Annexation request sparks urban sprawl debate

A request to annex nearly 69 acres of land into the Columbia city limits has sparked a debate over urban sprawl.

The Columbia Planning and Zoning Commission and residents affected by the annexation and zoning request spoke at Thursday night’s commission meeting. The commission voted 5-3 to recommend approval to the Columbia City Council.

“Let’s leave a little bit of green space here folks, come on,” a woman who didn’t identify herself said during the meeting. “It is destroying our quality of life. We planned to live in a rural area, so please do not approve this.”

The request includes some commercial zoning, causing angst with neighbors.

Al Plumber was among about a dozen people who voiced their concerns Thursday, all echoing a similar message.

Plumber argues the single-family homes on third-of-an-acre lots would “depreciate the value of all of our property.”

“Then the question becomes, how much traffic does that bring in the existing neighborhood,” Plumber said.

Bruce Summers, a Willow Brook Homeowners Association representative, opposed the approval. “Gas station is code for a liquor store that sells gas,” Summers said.

“There’s a lot of angst with the uncertainty that comes about with the commercial zoning,” a concerned resident said Thursday.

If the request passes, the land would be annexed into the city limits and most of the property would be used for single-family homes. Two smaller portions of the property would be coded for mixed commercial use. The site is now in unincorporated Boone County and zoned A-2, which requires a 2.5-acre minimum lot size.

Florida resident Gary Ridenhour, formerly of Columbia, owns the land. Ridenhour said during Thursday’s meeting that the land has been in his family for nearly 50 years. He no longer has any use for the land and decided to sell it, Ridenhour said.

“If I had the means to leave the property vacant, I would. But the truth of the matter is, I don’t,” Ridenhour said. “I think the question is, if not this, then what? I can’t just let the property sit, so there’s going to have to be some sort of development one way or the other.”

Commissioner Anthony Stanton said he understands Ridenhour’s point.

“The owner of this property has a right to do with his property as people who are sitting in this audience have a right to do with theirs,” Stanton said.”If I’m sitting on something that’s going to help my family prosper and build my family wealth, you can’t blame the guy.”

Stanton said residents should have formed a coalition to buy the land, but agreed Ridenhour has a right to do what he pleases with the property.

“I wish we could have done something different by the time that we got to this point,” Stanton added.

Most of the residents were concerned about what kind of commercial building could come to their neighborhood.

“I understand there is nothing static in this life except change, and that it’s going to happen, I’m not going to fight about it,” Debra Booker said. “I would like to keep my land in agriculture until I’m dead, and I’m 81, so I’m working on that. Get rid of the commercial business, it really doesn’t make any sense at this point, 20 years from now it may make great sense, add it in, but not now.”

The commission in its recommendation to the city council changed part of the suggested zoning from MC (Mixed-use Corridor) to MN (Mixed-Use Neighborhood) in an attempt to compromise with concerned neighbors.

The change means certain buildings and developments need city approval before they can be built.

The city council will set a public hearing as early as its Nov. 5 meeting and the annexation and zoning plan would be introduced during its Nov. 19 meeting. A final decision would be made during the city council’s Dec. 3 meeting under that timeline.