Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Yeah, I know. We need to move. [Music] 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. Thank you for coming to the regular plan Springfield Regional Planning Commission meeting Thursday, August the 7th, 2025. And finally, please call the roles. Baggot here. Bib here. Boyd

here. Briggs here. Greg here. Morland here. Shot here. Thomas here. Townsend here. All nine are here. We have a quorum. Item 1.3 approval of the minutes from the regular meeting of the planning commission held on July 1, 2025. So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed?

Item 1.4 public comment here. Do we have anybody registered to speak? Item 1.5 public hearing. Item 1.51, zoning ordinance amending a section 11-201 entitled non-conforming issues.

Excuse move on item 2.0, new business. Discuss and possibly take action on amendments to the city of Springfield zoning ordinance by amending section 11-1201 entitled nonconforming uses. Okay. To give you some background, um, this section of the ordinance, I had a zoning verification letter request that was presented for an apartment complex, the Flats at Morland. And in writing that letter, um, those apartments would be a non-conforming use because they're in a district that they're no longer allowed in. We don't have any zoning districts that actual where any of our apartments currently exist where they would be legally allowed to be built today. So the way the code was written, if they were to burn down and be 100% destroyed, they would no longer be allowed to rebuild. So we did a little bit of research and we're looking into what other cities wrote and how they approached this and realized the state had actually updated their regulations. And so what we've done is matched the new verbiage in the code to match state regulations essentially that would allow these apartments and any other structures but specifically we were looking at it with apartments multif family units to be rebuilt. Um the way it's been revised by state code is how it's written in the ordinance and how it's written that it will be amended in the code to specifically state that new principal building for a non-conforming multifi multifamily residential use may be reconstructed only in the event of damage whether partial or complete by involuntary fire or wind damage or other

natural disaster pursu pursuant to Tennessee code annotated 13-7-208. So essentially the biggest change to this section is bringing it in compliance for multif family uses. The other small change is um the period of abandonment or discontinuence which was stated in the code I believe for one year and state regulations now state 30 months. So we've changed it to match state regulations. So that is the reason and the background for making this amendment to the zoning ordinance. So we're asking you for a recommendation to move this forward to board of mayor and alderman.

Anybody have any questions for this gentleman? So it basically will forever be a non-conforming use provided they decided to rebuild.

Yes. Unless, honestly, unless, let's say, um, one of the commercial districts where some of these apartment complexes are located, unless multifamily uses are added back into that. So, after the flats at Morland were approved and under starting under construction, it's my understanding that the ordinance was changed pretty much immediately after that, which is why they're no longer allowed in that you in that district. [Music] motion. Second. Briggs, yes. Thomas, yes. Boyd, yes.

Bib, yes. Shot, yes. Bagot, yes. Townsen, yes. Greg, yes. Morland, yes. Passes with nine. Item 3.0, community director. community development director's report. I'll get it out.

Um, not much that has changed since last month. I'm still working on looking at the same parts of the zoning ordinance. Um, we've kind of slowed down a little bit in terms of plan review. So, I do anticipate being able to focus some time on this between now and when we meet again next month. Uh, one of the new things that has come up regularly in my office though is people coming in with requests for annexation or requests for zonings that would begin that would be against the future land use plan. So, I wanted to start a conversation or at least get some input on how this board and this commission how you feel about amending the comprehensive plan at this point. I mean, it's it was only adopted about a year ago, but regularly, I just tell people, hey, it's against the it's against the plan that was adopted by the city that was developed in with input from residents. So, until it's amended, staff's not going to support this request. So, I don't know. I just wanted to kind of feel out where everybody was with making amendments. or if you're happy with it, we can leave it and we can continue telling people that, you know, this would not be supported because it goes against the plan that was developed.

How far removed are the requests?

Uh, for example, I've had multiple requests for inquiries on a property that's on the north side of the county that's zoned industrial. It makes sense. It's a parcel that is currently zoned industrial. It's near an industrial park. That's one that I get inquiries about a lot. More recently, I've had multiple inquiries about annexations moving south along Tom Austin. Um trying to get almost all the way down to Douglas AMO picking up those larger tracks. The future land use plan shows the majority of those larger tracks as being appropriate for agricultural use. They're zoned agriculture. The land use plan still shows them as agriculture. So, I would seriously doubt anybody would bring those properties or would like to bring those properties into the city and keep them zoned agriculturally.

So, to understand the examples you gave, both of those, the industrial and the agricultural, you're getting requests to turn them into residential.

The ones on Tom Austin, it's been kind of a mix. Some people are considering some commercial because it is on Tom Austin. More recently, it is probably an SP or a PUD neighborhood would be what I would anticipate they would try to reszone to those particular properties though to get them into the city. It takes quite a few smaller pieces coming in as well. But those are just examples. There's other cases that occasionally somebody will come by and ask questions about a parcel. I can't really give anything off the top of my head an example, but where it's against the land use plan and so it's pretty easy to say, hey, staff wouldn't support this because it's not in agreement or in alignment with what was decided on by the city a year ago.

I feel at this time just to that plan, I mean, that's a long way out of town from here to there. I don't know that we need to go against that at at this time. No one's going to build south without sewer. And we're not fixing to put sewer in, are we, Mr. Beers?

Yeah, I I agree with everyone else that kind of trust your professional judgment on looking at the land use plan. You know, we may want to revisit it in a few years, but it's been too soon. There's a lot of thought and coordination with the different departments to to come up with that. Okay. Um, training. We're going to stay for training for about an hour after this. The members of the BCA will be joining us. Um, always open for work sessions if anybody wants to discuss anything or you do want to look at that future land use plan or any part of the comp plan in detail. Uh, this was all in your packet. all of the different projects that are still being reviewed. The one thing I did leave off though is the Panera Bread site. I realized when I updated the slide today that I had not put that on there as being under review by staff. We have looked at it one time. They've gotten comments back. They have actually submitted a building plan already so that codes can start reviewing that.

So my understanding it's going in the parking lot. It is going in the front of LLI, the front corner. And then when they develop that, they're going to do some interconnectivity with the Siler Center, which is the building that's outside the Walmart driveway access. Okay. So, the plan as it was proposed and updated, we got the new plan the other day, um, is to be able to phase construction to allow LLINA to remain open during the construction of the Panera. So, and officially I have had some phone calls now for Seven Brew. So, they're ready to set a meeting to kind of get started on submitting construction plans. So, and that'll go with MX.

That's my understanding for that property as well. So, who' you say? Seven Brew. It's a coffee shop. I've never been to one. So, right now, I think right now it's not.

Yeah. Couple of things that were approved though since last month. Um, but those were all in your packet. I don't know that the MDI parking lot expansion ever even made it to last month. It was a really quick just they wanted to build a parking lot because that particular business has relocated and so they're going to try to sell or not sell, lease out their space. Um, and then today when I sent over the updated agenda packet, I included the Jasper Fields HOA. So, I don't know that everyone on the staff has had a chance to look at that one. I looked at it, it met what we've normally been asking for and then look out, like I said in my email, added in some verbiage about maintaining landscaping for at least a year on partic individual lots. So, that one looks like from a staff perspective is probably fine, but I wanted to get your input because that one was one in particular that I know this board wanted to review or at least have an opportunity to look at. But that's all I've got unless there's any questions about anything.

I just wanted to know if you had gotten any community feedback on introducing that tracker, if the tracker has moved. Not directly to my office. No, I have definitely seen on social media where it's been shared both positively and negatively people are using it. So that's a good thing. Um I I don't see as much online about people being confused about what's being built. So I think it is helpful in that sense. Okay. But but it is available. I know that as of today I mean it it was updated with Panera today. So we are actively using it inhouse. Motion to second.

Oh, I thought we had the motion to adjourn. I thought you made the motion. Sorry, I'm excited. I'm making the motion to adjourn.