Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Planning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident asks CETA for status update, annual review of Glenwood master plan

2658884 · February 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A resident raised concerns about lack of public reporting on the Glenwood master plan and asked the Springfield Economic Development Agency (CETA) to provide a status update on annexation, zoning, comprehensive plan map amendment, and code text amendments — and to commit to a 12‑month public review by March 2025.

Daphne Mantis, a Springfield resident, asked the CETA board for a public status update on the Glenwood master plan and requested a 12‑month review detailing annexation, zoning, plan‑map amendment and development code text amendment progress.

“I believe it's a problem that there is so little reporting to the community in these meetings about progress in [the] Glenwood master plan,” Mantis said, noting that the CETA website lists a March 2024 milestone in which the CETA board approved a contract amendment for the Glenwood master planning work. She quoted the website’s language that the amendment “covers scope and cost of the processes to prepare and apply for previously identified land use steps,” including annexation and zoning actions.

Mantis said the March 2024 contract amendment approval is now almost a year old and asked the agency to provide a written update to the community by March 2025. “I have asked previously that there be a monthly review by CEDA, and now I'm asking respectfully to have an annual a 12 month review that answers these questions as to each issue, annexation, zoning, plan map amendment, code text amendments, and cost,” she said.

Board members acknowledged the comment and pointed the resident to materials posted online from a recent board retreat, noting that handouts and timelines were uploaded to the city’s YouTube and meeting materials. No formal board action or vote occurred in response to the public comment during the meeting.