City of Columbia, Missouri

Meeting Minutes

Planning and Zoning Commission

Conference Rooms

1A/B

Thursday, June 22, 2023

5:30 PM

Work Session

Columbia City Hall

701 E. Broadway

I. CALL TO ORDER

8 -

Present:

Sara Loe, Anthony Stanton, Michael MacMann, Valerie Carroll, Peggy Placier,

Shannon Wilson, Zack Dunn and Matt Ford

1 - Sharon Geuea Jones

Excused:

II. INTRODUCTIONS

III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Meeting agenda adopted unanimously

Adopt agenda as presented

IV. OLD BUSINESS

A. R-C (Residential Cottage) District - Discussion (continued)

Mr. Zenner re-introduced the topic and noted that he would talk about a recent

request of the City Council that may result in a slight detour relating to moving

forward with the creation of the new district. He also indicated that it was staff’s

intent to try to focus on the details of the permissible uses, in addition to cottage

housing, that would be allowed in the new district as well as try to address some

use-specific standards.

Mr. Zenner began by explaining some of the background of why the R-C district was

being prepared as context for Commissioner’s Dunn and Ford. He noted that as part

of creating the R-C new district there would be amendments to the exiting R-2 and

R-MF districts that would allow “cottage” lots between 30-59 feet in width. By

creating this option, there would be a means by which to allow existing

“substandard lots” to potentially be reused without the necessity of consolidation

platting. Mr. Zenner also addressed the issue of not having “legal lot” status and

the potential that platting the substandard lot would still be required prior to the

issuance of a building permit.

Mr. Zenner also addressed the issues of permitting development on the narrower

lots using the existing “cottage” dimensional standards and provided some

background on prior discussion and conclusions the Commission had arrived at

relating to those standards. Specifically, Mr. Zenner noted that the idea of having a

maximum lot coverage was something that may need further research before

adding to the pending amendment and may also be a consideration that will be

addressed as part of the consultant services related to the “Central City Study” that

was yet to be launched.

There was Commission discussion on the dimensional standards to be

implemented in the amendment such that the building area created on the narrow

lots would actually accommodate a home. Additionally, the Commission discussed

the desire to allow “cottage” lots within the R-1 zoning district. Mr. Zenner noted

that had not been part of the prior discussion as it was his belief that proposing

such an option would result in significant push-back from residents within those

neighborhoods. Several Commissioner’s did not agree with this conclusion and felt

that to allow the option for activation of substandard lots regardless of the district

in which they were located was essential.

Mr. Zenner then explained the most recent discussion of the Council at the close of

its June 19 meeting in which a request was made that the Commission consider an

amendment to the UDC that would allow substandard lots, generally in the R-2 and

R-MF districts, to be available for reuse. Mr. Zenner noted that this request was

partially being address with the revisions the Commission had been discussing with

the R-2 and R-MF districts. Given Council’s request, he noted that work on the R-C

district would be delayed to allow for the Council request to be addressed.

Mr. Zenner noted that there were several options that could be taken to address

the Council’s request. One option would be to create new language addressing the

issue within the “non-conforming” section of the UDC and addressing the issues

associated with the definition of “legal lot”. A second option would be to continue

revising the dimensional standards table for the R-2 and R-MF districts as had been

underway in association with the creation of the new R-C district.

There was Commission discussion on the approaches which included again a desire

to address the issue of substandard lots within the R-1 district as well. There was

discussion of how to allow for the reuse of the substandard lot only and not the

creation of new lots through subdivision actions. Mr. Zenner noted that if a

property owner were to attempt to replat an existing lot with a substandard lot

such an action would be subject to Council approval and may be denied as

promoting an “adverse” change in neighborhood character. He noted that

whatever regulations were created it may be possible to address that issue. He

also noted that unless a substandard lot actually contained sufficient lot area to

accommodate the next level of dwelling (i.e. duplex or multi-family) the

substandard lot could be restricted to just rebuilding a single-family. Ms.

Thompson recommended caution on what was being discussed without further

consideration of its ramifications. Mr. Zenner noted he had an idea and could

better explain it to remove possible concerns.

The Commission then discussed how the dimensional standards may impact the

proposed substandard lots. Mr. Zenner noted that he was proposing that the

dimensional standards presently permitted within the “cottage” standards be

applied in those instances. He noted these standards already are part of the UDC

and did not believe there was a reason to create alternative ones.

After additional discussion the Commission favored the idea of allowing the use of

substandard lots via a textual change using the dimensional standards for the

“cottage” lots as the minimum requirement. There was also agreement that a lot

coverage ratio not be added to maintain simplicity to the proposed revisions.

There was a motion made to include R-1 substandard lots within the new text such

that all types of residential zoning would be covered by the change. This motion

was accepted by a majority of the Commission. Mr. Zenner noted that he would

work with Ms. Thompson on the revisions and have a draft of the text for the next

work session.

V. GENERAL COMMENTS BY PUBLIC, MEMBERS AND STAFF