Joplin City Council Work Session – October 13, 2025

This work session, held on the evening of October 13, 2025, was dedicated to a detailed presentation by city staff of 38 proposed amendments to the newly adopted form-based zoning code. Council members reviewed the changes, asked clarifying questions, and provided informal direction to advance the ordinance for formal consideration at the next regular meeting.

Discussion Items

• Staff Presentation of 38 Zoning Code Amendments – Troy Bolander and Tyler (staff) presented a comprehensive set of updates to the zoning code adopted three years ago. Key amendments included:
  • Allowing certain accessory outbuildings on large rural lots (over 40,000 sq. ft.) to be placed in front of the primary structure, subject to a 60‑foot setback.
  • Clarifying that the 185‑foot mailing requirement applies only to special use permits and rezoning, not street vacations.
  • Adding encroachment agreements to the fee schedule for public hearing cases.
  • Removing specific fee amounts from the code and referencing an external fee schedule to avoid outdated information.
  • Updating bike lane design standards to emphasize protected bike lanes (buffered or raised) per NACTO guidelines, moving away from shared lane markings.
  • Allowing major utilities (e.g., substations) in non‑industrial districts via special use permit.
  • Updating marijuana use regulations to reflect recreational use, consistent with Missouri statute, and prohibiting on‑site consumption at dispensaries.
  • Permitting apartments by right in the C‑3 (highest intensity commercial) district to facilitate mixed‑use development.
  • Allowing outdoor auto sales, drive‑up storage, and animal care by right in C‑3, subject to enhanced site design standards.
  • Codifying a waiver of rezoning fees for historic preservation properties.
  • Adjusting setback requirements, fence materials, and buffer standards to provide flexibility for infill and redevelopment.
  • Clarifying definitions for large vehicle storage, modular vs. manufactured homes, and mobile vendor/micro businesses.
  • Requiring lot mergers for multi‑lot duplex developments to prevent piecemeal sales.
  • Prohibiting invasive species in ground cover and allowing cultivated native landscaping if maintained in a neat and organized manner.
  • Redefining the historic preservation overlay to differentiate between historic landmark districts (HL) and historic districts (HD).
• Council Questions – Several council members sought clarification:
  • Mr. Kobel asked whether the encroachment section would affect parklets; staff confirmed it applies to alleyway encroachments and fire escapes, not sidewalk cafés.
  • Mr. Lawson asked about bike lane changes and existing sharrows on Main Street; staff explained that sharrows are considered less safe and future designs will prioritize separation.
  • Mr. Bart inquired if Section 37 (flexibility in walkable design guidelines) could apply to front porch railings; staff confirmed it allows adjustments in neighborhoods where traditional designs are not present.
  • Mr. Jackson raised a concern about a local business operating a membership lounge that circumvents sales tax on marijuana products. Staff noted the proposed amendments do not address that loophole, and the issue of on‑site use at non‑commercial facilities remains unresolved. Mr. Jackson urged future action to prevent revenue loss.
  • Mr. Shaw expressed concerns about residential overcrowding in single‑family homes leading to excessive street parking and multiple vehicles. He also cited downtown parking issues from apartment dwellers and construction dumpsters occupying public spaces. Staff noted that residential parking is not currently regulated and that downtown parking enforcement had been relaxed. Council discussed requiring off‑street parking for each vehicle and potentially revisiting parking meter enforcement, but such changes would need to go through the Planning and Zoning Commission.
  • Joy asked about regulation of roll‑off dumpsters during construction; staff confirmed they are regulated via engineering permits when placed in public rights‑of‑way.

Key Outcomes

• Council expressed general consensus with the staff recommendations and directed the city attorney to bring the ordinance off the table for first reading at the next regular council meeting. No formal vote was taken.
• Concerns raised by Mr. Shaw about residential overcrowding and downtown parking will be explored separately, with staff to prepare potential options for future consideration. Any parking regulatory changes would require Planning and Zoning Commission review.
• The work session concluded without further action.