Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Please stand for the pledge. Pledge algiance 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. Thank you for coming to tonight's Springfield Municipal Regional Planning Commission meeting, Thursday, November the 6th. Item 1.2. Miss Marlo, will you call the order? Bagot here. Bib here. Boyd here. Briggs here. Greg here. Morland here. Shot. Thomas here. Townsen

here. You have eight present. They look for them. Item 1.3, approval of the minutes from the regular meeting of the planning commission held on October the 2nd, 2025. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Passes. Item 1.4 public comment period. Um, when I call your name, if you'll come to the microphone and state your name and address, and you'll have two minutes to address the commission. Clayne, 106 Kenny's Road, Springfield, Tennessee.

Appreciate y'all. U I've contacted everyone who I found the phone number and thank y'all for coming out looking at property on on site. It's um it's very hard to u understand what's going on over here from a piece of paper. Not sure what the city has told y'all about this piece of property, but I'll try to fill in and u got piece of property. Want to divide it. Uh there's two issues with it. It's 50ft road frontage. Uh the city when they annexed this property sometime back in the day uh failed to maintain the road that used to be in front of it and therefore there's no more visible road frontage in front of it. Uh the second issue is it's at an at the end of a deadend road. And years ago, I tried to get uh somebody here at the city, not just somebody, but multiple people groups to do something about addressing the an ordinance creating a a situation where we can drive off the end of dead end roads property. Obviously, you can't get 50ft road frontage at the end of a dead end road. There's not too many of those situations in town, but after all these years, nobody's done anything about it. And I still got a piece of property at the end of a dead end road. And uh I tried to uh give this property to the city to make a park, not a park, but a walking trail for the neighborhood to attach to the back of the cemetery. It's very pretty back in these woods. And I don't want these woods destroyed. It's too pretty. It's kind of like a um uh well just needs it just doesn't need to be destroyed back there against that cemetery and um but I would like to do something with it um other than sell 3 and 1/2 acres for one building lot. Um I don't think anybody's going to uh have any concerns about driving off the dead end road. I'm sure you'll have some

questions and I'll be able to answer those as they need. Okay. Michael Cwley, 1904 Woolen Mills Way, Springfield, Tennessee. Mr. Yeah, thank you. I'm item 2.1. Uh we originally purchased this property for our office before we purchased the woolen mills. Um kind of redid a facelift on it and we've had some interest for medical use, dentists and so on and it doesn't fit in the CG. So we were hoping to reszone it to the CS. If there was any questions, I could answer those. But other than Matt, that's all,

sir. Thank you. 2.0, new business. Item 2.1, discuss and possibly take action on a reasonzoning request for a property at 2814 Memorial Boulevard from Commercial General to commercial services to allow medical and professional services. Map 091L, Group A, parcel 036.00. 00 Miss Durham, we have a motion and a second to put this item on the floor. Motion. So move. Miss Durham.

Good evening, commissioners. This first item is a request to reszone approximately 2.15 acres at 2814 Memorial Boulevard from commercial general to commercial services to allow medical and professional offices. The property sits along one of Springfield's primary commercial corridors and is surrounded by similar serviceoriented uses. The requested change aligns with the adopted comprehensive plan for growth which encourages a mix of retail, office and service uses along major roadways. All utilities and infrastructure are in place and the reasonzoning will support continued commercial investment in this corridor. Staff recommends approval. Does anyone have any questions on item 2.1? If

not. Do we have a motion?

Did you have a question? No. No. Move to approve. Second. Ready for a vote. Prince, yes. Thomas, yes. Floyd, yes. Bib, yes. Bagot, yes. Townsen, yes. Gray, yes. Morland, yes. Passes with eight. Item 2.2, discuss and possibly take action on Blackwood Farms North and South Phase 1 final plaque map 69, parcel 071.01 01 and 073.00. Do we have a motion and a second to put this on the floor? So move.

Second, Mr. Durham.

Before you is the request for approval of the final plat for phase one of Blackwood Farms covering both the north and south portions of the project. The map shown here is the north side. This is the south side. Um these same plats were provided in your staff report. Phase one north includes 90 attached single family units while phase one south contains 94 detached lots. This represents the first phase of a large planned residential community that will include amenities and a future greenway connection. The plat has undergone full staff review. Remaining items include finalizing the secondary access plan for the northern section. a plan for the southern portion was approved with the construction plans and then there's a couple of label errors particularly the water line in Blackwood was misrepresented I believe it should be a 12 in and it was labeled as a 10 in so it's just a typographical error and then they still need to finalize the recording of their HOA documents but the they have adjusted the HOA and it reflects all of the staff's comments and requested additions. Staff recommends approval contingent on all staff comments being adequately addressed prior to recording.

Any questions for Miss Durham? You said the they did uh adhere to all the requests for the the HOA. Yeah, the the HOA was was very detailed. Motion to approve. Do you have a second? Mr. Townsen, do we have a second? Second. We're ready for a vote. Okay, we got uh Morland, yes. Fib, yes. Boy, yes. Thomas, yes. yes.

Greg, yes. Townsen, yes. Briggs, yes. Passes with eight. Item 2.3, discuss and possibly take action on a resolution amending the comprehensive growth plan for the city of Springfield, Tennessee to correct mapping errors on the future land use map. We have a motion and a second to put this item on the floor for discussion. So move. Second,

Mr. Durham. This item is a resolution to amend the comprehensive plan for growth to correct mapping errors on the future land use map. If you recall from last month's meeting, this is in response to the zoning on Highland Avenue. Was it Highland? 501 Highland. I don't remember if it's an avenue or street. The amendment applies to three parcels. 501 North Highland Street, 500 Hayes Street, and 5002 Haze Street. These properties are currently used as residential but were mistakenly designated as appropriate for general commercial. The correction will change their designation to highdensity residential ensuring consistency between the plan existing de existing development and recent commission recommendation. These are administrative updates not policy changes and staff recommends approval. Um, when we did start looking at the map, we identified these three lots because they were adjacent. Well, it included the lot, but it was the other two that were adjacent in the same area. There are a lot of parcels throughout the city. Yeah. Um, we recognized that there was some miscommunication between the consultant and the city zoning ordinance that if somebody were to come back potentially with an MRO zoning, there are some places that we might have to look at the map again in relation to multiple residential office districts and multiple the medical professional offices. There was some confusion between those two districts that we found in a few locations, but we wanted to make sure we clarified this section of the map because this was the part that was directly um impacted at last month's meeting, which is why we're only showing the three parcels here and not multiple parcels throughout the city.

So, you're only showing three and there's more that need to be corrected there potentially. Yes. Okay. But it is administrative in reviewing the whole process. It's not a long drawn out procedure. So should this be presented again in the future and this commission agrees that there are errors that need to be corrected, we can go through this process again. This will go to the board of mayor and alderman as well. But it is administrative. It's not it doesn't have to go back through the whole comp plan review process. Any further questions? And we appreciate staff doing this because it makes great common sense. I agree.

Yeah. Motion to approve. Second. Ready for a vote. Thomas, yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Forward. Yes. Item 3.0 under old business 3.1 discuss and possibly take action on a final plat for Evans Estates replat of lot 2. We have a motion and a second to put this item on the floor. So move

second. Item 3.1 is a request for final plat approval for the Evans Estate subdivision replplat of lot 2. The property owner, Mr. Clayne, originally submitted this request in 2017 to divide an existing residential lot into two separate lots. The intent was to create a new lot identified as lot 24 at the rear of the existing parcel on Wanita Drive. During staff's review at that time, both the engineering and public works departments determined that the proposed new lot would not have direct access to a public rightway. Instead, the only potential access would be across CSX railroad property located behind the site. Since CSX is a private is private property and not a public ride ofway, that access does not satisfy the city's subdivision regulations. The planning commission deferred the request in 2017 and stated that the item could be reconsidered if the applicant obtained written documentation from CSX granting permanent access rights. To date, no such documentation has been provided to city staff and the proposed plat remains unchanged from that original submitt. The city's subdivision regulations as well as the Tennessee code annotated section 133411 clearly require that all subdivision lots have access to a public street or a recorded public easement. This ensures that properties can be safely reached by emergency vehicles and that owners have legal ingress and egress to their land. Because the new lot fronts only the railroad, those standards are not met. Previously in 2017, staff also considered whether a variance could be justified under section 1-11 of the subdivision regulations, which allows

relief from specific requirements in cases of unique hardship. In this instance, however, the hardship is not unique. It results from the lot's existing configuration and proximity to private railroad property rather than a condition beyond the owner's control. Without an access agreement in perpetuity from CSX, granting the subdivision could create liability for the city and result in an unbuildable landlocked parcel. For those reasons, staff continues to recommend denial of the request. This is consistent with the original 2017 staff recommendation and the city's subdivision and access standards. In summary, approval can be supported without ver I'm sorry, approval cannot be supported without verified legal access to a public right ofway as required by city code and state law.

I'd like to ask Mr. Snes a couple questions. Mr. St. Yes. Now, in your comments during the public hearing, you stated about the dead end road, which I'm assuming you're referring to as Westside. Westside Drive only had two minutes. There's more to tell, but that's all I had time to talk about. Right. Well, on site, two minutes is 2 minutes. So, well, I asked everybody to come out and look at it on site. I could tell you. Question to you regarding Westside Drive. Is there any possibility of getting access to Westside Drive? I have access to Westside Drive now just like the four or five houses that are right.

Is it recorded access or is it an easement? What is what the same access that the four or five houses next to me have? Well, um 911 West Side. Actually, does Westside Drive go all the way down in front of 911? It does. It does. It does. And does that not butt up to your property?

His corner and my corner may that's at the end of that's that is the end of the dead end road. And if um if you drive to the end of the dead end road, you just continue and you're on my property. And my question would be why is that not public access?

Well, it's because of the 50 foot run the 50oot road frontage issue that I've asked years ago that somebody some board some individual take care of the few situations in town where you have end a road at the end of a dead end road or land at the end of a dead end road. But if you extend Westside Drive at your expense onto your property, then that prop that Westside Drive will extend onto your property. Is that correct? People have been driving off the end of that road onto this land for decades.

But does it dead end at your property line or does it dead end at prior to your property line in front of 911? Well, as I said in the my two minutes, when the city annexed it, the road went from Fifth Avenue all the way to Richard Street and the city failed to maintain the road as it went through and the form and the guy I bought it from came to see David years ago, if you can remember, and and and told him that. Well, I wasn't part of that. So, no.

Well, there's a lot there's a lot of history to it. So, the road was abandoned. I can't help it that they didn't maintain road all the way to Richard Street, but uh we've got deadend road. There's a few in town with this situation. Uh no one's addressed trying to fix that. I can't get 50ft roads and I did get permission from the railroad to um get an easement across. But I also asked since it was brought up, I did ask to see the same easements that were that have been granted by this board by the city for other businesses and locations in this town for that same access. I've never seen a document for the situations I asked about. Everybody's wanting papers. Um, everybody's wanting hard copies of this permission from me, but other people are getting it with just

Well, but we're talking about your property is what we're discussing. I'm trying to I'm trying to keep it comparative. Well, what my question is, according to the plat, which is what I'm looking at, it says the property that is at the end of your property is belongs to a Mr. Grimes. He's 911, but he sold that. He sold it to the guy it was written from. I mean, I'm assuming this is the this the 2017 document. 2017 Tim Groves owns it now. Okay. The the owner he passed and his his heirs sold it to the guy that was renting there. He's still there.

I mean, from a planning standpoint, if Westside Drive budded up to the end of your property, then you have road frontage. You have 50 ft of road going into your property. Is that not correct? The road is the the entire road, Westside Drive, is on railroad property. The the actual railroad property goes up into the yards of all the houses that are next to me. The whole road utilities are in the railroad right away. He does not have access. He does not abut the backside of that property where he wants to create the second lot does not abut legal road access, legal public right away.

And that's because the road was abandoned. But it's the same access that we drive off in that road. The same road. I understand. But it's drive a city street. It is a city street, but it's on the railroad right away. That's irrelevant. But she's bringing up the liability of of driving on railroad property. I'm doing I'm wanting to do the same thing that my next door neighbors are doing. Well, and because I'm coming in midway of this, so my question would be about,

you know, what's right and what's right, what's wrong, what's wrong. If you legally don't have 50 foot prop right away to a public street, then you can't do what you want to do. It's no different than it was then. I don't understand the rightway of Westside Drive and how how it affects the uh railroad. Well, you're you're you're asking about 50ft road frontage. The city abandoned the road when they annexed it because the last house was grime. You're talking about some I'm talking about Westside Drive where it currently ends, which is a

how the city stopped paving the road right there. I mean, that's just the last house that was there. But when you drive off the end of the pavement, you you veer to the right and you're on my property. But as you go up that road, you veer to the right to the first house. You go up the road on railroad property, you veer to the right to the next house. You do it for all the houses through there. I'm just asking for the same. But if the road ends before it gets to your property, then you don't It goes to my property. Pardon? It goes to my property. The road the paved road.

I mean, if we' gone out there and looked at it, we could see it. But I'm telling you, the road goes to the end of 9/11, and that's as far as it needs to go. His driveway is on on my side of his property. His driveway is not to one side of his property or in the middle. It's his driveway is all the way at the very as far as you can go. All I'm looking at is an aerial old plat. I mean, I call I call everybody's number I have. It's very hard to look up a piece of paper and see what situation is.

If you had a current plaque showing where the actual end of Westside Drive is, then I might be able to That's not a plat. I don't This your This is your platform 2017, correct? I mean, I I can't help what the city's provided y'all about documentation about the road. She's arguing about She's arguing that the road's not there. I mean, that'd be on them telling you that the road doesn't go that far. What type of documentation did she ask you for? Have you been asked for since 2017?

Want a lease? A property to lease. Basically, a lease or or buy the property. But the railroad won't sell property. They won't consider selling property unless it's $100,000 value. But they told me I could lease it, but it was so much red tape. But um the woman who provides these leases, she came out, she I know I work for the rail. She came to my house. We walked out there and looked at it and she had a tablet in her hand and I asked her, "Where's the leases for XYZ?" And she looked in her tablet. She said, "They don't have irrelevant. She don't have leases. That's That's irrelevant. It's comparative. I want to be treated the same." Yes, sir. You are being treated the same. But I'm being further question.

I'm being asked for hard copies. And I The woman had a tablet and showed no leases for the for the comparative. Okay. Well, we're not in the leasing business as an organization. What we have to determine is whether or not you have 50 foot roadr. You can't do that. The end of the dead end road, but I'm driving off of it now. Have been for decades. Access and a road are two different. You know, you can cut down a tree and cut a hole in the fence road and you got access. You just got to go out there and look at it. Any further questions? Yes,

I saw it. So, if if the West Side Drive continued down, let's call it 20 ft. Would that not let you put a driveway to the right and and build over in the area that you're talking about? Well, I suggested I that I build the road down through there. I mean, that we'd have to get contractor and see what the price would be, but how much would it cost to extend the road? But I mean, it that's I mean, I just want the drive my driveway to connect to the end of the dead dead end road. If the road continues down, Mr. Durham enough that his driveway could shoot across, could that work? He he doesn't

I'll be honest. I don't believe I I don't know for sure, but my understanding of Westside Drive is that there is no public ride ofway there because the entire roadway sits in the CSX property. That's correct. So, there's still no legal right of access to rideway. The lot as it currently exists has frontage on Wanita. So, the lot is a legal lot. It's just subdividing it creates a situation for that back half that that back half then doesn't have legal access. It's currently one lot.

It is currently one lot. So extending the pavement doesn't give it right of way, which is the issue. So the city has an illegal street. I have no idea. I don't know that the true situation.

That' be a correct statement, Mr. Engineer. The city has road an asphalt road there that's been there since before probably you and I were born. So the the railroad is you know that would have been back. So CSX is not saying the road can't be there and be maintained. But what we're saying is is the subdivision does the city currently maintain regulations require a public access and to have a public access you have to have a 50ft right away that the city

does the city currently maintain west side to my knowledge they can maintain the asphalt where was a drain derailment years ago That was in Waverly, was it? No, I'm talking about right there. I have no idea. You're old enough to remember. I don't know. You know, I don't know that I'm on your property that you currently own or was it on the uh houses before?

Mr. Grimes told me that right to the east of his house and they they burned coal that scattered down the bank for four years. That's a blessing. Any further questions on this? I've got just one. Um, and this maybe for the city staff or Mr. Sneed. the H has have we explored uh like a access easement off Wanita?

He has that, but he's wanting to subdivide into two lots, right? But could he not get an access easement that's recorded on the plat that gives access to lot two? Unfortunately, lot one. Unfortunately, no. the lot. He he his access is 40 ft on the culde-sac, 50 foot at the uh the setback. You have to have another 50 foot. Okay, that's what I'm asking. Yeah. So, so he doesn't have enough. You can't overlap them that way and have it recorded. Okay,

you're good. Any further questions? Mr. Chairman, based on the information that we have, which hasn't changed,

I see no way that that we can approve something that's illegal until the owner of the property comes up and shows on a plat that he has public rightway access coming from wherever. In my personal opinion, it looks like the best way to get that is coming off of Westside Drive if it is a current street maintained by the city was one more lot I move. So I move that we deny. Do we have Isn't that what I said? Yes, sir. Do we have a second?

Till he can come back with proof. Second. We're ready for a vote. Greg, no. Thomas, it's a it's a yes. I'm voting for to deny. Boyd, yes. Bib, yes. Morland, yes. Bagot, yes. Townsen, yes. Briggs, yes. passes with deny by seven.

Item 4.0, other business. 4.1, the November BZA meeting will be rescheduled following this meeting. Item 4.2 is the community development director's report. Miss Durham,

we don't have a whole lot to report this month. Um, as always, if you want to do a work session on anything, I'm always open to scheduling that. We haven't approved anything notable in the last month. When working through submitts uh notable submitts for December summit view phase 2 is coming back before this board. They have formally rescended their request for R seven and replaced it with an R10 which the R10 as we discussed at the last meeting is in agreement with the comprehensive plan. So we are working through staff reviews on that and that will be before you next month. Um, we have a highway 41 north reszoning. It's a small parcel that is in the urban growth boundary, but it is not in the city limits, but this board will need to make a recommendation to the county. And then I believe the 2209 Ruth Street is actually being pulled. Um, I don't have confirmation on that 100% yet, but I talked to Steve Art's office the other day and they said it likely wasn't moving forward. um things that are happening. The Capitol Theater work is starting to happen on that. So, we're all excited about that. And I think I'll have a planner by the next meeting. So, there will be some more office staff um working through these submitts. We do have a couple more submitts that have been submitted lately, but I'm not sure there are items that will come before this board. So, but things that are um more commercial stuff, we're seeing more commercial than residential right now. So, that's all I have.

Any questions for Miss Durham? Does your planner has planning experience? My planner is highly motivated and has a lot of perseverance and I'm hoping no great.

It is. Yes. We we'll go with the planner will have a little bit of a planning learning curve, but they will I feel like they will be very successful um right from the very beginning in some of the zoning code enforcement, which is something that I have not had the time to get out and do. And I know there's a lot of issues throughout town, just things that we could clean up a little bit that if I had some staff to help me do that, we could focus on that. Have a motion to adjurnn. So move miss board with a second.