Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. If you please stand for the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Good evening and thank you for coming to the Springfield Municipal Regional Planning Commission meeting Thursday, February the 5th, 2026. Please call the role. Bib here. Boy here. Here. Greg here.

Marlin here. Thomas here. Town here. We have a forum. Item 1.3, approval of the minutes from the regular meeting of the planning commission held on January the 8th, 2026. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion him. Motion second. All in favor? Any opposed?

Item 1.4, public comment period. Do we have anybody register? Old business 2.1, discuss and possibly take action on an appointment to the board of zoning appeals. Do we have a motion and a second to put this item on the floor? Motion. Second, Mr. because I still have to decide who wants to go to the board. The have you The conversation has been started with the city attorney. I do not have a response yet as to whether or not the atlarge position can serve. Okay.

So hopefully I will know before there's another BZA meeting. We don't have one in February and we don't have one in March. So I'm pretty confident there will be one in April. However, so I mean we we would still meet one more time before potentially. Yeah. One more time at least. Yes. Before the BZA would meet. So we would have time to hopefully get an answer from her. Follow up again with the attorney.

Okay. Now, in order to expedite, I'm not antsy to be on the bill board is on the pill. I was going to take it if nobody else would. But since we did have somebody else that spoke up, said that they would be willing to serve, then I think to be prudent, let's just go ahead and and do that. Take and not worry about waiting for an answer. Okay. Was there somebody else who stepped up adopt? There was you. Mm- You did too. I said I would fill it till it was Oh, I thought you said you would serve. Oh, no. I I set the I set the seat. I stand corrected. I don't want it.

Unless somebody else wants it. I mean, I I just I'll do my part and if I'm needed, I'll do it. But if I can't serve by rule, then so be it. Well, hopefully I will be able to find out soon and I will email this this commission when I do know more from the city attorney. Okay. I think we need to vote one way or the other. Correct. like if we're going to defer or whatever we're going to do. Yes. If you're going to defer, go ahead and vote to defer it again. I make a motion that we defer the person to serve on the uh BCA board to next month's meeting. Have a second. Second.

Ready for a vote. We're ready to vote. Yes. Yes. Yes. Greg, yes. Morland, yes. Thomas, yes. Yes. Yes.

3.0, New Business. 3.1 Discuss and possibly take action on a reszoning request from commercial services CS to core commercial CC for property at 411 Memorial Boulevard map 080J Group E parcel 019.0. Do I have a motion and a second to put this on the floor? Motion. Second,

Mr. Durham. Okay. Good evening. The first new item on tonight's agenda is a request to reszone approximately 0.58 acres located at 411 Memorial Boulevard from commercial services to core commercial. The property is located at the corner of Memorial Boulevard and Fifth Avenue. You can see that in your picture, which is a prominent and highly visible commercial intersection within the city. The site has remained vacant for several years and is currently underutilized, contributing limited aesthetic or economic value to the surrounding area. Redevelopment of the property is constrained by existing underground infrastructure and access restrictions related to the adjacent state roadways. Staff has had discussions with the owner regarding the T DOT limitations, specifically related to how the driveway placement and access significantly influence where a building can reasonably be located on the site. The core commercial zoning district provides the flexibility needed to address these constraints, allowing building orientation and placement that better align with restricted access points in the established development pattern along Memorial Boulevard and Fifth Avenue, which is not as readily achievable under the current commercial services zoning. While no site plan has been formally submitted, the applicant intends to construct a Shell commercial building with future tenants to be determined. The anticipated building form is expected to be similar in scale and orientation to nearby commercial development at Black Patch Drive and Memorial Boulevard. Staff also notes that surrounding properties, particularly those located on the same side of Fifth on the same side of Fifth Avenue, have developed in a manner that

aligns with the regulations and intent of the core commercial district, most notably with buildings positioned closer to the roadway. The requested zoning would allow development that is consistent with that existing pattern. The city's future land use map designates the property as neighborhood commercial and core commercial is identified as an appropriate zoning district within that designation. The request aligns with comprehensive plan goals encouraging infill redevelopment, reinvestment in underutilized properties, expansion of the commercial tax base, and improved aesthetics at prominent gateways. Staff finds the request to be consistent with the future land use map. the comprehensive plan and surrounding development patterns and therefore recommends approval of the resoning request from commercial services to core commercial. Happy to answer any questions or clarify anything about this request.

So this is contiguous to another CC. It is not contiguous. It is diagonally across. Okay. But that's okay, right? Yes. Okay. it. The designation on the land use map of neighborhood commercial has a list of suggested zonings and core commercial falls within that as well. And the buildings that are on the same side of Fifth Avenue are all really close to the roadway which is consistent with the core commercial patterns of development.

Are they proposing to push it up towards the road? They're going to push it as much as they can, but there are underground constraints that are still going to limit the exact placement. And obviously, they'll need parking for the building. So, that will be a consideration as well, but they're limited by T DOT's access points. Very. So, the this is just the reasoning. That's all we have to worry about now and then at some point in the future they would come back. But, okay. Yes. This was just to provide some alleviation essentially from the setbacks. Any other questions? Move to approve. Second. We're ready for a vote.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Paul, yes. Yes. Greg, yes. Morland, yes. Yes. Item 3.2, discuss and possibly take action on amendments to the city of Springfield's zoning ordinance by amending section 11-1202 entitled non-complying buildings or other structures. Do we have a motion and a second to put this on the floor? Motion. Second, Mr. Durham.

Agenda item 3.2 2 involves proposed amendments to the zoning ordinance intended to clarify and simplify the reconstruction of lawfully existing non-compliant buildings and structures. Specifically, staff is proposing to add a definition for reconstruction in section 11203 and to revise subsection C and D of section 111202. On the screen right now and in your packet was the definition for reconstruction. That was nothing in the code currently. So, we thought it was important to add that that definition. Currently, the ordinance limits reconstruction based on a 50% of floor area damage threshold and includes references to variations of the word convert, which is not defined elsewhere in the code. This has created practical challenges particularly for small or constrained lots where removing and rebuilding a structure may be the most appropriate option but is made difficult or cost prohibitive under existing regulations. The proposed amendments add a clear definition of reconstruction to distinguish it from routine maintenance or interior remodeling and revise the non-complying structure provisions to allow reconstruction on the same foundation when a building is damaged or destroyed provided that the existing non-compliance with bulk standards is not increased. The amendments exclude intentional crim criminal acts such as arson and require planning commission review and approval for reconstruction under this section, ensuring continued oversight and compatibility with surrounding development. These changes are intended to facilitate reinvestment, reduce unnecessary regulatory barriers, and make redevelopment more feasible. staff finds the amendments to be clear, reasonable, and consistent with the

comprehensive plans goals related to redevelopment and rei and revitalization and therefore recommends approval of the of the proposed zoning ordinance amendments. It is also worth noting that these proposed amendments were presented to the board of mayor and alderman during the strategic planning session held earlier this week where the item was discussed and no objections were raised. Any questions for Miss Durham? Yes, sir. This the statement of going you could go back on the same foundation and what if you have a event that caused the foundation to be basically destroyed then you would have to follow the existing setbacks. If there's no

I'm talking about but you if the foundation original foundation is not suitable to rebuild upon can you go back with the same footprint of that foundation in the same location if a surve the intent was if a surveyor could find evidence of where that foundation was whether or not it's rebuildable on the same foundation just that location. So it's not a literal Yes. It's the location of the foundation being field identified and then verified by um building staff within my department, inspecting staff within my department. Mr. F, I had a question just regarding the item number four commission review. Why we wouldn't review the enlargements?

You don't if the enlargement the only way they can do an enlargement is it has to go within the existing setback or within the required setback. So you wouldn't need to review anything that conforms. Do we need to review if they propose to build the exact same structure?

That's what this board said they wanted to do last month. So that's why I put that section in there that essentially the way I envision this happening. someone will come to me with a building permit request or to the building department with a building dep with a request to rebuild and I'll just add it to the agenda for the next month that this board gets to have some oversight and understand what's going to be rebuilt before that building permit is issued. Any other questions? If that's not something this board wants to do though, I mean it can be removed. I think it needs to be in there

and it can be revisited later if it turns out that you know you're inundated with it or you're comfortable with staff after you've done it a few times and you have happy to answer any questions. This is a the goal is to provide it to provide reinvestment and redevelopment. We've run into a lot of situations where some of the houses just need to be torn down and rebuilt. And this allows them to do that. Correct. This allows them to do that as long as it's not an intentional act of violence that destroys

whatever the structure is. If it's falling down, we are hopeful that they will rebuild completely rather than just putting paint on things because the code right now really only allows them to make repairs or there is a little bit of work around to piece meal it back together, you know, one wall at a time, but it becomes cost prohibitive and the product is not the same at the end. Sure. Any other questions? And there's no time limit. In what sense? And as far as redoing something after it gets in a condition.

No. No. Because a lot of the buildings are are old at this point. And the way it's written, it would technically apply to residential and commercial properties because we do have commercial properties, in particular the ones on Fifth Avenue that are zoned a certain way, but they're so close to the road that they would have to reszone or they could rebuild on their same foundation by this section of the code because there are situations throughout the city where there are some commercial properties as well. I don't foresee it being utilized with the commercial properties as much as with the smaller residential lots that are lots of record but are difficult to build on.

Let me see if I'm understanding what I think I'm understanding. A bunch of houses that have to be torn down, that's okay. But if you have a house that has a basement, u like the house is tore now, but the foundation is good. Do you have to use that same foundation? You do not have to use the same foundation. You just have to use the same location of the foundation. Gotcha.

And if I need to to tweak that a little bit, I can make that clear before I send it on to the board. In some cases, the foundation is falling apart, too. So, it's really just the where are those four corners essentially, so that when the house gets rebuilt, it's not increasing the nonconformity. The location of the house will be the same after as it was before. Gotcha. or whatever structure.

Do we have a motion to approve or deny or to change? I make a motion. We have a motion. We have a second. I'll second it. Ready for a vote? Yes. Yes. Floyd, yes. Thomas, yes. Yes. Greg, yes. Town, yes. Yes. Passes 80. Item 4.0 under other business 4.1 community development director's report. Miss Durham,

I just have a few updates to share. The February and March Board of Zoning Appeals meetings have both been cancelled. Right now, I have no notable approvals to share with the commission. Staff has received a number of submitts for the March planning commission meeting. Right now, I believe there are eight items on that agenda, so next month's meeting will be a little bit longer. Um, staff is also aware of a potential WAWA submitt that may be coming soon. They attempted to submit a site plan and was lacking a few things. So, because the vesting period starts the day we accept the plans, I asked them to make those corrections before we formally accepted. Um, in addition, staff is actively researching and evaluating several potential zoning ordinance amendments where we're seeing recurring challenges and questions. These are pretty similar to what I've showed you in the past. The one for traffic study requirements I plan to bring you next month, though. that one. Um, I would like to put before you. We're going to continue researching the parking lot design standards, landscape requirements for single family residential development. Um, I am starting some research on the consumer finance company regulations, which we talked about last month. I'm finding evidence that in quite a few jurisdictions. They are not outlawed, but they are restricted in terms of how close in proximity they can be located from another location, so to speak. quarter of a mile seems to be kind of the prevailing distance. If by chance I can get that together for next month, that will come, but I feel like that will be more likely in April. And then we're looking at some updates to the sign ordinance. There's a few sections that are just too subjective and are making it challenging to implement. So, planning staff is

currently doing a fantastic job. um trying to get some of the sign issues in town under control. So, if you're out and you notice less signage in some locations, that's because we are trying. Staff is also evaluating current development review and permit fees for consistency with surrounding communities. Um July 1st, we have to make sure that we have updated information available to the public on how all of those fees are derived. So, we're taking a look at how much they are and should they be re-evaluated. Um, as always, work sessions may be scheduled if we need to have in-depth conversations about anything. And we need to start thinking ahead about training topics. We're not going to start today. We have to do our one hour of property vesting or of private property rights, but then we'll have three hours that we need to kind of consider what do we need training on. So, be thinking about that. Go ahead and send me anything that you know you think we need training on so that I can start preparing because I don't want it to get to December and we're cramming to get those last two hours done. So, that's all I have in my report.

Question. Yes. What is a Waw Wa? What is a Wawa? A Waw Wa apparently is another fancy gas station that serves Great S. Are there any in Tennessee though? I haven't seen any. There are several under construction. I think it's like a mini bies. They said yes. I thought I knew what it was, but I'd never seen heard of one in Tennessee. They have a cult following. They do have a cult. Yes. I've never been to one. I'd heard rumors one was coming to Pleasant View, but I haven't seen any evidence of that either. So, but it will be in the shops at Morland. Um like if you're facing that by Chipotle New Orleans. It's Yes. Further down

at the end. Down at the end. Yes. What's that? But yeah, a mini bucky. Is that That sounds like a good description. Another name for a Canadian goose, too. Yes. Yes, it is. It's got to be from up north to know that. I am from up north, but I did not know that that was another name for one. So, I've heard. Anything else from Mr. Durham's report? Item 4.2. Um, commissioner items of concern and discussion. Yeah, I'd gotten an email that Mr. Val had something he wanted to bring up.

I just wanted to talk. I know, you know, Franklin of Kentucky is dealing with it right now, but just the data centers that are trying to bully their way into small town communities. And I was kind of looking through the zoning ordinance and it's not really classified that you can really find. And so I just wanted to kind of put it before that we get on the front end so we're not facing lawsuits or or trying to work where it goes and be subjected. It just be easier to front end to Well, you're right. It does not it's not addressed in the current zoning ordinance. And so I think just either defining it first and then figuring out how we want to handle it for zoning would be

well. We've had some conversations in my office about these and we while it's not defined in there and while it's not spoken to in any particular zoning district, we have the SP the specific plan zoning district. So that would be our recommendation that they follow a specific or file a specific plan request and we work through the request that way. I've had one conversation with a gentleman who was looking for large tracks and in that conversation it was decided that that likely would not be something the city would want primarily because of the lack of jobs that they truly provide and the amount of infrastructure, but obviously all of those would be evaluated on a case by case.

So, I can't speak to what the board would want to do. Concern us just now upgrading our water and sewer capacity. We don't want to get delayed. The specific plan would certainly allow for a zoning designation for anything that doesn't fit cleanly in the zoning ordinance as it's written. Now, would that be something we need to specifically address or because it doesn't fit, we can just push I think the fact that the specific plan lets you write your own code by default addresses that. So, we're not flat out saying it doesn't go anywhere, but this is kind of where to bring any recognition to the fact that we're even looking at anything.

We don't we really don't have the land for them either, right? The city is so built out at this point and the sheer amount of acreage that's required for most of them. There's really just not even within a data center itself is not necessarily going to be a very a real large footprint. Now, if you're looking at a solar array or solar farm, that's a totally different situation. But the the data centers are going to be so heavily electrically requirements on that that it's going to be a function of Tennessee Valley Authority being able to serve them.

Uh I would definitely get in with Terry Risha and let him give his two cents worth from a city infrastructure standpoint because there are some advantages. I mean, they have a high load factor. So as a result of that, they're very profitable for the local utility, but having the availability of power from a generation standpoint, TVA, that's the issue on on data centers. Well, I would look at the one amendment. Yeah. Oh, I've been listening to podcasts about the one amendments. They can't be the electrical loads. So, they're just fields of generators out there, right? That's why they have to have a lot of land because of the noise, too. And

and residents complaining, fuel, you know, gas, turbine, and diesel engines do produce and then the cooling of the water like the cooling of water is major. You can't just dump that water right back into a navigable or a blue line because it will kill the fish. Um the the one that I was approached about though, they were looking for hundreds of acres. So

those may also we have I I just thought of this they may fall into GI general but we do not have that would be so impactful. So it may not be that that was my suggestion. Stick it in there. It could be they can't they can't well you know because it says any other use in there too. So I know the car doesn't like that definition to spell it out.

So after y'all get through that chairman, I'd like to just do a brief update you guys on fire session number three. Anybody you have any more anything else? Mr. Bird, do you want to do that now?

Yes. I just wanted to make you guys aware that we are we're we're moving on a preliminary design for fire station number three. Um we've got the schematic design down. So we're we're starting to look at uh the site plan locations and and do some geotechnical work. So, uh, we haven't, you know, so at some point in the not too distant future, 2 3 months down the road, we'll be bringing a a fire station site plan and to you guys for approval so that um, you know, I just wanted to make you aware that we are moving forward with that and uh, we will hopefully, you know, within the next year or so have that completed in and online. Has it been cited?

Yes. Uh well, presently we are looking at uh the commercial portion of what we as staff call Harvest Park. It's it in the bend of South Maine where RA Bitten comes into it. There's a commercial port. Well, there's an MRI MRO zoning classification there for like 23 acres and we're we're in negotiations with the owners to do the commercial part of that development. Down by the wastewater holding tank. Yes. Well, north of that building. Okay. Gotcha. Gotcha. Not that far.

Right as you go. It's in that curve on South Main. So yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. B. Thank you. Do we have a motion to adjourn? So move. Second. I think make a motion we adjourn. Second.