Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

as we continue to serve to make the best decisions that we can make. We give you all the glory, honor, and praise in Jesus name we pray. Amen. Amen. Uh are our visitors at this time all signed in? Okay, that's good. Do any of our visitors wish to address the commission this evening? No, sir. Okay, then we'll dispense with that uh and go on to the approval of the minutes. And I know we resubmitted the October minutes and I've still got a problem with them because my name's still spelled wrong in the first paragraph. But if nobody else has a problem with that, I'm going to say they're approved and we're going to go on. Mr. Chair, yes. Roll call, please.

Oh, hey, we do need a roll call. Mr. Trace if you would. Todd Perry here. Tina Ferry here. Sharon Green here. Todd Lindsy here. Robert Wall here. Tommy Brown here. Jeff Chase here. Randy Rainey here. Paul here. Amanda Barry here. Patrick here. Mitchell, Mr. Chair, thank you for that, Mr. Tra. Uh, again, the only the only mistake I saw left over in the October minutes was my naming.

I changed it. Well, somehow I didn't I didn't see the other stuff that I thought was a rainy. That was not a Okay. All right. Okay. Well, well, let let's go on and let's have discussion though if we if we if anyone has any about the minutes of the November meeting. Uh the minutes of the November meeting are now the on the October 9th or what's it? If they don't have the corrected version, let's bump that to January. And so we'll only take out the November.

All right, let's do it. Okay. Does anyone have any additions, corrections, or questions about the minutes of the November meeting that you raw sent in your packet? Because if you don't, I'm going to move I'm going to ask for someone to move that they be approved as submitted. Mr. Brown moves for approval. Is there a second? I'll second. Okay. Amanda Barry seconds. It's been moved and duly seconded that the minutes of the November meeting be approved. Those in favor of doing so say I. I.

Any oppose say no. The opinion of the chair, the eyes have it. And the next item on the agenda is, let me turn my page. It is the uh preliminary plat of phase three of the Park Forest subdivision. Tax map 136, parcels 08.00, 08.01, 01 and 08.02 of combined acres of 74.50 on Tidwell Switch Road, Dixon, Tennessee, zoned A1 agriculture in the seventh district. Mr. Hayes,

this was surveyed by the creating 45 to be phase three. Now, I think everyone's seen the exhibits about this. Does anyone have any questions about the exhibits as they were submitted? Any questions about what? I'm sorry. About the uh about You've got a aerial photographic map of uh of item one, the third phase of Park Subdivision. So, do you have any questions or comments about that? I do.

All right. Please go ahead, sir. Um, I may have missed a meeting when this was orig There's some building going on already and hopefully I'm looking at the right property. I thought I was I there was a dictional the building is in phase one and phase two that's already been passed and the roads built and all of that. This is phase three. It's an adjoining piece of property to what what you see in existence out there now.

Okay. Well, I must have missed one and two. I cannot believe that. Um my only question is has there been a traffic study done on this entire thing or on phase three separately? No, there is not.

Okay. The reason I ask is um this particular development I thought it was larger than that but 45 new new uh lots. Is that correct on phase three? Okay. For that's uh 45 people maybe 90 people could be 150 people at least 45 vehicles maybe 90 100 120 vehicles. That road is a small two-lane windy road and at the road on each side of the development where they are currently building has line of sight that's very very short and I'm really concerned with traffic on that road especially when a lot of semis start coming in uh for building construction. I am all for development, but this um is going to add so much congestion to that area with the new hospital, the QT truck stop that's already there, um trucks coming in out of the uh the big warehouse that's there at the end of the of uh Turkey Creek. So, I'm I'm I'm surprised actually um that there hasn't been a traffic study. I guess I don't know if it's required. Maybe somebody could school me on that. But the road and my navigation told me the speed limit's 30 m an hour on that road. Nobody was going under 45 or 50 on that road. And with 150 new vehicles coming in in and out of just this subdivision, I'm surprised that those are my objections. I'm not 100% in uh in gear for voting and approving this. Does any other member have any uh further uh discussion about phase three of Park Forest? Mr. Chase, I think your concerns are

valid, but you know, there's objective triggers for a traffic survey and a traffic study, and this didn't hit any of those, but I I understand and share a lot of your concern, but I don't know if this is really the time that we can do much about that other than just vote the vote if we approve or not of this preliminary plat, But I think your your concerns I'm glad they've been stated for the record. I'll just say that we have a speaker for the preliminary plat. Well, I'm the engineer.

Yes, sir. Consulted by Smith. Thank you, M. I'm going to step back a little further. You had mentioned phase one and two. They were done maybe three three plus or minus years ago. Yeah. Three.

And the owner of the property didn't actively pursue development. Let's put it that way. Um and actually uh when the the the preliminary plan may have even been more than three years ago, it was passed and it nearly expired. It was about to expire when the final plat was approved. And the final plat was done. you remember was it a year or so ago? It's it's been a while. That's so it's it's been several years for phase one and two. Phase one and two in my mind is one phase. It's a total of 35 lots and they are mostly they're 3/4 of them are one acre parcels and then a quarter of them are two two and a half acre parcels. the roads been built. They're building homes. Let's talk about tonight's subject, phase three and four. Um phase three and four are fall under the your new newer rules. They're all one and a half acres or larger. And another subtle difference in your new rules is our length to width ratio used to be a 4:1. the depth could be, you know, four times the width, but now your ratio is 3:1. So these lots, all of these lots meet all the the codes. They're approximately 3:1. Um, there's something else that we can talk about. No, there's So there If you It would I would love to have you all drive through the the phase that's been built, if you will. It's to I I think it's one of the prettiest subdivisions in Dixon. Um pretty very pretty property. Some of

it's wooded, some of it's just open meadow. It's going to be beautiful. And this newer this next phase might even by some people's standards be a little better looking. They're bigger lots. Um we have had a soil scientist has looked at the soils. So, we've already, you know, progressed to that point of looking at the soils and so far we're asking for 45 lots, but when we come back for the final, it may go down. I'm hoping not a whole lot, but it may go down to 43, 42, but that's just how the chips fall sometimes. But it it can't be more than 45. I can assure you that there's not enough real estate there to do that. Um, I live Turkey Creek is in that neighborhood and Tidwell Switch hits Turkey Creek. I live on Turkey Creek, so I'm very familiar with with the area. Um, that property is approximately one mile from the interstate from high ex uh exit 172. Um, I'm trying to think if there's anything else to talk about that, but it's this my wife. I keep looking at her cuz she's the brains behind operation. [laughter] Um, if you were to go out there now with in addition to you get a treat to some pretty Christmas lights at the corner of Tidwell Switch and Turkey Creek Road, but I would love to have you guys look at that. Uh I I am one of the owners as well as the engineer on the project. Um another owner might make his presence known tonight, but there's there's three of us and we're all here in Dixon or the county of Dixon and uh

I've been working here at at my business for too many years. And so we're really dedicated to making this a really nice subdivision. And that's why we're kind of proud. I want you to come out and see it because the first phase is wonderful looking and the second phase we think will even be better. Mr. Smith, I'll ask you a question.

Oh, I didn't even touch on the traffic study. Typically, what we see on traffic studies is uh there's a threshold of a 100 lots and when you hit a 100 lots, you do a traffic study. Ours ours two combined is in the in the whatever 45 plus 35 so it's 80. So we're we're kind of considerably under that threshold. Mr. Smith I will ask a question. It's been a it's been a period of time since I've rode out to Tidle Switch. That's a that is a narrow road is shot and chip a few years back. I think now it's two lane. It's parked now paved. Yeah. Um, not a lot of shoulder on either side. Correct. Is that correct?

You know, I've I've driven it for the last 30 years and I don't remember. Pretty pretty narrow road. Best I remember. Unless they've re-engineered it very recently, there are no shows.

Okay. And and I know where Mr. Chase is going with this. I understand what he's saying. This is a lot of lots and it's very well done. I'll say there's a lot more open land and I know how this is going to go especially with its uh location close to the interstate. I know there's going to keep being more building and more building and more building. There's going to be a point in time here when Tidal Switch will not handle the traffic and I I do see that coming and what type of resolution. How do we you know I'm asking a question here. How do we do this? You know, moving forward as more land sells out there and right, this is 80 lots, but the next one, there's some big parcels of land still left out there.

Yes. How are we going to move forward with another 40, 50 homes on another parcel and then maybe another 40, 50 homes, you pretty quickly exceed right the road. If I'm lucky, I may be that person who comes back at this board. Um, and at that point in time, we would we will cross over that threshold of 100.

And I need to look at one of my partners and see maybe get a nod and a week, but we probably would not mind committing to doing that even before we showed up. Maybe not. That just reminds me of a comment by the late Jack Warner that a verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on. But uh yeah, as long as it's you, I'm sure you will try to do this responsibly. But we kind of have to take in care of the folks that are going to be here when we're not. And I I think these concerns are valid, very valid. And I do agree with as much nice land as remains on down that road, something's going to happen to it at some point. And and I I don't mean 50 years from now. I mean in the fairly immediate future, the next 10 or 12 years, a lot's going to happen. But I mean, we can't really put that on him right now. But I'm glad that everybody sees where this is headed. Just like I'm glad that he knows that with 45 lots in this part of middle Tennessee, they're not all 45 going to perk. We all know that, too. And I don't think the sewers are running out there anytime soon. But, uh, does anybody else have any uh comments, questions or concerns about this item, which is and is I know you referred to three and four. This is just three we're discussing tonight, sir.

Right. Oh, just three. Okay. So okay we when we come back for the final we'll probably come back it might be phase the final might be broken split into four and four a three and a four but this it won't be the three and four combined will equal this but we might break it into a a a small portion and in a a phase So, Mr. Chairman, if I may just please council. Um, so this is a preliminary plat. It's a vesting document.

That that was going to be my point. Owner of the plat to develop under the laws that exist at the time. You know, they apply and get vested under um to traffic. I want to point out that the county has adopted a traffic impact study guideline and there are a few triggers for a traffic impact study. Uh one of them is any subdivision in excess of 50 lots. This is 45. So that's why the county did not require them to do a traffic impact study is they do not have the requisite number. There's a number of other triggers but they don't apply here. Number of square feet. Um

is there anything about aggregate? I mean, if we go down one road and we have five 40 to 45 acre or 40 45 lot acre and a half lots down that road, we're not going to ever trigger it, but we're going to have a big problem. Mr. Chairman, that's a good point. But we have to look at things based upon the preliminary plan saying this is the area to be developed.

And I think what Mr. Smith was saying is that when he comes back, if it's the will of this body to approve the preliminary plat, he will not come back with a final platform for all 45 lots. He's going to phase them out and do maybe 20 or 30 and then the rest, whatever they choose for their phasing. Is that right? or or we might come back with well I mean the only reason we might come back with a phase is to allow us to sell some quicker but we we may come back in the same night in fact we're not opposed to coming back in the same night with both phases so but it but it's it's not a big deal if we do you know multiple phases

there's there's one sense in which Mr. Smith, I would differ and say there is the construction traffic for one 45 lot subdivision is not completely analogous to developing 20 lots and then developing 25 lots after those 20 are developed. That that's my concern is is very much what Mr. Barry was saying I think what uh Mr. Chase was saying that much construction traffic on that little road that's already got considerable development down it now that that could become quite problematic. That that I think that's the concern of everybody on this body because again there's nobody here that's trying to stop development doesn't want people to live in our county. That's not what it is. But the traffic concern is a legitimate concern.

I have something. Yes, ma'am. Go ahead, Mr. It may be a Mr. Mill's question, but um because it's broken into phases, I mean obviously it exceeds the 50 lot for the traffic study, but so they can actually get by with this by splitting it into phases even though the total development exceeds the amount of lots. So the way we have to look at this and it's a valid question, but our rags don't speak to this. We look at the preliminary plan, you know, so it's common to see really large subdivisions that are, let's just say, 500 lots. Someone has to come in with a preliminary plat for the whole thing. And they may break it up into 10 different phases, but that's what you look at for the triggers as written.

Years ago, they did a preliminary plat a final plat on a different section. Now, it's going to be connected at some point, but that's the nature of development to an extent. You could have an old subdivision that's there 20, 30 years and someone comes in

next door and maybe they're connecting in to a stubout on the road in that old existing subdivision. You don't you're not it's not triggering for that because that traffic already exists. You know, if they were to have to do a traffic study, the other existing homes are going to already be in what's called the background of what's already happening there. So, you don't double up that way. I mean, I know it sounds like, aren't they just peacemealing it to stay under 50? The way it's written is we look at the preliminary plat to see what is here. Uh, how many lots are you doing? Once you hit 50, you have to do a traffic impact study.

If it's a commercial development, once you're doing 25,000 ft or more, you have to do a traffic impact study. If it's a pud, which we don't see very often, you have to do a traffic impact study. If it's a major subdivision that's on a state highway that has a speed limit over 30 miles an hour, they have to do a traffic impact study. None of the triggers were here. Now, we need to relook back at these triggers and we can have further conversations about that. I think it's worth a discussion, but we have to look at the laws that exist and you know, I've not been made aware of any deficiency in this preliminary plan. And if it's the will of this body to deny it, you have to state

for the record where in the subdivision regulations you believe they have failed. and counselor as we've already stated the developer has and I believe you have too phase one and phase two they're there and they exist and they're mostly built out and they were under a previous regulatory regime that we're not under anymore but we can't go back and impose any aspect of that new one to those old pre-existing uh de lots as they're developed. So I I mean I'm I'm willing to discuss this however long we feel we need to discuss it but I I you know other than I think all the like again I'm happy these concerns were expressed. I'm happy to have them on the record but unless somebody has something else I would say the chair would entertain a motion to approve the plenary proud of phase three of part subdivision.

Mr. One more thing. Additionally, what I'm um I am pro-development. Um when I was in Arizona, I was an Arizona real estate broker and we did some development. I am in I am definitely in favor of development. I am really in favor of smart development instead of making money, giving people a development that works with what is where you're trying to build. And here I just want to make sure that everybody I'm sure is aware that the gas storage facility was under a previous long-term zoning thing. Couldn't do anything about it. And that's creeping now what I feel unfortunately into this because we're not looking at what can happen down the road. We're looking at only where like counselor mentioned the triggers are right now. And I think in my mind, in my heart, I have to look at what's going forward and where we're going to be. Like Miss Barry said, can you do 10 here, 10 here, 10 here? And all of a sudden, you got 3,000 houses because people have skipped underneath this. And I think it's time to, as Barney used to say, nip it in the bud.

Thank you for your comments, Mr. Ch. I have one more question, which I don't know if it's you, for you. you if it's for Councilman Smith. There's a thing on here. It says proposed mailbox kiosk. Now, we've talked about this before. I don't think the post office is going to start bringing the mail down Mandalorian way, are they? Not from what they they the noises they've been making at least. So, who is going to own that proposed kiosk and who's going to have responsibility for it? The the kiosk will be common ground area for [clears throat] the homeowners association. Okay. All right. So, and the HOA will be able to enforce such dues as are needed. Correct.

Okay. I I I I kind of like like having that on the record, too. All right. I've got a question for you, counselor. I anticipate this not being unanimous. Should I go ahead and ask for a roll call or should I ask for a voice vote? And if it's Well, Mr. Chairman, that's up to you. I mean, you can bypass the voice vote and just do a roll call, but we we don't have a pending motion yet. Okay. Yeah. No, no one's moved to do anything yet. That's correct. But yes, you can call. Does anybody have any problem with this that we need to address before we put it to a vote? Mr. Chairman, I'll say one more thing.

Yes, sir. I again I think this a very nice development and my concern I'll make sure my concerns are understood. I'm looking at future just like some of the other folks are. I'm just thinking about future and I'm not saying that we need to fail this one what pass it whatever. I'm not I'm not leading anybody to any direction here. just simply think we as a body have to look at the future at some point here and talk about these smaller roads. This is an area that's going to be developed. It is and and it is a it's a good area to develop. Um and I think they are on to something good here. We just need to think moving forward as we get through this one

we need to start looking at at some of this and thinking about how to handle this in the future. I I I agree with that and uh I'm I'm totally in sympathy with what you're saying. It's just we can't do this to him right now. But you're you're correct and I think at some point we need to probably form a subcommittee or something to study. And the main thing I'm always advocating is let's see what's already working other places that we sort of admire and see what they're doing and then emulate it with exemptions and changes for Dixon County. Not just blindly copy somebody, but do what they're doing that works. That having been said, is there a motion for the approval of preliminary plan of phase 3 part 4 subdivision? Mr. Chairman, I'll make the motion to approve.

All right. Mr. Patrick Reagan is moved for approval. Is there a second? Mr. Todd Lindsay seconds it again. I think we might as well go with a roll call vote. So, uh, if you would, Mr. Hayes, could you go ahead and call the role? And the motion is on approval of the plary hat of phase three of Park Forest Subdivision. Todd Barry. [clears throat] Yes. Tina Ferris. Yes. Darren Green. We're going to have to abstain from this. Can Can you state your reason for that for the record, Mr. Me and Trent working together on this project? Then then that's perfectly valid reason. Thank you, sir. Todd Lindsay, yes.

Robert Quz, yes. Tommy Brown, yes. Jeff Chase, no. Randy Ramy, yes. Paul Oregon. Yes. Amanda Barry, yes. Patrick Reagan, yes. Do you have a vote of 9 to1, Mr. Hayes? Like I do.

Okay. The motion is approved. And we will now move on to item two on the agenda, which is the preliminary plat of the overhalt subdivision, tax map 091, parcel 037.00 00 21.5 acres at 921 Yellow Creek Road, Dixon, Tennessee in A1 Agriculture, 9inth District. This was also surveyed by Aaylor and Associates creating seven new lots on Yellow Creek Road. And Mr. Chairman, I just want to point out this is a sketch plat. It was on the agenda as a preliminary.

I'm glad you addressed that. So, just, you know, I've seen a ton of these, but for a major subdivision, the first thing you're supposed to do uh is a sketch plat like this, and then you move to a preliminary plat, and then you move to a final plan. This does not require a vote. This is just informational uh on what they're doing. You have thoughts uh give them time before they put the money and resources into a preliminary plan uh to kind of get your thinking. So it's really for the body to provide comment on again

and and no development rights appertain to this sketch plat there's nothing vested that we would by looking at it whereas we just created from Mr. Smith a vested right to develop uh phase three of park forest. So with that in mind uh let's have the discussion. Does anybody see things they like about this? Things they don't like? Things that you just if it's got to change or or I'll not be for it because again, this is anformational item as counselors explained. So, we don't have to take action on it. And it's just that hey, it's it's on record that y'all are aware that this sketch plat has been submitted. And really, that's about it, isn't it? We're all aware of it. None of us are having a major heartburn about it sitting here.

Okay. It's a little unusual to have two 50 foot wide easements on there. We talked about that before the meeting, but that's permitted, you know, under Dixon County regulations uh for subdivisions. You can only have one lot served by an easement to the public road. Once you go to two, you have to bring that easement up to county road standards. So there's a reason they're only doing uh one ement for these two almost 5 acre lots. They can stay gravel or church. Yeah, they sure can.

Um but you've got your smaller I mean this is all A1, but you've got your smaller 1.5ish locks on the front. Uh so it's a little unusual looking, but it just at at first flush when we were looking at it, uh there's nothing glaring that's in violation of the sub resolution, right? Subdivision regulations, but obviously general commentary is warranted at this stage.

I appreciate those remarks, counselor. That concludes the agenda items for tonight, but does anyone have anything else that they would like to bring up or that we need to suspend the rules to address because I'm open to doing that if somebody needs to, but I'm not going to keep us sitting here all night if nobody needs to do that. Mr. Carl, I'm going to point out one thing on this. Yes, sir. As I look at that, it's a large wooded area in the back. Okay. Let's

And we've seen in the past, we've seen some lots and and there's there's This will pass as it is. As I see this, this will pass. But my concern always is that we have those large wooded areas in the back and that's not prime land that someone may choose not to buy. We don't want to ever see that happen and then the taxes stop being paid on it and it just falls into sheets to the county and the county owns this land. It's not very useful. Yes. It isn't drawing any revenue. And like I said, this this is this is acceptable. Yes.

The way we do it, but it's always that's always a concern of mine.

Well, we we start we we've addressed that concern, I think, several times in the last 5 years. Now, here's where let's just let's take a little bit of time because we've talked about this. Do we want to form a subcommittee task force or something to address just what we addressed here when we were discussing Park Forest, which is something that will keep people or just just prevent a bunch of little 40 lot subdivisions one after the other down a county road and say, "Well, you know, the regulations don't address that, so there doesn't have to be a traffic study. It doesn't have to be this, doesn't have to be that." Is anybody interested in pursuing that? Which when when we the last time we did a big change, a few of us, I know I was one of them, called up several counties in adjoined state that were about the size of Dixon County, about the same distance from their principal city that we are from Nashville. And we asked them, how do you all handle this thing? And is somebody interested in doing that? because we I I'd be happy for somebody to volunteer to do that and to form a subcommittee of three of us or so or three of y'all and and go and look at this thing before before it gets way way out of hand.

I would Mr.

be interested in serving on one. I don't want to be in charge, but I will be a foot soldier for doing whatever needs to be done. Well, that's all I was doing that time. I think somebody else was over it, but I I did a I did a lot of the calling and it was it was worthwhile activity. I I learned a lot about planning and zoning by talking to a lot of other people. [clears throat] I I I learned [laughter] I learned which other counties I might want to move to if ever had to leave here and which ones I didn't. But [laughter] and that may be all anybody learns out of it, but Okay. Are you are you interested in doing that, Mr. Barry? Would Okay. Well, who would like to serve with Mr. Barry, Mr. Chase on a subcommittee to address the issue of sequential development out long stretches of county? Why don't we I think we we it doesn't need to be all of us. I think three or four people working on this is enough. So, if the three of you all will get together after the meeting here and talk about when when do you want to meet and how much you can do virtually and how much you want to do in person and all of that. I said I all I did with these other counties. I didn't do what I used to do. I didn't drive to all of them. I I called I called the courthouse and I found out who was the right person to talk to. And you know, sometimes you go through two or three people do you get somebody that knows something and then you you make some good context and get some good information. So, Mr. Barry, if y'all will set a time, get together. Is there anything else we need to address in the formal part of this meeting before we wish everybody a merry Christmas and happy new year?

Um, Mr. Chair, sir, you'll probably get an email tomorrow or Monday on your training requirements. Okay. YouTube link has videos for hours. So, please try to watch it when you can. If it goes into January, that's okay. But if you'll email back and let me know that you've done it so we can check you off, that'll be great.

Okay. One other thing I'm going to address again. We're going to be proactive on it. you're all going to get this conflict of interest statement from the state where you've got to say what you're invested in and who you owe money to and who owes you all that stuff that intrusive stuff that they ask every year and I again because that thing I only log into once a year I never remember how to do it and I want to do it on paper again but and a few of the other members might be the same way but I did want to address that that's coming up that's always something to look forward to at New Year's I have something. Yes, ma'am. Oh, you you may not have been through that all before. No, not yet. Oh, it's a real joy in you. You can't wait to do it.

Um I just going back to the subcommittee, whatever. I do not I do not mind helping. I'm not qualified to be over anything, but another thing if you'd like to join with them, I don't think they'll run you off. And and again, you probably know more at this phase of your service than I did when I'd been on this thing the same amount of time you've been. So, you're fine. The only other thing that I would like to address maybe when we're figuring out what other counties are doing is this lot behind the other lots.

If if y'all would delve into that again, that's almost a white elephant in the room that nobody's ever talked about is all this where all the good stuff longer rideway there lays nice and all good people build nice houses then they got this big woods behind them. belongs to nobody. And that's that's not a good situation. That Mr. Perry's right about that. That's a that's a that's a problem. And when it's really a problem is when that land catches fire or there's something going on back in there that nobody can say, "Well, I don't own it. I mean, I think they're doing something back there. I think they're growing something or cooking something, but I'm not back there and it's not my property, so I don't have any right." Yeah. Yeah. We need to address that, too. Let's broaden that subcommittee to do that, too. Well, having said that, does anybody else have any other business that properly becomes for the Dixon County Planning Commission? Hearing none, the chair would entertain a motion to adjourn. Mr. Barry moves to adjourn. We got a second from Mr. Reagan. We're adjourned. So,

those three members of that subcommittee, we got four now. Sure.