Loading...
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