Public Comment Request for County Commission

Since presenting our Conservation Overlay Proposal and Petition request to City Council for a moratorium on development until a plan (by task force) is developed for sensitive areas around Rock Bridge Memorial State Park, and especially the Gans Creek Wild Area, and since defeating the developer’s latest building request last month, there’s been talk of needing County-City planning and protection for the area around Rock Bridge, especially Gans Creek Wild Area.

Thus far, many of us have submitted public comment to the City, and we’ve made ourselves heard loud and clear. So now is the time to tell the County Commissioners how YOU feel about protecting this wild area from development. 

Please share your personal experiences, feelings and thoughts about protecting this precious and irreplaceable resource. If interested, also checking back in with the City Council and asking them to move forward on setting up the Gans Creek overlay task force in coordination with the county could not hurt either.

Submit your public comments to:

Justin Aldred, District I Commissioner
801 East Walnut, Room 333
Columbia, MO  65201-7732
573-886-4308 (direct)
jaldred@bonecountymo.org

Janet Thompson, District II Commissioner
801 East Walnut, Room 333
Columbia, MO 65201-7732
573-886-4305 (Commission office)
jthompso@boonecountymo.org

Dan Atwill, Presiding Commissioner
801 East Walnut, Room 333
Columbia, MO 65201-7732
573-886-4305 (Commission office)
datwill@boonecountymo.org

Letter example (please add your own personal talking points and experiences):

Dear Commissioner (Thompson, Atwill, Aldred)

The area around Rock Bridge Memorial State Park, and especially the Gans Creek Wild Area, needs a plan by Boone County, in coordination with Columbia, to ensure the long-term protection of this precious and irreplaceable resource for the county, city and state.

Name
Address

Talking Points:

  • Personal experiences in Gans Creek Wild Area
  • The Gans Creek Wild Area is one of only 12 designated Wild Areas in Missouri
  • Gans Creek is one of only 44 Outstanding State Resource Waters in Missouri
  • Rock Bridge Park and the Gans Creek Wild Area have thousands of visits yearly and host many educational youth events
  • The park is an important engine for economic growth, both through tourism and the quality of life that helps employers attract and keep good employees.
  • Support a moratorium or delay on development
  • Create a special task force to work on a plan to protect sensitive areas like these
  • Encourage that the city and county include robust stakeholder participation, keeping the public process open, accepting input

Gans Creek Allies Conservation Overlay Proposal

Public Presentation at Columbia’s City Council on Monday, Oct. 4

On Monday, October 4 at 7 p.m., the Gans Creek Allies, Gans Creek Allies, a coalition of park neighbors, interested citizens, and local environmental organizations, will submit a public comment at the beginning of the Columbia City Council meeting to present a Conservation Overlay Proposal we have been working on for the last several months, along with the petition that 2,000 of you have signed, for a pause in annexation, and for a SE Area Plan that will protect sensitive areas, like those in Rock Bridge Memorial State Park and the Gans Creek Wild Area.

If you would like to stand with us in support of this plan while we present it shortly after 7 p.m. this Monday at City Hall, we would welcome your support! Show up with your buttons and signs. You may take it a step further and submit letters of support to Council prior to the meeting.

Rock Bridge Memorial State Park Conservation Overlay

Rationale and Request to City Council, October 4, 2021 from Gans Creek Allies (https://saveganscreek.com)

Rationale

1.     Because Rock Bridge Memorial State Park (RBMSP) is an important natural, recreational, aesthetic, educational, and economic asset to the City of Columbia and the surrounding area and deserves special protection;

2.     Because the greatest threat to the Park is development through removal of trees, soil disturbance, and over the long term, the amount of impervious surface cover in stream watersheds in areas just outside the park (a short list of relevant research is included); 

3.     Because  the people of Columbia, Boone County, and the State of Missouri support protection of Rock Bridge Memorial State Park (RBMSP) and its environs as demonstrated by over 2000 signatures to the petitions included with this request, along with recommendations to revise ordinances and zoning to protect sensitive natural areas in the 2013 Columbia Imagined document, the 2010 East Area Plan, and the 2007 Bonne Femme Watershed Project (a list of the relevant strategies, action items, and recommendations from the 3 documents is included).

Request 

The Gans Creek Allies request that the Columbia City Council appoint an ad hoc committee to develop a Conservation Overlay District to be added to the Universal Development Code that will protect the natural assets and experiences of nature in land in the Park by limiting the extent and kinds of development that can take place on the land near the Park. 

1.     The Conservation Overlay should – at a minimum – propose stricter standards than those currently in place for stream buffers, flood plains, Karst, the tree canopy, and erodible soils, plus specific limitations on impervious cover that, as can be shown by research published in refereed scientific journals (professional opinions are not sufficient), will protect the health of streams and their biodiversity. The overlay should also set guidelines and standards for alternative models of development that provide for homes while significantly limiting impervious surface. Clustered conservation subdivisions (page 131 in Columbia Imagined) are an example.  

2.     The conservation overlay should – at a minimum – include the area between Route K on the west, Gans Road on the north, Highway 63 on the east, and the boundary of Rock Bridge Memorial State Park on the south. 

3.     The conservation overlay should automatically apply to any parcels of land within the proposed area at the time of annexation, and requests for annexation and zoning should incorporate overlay conditions. Until then, county zoning and ordinances should apply.

4.     The protections of the conservation overlay should be inherent in development plans that are allowed and not dependent on the understanding, training, and good will of developers, builders, and homeowners, or the ongoing functioning of a Home Owners Association or Best Management Practices that require long-term monitoring and maintenance.

5.     Finally, we request a moratorium of 18 months on annexation and zoning of parcels within the proposed area to give the ad hoc committee time to develop the overlay and the council and community time to consider it.  

Appointees – We will be able to provide a list of possible appointees to the ad hoc committee that includes representatives of conservation groups and land owners.

Read the full proposal with supporting references here.

New Proposal For Canton Estates Submitted

September 30, 2021

On September 28, Crocket Engineering submitted this letter for a Zoning Application Waiver of the one-year waiting period for resubmittal, to annex, rezone and approve a new preliminary Canton Estates Plat at the SE corner of E. Gans and S. Bearfield Roads. The proposed development is adjacent to the Gans Creek Wild Area, which lies directly to the South.

The new plat is essentially unchanged in the number of lots and has potential increases for the 3-acre mixed-use request.  It does not address the road conditions or increased stormwater to Clear Creek which is only 1/4 mile away.

This topic will not be considered on the October 4 City Council agenda.  No information was received prior to the scheduled deadline for the submission of agenda content. 

This correspondence is tentatively scheduled to appear on the City Council’s October 18 agenda under the “Reports” section of that meeting.  It is uncertain what opportunities Council may give to allow public comment on this matter.  As such, it is strongly recommended that you submit written correspondence, to Patrick Zenner’s attention, addressing your concerns prior to October 13 so they may be attached to the correspondence and Council Memo relating to this matter.  

Notes from Patrick Zenner, City of Columbia Development Services Manager:

Section 29-6.4(n)((i)(d) of the Unified Development Code reads as follows:
(D) No application to amend the zoning map may be filed if it is the same or substantially the same as an application submitted within the previous twelve (12) months that was denied by the council or withdrawn by the applicant after a negative recommendation from the commission. The council may, in its sole discretion, authorize a resubmittal within the twelve-month period after reviewing a written request from the applicant that provides justification for the early resubmittal. 

The process for requesting early resubmittal could take various forms, which will ultimately be determined by the written request filed by the applicant and the Council.  If the Council takes any action on a request made pursuant to Section 29-6.4(n)((i)(D), it will need to be brought up at a Council meeting, which would most likely occur under Public Comments or Council Comments, but other paths could be pursued as well.  For instance, Council could request a resolution be prepared or a more detailed report providing some form of request analysis.  At this point, it is unclear how or what process will unfold. 

September 16, 2021

Last week we learned that Crockett Engineering has submitted a concept review for a revised proposal of the Canton Estates Development at the southeast corner of E. Gans Road and S. Bearfield Road. While the development is subject to the one-year waiting period for resubmittal after withdrawing the previous request in June, it is likely that they will ask the City Council to waive this requirement and begin moving towards a vote on their revised proposal at the October 4th City Council meeting,. 


The notification below is for annexation, request to rezone R-1 & M-N for 100 single-family residential lots, 3 larger acreage tracts, and one 3.59 acre M-N zoned lot that will contain neighborhood commercial uses.


Please note: while things have been quiet on here, the Gans Creek Allies have actively been meeting to plan next steps, including long-term protections for the area.

We will begin posting more updates here and urging public comment when the City Council agenda comes out and when we learn more about the proposal.

In the meantime, more information can be found at:

New concept map submitted by Crocket Engineering

Link to Concept Review Request dated August 30, 2021

Our Demand: A Southeast Area Plan

Concerns raised by the recent request to build 114 houses on a 65 acre plot directly north of the Gans Wild Area underline the challenge of reconciling development with the protection of two of Columbia’s significant natural assets, Gans Creek and the Gans Creek Wild Area. Since this is likely to be the first of several similar development requests, now is the time to address those concerns in a systematic and comprehensive way.


Therefore, we request that the Columbia City Council pause all annexation, rezoning, and development requests in the unincorporated southeast part of Columbia until there is a Southeast Area Plan that protects the sensitive area outlined in the 2013 Columbia Imagined Plan.


While Columbia Imagined outlined a sensitive area based on the recharge area of the Devil’s Icebox and the presence of karst topography, no regulations or guidelines specific to the protection of these areas have been developed. The current stormwater guidelines (and their enforcement) have already failed to protect streams in the western part of Rock Bridge Memorial State Park. In addition, developments on the west boundary of the park have affected the public use and enjoyment of the park. It is particularly important that these outcomes be avoided next to the Gans Creek Wild Area, one of only 12 wild areas in Missouri, and Gans Creek, one of only 44 Outstanding State Resource Waters in Missouri.

To this end, we have drafted a new petition which we will submit to the City Council prior to their meeting on June 21st, when they are scheduled to vote on the annexation and rezoning of the Canton Estates property adjacent to Gans Creek Wild Area. The petition can be signed online here and is also available as a PDF for those would like to circulate the petition in person.

Next Steps – City Council Vote

Updated 5/16/2021

The next step in this process is that the Columbia City Council will vote on whether to annex and rezone this property, and will vote on the preliminary plat design.

This was scheduled for the Monday, May 17 City Council meeting, but when the agenda was released on Friday, May 14 we learned that the developer is asking City Council to table this vote until June 7th.

The Council voted to schedule the vote for June 21st, so the Rally to Save Gans Creek has been rescheduled to 6:00 p.m. Monday, June 21, before the City Council meeting. This will be an opportunity to gather with other protectors of Gans Creek and add your voice to the mix…then attend the meeting to show Council how many people oppose this development in this location.

It is possible that the Council will NOT table the proposal and will vote anyway on May 17. This is unlikely, but if you can attend the May 17 meeting just in case…that would be super!

That gives us a few more weeks to share our perspectives with City Council, share the petition and spread the word. Check out our Take Action page for tips.

Thank you everyone for caring for this beautiful park we all share!

Quick Links

The Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing – April 8, 2021

The first public stage in the proposal process for the Canton Estates development was through the City of Columbia Planning & Zoning Commission. This all-volunteer board reviews requests for development, zoning changes and variances and makes recommendations to the City of Columbia City Council for approval or disapproval.

There were two proposals before the board:

  1. Annex the property from the county to the City of Columbia and zone R-1 Residential.
  2. Approve the preliminary plat design (the map and outline showing the development layout, infrastructure and basic engineering of the site).

The P&Z Commission ultimately voted 7-1 to NOT recommend approval of either of these proposals to the City Council. Following this vote, the proposal continues to City Council who may either approve or disapprove the current proposal. The most likely first step will be a public hearing, followed by a Council vote at a later meeting. City Council has wide latitude on what they can do in these situations and could recommend a specific remedy, approve part of the plan or reject all of it, requiring the developer to resubmit a plan they think will pass.

More about the April 8 P&Z Public Hearing

The hearing kicked off with a very detailed presentation by City Staff Senior Planner Rachel Smith. Crockett Engineering and the developer Rob Hill worked closely with city staff to design a plan that they fulfilled all city stormwater regulations and also provided a buffer to the park before the more dense luxury home part of the development. Staff was in support of the plan and recommended approval. (See video at 38:26 for the staff report)

26 citizens spoke before the commission. The only speaking in favor of the proposal was Tim Crockett, the engineer who designed the development plan. The remainder were either opposed to the development or wanted stricter limits on impervious surface, density or other measures that could impact the park. Many were not strictly opposed to development in the area but felt that R-1 zoning was too open-ended to protect this sensitive and unique area from future plan changes. Many recognized that this development could set a precedent for future development in the area and urged special caution.

Public speakers opposing the proposed development included representatives from Friends of Rock Bridge Memorial State Park (a nonprofit dedicated to protection, support and education about the State Park), Columbia Audubon Society, Missouri State Parks Association and a large group of nearby residents and interested area citizens. The meeting didn’t conclude until nearly 11:30 p.m.

The first speaker was Alicia House, a resident of Bearfield Subdivision, who listed a series of quotes from the Bonne Femme Watershed Plan, a document drafted by a diverse group of citizen stakeholders and adopted by the city in 2007. This plan was referred to by many other speakers. Ms. House was followed by a detailed presentation by Friends of Rock Bridge President Kevin Roberson detailing why the group is concerned about impacts to the park and offered to work with the developer to come up with a plan more sensitive to the park. (View a PDF of the FORBMSP presentation here)

These were followed by a parade of heartfelt, well-researched and powerful statements by many people passionate about the park, the wild area, and the watershed.

The Commissioner comments and votes were powerful as well. The general consensus was that this property, and properties adjacent to park in this area, need better protection and planning than R-1 zoning can provide. It was suggested that PD (Planned Development Zoning, where additional requirements or limits can be set for an area in discussions between the city, the developer and neighbors) may be a better fit, or that the area really deserves a special zoning overlay district. Most of the commissioners were impressed by the number of strong public comments and some mentioned the online petition, which at that point had over 5,000 signatures.

To view commissioner comments and votes, go to 3:53 in the meeting video.  

Video of April 8 Meeting

  • Watch video on City website
  • Staff Report – 38:26
  • Public Comment in Opposition – 1:34:36
  • Friends of Rock Bridge, Kevin Roberson – 1:46:33
  • Missouri State Park Association – Dr. Susan Flader – 2:40:00
  • Supporting Comment – Tim Crockett, Engineer – 3:22:37