Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Florissant Staff Proposes Removing ‘Tavern’ as New Permitted Use; Existing Taverns to Remain Nonconforming

Florissant City Council · January 27, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City planning staff told the council it proposes removing 'tavern' as a permitted or special use and replacing definitional language with new restaurant categories; existing taverns would be legal nonconforming uses and the liquor code would be amended to align with the change.

Debbie Irvin, the city planning staffer presenting Jan. 26, summarized a zoning amendment that would remove the category "tavern" from permitted and special-use lists in several commercial zoning districts and create clearer definitions for restaurants (sit-down, drive-through, quick service). Irvin said the change is intended to prevent new taverns while preserving existing establishments as legal nonconforming uses.

Irvin told the council the staff report (dated Dec. 11) and the plan commission discussion informed the proposal. "We will not be taking any more applications for any new taverns," she said, and added that the city's liquor code would be amended to support the approach. She said the plan commission had a "very healthy discussion" about definitions and district regulations.

Council members asked no substantive follow-up questions during the Jan. 26 hearing and the public hearing closed without additional public comment. Staff indicated the amendment brings Florissant into alignment with neighboring municipalities' spacing and use definitions while maintaining compliance with federal and state fair-housing rules where applicable.

The amendment was read as a first reading and placed on the council's calendar for subsequent consideration and adoption steps. The council did not adopt the amendment at the Jan. 26 meeting; further readings and an ordinance vote will follow.