Yeah.

Um you could try to switch the left of the speakers and just see it.

Okay.

I I tried that.

I tried that the other night at the H C D shooting.

Yep.

There should be a yellow name.

Oh, thank you.

Randy, it took me a minute to write register your voice.

It took me a minute to register the voice.

I saw you.

I need to get my glasses.

Uh and I was writing it.

I was like, I know that voice, I know that voice.

No, it's good enough.

Well, it was adjustable.

So that's the ADA podium.

Oh, right.

All the way up and down.

Yes.

Okay.

It's got the timer.

So you can't not see it.

I don't know.

Yeah.

So tell me last time.

I didn't read through it with that so close to those.

There's a lot of cameras.

Yeah, the recording.

Um is all technology.

Yeah.

Those kind of cameras.

Rosanna, I'm kidding.

Nice to meet you.

I'm not the need of video file.

Peter's better be back next time.

Janet?

You're gonna need a video file.

So you can't get the audio.

Yes.

No.

The video file is part of the approach.

No, guarding.

No, it's not on.

Sorry, no.

Not until we hit the gamble.

It'll explain what you think.

Yeah, it's right there on your right there on your part.

Yeah, that's a fine point.

Are you seeing any bars?

But I don't have a part of the end of the get them out.

Hello, hello.

Oh, that would have you.

You hear anything?

You read anything?

Yeah, that's it.

I hear you.

That matters.

Testing.

Testing, testing.

Nothing.

Yeah.

One more.

Oh wait, two for folkworm.

Four to conduct business.

Probably had a triple find out a parking spot.

They're probably in a triple funding parking spot.

There's a lot of people now too.

I'm assuming that's probably two people.

Sounds like an air, sounds like a fan.

It does when he talks, I think it moves.

I think so.

How many do we have to have?

Four for business and five for quorum.

Paul's on his way.

Oh sorry I do apologize for my lateness.

It's okay.

Okay.

The July 14th, 2026 Board of Adjustment Meeting will come to order.

Oh, first.

Uh Mr.

Zinner, would you call the roll, please?

Here.

Mr.

Sharp.

Here.

Mr.

Minchu.

Here.

Dr.

Zia.

Here.

Miss Gaines.

Here.

You have five.

You have a quorum.

Okay.

Uh any changes to the agenda?

Uh no.

Motion to approve.

Second.

I second.

Okay, sorry, I lost my place.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

I abstain.

The June ninth, twenty twenty-six minutes were distributed to the members of the board.

Are there any corrections or additions to the minutes?

No.

And a second to approve the minutes.

So moved.

Second.

Second, Randy.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

And that's what I abstain on.

Okay.

Uh do you want to swear in staff?

If you swear the testimony you're about to give this evening will be the truth, so help you back.

Yes.

Optional development standards on property addressed as three oh seven West Sexton Road so as to allow for development of a three-lot cottage subdivision to be known as Jefferson Street Cottages as required by section two nine-six point four J of the Unified Development Code.

If so, please do so now.

Has the notice been properly advertised?

Yes, it was.

Thank you.

Uh Madam Chair, members of the board, Caleb Colbert, attorney at 1203 West Broadway.

As always, I'll start with uh distributing our exhibits this evening.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

All right, so in your packet, you should have a total of four exhibits.

Uh exhibit one would be the staff report, exhibit two would be the locator maps, exhibit three is a copy of our application, and exhibit four is a copy of the hearing ad, the parties and interest list.

Uh and at that time, at this time, I would offer exhibits one through four into evidence or into the record.

No objection.

So are they entered into evidence as evidence?

As soon as you do, that's that's your job.

Uh they're entered into evidence.

All right.

Thank you, ma'am.

Sorry.

Uh again, my name is Caleb Colbert.

I'm here on behalf of the applicant tonight to ask for approval of the cottage design standards for the lot at 307 West Sexton.

Um, so 307 West Sexton is uh currently it's a lot uh zoned R2.

Uh what we're asking for is permission.

Mr.

Colburn, I'm sorry to interrupt you.

Can you get a little get up on that mic a little bit more for our reporter?

Thank you.

Is that better?

Is that better?

All right.

So what we're asking for this evening is approval of the cottage design standards so that we can develop this lot with three single family detached structures.

And in order to do that, we will need approval of the cottage design standards.

But at the end of the day, these three single-family lots will all comply with all other City of Columbia requirements as far as parking uh things of that nature.

Um I know the board has heard several requests for cottage standards in the past, uh, so but just as a reminder, uh the cottage standards allow for individual single-family residential structures.

They are homes on individual lots, they're just homes with smaller footprints.

Um, here you see the proposed dimensional standards uh that we're proposing for the Jefferson cottages.

Uh the column on the far right includes what we're proposing uh this evening.

As far as the site itself, here's a view from the assessor's uh parcel viewer.

The site's located again at the intersection of Sexton Road and Jefferson Street.

Uh when you zoom out, there's the area as a whole.

Uh this is located in an area that is predominantly zoned R2.

So this site right now could be developed with duplexes, things of that nature.

We're asking to go a different direction and develop with single family homes here.

Quick screenshot of the proposed preliminary plat.

Um again, you can see the layout there, just asking for three single family homes.

Um so really we look at this as we're we're taking a lot that's zoned for duplexes and basically adding one additional single family detached dwelling.

Overall, what are the the purposes of the cottage standards?

Um as the board's probably aware.

Columbia's done a housing study and has identified a need for more housing.

The cottage standards allow for some in fill development and to create some additional single family homes in a way to sort of uh blend single family homes into existing neighborhoods.

So that's certainly what we're trying to do to hear.

Here's an example of what cottage style housing might look like, not necessarily what the color scheme or anything that would be built here, but this gives you a little visual representation of what a cottage style housing might look like.

Overall, uh the board has defined that we've satisfied three criteria in order to approve the cottage design standards.

The first criteria is that the proposed development is basically consistent with Columbia Imagined or the comprehensive plan.

And here we think this proposal is.

Obviously, we're proposing residential use here.

Uh the existing neighborhood is a mix of different residential uses.

Uh the cottage standards promote one of the goals of Columbia Imagined, which is to provide a livable and sustainable neighborhood with diverse and inclusive housing options.

Similarly, one of the goals of Columbia Imagined is to promote and encourage land use and growth management with compact development around existing infrastructure.

Again, that's what we're proposing here.

And it's ultimately integrated with the surrounding neighborhood.

The second criteria for the board to consider is effectively whether or not there is adequate parking for the proposed development.

And here we're proposing three single family homes that each will have a parking garage, either a one or two parking garage, as well as parking spaces outside of the garage to meet the city requirement.

So at the end of the day, all of these lots will meet the city's off-street parking requirements.

The third and final criteria is that the proposal won't create traffic congestion ultimately.

Here, when you look at the surrounding road network, there's obviously adequate capacity to serve three single family homes.

And particularly when you compare the density or excuse me, the traffic that might be generated from a duplex development.

Here we're having single family homes.

So we don't think that the additional homes here would create any sort of traffic congestion issues.

And I think that's supported as by the staff report as well.

Additionally, there are currently no sidewalks along Jefferson Street with this proposal.

We would build the sidewalk along our lot frontage.

So we're filling in sort of a gap in the sidewalk infrastructure.

Just a list of some other uh cottage developments that have been approved and gone through the process, and I think are a good representation of uh you know what can come out of the cottage approval.

Um overall at the end of the day, uh, we're asking for your support.

We believe we've met the three criteria.

The three single family homes are appropriate for the area, it's an appropriate density, all of the development standards are going to be met.

It's inline and supported by Columbia Imagined, and we have the staff support.

Uh with that, I would be happy to answer any questions.

I also have Kyle Miller with uh Crockett Engineering here.

Uh he's not planning on speaking, but if you have questions about dimensions, lots, whatever, he'd be happy to chat.

All right.

Seeing none, I'll sit down.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Excuse me.

I just did have one question.

Yeah.

What is the uh on street parking like on on Sexton and on um Jefferson?

So it's a local residential street, so I believe on street parking is permitted on Jefferson on one side of Sexton.

But we would we're gonna have enough parking on site or off-street that we would hope to not utilize any of the on-street parking.

So that's assuming um one car per cottage for the driveway.

Well, there would be um parking in the garage and a parking space outside of the garage.

So you'd have two offs a minimum of two.

One in front of the other.

Yes, ma'am.

Would there be space between the driveway between the curb cuts to park on the street if you wanted to?

Or would it seem like it'd almost eliminate that?

Potentially, I might have Kyle speak to that if he'd like to.

Yeah.

Yeah, Kyle Miller, Crockett Engineering 1000 West Night Phone.

Do you use where the testimony you're about to give this evening?

Will be the true still up you got?

Yes.

Yeah, so going back to the question in regards to the curb cuts.

Um, yeah, we believe it's gonna depend a little bit on where the the buildings actually go, where the driveways go to align that.

So I can't sit here and say 100% yes or no, but just with the spacing of the lots and with the width of the driveway, I do believe that you'd be able to get a car between each of those curb cuts if it was placed in a symmetrical fashion to do so.

All right.

So if there's if there's if the occupants have two cars, then there will always have to be every day and organized orchestration of so that is that's again goes back to exactly the home and the type that gets selected.

You could have a wider driveway similar to any other single family where they have an extra space that put gets put in there.

I would imagine on cottage style, there's only gonna be the one garage that gets installed or one one side, but they could also have a two-car garage.

Uh they could have the driveway that's just as wide.

Um, it's it comes down to what you know what actually home gets selected to go on that particular lot that would fit in the space.

Uh questions.

Well, it might be for for Caleb.

Um you've seen any evidence where there's where when you would do three homes like this instead of a duplex that you'd actually have less cars.

It seems like we discussed that in a previous.

I mean, anecdotally, I would think there would be fewer vehicles because a duplex could potentially have four bedrooms on each side.

Um which case each person, if that's rented out by the bedroom, each person might have a vehicle.

So I think there would be less parking associated with this than a duplex development.

So if you had a small family or a single person that had one car, I mean because the home wouldn't hold ten people, it would it's not big enough for that, so it's gonna be maybe a couple and a couple of kids because it's gonna be what three bedroom units maybe.

There'll be either two or three bedrooms.

Two or three.

Yeah.

So the capacity of the house wouldn't allow for that many cars to begin with, right?

That's right.

Which would be different than if you had put if you put a single duplex on that lot, you'd you'd end up with potentially more people.

And less homeownership, right?

I mean, the idea between behind this is to have to sell these to individuals, right?

Right, absolutely.

Any more questions?

All right, thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh anyone in opposition of the application.

Staff report?

Oh I'm sorry.

Oh, sorry.

We might open to anyone else that is in support as well, both in opposition.

Oh, anyone else in support.

Any opposition?

Staff report.

So as Mr.

Colbert has uh described, uh this is a request to basically create three lots out of one that is sat vacant since approximately 2002 through 2007.

Um the narrow frontage of this lot is to Sexton.

Uh the lot requires dedication of right of way for Jefferson, as well as a quarter truncation, making the buildable area uh that much smaller.

So orienting the proposed lots to Jefferson Street is viewed as the most practical way to yield uh additional lots out of this problem.

Uh that increased yield would have to comply with all of our dimensional standards.

Uh the table that Mr.

Colbert showed you included the standard dimensional standards for a cottage lot.

That's 20 feet on the front, 10 feet on the rear, and six feet on the sides, keeping in mind that the rear is opposite the frontage along Jefferson.

As the staff report points out, that rear yard, effectively based upon the built environment, is really a side yard, and that side yard is still larger than what would be required in the R2 zoning district.

Staff believes uh that the site features associated with this particular property, the dedications required, um necessitate some alternative.

Uh there's a very large tree that appears to be desired to be preserved uh at the intersection of Sexton and Jefferson.

Keeping the neighborhood character intact, uh, there is a secondary large tree towards the northern end of this property that may need to be removed in order to accommodate construction.

So to Dr.

Zia's question, the UDC requires a minimum of two on-site parking spaces for every single single family dwelling.

Uh tandem parking is principally allowed in the R2 zoning district.

So dealing with jockeying a car around daily is not an uncommon event.

Though, as Mr.

Miller pointed out, depending on the floor plan chosen, the driveway may be widened uh to accommodate a winged parking space.

So that episodic event doesn't occur.

If that is chosen, that actually increases the total number of parking spaces to three.

If it's a two-car garage, we get four.

So as far as for meeting the requirements of parking and ensuring that Jefferson nor Sexton are impacted, staff is confident that that will be addressed.

As far as for meeting our overall comprehensive plan goals and objectives, as well as the housing studies, uh goals and objectives, there are no questions in staff's mind that that is being achieved.

We are yielding more housing by using the cottage standard.

This site in total area could potentially yield two duplexes, one fronting Sexton, one fronting Jefferson.

However, the livability of the duplex fronting Jefferson could be very, very compromised because of the lot depth.

And so in order to compensate for that, they've decided to eliminate the additional unit.

A second duplex would have gotten them and gone to single family housing.

Staff is supportive of the request and is available to answer any questions you may have.

Are there three curb cuts on Jefferson or one on Sexton and two on Jefferson?

Uh the curb cut apparently was on Sexton.

There are none on Jefferson today.

So you'll get to all three properties from Jefferson.

From okay.

So are there curb cuts on Jefferson?

Not today.

No, no, no.

I mean with with what's proposed.

There will be.

There will be three or two.

Three.

Three.

All right.

So because right now there's a curb cut on Sexton, right?

Yes, that will be.

So you would eliminate that.

And Sexton being the neighborhood collector, that is the street we would like to get rid of the curb cut on.

Right.

That was kind of my point is that that would be that would be a benefit to everyone to move the curb cuts to Jefferson as opposed to having the one on Sexton.

Correct.

Any more questions?

Do you have any comments?

Okay.

We're closing the hearing.

Comments from legal.

Uh yes, madam chair.

Um see, as a preliminary matter, uh, I'd like to offer uh board's exhibits one, two, and three.

Um exhibit one being certified copies of sections 291.11 definitions and rules of construction.

Uh 29 2.2a residential zoning districts and accompanying table 2.3.

Uh 29 3.3a use specific standards.

29 4.1 dimensional summary table, including table 4.1-1, 296.1c board of adjustment, 296.3 regulatory procedures in its entirety, and 29 6.4 subsection J optional development standards approval.

Exhibit two being staff report, locator map, application, and correspondence, and uh exhibit three being public hearing advertisement, parties and interest notice and parties and interest lists.

I realize Mr.

Colbert has already introduced those, but the risk of being duplicative, let's go ahead and put them in again if if uh if you'll allow us, please.

Thank you.

And will those be admitted into the record?

Yes.

Thank you.

It's not on my crib.

That's fine.

As a secondary matter, uh this is not a variance request.

This is uh different.

It is a request for approval of an optional development standards.

Uh there's a different section, different uh approval criteria.

This is under 296.4J.

And pursuant to that section, the board may approve the application for this optional development standards for cottage development.

If it turns that all the following criteria have been met.

First, that the use of the development of the optional development standard is consistent with the intent and character of the area as shown described in the city's adopted comprehensive plan.

Second, use of the optional development standard will provide adequate off-street parking for the permitted uses available in the zone district where the property is located, and will not result in significant off-site parking on sections of local neighborhood streets other than those immediately fronting the applicant's property.

And finally, the use of the optional development standards will not create additional traffic congestion or risks to public health and safety in the surrounding area.

And if there are no questions for me, that's that's all from legal.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, any comments, discussion from the board.

I mean, just on a I I'm in favor of this.

I think it's a great way to use that part of the city.

I think in fill is a great option.

The price of the lot, the the cost, you know, the cost of the property to acquire that the and then turn that into three lots.

I mean that's as close as we're going to get to affordable housing.

So I I just and because it they meet all the requirements, uh the standard has been met.

Uh I'm personally I'm in favor of I agree.

Anybody else?

I guess I'd also make a comment that is a longtime you know, resident of Columbia that having single-family homes, single-family homes are a very good idea, very supportive of having that.

And there's been a lot of similar homes that have been developed in adjacent neighborhoods and replaced older homes.

So it seems like it meets the city plan.

Any additional comments, Mr.

Colbert?

Okay.

Okay, we need a motion.

Well, Mr.

Zinner can write in what the motion is, but I make a motion to approve.

Should I read this?

You can.

Yeah, that would be preferable.

Let's go ahead and okay thank you.

Case number 181-2026, a request of Caleb Colbert on behalf of RAA Holdings LLC, seeking approval to use cottage optional development standards on property addressed as 307 West Sexton Road, so as to allow for development of a three-lot cottage subdivision to be known as Jefferson Street Cottages as required by Section 29-6.4 J of the Unified Development Code.

And we've got a motion made by Mr.

Minshew.

Yes.

Okay.

Second by Mr.

Sharp.

Thank you.

Call the role.

Yes.

Mr.

Sharp.

Yes.

Mr.

Minchhow.

Yes.

Dr.

Zia?

Yes.

Ms.

Gaines.

Yes.

So ordered by the board?

Case approved.

Okay.

Anyone from the public here to speak?

Any other podium, sir?

Yeah, we have to do that.

Come on.

And if you could provide your name and address for the court report, please.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Victor Miranda, and I live in 809 Jefferson Street.

Just across that lot.

And I think single family homes there is a great idea.

Would you put will you speak?

Yeah, thank you.

It's a great idea.

I was just wondering if one of the homes can go to Sexton, so the traffic and the flow will be a little bit better.

So always just set all of those three houses will go to a Jefferson Street.

This my question.

I mean, the way the way it's designed right now, all three all three curve, all three driveways would go to Jefferson.

And I mean the thinking, I think, is to get the traffic off of Sexton so the cars aren't slowing down and turning into a driveway on Sexton.

So it may be a case of you know it's a double-edged sword.

You're going to put more driveways on Jefferson, but it makes Sexton safer theoretically doing it that way.

Got it.

Maybe it makes sense because uh in Jefferson Street, only one side you can park outside if the driver's side are in front of the that probably will help.

That probably will help.

Um Jefferson, if you're looking towards Sexton, the left side on the lot, you cannot park on that side.

Okay, one there and uh one question.

Um is the side of the setbacks 10 feet for the houses as well, or that was a different just for the other duplex project.

Let me pull it in.

So from Jefferson Street, the house will be set back twenty feet, so that'll be a driveway.

Uh maybe a little bit more than 20.

There'll be a 10 foot rear yard, which is adjoining to the east, the lot to the east that accesses.

And then there will be six foot side yards.

Uh except on the corner of Sexton and Jefferson, which will have a 20-foot side yard setback as well.

24 side.

Yeah, 20.

So the corner lot at Sexton and Jefferson.

We'll have a 20-foot front yard and a 20-foot side yard.

Okay.

Um in my neighborhood.

The change the setbacks changed to like two weeks ago because I was looking into building um a second dwelling in my garage.

And I was told that it was the setbacks will be 15 feet, and that changed not like three weeks ago.

I was wondering if those setbacks just apply to new constructions or even constructions that are very former.

The reduced side yard setback is only applicable to accessory dwelling units.

It's not applicable to a standard single family home.

Got it.

Thank you.

Yeah, it's a little confusing on all the setbacks and what you can do with an existing structure and what you can build, you know, trying to move like too far into the backyard or too far into the side yard.

Um, and and so it it is different for what they're asking for for a cottage uh development, it is different than what you would be with a single family home there.

Okay.

So thank you for answering my questions.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, any further discussion.

Border staff.

Uh you will note uh that your next meeting is September 15th tentatively.

We did not receive any applications for the August meeting.

So uh enjoy a month off.

We'll see you in September if we get applications.

Okay.

And before you all depart this evening, um, I would like to have a moment with you.

It's all we have from staff.

Okay.

Motion to adjourn.

So moved.

Second.

Yeah, second, Randy.

Okay.

Or adjourned.

See y'all.

Thank you.