Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning And Permitting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Property owner questions zoning approach to contractor offices, warns permitting costs deter small businesses
Summary
At the March 9 meeting, Jim Coverman, a property owner and planning/zoning commissioner, argued that treating trades such as HVAC, plumbing and roofing as conditional uses in C‑1 zones—requiring a $550 application and two months for approval—discourages small contractors and harms local tenants; council acknowledged his remarks but recorded no immediate policy response.
At the March 9 Overland City Council meeting, resident and property owner Jim Coverman (S6) used the resident‑comment period to challenge how the city applies conditional use permits to contractor and trade businesses in C‑1 commercial zones.
"So my name is Jim Coverman. I'm the owner of the street mall... I'm very, very concerned with the ordinance of the city... I don't understand what's the point to bring this business to the condition use permit," Coverman said, adding that an applicant was told it must pay $550 and wait two months for Planning & Zoning review. He said the requirement can drive potential tenants away and questioned the consistency of Planning & Zoning's determinations about permitted offices versus conditional contractor uses.
Coverman said business offices are permitted in the C‑1 district, while roofing, HVAC, plumbing and similar trades appear to be treated as conditional uses when staff or Planning & Zoning classify them as "construction contractor" uses. He argued this practice creates uncertainty for landlords and small business tenants who may need frequent, immediate access to trade services.
Mayor Little (S3) and other council members acknowledged Coverman’s remarks; the transcript records no formal reply from staff or a council directive to reopen the zoning classification question during the meeting. The exchange remained unresolved at adjournment. Coverman indicated he had spoken previously with staff (Jason) about the issue but was urging the council to clarify which rules should apply.
Next steps: The meeting did not record a motion to change the municipal code or ask staff to return with specific edits. Any formal policy change would require referral to Planning & Zoning and a future council action.
