Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Columbia City council hears contested rezoning request for 304 North Main Street
Summary
Planning director Nathan Ber presented a request to rezone 304 North Main Street from R1 to R2 to permit a duplex; the owner and neighbors clashed over neighborhood character, parking, and historic nonconforming use. The transcript does not record a final council vote on the rezoning.
The Columbia City Common Council on April 14 heard detailed testimony and public comment on a rezoning request for 304 North Main Street that would change the property from R1 (single‑family) to R2 (two‑family) to allow conversion to a duplex.
For the record, Nathan Ber, planning director, told the council the application (26‑CZ‑3) seeks to align zoning with the owner’s proposed use: "effectively creating a duplex," he said, and staff reported a unanimous recommendation from the plan commission with a condition limiting future subdivision to duplex use.
The property owner, speaking to the council, described renovating the building, said he had spent more than $100,000 rehabilitating the house, and told the council he had reduced the number of electric meters and intended the property to be used as two units rather than the previous four. The owner also said he hired an attorney after a prior neighborhood petition and alleged some parties had lied under oath in earlier proceedings.
Neighbors opposed the rezoning during public comment. Gary Kessie, who lives adjacent to the property, said he and surrounding neighbors prefer the block remain single‑family and questioned whether a roughly 3,000‑square‑foot house should be used by two families; "we want it to stay that way," he told the council. Kimberly Susher, a local real‑estate agent, said the house’s multiple entrances and meters make it appear ready for multiple households and that zoning may be influencing the saleability of the property.
Council members asked detailed questions about parking and utility connections. Staff said the site currently has at least five paved off‑street parking spaces, exceeding the four‑space minimum. Members also raised the possibility of "spot zoning;" Ber said spot zoning has negative connotations while noting the property’s historic status and cited several other similar zoning irregularities in town.
The hearing included exchanges about enforcement and the practical effect of existing meters: councilors asked whether removing or disabling a third meter would prevent future reconnection; the owner said reconnecting a meter would require licensed rewiring and permitting.
The transcript records the ordinance read by title (Ordinance 2026‑9) and extensive discussion but does not include a recorded vote or final outcome for the rezoning item.
