HomeMy Public PortalAbout2017-11-09 packetNotice of Meeting & Tentative Agenda
City of Jefferson Planning and Zoning Commission
Thursday, November 9, 2017 5:15 P.M.
City Council Chambers, John G. Christy Municipal Building, 320 East McCarty Street
Enter through Main Lobby
All interested parries will be given a chance to he heard.
TENTATIVE AGENDA
1. Call to Order and Introductions
2. Procedural Matters
• Determination of quorum and designation of voting alternates
• Call for cases
• Receive and review requests for continuance
• Receive requests for reordering the agenda
• Format of hearing
• List of exhibits
3. Adoption of Agenda (as printed or reordered)
4. Approval of the Regular Meeting Minutes of October 12, 2017
5. Communications Received
6. New Business/Public Hearings
Case No. P17021 — 1707 Stadium Drive, Rezoning from RS -4 to C -O and Comprehensive Plan
Amendment. Request filed by Bert A. and Jane M. Doerhoff, property owners, for a rezoning of 1,120 sf
from RS -4 Single Family Residential to C -O Office Commercial and an associated amendment to the
Development Plan Map of the Comprehensive Plan. The property is located on the south side of Stadium
Boulevard 145 feet east of the intersection of Stadium Drive and Southwest Boulevard and is described as
Part of Lot 20 of Swift and Thompson Subdivision, Jefferson City, Missouri (Central Missouri Professional
Services, consultant).
Case No. P17022 —Text Amendment Pertaining to Historic Preservation Review of Demolition
Proposals. Request filed by city staff to amend the text of Chapter 8, Buildings and Building Regulations,
establishing procedures and regulations with respect to Historic Preservation Commission review of
demolition proposals. The proposed regulations would include provisions that could prevent the issuance
of demolition permits for structures meeting certain requirements and found to be historically significant.
The complete text of the amendment is available for review at the Department of Planning and Protective
Services, 320 E. McCarty Street, or may be viewed at the Planning and Zoning Commission webpage at:
www.jeffersoncitymo.gov.
7. Other Business
A. Staff updates on prior cases
B. Adopt 2018 Meeting Schedule
8. Adjourn
individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required
under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request.
Please call (573) 634-6410 with questions regarding agenda items.
MINUTES
JEFFERSON CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
October 12, 2017
5:15 p.m.
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT
Bunnie Trickey Cotten
Chris Jordan, Chairman
Jack Deeken
Dale Vaughan
Chris Yarnell, Vice Chairman
Michelle Mahoney, Alternate
Blake Markus, Alternate
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT
Bob George
Dean Dutoi
Michael Lester
David Nunn
Matthew Hall, Alternate
COUNCIL LIAISON PRESENT
Erin Wiseman, Alternate Council Liaison
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2 of 3
3 of 3
2 of 3
3 of 3
2 of 3
3 of 3
3 of 3
2 of 2
1 of 3
3 of 3
2 of 3
1 of 3
STAFF PRESENT
Sonny Sanders, Director of Planning & Protective Services
Eric Barron, Senior Planner
Alex Rotenberry, Transportation Planner
Anne Stratman, Administrative Assistant
1. Call to Order and Introduction of Members, Ex -officio Members and Staff
The Chairman, four regular members and two alternates were present. A quorum was present.
Designation of Voting Alternates
The Chairman announced that all regular members and all alternates were eligible to vote.
2. Procedural Matters and Procedures Explained
Mr. Rotenberry explained the procedures for the meeting. The following documents were entered
as exhibits. Mr. Rotenberry advised that copies of the exhibits are available through the City Clerk
or the Department of Planning and Protective Services:
The City Code of the City of Jefferson, as amended
Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map
Copies of applications under consideration
A list of property owners to whom notices were sent
Affidavit of publication of the public notice in the newspaper
Rules of Procedure, Planning & Zoning Commission
Mr. Rotenberry submitted the following items for the record:
Staff reports
Minutes of proceedings
Copies of drawings, plans, and/or renderings under consideration
Letters or memoranda from staff
Materials submitted by the public or applicants pertaining to the cases under consideration
Jefferson City Planning & Zoning Commission Page 2
October 12, 2017
3. Adoption of Agenda
Ms. Cotten moved and Mr. Yarnell seconded to adopt the agenda as printed. The motion passed
6-0 with the following votes:
Aye: Cotten, Deeken, Markus, Mahoney, Vaughan, Yarnell
4. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 14, 2017
Ms. Cotten moved and Mr. Markus seconded to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of
September 14, 2017 as written. The motion passed 6-0 with the following votes:
Aye: Cotten, Deeken, Markus, Mahoney, Vaughan, Yarnell
5. Communications Received
Correspondence was received at the meeting from the Jefferson City Area Board of Realtors
pertaining to the discussion of the proposed City Code Amendment for Historic Preservation
Review of Demolition Proposals.
6. New Business
Case No. P17019 —1310 Edgewood Drive, Amendment to Final PUD Plan. Request filed by
Capital Region Medical Center, property owner, on behalf of St Nicholas Academy, applicant, for
an amendment to a Final PUD plan to add boarding school as a permitted use of the property.
The property is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Edgewood Drive and
Memorial Drive and is described as Tots 5 and 6 of Medical Park Subdivision.
Mr. Rotenberry described the proposal and explained that the existing building on the property
was previously a child care facility. He stated that the applicant is seeking approval to convert the
building into a boarding school use, with the intent of providing a safe, structured, and adult
supervised boarding house for underprivileged and under -resourced children. Mr. Rotenberry
explained that the property is zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development, and the existing PUD Plan
for the property does not include boarding school as a permitted use.
Mr. Martin Grabanski, Facilities Director, Capital Region Medical Center, 1125 Madison Street,
spoke regarding this request. Mr. Grabanski explained that the purpose of this request is to allow
an opportunity for an early childhood development center for St. Nicholas Academy. He stated that
Capital Region Medical Center initiated the request since they own the property.
Ms. Elizabeth Huber, 3705 Fairway Drive, spoke regarding this request and explained that St.
Nicholas Academy will be a boarding school for underprivileged children. She stated that the
children would attend local area schools with the proposed facility on Edgewood Drive being
primarily for boarding purposes. Ms. Huber explained that the former day care facility will be
renovated in order to house up to 12 children, house parents and relief parents. She stated that
they will accept kindergarten, first and second grade students and keep them as they grow.
No one spoke in opposition to this request and no correspondence was received.
Mr. Rotenberry gave the Planning Division staff report. Mr. Rotenberry explained that staff is
recommending the establishment of an underlying zoning of C -O for the purpose of determining
future permitted uses in addition to the proposed boarding school use.
Ms. Cotten moved and Mr. Vaughan seconded to recommend approval of the PUD Plan
Amendment to add boarding school as a permitted use for the property and establish an underlying
zoning of C -O for the purpose of determining future permitted uses, signage, and lighting, to the
City Council. The motion passed 6-0 with the following votes:
Aye: Cotten, Deeken, Markus, Mahoney, Vaughan, Yarnell
Jefferson City Planning & Zoning Commission Page 3
October 12, 2017
Case No. P17020 — Zoning Code Text Amendment Pertaining to Short Term Rentals.
Request filed by city staff to amend the text of Chapter 35, Zoning, with respect to the following:
1. Establishment of short term rental of residence or lodging room as a permitted use in the
commercial and mixed use districts and as a special exception use in the residential and
industrial districts.
2. Establishment of specific use standards pertaining to short term rental of a residence or
lodging room.
The complete text of the amendment is available for review at the Department of Planning and
Protective Services, 320 E. McCarty Street, or may be viewed at the Planning and Zoning
Commission webpage at: www.jeffersoncitymo.gov.
Mr. Barron described the proposal and explained that the proposed zoning code text amendment
will accomplish the following: (1) define short term rentals and differentiate between rental of an
entire residence and rental of a room within a residence; (2) establish as a Special Exception Use
in the residential districts; (3) establish as a Permitted use in the Commercial Districts and the
Mixed Use District; and (4) establish specific use standards. He stated that downtown lofts would
be permitted to use as short term rentals without going through the special exception process. Mr.
Barron explained that the maximum days of stay (presented at last months meeting) have been
removed from the ordinance. He stated that if the stay is less than 30 days it is considered a short
term rental, and if the stay is 30 days or more it is considered a long term rental. Mr. Barron
explained the following specific use standards: (1) Special Exception Permits would be issued in
the name of the property owner; (2) use of accessory structures as rentals would not be permitted;
(3) number of guests for a short term rental of a residence is a maximum of five unrelated persons
and the number of guests for a short term rental of a lodging room is a maximum of four people; (4)
signage limited to a single small sign; (5) parties and receptions not permitted; (6) parking; (7) shall
maintain a residential appearance; (8) subject to any applicable taxes and licensing requirements;
and (9) subject to building and fire code requirements and inspections. He stated that presentation
of the proposed text amendment to the City Council will be held pending finalization of proposed
code amendments for licensing and applicable lodging tax requirements.
No one spoke in opposition to this request and no correspondence was received.
Mr. Barron gave the Planning Division staff report.
Mr. Vaughan moved and Mr. Yarnell seconded to recommend approval of the proposed Zoning
Code Text Amendment pertaining to Short Term Rentals to the City Council. The motion passed 6-
0 with the following votes:
Aye: Cotten, Deeken, Markus, Mahoney, Vaughan, Yarnell
Ms. Cotten left at 6:17 p.m.
7. Other Business
A. Staff updates on prior cases
• Schroeder Subdivision - 2713 W. Main Street. Approved by City Council.
• Southside Old Munichburg Plan. Resolution recognizing the plan scheduled for
November 6, 2017 City Council meeting.
B. City Code Amendment Pertaining to Historic Preservation Review of Demolition Proposals.
Mr. Barron explained that the purpose of the proposed code amendment is to establish the
following tiered structure for review of demolition proposals for historic significance: (1) buildings
less than 50 years old, no review process; (2) buildings 50 to 100 years old, keep the current
historic preservation review process in place; and (3) buildings greater than 100 years old, establish
a new process wherein the Historic Preservation could deny a demolition permit based on findings
of historic significance. He stated that no action is necessary at this time. Mr. Barron explained that
this item will be brought forward for as a public hearing item at the November 9, 2017 meeting.
Jefferson City Planning & Zoning Commission Page 4
October 12, 2017
Correspondence was received at the meeting from the Jefferson City Area Board of Realtors
pertaining to the discussion of the proposed City Code Amendment for Historic Preservation
Review of Demolition Proposals.
C. Mr. Rotenberry announced the following upcoming public meetings:
1. JEFFTRAN System -Wide Assessment, October 17, 2017 from 3:00 PM to 6:00 PM in
the Boone/Bancroft Room
2. Coordinated Public Transit -Human Services Transportation Plan Update, October 24,
2017 from 3:00 PM to 6:00 PM in the Boone/Bancroft Room
8. Adjourn. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:42 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Eric Barron, Assistant Secretary
Jefferson City
Planning & Zoning Commission
November 9, 2017
Case No. P17021
Bert & Jane Doerhoff
1707 Stadium Boulevard
A. Rezoning from RS -4 to C -O
B.Comprehensive Plan Amendment
PLANNING STAFF REPORT
JEFFERSON CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
November 9, 2017
Case No. P17021 — 1707 Stadium Boulevard, Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Request
filed by Bert A. and Jane M. Doerhoff, property owners, for a rezoning of 1,120 sf from RS -4 Single Family
Residential to C -O Office Commercial and an associated amendment to the Development Plan Map of the
Comprehensive Plan. The property is located on the south side of Stadium Boulevard 145 feet east of the
intersection of Stadium Drive and Southwest Boulevard and is described as Part of Lot 20 of Swift and
Thompson Subdivision, Jefferson City, Missouri (Central Missouri Professional Services, consultant).
Nature of Request
This rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment request is for a portion of a tract of land that consists of
1,120 sf and is currently utilized as a single family residential lot. The rear of the property is zoned as C -O
Office Commercial and the front of the property is RS -4 Single Family Residential. The purpose for the request
is to facilitate the construction of a commercial parking lot at the rear of the property and continue to utilize the
existing home on the property as a single family residence. The commercial zoning at the rear of the property
would allow for a commercial parking lot, which would serve the existing office building located on the corner
of Southwest Boulevard and Stadium Boulevard. The property would be divided via administrative parcel
division along the zoning line, with the rear of the property being attached to the adjacent office property. The
applicants are simultaneously filing several driveway and setback variance requests to the Board of Adjustment.
Zoning History
Prior to 2009, the property was zoned RS -2 Single Family Residential.
The property was rezoned to RS -4 and C -O in March 2009 in order to facilitate the future division of the
property and parking lot construction as is moving forward now. The RS -4 zoning of the front portion of the
property allowed the residential lot to meet the minimum lot size (it would not have met the minimum lot size
of the RS -2 district).
Zoning and Surrounding Land Use
Current Zoning: RS -4
Requested Zoning: C -O
Current Use: Single Family Residential
Intended Use: Parking Lot Expansion
Allowed Uses:
Permitted uses within the The C -O Office Commercial zoning district allows for a variety of land uses including
day care centers, nursing homes, banks, and substance abuse treatment centers. Please see the Land Use Matrix
in the Zoning Code for a more detailed list of permitted uses.
taff Analysis
Standard checklist for rezoning:
Surrounding Zoning
Surrounding Uses
North
RS -2
Single family residential
South
C -O
Office Commercial
East
RS -2
Single family residential
West
C -O
Office Commercial
Allowed Uses:
Permitted uses within the The C -O Office Commercial zoning district allows for a variety of land uses including
day care centers, nursing homes, banks, and substance abuse treatment centers. Please see the Land Use Matrix
in the Zoning Code for a more detailed list of permitted uses.
taff Analysis
Standard checklist for rezoning:
Yes
No
Notes:
Complies with Comprehensive Plan
X
The Comprehensive Plan identifies the property
as intended for medium density residential use.
The applicant has requested an amendment to
the Comprehensive Plan to show the
designation of the 1,120 sf portion of the
property as Commercial.
Has access to necessary utilities
X
The property has access to necessary utilities.
Located outside flood zone
X
The property does not lie within the 100 year
floodplain.
Meets district size requirement
X
The rezoning would be an expansion of an
existing C -O district.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Case No. P17021
November 9, 2017
Page 2
Standard checklist for rezoning:
Yes
No
Notes:
Benefit to City is substantial when compared to
adverse effects on adjacent property
X
The city would benefit from the development of
the rear portion of the property in a commercial
manner.
After rezoning, the allowed uses would be
compatible with uses allowed in adjacent districts
X
The area is considered a commercial node. The
slight expansion of commercial zoning in the
area would be appropriate.
After rezoning, the allowed uses would be
compatible with adjacent existing land uses
X
The allowed uses would be compatible with the
adjacent residential and commercial uses.
If not rezoned, the owner would be deprived of use
advantages enjoyed by surrounding owners
(reverse spot zoning)
X
Some of the adjacent property is currently zoned
C -O Office Commercial.
The requested rezoning would be an expansion of
an existing district
X
The rezoning would be an expansion of the
adjacent commercial zoning.
Approve
Deny
Neutral
Staff Recommendation
X
Comprehensive Plan Amendment:
While the intended use of the property is currently designated as medium density residential on the development
plan map of the comprehensive plan, the property is immediately adjacent to a commercial node located at the
intersection of two arterial streets. A re -designation of the rear portion of the property to commercial would be a
logical expansion of the commercial node that would not be a major change in the intended use pattern for this
area. Staff recommends approval of the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Development Plan Map to
show the property as Commercial.
Rezoning Request:
The requested commercial zoning would be a logical expansion of the existing node of commercial zoning
located at the intersection of Southwest Boulevard and Stadium Boulevard. The commercial rezoning at the rear
of the property would not appear to create any major land use conflicts and the expansion of the commercial
node would be a benefit to the adjacent commercial operations. Staff recommends approval of the request to
rezone the property. Staff recommends approval of the request to rezone the property from RS -4 to C -O.
Form of Motion
1. Motion to approve the comprehensive plan amendment request to show the 1,120 sf property as
Commercial on the Development Plan Map of the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Motion to approve the request to rezone 1,120 sf of the property from RS -4 to C -O.
City of Jefferson Planning & Zoning Commission
LOCATION MAP
Area Proposed for
Rezoning from RS -4 to C-0
(1,120 Sq Ft)
STADIUM -BLVD
r--
Case No. P17021- 0 20 40 80 Feet
1301 Southwest Boulevard
Rezoning from RS -4 Single Family
Residential to C -O Office Commercial
and Comprehensive Plan Amendment
City of Jefferson Planning & Zoning Commission
VICINITY
OM -
1111111111I
1311111111111
Case No. P17021-
1301 Southwest Boulevard
Rezoning and Comp. Plan Amendment
0
130 260
520 Feet
s
City of Jefferson
Department of Planning & ProtecUve Services
320 E. McCarty Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Phone: 573-634-6410
icnlannin_q(6ieffcitvmo. orp
www.jeffersoncitymo.gov
APPLICATION FOR ZONING AMENDMENT
The undersigned hereby petitions the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council of the City of Jefferson,
Missouri, for the following amendment to the Zoning Code:
Q Zoning Text Amendment (Describe below or attach complete narrative)
Article and Section Affected (if applicable)
Description of proposed text amendment:
Q Zoning Map Amendment (Rezoning of Real Estate)
The undersigned hereby state they are the owners of the following described real estate:
Property Address: 1707 Stadium Blvd
Legal/Property Description (write out or attach as an exhibit): Part of Lot 20 of Swift & Thompsons Subdivision
Who petition to rezone the above described real estate from its present classification of RS -4 district to
C -O district. The purpose of this rezoning request is to: allow consistency of the remaining
property and allow construction of a commercial driveway to access the rear of the property.
ALL OWNERS OF REAL PROPERTY PROPOSED TO BE REZONED MUST SIGN THE APP
MUST BE NOTARIZED. JF ADDITIONAL SIGNATURES ARE NEEDED, PLED A
Bert Doerhoff73 �sj�.�_
Property O&ner #1 Name (type or print)
SHEILA A. B''.y;`F' Artier
NotaryPublic - Nota ea
STTE OF O ,bed and
County of'C i
My Commission Expires1211 12018
Commission # '14983164
#2 Name (type or print)
, AND ALL SIGNATURES
SHEETS.
Property Owner Signatur
Property Owner Signature
worn before me this day of 66/%14.01
in the year
aor7 .
A.
NotaryPu iic
Address of Property Owner #1
Name
Bert Doerhoff
Mailing Address
PO Box 6, St. Elizabeth, MO 65075
Phone Number
573-634-4006
Address of Property Owner #2
Name
Jane Doerhoff
Mailing Address
PO Box 6, St. Elizabeth, MO 65075
Phone Number
For City Use Only: Application Filing Fee $210 (Revised June 30, 2015)
Payment Received: Cash (Receipt # ); Check (Copy; check # )
Attachments: Additional sheets or documentation Applicant/Project information Sheet Location Map
Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required
under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request.
P:\1980\ =-096 Doerhoff\81-108-IGS-1
K cO
(n m o ,111111111N11/1111,
•
D CT,ml• S
= rn V) -' 0 9�
0 D0O�� Q W C� Z
Gd , • p
mr- K =D N -nom
o Ci fGO NO �� , N- C—
m O• 1-P
o-1<Cm Z ��Z
N
ol
/H11111111\`\
rrl
N
n
0
co
C)
0
7210)
O
II
J
C
O
co
O
03
L
P1
CD
Com'
tj t=i
1-1
Z I_
O
Zc
n O Z
o
ate �
•
Cn
o
�� CD
o
o
13
O � ` V
1-3
Cl1 V1 U)CA CA
CA CA y C�
Z CD
CA L
CO -
CO 01 i--�
CO
1'016-JBR.dwg, ri_ZONING, 10/4/201/ 10:40:00 AM, brockwell,
I
—
a -sI QaKoz
N
0
co
w
4
i
I
_
n ZONED CO
I 0N2'33'59"E N2'33'59"E
wZ 9.7s ZONED RS -472.e:-....;:=7:17,;;;,,,,::;...--
:-7 .�....
W' iN r
O
1:30
0)
c_
CO
I -0
01 0)) 0
- m
-13
I m
N (n
f r
r
co
PI 0
NJ co
0)
7D
rn
0)
C
m
CO
= X
O
C
Z
L J
ZONED RS -4
73.55'
S2'35'30"W
ZONED RS -2
PI
*GArTEI IMICIVIS
PROPERTY BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION
Part of Lot 20, Swift and Thompson's Subdivision, in the City of
Jefferson, Missouri, per plat of record in Plat Book 1, page 9, Cole
County, Missouri, being more particularly described as follows:
From the northwest corner of Lot 7 of Block 2, Schmidt's Subdivision, as
recorded in Plat Book 5, page 45, Cole County Recorder's Office; thence
N87'40'00"W, along the southerly right—of—way line of Stadium Boulevard,
210.00 feet to the northeasterly corner of the property described in Book
392, page 199, Cole County Recorder's Office; thence S2'35'30"W, along
the easterly line of said property described in Book 392, page 199,
73.55 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING for this description; thence
S2'35'30"W, continuing along the easterly line of said property described
in Book 392, page 199, 21.27 feet to a point on the City of Jefferson's
Zoning Line between Zone RS -4 and Zone CO; thence along said Zoning
Line the following courses: N87'34'1911W, 35.49 feet; thence N24'061091'W,
13.37 feet; thence N8723'38'W, 27.85 feet to a point on the westerly
boundary of said property described in Book 392, page 199; thence
N2'33'5911E, along the westerly boundary of said property described in
Book 392, page 199, 9.79 feet; thence leaving said Zoning Line,
S87'05'59"E, 69.37 feet to the point of beginning.
Containing 0.0 acres.
0
0
0
ZEOFMISS
OG'Aj
LS -2524
J� BRIAN
ROCKWELL
Central Missouri Professional Services, Inc.
ENGINEERING — SURVEYING — MATERIALS TESTING
2500 E. McCARTY Phone (573) 634-3455
JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI 65101 FAX (573) 634-8898
REZONING AREA
1707 STADIUM BOULEVARD
j Brian Rockwell,;; M0. PLS #2524
i CENTRAL MISSOURI
2 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
:c.
MISSOURI' STATE CERTIFICATE
OF AUTHORITY #000355
FDR BERT & JANE DOERHOFF
DATE 10/04/2017
DRN. BY J.B.R.
SCALE 1 " = 30'
BOOK DC
REV.
DATE
CKD. BY PPK, GD
SHEET 1 OF 1
JOB NO. 82-096
REVIEW CRITERIA FOR ZONING AMENDMENT
1701 Stadium Blvd.
Jefferson City, MO 65101
CMPS JOB # 82-096
10/2/17
a) The existing zoning was in error at the time of adoption.
There was no error at the time of adoption. The original zoning for this property
was RS -2 and the north portion was subsequently rezoned to RS -4 and the south
portion was previously rezoned to the C -O zoning district.
b) There has been a change in character in the area due to installation of public
utilities, other zone changes, new growth trends, neighborhood deterioration, or
development transitions.
A portion of the south half of the property was rezoned previously in pursuit of a
previous development plan. This rezoning would allow for a modification of the
current development plan.
c) There is a community need for the proposed zoning.
The City would benefit by allowing the proposed development which allows a
small business on a congested site the ability to expand services for the
community and facilities for employees.
d) The proposed change is consistent with, and in furtherance of, the implementation
of the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, other adopted plans, and
policies, intents, and requirements of this Ordinance and other City regulations
and guideline.
The change would be reflected in an update of the comprehensive plan that would
provide consistency with all plans.
e) The proposed zoning is compatible with the zoning and use of property nearby.
Residential developments exist to the north and east; commercial developments
exist to the south and west. The zoning would be consistent with the commercial
properties and will be buffered in accordance with existing City ordinances.
f) Public and community facilities, which may include, but are not limited to,
sanitary and storm sewers, water, electrical service, police and fire protection,
schools, parks and recreation facilities, roads, libraries, and solid waste collection
and disposal, are available and adequate to serve uses authorized under the
proposes zoning.
g)
All public facilities and utilities are available in the area.
A traffic impact analysis has been provided to indicate the potential number of
new trips generated and provisions are provided to mitigate impacts of high
traffic -generating projects.
There is no requirement for a site specific traffic impact study.
h) Authorized uses shall not adversely affect the capacity or safety of the street
network in the vicinity of the property.
The area of rezoning would not affect the capacity of the surrounding street
network
i) Potential environmental impacts (e.g. excessive storm water runoff, water
pollution, air pollution, noise pollution, excessive lighting, or other environmental
harms) of authorized uses shall be mitigated.
j)
There are no anticipated environmental impacts from the rezoning and any
impacts would be addressed through the plan review process. It is anticipated
that the plan will accommodate stormwater runoff, pollution, etc.
There is adequate supply of land available in the subject area and the surrounding
community to accommodate the zoning and community needs.
A Board of Adjustment Application has been submitted with this plan to allow for
a lot size variance for a single family home that is located on the north half of this
property. The approval of the variance will allow for the development plan to
progress as required.
k) Benefits shall be derived by the community or area proposed to be rezoned.
The City will benefit from the development of the land to compliment the
commercial area along Southwest Blvd. and Stadium Blvd by allowing a small
business on a congested site the ability to expand services for the community and
facilities for employees.
City of Jefferson
Department of Planning & Protective Services
320 E. McCarty Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Phone: 573-634-6410
is plann in q(a7.ieffcit vm o. orq
www.jeffersoncitymo.gov
APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The undersigned hereby petitions the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council of the City of Jefferson,
Missouri, for the following amendment(s) to the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan or Development Plan Map.
°Text Amendment ® Map Amendment
Current Development Plan Map Designation Medium Density Residential
Proposed Development Plan Map Designation Commercial
Applications for Map amendments shall include a location map and level of detail required for site plan review as
outlined in Exhibit 35-71.
All applications shall attach a narrative which addresses the following criteria, as outlined in Section 35-74.A.4,
Jefferson City Zoning Code.
a. Whether there was error in the original Comprehensive Plan adoption in that the Planning and Zoning
Commission failed to take into account then existing facts, projections or trends that were reasonably
foreseeable to exist in the future.
b. Whether events subsequent to the Comprehensive Plan adoption have invalidated the Commission=s
original premises and findings made upon plan adoption.
c. Whether the change is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Plan.
d. Whether events subsequent to the Comprehensive Plan adoption have changed the character and/or
condition of the area so as to make the application acceptable.
e. Whether the change is needed to improve consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and other
adopted plans.
f. Whether public and community facilities, such as utilities, sanitary and storm sewers, water, police and
fire protection, schools, parks and recreational facilities, roads, libraries, solid waste collection and
disposal, and others are adequate to serve development for the type and scope suggested by the
proposed zone. If utilities are not available, whether they can be extended reasonably.
g. Whether there is an adequate supply of land available in the subject area and the surrounding
community to accommodate the zoning and community needs.
h. Whether there will benefits derived by the community or area by the proposed change.
Amendment Requested by: Q Property Owner 0 Staff
Bert Doerhott
Name (typed or printed)
Property Owner Name Bert A. Ooerhof & Jane M. Doerhott
Address 1301 Southwest Blvd. Jefferson City, 65109
0 P.. - ing and on , • Commission
Phone Number(s): 573-634-4006
Applicant Name (if different from owner):
Address:
Phone Number(s)
For City Use Only: Application Filing Fee $210 (Revised June 30, 2015)
Application Filing Fee Received: Cash (receipt # ) Check (copy; check # )
Attachments: Narrative Map Applicant/Project Information Sheet
Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as
required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request.
REVIEW CRITERIA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
1301 Southwest Blvd./1707 Stadium Blvd.
Jefferson City, MO 65101
CMPS JOB # 82-096
10/2/17
a. Whether there was an error in the original Comprehensive Plan adoption in the
Planning and Zoning Commission failed to take into account then existing facts,
projections, or trends that were reasonably foreseeable to exist in the future.
There was no error at the time of adoption. The Comprehensive Plan amendment
would be consistent with the proposed zoning amendment.
b. Whether events subsequent to the Comprehensive Plan adoption have invalidated
the Commission's original premises and findings made upon plan adoption
Subsequent events to the Comprehensive Plan Adoption have not invalidated the
Commission's original premise and findings.
c. Whether the change is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the
Plan.
The change will be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the
development plans and align with the intent of the zoning amendment.
d. Whether events subsequent to the Comprehensive Plan adoption have changed the
character and/or condition of the area so as to make the application acceptable
Areas along Southwest Blvd. and Stadium Blvd. have seen an increase in
commercial development intermingled with residential developments. This
proposal would do little to affect the residential area. The area was previously
rezoned to a commercial district, this proposed comprehensive plan amendment
would be consistent with the zoning district.
e. Whether the change is needed to improve consistency between the
Comprehensive Plan and other adopted plans.
The comprehensive plan amendment would be consistent with the proposed
zoning amendment. The change would be incorporated into the next
comprehensive plan.
f. Whether public and community facilities, such as utilities, sanitary and storm
sewers, water, police and fire protection, schools, parks and recreational facilities,
roads, libraries, solid waste collection and disposal ,and others are adequate to
serve development for the type and scope suggested by the proposed zone. If
utilities are not available, whether they can be extended reasonably.
g.
All public facilities and utilities are available in the area.
Whether there is adequate supply of land available in the subject area and the
surrounding community to accommodate the zoning and community needs.
A Board of Adjustment Application has been submitted with this plan to allow for
a lot size variance for a single family home that is located on the north half of this
property. The variance would allow for this amendment to occur.
h. Whether there will be benefits derived by the community or area by the proposed
zone.
The City will benefit from the development of the land to compliment the
commercial area along Southwest Blvd. and Stadium Blvd.
rags 1 u.
cote County
Larry D. Rademan, Recorder of Deeds
RECORDED
Book: 636 Page: 103
Receipt if: 271057 Total Fees: $27,00
Reception: 201310325
Pages Recorded: 2 Deputy:
Date Recorded: 8/28/2013 9:59:15 AM
.414/7),),1,,4. cle".
SEAL
;�5°utirr 3
WARRANTY DEED
Grantors' Address: P.O. Box 6, St. Elizabeth, Missouri 65075
Grantees' Address: P.O. Box 6, St. Elizabeth, Missouri 65075
This Indenture, made on August 26, 2013, by and between Bert A. Doerhoff and Jane
M. Doerhoff, husband and wife, of P.O. Box 6, St. Elizabeth, Missouri 65075, Grantors, and
the Bert A. Doerhoff Living Trust dated October 21, 1989, P.O. Box 6, St. Elizabeth, Missouri
65075, Grantee:
WITNESSETH, That the said Grantors, for estate planning purposes and without other
consideration, do by these presents GRANT, BARGAIN, CONVEY AND CONFIRM unto the
said Grantee, its successors and assigns, the following described lots, tracts or parcels of land
lying, being and situated in the County of Cole, State of Missouri, to -wit:
Part of Lot No. 20, Swift and Thompson Subdivision, in the City of
Jefferson, Missouri, per plat of record in Plat Book 1, Page 9, Cole County
Recorders Office, more particularly described as follows: Beginning 5 feet
southerly from the northwesterly corner of said Lot No. 20; thence southerly along
the westerly line thereof, 95 feet; thence easterly parallel with the northerly line
thereof, 142 feet; thence northerly parallel with the westerly line thereof, 95 feet;
thence westerly parallel with the northerly line of aforesaid lot, 142 feet to the
beginning point of this description.
Subject to easement for road right-of-way of record in Book 275, Page 220,
Cole County Recorders Office;
Subject to deeds of trust and easements, if any, and to any declarations, covenants,
restrictions, reservations, rights, roadways, options, liens, encumbrances or transfers that may
have attached, been created or made subsequent to Grantors' acquisition of title;
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises aforesaid, with all and singular the rights,
privileges, appurtenances and immunities thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining, unto the
said Grantee and unto its successors and assigns FOREVER, the said Grantors hereby covenanting
that they are lawfully seized of an indefeasible estate in fee in the premises herein conveyed; that
p://mo836.cichosting.com/rap/viewimage.aspx?id=00006360000103 9/25/20
•
ifrn
•i
they have good right to convey the same; that the said premises are free and clear of any
encumbrances done or suffered by them or those under whom they claim and that they will warrant
and defend the title to said premises unto the said Grantee, and unto its successors and assigns
FOREVER, against the lawful claims and demands of all persons whomsoever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Grantors have hereunto set their hands and seals the
day and year first above written.
STATE OF MISSOURI
COUNTY OF BOONE
Bert A. Doerhoff
127
ane M. Doerhoff
On August 26, 2013, before me personally appeared Bert A. Doerhoff and Jane M.
Doerhoff, his wife, to me known to be the persons described in and who executed the foregoing
instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same as its free and voluntary act and deed.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal
on the day and year last above written.
SHERRILL L BARTON '
Notary Public- Notary Seat
STATE OF MISSOURI 0
ty
MyCommissIn Expires: Feb. 21, 20151
Commission # 11508567_
-2-
21.1.11 Aktu
Sherrill L. Barton, Notary Public
rage z o:
p://mo836.cichosting.com/rap/viewimage.aspx?id=00006360000103 9/25/20
V.;
rage 1 0.
3?2-/99
TRUSTEE'S SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED
made on the � dayof December,1997,byand between
THIS INDENTURE, rn d
George E. Schllen, Trustee under the George E. Schilen Trust created by George E. Schilen
under Agreement dated June 5, 1986, as "Grantor" and Bert A. Dcerhoff and Jane M.
Doerhoff, Trustees of the Bert A. Doerhoff Living rus, dated a tober 21, 1989, as
"Grantees", whose mailing address is Pe.). (,o x (.o . , MO
4;
WITNESSETH:
THAT GRANTOR, In consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars (S10.00) and other good
and valuable consideration, to Grantor paid by Grantees (the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged) does by these presents SELLand CONVEY unto Grantees, and Grantees' heirs
and assigns, the following described lots, tracts or parcels of land, lying, being and situate
in the County of Cole and State of Missouri, to wit:
Part of Lot No. 20, Swifts and Thompson's Subdivision, in the City of
Jefferson, Missouri, per plat of record in Plat Book 1, Page 9, cole County
Recorder's office; and more .particularly described as follows:
Beginning *at a point .which .is 5 feet South of the North line and 210
feet.West of. the East 1ine.of said Lot No. 20; thence South 225.66 feet, more
or-less,.to a_pont on the.northerly line of a tract conveyed to* Lee W. Neutzler
and. wife, by:Warranty. Deed of record in Book.163, Page 167, Cole County
Recorder's Office, and Which is also 210.4 feet West of the East line of said Lot
No.. 20; thence parallel with the North line of said Lot, 61.3 feet; thence
North. 1.31;63 -feet •to the ,southeast corner of a tract conveyed to John R.
Taggart .and wife,.:by� warranty Deed of record in Book 139, Page 229, Cole
County: Recorder's Office;:thence West parallel with the North line of said Lot,
8 feet; thence North parallel with the West line of said Lot, 95 feet, more or
less; to a point which is 5 feet South of the North line of said Lot, and 279.4
feet West of the East line of said Lot; thence East 69.4 feet to the point of
beginning.
Sullied to any recorded restrictions,:easements, party wall agreements and community
contracts, to any existing.:!eases,. tenancies 'and zoning laws, to .easements or claims of
easernents"not shown by the. public records, Including.but-not limited to all rights acquired
by any public or private utilities in the streets prior to the vacation thereof and utility
easementsof the.City of Jefferson, Missouri, in the vacated streets above described, to any
defects, encroachments, overlaps, boundary line disputes, acreage and any other matters
which would be disclosed by an accurate survey or inspection of the above described
property ..and to the lien of taxes and assessments, general and special, for 1997 and
• subsequent years.
Grantors liability under this Deed with respect to any covenants or warranties is
specifically limited to the assets of the trust estate held by Grantor as Trustee under the
aforesaid Trust created by George E. Schilen under Agreement dated June 5, 1986. This
Deed is executed pursuant to the powers of the aforesaid Trust, which remains in full force
and effect as of the date of this Deed.
To HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises aforesaid, with ail and singular the rights,
privileges, appurtenances and immunities thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining
unto Grantees and unto Grantees' heirs and assigns forever; Grantor covenanting that the
p://mo836.cichosting.com/rap/viewimage.aspx?id=00003920000199
9/25/20
•
said premises are free and clear from any encumbrance done or suffered by Grantor; and
that Grantor will warrant and defend the title to said premises unto Grantees and unto
Grantees' heirs and assigns forever against the lawful claims and demands of all persons
claiming under Grantor.
-A-46-7Tr-14
Georg Schilen, Trustee
STATE OF MISSOURI
I ss.
COUNTY OF COLE 1
On this 4- day of December, 1997, before me appeared George E. Schilen, to me
known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument in his
capacity as Trustee under the Trust created by George E. schilen under Agreement dated
June 5, 1986, and acknowledged that he executed the same as his free act and deed as such
Trustee.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, t have hereunto set my hand and affixed my notarial seal at
my office in Jefferson City, Missouri the day and year last above wr
My commission expires:
0 1 3 7
Notary Public
TARA LYNN HOSKINS
t+totary Public - MISSOURI
Seal
STATE OFISS
County of Cole
My Commission Expires 11/4198
STATE OF MISSOURI
COUNTY OF COLE
RECORDED ON
'97 DEC 4 Pir1 1 91
BOOK 394 PAGE 199
LARRY D. RADEMAN
RECORDER
Debra Nasi Dap"
rage 2 o.
p://mo836.cichosting.com/rap/viewimage.aspx?id=00003920000199 9/25/20
City of Jefferson
Department of Planning & Protective Services
320 E. McCarty St.
Jefferson City, MO 65101
October 26, 2017
Carrie Terpin, Mayor
Sonny Sanders, AICP, Director
Phone: 573-634-6410
Fax: 573-634-6457
Dear Property Owner:
This letter is to notify you that the Jefferson City Planning and Zoning Commission will meet at 5:15 p.m.
on Thursday, November 9, 2017 in the Council Chambers of the John G. Christy Municipal Building, 320
East McCarty Street, to consider the following matter (see map on back):
Case No. P17021 — 1707 Stadium Drive, Rezoning from RS -4 to C -O and Comprehensive Plan
Amendment. Request filed by Bert A. and Jane M. Doerhoff, property owners, for a rezoning of 1,120 sf
from RS -4 Single Family Residential to C -O Office Commercial and an associated amendment to the
Development Plan Map of the Comprehensive Plan. The property is located on the south side of Stadium
Boulevard 145 feet east of the intersection of Stadium Drive and Southwest Boulevard and is described
as Part of Lot 20 of Swift and Thompson Subdivision, Jefferson City, Missouri (Central Missouri
Professional Services, consultant).
As a nearby landowner and/or neighbor, you have the privilege of attending this hearing. Unfortunately,
we are unable to record comments received by telephone, however, written comments may be directed to
the Planning and Zoning Commission in one of the following ways:
e-mail: jcplanning@jeffcitymo.org
fax: Dept. of Planning and Protective Services / Planning Division 573-634-6457
mail: Dept. of Planning and Protective Services / Planning Division
John G. Christy Municipal Building, 320 E. McCarty Street Jefferson City, MO 65101
Written comments received on or before 1:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting will be made a part of the
official record and copied and distributed to Commission members at the meeting. Those unable to
provide written comments in advance are invited to deliver their comments to the Commission Chairman
only at the meeting. Correspondence received after 1:00 p.m. will be included in the official record, but
there is no guarantee that copies will be made for distribution to all Commission members.
For your information, this case is tentatively scheduled for a public hearing in front of the City Council on
December 18, 2017. The City Council meets at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the John G. Christy
Municipal Building, 320 East McCarty Street.
Information regarding this case may be viewed on the Planning and Zoning Commission webpage at:
www.jeffersoncitymo.gov.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact us at 573.634.6475.
Sinc
ex Rotenberry, AICP
Planner
Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats
as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request.
Please call (573) 634-6410 with questions regarding agenda items.
Jefferson City Planning & Zoning Commission
Property Owners List
Case No. P17021
SCOVILLE, GLENDA S, TRUSTEE
1223 SOUTHWEST BLVD
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1221 SOUTHWEST BLVD
1223 SOUTHWEST BLVD
MCGEORGE, ARTHUR W & ELIZABETH J
1025 HUNTERS CT
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65101
1706 STADIUM BLVD
PAYNE, CHARLES DAVID
8538 COUNTY ROAD 363
NEW BLOOMFIELD, MO 65063
1704 STADIUM BLVD
M D& M J PROPERTIES L L C
2204 RIVERCREST CT
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65101
1702 STADIUM BLVD
CARROLL, MARILYN ET'AL
RENKOSKI, JANET
5725 HARDWOOD DR
DES MOINES, IA 50312-1203
1226 SOUTHWEST BLVD
WALL, JAMES D
1222 SOUTHWEST BLVD
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1222 SOUTHWEST BLVD
TEUBNER PROPERTIES L L C
1528 FOX MOOR CT
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1801 STADIUM BLVD
ROWAN RESOURCES L P
430 VIRGINIA TRL
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1312 SOUTHWEST BLVD
CHMIDLING, DAVID S &
SHARON K CZESCHIN
1701 STADIUM BLVD
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1701 STADIUM BLVD
Page 1
1707 Stadium Boulevard November 9, 2017
KISO, BONNIE ANN & JOHN L
1703 STADIUM BLVD
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1703 STADIUM BLVD
C K J PROPERTIES L L C
1739 ELM CT, STE 203
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65101
1705 STADIUM BLVD
MILLER, TODD LAW OFFICE L L C
1305 SOUTHWEST BLVD, S-A
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1305 SOUTHWEST BLVD
DOERHOFF, BERT A, TRUSTEES
PO BOX 6
ST ELIZABETH, MO 65075
1301 SOUTHWEST BLVD
RICHARD WALZ APARTMENTS INC
2013 WILLIAM ST
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1313 SOUTHWEST BLVD
J & 5 HOLDINGS RENTALS L L C
1314 HWY 179
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1708 THOMPSON ST
ANGEL, MARIA E
1706 THOMPSON ST
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1706 THOMPSON ST
BACKERS, EDGAR & ANNABELLE J
1704 THOMPSON ST
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1704 THOMPSON ST
VOSS, WILLIAM J JR & DENISE L
1702 THOMPSON ST
JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65109
1702 THOMPSON ST
Case No. P17O21-1301
Southwest Boulevard - Rezoning and Comp. Plan Amendment
185 ft. Notification Buffer
s
0 50 100 200 300 400
Feel
Jefferson City
Planning & Zoning Commission
November 9, 2017
Case No. P17022
City Staff
City Code Text Amendment
Pertaining to Historic Preservation
Review of Demolition Proposals
Historic Preservation Demolition Bill 9-12-17
Staff Summary and Description
Summary
This bill would
- Relocate the regulations for review of demolition proposals by the Historic Preservation Commission
to a separate section of the City Code (they are currently contained within the regulations regarding
issuance of a demolition permit) and establish an approval process separate from the process for
approving a demolition permit (although they would still be linked).
Amend the review process and review criteria for demolition proposals requiring Historic
Preservation Commission review.
Establish the requirement for approval of demolition proposals for structures greater than 100 years
old or located in a local historic district (by the Historic Preservation Commission or, upon appeal, the
City Council) prior to demolition permit issuance.
Establish a public hearing process for the Historic Preservation Commission.
- Establish application fees within Appendix Y.
Key Terms
Demolition Permit — required to demolish or remove any structure or part of a structure, where the structure
is at least 120 sf for Commercial, 200 sf for Residential (the same sf sizes that require a building permit).
Historic Preservation Demolition Review — review of demolition permit proposals for structures between 50
and 100 years old, or located within a National Register District, or designated a local landmark, by the
Historic Preservation Commission. The review process is largely advisory in nature, and cannot prevent
a demolition permit issuance.
Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance — review and issuance of clearance for demolition permit
proposals for structures greater than 100 years old or located in a local historic district. The issuance of
clearance is required prior to demolition permit issuance.
Notable Structure — A structure that has been found to be notable with respect to historic value or impact on
other historic structures or districts. Finding of a notable structure does not necessarily preclude
approval of demolition clearance, the state of deterioration or location within a redevelopment area are
other items for consideration.
Appeals — a denial of issuance of demolition clearance could be appealed to the City Council.
Local Historic District — a historic district established in accordance with Chapter 8, Article IV of the City Code
pertaining to Preservation and Conservation. Not to be confused with a National Register District.
National Register District — a district established in accordance with federal regulations and meeting federal
criteria. National Register Districts are often presented with a "no strings attached" description to
property owners contained within the district, and are therefore not appropriate for regulations that are
anything but advisory in nature. Nothing would prevent a local historic district from being established
along the same boundaries as a National Register District.
Public Hearing Requirement
Demolition Review — Applications for demolition review would not be subject to public hearing
requirements.
Demolition Clearance — Applications for demolition clearance would require a public hearing prior to vote on
issuance of the clearance. Notice of the public hearing would be posted on the property. Notice would not
be mailed to surrounding property owners.
Appeals — Appeals of denial of demolition clearance would be heard by the City Council with a new public
hearing. The property would be reposted with the public hearing time.
2
Processing Timeline
Demolition Review — 75 day (or two meetings, whichever is less) timeline from the date application is
received — or — when Historic Preservation votes for approval.
Demolition Clearance — Application placed on next available agenda, with consideration for public
notification requirements (filing deadline calendar to be maintained by the director, similar to P&Z
applications). Applications could be continued by applicant for one month by request, and by Historic
Preservation Commission for one month with cause.
Appeals to City Council — Application for appeal would be placed on next available agenda with consideration
for public notification requirements. A resolution for approval of the Demolition Clearance would be placed
on the Council agenda for their vote along with a public hearing. Consideration of the appeal could be
continued by applicant for one month by request, and by City Council for one month with cause.
Review Criteria — Review Criteria would be tiered, with the finding of a historically significant or "notable"
structure being separate from the determination of the structural integrity of the structure of location within
a redevelopment area. If the structure is not found to be "notable", or if the structural integrity or location
necessitates demolition, demolition clearance would be issued.
Fees — application fees are proposed as $53 for reviews and $105 for applications for Clearance. Fees are
based on comparable application fees (P&Z and BOA applications are $210, but include newspaper publishing
and surrounding property mailing expenses).
Validity — approval of clearance or review would be valid for a period of one year, and would have no tie to
the current property owner. This would allow for a property owner to pursue historic preservation review
independently from plans to actually demolish the structure. This allows historic preservation review to
proceed in anticipation of a real estate transaction, as a single piece of a development plan involving multiple
properties, etc.
Penalty — penalties for demolition without a permit are outlined in Section 8-37, and include misdemeanor
designation punishable by fine of up to $500 and/or 180 days imprisonment. No changes are proposed.
What the Demolition Ordinance does not consider
Modifications to structures that meet the requirements for demolition review or clearance. Facade
rehabs, roof replacements, etc. would not be subject to the demolition review process.
The future use of the property or the design of, or requirement for, a replacement structure. Such
considerations would require design standards to be in place. The requirement for a "Certificate of
Appropriateness" for new construction or renovations within historic districts is a future possibility
for properties within local historic districts, but would be difficult to justify without design standards
in place.
Statement by engineer or architect as to the structural stability or feasibility of repair. Statements
can be prepared by the property owner or applicant. Consultation with professional engineers or
architects can be a costly endeavor, and my not be entirely necessary in order to get a general sense
of the condition of the structure.
The Zoning or intended use of the property. While there is a reference to consideration of areas
designated for redevelopment, redevelopment areas are not the focus or expertise of the Historic
Preservation Commission.
3
BILL NO.
SPONSORED BY
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JEFFERSON, MISSOURI, AMENDING CHAPTER 8,
BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS, PERTAINING TO REVIEW OF DEMOLITION
PERMITS BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF
PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Jefferson recognizes the need to preserve and
protect historic resources and notable architecture, and;
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has been assigned the duty of
safeguarding the city's historic, cultural, aesthetic and architectural heritage,
among other duties, and;
WHEREAS, a process for review of proposals to demolish buildings by the Historic
Preservation Commission would help protect historic resources and notable
architecture.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JEFFERSON,
MISSOURI, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Sec. 8-32 (Permit to Demolish) is deleted in its entirety and reestablished
as follows:
Sec. 8-32. Permit to demolish.
A.
Code of the City ofJcffcrson, Missouri. (Ord. No. 12911, §1, 6 21 99; Ord. No. 13106, §1, 9 5 2000)
B. D eyiew Pr ooess-
Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus.
4
of the application to CJHPC. (Ord. No. 15184, §1, 10 21 2013.
2. CJHPC. The CJHPC may have a sixty (60) day period for review of every application for a
(Ord. No. 12911, §2, 6 21 99)
C.
D.
1.
the CJHPC's determination: or
Sec. 8-32. Permit to demolish.
A. Permit Required. It shall be unlawful to demolish, remove, or relocate a structure or part of a
structure or accessory structure, where said structure or accessory structure exceeds 120 square
feet of area in a commercial setting, or 200 square feet of area in a residential setting, without first
filing an application for demolition with the Director and obtaining a demolition permit.
Demolition shall be construed to include an act or process which destroys, in part or in whole, a
structure or which threatens to destroy a structure by failure to maintain it in a condition of good
repair and maintenance.
B. Review Process. Applications for demolition shall be reviewed in accordance with the following.
1. Application form. All applications to demolish or remove a structure shall be made to the
Department of Planning and Protective Services on the appropriate form supplied by the
Department.
2. Utility Disconnect. A permit to demolish or remove shall not be issued until a release is
obtained from the utilities having service connections with the structure. The release
shall state that service connections and appurtenant equipment, such as meters and
regulators, have been removed or sealed and plugged in a safe manner.
3. Storm Water Quality and Grading. Demolition sites are subject to the stormwater
quality and grading permit regulations of Chapter 31, as well as applicable state and
federal regulations. Information regarding adherence to applicable stormwater and
grading regulations shall be submitted with the demolition permit application.
Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus.
5
4. Review by Historic Preservation Commission. Applications to demolish or remove a
structure shall be subject to the review requirements and regulations contained in Section
8-43 pertaining to Review of Demolition Permit Proposals by the Historic Preservation
Commission. Where a Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance is required, issuance
of a demolition permit shall not proceed prior to approval of Historic Preservation
Demolition Clearance. Nothing in Section 8-43 shall be construed so as to prohibit the
building official from acting under any emergency provisions of Chapter 8 of the Code of
the City of Jefferson.
Section 3. Section 8-43 (Reserved) is hereby amended with respect to establishment
of Historic Preservation Commission review processes associated with demolition permit
applications.
Sec. 8-43. Reser-we- Review of Demolition Proposals by Historic Preservation Commission.
A. Purpose and Intent. It is the purpose of this section to encourage and enforce the preservation of
notable historic structures and historic or notable architecture and to preserve the character of
historic streetscapes and areas.
B. Applicability. Applications to demolish or remove a structure that meet one or more of the
following criteria shall be subject to the application requirements, regulations and review by the
Historic Preservation Commission in accordance with this section. Where Historic Preservation
Demolition Clearance is required, issuance of a demolition permit shall not proceed prior to
issuance of Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance.
1. Demolition Applications Requiring Historic Preservation Commission Review.
a. Structures greater than 50 years old.
b. Structures designated as a Local Landmark
c. Structures listed on the National Register or located within a National Register
District.
2. Demolition Applications Requiring Historic Preservation Commission Review and
Issuance of Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance.
a. Applications to demolish or remove a structure greater than 100 years old.
b. Applications to demolish or remove a structure located within a locally
designated historic district.
C. Public Hearing. For applications for demolition requiring a Historic Preservation Demolition
Clearance, a public hearing in accordance with Section 8-47 shall be conducted prior to Historic
Preservation Commission action on the application. For appeals pursued in accordance with
Section 8-43.I, a public hearing in accordance with Section 8-47 shall be conducted prior to City
Council action on the appeal.
D. Application Requirements. Applications to demolish or remove a structure that is subject to this
section shall include the following:
1. Application for Historic Preservation Demolition Permit Review/Historic Preservation
Demolition Clearance. The application may be submitted independently or concurrently
with an application for demolition permit.
2. Digital photographs of the structure taken within the last ninety days including
photographs of all exterior sides, interior rooms and stairwells. Photographs must show
all areas and characteristics of the principal and accessory structures, not just those areas
in disrepair. Interior photographs may be waived by the Director if the structure is
determined structurally unsound.
Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus.
6
3. Applications requiring Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance shall include the
following additional information:
a. The Historic Preservation Commission may request information regarding the
state of deterioration or disrepair or structural unsoundness of the structure,
and the practicability of rehabilitation. In order to expedite review time, said
information may be submitted with the initial application.
b. plans for the preservation or salvage of notable historic or architectural features
and historic fixtures that contributed to the finding of a notable structure.
F. Application Processing and Timeline.
a. Upon receipt of a complete application for demolition permit review by the Historic
Preservation Commission, the Director shall forward the application to the Historic
Preservation Commission for review. If a public hearing is required, the Director shall
initiate notification requirements in accordance with Section 8-47. The Director shall
maintain a calendar of filing deadlines associated with the application and review
process.
b. Applications not requiring Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. The Historic
Preservation Commission shall review applications for demolition permit review that do
not require Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance within 75 days of receipt of a
complete application by the Director or within two regularly scheduled meetings (where
the application was submitted at least 10 days prior to the first meeting), whichever is
Less. If the Historic Preservation Commission does not take action on the application
within the review period, the application is deemed approved.
c. Applications requiring Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. The Historic
Preservation Commission shall review applications for demolition permit review that
require Historic Preservation Commission Clearance in accordance with the public
hearing requirements outlined in Section 8-47. At the conclusion of the public hearing,
the Historic Preservation Commission shall vote to approve or deny the Historic
Preservation Demolition Clearance unless the proceedings are continued in accordance
with Section 8-47. If the Historic Preservation Commission does not take action on the
application in accordance with Section 8-47, the application is deemed approved.
G. Review Criteria. In reviewing an application for demolition review or Historic Preservation
Demolition Clearance, the Historic Preservation Commission shall consider the following criteria:
1. Whether the structure is a notable structure with respect to historic value by reason of:
(a) its association with an event or events that significantly contributed to the broad
patterns of the history or architectural heritage of the city, county, state or
nation: or
(b) its association with the life or lives of a person or persons significant in the
history of the city, county, state or nation; or
(c) its embodiment of distinctive characteristics of a type, design, period or method
of construction; or
(d) it represents the work of a master designer or architect or possesses high
architectural value; or
(e) it exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social or historic heritage of the
city; or
(1) it contains elements of design, detail, material or craftsmanship which represent
a significant construction innovation; or
(g) it is part of or related to a square, park or other distinctive area that was or
should be developed or preserved according to a plan based on a historic or
Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus.
architectural motif; or
(h) it is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or of the entire
community; or
(i) it has yielded, or is likely to yield archeological artifacts and/or information.
2. Whether the structure is a notable structure with respect to its demolition being
detrimental to:
(a) the visual or spatial relationship of the structure to designated landmarks,
national register sites, or the streetscape of a local historic district or national
register district; or
(b) the architectural, cultural, historic or contextual character of property
designated as a local historic landmark, local historic district, or building or area
listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
3. If found to be a notable structure with respect to item 1 or 2 above, the Historic
Preservation Commission shall consider the following:
(a) the state of deterioration, disrepair or structural unsoundness of the structure,
and the practicability of rehabilitation. The Historic Preservation Commission
may request the applicant to submit documentation or other information
necessary to determine whether the property can be rehabilitated or restored
with a reasonable economic return to the owner.
(b) whether the property is located within an area identified for redevelopment
within the adopted comprehensive plan, and the nature of the intended
redevelopment.
(c) the nature of the surrounding area and the compatibility of the structure to
existing adjacent structures and land uses.
(d) the number of similar structures that exist within the City of Jefferson.
(e) plans for the preservation or salvage of notable historic or architectural features
and historic fixtures that contributed to the finding of a notable structure.
H. Decision -maker. This Historic Preservation Commission shall review the application for
demolition review or Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance and shall approve or deny the
application based on the applicable review criteria. The decision of the Commission shall be
documented and the Director shall notify the applicant in writing of the decision of the
Commission.
Appeal to City Council. An application for Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance that is
denied by the Historic Preservation Commission may be appealed to the City Council. A written
request for appeal to the City Council shall be submitted to the Director within 30 days of notice
to the applicant of the Historic Preservation Commissions decision. The City Council, after
reviewing the circumstances of the application and the reasons for the denial, may vote to approve
or not approve a resolution granting Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance.
J. Conditions that the Historic Preservation Commission or City Council May Impose. The
Commission or Council may impose conditions on the approval of a Historic Preservation
Demolition Clearance in order to ensure that the demolition complies with any applicable
requirements of this section that include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. to ensure that notable historic or architectural features or historic fixtures that
contributed to the finding of a notable structure are being salvaged or preserved.
2. to ensure that a structure found to be a notable structure and approved for demolition
clearance is properly documented for posterity.
3. to ensure that partial demolition of a structure found to be a notable structure does not
Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus.
8
result in establishment of an exterior finish that is out of character with the structure.
4. other conditions that the Commission or City Council may deem appropriate to reduce
the impact of the demolition with respect to the applicable review criteria.
Conditions imposed by the Historic Preservation Commission may be appealed to the City
Council in the manner provided for in Section 8-43.I.
K. Validity.
1. Applications not requiring Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. Historic
Preservation Commission review of applications for demolition that do not require
Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance shall be valid for a period of one year from
the date of approval of the application by the Historic Preservation Commission or the
date of the expiration of the 60 day review period, whichever occurred first.
2. Applications requiring Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. An approval of
Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance shall be valid for a period of one year from
the date of approval by the Historic Preservation Commission or City Council, as
applicable. In the event that the applicant fails to obtain a demolition permit within one
year of approval of Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance, the applicant shall be
required to obtain a new Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance prior to demolition
permit issuance. In the event of expiration of a demolition permit prior to demolition and
after Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance has expired, a new certificate of
appropriateness shall be required prior to issuance of a new demolition permit.
Section 3. Sec. 8-47 (Definitions) is hereby moved to a new Sec. 8-48 as follows:
Sec. 8-47. Sec. 8-48 Definitions.
Section 4. Sec. 8-48 (Definitions) is hereby amended to include the following
definitions:
Director. The Director of the Department of Planning and Protective Services, or his or her
designee.
Local Historic District. A historic district established in accordance with Chapter 8, Article IV of
the City Code.
Notable Structure. A structure found to be notable per the review criteria listed in Section 8-
43.G.
Section 5. A new Section 8-47 is hereby created with respect to establishment of
public hearing procedures for Historic Preservation Commission and City Council review of
Preservation and Conservation applications.
Sec. 8-47 Public Hearing Procedures
A. Public Hearing. the following notification requirements and public hearing procedures shall
apply for matters requiring a public hearing before the Historic Preservation Commission and
such matters forwarded by the Historic Preservation Commission and requiring a public hearing
before the City Council:
1. Notification Requirements.
a. Property Sign. The Director shall post one or more distinctive signs, with
minimum dimensions of 24" x 24" giving notice of the date, time and place of the
hearing and of the action requested. The signs on the subiect property shall be
posted at least ten calendar days but not more than 15 calendar days prior to the
hearing in conspicuous places visible from every street along the frontage of the
Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus.
9
subject property. The signs shall remain posted on the property until after the
close of the public hearing. The failure to post signs upon the property or retain
notification signs upon the property shall not be grounds for invalidating any
action taken by the responsible decision making body.
b. Agenda Notice. Notice of all public hearings shall be posted at City Hall at least
24 hours prior to any public hearing.
2. Public Hearing Procedures.
a. Purpose. The purpose of a public hearing is to allow the applicant and all other
interested parties a reasonable and fair opportunity to be heard, to present
evidence relevant to the application, and to have input into the process.
b. Conduct of the Hearing.
(1) Any person or persons may appear at a public hearing and submit
evidence, either individually or as a representative of an organization.
Each person who appears at a public hearing shall state, for the record,
his or her name, address, and if appearing on behalf of an organization,
the name and mailing address of the organization.
(2) The order of proceedings shall be as follows:
(a) The Director or appropriate staff member shall present a
description of the application and required findings, if
applicable. The findings shall address each applicable factor
required to be considered prior to action or approval of the
application;
(b) The applicant may present any information that the applicant
deems appropriate;
(c) Public testimony shall be heard first in favor of the proposal,
then in opposition to it;
(d) The Director or other staff member may respond to any
statement made by the applicant or any public comment;
(e) The applicant may respond to any testimony or evidence
presented by the staff or public; and
(f) The body conducting the hearing shall close the public portion
of the hearing and conduct deliberations prior to acting on an
application.
c. Record of Proceedings.
(1) The body conducting the hearing shall record the proceedings by any
appropriate means as prescribed by rule and consistent with city code
and other applicable laws and regulations.
(2) Testimony and statements of opinions, the minutes of the secretary,
applications, exhibits submitted, all staff and advisory body reports and
recommendations, and the decision and report(s) of the body before
which the hearing is heard, shall constitute the record.
(3) The record shall be open for inspection at reasonable times and upon
reasonable notice.
(4) The body conducting the hearing shall appoint, by rule, a custodian of
records.
d. Continuance of Proceedings.
Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus.
10
(1) Any applicant or authorized agent of an applicant shall have the right to
one continuance before the Historic Preservation Commission or City
Council, provided that a written request is filed.
(2) The hearing body may grant one continuance for good cause shown. All
motions to grant a continuance shall state the date on which the matter
is to be heard. A majority vote of those members in attendance shall be
required to grant a continuance. The record shall indicate the reason
such continuance was made and any stipulations or conditions placed
upon the continuance.
(3) If a public hearing is continued, the Historic Preservation Commission
or City Council may direct the Director to renotify property owners or
repost public notice on the property, if such notice was required in the
first instance.
Section 6. Appendix Y, Schedule of Administrative Fees, Permits, Licenses and
Other Charges, is amended with the addition of the following fees pertaining to historic
preservation review of demolition proposals:
Chapter
Section
Section Title
Fee
8
43
Application for Historic Preservation Demolition
Review
$53.00
8
43
Application for Historic Preservation Demolition
Review and Clearance
$105.00
Section 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage
and approval.
Passed: Approved:
Presiding Officer
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus.
11
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED
Case No. P17022
November 9, 2017
Sender
Senders Address
How Received
Date Received
Historic City of Jefferson
Email
11/2/2017
Jefferson City Board of Realtors
Hand delivered
10/12/2017
Historic
City of Jefferson
November 2, 2017
City of Jefferson — Planning Division
Jefferson City Planning and Zoning Commission
320 East McCarty Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101
RE: Public Meeting November 9, 2017
To Whom It May Concern:
The Historic City of Jefferson introduced a Historic Preservation Ordinance about September, 2014.
Through the years, this proposal has been researched and scrutinized by several commissions,
committees, and individuals, particularly the Historic Preservation Commission, members of the City of
Jefferson staff, and legal counsel. It appears that finally a workable draft has been reached through
compromise, collaboration, and persistent hard work.
As President of the Historic City of Jefferson, I represent our membership, which is comprised of about
300 people and at least 6 local businesses. Those members — most citizens within the Jefferson City city
limits - joined this organization because they want to see historic buildings in Jefferson City saved from
the wrecking ball.
Overall, our organization is pleased with the current ordinance:
• It strengthens and clarifies the Review Criteria for the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) to
follow.
• It allows for discussion at two meetings of the HPC (if needed) before a decision is made.
• It gives decision power to the HPC to deny a demolition permit for a property deemed
historically significant for the community, with an appeals process that goes to elected officials.
• It provides some public notification that a property might be demolished.
• If a demolition permit is granted, it allows additional time for historical research to take place
before the structure is actually demolished (which may prevent demolition of that structure).
• The Ordinance covers city-wide properties.
However, we still have some areas of concern.
Looking Back...Moving Forward
Historic City of Jefferson
PO Box 105056
Jefferson City, MO 65110
Email: hcjprez@gmail.com
www.historiccityofjefferson.org
Page two
November 2, 2017
1. Threshold of 100 years for consideration of Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance (denial
allowed by the HPC). In the preservation world, the standard property age considered as "historic"
is 50 years. This is reflected in the guidelines of the application for designation by the National
Register of Historic Places and goes back to the Historic Sites Act of 1935. It is also the current
standard for Historic Preservation Commission review in Jefferson City. Other cities and towns
typically consider the 50 -year threshold, as well, especially if certain historical factors apply.
An additional concern is in how the age of a building is determined. It has been proven that certain
sources typically relied upon to determine the age of a building are, at times, incorrect, and to
determine the true age of a building, additional research needs to take place. We suggest a
compromise of 75 years be the designated property age that falls under Historic Preservation
Demolition Clearance.
2. Fine amount. The current fine of $500 is a minimal penalty to most developers for not going
through the proper channels for demolition. In the March, 2017 draft of the Ordinance by the
Historic Preservation Commission, HPC recommended a much heavier penalty of $1000 and/or 180
days jail time plus a ban and/or restrictions for the person/entity who unlawfully demolishes (based
on the building code in Columbia). We suggest raising the financial penalty amount to $950 and
retain possible jail time in the current draft to further discourage unlawful demolitions.
Like any ordinance, the proposed draft now being considered is not "perfect" but it is a starting point to
give protection for our most historic and oldest buildings. The strides that have already been accepted
by the City Council, including the Capitol Avenue Rezoning and Overlay District, the East Capitol Avenue
Urban Renewal Plan, the Neighborhood Plan for the historic Southside/Old Munichburg district, and
incentive programs for those purchasing or renovating older properties, are all moving in the right
direction to protect our culture and heritage. Acceptance of a Historic Preservation Ordinance will
strengthen that commitment.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Tammy Boeschen
President
573-893-4121
HCJ Mission Statement: "To proactively preserve our historic resources and create an environment that
makes preservation a central focus for future development in the City of Jefferson"
Looking Back...Moving Forward
Historic City of Jefferson
PO Box 105056
Jefferson City, MO 65110
Email: hcjprez@gmail.com
www.historiccityofjefferson.org
To Whom It May Concern:
On behalf of the Jefferson City Area Board of Realtors ® we must first commend the dedicated work of
city staff for being very patient and informative as we attempt to understand the impact of any
proposed ordinances and in particular the proposed demolition ordinance. This is a very important
change to our cities ordinances and as Realtors® we are keenly sensitive to items that affect property
rights and development.
The latest proposal represents a much more measured and thoughtful approach than previous iterations
of the demolition ordinance and we commend those responsible for taking steps in the right direction.
That said, we think there are certainly ways to improve the ordinance to ensure property rights aren't
unduly infringed.
We have listed our suggested changes below:
1) In staff summary, the comment is made that the "Demolition Review" process is meant to be
"largely advisory in nature, and cannot prevent a demolition permit issuance" but the text of the
proposed ordinance doesn't clearly spell that out. We would recommend including a
declaratory statement to that effect to remove any ambiguity.
2) In the application review process, it requests photos of interior rooms and stairwells. The
requirement for photographs of the inside of the building arguably infringes on the privacy of
the owner and any tenants. If the .purpose of the proposed ordinance is to assess the buildings
historical or architectural significance and its potential contribution to the neighborhood the
interior of the building should have no relevance. We would recommend removing the
requirement for interior photos.
3) There are several sections that reference "plans for preservation". While the goal is laudable
and generally a,best business practice, we are unsure how this would be implemented in a
practical way and how it would .benefit the government or its citizens to have this provision.
4) In HPC review under the proposed ordinance they are entitled to ask for documentation "to
determine whether the property can be rehabilitated or restored with a reasonable economic
return to the owner". This section invites arbitrary and capricious decisions from the
Commission and possess unique problems for the myriad of different ownership interests of
buildings. We recommend you remove this from the list of criteria that the Commission can
consider.
If you have any questions about the comments in this letter or need further clarification please feel free
to reach out to our Government Affairs Director Brian Bernskoetter (brianb@swllc.us.com or 619-6040).
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this process.
With Regards,
Distributed at the meeting on 10/12/2017
Jefferson City
Planning & Zoning Commission
November 9, 2017
Other Business
City Staff
Adopt 2018 Meeting Schedule
2018
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING SCHEDULE
Following is a list of regularly scheduled meetings of the Planning
and Zoning Commission through December 13, 2018. All
meetings will be held at 5:15 p.m. in the City Council Chambers on
the Second Thursday Evening of each month. We will follow this
schedule unless you are notified of a change.
JANUARY 11
FEBRUARY 8
MARCH 8
APRIL 12
MAY 10
JUNE 14
JULY 12
AUGUST 9
SEPTEMBER 13
OCTOBER 11
NOVEMBER 8
DECEMBER 13