Planning & Zoning - Regular Meeting

The chairperson will announce the subject of the hearing, followed by a report from staff. The chairperson will then open the public hearing to the applicant, followed by those in favor of the application and those opposed to the application. The chairperson will close the public hearing. During this time, the commission will discuss amongst themselves. The public may not address the commission after the close of the public hearing unless requested by the chairperson. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall base their recommendation and or decision on information and evidence presented during the public hearing. This decision, if required by the application, will be forwarded in writing to the City Council for further consideration.

Thank you. We'll move to our first public hearing which is rezone 26 days, 0, 0, 4. For the record, I note that there's a typo in the in the description and I'll tell you where it is. The matter we're going to hear is public hearing and possible vote to recommend the approval of an application to change the zoning classification of approximately 105 the the the agenda says one written out and it has parentheses 105 it's 105 acres of real property located at 5470 West Republic road from agricultural AG to high-density single-family residential R1H. Chris?

Thank you, Chairman Ellis. Chris Tabor, Principal Planner. An application has been submitted on behalf of Rose Century Farm LLC for the rezone of 105 acres of property at 5470 West Republic Road. The property subject to this rezoning is currently zoned as agricultural. The applicant wishes to rezone the property to high density single family residential district, R1H. The property is currently undeveloped farmland and is the site of several dilapidated structures previously utilized for residential and agricultural related uses. The property was recently annexed into the city by the owner in November of 2025. Upon incorporation, the property was assigned to the city's Agricultural AG Zoning District, which most closely aligned with its previous Green County Zoning District of Agriculture A1. The city's R1H zoning district is intended for single family only residential uses on lots of at least 7,000 square feet. The R1H zoning district does not allow townhome, duplex, or multifamily style residences. More specifically, R1H lots must meet the following regulations for configuration and setbacks. Minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet, a minimum lot width of 70 feet of street frontage, and a minimum lot depth of 90 feet. Setbacks are front 25 feet, rear yard 25 feet, side setback internal against other properties of six feet, and a side setback on the street of 15 to 25 feet, depending on the classification of the side and frontage streets. The city's comprehensive plan generally encourages the expansion of development through proactive rezoning of land at appropriate locations. Appropriate locations are described generally throughout the plan with regard to the relationship of land at particular locations to infrastructure capable of supporting various intensities and densities of uses. The 2021 Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Plan identifies land use goals and objectives relating to development, including the following. Policy, to support market conditions to develop a greater variety of residential and commercial options. Objective 1B, to support a variety of housing developments and styles to ensure a range of options are available. The portion of Republic Road occupied by the subject parcel connects the cities of Republic and Springfield and is mostly occupied by residential and agricultural uses. The subject property itself is bordered by agriculture and residential uses, most of which are unincorporated and reside in the county. The surrounding zonings are to the north, Green County Zoning Agricultural, A1, to the east, Green County Plot Assignment District, PAD. This is a counseling or training office allowed use. And also to the east is a Green County Zoning Agriculture, A1, South Green County Zoning Agriculture A1 and West Green County Zoning Agriculture A1 and City of Republic Zoning Agriculture AG. If successfully rezoned, the property would then be eligible to pursue a use within the approved zoning district. This property is not currently served by municipal water or sewer. Were service to become necessary, it would be the responsibility of the developer to undertake all costs related to the planning and construction of the necessary utilities. At that time, city staff would review all related plans during infrastructure permitting. A traffic impact study was required for this application. The study evaluated the project build out of the property with 298 maximum dwellings. The property would be required to make two new road connections to Republic Road. Each of these new connections would have both right and left turn lanes coming onto Republic Road. Initially, both access points would require westbound left turn lanes. By 2030, an eastbound right turn lane becomes necessary at the westernmost access, including storage, deceleration, and taper lengths. And by 2032, an eastbound right turn lane becomes warranted at the easternmost access to the site, including the storage, deceleration, and taper lengths. If in the future the planned build out of the property were to exceed the parameters of the TIS of 298 dwellings, a revised TIS would be required by the city. The subject parcel does not contain a special flood hazard area or floodplain. The subject parcel does not contain any identified sinkholes. Staff considers the proposed zoning map amendment rezoning to be generally consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan, consistent with the trend of development in the vicinity of the site, compatible with surrounding land uses, and able to be adequately served by municipal facilities. Based upon this analysis performed without the benefit of evidence and testimony of a public hearing, staff is recommending approval of this application. I would also like to say that staff brought in MoDOT to review the traffic study. So they have reviewed that and have gone back and forth through a few revisions.

Thank you. I will now invite any one who is the applicant or the representative of the applicant to come forward and give us your opinion if you wish to do so.

Tim Shovey with Cochran Engineering here on behalf of the property owner. As Chris mentioned before, it's roughly 300 lots on a little over 100 acres. This comes out to be 2.8 lots per acre, which is well below the allowed density in this area. The average lot size ends up being roughly 11,750 square feet. We're also looking at doing a little bit larger premium lots on the far south end of this development to have a little bit of a mix in the types of homes being built. As Chris mentioned as well, we did a traffic study that meets MoDOT and city requirements. It has turned lanes throughout the various phases of this project. The stormwater will meet all city requirements. There will not be an increase in peak flow that leaves the site where possible. We're going to hope to leave as much trees along the fence line that surrounds the property just to provide a little bit better buffer as well. And then I just like to reiterate that city staff does recommend approval here to answer any questions, comments or concerns you may have.

Any questions. You may get one later if you stay thank you for your time, thank you. At this point anyone who is in favor of the application who wishes to come forward and tell us anything. Not seeing that anyone come forward is there anyone who is opposed to the application who wishes to tell us something. Come forward give us your name.

Hello, I'm Grant Hamby. We live in the little pocket on the southeast corner. So we're kind of pretty close to the boundary line there. And I don't have any strong arguments against doing it, but I do have some questions about just some of the drainage and the stormwater runoff. just since we are topographically kind of in that flow from that property. So I'd just like to, if there are any examples of how that's gonna be managed to keep it off our land, I would just be curious to hear about that.

You're concerned about water runoff?

Yeah, just because we're kind of downhill. We're in the topographic flow of that. So I'd just like to see how it's being managed. If there is any examples of graphics that I could look at, that'd be great.

Chris. At this time, the city doesn't have any specific design work or stormwater reports for this site. The project engineer is probably the person best versed with the project that far along to tell you the specifics of what will be done with any of the detainment and how they intend to do that. you'd like we're happy to provide you at a you know after the meeting with general city guidelines on those regulations but as far as this specific project we're right now we're just reevaluating the ability to move to this zoning district and it does not have a specific layout so we have not evaluated the infrastructure in that way okay and like I said it was more of a curiosity than an objection or anything so I'm just curious

Chris, and correct me if I'm wrong, but it just, you can't increase the amount of water flow into certain areas. It needs to be the same or less than.

So, right, generally the guidelines of the city don't allow you to increase the rate of flow from the property. So it has to leave at roughly the same spot on the property and roughly at the same rate that it leaves now. And so they do this generally by creating a chain of detention basins that hold that water and release it at time intervals based on the volume of those basins and the height of the discharge structures to achieve that.

I'm guessing since there are no plans that there's no estimations of the locations of those basins and where they'll be on that?

I would have to defer to the project team on that.

Okay.

no no no we're as we're not evaluating the project itself we're just evaluating the zoning um that's probably something that's more appropriate to be dealt with you know after the meeting if everyone's okay with that okay that makes sense thank you thank you is there anyone else who's opposed to the application who wishes

Be sure and pull that down a little bit or get it up close to your mouth. Can you hear me now?

I can hear you. Good. Thank you. My name is Russell Brand. I live at 6121 West Farm Road 178. That would be slightly to the southwest of this proposed. I'm also speaking for one of my neighbors that has land on both the immediate west side and the east side. A couple things that we see. So first of all, I would kind of concur with concern over water drainage issue being that part of my property resides on McElhaney Branch. the water study uh... what i've seen in my six years living there what i've seen from experiential data from my neighbors that have lived there their entire lives eighty years we've seen projects like this diminish the water flow in that branch i'm concerned about what effects that might have uh... again just experience speaking here in the six years that i've lived in my house i've seen the mackle haney branch go from running 10 months out of the year to where now we're lucky if we have two months of flow in that water i think a lot of it has to do with the zz improvements and a number of different things that are happening because if you look down i believe it's farmer 174 here the primary spring that feeds that flows year round but it somewhere stops right here around the zz so there's concern about what we've already done the water flow in the area Second major concern, I heard a staff member speak of the projected traffic implications and how MoDOT has done their study. I would encourage anyone to actually go out there and take a turn off of 107 and notice the blind spots that reside right there at 107. If those traffic improvements aren't going to be made until after the implementation, which I heard 2030, I heard 2032, so that's several years after that, you already have M Highway that is very, very heavily taxed by the traffic that's flowing into the battlefield Springfield area. You have a number of blind spots that reside right there in that way, in that area. What I see personally is Farm Road 107 becoming a dumping point. If you look at Farm Road 107, which resides in the county, extremely narrow, dangerous roadway for passing traffic. And if you're going to get additional traffic that flows through that 107 and into 178 and up here on the ZZ where, again, I believe there's a proposed traffic circle, don't know that for certain i've just heard about a proposed traffic circle over there i think we've run into a number of issues whenever we're talking about the safety of drivers out on those bypasses so my recommendation again if i would to see this go forward i would want to see some of those road improvements done prior to the development going in just for the safety of all transportation that's going through that area And I would also say one other thing that I heard him say. He said it meets the surrounding. Well, I believe what I heard also in there is everything around that's zoned agricultural by Greene County. So if everything around that is zoned agricultural, I don't know that high density residential matches everything around it being zoned as agricultural. That doesn't sound like it's similar like in use. Thank you.

What I want to reiterate from the report is that the traffic study evaluated the projection of 298 homes and that traffic improvements are required prior to any construction of any homes. Before the city would take that into the city and take those roads and that infrastructure, what would be required specifically is two new connections would be made to Republic Road. Both of those new connections would have both right and left turn lanes coming onto Republic Road, and both access points would have westbound left turn lanes for cars turning onto them. What is a staggered implemented approval over time is in 2030, an eastbound right turn lane will become necessary the westernmost access so for cars coming off Republic to the first if they're heading east the first road they would come to of the two connections a right turn lane comes available in 2030 and then to the next connection a right turn lane becomes available in 2032 so the only thing the only part of that improvement that staggered are those two right turn lanes for eastbound traffic The rest of that is all required for just the immediate service of the 298 projected homes.

Thank you. Wait. Come up to the front. I'll give you another shot.

so sorry very visual person i hear access points in my mind access points are points that are on the existing 105 acres that are going out onto republic road is that correct okay so that has no bearing on the actual traffic of republic road So my concerns were the actual flow of traffic on Republic Road. So to reiterate what my concerns are is the people that are the deceleration lanes, as you call them, wouldn't be happening until I believe 2030 and 2032. Getting on to Republic Road, yes, is a concern because of the blind spots. But it's also the leaving of Republic Road. And that's where none of those prior adjustments address the actual traffic on Republic Road. They only address the access points coming on and off the property. So I'm more concerned about what's that do to Republic Road traffic. again if we look at example zz highway i sat here for you know nearly two minutes with counts i believe it was councilwoman hyder behind me waiting to try to turn in here for a while because we have a we have a little bit of a traffic problem out here on zz from time to time so i feel like we're only going to pinch ourselves even more so for the city of republic and transporting back and forth so thank you though

Again, let me reiterate that there will be left-hand turn lanes for both access points at the beginning implementation of this subdivision. So before any of this property became, any of the utilities or any of the roads became right of way within that subdivision, there would be two left-hand turn lanes on Republic Road that would turn into the access points for traffic moving from Springfield to Republic, westbound traffic.

Thank you. And later?

And later, eastbound traffic would have two right-hand turn lanes. Thank you.

Is there anyone else that wishes to speak? Carla burbacher I live at 4053 43 West David Lane, so I am the close to the microphone for me at least you need me to say that I don't hear well and I can hear you now.

OK, I live if you take that corner that comes down South I live in that little circle that you see I'm that House right South of there. and I too have questions about the stormwater, but the big concern I have too is was MoDOT out there?

Speak to us.

Yeah, I ask that you address all your comments to the PNC Commission and then we can cancel a staff member. Okay, so if you've never been out there before work, before school, or after work, a turn lane, how long is that gonna be? Because if you turn onto ZZ off of Republic Road making left, I think 15 cars can make that light and then we're backed up pretty far. If you add 298 cars a day coming in and out of that place during work hours, school hours, how long is that turn lane going to be that we're gonna have access and not have accidents or people backed up almost to FF from that road? That is my big concern besides the water as well that my neighbors addressed.

Thank you. Is there anyone else who is opposed to the application that wishes to speak? I think we've exhausted the pool. I'll close this hearing and we'll move to our discussion.

With the sewer and wastewater, is that gonna require another lift station in that area or is it gonna be able to feed into an existing lift station?

I believe it does require an additional lift station.

Okay.

Tell me about, ZZ is a county road, right?

So MoDOT is in charge of this section of Republic Road. We sent comments for, we asked for comments from both Greene County and MoDOT. MoDOT participated in the review of the project. The county opted not to.

And then when the left turn lanes go in, who's responsible for that?

All of the traffic improvements will be made at the expense of the developer. for the design and construction of them.

But they'll be also approved by?

MoDOT will ultimately be responsible for them after they become part of the public transit system.

Got it. Chris, there was a question asked about matching the existing zoning in the area, and the question was they were all agricultural. Is an agricultural and housing, are those considered to be congruent next to each other?

So the general rule of thumb that we look for when we're going through a zoning change or a request for change is, is there a bit of a step between two zonings? Obviously there are points at which a different zone has to border, you know, a different zone that otherwise everything would be the same. So we look for things to be of generally the same nature. In this case, these properties are mostly used as residential agriculture properties, single family homes, and so We consider this to be a step up in intensity to go to platted single-family home lots.

It's not like if you put heavy manufacturing in right there, that would be opposite.

Right. That's the type of thing we would be judging on is whether we're putting something that is going to be way out of line with the existing.

Because the agricultural area has homes, it's considered a step because this will be homes. Okay. Thank you.

Any other discussion or motions?

The there will be two connections from the property to Republic Road. Those two connections will be what supports those homes. There is no other connections to any roads outside of the outside of that subdivision. Is that what you mean? So one Oh seven, it doesn't, it won't go over to one Oh seven in any way.

No, not even like any stubs or anything.

It's just going to be, no, this, this project, um, is totally, totally reliant on this 105 acres. Uh, the bordered piece there there's about, uh, a 10 acre track separating that it won't, there won't be a road going through that to make that connection. I can't speak to what would happen in the future. There's no plans for that in the traffic study.

Okay. Any other discussion or motion?

Motion to possible vote to approve.

OK, I have a motion. To recommend the approval of an application to change the zoning classification approximately 105 acres of real property located at 5470 West Republic Rd from agricultural to high density single family residential are one age to hear second second. I have a second call rule.

Chairman Ellis I. Commissioner Heider? Aye. Commissioner Crosby?

Aye.

Commissioner Copeland?

Aye.

Thank you. We'll move to our second hearing rezone 26 days, 0, 0, 5, public hearing and possible vote to recommend the approval of an application to change the zoning classification of approximately 3 point. 9, 1, acres of real property. located at 2193 North Stone Falls Road from Agricultural and Amended Stone Creek Falls Plan Development District, PDD, to General Commercial, C2. Chris?

Thank you, Chairman. A and B Rep Land LLC has submitted an application for the rezone of 3.91 acres of property at 2193 North Stone Falls Road. The property subject to this rezoning application is currently split zoned as both agricultural and Stone Creek Falls PDD. The property was recently combined into one parcel from two lots. The applicant wishes to rezone the entire property to the general commercial C2 zoning district. The property is currently undeveloped. The parcel was recently combined from two smaller lots through a minor subdivision, which is an administrative process allowing for certain limited reconfigurations of property. The combined parcel carried over the zoning of the two original lots and now needs to be cleaned up to maximize buildable space. The City of Republic C2 zoning district is intended to permit less restrictive retail and service related businesses with a compatible location adjacent to similar uses, which take into consideration the adjacency of residential uses. C2 zoned lots do not have minimum lot size requirements, but they must meet the following regulations on setbacks. Front setback of 15 feet. back setback or rear of 15 feet, a side internal setback of six feet, and a side street setback of 15 feet. The city's comprehensive plan generally encourages the expansion of commercial development through proactive rezoning of land at appropriate locations. Appropriate locations are generally described throughout the plan with regard to the relationship of land at particular locations to infrastructure capable of supporting various intensities and densities of uses. The comprehensive plan and land use plan identify land use goals and objectives relating to development, including the following. Policy of coordination with infrastructure and goal of supporting new development well connected to the existing community. The property exists in a quickly developing part of the city and the relocation of State Highway MM is expected to continue this trend. The subject property itself is bordered by a mix of commercial uses and currently undeveloped properties. To the north is an agricultural zone property. To the east is a light industrial M1 zone property and a green county light manufacturing M1 zone property. To the south is Stone Creek Falls PDD, which is Huey Magoo's and Arvest Bank. And to the west is Stone Creek Falls PDD, which is Break Time, also a Taco Bell currently under construction. If successfully rezoned, the property would then be eligible to pursue a use within the approved zoning district. The property has municipal water and sewer on the premises. Both the water and wastewater systems have capacity to accommodate this property. A traffic impact study was not required for this application due to the location of the parcel along the incoming State Highway MM. Access to the parcel is project dependent. The subject parcel does not contain a special flood hazard area or floodplain. The subject parcel does not contain any identified sinkholes. Staff considers the proposed zoning amendment rezoning to be generally consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan, consistent with the trend of development in the vicinity of the site, compatible with surrounding land uses, and able to be adequately served by municipal facilities. Based upon this analysis performed without the benefit of evidence and testimony of a public hearing, staff recommends the approval of this application.

Thank you Chris. First turn to the applicant or the applicant's representative if they are here and wish to speak. Now's the time.

Good evening. I'm Aaron Hargrave with OWN, a civil engineering firm, 3213 Southwest Bypass. And I'm here to answer any questions you guys might have.

I don't know if anybody's got a question right now, but we certainly didn't have any at the beginning of the other one, so I'm sure that we'll have some along the way here.

Okay. I'm just trying to get you out for kickoff.

Thank you. Or maybe not. I'll have to call it, but is there anyone here who wishes to speak who's opposed to the application?

And for the record, that

I said that that way because there's no one else here except for city staff and the applicants representative. So I suppose we will close this hearing and move to our discussion.

Motion to approve.

I have a motion to recommend the approval of an application to change the zoning classification approximately 3.9 1 acres of real property located at 2193 North stone falls road from agricultural AG and amended stone Creek falls planned development district PDD to general commercial see to your second second. I have a motion and a second. Call the roll, please.

Commissioner Crosby?

Aye.

Commissioner Heider? Aye. Chairman Ellis?

Aye.

Commissioner Copeland?

Aye. Thank you. Motion carries. Now's the opportunity for citizen participation. Don't leave yet. You might want to participate. Anyone here who wishes to bring something to our attention may do so now. Not seeing anyone coming forward, we'll move to our next item, the community development department update.

Good evening. Tonight we're going to continue with topic three of the P&Z 101, which is public hearing and notice. The public hearing and notice process are two important elements used to ensure the opportunity for participation in the legislative process. Chapter 89 of the Missouri revised statutes mandates that municipalities must require these elements whenever land use or zoning ordinances are altered. So whenever the text of the land use chapter of the City of Republic's municipal code is changed or amended or whenever the city's zoning map is amended, there is a public hearing requirement at which the public may speak and attend. specifically for these items a notice of the hearing is required to be posted at least 15 days before the meeting and to appear in a local paper of record and that's through the state's revised statutes the city has its own land use requirements on top of that the requirements that the city has to include the 15-day notice in the paper of record, but then also include a posted notice on the property with the announcement of the hearing. And then also we do send out a certified letter to every owner of property within 185 feet of the subject land. So for example, in tonight's meeting, most of those people were probably They probably bordered that property, it sounded like, based on their addressing, and they received letters for this particular project by certified mail. That's something that we're not required to do by the state, but we do go kind of above that just to make sure that there is public awareness of the process. The public hearing and notification process is very important to the process. It provides an opportunity for the affected stakeholders to be heard. The people that come in here, they often aren't checking the city's website or taking any type of steps to regularly educate themselves on what's going on, if something's going on right next to them. So we want to make sure that anybody who might be affected by this will receive these notices either by the mail or because they drive by the property and see that regularly. It's also a setting for public engagement and participation for residents. So here we provide an opportunity for the developers and the citizens to come in to state their side to get on the public record with their opinion or an evidentiary testimony of the project and then to discuss that with the commission and staff. We also work to present information to aid in the decision-making process. So we provide a staff report. That staff report is something that's also publicly available. Whenever possible, we take opportunities to talk to any of the people who are interested in this. If they contact us before this meeting, we'll always invite them in to talk about this and share whatever we know with them. The public testimony is intended to utilize a factually based testimony to influence the findings of facts that you guys fill out. It is not intended for emotionally driven or anecdotal arguments. The idea is evidentiary based. And that's ultimately on the commission to determine the difference between those two types of arguments. So that's part of the responsibility you guys bear. Some of the emotionally driven arguments may sound very compelling, but ultimately what we're here to listen to is testimony of facts and figures. That concludes this topic. Next month we will be speaking on city plans and master planning, and we will have a meeting for next month. We've got two applications.

Thank you. Do I hear a motion to adjourn? Motion that can have a motion and a second to adjourn the meeting call the roll, please.

Commissioner Copeland.

All right.

Mister Heider I Mr. Crosby I chairman Ellis.

Thank you were.