Council tables two nonconforming‑building code updates, asks staff to simplify language

At the May 13 meeting the Springdale Town Council voted to table two related ordinance proposals addressing the maintenance, involuntary removal and renovation/redevelopment of noncompliant buildings.

Staff presented planning commission language intended to clarify the town’s definition of ordinary maintenance and repair and to add a process allowing more extensive reconstruction where a building is unsafe or has declined over time. The draft included an "involuntary removal" provision that would allow reconstruction beyond ordinary maintenance when a written opinion from an engineer or other suitably qualified individual demonstrates that extensive work is necessary.

Several councilmembers expressed concern that the draft was circular and used overlapping terms ("reconstruction," "redevelopment," "renovation") without consistent definitions; others worried about when demolition and building permits would be triggered and how to ensure predictability for applicants. Councilmember Jack said the language should be written so "the average lay person can understand it." Staff and council agreed to have planning staff work directly with Councilmember Pat Campbell to revise and clarify the draft. The council then tabled both ordinances to allow that work to occur.

Why it matters: The proposals attempt to give property owners and the town clearer rules when older buildings deteriorate, while preserving the town’s code intent for setbacks and other nonconforming elements. Council paused the proposals to avoid creating ambiguous rules that could produce inconsistent outcomes or contested interpretations.

Next steps: Staff will prepare revised language with clarified definitions and permit triggers and return to council. Council asked for specific edits to reduce circular wording and to clarify when removal or replacement requires bringing noncompliant aspects into full compliance.