City of Columbia, Missouri

Meeting Minutes

Planning and Zoning Commission

Conference Rooms

1A/B

Thursday, July 6, 2023

5:30 PM

Work Session

Columbia City Hall

701 E. Broadway

I. CALL TO ORDER

7 -

Present:

Sara Loe, Michael MacMann, Valerie Carroll, Sharon Geuea Jones, Peggy Placier,

Zack Dunn and Matt Ford

2 - Anthony Stanton and Shannon Wilson

Excused:

II. INTRODUCTIONS

III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Meeting agenda adopted unanimously.

Move to approve

IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

June 22, 2023 Work Session

June 22, 2023 work session minutes adopted unanimously.

Move to approve minutes as presented

V. NEW BUSINESS

A. Proposed UDC Text Change - Substandard Lot Activation

Mr. Zenner introduced that topic explaining that the staff had put together the

framework of the proposed text change that would address the issue of allowing

lots that were substandard (i.e less than 60-feet wide or smaller in area than

required by zoning classification) to be developed with at least a single-family

home. He indicated that this approach was to replace the need to make

modifications to the R-2 and R-MF districts to accommodate “cottage-sized” lots

and was in response to a request made by Council at the end of their June 19

meeting.

There was significant discussion and clarification about how this activity was not

intended to replace the proposed R-C district which was intended to be used in

“greenfield” situations. Rather the proposed text change was intended to allow

existing “legal lots” the ability to be developed with reduced dimensional

standards such that they could be reused without the necessity of a replat. In

essence, the term “cottage” was not to be associated with these types of lots rather

these types of lots are what is considered “substandard”.

Mr. Zenner explained that to activate development of substandard lots it was

necessary to modify the definition of “legal lot” by expanding it to include the R-MF

district. This change, he noted, may avoid the need for many of the replats that are

submitted to be a requirement in the future; therefore, eliminating the tension

that has previously existed in new development in established neighborhoods. He

noted; however, that a substandard lot would need meet the expanded definition

of “legal lot” otherwise it would need to be platted in its current configuration to

obtain “legal lot” status before a permit could be issued.

Mr. Zenner noted that such a process would assure that the City could obtain

necessary easements and right of way if necessary or desired on those historically

substandard parcels. He did note that in some instances gaining these additional

dedications may create greater issues than their benefits and before requiring such

an action internal staff discussion was needed.

Mr. Zenner also noted that a new definition for “substandard lot” was being

proposed. It was within this definition that the issue of platting a lot not meeting

the definition of “legal lot” was found. He noted, based on the outcome of internal

discussion on the value of new dedications this definition may be modified.

Mr. Zenner also discussed how the “summary dimensional” standards tables within

Article 2 were modified for the R-1, R-2 and R-MF districts via the addition of a

general footnote. This footnote, he explained, directed readers to the general

dimensional standards table in Article 4 where the full dimensional requirements

for the R-1, R-2, and R-MF districts were described. Mr. Zenner then explained how

the Article 4 dimensional standards were modified by the addition of footnote

directing a reader to a new “Special Dimensional Standards” subsection dealing

specifically with substandard lots.

Having explained how the dimensional standards tables of Articles 2 and 4 were

amended, Mr. Zenner discussed the new “Special Dimensional Standards”

subsection that was created for substandard lots. He noted that Mrs. Thompson

and he discussed at length the manner in which it would be effective to present the

dimensional standard requirements. There was discussion of putting them directly

in the dimensional standards table of Article 4, but it was ultimately determined

the presenting them as a separate subsection would be easier.

Mr. Zenner explained that the dimensional standards within the subsection were a

direct copy of the dimensional standard currently used for “cottage” lots. He noted;

however, that he had become stuck when trying to determine if a maximum lot size

and/or lot width needed to be included within the table. Mr. Zenner noted that a

parcel could be either substandard by lot width, lot area, or both in some instances.

There was significant Commission discussion on this concern and it was concluded

that the maximums should be eliminated from the table. This would permit

“oddly” configured lots potentially meeting or exceeding lot area or lot width to be

able redeveloped. The Commission concluded that if a lot didn’t meet one or the

other lot standards it would still be considered substandard; therefore, it should be

eligible to be redeveloped under the proposed provisions.

Having worked through the regulatory amendment, the Chairman asked if this item

would be brought before the Commission at the next regular meeting. Mr. Zenner

said that was not possible given that the advertising deadline had already passed.

Mr. Teddy asked if the Commission wanted a report to go to Council explaining

what was being considered before a public hearing was held. The Commission

indicated that would be appropriate. Mr. Zenner indicated that he and Mrs.

Thompson would go other the specifics of the proposed change and would

determine if the current provisions addressing “Non-conforming Lots” was still

needed within the UDC as a result of this provision. It was believed such provisions

could be removed which would eliminate possible confusion, but a deeper dive

into the specifics was needed. Mr. Zenner noted that this item would likely be

brought back at the earliest in August given the Commission’s attention would be

shifting back to the STR regulations.

Mr. Zenner reminded the Commission of the joint City Council-Planning

Commission work session on July 24 at 5:30 pm in Conference Rooms 1A/1B. He

noted that an agenda would be produced for this meeting before the Commission’s

next meeting on July 20. As such, he noted that he would put together some

general topic questions for the discussion with the hope that the Council would

provide more definitive guidance on what it’s desired outcome with the

regulations were.

Mr. Zenner noted that given the issues and concerns raised by the public

engagement responses some consideration of modification may be appropriate at

the Commission level. There was discussion on this suggestion and the Chairman

asked that Commissioners review the ordinance and come prepared to discuss

what aspects of the ordinance were non-negotiable elements at the upcoming

work session on July 20. Commissioner Loe requested that the Commission be

provided the engagement results with the non-residents removed. Mr. Zenner

noted that he could get that information sent to the Commission.

VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS

None received

VII. NEXT MEETING DATE - July 20, 2023 @ 5:30 pm (tentative)

VIII. ADJOURNMENT

Meeting adjourned at 6:58.

Move to adjourn