conditional on State oversight.

Mr. Ratermann submitted a letter addressed to the Boone County Regional Sewer District from the Attorney Generalís office.

Commissioner Mink asked what the cost comparison was to install this plant, compared to simply fixing the third cell.

Mr. Sander stated that he couldnít say in dollars right now, but it would be significantly more expensive to install the new plant; it involves building a gravity sewer from the south side of Hinton Road, across Hinton Road, Mr. Sander stated he believed they would have to bore underneath Hinton Road for the underground piping and then purchase and installation of the plant versus earth work to seal the leak in the existing lagoon.

Mr. Nichols stated applicants would have to drain the leaking cell to rebuild it.

Commissioner Mink asked why this hasnít been done.

Mr. Sander stated the treatment plant was proposed instead of repairing the lagoon.

Commissioner Freiling asked who proposed it.

Mr. Sander stated it was proposed by the Nichols'.

Commissioner Freiling stated that this is something odd from his side of the table. If there was an easy, inexpensive fix that would have brought the applicants quickly in to compliance with the agreement that had been signed three years ago, why was that path not taken.

Mr. Nichols stated that after the leak was found, the applicants waited until August, because Mr. Nichols stated he didnít believe there was a leak, Mr. Nichols stated he had a lot of people come out and look at the lagoon, that took about a year. He didnít think the guy from DNR knew what he was doing. The last couple of years, applicants have been fighting.

Ms. Farr stated the treatment plant is better than a lagoon, it is better for the development, and better for everyone. That would be the preferred choice.

Commissioner Freiling stated that what he knows with his lengthy involvement with wastewater, that is not necessarily the case and certainly DNR has no regulatory requirements for a plant taking in high volumes in highly sensitive areas. It has no regulatory preference between lagoon systems and treatment systems, there advantages both ways. One is less sightly, but less maintenance, the other is much higher maintenance and have to have a professional engineer on staff, itís much more expensive.

Ms. Farr stated that the State has expressed to applicants that they would prefer the treatment plant.

Commissioner Freiling stated he is sure they would, they prefer treatment plants everywhere.

Commissioner Smith read the letter presented by Mr. Ratermann from the Attorney Generalís office. The letter is in regard to the status report on October 21, 1998.

Commissioner Smith readÖ

"The above referenced parties (DNR, Attorney Generalís Office, G. Louise Nichols, Loy Dale Nichols, Greg Nichols, and Loren Gene Nichols, doing business as both Greg Nichols Properties, Inc., and Hinton Properties, LLC.) entered into a Settlement Agreement on October 21, 1998 to resolve the Nicholsí long-term violations of the Missouri Clean Water law concerning a three-cell wastewater lagoon serving Lake Heights Estates. This Settlement Agreement required the Nichols to maintain a current Missouri State Operating Permit and to upgrade their wastewater lagoon. The Settlement Agreement further provided that an engineering report had to be prepared and filed with the department, which provided a plan to upgrade or replace the three-cell wastewater lagoon.

On January 18, 2001, I sent a letter to the Nichols demanding payment of a stipulated penalty because the deadlines set out in the Settlement Agreement had not been met. While some of the issues related to questions and issues concerning the plans and specifications submitted to the department, the Nichols had not provided documentation showing compliance with the continuing authority regulations 10CSR 20-6.010930(A). It is my information from Mr. Dale Nichols that he attempted to resolve the continuing authority issue with the Boone County Sewer District, but was unable to do so.

I was contacted by attorney Diana Farr who advised me that she represented the Nichols and that the Nichols had formed a not-for-profit sewer company pursuant to 393.825, RSMo, which should resolve the problems with the continuing authority regulations. I then sought to negotiate a second settlement agreement that would be acceptable to the Nichols, the Boone County Sewer District, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources and the Office of the Attorney General. While I did have several talks with the parties, nothing progressed, and the decision was made not to pursue such a settlement agreement.

I notified Ms. Farr by letter dated October 18, 2001, that the department would be pursuing a second settlement agreement, and that provided any questions concerning the plans and specifications the Nichols had filed in support of their application for a permit were satisfactorily resolved, and the Nichols satisfied all local requirements including zoning requirements, the department anticipated that it would public notice the permit on or about November 9, 2001. I have attached a copy of the letter I sent to Ms. Farr on this matter.

Signed, Deborah Neff, Assistant Attorney General"

Commissioner Smith also read the attached letter addressed to Ms. FarrÖ

"I have met with various Department of Natural Resourcesí officials regarding your clientís current settlement agreement with the department, your clientís pending application for a permit, and a possible second settlement with you client regarding its pending application for a permit and revising the original schedule of compliance set out in the original settlement agreement as that schedule has not been met.

The department anticipated that it will put your clientís permit on public notice on or about November 9, 2001, and not enter into a settlement agreement with your client. This is provided that your client satisfactorily resolves any review questions Mr. Foreck may have. Additionally, you client will have to obtain any necessary local permits including zoning.

The permit that the department anticipates putting on public notice will be for a five year Missouri State Operating Permit. The permit will contain a "re-opener" clause. While a re-opener clause is standard for such a permit, the re-opener clause in this permit will make clear that it allows the department the option of opening this permit should there be a change in the law regarding any part of the permit. For example, should the law change regarding the applicability of the Missouri Clean Water Lawís continuing authority regulation to a not-for-profit corporation formed pursuant to 393.825, RSMo, that would impact the permit you client will have, the department would have the option of re-opening the permit. Signed, Deborah Neff, Assistant Attorney General."

Ms. Farr stated that it is good that the Attorney Generalís office did not insist on a second settlement agreement, instead, they are going to put the permit to public notice, which is what the applicants had requested initially was simply to have a permit as opposed to having to do another settlement agreement. The settlement agreement was going to possibly be necessary if the Boone County Regional Sewer District continued with the fight with the State and the State felt comfortable that the continuing authority issue had been resolved so there was no need for another settlement agreement instead, they would simply put the permit on public notice.

Commissioner Freiling stated as he understood, what Ms. Farr was saying is that they were required to do that, because applicants have every right under Missouri law to form a not-for-profit sewer district.

Ms. Farr stated that under those circumstances Boone County Regional Sewer District has no right to assert continuing authority.

Commissioner Freiling stated that the State of Missouri has no right to turn applicants down, they have to allow applications.

Ms. Farr stated that the State of Missouri had the right to turn applicants down for a permit. They have no right to require applicants to have a continuing authority from a governmental agency. They have the same right to turn down the Boone County Regional Sewer District if they donít comply with DNR regulations.

Commissioner Freiling stated that if applicantís not-for-profit status meets the Stateís requirements then they have to authorize. If applicants go in with their not-for-profit application for this sewer district and it meets all State requirements for that, the State canít say no.

Ms. Farr stated that the State canít arbitrarily say no.

Commissioner Freiling stated that the fact the State decided to post this is a regulatory procedure and not that they like it.

Ms. Farr stated it is certainly not that they like it, but it is that they feel like the engineers have met all of the safety regulations.

Commissioner Caruthers made a motion to deny the request based primarily on the grounds of the application not complying with conditions one, two, and five of the zoning regulations.

 

Commissioner Caruthers made and Commissioner Mink seconded a motion to deny request by Loren Gene Nichols on behalf of Hinton Sewer Co. for a permit for a mechanical wastewater treatment plant located at 331 E Hinton Rd., Columbia.

Pat Smith Y Mike Morgan Y

Mike Caruthers Y Keith Neese Y Mary Sloan Y Carl Freiling Y

David Mink Y Kristen Heitkamp Y

Motion to deny request carries unanimously.

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

  1. Request by Kim and Jonathon Kriekhaus for an animal training facility on 26.2 acres, located at 2202 W Williams Rd., Sturgeon.

Planner, Thad Yonke gave the staff report stating that this property is located on the south side of Williams Road across from Mertens Quarry in the area of Riggs. The site is approximately 1 mile west of the intersection of Creed Road and Williams Road. The site is about 4-miles south and 4-miles west of the municipal limits of Sturgeon. The site is zoned A-2 (Agriculture) as is all the surrounding property. These are all original 1973 zonings. There is a single-family house, garage, and several sheds currently on this property. The property is served by Public Water District Number 10 and Boone Electric Cooperative. It is located in the Sturgeon School District. The applicant is seeking a permit for a horse boarding and training facility. Incidental to this, the applicant hopes to establish a training facility. The proposal includes providing riding lessons and seasonal riding camp activities as an incidental aspect of the facility. There have been no previous requests submitted on behalf of this property. Staff notified 15 property owners about this request. The master plan designates this area as being suitable for agriculture and rural residential uses. As a CUP the proposal must meet the following criteria from the zoning ordinance to be eligible for approval.

1. The establishment, maintenance or operation of a conditional use permit will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare.

2. The conditional use permit will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted by these regulations.

3. The conditional use permit will not substantially diminish or impair property values of existing properties in the neighborhood.

4. All necessary facilities will be available, including, but not limited to, utilities, roads, road access and drainage.

5. The establishment of a conditional use permit will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the zoning district.

6. The establishment of a conditional use permit will not hinder the flow of traffic or result in traffic congestion on the public streets. This will include the provision of points of access to the subject property.

7. The conditional use permit shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the zoning district in which it is located. The County Commission shall find that there is a public necessity for the conditional use permit.

Staff recommends approval with the recognition that the facility will have to have adequate fire protection and approval from the Fire District before operating and that all drive and parking areas must be dust free with a minimum of a chip seal surface.

Present: Jonathon and Kim Kreickhaus, 2202 W. Williams Rd, Sturgeon.

Mrs. Kreickhaus stated that she is not looking to run a boarding facility but would like to run a riding lesson program. Applicants currently have three horses to begin with and no students at the moment and would like to eventually start teaching group lessons of up to five students.

Commissioner Neese asked applicant if there was going to be a problem providing dust free parking.

Mrs. Kreickhaus stated no; applicants have a large parking area that is concrete at the moment. The driveway is gravel, Mrs. Kreickhaus stated she didnít know if that makes a difference.

Mr. Yonke stated that staff could work with applicants on that. That is a standard requirement, but not a condition of the permit. Staff makes it in the record to recognize that. It is a standard requirement of all developments that are anything other than a residential development.

Commissioner Caruthers asked applicant what type of certification or license she had.

Mrs. Kreickhaus stated she had certification with the American Riders Association. Mrs. Kreickhaus stated she was certified in 1997 or 1998. To get that certification she went through a process of written examinations as well as oral examinations, they are a national organization.

Open to public hearing.

No one spoke in favor of the request.

No one spoke in opposition to the request.

Closed to public hearing.

Commissioner Mink asked if this was an existing building that applicants already have.

Mrs. Kreickhaus stated applicants have just put in a riding arena and will be putting a fence around the arena. There is a shed, but no actual barn or stalls. There is a hay shed that applicant intends to convert in to six stalls.

Mr. Kreickhaus stated that they have no plans to build any new structures other than probably a small horse shed so they can have a shelter. The only other major improvement would be putting these stalls in.

Commissioner Smith stated that on the application, applicants stated that this was justified by its ability to meet the communityís demand for another teaching facility.

Mrs. Kreickhaus stated yes, there are several places in the area that currently have waiting lists.

 

Commissioner Freiling made and Commissioner Neese seconded a motion to approve request by Kim and Jonathon Kriekhaus for an animal training facility on 26.2 acres, located at 2202 W Williams Rd., Sturgeon.

Pat Smith Y Mike Morgan Y

Mike Caruthers Y Keith Neese Y Mary Sloan Y Carl Freiling Y

David Mink Y Kristen Heitkamp Y

Motion to approve request carries. 8 Yes 0 No

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

REZONING REQUESTS

 

  1. Request by Simon Development & Equipment Co. on behalf of the Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of the Grand Lodge of Missouri to rezone from A-2 (Agriculture) to C-GP (Planned Commercial) of 6.67 acres, more or less, and to approve a Review Plan for the development, located at 6100 N Masonic Dr., Columbia.

Planner, Bill Florea gave staff report which covered both the rezoning request and the review plan stating that the subject tract located just north of Columbia near the intersection of Prathersville Road and Highway 63. It is 6.67 acres in area. The property is undeveloped. The current zoning of the property is A-2, which is the original zoning. The property adjacent to this tract is also zoned A-2. Property on the south side of Highway 63 is zoned C-GP. The proposed use is the State Office for the Masonic Home of Missouri. There have been no previous requests submitted on behalf of this property.

Water service will be provided by the City of Columbia, electric service is provided by Boone Electric. The property is within the Columbia School District. Sewer service can be provided by the City of Columbia if a pre-annexation agreement is executed.

The Master Plan designates this property as suitable for residential uses. The Plan also encourages the use of Planned Districts when establishing new commercial and industrial areas.

The Master Plan also identifies the sufficiency of resources test as a means to determine whether a proposed rezoning is appropriate. Generally, the test can be broken down into three components, traffic and transportation, potable water and fire protection and sewer service.

The property has frontage on N. Masonic Drive, which is a paved, publicly maintained road. Traffic generated by the proposed office building will have a negligible effect on traffic circulation in the area.

Water service will be provided by the City of Columbia.

The City of Columbia will provide sewer service to the property if the developer executes a pre-annexation agreement. The developer will be responsible for design and construction of the main extension.

The property scored 83 points on the rating system.

Staff recommends approval of the rezoning and review plan subject to the following condition:

Prior to approval of the final development plan, the applicant must enter into a pre-annexation agreement with the City of Columbia and provide documentation that the City will provide sewer service to the property.

Present: Tim Reed, Engineering Surveys and Services, 1113 Fay Street, Columbia

Mr. Reed stated that this building will be the new State office for the Masonic Home of Missouri. It will contain their offices, the Masonic Library and a Masonic Museum. It will contain approximately 20 staff members in this building. It will be a single story with a basement as it shows on the plan; it wonít exceed over 40,000 square feet. The Masonís are interviewing three contracting firms, this coming weekend and they will select one of those firms to build their building. As soon as that occurs and as soon as the contractor and the Masonís decide on the final size and shape of their building, that information will go on the final plan and applicants will re-file with the County Planning Staff. Applicants are designing a sanitary sewer to connect to the City sewer. That will all be done and approved by the City of Columbia Public Works Department in accordance with the City of Columbia specifications and applicants are also going to enter in to a pre-annexation agreement with the City. There will be some lighting on the parking lot and around the building, just for security purposes. Mr. Reed stated he had been told that there would be minimal evening activities in this building. Any lighting that is there will be directed downward in order to illuminate only the parking lot and the building area. Applicants did have a neighborhood meeting last Sunday afternoon and a few residents showed up to review the plan. Applicants answered a few questions. The State office will be visited by Masonís and other people from around the State. Mr. Reed stated he believes it will be a real asset to the City and the County.

Commissioner Heitkamp asked if this is in the metro 20/20 plan designation of the City of Columbia.

Mr. Florea stated it is within the 20/20 planning area.

Open to public hearing.

No one spoke in favor of the request.

In opposition to the request:

Present: Harold Stearly, 2070 E. Northwood Drive, Columbia.

Mr. Stearly stated that he has a tract of approximately 18-acres of residential land in which his south border shares a common border with a total 46-acre tract of land owned by the Masonís. The 6.67 acres they are planning on rezoning is located in that 46-acre tract. Mr. Stearly stated that he didnít know if it was proper to characterize his comments as being in opposition, but he just has questions of concerns about the development itself. The Masonís would probably be good neighbors in the community and appreciates the one-story design, which would minimize the impact to the community. Mr. Stearly stated that his most immediate concerns have to do with the construction of the sewer system. Mr. Stearly stated he is glad to hear there will be a pre-annexation agreement with the City in terms of maintenance once it is constructed. Having met with Mr. Reed, applicants showed the neighbors tentative plans for the location of the sewer. Its seems to shoot a straight line back to Mr. Stearlyís border and then run east to where it would make its connection to the already existing sewer line. The line halfway where that common border is has three very deep ravines that run from their property on to Mr. Stearlyís property. One of those ravines is part of the water shed. The other two ravines channel back behind Mr. Stearlyís lake through a creek bed, which is dry at times and flowing with water at times. It then proceeds to run off Mr. Stearlyís land on to another neighborís land. Mr. Stearly stated he couldnít say for sure who the owner of that property is. Mr. Stearly stated his most immediate concern would be the placement of the sewer line and how they would bridge these deep ravines and how the lines would be maintained to prevent leakage, which would end up contaminating Mr. Stearlyís land and possibly others adjoining.

Commissioner Freiling asked Mr. Reed if he had an answer for this question.

Mr. Reed stated that since Mr. Stearly saw that plan, it has been revised. Mr. Reed stated to Mr. Stearly that the sewer would go along Metro Drive and be lift stationed up to the sewer. As Mr. Stearly pointed out, it is very rugged back there and the applicantís plan for the future of that property are in-determined right now, so it did make since to go that direction.

Mr. Stearly asked Mr. Reed to show him on the plat where the sewer would go.

Commissioner Smith asked Mr. Stearly how long he had owned the property.

Mr. Stearly stated he had owned the property for almost ten years and has been living on the property for seven years.

Mr. Reed showed Mr. Stearly the information. Mr. Stearly stated that information alleviated that concern. Mr. Reed stated that the only other concern he may have, and it may be a concern that would need to be addressed in the future, is any future development that the Masonís intend to use of the property which comes back closer to his border. That is an agricultural, rural environment, which has now, growing subdivisions, but they are relatively nice subdivisions and there has not been overcrowding. The only concern is that the rural atmosphere be preserved.

Present: Jennifer Arnold, 6448 N. Wagon Trail Road, Columbia.

Ms. Arnold stated that she and her husband owned about the same size acreage as Mr. Stearly. The property has been in her family since her great-grandparents. Ms. Arnold stated she has lived there all her life except for a few years. She has a close connection with the land, her grandchildren love it. Ms. Arnold stated she also has a connection with the Masonís and doesnít want the Commission to think that sheís opposed to the Masonís personally. Ms. Arnold stated she is concerned that this area is growing rapidly and beyond control and there is nothing she can seem to do about it. There is much growth there now in that area. There is the sheriffís station, juvenile justice center, the fairgrounds which is the most uncomfortable situation for most of the residents, noise from that area is horrific. Most of the commercial growth that is there now is all on the south side of Highway 63, if this request is approved, the residents will have commercial growth on the north side of Highway 63. It seems logical to Ms. Arnold that this rural setting Mr. Stearly referred to could be a buffer between the commercial zoning and the agricultural zoning seems most logical that Highway 63 could act as that buffer and the area could be kept in a rural setting where there are homes. Ms. Arnold stated that the Commission must give some thought to forestation efforts that are now going on nationwide and in the State of Missouri, encouraging land owners to keep some areas forested. Ms. Arnold stated there are some nice forested areas for people who like to go out and hunt and enjoy nature. The more commercial that is zoned, the more it takes away from that.

Ms. Arnold stated she is opposed to the extra lighting in the area. Right now it is a nice rural area; the extra lighting will take away from that, even if it is pointed down. Ms. Arnold stated she is concerned with the idea of rezoning this land. If this land becomes rezoned, how long will it be before those who own land that is now zoned agriculture or residential are feeling pressure to rezone and the taxes become so high they canít pay them. The land that the Arnoldís own has been in her family since her great-grandparents. Ms. Arnold would like to preserve that land for her grandchildren who now live on the land. That will not be possible if rezoning occurs. Ms. Arnold asked the Commission what the pre-annexation agreement referred to and what that meant. Ms. Arnold asked if that meant the likelihood that the Arnoldís land would be annexed beyond their control.

Mr. Florea stated what that meant is that the property owner will sign an agreement with the City of Columbia saying that as soon as the City Limits is contiguous with their property, they will agree to petition for a voluntary annexation. That would have the effect of bringing the city limits closer to the Arnoldís property.

Ms. Arnold stated that adds one more point in her opposition to this request. Ms. Arnold wants to remain in the County; she doesnít want to be in the City.

Commissioner Smith asked how many acres the Arnoldís owned.

Ms. Arnold stated she owned about the same as Mr. Stearly, 16.5-acres. Ms. Arnold stated that she and her husband are strongly opposed to this request.

Closed to public hearing.

Mr. Reed stated that he couldnít address those concerns. This is a low intensity usage that a person could expect on a piece of property.

Commissioner Smith asked about the lighting.

Mr. Reed stated the lighting wouldnít be intrusive.

Commissioner Heitkamp asked if the lighting was necessary.

Mr. Reed stated he thought the lighting would be necessary just for security, so it is not pitch black out there.

Commissioner Heitkamp stated that the neighbors are saying that it is a rural area and they like the pitch black.

Mr. Reed stated yes, but is right along the highway and that road dead ends and Mr. Reed has witnessed a little activity along that road. The Masonís are going to invest a substantial amount of money in to this building and for people leaving that building in the evening, they have to have something to illuminate that parking lot. But it is not going to be like a convenience store.

Commissioner Heitkamp stated that in other words it would be in compliance with the proposed lighting regulations for the City of Columbia.

Mr. Reed stated that he couldnít say that, but thinks it would be less than that. There is no evening activities that will be taking place at this building, so the parking lot lighting would simply be for security so people could get to their cars. It is not as if there were going to be regularly scheduled events there in the evening.

Commissioner Sloan asked if Masonic Drive is already in place and named.

Mr. Reed stated yes, it was originally called Metro Drive. Mr. Reed went through the property of getting that property rezoned and assisted the Scottish Rite in rezoning that property ten years ago. Some member of that organization took some steps and was able to get the street name changed to Masonic Drive.

Commissioner Sloan asked how many people were going to be employed there.

Mr. Reed stated about twenty staff members.

Commissioner Sloan stated in counting the parking spaces there are two-hundred-one parking spaces, applicant stated that there wasnít going to be very much activity.

Mr. Reed stated that was correct.

Commissioner Sloan asked the reason for so many parking spaces with that many parking spaces, it sounds like a lot of activity is to go on sometime.

Mr. Reed stated that he believes the applicants are expecting a lot of activity during the daylight hours. Applicants are proposing a Masonic Museum and a Masonic Library and Mr. Reed assumes that a lot of people will come in from all parts of the State to get to the organizational records and to go to the exhibits. The parking lot configuration will be more finalized on the final plan.

Commissioner Heitkamp asked if there were going to be banquet and conference facilities.

Mr. Reed stated he didnít believe so, but wasnít sure. Mr. Reed stated he didnít believe there would be. It is a State office building.

Commissioner Caruthers made and Commissioner Mink seconded a motion to approve request by Simon Development & Equipment Co. on behalf of the Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of the Grand Lodge of Missouri to rezone from A-2 (Agriculture) to C-GP (Planned Commercial) of 6.67 acres, more or less, located at 6100 N Masonic Dr., Columbia.

Pat Smith Y Mike Morgan Y

Mike Caruthers Y Keith Neese Y Mary Sloan N Carl Freiling Y

David Mink Y Kristen Heitkamp Y

Motion to approve request carries. 7 Yes 1 No

 

 

 

Commissioner Neese made and Commissioner Caruthers seconded a motion to approve request by Simon Development & Equipment Co. on behalf of the Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, a Review Plan for the development located at 6100 N Masonic Dr., Columbia.

 

Pat Smith Y Mike Morgan Y

Mike Caruthers Y Keith Neese Y Mary Sloan N Carl Freiling Y

David Mink Y Kristen Heitkamp N*

Motion to approve request carries. 6 Yes 2 No

*Commissioner Heitkamp stated she voted in opposition on the grounds of parking and lighting issues.

 

 

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS

None.

 

 

PLAT REVIEWS

 

 

  1. I-70 Trade Center Plat 2. M-L/REC. S7-T48N-R11W. Jeff Crane Builders, Inc., owners. Jay Alan Gebhardt, surveyor.

Planner, Thad Yonke gave the staff report stating that this 4 lot minor plat is located at west end of Trade Center Drive. The site is approximately ľ mile west of the intersection of Rangeline Road and Trade Center Drive. The site is approximately 3 miles east of the municipal limits of the City of Columbia. The area being subdivided contains 26.07-acres. A portion of the property is zoned REC (Recreational). The REC zoning was a rezoning from the original 1973 zonings of M-L (Light Industrial) & C-G (General Commercial). The rezoning occurred in March of 1981. A portion of the area rezoned to REC in 1981 was rezoned back to M-L in June of 1993, leaving a portion of the REC zoning in the approximate location of proposed lot 201. The remainder of the property is zoned M-L. All the surrounding property to the east, south, west, and northwest is zoned M-L; property to the northeast is zoned C-G and all these are all original 1973 zonings. The property is currently the site of a 180 feet tall monopole transmission tower; a no longer used ball field, and assorted small structures from when the ball fields were active. Otherwise the property is vacant. The site is in Water District #9; waterline upgrades may be required. Fire hydrants are required for minor plats containing 4 or more lots, as is the case here. The site is in the Columbia School District. Sewage treatment is proposed to be from an extension of the central sewage system in the area operated by the BCRSD. The sewage system will have to be installed to Sewer District specifications. A traffic analysis waiver has been requested. Staff concurs with the granting of this waiver. As part of the proposed plat the developer is proposing to dedicate the area of the current temporary turn around to make a permanent cul-de-sac at the west-end of Trade Center Drive. The original plat of I-70 Trade Center created Trade Center Drive with the temporary turn around since at that time the previous owner was looking at developing the property of this current proposal in a similar manner to that of the first plat. This would have required extension of the public road network and a second point of access. The current length of Trade Center Drive is in excess of the 1000í maximum length for a non-through street. P&Z approved this length by approving the plat. The 1st plat also required and received a variance for the length from the road & bridge advisory committee and County Commission as required by the regulations. The public works department has determined that this current plat should also go to road and bridge advisory committee to obtain a further variance to make the temporary turn around a permanent cul-de-sac due to the length being in excess of the maximum. It should be recognized that the current plat could have been proposed to come off the non-dedicated temporary turn around and that the plat would still have met the regulations. The current proposal to make the temporary situation permanent by dedicating and building the proper cul-de-sac bulb is a preferable situation. In light of this the Planning Department and Public Works Department are planning on supporting the road and bridge variance request. This plat has 71 points on the point rating scale.

Staff recommends approval along with the granting of the waiver for traffic analysis subject to the following 2 conditions.

  1. That the plat be approved subject to obtaining a variance from the Road & Bridge Advisory Committee and County Commission for the additional length to make the temporary turn around into a permanent cul-de-sac which will have the potential to be accepted for county maintenance.
  2. There are some surveying corrections that need to be made on the original mylar of the plat. These corrections should be made to the satisfaction of the Boone County Public Works Department.

 

Present: Jay Gebhardt, 1010 Fay Street, Columbia

John Massey, Owner, 4829 N. Cedar Lake Ct., Columbia.

Mr. Gebhardt stated that Mr. Massey is a contractor and needs a location to grow his business and place his office and warehousing up. Mr. Massey purchased this land and subdivided it in to four lots to try and improve his situation. Mr. Gebhardt stated the applicants have no problems with the conditions placed. Mr. Gebhardt stated he spoke with Dave Piest with the Public Works Department around noon today. Mr. Piest pointed out a couple of things that needed to be changed on the mylar. Mr. Gebhardt stated he made the changes and replatted it and let staff know that those changes have been made.

 

Commissioner Sloan made and Commissioner Morgan seconded a motion to approve with staff recommendations I-70 Trade Center Plat 2. M-L/REC. S7-T48N-R11W. Jeff Crane Builders, Inc., owners. Jay Alan Gebhardt, surveyor.

 

Pat Smith Y Mike Morgan Y

Mike Caruthers Y Keith Neese Y Mary Sloan Y Carl Freiling Y

David Mink Y Kristen Heitkamp Y

Motion to approve plat with waiver request carries. 8 Yes 0 No

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

 

  1. Hodges Hill. A-2. S13-T49N-R12W. Thomas and Melania Rogers, owners. C. Stephen Heying, surveyor.
  2. Planner, Thad Yonke gave the staff report stating that this 1 lot minor plat is located on the north side of Kircher Road approximately Ĺ mile east and Ĺ mile south of State Route HH and Kircher Road. The site is approximately 1&1/2 miles east of the municipal limits of the City of Columbia. The area being subdivided contains 3.00-acres out of a 40-acre parent parcel. The property is zoned A-2 (agriculture). All the surrounding property is zoned A-2 these are all original 1973 zonings. The site is currently vacant. The site is in Public Water Service District #4. Fire hydrants are not required for minor plats containing less than 4 lots, as is the case here. The site is in the Hallsville School District. Sewage treatment is to be from an on-site lagoon that will have to meet Health department regulations. A waiver for cost benefit analysis for on-site versus central wastewater systems has been requested. A traffic analysis waiver has also been requested. Staff concurs with the granting of these waivers. This plat has 34 points on the point rating scale.

    Staff recommends approval along with the granting of the waivers for traffic analysis and cost benefit analysis for central sewer.

     

    Present: C. Stephen Heying, 1202 Madison Street, Columbia.

    Mr. Heying stated this lot will be similar to others in the area, in fact the future ownerís parents live just west of the property on the north side of Kircher Road, it is a way to end up with being able to build a home near his parents.

    Commissioner Neese asked if there was a lagoon on the property.

    Mr. Heying stated no, he was making sure there was a suitable location for the lagoon. That it is possible to have a lagoon on it and have it work.

    Commissioner Neese made and Commissioner Heitkamp seconded a motion to approve with staff recommendations Hodges Hill. A-2. S13-T49N-R12W. Thomas and Melania Rogers, owners. C. Stephen Heying, surveyor.

     

    Pat Smith Y Mike Morgan Y

    Mike Caruthers Y Keith Neese Y Mary Sloan Y Carl Freiling Y

    David Mink Y Kristen Heitkamp Y

    Motion to approve plat with staff recommendations carries. 8 Yes 0 No

     

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

     

     

  3. Country Farms Lot 20. R-S. S33-T48N-R11W. Gary and Mary Lee Mayfield, owners. Ron Lueck, surveyor.

Planner, Bill Florea gave the staff report stating that the 10-acre tract is located on the west side of Old Mill Creek Road, approximately 600 feet south of Old Field Road. The applicant seeks to divide the tract into 3 lots of roughly equivalent size.

All lots will have frontage on and access to Old Mill Creek Road. The applicant has requested a waiver of the requirement to provide a traffic analysis.

Consolidated Public Water District Number 1 owns a 4-inch water line along the front of the proposed lots.

On-site wastewater systems will be used for sewage disposal. A plan showing a suitable location for a lagoon, on each lot, is on file. The applicant has requested a waiver of the requirement to provide a wastewater cost benefit analysis.

The property scored 73 points on the rating system.

Staff recommends approval of the plat and waiver requests.

Present: Ron Lueck, 300 St. James Street, Columbia.

Mr. Lueck stated that the owners are simply dividing the lot in to three smaller lots, this has been done in the subdivision at least four other times and applicants have already gone through the request for the ability to replat last month.

Present: Gary Mayfield, 4501 Old Mill Creek Road, Columbia.

Mr. Mayfield stated he is the owner of the 10-acre lot. Owners are not doing anything that is out of the ordinary from what has already been done in some of the areas at the subdivision. Applicants are not sizing down to smaller lots than what is already in the area. Mr. Mayfield stated that part of County Farms about a 1/3 mile north of the ownerís land has been divided. There was a 20-acre tract that had been divided in to 3-acre lots.

Commissioner Caruthers asked if there were any residential developments on this property presently.

Mr. Mayfield stated yes.

Commissioner Caruthers asked if there were any future plans for the other two lots.

Mr. Mayfield stated the other two lots are for sale.

Commissioner Sloan made and Commissioner Neese seconded a motion to approve with waiver requests, Country Farms Lot 20. R-S. S33-T48N-R11W. Gary and Mary Lee Mayfield, owners. Ron Lueck, surveyor.

Pat Smith Y Mike Morgan Y

Mike Caruthers Y Keith Neese Y Mary Sloan Y Carl Freiling Y

David Mink Y Kristen Heitkamp Y

Motion to approve plat with waiver request carries. 8 Yes 0 No

 

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

 

 

OLD BUSINESS

Director, Stan Shawver updated the Planning and Zoning Commission on the decisions made by the County Commission stating that the recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve the rezoning for Mr. McCray was upheld by the County Commission.

Mr. Shawver introduced Commissioner Heitkampís daughter Zoe to the Commission. Mr. Shawver stated that Zoe is a fifth grader at Columbia Catholic School, Zoe is a very intelligent young lady. Mr. Shawver stated he thinks it is great to have people that are interested in the proceedings other than those who are required to attend these meetings.

NEW BUSINESS

None.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ADJOURN

Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Mary Sloan

Secretary

Minutes approved on this 20th day of December, 2001.