Council approves first reading to rezone 427 Hardin Street after neighbors and attorney clash over preservation

Columbia City Council gave first reading approval on Feb. 18 to a zoning map amendment for 427 Hardin Street that would change the parcel from residential mixed to single‑family residential medium lot.

Supporters and opponents packed the council chamber during debate, with neighbors urging the council to protect a historic house and an attorney warning the rezoning could constitute spot zoning and a regulatory taking. Councilmember Brennan moved the measure and it was seconded; the roll call vote was recorded as unanimous for first reading.

The item drew four neighborhood speakers. Jim Daniel, president of the Wheeler Hill Neighborhood Association, said the property and adjacent Spagna family buildings “need to be developed as a single family home and not split into 2 or 3 or 4 different, smaller properties like duplexes.” Attorney Toby Ward, speaking for other interests, argued the rezoning “violates the 2 acre rule” and said the lot is “three quarters of an acre,” calling the proposed rezoning inconsistent with current and future comprehensive plans and warning it could amount to a regulatory taking.

Caitlin Hayward, owner of 415 Hardin Street, told council she and her family have invested “hundreds of thousands of dollars” restoring a nearby historic house and said converting 427 Hardin to mixed use would “totally” undermine that investment and increase traffic on the block. Neighbor Francis Goldstein said he supported preserving the house and would not object to rezoning his property if that was the legal remedy.

Councilmembers debated options and asked staff to research alternatives between readings. Several members suggested examining a wider rezoning of the block rather than protecting a single lot, and the council asked staff to present options that could protect the house while addressing legal and valuation concerns. Staff agreed to “look at all options” and to educate council about what protections would and would not prevent demolition or allow a compatible single‑family restoration.

The motion passed on first reading; council set the matter for follow up between first and second reading so staff can return with findings and options, including whether a broader block rezoning or a landmark/bailey tax option could be pursued.

Council’s action at first reading does not itself change property rights; additional formal steps would be required before any permanent rezoning or landmarking takes effect.