Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

Mr. Okay. Is everyone got their microphone turned on? You need a microphone. If you can down here. Thank you. Okay. We will call the meeting of the board of zoning appeals of Coffee County, June 26, 2025. We'll call the meeting to order. Um, do I have has everyone had time to look over the minutes? And I will entertain a motion for the approval of the minutes. I'll make a motion to approve. I'll second. Minutes been approved. Motion's been made by Kendall and a second by Anna. All in favor say I. I. opposed. See none. Moving on, we will uh move to the approval of the agenda. Is there anything needs to be added to the agenda or taken away? Mr. Chairman, I move it be approved as presented. Okay. Do I hear a second? A second. All in favor of the agenda say I. I. I. No. Likewise. That that is approved. Next, we're going to move on to public comments. If we can, I'd like to keep public comments to two minutes if we can. If any if public would like to come

up and speak, they're more than welcome to at this time. Yes, ma'am. We will take uh what we will do is have someone come and present each item because we have a long agenda tonight. They'll present that and then we will ask for comments from that from each item and I would like to keep those comments under two minutes after the presenter and that's due to the length of the meeting because we will be here a long time. Any other public comments? Moving on. Um, first item on the agenda is a variance building setback. Earnest No, no. That's it. No, Fire Lake Drive map 087P group A parcel 0001 0. Would you like to come up and present? Yes, sir. Okay. Would you like me here? Uh, I'd like for you at the podium if you don't mind. Good evening. Thank you for seeing me again. I'm here in representation who is the property. Um, last meeting in May, you requested that I get a fireflate fire. Yes, sir. As well as a setback for the adjoining building on property next to the Yes, sir. Um, I have a print out from Mr. L. Flow. Okay. For that building. Yes, sir. I am.

And the uh building on the adjoining lot back is 26 that we had staked after a new survey was done on the property. The how much uh 26 ft to the adjoining the property from the property line. So be over 50 separation between the two buildings. But that okay um that is not in current codes. I think it's went to 100 ft. Correct, Mr. Mayor. Uh the setbacks that has passed. Correct. A1 district only is 50 ft side. Yes, sir. 50 ft from that from the property line. Correct. Correct. Yes, sir. So, you're asking for a 26 foot variance um on the adjoining Do you still have the documents that we sent in? Do they still have those provided to you? No. That's what we have right here. Yes, sir. So, the variance that we're asking for is on the side that is closest to the cutout. So, the original variances will still remain on the side that is adjacent to the building and the lot that has the house on it. Okay. So, you're saying you can approach right here and I handed these out. L uh you were 50 feet here from the property line. Did that get changed since the last meeting? No, sir. Because the original what we were told was 50 from the front, 25 from the sides. And this was an old neighborhood. I remember having this conversation because it was an old established neighborhood. All the house, all the

houses are that close together. It was 50 25 for the front, 50 sides for the 25. The varian we're asking for are on the left hand side towards the cutout road. Yes, sir. There's a cutout where it drops about three or four feet um for a gravel road that goes down to the marina for the subdivision. And we're asking for that to be at 15 ft instead of 25 ft. And you're 25 ft here. Yes, sir. 25 ft right here. And the house on the other side is 26 feet from the lot line as well. Yes, sir. So, you are actually 50 ft from this residence. Yes, sir. And I think that's what we because I know Mr. Mayor said that without the fire. Yes, absolutely. Oh, yes. So, the variance we're asking for is here on the back corner for the foundation of the home. to accommodate for the septic. Our our field lines are going to need to be in the front of the home and we're going to set this back down the hill for the current foundation for the plot he wants to put on. We would be at about 22 ft from the slot line as it cuts in on the property. So, we're asking for that variance to be a 15T on this side. We'll still comply with the 50 foot set back on this side, 25 here, and 25 from the rear. That would be I think subdivision regulations on that part. Yes. And I remember the point one of the point of contention was the fire flow on that hydrant. I think and the fire flow on the hydrant is above 500 gpm. Yes sir. From 20.

Okay. It's it's actually 919 is what we would mark the hydro at the flow. Okay. 20 PSI. So that's why that that is off the other feedings. The GPM fire flow is 919. So it is above 500 gpm. You need to keep that or No sir. I brought that so you can see that was okay. So it does meet fireflow and I think the other point we go back to last meeting we had talked about the original variances on the subdivision were 10 and 10 and that's why we wanted to check that joining home was more than 25 ft from the lot that separation between Okay. Does anyone else have any other questions? Our subdivision regulations, this is for fire lake. The subdivision regulations says that buildings should be 100 ft separation absence of fireflow. So he now has fireflow established, right? Yes sir. Yes sir. So that leaves you how much distance between structures? 50 ft. Okay. Um so the the variance changed from the original variance which was a 10 foot from the road front side was 5T to newer codes are 50 foot set back from the road and 25 side side and rear. We're asking for that 25 on the adjoining side of the access road to be 15 instead of 25. So we can allow for So you're asking for a 10 foot variance and that's not a buildable lot either anyway. Isn't that a road access to the lake? Yes, sir. It is the access road to the

uh marina for the subdivision. This is a dirt road kind of gravel road. It's a gravel road that leads down to where is that road public private county or it's private private and I have already Mr. Charles Miller is the fallback owner of that. He is has a conditional lease to the subdivision for them to own it while the marina is there unless the TVA says the marina needs to be removed and in that case it falls back to his ownership and he's been notified. He didn't have any? Yes, ma'am. I spoke with him directly. And who owns the piece of property at this time? Is it Charles Miller? No, it is not Charles Miller. We're purchasing it. Joseph Joseph. Yes. It appears to me that this this lot is one of the few that's in irregular shape other than the access lot. The rest of them appear to be normal lot size lots and I think that's the reason for this yes variance. Right. So that makes it qualified to me. But do you know the do you know the square foot in this lot square footage? It's.3 acres, sir. 3 acres. Just as a comparison, what's lot in it. Lot three. I believe that one's five. They're small lots. They are. about4 acres.

The fireflow proof is acceptable. Yes, sir. We don't have any other questions for him. We can uh ask if anybody else wants to speak on this. I think there be an order. Okay. You have any other question? Thank you. And we'll see if anybody else wants to speak. Is there anybody else that wants to speak on this agenda item? Thank you. Seeing none, we need to have a motion. This was This was presented and discussed in detail at the last meeting, correct? And I wasn't here. Okay. So, did you mention it's a nonbuildable lot? Is that what he said? The private drive here is a non-buildable lot. Not the lot itself. Not the lot itself. Okay. But we are uh I guess satisfied with the right away and all the various components of this. I'm assuming because the only thing I seen in the last month's minute was approved. I think that was the only real major issue. What size structure is he put on this? Sir, if you don't mind, what size structure were you going to put on it? I

know that was brought up last time. It was about 15,800 square feet. Mr. A little less than that. It's a twobedroom. It was not a very large structure. Best of my memory. Now that's going off memory. 12-500 square ft. Yeah, I'm thinking two bedroom. This should only be like 2300 linear feet. So only two lines. Not that much really. Yeah, there's there's nothing we can that's up to the state on that decision. You're fine. You're fine. We should have asked you when we were Just on the surface there seems to be a lot of very close on this but I'm assuming everybody looked at it last last time and satisfied. Yeah, it is. What he's needing is a 10- foot variance on the gravel road corner. Being that it's a triangle lot, that is my understanding. That's correct. Is this is this a turn? Yes, sir. No,

sir. this sliver right here beside it. This is the access down to a boat dock for the community. So, it's that's why it's not a buildable lot. They just have a gravel road down the water. So, this is the only thing it really encroaches on is this. And the grade of the land didn't appear to be from what they were saying issue either. It's not more than a 20% grade or anything like that. So, is this considered part of seminary? No, this that's a different this one different. Okay, that's a different agenda item. It's just 20 to 30 ft between all the other houses. It it's 20 to 30 ft between all the other houses in the neighborhood. This this matched the entire neighborhood. That's what we determined last meeting. This this build other than the encroachment on the one property line matched the build of the rest of the neighborhood. But due to the irregular size of the lot was the only holdup which made it difficult for them. That was their Sure. Okay. There's nothing here. You said 1500. Yeah. 16. So it'll be a smaller footprint. Yeah.

It seemed like what he was said with the foundation actually wouldn't be that close. It was the overhang they were concerned about being actually close inside that I think so set back. I'll make a motion to approve. I'll second. Anna has approve made a motion to approve this. Kendall has second. Did you get that? I did. All right. Proceed to vote. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Ver that variance passes with a 50 vote. Thank you. Wait, you passed. I'll give you that one. Now then, we'll hand out a second packet. And um if you would pass him around. Moving on to agenda item two, variance request access are no cross creek map 070 parcel. Mr. Chairman, if I may. Yes, sir. Would you please ask for public comment prior to the presentation of each vet? Prior to before before. Yes. Okay, that's the way it's set up. State law plainly says the public comment is to be had prior to the business. Okay, but if

you want to do them one at a time, at least let them speak prior to the prior to the business, please. Okay. If um we can change their format there. Um branch request access with Arno I Cross Creek map 070 parcel 01801 public comments on this. Does anyone have public comments? You want to speak on the item? Yes ma'am. Do I speak after him? You speak before. Okay. U only before. Okay. That's TCA requirements. It's actually all public comment should be made prior to the start of the meeting. Okay. To the meeting. But yes, after the agenda is approved. That is TCA law. So all I'm asking is it gets a little bit hectic with as many as we have tonight. So having them speak to each item individually is aok. Okay. But let them speak before the presentation. Okay. Okay. The public comment. Okay. Well, the public opposition. If you're opposing, it doesn't matter if you're for or against. Okay. I'm going to give each of you one of these packets. And it's not as bad as it looks. It's simply some pictures to kind of help you go along with what I'm saying. Mr. L, did you get one of these? Okay. Okay. How many did I give out? I guess. Thank you. I guess you gave out five. It's five. Make sure I have mine.

And can we try to keep I I know this is a long packet here. It is, but I'll try to talk fast. Yes, ma'am. Keep up. Okay. Yes, ma'am. Good. Yes, ma'am. Okay. I know. I know it's a lot, but I really try to consolidate it. Uh Arnold Ilner is asking for a variance through a 10 foot granted a a court easement granted through my property. My property is Kathy Ridge is here. My 80 acres here. It's not 80 anymore, but it's close. Arnos is here. Well, he and his siblings are here. So, our two farms butt together and are sandwiched between Kathy Ridge Road and Pidge Road. Just a little history. Now uh when subdividing a track of land access should be given to each parcel. Arnold's parcel of land should have been given road access when Harry Ilner his father's 80.3 acre farm was subdivided in 2021. Arno Ilner's parcel was landlocked at the time that Ilner's siblings subdivided their property 80.3 acre farm into four parcels. Three of the parcels had per road frontage. Arnold's had no road frontage. I'm confused as how subdividing a tract of land while landlocking a parcel is even legal. I'm not sure how that can be done. If it if it could, why can't I subdivide mine and my last lot, landlock it, and put that burden on a different track? Okay. The owners considered giving Arno access to his propert. when subdividing. At the time they subdivided, they decided that they were going to give him. Now, how do I know that? If you look at picture number one, the packet number one, and I labeled it, that's Martin excavating bed. The Il

siblings were aware that Arno's parcel was landlocked and sought to build a road to his property. In June of 2021, prior to the father's passing of July 2021, and Prior to them filing a lawsuit on me, they hired Martin Excavation to locate reasonable access and submit a bid to construct a road. July 5th, prior to his death, 2021, prior to his dad's passing, prior to any lawsuit fa filed, uh Mr. Martin presented a bid um law reader at this time now after this 23rd of July, they I mean yes of July they filed a lawsuit against me lawer which was Mr. uh Arno's uh lawyer acknowledged and you will see that on this right behind the bid in number one you'll note and I highlighted everything so you could see it go quicker lawyer reader acknowledged in his brief that Martin's bid and described it as the new road and would reasonably accommodate a vehicle tra traversing without action the quote expired August 31st of 2021 aftering ing the quote period and the quote period and approached a year or so later. According to testimony, Martin said the bid would increase 20%. Due to rising cost, his original bid was, as you see on the quote, $79,600. Morgan Excavator, they not only sought one bid, they sought two. Morgan Excavator also bid on putting in a road. I don't have access to that. The court records could not find that it was entered, but it was noted as the bid. And I'm thinking there might have been another one that I that they think they might have missed.

Morgan Excavation also provided the bid. It wasn't entered in the chanc. The pursuit of bids does show that the illness were aware that parcel number one prior to subdividing needed access. Again, I'm going to You can even subdivide your property and leave somebody without road frontage. There is uh number two, there is an existing downstairs access drive. If you look at number two, you can uh unless someone else wants to give you time to figure that out. Well, I I am not through. I have made no point. Okay. Uh Arian Ste, if you look at number two, Arianne says that there's a access drive that's in the D. So therefore, there was another option to for them to go from the top part of the property down to Arno's property. Um, and that is referenced in the deed. Vicer's excavation gave a bid on that, went over, looked at it, and walked it. You'll see the pictures in there of the downstairs driveway that is very well manicured. And they went down the downstairs driveway to the old home. Vickers and I did and he gave a bid of 65,000 to build a road down that bid. So now he's got at least two bids that we know are floating. The other part will go quicker. I'm sorry it's taking time. Okay. So he has provisions for a road to the property. He had the provisions for the road to the property prior to prior to filing a lawsuit suit on me, prior to seeking a prior to going um prior to uh subdividing the property. Um the f

lawsuit was filed. Now this is important for 50 deg 50 um feet ingress secret. He lot number four I mean one and his sister lot number four they call the downstairs of the property filed a lawsuit asking for 50 ft ingress egress ement. Now they also tried to prove a public road but we won't go there because the judge Ben Barlet debunked that very quickly. In 1959 when moving to the old home place from Ohio Ohio this is what testimony showed that the ners came in through P Ridge Road not my road Kathy Ridge Road but they came in through P Ridge Road to their home place. So they knew that P Ridge Road was their home place. the trailer turned over filled with their goods and they um and uh so then from that time on they started going through what was Dr. Galver's property which is now my property we butt up together Dr. Galbert did not live there they entered an exit till 1974 the old house burned they entered in well they moved to the old the new house in 1972 that they built at the top of the hill and so they entered uh through that. Now, this went to court uh July of 2024. The court granted parcel one Arno a 10-ft ement based on historical use 1959 to 1974. The judge said, "I know they didn't get 20 years for prescriptive ement, but what if I just what if I look at the 15 they do have and give them the other five?" That was the exact comment he made. And that's exactly what he did. So I and I have lived by that, but he gave them So hold on, let me just summarize this. Okay, I'm I'm losing

track of this. So what you're saying is long story short is they have an access from another side which was technically their family's land and that's where you want them to go through. Well, no, that's still put through. I mean the court ordered that. Okay. But they didn't. So they always get to keep that. They always get to keep that. But it's based on historic historical use from 59 to 74, which is what my appeals lawyer told me. And they can only do and what did they do from 1959 to 1974 they were very they never had in all the years in testimony and that would be 30 that I've been involved never met one person on that ement or their in way out they never had but one person visit them and that was a guy delivering a a concrete mixer to his dad. They never had any family that they talked about or friends that they talked about. Nobody, not one person including myself in 30 years did they ever see coming in out of my place. Little bit unbelievable to me, but I the judge it was based on 59 to 74 and that was before my time. Okay. Now the court the court granted Arno only he and his sister both lot one and lot four sued me for 50 ft easement. The judge gave them 10 based on historical use. Now, there has to be a reason that he did that. And now he's asking this committee to go above and beyond that and give him that 50 ft. The judge wouldn't give it. And that concerns me that he first it concerns me. The first concern is that he's their family is allowed to subdivide a parcel and leave somebody landlocked. The second thing is that that landlock piece burdens my property. Yes, he has 10 ft, but it's historical use. That's one

vehicle, one family, no construction. His father going in and out periodically with a truck that has u water jugs on it to water their gardens. And that was the extent of the and I'm just about through. Okay. Now, if you look at number six, that's where TVA my property at one time it had lots of road, not mine, but when Dr. Galbert owned it, the Normandy lake came in. It took three sides of my property. You'll see an access number five, you'll see an act note number six, you'll see a TVA written access. Now, if you go back to number five, it does talk about That rule of order does talk about the judge did not expand and he did not shrink what was historically so far. Well, we don't even know what he's asking. He wants 50T, right? We don't know that far. I'll tell you he does. Well, well, he he wants codes. He wants a building permit. Isn't that 50 ft? Yes. Okay. If but there is variances in there. Well, I understand that's why we're here. Yes, ma'am. But are you telling me there's always a loophole? No, ma'am. I'm telling you that there are variances that can be allowed if the property was lot of record. That's what this is. I mean, I'm not for sure until he present one years ago that house for or more. Well, the property still stands. Well, that's true. The property

will is is there and this whatever is passed yes or no tonight will be tied to that property, not tied to the house. not tied if as long as he owns or as long as whoever owns that property, it will stay with that property. Does that make sense? Well, I I see it's a loophole. Okay, number eight. Um, let's look at first of all, I want to say his once again his sibling should have subdivided that property and give him a 50 foot easement handed out. The court chose not to do that, but and he was he for two and a half years and $150,000 later, he only gave him 10 ft. There was a reason behind that. Okay, you look at my ingress eress out of that Dr. Gabriath had. It is only 10 ft. Now look at the pictures, please. And if you look at those pictures, you'll see my truck. I see that you're looking at it now. You see my truck takes up every bit of that. I have met on a little car on there. He had to back up all the way to the bridge. There is a 10ft bridge to get into that property. So that is my little that's my property. Now let's go to number eight. Look at that picture. October the 23rd. That is Arnold Ilner coming through my driveway with a convoy of equipment and trucks. How do you possibly navigate my farming and and the enjoyment of my property? If you grant him an easement, define what TDA gave him. I mean, what uh what the court gave him, how can you possibly go over that and accept that my property has to be like this? Because it says historical use. This is not historical use. There was never a corporate put in. There was no testimony to a corporate and no

testimony to u to building equipment. And that's what you all are going to be opening up. Testimony to a building equipment. And and my argument is going to be if you look at that, if you look at this house being there one time hardway had a house way down there on the lake. If I subdivide my property, then I will be able to come back up here and get a variance which is going to make my property so much more valuable. And you're going to have everybody in the county doing the same because a hundred years ago there were houses all over the place that's not standing there anymore. Now I want you to look. This is the most important thing I'm going to say to you tonight. I want you to look at this picture and I want Arno to look at this picture. Arno, this is my grandchildren. They play in that creek all the time. One of them's as little as two years old. When they come to grandmy's house, this is what they do. They in the creek. They ride. You see the trails I made for them? And they have to come down this eastment road to do anything. If they want to play in the creek, if they want to ride their four-wheelers, this is where they are. How are we going to feel when that convoy of vehicles doesn't see one of them and it kills them? when he could have a different access into the property only because he was not given access through his family and he got bids they knew. So, I've proven that he's got two bids at least and more. And he had and and I even got him a bid even said I would pay for building that road if he let Gary Vickers have Gary Vickers. I would pay to go down that downstairs driveway if he would just let Gary Vickers build that road. That is not what he chose to do. Okay, I'm two minutes away and I know I only have two minutes, but I'm going to make it quick. I pray this board will not override the court order. I know

I've said that before. I pray this board will not expand the easement by granting a variance. I pray this board will deny the application. I pray that I siblings will provide Arnold with access through their property as they consider doing so by pursuing a bid for construction of a road. He has the right to enjoy his property. I want him to have a home there. I am opposed to him building When given a variance above and beyond the court order, his siblings should provide him access to build a road and that he can use while building. He's not permitted to go above historical use, but he's going to. He's already done it on that picture I showed you with the convoy coming down October the 23rd maybe. Uh the illness are a tightnit family. They will give him a variance. They're just sucking this for all it's worth. They're getting out of me and taking as much from me as they can take while the going's good. Once that stop this board can stop it, otherwise you all I'll have to sell my place. My place will have to be history. I cannot farm. I have big farm trucks. We do hay. We're doing hay today. I have grandchildren on that road. I cannot do that. That's what I've done 30 years. And I never met that man till October 2021. Nor his dad nor his siblings nor heard of them and now they want to take over my property. Did you introduce yourself? Fa Coleman. Bay Neil Coleman. I I did not. I'm sorry. Thank you, FA. Okay. Uh I will I pray that this board will not further burden my property. The burden should be on the property that was subdivided. If you look at Arnold's construction convoy and he didn't care. I said to him that day, you are not allowed you are, and that's when we took pictures, you are not allowed to do

this. The court granted you uh historical easement based on use. And his comment was, well, that piece of equipment is not bigger than my gas truck. He he finds this. And you know, I like it. In a different world, we could probably be friends, but I do not like when somebody comes in and takes over my property. I do not mind him building there. If he builds there, we'll be great neighbors, but we won't if he takes my property. I understand. Um, we need to wrap it up. Okay. Uh, I pray that the last thing I want you to look at is my grandchildren playing. That's the last thing I want you to take a look at. Now, one other thing I don't think count to get into my property, the first 700 ft is the variance that I mean the u 10 foot When Dr. Galbert's property got taken, TVA gave him 10 feet only that is 7 feet long going up to my house. Can you all even grant a variance over TVA federal land? TVA tells me no. Talked to him today. They said if you need a if you need that in writing, he'll be glad to provide it. He his comment I believe was federal land trumps u county. County. Yes, ma'am. It does. And um I pray that this board will consider my limited access on my huge farm. That's my livelihood, you all. I say, "Oh, hey, I can't do those things anymore. This is not fair." Now, life's not fair, and I'm not playing the victim, and I'll go away here with a smile, but I'm not happy that this man continues to go through the weeds to get access to my property. what he wants and what he will get. If you all do that tonight, it will be a private drive through my property. It will become when you give a 50 foot grant variance, he has a private

drive. You know what he did the first day when the GR You know what he did the first day when the um uh court ordered and gave him the 10 ft. He cut 15. He cut my trees down. He threw them on the ground and I I text him and said, "You got to pick up my trees." These are the things he does. And I'm not talking about him, but I'm telling you now. I'm through. I hope that you all consider my request. I know that's new. I know that it's a very big long and I think in all honesty, I'm probably want these back. I would like to have them back. Unless you need them. Well, I'm probably going to need them for pills for Okay. But if you need them to study, you are welcome to. Anybody wants to keep theirs, keep them. I would like to know which one's your driveway. That's what I'm trying to figure out here. Once I saw this Cross Creek Drive% 700 ft of Cross Creek Drive is my driveway and has been for 30 years. It belongs to TVA, but I have an written access in. You want to help me find it on the map? That right there. Nobody has access on that. Nobody has ever had access on that drive. Okay. Thank you. So that drive is through TVA property right there. The first 700 ft. Okay. Then at the corner is where at the corner my land spreads out left and right and that easement is right through it. And you know I will live with that. I'm okay with that. I'm just not okay with overstepping what the judge said, what the judge intended. The judge intended to otherwise he would have given him the 50V but he chose not to. Ma'am, we're not You know that that's civil and we're not civil at all. I mean this is not civil law right here. We we just have to understand. Okay. Civil law is where you

go to a lawyer and a judge. We've done that. You got 10 ft. Okay. Can you override that? That's the question. Will you override that? Is it right to override what the judge said? You don't know what the judge intended. Well, I don't know what he's asking yet. That's the That's the question. Tell you what he's asking. Well, ma'am, listen. I won't say anymore. You you have said your your piece. All right. More than my piece. Thank you for listening to me. If you want to get those back to me, you can. I just ask you not to share them with anybody else that Thank you. And thank you. Thank you. Thank you for listening to me. When will we get the answer on this? Uh hopefully tonight. Okay. Anyone else has any public comments on this agenda item? Okay. Would Mr. Arno like to come forward? Speak up a little bit, please. Arno and Nick. And I was going to be, you know, helping uh Mr. out with this. And uh we got a little plaque to throw out on the table here if y'all wanted to look at it to give you a little perspective on things. Um we also had a couple other things we wanted to throw out here to share with y'all. Um so these are old TVA maps that show the road And this is another TVA map which shows the 10 foot uh road. So just to give you a little back history about this property. Um

this farm has been in the family since 1955. The INRE family had a home on this property and the driveway to that home was drive in question here, otherwise now known as Cross Creek Drive. This is the driveway that we're requesting the variance for this road. Um, we we understand um you know that Miss Coleman passionately objects to this. However, um as she had stated, they did um you know have to go to court about this about this road. This road was place when Miss Coleman bought her property and this road has been there for over a hundred years. This road has always been used to access the bottom part of the Ilner farm. Now, Miss Coleman has spent the last, you know, 20 minutes or so rehashing a court case that has already been decided. Um the judge also decided that the ilers did in fact have continuous use of this. Um and the reason the judge gave 10 ft was because that was all that they had across TVA. TVA granted a 10 foot easement through Miss Coleman and he's also got written letter from uh TVA showing that he's got the same written permission to use the 10 ft that Miss Coleman does on the property on his property. Yes. On Miss Coleman's property also she has 10 feet from TV. Yes. same drive. So the same road that she's talking about hay trucks and everything else coming out of those are the same that's the same driveway that we're referring to uh accessing the bottom portion of

the property. Now the reason um this was set up like it was was because in 1996 Mr. INR's father set up his will and trust for that property and in 1996 he determined um which kids were going to get which portions of the property. So, Miss Coleman is correct that he does have siblings that do front on P Ridge Road, but this portion of land was always intended to be accessed by Cross Creek Road like it has always been. The other siblings that she's referring to are not interested in giving an easement across their property because to Miss Coleman's point, um the putting a driveway from Pirid Road down there would be cost prohibitive to say it at best and it would be probably about a 15% slope um consistently possibly more which is a very steep driveway to have to maintain. So basically there is a trail that is there now but it's a four-wheeler trail and you'll get puckered up driving up and down it. So that's what she's referring to putting a driveway up and down. Um is that is that the four wheeler uh trail is that owner of part 10? No, it's on the other siblings property. It goes from the top at P Ridge down to the bottom down in this valley. Um, so the variance process was put in place to allow for existing properties that didn't conform to current zoning resolutions to be able to use their property. Mr. Ner is seeking this variance to be able to build a home back on the spot

where his old home place once stood and use the driveway that always accessed his property and his farm. This property also certainly qualifies as steep, which is one of the noted in the reasons for various requests. So, u to a couple of the other points made um you know, Miss Miss Coleman is saying, well, what's stopping her from dividing another piece of property? Well, the major difference in what she's saying and what this is is that this is an existing road that has always been used to get to this part of the farm. and that was the way it was divided and intended to be used back in 1996, 10 years prior to the adoption of the zoning resolution. And also, we're not asking for an extension of any easement. We know that we we don't want to be any more of an incumbrance on this Coleman's property as as at all possible. Um, but we are asking for a variance to be able to use the 10 ft. The variance cannot go above and beyond what the court has ordered. And the court only allowed the same access to Mr. Ilner that was granted to Miss Coleman, which was 10 ft because that's what's on the old TVA maps that you've got there. Um, so anyway, we argue that the existence of the Ilner farm and the division of it back in 1996 in his will and trust predated the adoption of the zoning ordinance and it should qualify as a lot of record and we're seeking a variance to be able to use this 10 ft that they have always used. Why are you not using it currently? We are using it but we're so that I can get a building for. So to my understanding,

current code says you have to have a 50ft variance to build a house. Correct. Yes, sir. And this was a lot of record and you had a 10-ft entrance that you had. That's correct. And you're needing a variance from for a 10-ft entrance that's always been there because this is a lot of record that we had before codes. Correct. That's correct. Suming it up to build one residence back former residence was. Yes, sir. And this this this structure residence may be used. Yes. I'm sorry. I didn't hear that question. What's your question? I didn't hear it. The residence may be used daily. Oh, gotcha. Yeah. When when we lived there, I grew up there and when we lived there, we used it daily. Went to school bus and I just want to build a house, small house back there where an old home place was. Is there space and accessibility for another home? Not really because A lot of it is, as you can see on the demographic map here, it's steep, but the old home base is one of the old only flat places on the lower part of the farm. Are your your thoughts that you would live there continuously and constantly? No, I live in Lever right now with my wife, but where do you live in? What's your address? 315 Oakwood Cove in the Woodland Hills, but would like to build a little cabin there to go there maybe a few days a week, something like that. Is the cabin already tore down or it's still standing? No, the old house that was

there burned down like Miss Gman said in 1974. Okay. So, I'm right now looking at what it would cost to build a small cabin back there. Okay. So maybe to answer your question about whether other residences could be built in there, regardless as to whether it was flat or not, you wouldn't be able to use this driveway to access any other residences on that part of the farm. You can't really as exopicial member of this body, I've got a question. Are you asking for a variance to build a house using the 10 foot rideway or are you asking to grant a 50 foot right away through her property? No variance to get a building permit to use the existing ement put in place. Correct. So, you're not going to use more of her property. Like the judge, like she said, we don't want to go above or beyond what the judge I I would like to point out that Tennessee law has it not changed. The court of law cannot grant more than 25 ft, which sometimes runs headlong into our 50 foot requirement, which uh like I said, the court cannot grant more than 25. So having said that, you're not asking to widen the easement. You're just he just want a building permit. Correct. Using this 10 foot. So and and and to that point, if he were to have granted anything that was wider than 10 foot, it would have gone from Kathy Ridge along Miss the existing 10ft easement, you know, accessing Coleman, and then it would have had to have gotten wider to a 25 foot wider and then gone into his property. So it's It still starts at 10 foot coming off of Kathy Ridge because

of TVA due to TVA and it's on that old map. Yes. Yes. Just just to clarify, the court granted ingress and egress 10 ft, you know, to use that road. So that's not an issue. What's an issue is we want to get a variance for a building permit based on Is this the area right here on the map that you're looking at right here? Yes. So this is the roaded right along this property line here. Okay. Right along in here goes right there through the middle. Okay. So this right here is the a deep gully here. It's a little bit and a gully here. Yeah. Yeah. We have 3D renderings of it. I think I got the point. I know that area well. I live in that area. Is the road the 10 foot road that you're using now is it emergency vehicle? Could emergency vehicles get in and out? Yes. In secret. Yes. They sure can. We've had like said I wanted to put in some culver to get across the the creek that was washed out and we had a dump truck. You know that's pretty wide. You know it's construction equipment that went in there just fine. Okay. It's a standard driveway but it doesn't require a four-wheel drive truck or anything like that to get through there. Right. This would definitely guarantee them the

opportunity to get a building. Is that a true statement? Say that again. If their request is granted, yes, that would definitely position to not be opposed in getting a building permit. Yes. Really just wanting to do what used to build something like we've used before and just like there in how many acres is in that 18.01 around 30 30. Any other questions? You have any? Yeah. I will tell you that I called Mr. North's father when this thing about your dad told I mean, it's on the TV. When was the Let's Let's don't do this here. We don't need to do this in the meeting. Um, we uh when was this court order? Was it It seems like it was July 23rd of this year. Yes. No. 74. 74. The property, the driveway was 73. Okay. She didn't give us that. I make a motion to approve. The driveway was already there. They have to rebuild

what's existing. And my eyes and there's I really don't see any reasonable way to get in from the other way. We have a motion on the floor to approve this from Anna. Do I hear a second? I seconded by Mr. Lil Duke. Any other discussion on this? If not, proceed to vote. All in favor say I. I. All opposed? Seeing none, it passes with a five to zero vote. Thank you. I'll let you know when my grandchildren get hurt. Well, we pray that never happens. Did you get all your information that you brought? Okay, thank you. Moving on to agenda item three. If you would pass one of them around. Sure. We will be moving to agenda item three, special exemption request, single wide in a C1 zone, Patricia Hannah, 9020 Hillsboro Highway. Do I hear any public comments on this? Anyone on uh Single? Seeing none. Are you Miss Hannah? Okay. If you would like to come up and present.

Okay. Okay. Thank you. And your son Robert? Yes. And what is your name? Patricia. Patricia. Thank you, Patricia. just put back in the corner. Okay. We already have accepted permit and the surveyor finished his measurements last week. I'm still waiting for the actual dicl the setbacks and everything has public water at the road. The land is to remain intact even though it will be um surveyed into a second. It's all going to be retained by So just let me verify that there's already an existing driveway and you're just in in a house in a C1. So the house is already in a C1 zone. Yes. Okay. will be the Okay. And right up in this corner up here is where you want to put the the mobile home. Yes, sir. Well, right behind the right here. Right here. Right here. Okay. May I ask where you're currently living? That's exactly what my daughter-in-law thinks.

How much road access do we have this? Um I know. Yes, ma'am. Even though if you use the same driveway, it needs to be. Are you going to parcel this off in case it ever is parcelled off? I have no idea what my son intends to do. But for future future for I don't know he may do it but I don't know if he will use that particular hand. Okay. May I ask what they told you in our code enforcement office when you were applying for this? Had to have 50 foot road to make sure when we had it surveyed that the ement for the driveway was put in. Well, let me stop you. You are going to survey for a separate parcel for this home. Yes. But you haven't done it yet. No, it's been surveyed. We just haven't got the paperwork back from the survey. The septic permit has already been waiting on a building and this is in C1 I think. Yeah, right. Yeah. She's saying she has had it surveyed. So, you're splitting one parcel into two because you cannot have two primary residential structures on one parcel. Correct. Unless you're A1 15 or more

acres and you're allowed up to three. So yes, sir. It is being split technically even though he's going to be nice if you already had your plat here for the body to look at. Yes, it would. Who's your meet all your setbacks? Yeah. Do you know how large the new parcel's going to be? Not exactly. I believe he's making it at least two acres. That two acres going with his the primary residence or the proposed the primary res. It already has everything it needs. just asking to take a portion of that and let me put it to separate it into two separate. Is there going to be a separate driveway or use the same drive? Okay. But you will have 50 foot with your new survey. Would there be a problem that two two separate residents using the same access road? I don't think there is because she's because she's putting on a separate parcel and they're providing a easement. But it doesn't matter if she has just so

she has 50 foot access. She don't have to use it. missed my memory in our training. I'm not certain, but I think my son said that they could make the driveway that's existing a private road and then it would have to bring up to if you subdivide off of long as you got the 50 foot easement servicing your parcel that you're creating, you're good. Yeah. and that will be included. Any other questions? I think that the issue I'm having about the plat being here is that this stuff is provided or not. So we grant the variance. Now the codes has to verify that she she's not going to get a permit unless she has that in front of them. Really, that's their the question that we have is she has to come before this board to be able to put a house trailer in a C1. It's not the plat or anything. As long as the plat fits, that goes through the codes department. The house trailer is what she's got to come here for. I make a motion to approve. Motion's been made to approve by Anna. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Summer.

We'll proceed to vote if there's no other discussion. All in favor of this say I. All opposed. Seeing none, it passes with a 50 vote. Thank you very much. For a point of clarification, this uh our agenda says you were asking for a single wide, but didn't I hear you say you're putting a new double wide? No, it is a new is a double. Oh, gotcha. Temple. Thank you. You're welcome. Moving on to item number four on our agenda. Item four on the agenda is a variance request access with Michael Logan, James Robert Lane, map 057, parcel 018.02. Uh is there any public comment on this issue? Seeing none. Are you Mr. Logan? I'm gonna try not to take too much time. I've got property that's one section is four and a half and one is five and I have to go through the five to get to the four and a half. So that being said this has been used for many years. It used to be bunch of mobile homes in there when I bought this which was back I've been there 18 years. I took all the old homes out of there like that. So

It looks good. And I wanted my wife passed away a year ago in March. So I since then, which I never was going to get married again, but I did. And so we want to build up a nice little house. And um so on this 5 acre track um is where we'd like to and what they're I wanted to get the building permit. And what they're needing my drive part of that drive is long drive and part of it is 35 ft I guess and I know even emergency you said 35 you have a copy of that pretty much but I tried to list stuff in there so you'd have a good idea but You know, I can I try to tell my life story in five minutes. I understand good. But um so the there's there's a good well on there. Uh when I first moved to Tennessee from Texas back in ' 84, I didn't know anybody, so we rented a place there on that property and we went to other places and lived there and went back and bought this property somehow. I don't know how that happened. Been easier for me to just stay there, but since that didn't work out, I've got it now. And the septic has tank has been approved. Charbano or whatever his name is. I I think I've got it right. He's already approved the septic and it's really good farmland. So really would it had a lot of it had like eight or 10 mobile homes. It was all septic tanks back down the drive. So one section here has a little map of it. Uh one this section that's that's right here is County Farm Road is here. This section

goes back and then I I had the survey and I put a 50 foot on this but this is the part this section right here that they're giving me um that that they don't want you need a variance for. I do for for and I've accessed that my delivery trucks go back there full of a big pontoon and you know 35 foot delivery trucks get back in there no problem and of course the UPS and all that Amazon stuff. So this this the whole 10 acre piece of property. Yeah. That you own right now. Correct. Yes. When did you purchase that? Uh or when was it? When was it? U I purchased the I I purchased the back section here 18 years ago, I guess, or more. My my stepson had this and he was not paying so I I paid for it but he he handed that over to me. Okay. So this was all in one parcel at one time. Yes. And it only had a and it only had a 35 foot access at that time. Exactly. And all these mobile homes were like along here and down the drive goes here and back here. And there is a manufactured house back here. Okay. And and there's a barn back here. So I was going to build somewhere in here. This is electric. lines are already there and like I said there's a well and he's approved the septic can you point to the t green so the rest of them okay I might have got lost here this I think this right here the blue circle there is where blue circle is where the property that you're wanting to do uh I'm trying to find the drive uh right here yeah so right now uh I have this right here where it has manufactured But this goes to County Farm Road, which is right here. It goes out to 41. This uh part of the drive is this this section right

here is what we were talking about needing the variance so that we could uh build here. And I did try to buy something from this guy and this lady doesn't even own hers. Uh that's a another story. U so uh but I wasn't able to do that to buy an extra piece of that property. I put and make it bigger. But so for me to get a be to build on here, that's what I'm asking for is various James on the James Robert. James Robert Lane. Exactly. Coming off of the county farm road. And you were pointing that this area right here was the issue, right? The 30 35 ft right here. Yeah. And you have needed put 50 foot. Yeah. Going to the next part. I have. So you have widened, right? I wanted to make sure that was done. So that's all. It's just that one section right there. And like I said, I tried to buy some, but I wasn't able to do that. And that that piece of property was cut out with a 35 ft access. Correct. Yes. Back in that is like back 50 years ago. That's what I that before zoning. So it's a lot of record. Oh yeah. And even though you've got 50, it's fronting on the 5 acre track that you'll be traveling across. in order to get to your 4 and a half acre. Well, I do that now. Yes, but but I we'll have to go here. But yeah, that's right. He's wanting to build a new lot new house where the Yeah. circle is. Yeah. And you know, already done homework even on that. I've got some friends that build and so I'm just going to Yeah. Something like this has been built, you know. Well, thank you. Yeah. And then this is the this is actually the property. So, it's pretty flat and it's been I just didn't know all this, but that's the Yeah. And then this is the driveway. Here's a couple pictures of the how the

drive looks from the entry and then uh from the five acre back to the county farm road. All right. This is This is going to stay a five acre tract, right? You're not you're not dividing that. Okay. What are you going to do? It's private back there. And what are you going to do with that other track? Uh my wife's daughter wants to move in there and and live there. So, it will stay the same piece of property. It'll stay the same. I won't change any of that. I mean, I would have done that. And and uh but but it is two tracks. It is two tracks. You can see I take care of the drive. Yeah. This is off the county farm here. So, we've only got 35 ft. on the county bar and road. Yes, sir. And it is a lot of record and all the neighbors have been notified. Looks like I don't know if all I talked to them about buying piece of property from them and the one lady her husband sold their or they bought that property but the lady that they got people owned it they got divorced and the lady never signed off on it so she doesn't really own it and the other guy uh he he uh his son has kind of taken over that thing and and they had money on it. He said he couldn't cut me anything out of it. So that to be able to give me but Cindy did send him a letter notify notify. Yes. I'll make a motion to approve. I second it. Motion been made to approve and seconded by Kendall. Any other discussion?

Question. All in favor uh what is to vote? Yes. Favor uh vote. All in favor say I. I. I. All opposed. Pass five to zero. Thank you. Thank you. Long meeting. Moving on to agenda number five. Variance access Wilcott map 089 parcel 0001.01. Is there any public comment on this? Is there anyone here to present it? Okay. Okay. I'm grow attorney Gross. Okay. I'm an attorney and I was contacted by Mr. Walcott and I l Okay. Oh, I got W. That's what I had. Okay. So, Mr. He resides in Davidson County and this is a sizable farm. Um it's kind of cut up because 70 acres of it approximately 70 acres is located in Coffee County and the remaining balance is in Bever County. Okay. So this farm was purchased by his father-in-law in the 70s. Oddly enough, my father was the real estate agent, but he purchased it and it has been used as a farm pretty much that entire time. He passed away a few years back and he

and his wife purchased it from the other family members. So now family still has your last name. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. That's what my mother always uh but the family attends and wishes to build a house. It's a beautiful spot out there. It's in Befford County and I'm trying to find it right here. I think this is Nancy Lane. This is what we're talking about. Okay. And they're wanting to build a home up here in this area and it's a spot, but it's also landlocked by the by the river and everyone around. And this is TVA property here. Okay. So, this Nancy Lane is a right away 50 foot that comes down and services a home here. They also had a home or there was a there's a barn right here. There's a barn right there and there used to be a house here and it burned down around 2022. Um, so they're wishing to be able to have a variance to where they could have access for two residences based on this one road right here that cuts through TVA. This Nancy Lane, this is TVA. That's down across from the dam, right? Yes, it is. Um, Becker County will not grant them a building permit unless there is a variance. So, the variance we're requesting is in Coffee County. The home is going to be built in county. Okay. And this is all TBA. I want pass it off to M.

I think G summed it up, but really this is a strikingly similar situation to what we were looking at a moment ago where you've got one road that has always accessed this farm and then it was cut off when TVA acquired their acquired their properties. Other than that one road in and out, like he said, you're bounded by river on one side and all other properties that are not related to this property at all. Like it's it's essentially landlocked because of that. There was never a formal easement established on that, but they did have a survey of that property done where it was it was established that Nancy Lane was a 50-foot rideway. Uh but there again to his point, it it serves the house that's on par and it also served the residence that was on parcel eight. Now that road has been there for a long time because the house on parcel 2 was built in 1900. So that I mean and I've got the TVA maps on this one as well too. Who maintains that road? Is there any maintenance? It's a gravel drive. Yeah, it would be the parties that drive on it. I believe I attached this would be the TVA and it shows the old road going down this property. So the old house that you see right there is it's like right in that area and then the res. So the was there there well before the lake and has always been has always been the only access into this farm

the uh the property is actually in bed county well the farm itself is divided there's approximately 75 or so acres that's in Coffee County which Nancy Lane is included That is also the Bedford County's LOL. If you look on the screen up here, you can see the county line, right? But it's this is this road right here that we're concerned about. Yeah. This drive and it Well, he was asking about the county. This is in Coffee County, I believe. Right here. Oh, this is in Yeah, this is in coffee and this liver right here. This is Bedford and this over here. Right. Interesting problem. So, but you're but you're landlocked other than Nancy Lane. Yes, we are. Or they are. Oh, yeah. And is that a 50 foot rideway? It is per the I believe you can see it right here. Are you talking about Nancy Lane? Yes. Coming into res. I know it is. I saw that I'm looking at as well as the highlighted property there. Yes, sir. So, it it comes down and then it forks and one one end goes into there, the other end goes into this. And this is Mr. Wal. This is okay. Right there. Right here. This is It comes down. There's a gate right here and then you can come through down here. This farm, this had been farmed by Dr. Bills for a number of years. And here's the old barn right there. And the house that the burn was right through here.

It's right where the house is. Right there. Yeah. Okay. I'll make a motion to approve. The motion has been made to approve by Kendall. Do I hear a second? I'll second. Hannah has seconded. Is there any other discussion? Seeing none, we'll proceed to vote. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Passes with a vote of five to zero. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you all for your time. Thank you. Here you go. Moving to the last item on our agenda. Special exemption request duplex in a RS1 zone. Larry Swan 1398 1388 1368 Old Seminary Road. Is there anyone would like to publicly speak on this? And I'm assuming Okay. Are you the only one that would two? No, I think two other. Okay. Um, due to the time limits, I'll do my best. Um,

so I would like to provide you all pictures of the property that's in question so that you can actually see these items. My name is Charlotte Graves and I have property at 1223 Old Road. My neighbors and I have been to two meetings already regarding this duplex issue on seminary road. The first meeting it was deemed the request was not proper at the time and would be revisited at the next meeting. September 26 of last year was the second meeting and After much discussion between the board and the residents of Old Seminary Road, it was determined that Mr. Swan's request to locate duplexes on Old Road would be denied. Imagine our surprise when on May 16th, two duplexes came rolling down our road and was deposited on Mr. property and then a third showed up on June the 11th on May 16th when I and other neighbors called the codes office to let them know that the duplexes were being moved onto the old seminary road property. What were they going to do to resolve it? Because in our eyes it had been resolved and we were told that Mr. Swan had applied for a building permit that was approved by the codes department because promised that they would be changed into single party residences. How is that possible? We asked. Wouldn't they have had to already convert those buildings into single party residences before they were? There was no answer. Who made the decision of the department to override the zones of the zones ruling? I got no answer. Could the codes come out and see

what was happening. No, I can't leave the office. When will you be able to come out and complete and see the disregard of the original decision by the board of zoning appeals? They cannot say, but they told me you can come make a complaint. At that time, I was sitting behind those duplexes being moved down our road. It took approximately two hours for each one of these to get down. We are on a runway in and a one way out. So since I was sitting there in traffic doing nothing but twiggling my thumbs, I decided to come to the codes department and was given a form to fill out which I did because I was there. Was anyone there that I could speak to regarding this issue? No, they were busy. I was told I would have a follow up on the complaint in about a week. I still have not received a followup call. I went back to my property and it was still locked by these duplexes heading down the road. So now here we are with three duplexes that you can see in those pictures located within a half acre of each other on old seminary road. Is it normal for someone to blatantly go against the codes and zoning board with zero consequence? Now an exception is being requested and it was filed 11 days the time that the first duplex was placed on this foundation. What is happening? What order was this approved in? And who approved it? Did the codes department encourage the property owner to go ahead and do what he wanted to do and ask for permits and exceptions after the fact and they would be forced to give it to them because the items were already there. Why wouldn't that building permit have been flagged for a vote by the zoning commission

since it violates the original decision on September the 26? Mr. Swan has created a highdensity rental development right under your noses with zero regard for your original decision on September 26. His application for special exception simply states duplex as his reason and why it is needed. It should say I spent a on these three buildings and I'm putting them where I want to regardless of what you think. I urge you to deny the special exception request for locating the duplexes on road for the following reasons. It's a violation of the first decision that was made on September 26. The codes department overrode your decision on September the 26th. This is a rural county road and is not sufficient for high density housing. It is in violation of the green belt that propert. The neighbors here are advising the board that this is a high density housing development and is not in keeping with the community and current housing of farmland located on Old Seminary Road and it would be detrimental to the current residents near property on Old Seminary Road. This sets a precedent if it is approved that more D places could be placed within this property and that such actions can occur across all rural coffee without the proper permitting or the code requirements being met. It also sets the precedent that some developers get what they want while others do not. Please uphold your original decision from September the 26. The these items are completely and totally incompatible with the current properties on the road. Thank you for listening. Thank you very much. Would you mind pointing out where you live at? Would you mind pointing out where you live at here, please?

Right. And the properties are are right here. Did you say that old seminary road was public, private, or county? County. It is a county road. It's on the county road map. It is. Yes, sir. And it dead ends right here. Air Force property with the air force base. Is that seminary old seminary hill road or old seminary road? Old seminary. Seminary starts after. Yes. Okay. Okay. When um people come down this road, that's it. or they go to house and Craig's house back there. That's it. They're dead ends. Thank you. Thank you. May I point out a technicality before anybody else comments? The original decision made by this board was dull and void because the application had one parcel number. The first time they came before this board, the permit had one parcel number asking to put three duplexes on one single parcel. That could not happen. The board addressed it and I understand that the applicant before they went through the process of subdividing their property, they wanted to know maybe if they could do it. it should have never been addressed by the BZA because the permit have one parcel number. So in following up they decided because they could as uh Mr. Northcot pointed out you can put a single family resident on the three different parcels without any

special exception or permission of this board. So the structures, as I understand it, could easily be changed to single by just opening up the the firewall that separates the duplexes. But having said that, the property owner has went back. They did parcel it out, and correct me, Mr. Northcot, if I'm wrong, you did draw up a plat separate parcels. Now the the applicants have three separate permits for the three separate parcels tonight. So I think it's fully compliant with the uh B single family. So for a single family dwelling, not the permit is for a single family, not a multi family. Well, you're we got three different meetings. I'm talking about the first meeting was the one that was null and void. The second one was for the single. We're talking about the permits are for a single family. Yeah, that's where they're working right now that tonight they're asking for a permit for duplexes which is allowed in our zoning resolution by this by this board's approval. already there. Just so you know, there found just as a as a point of order to what you said, I went back and I rewatched that meeting and it was said at that meeting that they had already been surveyed out, had been parcelled. I'm talking about the technicality of I can't technicality. It was said in that meeting. I'm not going to argue with anybody in the audience. I'm just telling you what was said. If you want to speak publicly, our chairman will allow you to speak. You gave a point of clarification. I wanted to give a clarification on that exact comment right now. So, it didn't get technically the application for the

BZA to address had one partial number on it. It was way in the meeting. Please go back and rewatch that meeting because that question was specifically asked. Any other public comments? My name is Aaron Carmine. I live at 162 Revival Lane, which is the name of our driveway, but it is on Seminary Road. If you scroll back a little bit more, this is our house right here. Okay. Excuse me. Um, my family and I live on 070. We moved to Tennessee some eight years ago, purchased this land to build our dream home on, and we've now lived in that home for four years. Um, why did we choose Old Seminary Road? Well, like many other people, uh, we wanted space to build on and enjoy the beauty of Tennessee. Um, we didn't want to live in the city. We wanted room for our boys to roam. Uh, I think is safe to say the vast majority of people that live in the country do so uh because it's quite the opposite of living in the city. Thin city limits you have closer neighbors, smaller properties and as we're seeing around here, rental complexes galore and a significant increase in traffic. Uh people choose old county roads to build on because they don't want the city way of life. And I have to commend them for that. It is to no surprise that our area has been inundated with new builds, specifically larger multiple home developments and rental complexes. They're popping up everywhere. To my understanding, the counties try to mitigate this explosive growth to make sure not to overwhelm our resources and our infrastructure by limiting the amount of housing we built per acreage.

A great move in my opinion and one that must be enforced. With that being said, it's my opinion and my recommendation to not allow our county roads and their adjacent land to turn into apartment complexes. Apartment complexes drastically change any area they are allowed on. I have no qualms with Mr. Swan and I can say that with 100% I would be standing up here no matter who was looking for an exemption on our road. Uh I do have several questions about the future if this special exemption is passed such as what is the effect on our water water pressure. Uh adding six new rentals and six new families to our area overnight. Our road is deteriorating by the day with the added traffic. This will only accelerate. In the nearly eight years we have owned our property. Nothing has been done to our road except irregular patch jobs that do not last. My main concern, however, is how many more exemptions will continue to be made. It seems as though in the county and even our local cities, we keep making exceptions to rule over over and over and wonder why citizens become frustrated. I have read many times on different social media platforms, people saying, "Why do we have rules that they're constantly ignored or being special or given special permission to ignore?" Who's to say this project stops at three duplexes? Uh, this area could easily house a dozen more duplexes, literally creating an entire community in that area that was never intended for. Rentals by large have a very negative effect on neighboring property values as well. This is something widely agreed upon via statistics that anyone can simply look up. Something this department needs to heavily weigh when considering this exemption. This decision could affect

many people negatively. Lastly, would you as any uh member on this committee want six very small low-income rentals built next to your home or just down the road from your county country road home? Only you can answer that. I respect the decision, but for the sake of our county residents, please do not allow our beautiful county land and roads turn into congested rental complexes. Um, I will add one thing. This is all I had written down. Um, I feel like this is a classic case of uh, don't ask permission, ask for forgiveness. They are duplexes. My dad owned several in town in my little small town. I grew up in Ohio. They were in the city. Um, I don't think there was any intention to turn these into single family homes. And I know that a lot of residents on our road feel that way. So, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Any other public comments? Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Travis Reed. I live at 71 Seminary Hill Road. It's lot 2.14 Travis Reed. Okay. Yes, sir. Um my property faces east or I'm sorry, my house faces east. It's in the middle of that property there, five acres. Um so again, we chose this area out of the the serene nature of what's out there. Uh we moved out there. The only thing there that that was out of uh Robert Frost point was how house been there for 100 years or so, whatever, I don't know, but it's been there for a while. I knew it was there when I bought

my property. Um, that's the only thing that looks commercial out there. Um, I forgot Mr. Northcut. So, we got a concrete truck parking area behind my house, couple trucks that are down. But, uh, in of that, we've done 36 house foundations this year. Cross foundations that are equivalent to the ones they put in. I can from outer space and I know when one has been segregated off to accommodate a low bearing wall down the middle like Mr. Mayor pointed out the firewall would have to be taken out to accommodate make this single family right you'd have to have reasonable accommodations to support a Lvl engineer beam underneath that house in order to support subtracting that low bearing these foundations were built just in accordance with regular There's enough pictures to the market here today to look at the they were not put as has been I'll just reiterate. They were not put in in the intention of being single family homes. It was my understanding they were told no that this could not go in. They're there as you can see. Um, also the road, if you zoom in, um, at the end of the word road on old seminary road there, there's a culvert. Yeah. Right there. Zoom. Sorry. Right here. There's a wet weather ditch that runs from the back of our property, Springfield pond that runs under the road there. Um, shot elevations on that. That road has dropped four and a half inches. dug it out since they since they put the uh since they brought the duplexes in. So that was uh that was before

anything was done and after they were put in. So I'm sure the county highway department needs to address that at some point. Um or at least somebody does. Um again like Mr. simply we want a nice area for our families. Um I mean three additional houses is one thing. I mean and I get that if all go also to my knowledge somebody would have to be prime contractor on this because as a homeowner you're only allowed to do one or two years on your own property and that's not for these are intended to be correct. Thank you for allowing me to speak. Okay. Thank you. Thanks. Anyone else? Mr. Hal Hul. My name's Hal Hul. Just one. Excuse me. Name Hoke. H A L H O K on the uh 2.13 2.12 and the uh 1.02 that whole section. [Music] Okay. Originally this this farm was the Parson's farm 102 acres roughly. Okay. went up for sale. I screwed up and didn't buy the whole farm when I had to basically all your fault. It's all my fault. Jim Parson Jim Parsons was married was married to my mom before he passed away. But anyway, Melody and then they split the phone up,

sold it at auction. At that auction, we have restrictions on the property. Restrictions being all locks all lots are restricted to residential construction only. All houses must have a minimum of,450 square ft. All twostory houses must have a minimum of,00 square ft on the first floor. All garages are to be constructed of similar material of the house. No swine, no feed lots, no mobile homes, no junkyards, no cars on blocks, and they hand wrote in number 10, no chicken houses. Okay, those are the restrictions that was placed on the property at sale when the lots was sold. I've got a plot of all the different lots. With that being said, the zoning is in place for a reason and the parcel farm was sold with specific restrictions. The request has been denied once already. Whatever the reasons that we are back here again, nothing has changed within the zone. No duplexes are allowed in the zone. There are currently three duplexes on the property with two of them already on foundation which were permitted as single family dwell which means they are going to convert them to a single family. A true single family residence on a property is bound by restrictive covenants to be a minimum of 1450 square ft.

If this body agrees to allow the variance that I totally believe it shouldn't, then the duplexes would have to be 2900 livable square feet equally divided. By no means do I feel that this should be an excuse to allow duplexes when zoning when the zoning doesn't allow it. What is the point of the restrictions in the deed? my question. They're there. They're in the deep. It's part of the deal. Currently, the road surface on Shipley Road at the intersection of Old Seminary Hill Road narrows down considerably to 15 ft and even 12 feet at the drain cul that was mentioned. Whenever current residents, property owners, and other visitors meet during the travels throughout the day, someone is forced to move off to the side or stop and let somebody else travel because the road does not permit two vehicles. Unless you have to be one of the neighbors that don't give a rat. He just drives right over anyway. So further on down some here road right there at the corner. I don't know where y'all got. Anyway, right there at the corner the road even narrows down even even more right here. Okay, this right here is already not passing. I have trucks come in and out of my my business every day.

However, I did buy that property quite some time ago. It is grandfathered in my part of it being the commercial part. I bought the other I screwed up when I didn't buy the whole farm period. It's still my fault because it was offered to me before everything was done and I don't mind. Now again, I'm going to reiterate that the type of housing being promoted is simply not in line with the current housing that we have around. Travis got I don't know three or $400,000 house. Uh Brad, they've got a their house. Other neighbors has got considerable, I don't know, 1,800 square feet, whatever. The houses in your uh in the deal of covenant, it specifies no duplexes. Does not say no duplexes. It specifies all houses must have a minimum of,450 square feet. How big are these? I have no idea. I mean, hell, I had a dove shoot. Somebody got on the property, raised all kinds of like 16. I'm not going to try to get on anyway. which I own. I own 20 acres out there. I don't want to put new duplexes in. Go ahead and let me

understand. Thank you. I'd like to know those three structures that are already there. If if you would please come up and All right. That way we can understand. Okay. And state your name, please. Carl Anderson. Carl Anderson. Yes. Okay. Uh question. Uh if you have those three houses in place, isn't there a required separation between them? Each one of those, they got to be 50 ft off the property lines, those blue lines. Is that correct? I believe it is. So, they'd have to be at least in a Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. In a C1, they're not in a uh they're not in A1 RS1. They're in RS1. So, they're zoned separate. And Mr. Mayor, do you have that deal? The district on it is RS1, isn't it? 25 ft. Yes. Uh setbacks. Yes. and a RS1. That whole area is zoned for an RS1. It's not a A1 agricultural. Even though it is agricultural area, it is zoned for an RS1. The whole area is if you change the zoning that changes the setback. Yeah. Yes. To 25. It it we're not changing the zoning today. It is already zoned in RS1. Okay. So to my understanding it's 25 25 in a RS1. So they have to be 50 ft apart. Yes sir. 50 25 foot from the property line of that lot. Oh yes. But I'm just saying so but that there would be no way there

would be no way for any of them to be closer than ft. Yes sir. To my understanding that's the way the uh RS I I' argue but I don't know because I haven't been out there with the be questionable as they are. Okay. Well, that would be up to our uh zoning. That would be up to our zoning uh individual. He's a sheriff's deputy. I think that is his job. Okay. But I mean, I'm not telling you not to, but that that Okay. Okay. And I understand that. Okay. Anything else? No, that's it. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else would like to speak on this? Okay. My name is Darren Gatkin. I reside at 1318 Old Seminary Road in Manchester and I'm the only property that shares a property line with the proposed duplexes. First off, I'd like to clarify the road collapsing that was uh that was stated by Mr. Reid earlier. Um that has been already addressed months ago um with the highway department uh with Jojo Dobson. Um and that was due to Mr. Reed digging out the tile there because he didn't like the uh the appearance of his property line. Um now I'll continue on. I know many of you here tonight by Mr. Mark that. I know many of you here tonight um that I have met throughout the 18 years that I worked in law enforcement in this county. That being said, I've dealt with just about every situation known to the profession, including hundreds of neighbor disputes. Most of those calls I ended up asking complainant, "Do you want anyone else telling you what you can do on your own property? So, why are you concerned with what they're doing on theirs?" After the last hearing where people came together

to bash my in-laws over what they wanted to do on land that they purchased, uh, they pay taxes on and by all means should be able to do as they please on. One neighbor in particular has tried to make things personal and started to harass our family. Excuse me. We've been documenting harassment for months now. We have had sheriff's deputies called to our property on multiple occasions uh with unfounded calls. All originated from the same origin. The extremely funny thing about the situation, uh, the person complaining has already had contact with the codes department about running his business from a county residential property and can continues to do th so to this day. Um, with multiple pieces of commercial equipment in and out daily. Knowing the previous violation, I could have called codes that individual issues. Um, we have not for the simple matter that we don't care. Um, I didn't buy that land and I don't pay his property taxes. Previous complaintants mentioned the au the added traffic and wear on Old Seminary roadway. Old seminary sees multiple 18 wheelers daily plus the 18 8 to 10 employees um that are back and forth to Wolfpack Industries um and not to mention the residences at the end of Seminary Hill. None of them continue straight to where these new residences are on the portion of the road that has almost no traffic. Now, I'm not an asphalt expert, but I can assure you that loaded 18 wheelers run 60 mph down a county road are more dangerous and much heavier than six cars that could possibly be uh at the U duplexes. Where safety concerns, road damage, that needs to be addressed. At the end of the day, the only duplexes, the only ones the duplexes will affect is me and my family. I'm the only residents that are close to. I'm the only resident that will share a property line and the only residents will have to deal with the extra noise. I didn't purchase the land. I didn't pay taxes on it. Therefore, it's none of my business what they do. The Swans are a very tight-knit family. Any of you think they would allow anyone that could remotely be a problem um or, you know, have someone there that might eat their the neighbors dogs and cats? Uh especially

next to my home where their grandkids live is sadly mistaken. Seeing that the sheriff's office and codes have been called out multiple times, anyone that wants to complain about anything ongoing at either my location or the Swans property, get out your checkbook. If you can add enough zeros to that check without it bouncing, um you can very easily control what's going on there. Thank you. Hello. Brenda 81. If you would spell your name for Mr. He's got to keep up a record with it. Pet Paul. Oh. E T I T J E A N. Got you. Thank you. Thanks for all this. So bear with me. Okay. We live on 81 Chipley Road. I was actually in the auction. I actually been on that track and I bought it. We have built this six years ago. Everything was nice and quiet and peaceful. That's all I ever wanted. I was from a big area and it just seems I got caught up in that traffic twice. I seen that poor guy that was pulling the trailers hit me in boxes. That's how wide these things were. I'm like, I'm going down Brandon Town and I made my way back. I don't like conflict. I don't like confrontation. However, people got to calm down and work together. Um, Mr. G, I can't say your name. I just want to get along. But on the other hand, I've had experience with rentals. I've had experience with duplexes. You do you do

see cars on blocks. You do see things. This is a very narrow road. I just want it to be a single family house if at all possible. Um I think single family houses would be better for the neighborhood if we had them. Um and everybody came at all. Do you agree? Does anybody would you guys want to duplexes at your houses or your housing areas or you see what I'm saying? Because we've worked very hard to build what we have. Everybody in this room has just because of something very simple that could be very easily fixed. That's all I got to say. All right. Thank you. Thanks, Brenda. Okay. Hello. What is your name? My name is Vera Lance. We I'm married to Danny Lance and we were the ones that sold the property. Okay. Uh it was family land. We're the ones that remained out there. So, we wanted restrictions put on there. so that we could protect us in our neighborhood to keep I'm not a person that talks and speaks publicly. Where is it you live, Brenda? Ver I live at 137 Shipley Road and it was 110 acres that we divided off to auction. You know, like I said, we were the ones that lived out there and uh we just wanted to I mean I I do think that people should be able to do things on their property, but If you're going to do duplexes, go to a place that allows it. We have restrictions put to protect our neighborhood and to keep it. Um, I'm Jim Parson's daughter-in-law. So, uh, and we spent a lot of time out there. Uh, so it was a hard decision to actually cut it up and sell it. But, um, we've gotten

some great neighbors. We, uh, there's some really good folks that's moved in out there and just why why do you have restrictions? Why do you go through those steps if people can just do what they want to and then come back and try to get it allowed to be done? Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? My name is Mike Kenned, the husband to the little short girl that's come up here. Mike Pitt. Mike. Yeah. Spelled the same, unfortunately. Yes, sir. Anyway, uh I don't agree with that at all with you. You might be the neighbor to these projects, but it affects all the values of all our properties out there. We happen to live next to a house that unfortunately uh our neighbor passed away and his daughter took over this property and turned it into a rental. Well, since you're an ex cop, you ought to know this. You probably knew this. This guy's in jail now. property's going to And I've got a property right next to it. And I keep the knife ashore. I wish the county would do something to hold up these things. Anyway, we got a neighbor on the corner that has a freaking junkyard. There's cars that's been sitting there for three or four years. Weeds as tall as the car. There's car parts all over the driveway. Stay on the agenda. But what I'm saying is I'm we've made complaints about that. Nothing ever happened. I understand but let's stay on the agenda if you don't mind. My my value is

if we I I we have this as an investment and if my investment goes down because people don't want to live around apartments that affects my end and I didn't buy this to lose money. I bought this to invest to make money. So you guys can take that as you want. Rentals are not a good thing for anybody in any neighborhood unless you got them in a designated area. Hell, if you're going to allow this, you might as well let somebody put in a trailer park. I understand. Thank you. Thanks, Mike. Any other public comments? Brad. All right, Brand. I figured that was going to be the question you asked. Yes, sir. Sorry. That's quite all right. That's quite quite all right. We'll rehash some of the things that have been said. I'll try to shorten what I've got here. Since everybody has said pretty much the same thing, but back in September 24, uh, the Swans tried to get their land zone duplexes. During the meeting, this committee was given a petition showing that the overwhelming majority did not support the special exemption allowing due places to be moved out. At the end of the meeting, they were obviously denied that. Overwhelmingly, it was a unanimous vote to deny them. And it has not changed tonight, as you can see that the overwhelming majority of people that are here at this meeting still oppose having these duplexes out there. We fast forward nine months to today where they are trying to get an exemption again for the same pieces of land. Nothing's changed with the infrastructure. The road is still what amounts to being a lane and a half wide and no fireflow studies that I know of have been done. The only difference between then and now

is that they went ahead and moved these three duplexes in. This went against the unanimous ruling of this committee and the wishes of their neighbors. What the swans have done is akin to a child taking a cookie after they were told not to and now they are asking for forgiveness. The feelings everyone out here has not changed. The infrastructure has not changed. On June 16th, Manchester Housing Authority approached Manchester Planning Commission with a request to reszone 20 acres to be developed specially for duplexes. gremlings of people not wanting them located. There have already started. That was just a few weeks ago. So, this isn't just about us not wanting duplexes. This is a countywide sent. Everywhere you go where people have moved duplexes in, they will all tell you that they wish they had not been able to move those in. Duplexes belong in the cities where they have proper infrastructure already in place, not down a rural tar and chip single lane road. And I'm not convinced that the swan should have even been given a permit to move these duplexes in under TCA 55-7-205 section 1680-70112. Additional requirements for super heavy or extra overdimensional movements. Paragraph one. Movement of super heavy andor extra overdimensional loads may be permitted provided that the highway can accommodate the move and move is not considered to be detrimental or unsafe for the for the other traveling public. For the purposes of the rule, an extra overdimensional means that the width of

the vehicle and load exceeds 16 ft. I believe blocking and preventing traffic from passing for several hours would be considered detrimental and unsafe for traveling public. Remember old seminary road is one way in one way out. I'll skip that. You know they had they had blocked the traffic. The reason it was being blocked was they had to come in and scab a bunch of stuff together to span that cover and they had equipment out there. So there was nobody able to be able to pass while they were out there on it. They did not have per the code people in orange waving around traffic in front or behind of this load while it was setting in this area. By allowing the duplexes to stay on the property, the Swans have in fact created a major subdivision. Just recently, the county decided that any developer building five or more residences constitutes a major subdivision and is mandated to increase the waterline size to 6 in back to another 6 in line. The current waterline size on Old Seminary Road is believed to be 4 in. I contacted the water department to ask for sure. I have not gotten anything back from them. I realize that was for A1, but this should also apply to other rural areas of the county where proper infrastructure is lacking. The swans are trying to change the restrictions, and this change is not for the betterment of the area. The buildings were moved in and are not representative of the homes and simply do not belong because there are no other duplexes in the area. When the swans started this, they gave zero consideration to the effect or on the effect to the area and how it would negatively impact

their neighbors. That statement reigns as true today as it did nine months ago. This has created rifts and tension between neighbors that did not exist before. As we've seen here tonight, the only way to put an end to this is to remove the duplexes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone else that has public comments has anything new to say that has not been said? The only thing I want to say is that I remember Tim Morris. Yes, sir. He was very adamant about the busing in the previous meetings. He he even made the comment that he didn't want the bus to go down hill. So your semiis and it was We have to take that Morris Morris is not here. I know that. So I just remember in the uh in the meeting what was said as far as that along with also emergency vehicles. So what I have here is uh Tim has visited the site and he has confirmed that as long as a 30foot drive is put in place which has been granted by the swans and they are are you know have agreed to accommodating that Tim is good with it. Okay or it suffices his it suffices his needs. I should say that was that was a letter submitted to us and signed by Tim Morris in his absence and he is in on vacation. Um a planned vacation. So no one else has anything new to say other than what has not been said. Would someone uh with the swans would like to present this

application for a special exemption. My name is Cheryl Swan. All right, Cheryl. C R Y S S H No, C H E R Y L S W A N. We apologize for not getting these to Cindy to the meeting. But my husband is out of town, so I apologize that he cannot be here because he's dealt with this mainly, not myself. I did email the picture the what they would look like if you guys do grant us this. Um, this was um obviously done with an AI program. We took a picture of the duplexes, which I see they my neighbors happily provided to you. So, we took a picture of one of them and then it the program and said, "We would like to put, you know, white vinyl siding, black roof, black shutters, black door, and that's the picture that we presented to you because that's how we like for these to ultimately look. We um take pride in our property. We have other rental properties and I'd be happy to provide my neighbors with those addresses to where they can go by and look at those to see that they are very wellmaintained. It is my understanding that this board cannot make a decision based on our deed restrictions. So I would ask you to strike the comments made by my neighbor. I would like to clarify also that there is 102 ft. That's the smallest distance between the three duplexes. It just goes beyond that from the property line right here.

I know this is a drawing. Yeah. But this driveway goes to this duplex and you have we have a 50 foot easement there to this duplex. Were you guys provided with the flat that was approved by both the county and the city previously? No, we are not. I brought a copy of that. I'll be happy for you guys to look at it. It's 4.31 acres that was taken out of our total acreage. Okay, the same thing we got on the screen there. Yeah, the link shows the back lot's called a flag lot driveway down the center. We also have 50 here to the side. We have additional acres behind my son-in-law's house that driveway to that. We actually reside at the very dead end at the black roof that you see. Um, there was a very good point that my son-in-law made. I can't go on without saying there's two people in this room that's known my husband's family for a very, very long time. They know what kind of man he is. And they have to know and believe without a doubt in their mind and heart that we would never bring any type of furniture out there that would do any harm to any child on that street. My own grandkids live there. Like I say, we've had rental property for 14 years. We have a very indepth lease agreement that I would be happy to every one of you. It does not allow for junk cars, cars on blocks, doesn't allow for an a vehicle that is not in operation.

We do a general background check on everyone. We also make them provide us if they have a cat or dog or any kind that they have proof of vaccines. We make them provide us with proof of income to make sure that they can afford that home because we don't want a revolving door in any of our rental property. I could go back and probably the person that's lived in one of ours the shortest period of time is about two and a half years and everybody else has been in our units a lot longer. I'll be happy to answer any questions that you guys might have for me. Carol, just to comment, there is definitely a need. There is a place and a desire for duplexes. Yes, sir. I have some family members that live in duplexes and that allow them to live a little cheaper. Yes. Than what they would and therefore they can save for a future home and other things. And for that reason, it works out good. And I don't know of any problems that either of them have with their neighbors. Uh that's just a comment. Yes, sir. Were you anywhere you or your your family anywhere along the line? Were you aware of this covenant that was initially put in place by the Parsons? The deed restrictions? Yes. Yes, sir. That is in my deed to my property. Yes, sir. I am aware of it. doesn't say anything about a single family home. It just says that a house or home, I'm sure they provided that to you. About the restrictions of the square footage under roof, this is a 24 by 72 unit. So, if you add that together, it's a little over 1700 square feet.

So, so it does meet the date restrictions that I don't again I don't think that that can be considered in BCA. Yeah, that that would be a civil um I had another real good question. Cheryl, is this in the the urban growth boundary? Yes, we are in the UGP. Okay. And this this 30th that was uh discussed by my husband and Tim and again I apologize that Larry is not here to tell you that whole conversation but in addition to that once we knew what we would be required to have in order to provide for a bus to come down there we then went to back to Benton Bartlett even after he had signed off on our original plat and he said yes without a doubt that would work. Cheryl from from these I don't know which one but from some comments that we've been shared with us tonight u I think I heard right that your request was denied by the planning commission for yes for egress and ingress from the ba from the BA not planning commission yeah the planning commission approved for us to move the units to our property And that's quite a process. These came from Murphy'sboro, so it took days to get them here. They've been behind much. And the reason why I guess I have to explain everything, but the reason why they were the home mover almost died. He was in the hospital for weeks. The home mover, the one who moved those to our property. So there was a huge delay in getting them there.

Okay, let me just verify a couple of things. So, I want to verify four things. So, they essentially preserve the look of the single family home. They're not going to get any larger looking like apartments from which you've presented. That is correct. So, uh the burden for the road and the driveway has been addressed as well. Yes, ma'am. And then the lots and setbacks, you've got 100 feet in between them which meet our criteria. Yes. Okay. How do you handle the BCA has the right to Yeah. as an exception for duplex? Yes, it is an exception for a duplex, but that is a civil matter from the previous land owners and the new land owners and we don't take care of civil matters. I mean, we're we're zoned. You're zoned RS1 and RS1 is an accept duplexes are acceptable in RS1 if they come to the BZA and get permission. That's what we have to make. That's the decision that has to be made here. Miss who? Oh yes. Yes. I reserve a 50 foot on my property to access my property in the rear. I have no desire to bring any more duplexes. And to answer your question, the whole reason why these duplexes came into my lap and it was sent from God if we want to go there. My father passed away in May of last year and my mother doesn't

want to live in her by herself any longer. And I got a call from Rude Morgan when I was desperately trying to find a way to get my mother to my property. And he said, "I've got three duplexes." I said, "This could be the answer to my prayers." A high density rental area is 20 units or more. I'm sure you'll be a great landlord. I'm not questioning that. My only and last comment will be the future. We're all we're all going to pass away one day. We're all not going to be here. So, why are you asking that question? The the request is only for these three lots. It is not for the whole property. I can say that. My is one day these are all going to be sold by somebody else who might not be the best. I'm not going anywhere. So they're not going anywhere. Okay. September. There's tractor trailer coming down the road. [Music] Special exception. I just follow a lot. That's our neighbors.

Any other Mr. L still reading? You're You're still reading. Go ahead. I'm I was there today. I had a salad. I saw you. I saw you. I didn't even pay attention. I was hard at it. I know. So, it's in the district. Yeah, it takes some time to digest it. I just noticed I was at that meeting and that's why it was first a motion to approve and then a motion to disapprove. Yes. Yes. And it was in those minutes. We were stand

I've got a mess. Air conditioning would be nice, too. I didn't mention that the flat was already we have our septic permits and everything. So So it's already been divided and mayor remembers that it was subdivided and approved for the subdivision, but I think you were correct in saying that it still was one parcel because that had not gone through Alyssa's office yet. So now it is That's why you pay for 37. Okay. I think is anyone have any other questions for Cheryl at the table? Mr. L. Are you ready to entertain a motion, Mr. Yes. Make a motion to approve. Motion been approved by or made by Anna. Second. seconded by summer. Without any other further comment, proceed to vote. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. I. One opposed. Four.

It passes. Moving on to down the agenda. Anything else on the other? You know, it's a sad day when a group of unelected people can make decisions like this. There's no recourse against any of you being voted out. this very thing. That's sad. Thank you. Anything else needs to let the room clear out the meeting dates, which generally this board meets as needed, but I feel like they're going to be needed quite a bit. You know, I feel like the uh I feel like the five acre minimum parcel in our A1 districts, I'm pretty sure the BZA is going to be asked. If you don't mind, hey, how we're still trying to if you don't mind, step outside. I apologize. We're still trying to conduct the meeting. the minor subdivision variance that was included in the zoning resolution amendment is probably going to fall to the board of zoning appeals. There you go. Yeah. Minimum lot size minimum lot size is a function of the zoning resolution.

So if to change anything by variance in the zoning resolution comes here. There are certain criteria of our subdivision regulations that will uh fall to the planning commission only. So that's just something to keep in mind that you're probably you guys are probably going to be asked to uh somebody's going to have eight acres and they want to cut off two for uh to sell or to give to their kid or whatever. I'm pretty sure it's going to come here. When do you think this might start, Dennis? Quickly. Very soon. A lot. Your very next meeting is going to be next month. Will probably have a bunch on it. It's going to be very hard to get people to understand between a motion and regulation, too, I think. Oh, yeah. It is. It's that's part of it. There was some there was a a constituent gave me a call regarding a property out on Freedom Road that he had purchased. I think it's seven or eight acres and he had planned on cutting it into three parcels and uh I told him he had a pathway had about two pathways either make his parcels bigger. I think he had enough to make two fives. I really did. Or have it reszoned just like that individual that's walking out. It's sad that a bunch of unelected individuals well the the way our major subdivisions were approved by the planning commission uh because we had we have one lot size all across the board. It just we did not differentiate between A1, C1, RS1. Everybody had the same lot size. It just sort of defeated the purpose of having disperate zoning

districts. So we addressed that. So the A1 district is now five acres is the minimum parcel size. And what the beauty of that thing is the state law u any parcel 5 acres or larger requires no permission from anybody. You can have uh you can go down a road a mile long as long as you're going 50 foot you can go side by side beside it endlessly with five acre lots without asking permission. Now, if you have to build a interior street that becomes a major subdivision, even if it's two parcels, if it requires a new street, then it becomes a major subdivision by by stipulation of that new street, even if it's just two or three parcels. So anyway, having said that, the individuals that want to go to the smaller lot sizes have two pathways right now. Coming here and ask for a variance to the lot size requirements in the zoning resolution or go before the planning commission and ask to be reszoned to say C1 or the RS1 that does allow smaller parcels. then the planning commission gives it a thumbs up or a thumbs down. If it's a thumbs up, either way, if it a thumbs down, the the applicant can actually go forward to the full legislative body to overturn the thumbs down that was given to their request by the planning commission. That way your elected officials do have a voice and that's that is uh the reason you guys are five unelected and there's there's titles for each one of you know there's a farmer uh you're um summer is the

associate now right summer? Yes. You're the associate. very important to have the associate member because it would have been just four individuals here making a decision with the absence were it not for her being the associate. So it gave five full members and you are supposed to have no favors. You don't owe anybody nothing because they voted for you and all that. You're an independent thinker making decisions based on the information on this table and nothing else. So, that's that's what I wanted for you to guys to be thinking about. You're going to be asked to uh create minor subdivisions by variance and uh and that's only going to be one or two parcels. You know, that's what I think. I don't there might be somebody come in here with six acres and say, I want three two acre parcels. That might happen. Who knows? I'm going to suggest that those Robertson County has done this and been dealing with it for quite some time and they it seems to me that most pe most of the uh the activity in Robertson County is people are asking to be reszoned that way. The planning commission and the full legislative body does it every time. And it it's a two-step process, but it it can happen pretty easily. And I don't know that any of them's really getting turned down up there, but something to study. You know, you can if you can get Yeah. This one. Uhhuh. He's with the newspaper. The newspaper. Oh, all right. We can He's going to sit there till we adjourn. So, I'm ready for it, guys. Oh. Okay.

Somebody any other business of what happened on each issue at that time. Okay. All right. We'll get them stamped. Stamp should be right behind you. Stamp. Don't we have to stamp them? The what? The minutes. Yes. Yes. The ones that were just approved. Yes. Where's the st? Are you stamping them? All right. Wow, what a job. Are we entertaining motions now? We are entertaining a motion to adjourn and animate it. I'll second. Is seconded. I'll approve. Say I turn you back.