Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Let's stand for the pledge. Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you for attending tonight's Springfield Municipal Regional Planning Commission meeting Thursday, July the 2nd. Ms. Marlowe, if you'll please call the roll. Here.

Boyd?

Here.

Fowles? Here. Greg?

Here.

Holt? Moreland? Here. Schott?

Here.

Thomas?

Here.

Townsend? We have seven present. We have a quorum.

Item 1.3, approval of the minutes from the regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on June 4, 2026. We have a motion. Motion. Second. Second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes. Item 1.4, public comment period. All right. 2.0, under new business. Item 2.1, discuss and possibly take action on a request for rezoning of property on Highway 41 North, Map 069, Parcel 026.03. Do we have a motion and a second to put this item on the floor? So moved.

Second.

Mr. Durham?

Good evening commissioners. The first new business item on tonight's agenda is a request to rezone approximately 3.08 acres located on Highway 41 North from Restrictive Industrial to Commercial Services. The parcel is currently split zoned with the frontage along Highway 41 North already zoned Commercial Services and the rear portion zoned Restrictive Industrial. Because the rear portion does not have independent access and can only be accessed through the commercially zoned portion of the property, maintaining two zoning districts on a single parcel creates practical limitations on future development. The future land use map identifies the rear portion of the property as light industrial, so the request is not fully consistent with the future land use map. However, staff finds that creating a single zoning classification across the property better supports the comprehensive plan's broader goals of encouraging orderly development, expanding commercial opportunities, and promoting efficient land use. I'd also like to note that the property is located within the city's north industrial park. Staff reviewed the applicable deed restrictions as part of our evaluation. Based on that review, the proposed rezoning does not appear to create any significant conflicts with those restrictions. The primary impact is that development will remain subject to the required 120-foot minimum building setback from Highway 41. Staff recommends approval of the request to rezone approximately 3.08 acres from restrictive industrial to commercial services. Although the requested zoning is not fully consistent with the future land use map, staff finds that creating a single cohesive zoning district across the property represents sound planning, eliminates development constraints created by split zoning, and supports the comprehensive plan's goals of expanding commercial opportunities and promoting efficient land use. I'm happy to provide any clarification or answer any questions, and I understand there are representatives here of the property should you have questions I can't answer.

Any questions for Ms. Durham or the representatives on this request?

So this rezoning does fall into the comprehensive growth plan?

It falls into the overall goals of the comprehensive growth plan, yes. In the sense that promoting commercial development and creating orderly development.

Is there a planned use for the site already, or is it just rezoning?

Nothing has been formally submitted. I've heard talks about assisted living facilities, which doesn't fall within restrictive industrial. So providing that one zoning of commercial services makes it a lot easier to develop the property in a use that makes sense in the area. Okay.

Ms. Brooke Duffer's here. She's the one interested in the future development of the property. It's going to be a memory care facility. So some of the civil engineering drawings have already been started on that. So assuming this rezone goes through, that is definitely the intention of this piece of property.

Thank you. Any other questions? Motion to approve. I have a motion. Second. And a second. We're ready for a vote.

Thomas. Yes. Boyd.

Yes.

Bibb.

Mr. Chairman, I need to abstain. This is a family member that owns the property. I'd like to abstain. Yes, sir.

Schott.

Yes.

Bowne?

Yes.

Gregg?

Yes.

Passes with six.

She didn't call me. I think you called Jeff twice.

Did I?

Moreland.

Moreland. I'm sorry. Moreland. Yes. Okay. I did call him twice.

Item 2.2, discuss and possibly take action on an amendment to section 801 of the zoning ordinance. Do we have a motion and a second for this item on the floor? So moved. Second. Ms. Durham.

Item 2.2 is a proposed amendment to Section 8, excuse me, Section A801 of the zoning ordinance pertaining to temporary use permits. Currently, the ordinance provides for several temporary uses but does not establish a process for approving temporary residential development sales offices or model homes with a new residential subdivision. As residential development has increased, staff has identified the need for a clear and consistent review process for these temporary uses. The proposed amendment would authorized administrative approval of temporary sales offices and model homes with an approved residential developments and establishes standards regarding permit duration, location, signage, accessibility and restoration of the structure once the temporary use expires. Because these uses are accessory to an approved development and temporary in nature, staff believes they can be appropriately reviewed administratively while maintaining appropriate operational standards. Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to Section A801 of the Springfield Zoning Ordinance. The amendment establishes a clearly defined administrative process for temporary residential development sales offices and model homes provides objective operational standards and improves the efficiency and consistency of development review while protecting the public interest. Happy to answer any questions about this proposed amendment.

Any questions for Mr. Durham on this item?

Move for approval. I'll let you have a question.

I have a motion. Second. And a second. We are ready for a vote.

OK. Bim.

Yes.

Shot. Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Greg.

Yes.

Thomas. Yes. And Boyd.

Yes.

Passes with seven.

Item 2.3, discuss and possibly take action on a request for approval of a preliminary plat for Spring Creek phase one also known as Highland Estates. Do we have a motion and a second for this item on the floor? So moved. Second. Ms. Durham?

This item is a request by Steve Arts on behalf of GS Moore & Son for approval of the Spring Creek Phase 1 preliminary plat. Before discussing the plat, I'd like to provide a little background. This development is already underway and was previously approved by the Planning Commission as Highland Reserve. Most recently, Highland Reserve Phase 1, consisting of 15 lots that completed Curtiswood Lane East and Walnut Grove Drive, which is in the northeastern portion of this property, was approved by the Planning Commission and recorded this past January. The preliminary plat before you this evening serves two purposes. First, it reflects the developer's request to rename the subdivision from Highland Reserve to Spring Creek. Second, it revises a portion of the previously approved development by replacing the attached townhouse units on the south side of the subdivision with single family detached lots. The remainder of the subdivision generally remains consistent with the previously approved development plan. as proposed the subdivision before you consists of approximately 61 acres and includes 145 single family lots and approximately five and a half acres of common area staff has completed its review of the preliminary flat and found it to be in general compliance with the city's zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations the remaining staff comments are primarily related to missing notes on the plat and are not anticipated to require significant revisions mr arts is here this evening as well as aubrey moore if there are questions about this development that i cannot answer any questions on item 2.3 so all 145 lots are one phase yes they're being plotted as one phase

Sorry, go ahead. I'm just trying to follow along here because on the agenda there's a Highland Estates and then you mentioned Highland Reserve.

The name has gone back and forth and so I looked through several things. This section up in this area at one point in the system it was Talked about as Highland Estates, Highland Reserve. And then I went back and checked and see to see how it was officially platted. It was officially platted as Highland Estates phase one back in January. Ultimately, all of that name is going away and they're calling this Spring Creek. Okay. Yeah. So that's part of it.

Mr. Arch, do you have something?

Well, I was just going to say primarily this area right there. was all going to be townhomes.

That abuts the college, correct?

Yes. And so now what we've done is basically that area has become single-family residences. Now, this one area, I will note, that one area still could possibly be townhomes in the future. But right now, that is what changed.

And the reasoning for the change?

Sure.

Ms. Moore, if you'll comment. Just out of curiosity.

Oh, sure, absolutely. So we just think there's going to be more demand for single homes instead of townhomes in that location. And so it actually reduces the density.

I think you're right. How many single-family homes was in that area you said would be in that area?

Do you have the number on that section? Oh, in just that section? Are you asking just the section?

Did you say full 16 at first? I mean, in overall? 145. 145. 145 it looks like.

The whole community right now, as it's shown in this file, is 145.

And I'm going to say that, and this is where 40 to 50 homes, as I told you, sir.

Thank you. So less doors now.

Yeah. Yeah.

And I will just mention the Spring Creek has been requested by the home builder. They have a neighborhood that's very similar to the name that we already have. So that's the only reason for the change there.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Move to approve. I have a motion. Second. And a second. Ms. Marla?

More land.

Yes.

Finn? Yes. Thomas? Yes. Schatz? Yes. Boyd?

Yes.

Gregg? Yes. Fount?

Yes.

Passes with seven.

Thank you all. Thank you. Item 2.4, discuss and possibly take action on an amendment to the Springfield Municipal Regional Planning Commission bylaws. We have a motion and a second for this item.

So moved. Second. Ms. Durham?

Item 2.4 is a proposed amendment to the Planning Commission bylaws. The purpose of these amendments is to modernize the bylaws, clarify administrative procedures, align the document with current Tennessee law, and better reflect the Commission's existing practices. The proposed revisions do not alter the statutory authority of the Planning Commission. Rather, they clarify procedures related to meeting administration, electronic notices, agenda preparation, quorum and voting requirements, conflicts of interest, hearing procedures, and the respective roles of staff and the commission. Since the draft bylaws were distributed in the agenda packet, one minor revision has been made. A copy of the updated bylaws was added to Dropbox earlier today. The revision is located in Article 3, Section 6, related to voting. The updated language specifically states roll call votes shall be recorded in the official minutes. The way it was previously drafted implied that the minutes would state each commissioner's name and their vote as opposed to just six in favor, three denied or however it is normally. So we made a slight revision to those bylaws to make it a little more user-friendly when typing the minutes. This change is intended to clarify how roll call votes are documented in the official record and to align the bylaws with current practice. No other changes have been made to the proposed bylaws since distribution. The revision does not change voting procedures or requirements, but simply clarifies the documentation of votes. It should be noted that to the best of my understanding, these bylaws have not been comprehensively amended since 1995. Overall, these amendments are intended to improve transparency, consistency, and administrative efficiency while ensuring the bylaws accurately reflect current municipal practice and applicable state law. Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the planning commission bylaws as amended and presented in the Dropbox file.

Any question for Ms. Durham?

I'll make a motion to approve.

We have a motion. Second. We have a second.

Fowle?

Yes.

Gregg?

Yes.

Thomas? Yes. Moreland? Yes. Boyd?

Yes.

Bibb?

Yes.

Schott?

Yes.

Passes with seven.

Item 3.1, the Community Development Director's Report. Ms. Durham. Ms. Durham.

Going backward, we will need your signature on that document, Mr. Thomas. That does not move forward. It just stays with this commission. First, the July Board of Zoning Appeals meeting has been canceled, so there are no BZA items to report this month. Looking ahead to August and making a change from what I shared earlier, staff anticipates bringing forward two items for consideration. Looking closer at the IBC code modification, I don't believe that has to come before this board. It will only go to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen. But just so you know, codes is going to put forth a request to modify the code to eliminate the need for storm shelters. That's where that one is. I am going to bring forward two bond projects. The Reyes Estates is ready for their maintenance bond, and Jasper Fields Phase 1 has been deferred several times, but ideally should be ready for a performance bond by August. We've had no recent approvals over the past month. We are continuing to review several residential and commercial projects. Residential projects include lookout crossing phase two, the single family portion of spring view village, which is also known as the Kumar property, Magnolia farms, harvest park and spring Creek, which we just previously talked about commercial projects currently under review include a building on Bradley drive, the Wawa gas station development, convenience store development, fire station number three and a fifth third bank branch on Tom Austin Highway. Staff is also working on several zoning ordinance amendments. These include updates to the temporary signage regulations and a potential amendment to development related fees based on the recent analysis of staff time and resources associated with permit review. We've spent a lot of time over the past month analyzing how much time, what staff, what each person is doing in looking at every review fee that is charged associated with developments and quantifying the amount of time it takes so that we can make sure that we have this document available as part of a change in state law, which could potentially cause us to bring forward amendments to fee structures. Additionally, the Commission has discussed residential design standards over the past several months. If this Commission would like to pursue those standards, staff will begin drafting ordinance language. I will need your input, though, in identifying preferred building materials and design elements so that the proposed standards reflect the Commission's vision while remaining consistent with state law. If you have thoughts this evening, I'm happy to start writing those down. Otherwise, if you want to think about design guidelines for residential developments and have those ready to discuss next month, we can have notes ready for next month that I can work with to start drafting that language.

I think that's probably the best idea.

Yeah, and I'm not sure that really anybody's fully prepared to talk about that tonight, but.

If you could maybe send an email.

Yep, I will absolutely send an email reminding everybody about that.

Do you have any references or examples from other places?

I don't off the top of my head. I do know there are several places that have those, and I can pull some together and have those sent as well. I will say that whatever we come up with will be confirmed with the city attorney to make sure everything would be legal in the sense that we would be allowed to ask for those things. So, but I just wanted to put that there that we'll be like happy to draft that language, but I do need input from this commission. Um, finally, I'm working on coordinating the first of the one hour training that will include ethics and personal property rights. Last year when we did training, we had the BZA come to you. If at all possible in August, I would like to have you go to the BZA partially because I had thought about just doing two one-hour trainings. I can do one with this group on the 6th and one with the BZA on the 11th, but the 6th is an election day. And so I do know that will impact some folks scheduling here. And I've already have been told by BZA they can't come here because of that, because they have folks that are on election committees or commissions.

I think it's fine to just we'll go to them on the 11th. What can I do about the commission meeting on the 6th?

It will still have it unless you need me to. If you need me to do a separate meeting for trainings, I can do that.

It's just up to this board, if you're willing to come to the election, would have an effect on the planning commission actually having to have a meeting. You know, are there any other PC members that were involved with the.

I mean, we can look at changing that meeting date if we need to.

I think you got to right here.

You'll be at the election. If the board, if the commission wants to make a motion, we can look at changing that meeting date if it's going to impact. There's only two items right now.

Move it. to the 11th as well.

That would be moved to the 11th with the BZA. Right now, I don't have anything on the BZA. However, they have until Monday at noon for me to confirm.

So if I can get a motion, we'll move it to the 11th before or after the BZA.

And if anybody needs to check their schedules, I mean, we can.

The BZA normally meets at 5 as well.

5 on Thursdays, the second Thursday of the month.

It's the second Tuesday, isn't it?

Second Tuesday, sorry. Planning Commission is first Thursday. BZA is second Tuesday. Board of Mayor and Alderman is third Tuesday. You are correct. So, yes, Tuesday, second Tuesday, August 11th.

I would say let's try to schedule the Planning Commission for five and it goes that way. If you don't have an agenda for the Board of Zoning Appeals, it won't have any effect on the training efforts anyway.

Okay.

Is that your motion? Yes. We have a motion. Do we have a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? So we will move that meeting to 5 o'clock on August 11th.

Because of the elections.

Because of the elections.

Perfect. And then immediately following, and that agenda right now, like I said, is short. It has two items related to bonds, one maintenance bond, one performance bond. I don't anticipate any plaques trying to sneak in at this point. I don't think anything's far enough along, so it should only remain those two items. And we'll do an hour of training on ethics and property rights.