City of Columbia, Missouri

Meeting Minutes

Planning and Zoning Commission

Conference Rooms

1A/1B

Wednesday, November 30, 2022

Special Call Work Session

6:00 PM

Columbia City Hall

701 E. Broadway

I. CALL TO ORDER

8 -

Present:

Tootie Burns, Sara Loe, Anthony Stanton, Valerie Carroll, Sharon Geuea Jones,

Robbin Kimbell, Peggy Placier and Shannon Wilson

1 - Michael MacMann

Excused:

II. INTRODUCTIONS

III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Meeting agenda adopted unanimously

Move to approve

IV. OLD BUSINESS

A. Draft Regulations - Short-term Rental (continuation)

Mr. Zenner provided a brief overview of where the Commission left off at the end

of the November 29 work session and opened the discussion to begin with the

remaining outstanding provisions that were not previously addressed. However,

prior to engaging in that discussion the Commission indicated it wanted to circle

back to discussion of the proposed provision dealing with requiring separation

between STRs (use-specific standard B.11).

There was additional discussion that having the provision included in the

regulations or at least as a consideration when a CUP may be required would be

worthwhile. There was Commission discussion on this concept and it was agreed

that the provision should be removed from the body of the regulations and added

to CUP review considerations that would be discussed later in the work session or

as part of an upcoming session. It was further discussed that provisions should be

made more “generic” by removing a specific separation distance between possible

STR locations.

Commissioners noted that when staff would be conducting its review of a CUP

request it could comment on the number of STRs already in the vicinity; thereby,

providing a better gauge of STR concentration in that specific location. There were

also comments offered that indicted removing the arbitrary separation distance

would not create “winners or losers” when decisions needed to be made on allow

additional STRs in a particular location. The recommended move of the provisions

found in use-specific standard B (11) to only be applicable when a CUP is sought

was approved by a vote of (7-1).

Having addressed the only “circle-back” issue from the November 29 meeting, the

Commissioners resumed discussion of the remaining outstanding regulatory

provisions following the outline prepared by Chair Gueau Jones. The following is a

summary of the discussion and votes taken.

Proposed use-specific standard B (18) [Revocation of Certificate of Compliance] was

approved as written and was agreed upon to be applicable to all STR tiers by a vote

of (8-0).

Proposed use-specific standard B (3) [Proof of Ownership] was approved as written

with modifications to address authorized tenants and was agreed upon to be

applicable to all STR tiers by a vote of (8-0).

Proposed use-specific standard B (2) [Limits on Licensure] was approved as written

with modifications for tenants and was agreed upon to be applicable to all STR tiers

by a vote of (8-0). There was Commission discussion and clarification on the fact

that this provision would allow a property owner with multiple rental properties

the ability to grant “authorization” to tenants for the tenant’s own personal STR

licensure. Such granting of “authorization” would not result in the property owner

from forfeiting their right to have single dwelling unit licensed for STR purposes

under their individual name.

Proposed use-specific standard B (10) [Parking] was discussed and concerns were

expressed relating to the impact that requiring additional parking may have on

neighborhoods given such paving may go unused for significant periods of time.

Staff explained that if insufficient parking already existed at a dwelling, failure to

provide adequate parking may exacerbate parking existing deficiencies. The

Commission discussed this observation noting that if such properties were used as

primary/secondary residences the resident was already parking somewhere to

meet their needs and that paving for more parking just because the dwelling was

licensed for STR was not necessary. There was discussion that availability of parking

may serve to self-regulate the impact that a dwelling used for STR purposes would

really have on the neighborhood.

A vote on this provision was taken on a tier by tier basis. The Commission voted to

approve the provision for use within Tier 2 and Tier 3 by votes of (7-1) and (8-0),

respectively. The Commission voted to deny (2-6) to have the provision applicable

to Tier 1.

Proposed use-specific standard B (16) [Compliance] was reconsidered given

concerns about the number of days to bring a property in compliance being

sufficient. The Commission expressed concern that 180 days would not allow a

property owner sufficient time to become compliant or to make decisions on what

to do with a dwelling if such compliance was not possible. Commissioners also

cited several administrative issues that could arise as well as questioned when the

actual “effective date” of the ordinance would be.

Staff agreed with the Commission on possible administrative burdens and noted a

short compliance period could result in operators going “underground”. However,

staff cautioned that creating standards complicated may create similar compliance

issues. Mr. Zenner stated that in reviewing other ordinances compliance periods

ranged from 180 days to 365 days. Ms. Thompson noted that the “effective date” is

typically the same day the ordinance is approved by Council; however, can be

delayed by Council. Mr. Zenner noted that staff would seek to delay the effective

date to ensure that all forms for administration were prepared and sufficient public

notice was given regarding the new regulations.

There was additional Commission discussion resulting in a decision being made

that revising the 180 days to 365 days for becoming compliant was sufficient.

Commissioners noted that any longer period would only prolong the inevitable

with limited added value. Allowing a year seemed reasonable given this would

allow someone to clear their booking calendar and decide what to do with a

dwelling/property that could not become compliance by any means. The

Commission made a motion to approve the revised provision by a vote of (8-0).

Commissioners also inquired on how members of the public could access STR

licensed STR properties. Mr. Zenner stated that the GIS Division and Community

Development would partner to create a database of licensed STRs and a

corresponding STR map. The map would likely become public and could serve as a

tool to help in regulation enforcement. The map content still needed to be

discussed with the GIS Division and will need to consider possible limitations to

protect personal information. A map associated with STRs has always been

anticipated as part of the regulatory process.

Having arrived at approximately 8:30 pm the Commission agreed to adjourn for the

evening. Discussion would resume on December 1 at 6 pm. Topics for the next

meeting would include conditional use criteria specifically for STRs and possible

revisions to the Council work session report/memo.

V. NEXT MEETING DATE - December 1, 2022 @ 6 pm (tentative)

VI. ADJOURNMENT

Meeting adjourned at approximately 8:30 pm

Move to adjourn