7:30 P.M. - THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 15, 1994


Present: Keith Schnarre, Chairman

Jim Beasley, arrived 8:18 p.m.

Jon Gerardi

Linda Vogt

Keith Kirkpatrick

Joe Falco

Mike Sloan

Stan Elmore, County Engineer

Absent: Andrew Stanton

Also present: Stan Shawver, Director

Gene Poveromo, Staff

Noel Boyt, Staff


Chairman Keith Schnarre called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Roll call was answered as above. The minutes of the August 18, 1994 meeting were discussed. Corrections and additions were to be made. Approval was carried over to the October meeting.




Request by Jeffrey E. Smith to rezone from R-S (Single Family Residential) to C-GP (Planned Commercial) of 4.6 acres, more or less, located at 8375 N Rte B.

Director Shawver reported that this property is located north of Columbia and is accessed from state Highway B. The property is currently zoned R-S, (Single family residential) as is property to the north and west. Property to the south is zoned R-M (Moderate density residential). To the east, across Highway B, land inside the city limits is zoned M-1. The request is to rezone to C-GP (Planned Commercial). This property was considered for rezoning to G-G (General Commercial) at the May 1994 meeting, however that request was withdrawn by the applicant prior to any recommendation being made by the Commission. The comprehensive plan designates this area as being suitable for agriculture and rural residential land uses. Staff notified 8 property owners concerning this request.

Ron Shy with Allstate Consultants appeared on behalf of the applicant, Mr. Jeff Smith was also present. Mr. Shy explained that planned commercial property would be more tolerable to the surrounding area. He stated that they do not have a plan, and that they understand the ramifications of not having a plan. They want to be sure they could rezone prior to preparing a plan.

Chairman Schnarre ask if there was an idea how it would be used. Mr. Shy advised that at this time they wanted to get basic approval. It would be a neighborhood type service for the single family and multi family complex in the area.

No one spoke in support or opposition to the request.

Keith Kirpatrick asked if this tract was being considered for annexation by the city. Mr. Smith said yes. He explained that they are trying to get the city sewer up there. They agreed that if they got the sewer, they would annex, they have asked the City to accept whatever zoning is currently in force. Sewer extension requires annexation, he did not want to annex.

Mike Slone asked why it needed to be rezoned for it simply to be annexed. Mr. Smith said it was a practical matter with the small strips. Buyers generally do not look for property that is not zoned. If you have an area that is designated by the Planning and Zoning Commission, to have a small commercial use like this, you will see some development.

Stan Elmore asked if the access was limited to one location by Highway B. Mr. Shy said the property just north of this has a power line across it, so it prohibits development.

Keith Kirkpatrick commented that Mr. Smith’s point was well taken, and that the type of business that people expect to go in there will be appropriate for development in that area. The Commission did indicate the last time he requested that commercial zoning would give more consideration if it were planned commercial. He did not a have problem with the request, particularly if the approval by this body does not rezone the property until a plan is presented and approved.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick made and Joe Falco seconded a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning request of Jeffrey E. Smith.

Voting was as follows:

Keith Kirkpatrick yes

Jeo Falco yes

Mike Sloan yes

Stan Elmore yes

Linda Vogt yes

Jon Gerardi yes

Keith Schnarre yes

The motion to recommend approval passed unanimously.






Request by Melvin G. Sapp to rezone from A-R (Agriculture Residential) to REC (Recreation) of 17.12 acres, ore or less, located at 9689 I-70 Dr NE.

Director Shawver reported that the property is located 4 miles east of Columbia and is accessed from I-70 Drive Northeast. The property is currently zoned A-R (Agriculture Residential) as is all of the land located to the north and east. Land to the west and south is zoned A-2 Agriculture. In July 1986, a conditional use permit was issued for a private outdoor recreation facility on 10 acres. A driving range has been operated on the site for the past 8 years. The applicant is seeking REC (Recreation) zoning for the driving range and adjacent area so that he may add a miniature golf course and batting cages. The comprehensive plan designates this area as being suitable for agriculture and rural residential land uses. Staff notified 11 property owners concerning this project.

Melvin Sapp approached the Commission and explained that he has operated a driving range for 8 year with no problems and would like to have it rezoned.

Chairman Schnarre asked if there was a conditional use permit on the area. Mr. Sapp stated he did have CUP for the 10 acres. There was a driving range in the middle.

No one spoke in support or opposition to the request.

Linda Vogt asked staff if there were any conditions on the CUP or a termination time. Mr. Shawver advised that the restrictions were on the hours of operation, 10 p.m. during the week, 11 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays; and the lights to be directed away from the Interstate/Highway, were the only restrictions.

Mr. Kirkpatrick asked if they are looking to rezone the entire 17 acres. Mr. Schnarre agreed, and said Mr. Sapp had a CUP or 10 acres and he wanted to add 7 acres for recreational use.

Commissioner Mike Slone made and Stan Elmore seconded a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning request for Melvin Sap.

Mike Slone yes

Stan Elmore Yes

Joe Falco yes

Keith Kirpatrick yes

Linda Vogt yes

Jon Gerardi yes

Keith Schnarre yes

The motion to recommend approval passed unanimously.





Request by Price Land, Inc. for Bulloch Enterprises, Inc. to rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to C-GP (Planned Commercial) of 3.85 acres, more or less, located at 7275 S. Hwy 63 south.

Director Shawver reported that this property is located 4 miles south of Columbia and is accessed from Highway 63. The property is zoned A-1, as is all the surrounding land. This request is to rezone 3.85 acres to C-GP. The applicant's intentions are to open a boat dealership, including sales, service and storage. There have been no previous requests concerning this property. The comprehensive plan designates this area as being suitable for rural residential and agricultural land uses. Staff notified 7 property owners concerning this request.

Mr. David Rogers, attorney appeared on behalf of the applicant Bulloch Enterprises, Inc. who wished to open a marine boat dealership on this property. He said they are asking for planned commercial zoning. They are not submitting a plan with this request. They would plan to do that at the next meeting to incorporate any conditions which might be suggested in addition to the ones they have in mind. Obviously the preliminary and final plan will in fact be drawn by a professional engineer. They have tried to anticipate most of what might be the objections to this type of commercial enterprize. This is near the intersection of Highway 163 and 63. It is almost certain that this area will in fact be a commercial area as the county continues to develop because of the high traffic count on Highway 63. Because this does tend to be somewhat of a high speed traffic way, they did not think that it was advisable to have the access directly from Highway 63. On the south side of the property, they propose to build a commercial type road 50' in width and built to county standards.

This would initially provide safer access to this property. A continuation of this road would obviously be in the interest in the landowner to allow the balance of the land to develop. Approximately 300’ to the west of this property is an electric substation owned by Central Electric Power Cooperative. The electric line is not detrimental to a commercial development of the property. It would be a substantial detriment to any sort of a small acreage residential development of the property.

They plan to build a 50' road to county standards, and construct a 90' x 90' Butler Building. They are planning to add substantial landscaping along the front of the property. They are willing to have a condition where no pole signs will be permitted, and limiting the lighting of the property to 3 dawn to dusk lights on the corners of the building.

The parking lot will be asphalt paved. There will be no merchandise display in front of the building. They plan to make a display area for approximate 3 new boats along the north side of the building. They would have an approved septic system on the property. This is a well financed venture, they expect to create 60 jobs and willing to make this a first class operation.

Kieth Schnarre confirmed that it was intended to chain link the whole 3.85 acres. Mr. Schnarre stated he understand Mr. Rogers was asking the rezoning request and not the approval of the plan. Mr. Rogers agreed and asked for any conditions be discussed.

No one spoke in support or opposition to the request.

Linda Vogt asked if the road to the south of the property to be constructed to county standards, would it access on to Hwy 63. Mr. Rogers advised he had permission to put in such a road. He stated there was an existing lane that went back to the electric substation.

Mr. Kirkpatrick asked if the lane was or was not part of the 3.85 acres. The road right of way was not part of the acreage Mr. Rogers said.

Jon Gerardi asked Mr. Rogers if the Highway Commission in entertaining that access to the south bound lanes of Hwy 63 ever entertained the idea that it might carry commercial traffic as opposed to an access to the electrical substation.

Mr. Rogers stated it would be safer even for the equipment that is going to the electrical substation to have a paved road intersecting Hwy 63 as to a 4-wheel drive type rough lane.

Stan Elmore asked Mr. Rogers if in the selection of the site, did his client realized that when people leave this location, they will be headed north bound in a south bond lane.

Mr. Rogers said he understood that this was a one way road.

Mr. Elmore ask if that was not a little dangerous. Mr. Rogers said that was a type of thing that would be marked by signs, and was certainly not a unique problem. There are other places along there that also only turned one direction. The long range plan was that the Highway Commission would turn it into an access road and have extra lanes.

Mr. Elmore asked if it would have been more logical to purchase the property that had access in both directions. Mr. Bulloch advised that they requested to purchase that area and the owner did not wish to sell.

Jon Gerardi said the road access problem is why he could not support this request. The property owner and applicant by the application owns 173 acres, and to simply piece meal one corner with poor and very possibly improper access as far as egress and ngrass was not good. It would be better to plan the roads now. The entry and exit could be on 163 at the north, bring a road immediately into this property and guarantee himself adequate commercial zoning on that entire track. Proper planning on this tract would afford this individual more zoning than he is requesting at this point. The family of boat shoppers on the way home from the Lake of the Ozarks, pulls in to this nice facility, on that Sunday afternoon on their way out trying to decide whether the steam mastic or the boston whaler; just for that one moment turns north and gets killed. he does not want a thing to do with it. This is poor planning of a piece of ground that obviously has commercial potential.

Stan Elmore stated he had driven from Channel 8 all the way to the airport. He could find only one driveway that had been built on this roadway where it did not go all the way across Hwy 63.

Jon Falco agreed with Stan Elmore, he liked the concept and ideas on the drawings but was concerned for the restricted access.

Kirk Kirpatrick noticed there were 4 other corners at Hwy AB and Hwy 63 that are commercial; with only one corner developed.

Commissioner Jon Gerardi made and Commissioner Elmore seconded a motion to deny Price Land, Inc.

Jon Gerardi yes

Stan Elmore yes

Keith Schnarre yes - because of the road access

Linda Vogt yes (had left the room but returned)

Keith Kirpatrick yes - because of the road access

Joe Falco yes - because of the road access

Mike Sloan yes

The motion to deny Price Land Inc. request was passed unanimously



Eastland Hills Plat II and Plat III, final for both plat. RS S10-T48N-R12W Eastland Hills Development, owner. Ron Lueck surveyor and Gene Basinger the owner.

Plat II and Plat III is a continuation of Eastland Hill.

This plat has 83.5 points on the rating scale.

Keith Schnarre asked Mr. Poveromo if everything was up to code and he said yes. Stan Elmore asked if anything foreseeable would delay the connection to the outer roadway north. Mr. Lueck responded that there should not be a delay.

Gene Basinger stated he had been waiting on rezoning with the City on the front part. They hope to rezone to R-2 and a design can be put in with a zoning request. The whole process is moving as quickly as it possibly can. The reason for all the multiple plats is that regulations are in place where you cannot replat without all the owners signing.

Stan Elmore made a motion to approve Eastland Plat II, Mike Sloan seconded.

Stan Elmore yes

Mike Sloan yes

Joe Falco yes

Keith Kirkpatrick yes

Linda Vogt (left the room0

Jon Gerardi yes

Keith Schnarre yes

The motion to approve the request passed unanimously.

Eastland Hills Plat III, final plat RS S10-T48N-R12W Eastland Hills Development, owner. Ron Lueck, surveyor

Stan Elmore made a motion to approve Eastland Plat III, Joe Falco seconded.

Stan Elmore yes

Mike Sloan yes

Keith Schnarre yes

Jon Gerardi yes

Linda Vogt (had left the room)

Keith Kirkpatrick yes

Joe Falco yes

The motion to approve the request passed unanimously.




**PLAT 3**

Brinkman Subdivision, minor plat. RS S34-49N-R12W William Brinkman, Owner. Ron Lueck, surveyor.

Brinkman Subdivision, minor plat. RS S34-T49N-R12W

William Brinkman, owner. Ron Lueck, surveyor.

This two lot subdivision is located on the east side of Wyatt Lane approximately 1/2 mile north of Hwy PP. Located in an RS zoning district, there is an existing house and mobile home on the property. The mobile home was placed on the property in 1987 as a conditional use permit. Both units use the existing lagoon on lot #2. Lagoon and sewer easements will be handled by separate documents.

If the trailer is removed from lot #2 in order to construct a new house, continued use of a shared lagoon would not be approved by the Department of Health.

Additional right-of-way has been granted along Wyatt Lane.

Stan Elmore made and Mike Sloan second a motion to approve Brinkman Subdividion, minor plat.

Stan Elmore yes

Mike Sloan yes

Linda Vogt yes

Keith Kirkpatrick yes

Joe Falco yes

Keith Schnarre yes

Jon Gerardi yes

The motion to approve the request passed unanimously.



***PLAT 4***

South Brook Subdivision, preliminary plat. RS S1-T47n-R13W Jac and Judith Durk, owners. Ron Lueck, surveyor

This twenty-six lot subdivision is located between Bethel Church Road and State Rte K approximately l/2 mile south of Rockbridge Elementary School. Located in an RS zoning district the development will be served by the Walnut Brook waste water treatment facility (operated by B.C.R.S.D.). the plat reflects two fire hydrants and additional right-of-way has beeen granted along Bethel Church Rd.

The developer originally approached the Commission December 1992, and requested to rezone this property to RM. The request approved by the Planning Commission was denied by the County Commission.

There is an existing single family dwelling and associated outbuildings which will be removed.

This plat has 68 points on the rating scale.

Stan Elmore requested that South Brook Drive hits Bethel Road. This road lines up Brookside Lane which is on the other side of the road. It would appear that you could face a house on lot 13 on Bethel and it would be as wide as the typical lots that are in the center of the subdivision, which are 72' 6" and an intersection alignment would be a lot safer. It would be an alignment for the road pavement which is shown on the plan.

It would be much safer if traffic hit Rte K at more of a 90 degree angle. The right of way should be adjusted to provide for right of way that is as near as possible to Brookside.

Stan Elmore made and Joe Falco second a motion that Preliminary Plat South Brook Subdivision be approved with three (3) conditions.

1. Additional right of way be provided on Rte K to provide

for half of a 100' right of way

2. Road pavement at South Brook be aligned to enter Rte K

at more of a right angle but not changing the right of way as shown on this plat.

3. That South Brook as it hits Bethel on the west side be

aligned with Brookside Lane. This will be a 4 way


Stan Elmore yes

Joe Falco yes

Keith Schnarre yes

Jim Beasley yes Arrived at 8:20 p.m.

Jon Gerardi yes

Linda Vogt yes

Keith Kirkpatrick yes

Mike Sloan yes

The motion was approved unanimously.




Cross Creek Planned Residential Development, Review Plan and Preliminary Plat. A-2 S11/12/13-T47N-R13W. Jeffrey Smith, owner. Ron Shy, Surveyor.

Gene Poveromo, staff member presented his report on Cross Creek Presliminary Plat:

This tract includes 265 acres of A-2 zoning district, with a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres. Overall permitted density allowed is 106 single family dwellings.

Planned developments allow the creation of individual lots less than the required 2.5 acres. In permitting smaller lots without increasing the density, one result is dedicated open space and the clustering of home sites. Planned development can also encourage designing individual home sites based on an appropriate building locations as opposed to maximizing minimum lot size.

The plan reflects approximately 138 acres of undeveloped/open area.

The site is located due south of Rock Bridge State Park; the east property line is along Rock Bridge Lane. The west property line adjoins Hill Creek Road southeast corner adjoins Highpoint Lane.

Phased development and access to Hillcreek Road has been discussed with the developer. (see map)

There is some higher density along High Point Lane. Such design is permitted in a planned development with Commission approval. There has been neighborhood concern expressed to the staff about this area and other aspects of the development.

The DNR has been contacted and provided written comment (copy provided to commission-see file).

Septic tank and lagoons will not be permitted. The development is to be served by a waste water package plant which will be constructed and turned over to the B.C.R.S.D. (Boone County Regional Sewer District) for ownership, operation and maintenance.

The development site has 56 points on the rating scale and it does meet the requirements of the subdivision regulations far a preliminary plat.

Commissioner Gerardi wanted to know if the deliberation is on the planed residential development as an overlay to the A-2 zoning classification as opposed to the subdivision plat or is this simultaneous.

Mr. Poveromo advised it was being presented simultaneously as a review plan and a preliminary plat. He suggested a motion on both, one to approve or deny review plan and to approve or deny the preliminary plat.

Chad Sayer with Allstate Consultants approached the commission. He stated he had been working with the owner, Mr. Smith on the development plan. The goal of the planed residential development is to shift the focus from minimum lot size to maximize the building space. Each building site has been individually sited and a process was followed to maximize the common area for the lots.

Mr. Sayer explained that in an effort to protect and preserve the park boundary, Mr. Smith has agreed a the 100' buffer which will be restricted from development. Several public concerns have come to light this week through the Planning office. One of them was increased runoff from the developed area from the streets and lots. All of the storm drainage will be onto the property.

Mr. Sayer continued stating the future access to Hill Creek is a problem, but as far as the plat itself causing a problem or worsening a problem, they did not identify it as that. The existing situation along Hill Creek Rd. with the roadway width, degree of curvature, and hill is inadequate now. The roadway entering Hill Creek is designed to see up the hill, see traffic coming and see to the bridge. They have not proposed any intersection designs to the county at this time. They want to widen the shoulder and allow vehicles that could not stop because of the surface conditions to continue to the future access.

Commissioner Gerardi asked who owned the common area. Mr. Sayer said that the proposed schedule for development is not immediate. It is not a one year development plan, they are looking at 7 to 10 years to complete the development plan. At this time, the common area would be common to Lot 45 until the development initiates and then the western portion common ground will be common to Lot 45. The area will still be restricted.

Mr. Jeffery Smith, owner approached the commission. He stated he had bought 3 different pieces of tracts to comprise the property. The plan was to build his home on the western third of the property. He has no immediate plans to do anything with the rest of the property. Mr. Smith stated one concern with the people at Hill Creek was the intersection. The residents had stated to him that any increase of traffic would exasperate the problem. Mr. Smith agreed with the residents. He continued that if the road problem was to be addressed it needed to be worked out with the county.

Mr. Smith stated another concern was one area with 15 lots. He stated he did not care if 4 lots went in or the 15 lots, it was a number that Chad Sayer had come up with. Mr. Smith stated no one had contacted him with concerns or questions. He was willing to change his plans.

Mr. Smith said at the concept review meeting, the Dept. of Conservation wanted a 100' buffer adjacent to the park. He was also going to provide 2000' of common area adjacent to the eastern borders and 150' buffer on the southern boarder. He stated there was about 138 acres of common area and he is working with a horticulturalist for that development.

Mr. Smith stated one problem brought up would be the type of treatment plant. He said that water samples have been taken from the creek and substantial amounts of coli in it. He wanted to get the people on High Point to hook into the treatment plant to end the pollution that may be going into the creek.

John Weston approached the commission to discuss the development and types of ground cover on the property. He said they are growing buffalo grass and a native prairie grass in a greenhouse. In the wooded areas they would go back and do restoration. The same process had been done by Rock Bridge State Park and the National Forest Service. He advised this would be at least a 6 yr program.

Mr. Smith advised the program was for 6-7 years on the entire piece. He wants to make the lots blend in, not to knock down all the trees and scrap the land.

Commissioner Gerardi asked for clarification on the common area and ownership. Mr. Smith said his attorny will work with him on that. He would have to have a home owners association combination. At this point Mr. Smith said he did not have all the details, it had been debated whether he would own the common ground, or deed it to a homeowner’s association.

Commissioner Gerardi asked how Mr. Smith intended to get into his house. Mr. Smith showed that he would come off Hill Creek, cross into the bottom, cross the creek on a covered bridge and and follow an old road-way. He stated 60 years ago this was a way in. The previous owner had showed him many of the old roads on the property. Mr. Smith showed 3 different means into the property but the Hill Creek people did not want one way used and the park people did not want another way used.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked if the one left would be his future private road. Mr. Smith advised the penciled area on the map was the proposed road.

Commissioner Sloan asked if that was the extent of the private road and Mr. Smith stated there was another road in.

Chairman Schnarre asked if the neighborhood could join into the treatment plan, he asked if it would be oversized.

Mr. Smith said it could be done and he would want to do it. He said it would be to their best interest to do that.

Commissioner Gerardi suggested if there were different plans for the southeast corner of the tract to show them for discussion, it might save a couple of hours of talking.

Chad Sayer said the funny lot configuration was to support the existing greenhouse. That process will take 5 - 8 years. He still wanted to support the greenhouse on a platted lot.

Commissioner Falco asked where the waste water location was. He was advised lot 101. Mr. Sayer explained it could be switched to the other side of the street since there was some concern.

Jeff Barrow, stated this was one of the neatest neighborhoods in Boone County, that it is really aspecial place. He first heard of the development from John Weston who is assisting the owner. He heard of the large tract that was being restored and looked at the plat being presented. He stated there are four (4) types of neighbors in the area; Jeff Smith who owns the land; the people who use Route K, the people who use Route N; and, the Rock Bridge State Park visitors. His interest was as a neighbor of the park. Mr. Barrow spoke of differences between neighbors, wanting not to think of their own interest, but of the greater neighborhoods interest.

Mrs. John Searcy who lives to the north and east of the property approached the commission. She felt confident Mr. Smith will do his very best to do this to their satisfaction and that of all of the neighbors.

Tom Schneider approached the commission to speak on behalf of the Hill Creek Association. He stated the Hill Creek subdivision residents have several infrastructure concerns they felt should be addressed prior to the discission on the plat. He stated that Mr. Smith said he did not have any plans to develop this subdivision for 7 - 10 years, but wanted to build his own home.

Subdivision regulations allow 5 acres or larger, Mr. Smith could build his house by simply surveying off the 5 acre tract without going through this process at all. Mr. Schneider said there was no urgency in acting upon this request, he was asking that several issues be first studied and resolved before this plat be set in stone.

Mr. Schneider said there is concern with the intersection of Deer Run Road into Hill Creek Road, which is a very hazardous road under current conditions. Another concern was the location of and necessity of on site sewage.

Regarding the road conditions, Mr. Schneider circulated photographs showing the location of the intersection with the blind 90 degree turn to the right. In addition to the grade (almost like a ski slope) lack of site distance is a great concern. Some 8 accidents happen a year at the intersection. There is also a flooding problem at that immediate area.

Mr. Schneider spoke of the 100 lots with two ways out. Hill Creek would be the shortest way to Columbia and with multi cars per family; it could mean some 400 or 500 trips per day at that intersection. It currently is unable to safely handle the traffic.

What Mr Schneider's group thought should be done is to determine how to handle the situation and require off street improvements. He stated these problems need to be addressed now.

Second problem he stated was the waste water plant location. He said Mr. Sayer had indicated it would not be a problem to place it on the north side as opposed to the south side. Obviously the residents outside of the subdivision would be over looking the sewer treatment plant would want it moved and moved in land.

Mr. Schneider spoke to another consulting engineer who told him that the State Park, planned to install a sewer pressure line to the City of Columbia sewer system. He said why not send the sewage up to the State Farm offices. If it could be done, it would be cost effective. He stated that once a plat is approved it tends to be some what of a self fulfilling prophecy.

Marion Stevenson of the Scenic Road Committee approached the Commission. She felt that the initial phase of the design is too dense. To exit onto Rock Bridge Lane which is part of the original Pierpont/Providence Road will impact the traffic. With scenic consideration this is not a reasonable access point. The road dates back to 1910 and has historic value.

Ed Moore addressed the Commission stating he would be sharing the boundary line with the proposed sewer treatment system. He wanted to underscore the need for delay. Mr. Moore does not want the system where he can see it off his back porch.

David Eagle also addressed the Commission regarding the proposed sewer treatment system. He stated it would be in his back yard and in full view. Mr. Eagle wanted to know if there was a better place for it.

Mr. John Watkins addressed the Commission stating that he did not receive the notice to the meeting. Mr. Watkins and adjacent owners were concerned about the pond drainage and detention. Mr. Sayer advised a survey will be done for the pond and it will have an adequate design to handle the run off into the potential pond.

Doug Abrams approached the Commission to postpone a decision since neighbors needed more time to review the plans. The plans had even been revised earlier in the meeting.

Susan Haines, property owner of the se corner approached the Commission. She presented a signed petition of 40 neighbors opposed to the plan that wanted the matter tabled. She asked for the residents who attended the meeting to rise and be seen by the Commision.

Sheriff Ted Boehm approached the Commission as a concerned resident in the area. He said he had 25 years of law enforcement investigating accidents. Ten (10) years in this area and Deer Run Road. An engineer said the existing road was inadequate. Mr. Boehm asked the Commission not to act until changes are done and they have agreed to them. Residents do care what is happening, that is why they are here tonight.

Mr. Boehm continued that the intersection has a blind spot, and that no one knows what to do to alleviate the problem. "It is an accident waiting to happen", Mr. Boehm said. Add 100 homes and 200 cars, it is mind boggling what could happen.

Rosemary Willis addressed the Commission. Her concern was the impact on the schools and the roads.

Dennis Murphy, stated that he is a personal injury attorney. In his openion, if Boone County added the access they would be liable for any accidents.

Jerry Forester addressed the Commission with two major concerns. He had lived there since 1987, he wished he had a canoe to get out since it tends to flood 3-4 times a year. His second concern was the location of the sewage system since it was 1000’ from his property line.

Joan Bay approached the Commission with her concerns regarding road safety, and the sewage system that is out her back door. She stated so many things were indefinite, please table the plan until the items are resolved.

Deb Dushon approached the Commission to speak regarding the two dangerous intersections. She appreciated the developer wanting to change things. If the lots were made larger in the range of 5-10 acre it would decrease density.

Gene Worth addressed the Commission. He stated Turtle Creek split 70 acres into 13 lots, if that were done here there would be no complaints. Beautiful property but the plan now is too dense. He did not see that in these plans the concern for the property. He tried to buy this land two years ago with 6 other people to put 6 individual homes on 240 acres.

Millie Cottle addressed the commission. She lives at High Point Lane and Rock Bridge Lane. She has lived there 5 years. She was a victim of an accident on Hill Creek when her pickup was rear ended on the ski slope. The intersection of 163 and Rte K is another dangerous area. The impact of cars from the subdivision at Cross Creek will increase this. She was asking the commission for protection of their way of life.

Joe Engeln, Phd in geology on the faculty at MU approached the commission. His concern related to the ponds and other closed depressions on the property. He stated that with the unknown of underground caverns and sink holes in the area, it could lead to a number of problems. No maps are available for this area to know what is going on underground. Mr. Engeln was glad to hear that a treatment plant is planned for this area.

The second risk he stated was of structural damage. Because no one knows where things are in the subsurface. It is very risky to go very deep with any drilling. That might include foundations, putting in sewage pipes, water pipes or anything else that has to go into the subsurface.

Chad Sayer addressed the hydraulic concern about the future access. The water does back up at the bridge. The design for the covered bridge is to pass the 100 year flood and take care of the back water.

Regarding the intersection at Hill Creek it is bad. The proposed future access would be an improvement. They planned for a large widen shoulder.

Mr. Sayer addressed the lots, being in the southeast reduced from 15 into four (4).

Mr. Smith approached the commission. He said with a project like this he tried to comply with rules and regulations. He has a very good idea how to help Hill Creek. He said if the Commissioners did not want to vote for this plat, vote it down. If it meets all the legal criteria, vote yes. He said he would not be held hostage. If he is expected to solve Hill Creek’s problems to get this plat done, it would not happen.

Mr. Smith continued that the Commission had a duty to take a look and see if it meets with the regulations. He would continue to work with Hill Creek and with the neighbors who are concerned.

Commissioner Beasley asked for other ideas on the intersection. Mr. Smith went to the map to show the possible new intersection, widen shoulder and possibly flattening the corner.

Commissioner Gerardi made and Jim Beasley seconded a motion to recommend approval of the Cross Creek PRD Review Plan and Preliminary Plat, subject to the following conditions:

1) prior to any further action/approval, the applicant resolve problems with the intersection of Deer Run Road and Hill Creek Road, working with the County, the neighborhood and professional staff.

2) that the location of the sewer plant be resolved.

3) that development of the southeast section of the property be reconfigured to no more than 4 lots (near the intersection of Rock Bridge/Weymouth Road and High Point Lane).

4) that the ownership and maintenance responsibility for land labeled as "common ground" be resolved.

5) that the entire development area to be restricted to no more than 100 lots.

6) that no more than "X" lots be developed prior to two routes of access be provided ("X" being the number of lots developed, said number to be determined by the developer).

7) the question of proposed closing of the east-west extension of Rock Bridge Lane be resolved prior to a final plat being submitted.

8) that the developer provide adequate protection both during and after construction to insure the protection of all sinkholes located on the property (to County satisfaction).

9) that all lots front on a publicly dedicated right-of-way.

10) that right-of way as required be provided adjacent to all existing roadways.

11) that storm water design and construction meet standards of the City of Columbia.

Jon Gerardi yes

Jim Beasley yes

Keith Kirkpatrick yes

Stan Elmore yes

Keith Schnarre yes

Mike Sloan yes

Linda Vogt yes

Joe Falco no


The motion to recommend approval of the Cross Creek PRD Review Plan and Preliminary Plat was approved, with 7 members voting "Yes" and one member voting "No".


**Conditional Use Permit**

Request by Brian and Patty Rigby to operate a day care center on .97 acres located at 3400 S. Rangeline Road.

Motion to table until October meeting was approved by acclimation.


Adjourned at 11:05 p.m.






Respectfully submitted,



Keith Kirkpatrick, Secretary

On this ________ day of _____________, 1994.