Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Prosperity Business Park variances advance to debate after aldermen, neighbors raise traffic and stormwater concerns
Summary
Council committee moved several related variances and a sketch map for the Prosperity Business Park to the debate agenda after questions about adding two entrances to Eleventh Street, possible industrial uses, and stormwater detention ponds.
The Springfield City Council committee voted to move multiple ordinances related to the proposed Prosperity Business Park to the debate agenda after aldermen and neighbors raised questions about traffic, future uses and stormwater management.
The package includes requests for variances to allow additional vehicular access points on Eleventh Street, a sketch map and related subdivision changes for the former HD Smith property. Public works staff said the replat would add two entrances from the new parcels to Eleventh Street, bringing a total of three in a compact area; the parcels total roughly 20–30 acres in size.
Developer consultant Sam Nichols told the committee that ‘‘Have 1 ingress egress out of 20 to 30 acres would be a nightmare,’’ arguing additional access points make the development more marketable and workable. Neighbors and several aldermen said they are concerned those extra entrances could encourage heavier industrial traffic near residential streets that are not designed for large trucks.
Engineering and stormwater questions: Aldermen asked whether existing detention ponds could be filled to create developable parcels; public-works staff said they needed to consult engineering plans but expected compensatory stormwater storage would still be required. Director Dave Fuchs said he would bring engineers to the debate meeting to answer technical questions.
Zoning and uses: Committee members noted the parcels are largely zoned B-1 (business) with only two detention-pond parcels zoned I-1 (light industrial). Aldermen asked what specific industrial uses, if any, the developer anticipates; the developer said prospective tenants had not been finalized. That uncertainty prompted requests for clearer answers before final approval.
Next steps: The committee moved the related ordinances (variance requests, shared-access variance, sketch map and location approval) to the debate agenda. Staff and developers were asked to provide engineers’ input and additional details at debate so aldermen can evaluate traffic impacts, stormwater management and the precise mix of allowable uses.
