Hendersonville Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, welcome. This meeting is officially called to order. Number one on the agenda is the opening prayer. Wendy, will you do that for us, please?

Would you pray with me, please? Heavenly Father, we come to you first with grateful hearts for all the many blessings you bestow upon our community and our city. We thank you for the privilege of gathering here to discuss and make decisions that will affect our city. We ask that you guide us in our deliberations so that we make the best decisions. As always, I ask that you remind each of us that we are neighbors and friends and heated discussion is not productive. So, we hope we have a good evening tonight. We ask that you would continue to hold in your care all those families who have suffered horrific losses of children and loved ones over the past several days. We ask that you would bless our leaders of Hendersonville, of Sumar County, of Tennessee, and of the United States of America. Continue to pour your blessings out on us as you have always. We ask that you would protect those are here. We ask your blessings on those that who who are not here this evening. And we ask all of this in Christ's holy name. Amen.

Amen. Thank you, Wendy. Next is a roll call. Zack Aliser here. Evans here. Hardwick here. Hasty here. Kerr here. Longmeer. Martin here. Silkwood here. Slatterie here. That is eight present and one absent.

All right. We have public hearings tonight. So the first one will be the request by Century Communities to annex 32.8 8 acres into the city limits with a plan of services to reszone the property to mixed residential plan development MXR-PD and to approve a comprehensive development plan for the property. The property is located on the west side of Avant Lane south of Old Drexs Creek Road as identified on Sar County Tax Map 138 parcel 036.00. So

try to. Okay. So we have a group of people tonight that are here to speak for the public hearing. And the first one is named Mark Evans. Will you tell us your name, your address, please, for the record?

Good evening. My name is Mark Evans. I live at 1567 Drakes Creek Road in Durham Farms. Uh I'm a resident of Hendersonville for 33 years and been in Durham Farms for eight years. I'm also uh representative of Bulma. Uh I'm in Ward Six. Um first of all, I want to thank you all for your service on the planning commission. You have a a difficult job and I appreciate the time that you spend doing that. And I thank Keith and his department for the work that they do leading our planning department. We have an excellent planning department. So, thank you. I want to say that um you know traffic is a concern for almost every city. I was in a conference a few weeks ago and that was the number one uh issue at at the conference was talking about traffic and what to do about that. I don't think anybody had any answers. But for the city of Hendersonville, we know that traffic is a problem and um we've grown exponentially and the roads have not. the roads are are desperately inadequate to match the growth that we have in the community and we must address that first. Um, yes, I'm a part of a community Durham Farms that we have, 1200 homes there now and I love it there. I I like it. We are on Drakes Creek and it's a very busy road. Um, a couple of years ago we did a traffic study here in the city and the Drake Creek corridor was at that time said to have about 9,000 cars that travel through there every day. That was before the light was put at at the the um Long Hollow and Drake's Creek at the other end of Durham Farms. That was before Durham Farms was finished out and that was before Norman Farms was finished out. Since that time, those have been finished and we probably are having 11 to 12,000 cars come through that area every day. The reason I'm speaking tonight, and for

a lot of people who are here that probably don't want to speak, we cannot consider any new homes in this area until the roads are improved greatly. We do have two projects that are on um that are that are ready to go, uh but they're not going to be finished anytime soon. We do know that the Drakes Creek and Stop 30 intersection is going to be start construction hopefully in the spring of 2026, but that's going to be a two to threeyear project and won't be completed till almost 2028 2029. So that's going to be an important thing for our for our community, but it's only a part of the puzzle. The other part of that is that we we're looking for a light that's going to be at the New Shackle Island and Old Drakes Creek uh intersection. that's at the pumping station there for the um for the utility district that's been long needed as well. There are wrecks there almost weekly and today we had another one that happened uh this afternoon

two hours to go. So um so these are problems and these have to be addressed before we can consider any more new homes. So I'm asking for you to vote no for an annexation uh into the city. Um, I know that that probably if if we vote no and we're not going to take it into the city, it might go to the county. We'll address that when that happens and goes to the county. Thank you. Next on the list is Chris. I think it's Pucket. Yep. Name and address, please.

So, my name is Chris Pucket. I live at 102 Nighthawk Road. So, forgive me if I haven't spoken publicly since like college, I think. Um, so that's got a prepared statement. I just want to read because a little nervous. So, so I said, "Thank you for giving me the opportunity tonight speak. Um, I live directly next door to the site at the proposed development. I'm here today to respectfully voice my opposition to this project. Um, first I want to make it clear that I understand the need for responsible growth in our community. However, growth must be balanced with the realities what our local infrastructure can actually support. I've seen firsthand negative effects that a highdensity development can have. I first moved into Durham Farms in 2018 during the phase one of that development. We were made a lot of promises by builders, developers that have not really come to fruition and resulted in a negative impact in that part of the community. I don't I love living in Durham Farms, but I've just seen the negative impact it has had so far. Um just just basically the traffic really. Our roads are already under significant strain during peak hours uh early morning, mid-after afternoon, evening after work. It is not uncommon to see long backup, significant delays, and congestion in and around our neighborhood. Adding another highest development next door, likely bringing hundreds of additional cars will only intensify these problems. Emergency vehicles, school buses, and residences will all be affected. We've already seen that we need an additional traffic light at the corner of New Shackle Island Road and Old Dre um due to high amounts of traffic accidents and lawn delays here um at the south end of Durham Farms. A roundabout's already been proposed there due to traffic concerns. Um both of these areas are really highly congested impacting the safety of our families that drive through these areas daily. Um, beyond traffic, I'm also concerned about the added pressure on utilities, parking, public services, including schools, hospitals, the fire department, police officers. Um, our community infrastructure was not designed as this excessive level of homes, and I'm worried that rushing forward risk long-term inefficiencies, cost, and

possible safety concerns ultimately fall back on existing taxpayers. Another critical concern is the potential effect on property values. I think adding another high density development priced directly adjacent to another one already is just going to make uh nearby properties less attractive to future home buyers. Um I just think really it's about fairness. I think we've worked hard to build a life here that shouldn't be penalized by developers that benefit outside interest at the expense of existing homeowners. So I would just urge you to consider these consequences. I think we need to have responsible development, but that doesn't mean we need to have unchecked development. Um, I think we just need to pursue growth strategies that enhance our community, not diminish it. And I respectfully ask the council to either reject this or to significantly scale it back. Again, I'm not saying we can't build on that property one day, but just having that many homes right next to already 1,200 homes is kind of uh not where we want to go. So, thanks. Next on the list is Gary Dy.

Good evening everyone. My name is Gary Dy. I live at 1409 Drakes Creek Road. I'm before Durham's farm. I got to watch Darham Farms be rebuilt from a nice corn field and hay field to what it is today. But I want to speak on something totally different today. Um there's been plenty of discussion that I want to talk about storm water management. And you're going to say, why does this guy want to talk about storm water management? I'm not an expert in the field. And I want to talk I want to be a historian for a few minutes. If you take from Long Hollow Pike all the way down to Indian Lake where the we go across the railroad, one mile wide on each side of Drakes Creek corridor, you've got 5,000 acres of land. Our FEMA requirements were issued in 2012 after the great flood as you guys remember and we're still using that FEMA standard today. Unfortunately, that 5,000 acres has become 70% occupied now with all of our growth and we're still living to that same FEMA standard. Why do I talk about the FEMA standard? Well, that's how we determine how we want to manage our water, our our storm water. And I can attest um today of strong evidence that we're not we're failing. The greatest evidence of our failing is our nice sandbar we have outside our park here in Hendersonville. All that dirt is from the erosion on Drakes Creek. I believe the majority of it happens between Long Hollow Pike down to the lake because you can see the erosion. Now, we've converted some several thousand acres and we've taken this farmland and turned it into beautiful homes and companies. Um, Alder

Ottoman Evans has two pictures, a picture of 2012. And I think I'll leave this for you guys, too. 2012 and 2023 and it is vivid. Sir, can I give this to you? Sure.

2012. There's the day. You flip it over.

Okay. Since 2012, we've had some great growth, but with that growth has been the inability for us to manage our storm water. And I think anybody that lives on Drake's Creek Road and now that part of the area would attest to that. I got witness that um parts of the creek, we've lost 30 feet of land, taxable land that you would say, but it's not there. So, is it taxable? Anyway, from that, I don't have an answer. What I do have is that we've got to do something differently. We've we've got to strengthen our storm water process and not live in 2012 standards because we're producing more. The weather is different. Here's a few examples. This year alone at 1409 Dice Creek Road, we had four floods that reached within 5 ft of the 100-year flood plane. One year. Okay. The new flood plane. On April the 3, I reached 487 ft. Our flood plane is 491. That's how close we're getting. Now, we don't see that globally because this is a creek related issue. This is not a Cumbland River issue. This is a Drakes Creek issue because we built so much around Drakes Creek. Nowhere for the water to go. Have we done retention? Yes. But I can attest that Durham Farms attention retention was built for 600 homes. It's got 1,200 homes. Got a problem. So, I don't have an answer to to this. I want you smart people. I'm not the smart person to think about this. We can't continue to build with no good sta storm

water management process. It's not all our fault in the city. We're taking on water from Gallatin, the snail farm that's being built. That's our problem now. That's a Drakes Creek problem. So my qu my report to you is to we've got to do something different. Therefore, right now, I'm not in favor of this program. Thank you for your time and attention. Thank you. Cindy Williams.

I'm a nervous wreck. I've never spoken anywhere. Okay.

Although I was a professor, so I did that for 22 years. I am a Cindy Williams, a resident of Durham Farms. I live at 105 Misty Way. The developers proposed he has two entrances. One I think might be Nighthawk. I'm not sure of the other one is our street. Our street is a little street. I bought on that street and I asked the builder, not your problem. What about that land? Cuz my daddy was the biggest real estate developer in Washington DC. She said, "Oh, that's flood plane." I said, ' Okay, we're good. No, we're not good now. I am against it totally. We have enough problems. Every day when I drive out Drakes Creek and turn left on Old Shackle, I pray to Jesus I make it out safely and I drive a Hummer. Seriously, we don't have adequate. We need a light there. Stop 30 I know is getting fixed. We need patience for development and Durham Farms is not a public community. That developer made both of his entrances and exits to our streets. He could put them adjacent to grassland yards and force his traffic to go in left or right out the areas you fix. And that's all I have to say. And thank you very much.

You'll have to excuse me. I hope I don't mask her this name. Helen Megaban. McGibbon. McGibbon. Okay. Yes, I got close. Not too bad.

Hi, I'm Helen McGibbon. I live at 1562 Drakekes Creek Road. Moved there six years ago this week from Big D, Dallas, Texas. and never thought I'd not be a city girl, but we are loving it here. And so for the the reasons that we love, one of the reasons is all the greenery around us. So I know you guys have to be very careful how this city grows because you're going to lose what's beautiful about Hendersonville if you don't. Um my big biggest concern is too about the traffic going in and out of the area. Uh there's only old Drakes Creek Road and uh Drakes Creek Road to get in and out of Durham Farms and uh definitely that light has to be fixed at New Shackle and Drake Old Drakes Creek and um Avant itself where this proposal is is a little twane road with a 15 m an hour speed limit. So obviously that that street is going to be undized for adding more houses if especially if they want it to be a 15 mile an hour um road which people don't obey anyway. And um I was looking at what FEMA said on the flood maps too and I agree with the gentleman that spoke before me. I can see on that map there where the parcel that's that's where the hundredyear flood plane goes up to they're bu they want to build right up to it. So, I just don't think it's a very good idea and um you know for that for that density of

housing to be put in. It would be different if it was just a few houses on that is what I'm meaning. But having moved here from Texas, I see Tennessee, you guys are struggling and I see that you are working on it to get the infrastructure done before the development. It, you know, because I'm we just need to do it. And it and I just wanted to add to stop 30. That's a big big piece of land over there. And I hope y'all really think a lot before you allow new developments to go in office stop 30 because that road is really kind of dangerous and it's very overcrowded. So I appreciate your time. Thank you for all you do.

Thanks.

Matt Valentine. My name is Matt Valentine. I live at 475 Norman Way. Um, I have been here for about three years and I actually have the opposing view to everyone before me. I have two young children, three and a half and 6 months. The amount of park space we find incredibly limited. Every concern that's been raised is valid. Everyone knows traffic is terrible. I drive it every day. Um, two completely separate issues. I think holding this project ransom because we need to fix a traffic problem. We would never have another development in Hendersonville if we're worried about traffic and we wait to fix traffic before we build 61 homes. Everyone's used the number 1,200 homes in Durham Farms. Adding 61 homes is not going to change the trajectory of traffic through Durham Farms. I know it's bad. Again, we live right behind Durham Farms. We see it all the time. The one thing I've also noticed is the chaos with the traffic when there's an event in these fields that are currently there. That's also a large issue that's going to be alleviated by um some extra parking space. I think the project's great. I think use utilizing some leverage, utilizing a partnership with the builder in order to get these things out of it is exactly what we would want. Responsible development was a term used by someone before me. This seems to me like a responsible development where we're actually going to get something in return rather than um just building 61 homes and just having them on the property. So, when I rush out of here, it's not because I don't care. I promise you I do. I have two young children. I got put to bed. So, thank you for your time and uh good luck. Appreciate you. Eddie Robersonson. Thank you. My name is Eddie Robertson and I live at 1049 Smoke Rise Lane. It's in Autumn Creek. Um I'm also an alderman in W 6 and I'm also chairman of the

capital projects committee for the city. And uh I've I've lived in Autumn Creek since 2011 and that of course was before uh Durham Farms. Uh I did not oppose Durham Farms because I thought that it was good land and I knew that it would bring good neighbors which many of you have moved there because that Durham Farms was available. I do want to thank this this board. Uh I served on this board before I became an alderman and I know how difficult it is to try to define what smart development is. I've tried in my own uh mind since being on the Bulma for seven years now to what is smart development? What I hear over and over again is re residents say uh try to make the infrastructure improvements coincidental with the development. Make that part of the make that part of a development. We didn't do that at Durham Farms. Um and we're trying to catch up now. Uh Alderman Evans mentioned two projects. The first project was the the old Drake's Creek and and New Shackle. uh when when I first ran for alderman uh especially um in Drake's Point that was a a constant problem that was brought to my attention and we've worked on it that is a state road so the city has its hands kind of tied and it's also in the county it's not even in the city but with the help of Bulma uh and the mayor uh we did help fund that improvement so even though it's a city a c a state road and in the county. We're making that improvement. Again, it's going to take several years for that to happen. Uh stop 30 in Drakes Creek, the same thing. But one other new capital project that's

going to help this area is recently the staff has announced that they are are doing a design of the stop 30 new shackle island intersection. uh a lot of people that come down stop 30 turn right to go to beach and so the uh it's it's in for this fiscal year to do a design improvement for that. So we've got a lot going on. So at this time I would ask the board to postpone any development at this area. Uh and and just to let you know what Bulma has done recently we voted a uh moratorum on highdensity development. Uh that's a drastic step, but we felt like we needed a breather. We felt like we needed to pause and to let us catch up on some of the improvements that are needed. We're also looking at impact fees, which would be a fee on on development. Uh that would help us pay for some of these projects. What we're trying to do is try to put the cost on the cost causer and not raise property taxes and and to try to put uh to try to raise money for these projects. So it one of these days this property is going to be developed and when it is developed I hope it is in the city because then we can be more careful of and planning and what the off-site improvements are. But at this time, until some of these projects get improved, I think it's smart development to say no at this time and pause and let's complete some of these projects and then we'll look at uh possible developments in the future. Thank you.

Thank you. Just bring that up just to make sure that Josh Roland, I see you're the applicant. Okay. You're going to have your opportunity in a little bit to speak. Okay. So, you won't do it right now. Thank you. Just didn't want you to think we skipped you. Okay. All right. So, that's all for that hearing. That's all for that one. Okay. The other two. All right. That's all for that public hearing. So, that one is officially closed. Now, we have two questions. Oh, good. If there's anybody else like uh

well go ahead and stand up and go to the microphone and say your name and your address. We thought we canvased the audience beforehand and got everybody. Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you tonight. Uh my name is Trisha Langan and I'm at 106 Championship Place. I speak to you tonight as an 8-year resident of Durham Farms, but I also speak to you as a retired city, senior city planner, AI, AICP certified. Okay. I have been involved in more than enough developments over my career. I've helped build things. I've worked against things. I have heard all the comments. I agree with most everything that was said. But my true concern is what is going to happen to Avant Lane. When I moved there eight years ago, we were told, of course, by the developer who means nothing now, that that road would be closed. That didn't happen. It became a park road with a 15 m an hour speed limit. Stand at my corner any day, anytime, and you can watch the cars go 40 and 50 miles an hour down the street.

The other thing uh and this may be just a a comment uh it's not really a question but there are utility markings on Avant. Now, does that mean the road's going to be widened with this project or anything's going to be done with it? Or is it just supposed to look like a done deal and that's what it smacks of? The rugby field. I bought my house because it's one of the few places that actually has a clear view all the way to the trees. Now I've got lights. I've got another light from the bathroom that's on all night long that is not downcast and is not shielded but shines right into my rooms. I also watched the uh lightning detector flash yellow lights. Five flashes stop. Five more flashes. I watched that three days in a row and finally called the city. I've seen that happen twice now that it's not being taken care of. It's nice that we know when there's lightning, but the road is not maintained. The road is not checked for speeding in any way. The rugby field and I sat in on a meeting, I believe, with Mr. free and the head of

the rugby association if I'm if I may remember correctly and was told that that field was going to be used by youth. Well, some of these guys that are playing rugby, if they're youth, then I'm five years old. Okay. Uh the cars are parked up and down Avant. They're parked on the streets, our streets. I mean, I understand that they're a public street and anyone can park there, but that isn't what we bought into. I just uh and and again going back to my work as a planner. It's a nice design and all. And I don't know if that one gentleman felt that he was going to be able to use parkland there. Uh I don't know. I didn't catch that for the practice field. That just means there's going to be more people at the rugby center. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you and uh I hope that you will look at this in a manner that will consider the city and the residents of Durham Farms. And I just find it strange that one person can kill the whole project at the front of Drake's Creek for the five roads.

And yet there are a lot of people here that are not happy with this project. And I hope that you would consider voting it down. Thank you. Thank you. Any of the other people in the audience want to speak? Okay, we will now keep we will call that public hearing closed. We have two two more public hearings. Nobody to speak. That's correct. Okay, I'll read them and then after that done.

Okay. Second public hearing is requested by Hendersonville Planning Department to hear comments on amending the Hendersonville subdivision regulations for the city of Hendersonville. Nobody was signed up to speak for that. Anybody in the audience here for that reason? I'll consider that one closed. Second or the third one is requested by Hendersonville Planning Department for the purpose of receiving public comment on proposed revisions to the zoning ordinance for the city of Hendersonville. Again, anyone here to speak on behalf of that? We'll consider that one now closed. Thank you very much. We have public comments agenda items only. Anybody signed up for that? No, sir.

Okay. No one signed up for that. Anybody here wanted to speak on any agenda item that did not sign up for that? All right, we'll consider that closed. Thank you very much. Next thing we have is acceptance of the agenda. So, anybody had time, everybody's had time to look at it. Anybody have any comments, any changes, any thing you want to do differently? All right, we'll leave it as it is. I need a motion, please. So, move.

Okay, I hear a first and a second. We'll do a roll call. Is Zach? Motion to accept the agenda passed with eight yeses. Thank you. Next on the agenda is the minutes from last meeting on August from August the Let's see here. Yeah, from August 5th, 2025. Do I have a motion?

So move. Okay. I heard I heard a motion and I heard a second. So first one was from Wendy and then I heard Mark. Okay. And somebody down here. So sorry about that. All right. Uh we can do this by voice. Correct since its all right. And all in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? Any abstensions? None. It passes. Thank you. Next we have is the consent agenda. So Lincoln Lincoln Rockland preliminary plant owner Frank Richard Messenger Living Trust. The location is parcel 16066.01. Lead planning staff Timothy Whitten. You want to take it away and tell us about it, Timothy? Sure.

Thank you, chairman. Uh the comprehensive development plan for Lincoln Rockland was approved by the planning commission in July this year and then uh uh was approved by Obama. Uh passed the second reading of BMA in August. Um so that concludes the development part of the portion of the process. Now they're in the platting stage. First part of that is the pre preliminary plat which will establish the right of way for the new road. Um if this is approved that'll be followed up by final plat and then uh the site plan stage. Um so the the prelim preliminary plat is uh in substantial compliance with the approved CDP. Um per Bulma per Bulma's approval they are they they will be shifting that road alignment um so that it lines up with the speedway in ingress egress. Um so that's shown in that image there. So if this is approved tonight, they will adjust the preliminary plat to show that new alignment and they have agreed to all staff comments.

Thank you, Timothy. Anybody from the planning commission have questions, comments? So no comments. I'll entertain a motion. That's grouped with the consent. Oh, it's both of these. Yeah. Okay. I'm sorry. accept the cons. Okay, I jumped ahead. I'm sorry you all. Next is Manser Farms phase 19 section 1C final plat owner Meritage Homes of Tennessee Incorporated. Location parcel 144084.00 and this one's yours, Caitlin. Will you speak to it? Yes, sir.

Meritage Homes has submitted a final plat for 26 single family homes. um an open space lots of five across 11 acres. Um this extends Manorway, Stein Street, and connects with section 1B uh through Farm Ridge Drive. And this was section A was approved by planning commission in September of 24. Section 1B was approved September of 2023. and um it is in compliance with the preliminary plot.

Any comments, questions? Okay. Since they were grouped together, we vote on them together. So, I'll entertain a motion to accept the two of them together on the consent agenda. With all staff comments. Okay. So, we have that.

And we still have a second. All right. So, we'll do this one by the electronic vote. motion to approve the consent agenda. Pass with eight yeses. Thank you very much. Next, we have the development plans. So, this first one up, let's see. Sorry, I'm just making myself my notes. So, that's a CDP and they go plan of service annexation,

right? So, the first one up is Crestwater CDP plus it's the acceptant plan of services. Okay, so the owner is Robert Avant and the location is 1765 Avant Lane, parcel 138036.00. lead planning staff is Zachary Coleman and Caitlyn Shin. So, which one of you two's taking it away? Zachary. Zachary. That would be me. Go ahead, Zach. Um, so we're going to start, we're going to do both at the same time. The uh plan of services for the annexation and then we'll go into the comprehensive development plan. Um, so starting off with the plan of services. Uh, Keith, did you have anything to add?

Good. Okay. Uh so the applicant Kimley Horn on behalf of Century Communities has requested voluntary annexation into the city of Hendersonville from Sumar County uh for the property located at 1765 Avant Lane in Hendersonville, Tennessee. Uh the property totals 32.8 acres. Uh it's currently zoned RR, which is rural residential within Sumar County. Um, it lies within the city of Hendersonville's urban growth boundary and it's within an area identified in chapter 3 of the city of Hendersonville's future land use and transportation plan is mixeduse neighborhood. Um, the property lies directly adjacent to the east side of Durham Farms development which is zoned MXRPD and north of the city of Hendersonville Rugby Park. Uh the applicant is requesting voluntary annexation under the MXRPD zoning district uh to allow for a single family residential development of 61 lots. Uh the required plan of services for the annexation has been prepared for the commission to consider uh and letters have been provided from utility providers confirming the uh ability of the site to be served by sufficient gas, electric and water uh sewer services. These are attached to the report and available for the commission uh along with the resolutions for the plan of services and the proposed annexation. Any questions on the plan of services?

I have no question. Anyone from the commission have questions?

Okay. Moving on to comprehensive development plan. uh in con in conjunction with the annexation uh plan of services request above uh the applicant has submitted a comprehensive de development plan application to reszone the property from rural residential uh which is Sumar County to mix residential plan development MXRPD uh within the city of Hendersonville. Uh the development includes the construction of 61 single family homes in a single phase with minimum lot size of 6600 square feet or 0.15 acres. Uh this meets the minimum lot area requirement of 6,500 square feet for single family homes in the MXR. Um no driveway access will be provided from uh Avant Lane. Sidewalks, a 5-ft planting strip with street trees uh and curb and gutter will be installed along Avant Lane and throughout the development. Additionally, a 4ft fence is proposed along Avant Lane. Based on the zoning ordinance, all residential plan development shall conform to the design standards as prepare prepared by the developer and approved by the planning commission in conjunction with the approval of the development plan. Um the applicant has provided architectural notes to address these design standards from the zoning ordinance. Um the proposed single family residences will be both front-loaded and sideloaded garages with sideloaded garages uh located along lots 1 through 17 fronting Avant Lane. Um this prevents any driveway access from Avant Lane. Typical lots will have a 20 foot front, 6t side, and 20 foot rear setback. Um elevations were provided for review. uh sample elevations. Future elevations would need to be submitted and approved by staff in advance prior to receiving a building permit. These elevations could only be approved if staff feel that the homes meet the character, style, and size of the new development and surrounding area. Um also, as part of this development plan, Century Communities has proposed the dedication of 5.36

acres for a gravel parking lot and practice fields to the city of Hendersonville parks department. Uh the land will be conveyed to the city of Hendersonville. uh along with a six foot wide walking trail that will connect the proposed neighborhood to the dedicated public parkland. Um at the end of the report um the commission will find a list of items that should be considered in evaluating the plan development. Additionally, the findings of fact um that should be included in any motion are included in the planning staff comments. Um applicant has a agreed to all staff comments aside from comment four uh pertaining pertaining to the consideration of incorporating two single wide garage doors uh rather than a single double wide door and that completes the staff report.

All right, let me ask you this. Should I bring the applicant up now since he was already on that list? Yeah. Okay. Will the applicant please step up? Thank you. Did Did you want your PowerPoint?

Yes, please. We've got a presentation uh for the commission tonight that we'd like to share. I'm Josh Roland with Kimley Horn uh 10 Lee Avenue in Nashville. U first of all, thank you commissioners and uh community members for coming out. It was very helpful to hear um comments from um council members and and the community about the project. Um we're excited to have the opportunity to have this discussion tonight and also uh be a partner with the city and and a a community member as well um if this project moves forward. If you'd go to the next slide, please. I appreciate staff's comments. Um just wanted to touch on a few points. Additionally, um just reiterating that, you know, this project and our proposal this evening is consistent with the comp plan. Um you know, we're meeting the character and the quality of the Durham Farm subdivision and the surrounding community. We are within the urban growth boundary. So, we're following the guidelines that the city has put in place for growth. Uh and we're uh here to be a responsible partner in doing so. Um, again, our our lot sizes are consistent with the larger lots within Durham Farms. Um, and we, as we talk about the architecture, you'll see that we we intend to meet the quality and the character of Durham Farms as well. Um, we want our community to fit in seamlessly with with the homes and with the community and and have this act in some respects as an extension of Durham Farms. Um we're following the MXR um zoning requirements which is the same uh zoning that is uh within the Durham Farm subdivision. Next slide please. A few details about our site plan. I think first and it was brought up earlier you know this is not a proposal for high density. This is not

apartments. It's not town homes. It's large lot high quality single family. Um the site as a whole is 32 acres. uh we're preserving uh up to 60% of that as as open space with you know a mixture of passive and active open space. Um the density we're proposing is 1.7 units to the acre. Uh it was asked earlier and mentioned you know what what could this be in the county? Uh the county on this property today currently allows up to one unit per acre. So we are above that but not uh not excessively. So, um, as I get to my last slide, I want to touch on a few points of of the benefits that we we plan to bring for the SL, uh, for this project, um, that helped to offset the request for some, um, slight density, uh, increase. Uh, we do have, actually, if you would go back one slide, please, we do have 61 single family homes as was previously mentioned. Um, we were trying to be very intentional about the look of this project from Avant Lane. Uh, so we put no garages, no driveways onto Avant Lane. We've got an alley fed uh garage on the back of these lots. And so what you'll see is 100% highquality elevations for these homes fronting Avant Lane. Um, one of the comments from staff, uh, that we have agreed to is that now the homes behind those facing Avant Lane will also be um, an alleyfed driveway. So, we'll have consistent character on that first block. Um, trying to leave openings through our public streets and those culde-sacs to get pedestrian access out to the park and open space. You know, the question was asked before, what what type of use um, is this beyond rugby fields? So, one of the other criteria is a walking path that's being installed. Um, you know, while there is an active use within the rugby uh field and the rugby uh use on

the project, these passive trails will also provide a recreational use for the community at large. Um, we are uh offering and promising to build uh a parking lot that doubles the size of the parking for the rugby facility. that'll pull all those cars off of the neighboring streets, off of Avant Lane. We're going to pave it. Um, and so that will hopefully help to alleviate some of the congestion that you see currently on Avant Lane. Um, questions about this the state of Avant Lane today and what you know what it's in. The uh developer for Durham Farms did part of it. Um, it's our plan to complete the rest on our uh west side of the development. We're gonna widen the pavement section, add curb and gutter, add a detached sidewalk, add street trees. Um, we're going to match the same uh decorative fencing along the front of those homes. Again, so that the character and the kind of the the patterns that you see in Durham Farms will be uh uh used in this development as well. Next slide, please. Um, so what you've got on this screen are two different types of elevations. The two images at the top are are two different uh single family product for the lots in the rear of the property where the homes face the street. Um it was mentioned uh by Zachary that we have requested just one comment uh that that we would like to to not uh follow through with on the the double bay garage doors. We've, you know, our home builder clients um talk with home buyers all the time and you know, one of the biggest complaints is that um as vehicles get bigger and people have more stuff in garages, it just becomes more difficult to navigate through those narrow garage doors. So, what we have committed to doing is um providing windows and enhancements on all the garage doors. So, if it's decorative hardware, if it's some of the decorative cross bracketing, there's

there's a lot of very attractive options for double wide garage doors on the market today. So, we're we're committed to having a good-looking garage facing front for the homes that are in the rear of the property uh that you will not see from Avant Lane. The elevation on the bottom of the screen are the homes that we have currently proposed for Avant Lane. Again, it's a nice mix of stone or brick, uh, hardy cement siding, uh, good roof lines, good color pallets. Again, trying to create a nice kind of rich, um, context here and, um, really finish off the elevations along Avant Lane with very high quality designs and materials. And I'm going to end on my last slide just kind of summarizing um some details both sort of on the property and off the property. A lot of conversations about traffic uh and we certainly uh have heard those before. Um and it's good to hear kind of some of the specifics tonight of the projects that are underway. Um just for some context here, our we did a lot count and a traffic analysis for uh this entire area, there's, you know, roughly 1,850 homes both in Durham Farms and in the subdivisions outside of there. Um those total uh nearly 15,000 average daily trips. Uh clearly that's what you guys are seeing today and what's causing some of the concern. uh this development of 61 homes is is a small percentage of that overall uh area in the development. This project would create about 640 average daily trips. That's you know less than 4% of the overall traffic volume. So just trying to give a little bit of scale and context in terms of what this project would add uh to the current traffic. Um, you know, we've been very intentional about talking with

staff and talking uh with others about what we can do uh that would provide community benefit as a part of this project. Um, again, it's it's dedication uh to the parks department for additional uh practice field lands and um and the improvements to the parking uh parking lot there at the rugby facility. Uh the street improvements along Avant Lane. It's going to be widening the pavement section. that's going to be building out that infrastructure along this project frontage uh to allow for, you know, both the on street parking and the sidewalks and street trees. Uh we've also agreed to doing a uh $3,500 impact fee per lot. That's not a requirement. That's something that we're offering uh to help uh mitigate some of the city's costs for the off-site traffic improvements that are currently being designed. Um, and just something else to consider, you know, in terms of services, you know, this community becomes other taxpaying uh members of the community. Those taxes go into fund what's already a pretty robust existing um amount of infrastructure in the area. Uh, so those those tax dollars will just be there to further the city's projects um in the future. And I wanted to end on something that's pretty important relative to the overall development life cycle. Um, timing was something that was brought up many times about traffic. We've got road improvements that are in design being planned two to three years out. Um, development takes time. Uh, we're here at the very first step. Nothing is a guaranteed given at this point, but we're here making that first application, the first step to be annexed and zoned. Um, I've got a a brief kind of outline of our schedule. You know, first I wanted to mention that um we're very happy and and and welcome to have a community meeting to hear, you know, in a in a less formal setting from

the community about concerns. Um so we're going to extend that um opportunity or offering to the community uh if we're able to move forward on this project. Um we have other steps along the way where we're certainly going to need the community's input. um zoning and permitting. You know, we're at the very first step in the process. That's a 12 to 18month process to get uh drawings and construction plans approved. Site development takes another, you know, 12 to 18 months. And then there's easily two years of vertical construction timeline. So, uh, when you look at it in the broader, uh, scale of schedule, these homes are not going to be occupied and sold until around the time that some of these traffic improvements that are being considered and designed and and built, uh, will come online. So, uh, we hope that you'll take that into consideration and not slow down this very first step in the process. allow us to get uh through the annexation and zoning uh and work with the city on this project that is kind of a a very logical expansion. It's again in your uh comprehensive plan designated for this use. It's in your urban growth boundary. It's a project that can build um some improvements that are needed. It can dedicate uh public land dedicate land for the public to use for your parks and recck department. Um, and again, just consider that schedule long term. We're we're two to three years out of um, selling the first home here. So, we just ask that you consider all these things. Uh, and we request uh, your approval tonight. We appreciate your time and I'm available for any questions that you might have.

Planning Commission. Any questions by anyone? All right. We have a a group

ma'am. Right now, this is the planning commission's time to ask him questions. You got to remember all the questions you all have or comments you've made. We'll hopefully see these people ask those questions of this man right here. Okay. So, first on the agenda is Todd. Go right ahead.

Yes. Thank you for uh being here and thank you for the comments tonight. Uh let me speak just from uh somebody probably sitting on that side of the equation. I live on stop 30 and I I know exactly what you're you're dealing with in terms of traffic. Um it was a nightmare even getting here tonight uh from my home. So I certainly understand that. Um, I've had a chance to go out to that area three or four times this weekend for different practices and things with my grandson. And I I took the time to kind of drive it, look at understand where the the creek is. Um, and also understand what Stop 30 deals with and when it rains and and and all that. My rough count, uh, there are about 30 homes, give or take, depend on what you you you consider or homes or lots that are on the adjacent to the 100redyear flood plane. Um, how's that going to work? I mean, how are you going to build that up? And my concern, you know, from from the planning commission perspective is I look at some of these as is it going to hurt or help some of the current problems that we've got. Um when I looked at the detailed plans, I think this hurts more than helps uh the current situation that we're all dealing with with traffic. Now, one thing that wasn't mentioned, maybe one person mentioned schools. Um, I reached out to one of the the board members today and I asked about Burus Elementary, which I think most of the students would be zoned for Burus. They're at 80 plus% capacity and schools and and road infrastructure are usually catching up to development in terms of space and needs. So, I have

a lot of concerns about this just from growing too fast and not allowing the infrastructure to keep pace with the needs of the of the community. Schools being one. Um, also just our first responders getting in and out of Stop 30, Drakes Creek. Um, that's a nightmare. That is a nightmare. Um, so but let me let me pivot back to the 30 homes that that are in the back that are adjacent to the flood plane. Can you kind of walk me through visually what you would do to prevent a flood risk to on the other side of Avant Lane? That's what I'm as concerned about that side of Avant Lane as I am your side of Avant Lane. what does that do to the flood risk and what does that do to the actual um aesthetics of their neighborhood? Does it detract from the value of their neighborhood? And and I'm I'm worried about that. I you know I worry that if if you move forward or we move forward with this plan, it can detract from the value of the folks in Durham Farms and Autumn Creek, the 1,800 homes that we're talking about. So, I don't I don't know if there's a magic number here or um a magic equation, but walk me through, if you could um some of those questions and concerns.

Sure. I I heard your main concern being the storm water. Yeah.

Um and if you wouldn't mind going back a couple slides to our site plan. Um, as with any new development, the city and the state has very stringent requirements for how we address storm water. And you know, one of the benefits of uh development is that you're actually able to better capture and control storm water. were required to release what's called releasing at historic rates, which means that the rate at which water currently dumps off of Avant Lane, flows across this undeveloped farm and and into the creek, has to be maintained. And so we're required to build water quality and storm water detention ponds, which means they're not a pond with water in them. They're an empty pond that's only used during um high rain events. And um and again it's you know you've got water that sheep flows off of Avant Lane and and some of it may come from Durham Farms. Um by building this new edge along Avant Lane, you know, a new curb and gutter to catch storm water, new inlets to catch storm water. Same thing throughout this entire property. We put our sight storm into our new ponds, new detention ponds, and we release at historic rates. Um, in regards to your question about the 100red-year flood plane, you know, we're going to, you know, we can't really touch or change grades beyond that line, but we will be building up our property to keep all of the proposed homes out of the flood plane and out of the flood uh elevations. And um that in conjunction with our storm ponds is what's going to protect these homes in this community. There's again very very stringent guidelines on how you can develop around the flood plane. Commissioner Silkwood, you're next.

Thank you so much for being here tonight. Um, just a couple of questions dealing with um, road infrastructure and traffic congestion. As I'm sure you heard, there's plenty of um, worries about that from the community. Um so one of the main things um is you know when you're looking at the map you see that you know you ab you don't absolutely have to be mixeduse residential you know you could be adjacent and you're adjacent to you know SRPD PD SR PDSR1 so you could do PDSR1 did you give any consider did you all give any consideration to reducing the density

you know we're we're balancing the cost of development uh with the unit count, you know, it's kind of a it's a delicate uh process there. You know, we we did consider looking at, you know, a development in the county as well, right?

Um but, you know, we want to be a partner with the city in this development and provide benefits along with the new development. So, the things that I spoke about are things that we're able to do with this amount of density. You know, as I mentioned, we're at 1.7. The county is around one. So, we're not double the amount of homes in the county, but we're not, you know, asking for, you know, an egregious amount of um density beyond what what may be possible uh in the county. Um, you know, at this time trying to match the the upper end lot sizes in Durham Farms. We're not doing the duplexes or the town homes or the smaller single family lot sizes. We're trying to do the nicer uh nicer homes uh that you can find on the bigger lots in Durham Farms. I understand. And it just as a comment though, it might be a little more palatable to the community and maybe I mean I don't speak for the full commission but perhaps to the commission and maybe even Bulma if you reduce the density with the understanding that the impact fee per lot would not be quite as much. Just something to consider. Um another quick question dealing with traffic congestion. So as someone mentioned um that road of lane is a park road. It's 15 miles an hour. There are a few, you know, speed bumps and things along there. Will you all at any time be requesting that that become a non-p park road and just a regular road with a speed limit of 30, 35, whatever that would be?

We would take uh planning and engineering staff's lead on that. They've directed us to build out a com a comparable street section to what Durham Farms did on portions of their side of OAT Lane. So, we're building out that street section that was um given to us by planning staff. I

I just have a hard time understanding how you're going to add all these additional trips, but folks can only go 15 miles an hour along there. And that to me just really screams of a lot of backup and congestion in an area that is already sort of dealing with a lot of problems in terms of infrastructure. And I think there was a, you know, roundabout that failed that probably should have gone through over there would have helped some things. So, It's a problematic area, but that's why I was asking about the 15 miles an hour.

Uh we certainly wouldn't uh go in and advocate to raise the speed limit. We're proponents for safe walkable streets, and that's why the you know, the addition of the detached sidewalks and the street trees. Um just the widening of the road to make it make it safer uh is something that we're It's just a long stretch for almost 700 additional trips and all those cars have to go 15 miles an hour. So that's all. Thank you. Understood. I don't see any other commissioners in the queue. Oh, Keith, I see you in the queue. Go ahead. Yeah.

Yeah. I just I just wanted to note that uh let's uh let's include the PowerPoint that the applicant had. We'll include that in the uh in the record. Include that for that. And I just wanted to note because uh the information on your PowerPoint and what you shared, there was some new additional information that wasn't in the packets uh that you shared and I just kind of want to pull that out uh just uh to make the planning commission aware of it as well as for the record uh as we as we move forward. Uh one of those were if I understood it right, you were saying you're going to pave the parking lot. Yes, that was a I believe a comment from planning staff here in the last week that we agreed to.

And then you you're voluntarily offering 3500 uh per lot. Yes, that's correct. Okay. Uh and then um with the double garage doors versus the single uh you're you're saying uh going to have enhancements on those windows and more carriage style double garage doors. That's correct. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to note that. Next in the queue, I saw Charles, Mr. Hast. Yep. Okay. Uh, couple of questions. Uh, Advent Road, the right of way, is it in the uh rightway in the county or is it in the city?

Answer. I'm pretty sure it's in the uh that portion. Go ahead, Stephen. I'm pretty certain that the uh Avant is is in city right ofway. Uh I think the county county property is just to the to the west. That's my understanding of the right of way. Okay. So it's a it is a city street. Yes.

And one of my questions about it being in the county and their zoning and their zoning allows one unit per acre I believe you said. Does the county have a cluster provision so that they could calculate their one per acre and cluster them all out of the flood plane? Does anybody know they had that? That might be something the applicant may be aware of that if you've looked into that. Yes, they they still do have a cluster provision in their zoning ordinance. So with the clustering provision under the county, you could still get about the same number of units. close.

I mean, and it's, you know, it's just worth mentioning that the benefits that we hope to provide with this project, if we're given permission to come into the city, we wouldn't do so if we were in the county because we'd be talking to a different board. Um, so we tried to be intentional about the things that we offered to let the community and, you know, the governing bodies of of the city know that, you know, we're we're here to partner uh with you all and provide benefit along with this project.

Well, I think your voluntary donation impact fee is commendable. But if you would do a whole lot more work from all the way one end to the other of advent, it would make it a little bit more palatable because if you were asking for a high density, my answer would be hell no. But since you are you you're really providing for the density of the area something that is comparable and a pretty good development I think but the traffic is the issue and I think everybody up here may be struggling with that one issue as to how that will impact the neighborhood and I realize you so your timeline is pushing it way on out there. And maybe your timeline on the improvements to Advent and maybe some that the city can do, we can address or some of the traffic issues directly related to your development maybe can be somewhat mitigated. Yeah. Yeah. I'm ready for some more to hear some more discussions. I don't know what I'm how I'm going to vote this.

Commissioner Martin, you're in the queue.

Thank you for bringing this project to us. Um I think what you're proposing and the development and the quality is wonderful. um you voluntary fees that that the developer is offering is wonderful. Plus a lot of the upgrades. Um I I wanted you to know that um because I appreciate it. I love the single family homes. I'm going to vote no, but I wanted you to to know that I really like this development. The reason I'm going to vote no circles back to what the two aldermen that spoke at the beginning uh had to say. Um we are desperately trying to take care of our traffic and our infrastructure and storm water. And so we did something very drastic. We did a moratorum to give us time to do that. Um and I know you're probably saying two years out. I would love to see this exact project come back after the nine months because I would love to support it because I trust uh Alderman Robertson, um Alderman Evans, and and a lot of the others um to push to address those issues during the nine months that we have. Um so, um again, I appreciate you bringing this to us.

Thank you for your comments. Commissioner Evans, you're in the queue. Go ahead.

I I don't know where to start. I moved here 30 years ago and and I would like for Hendersonville to be like it was 30 years ago, but never in my wildest imagination did I think that it would. Uh I've watched people build houses beside my house. I would hate for somebody to tell me that I can't use my house now. I can't sell it. I can't uh transfer it to someone else. I do share the concerns uh about the flood plane. Uh since the beginning of time, mother nature has been trying to level our planet and uh part of our top soil is down in New Orleans now, probably with houses on it. So, that's going to keep on. We're not struggling uh with storm water. We're managing storm water. We do it every time we look at another project here. Our staff knows what they're doing. Our engineers know what they're doing. and we try to manage this the best way we can. So to get to the bottom line, uh could could we bring up that aerial view again that we had earlier?

Other than other than storm water, uh what's the difference between one side of that road and the other side of that road? And why would we tell folks that they can't build on this side of the road, but on the other side of the road we have a similar development? It's it's not in our purview to do that without a finding a fact that there is some sort of damage that we just can't live with. So, uh, personally, I can't find that fact. But thank you. No other commissioners in the queue. So, Charles, oh, sorry, Barry, you lit it up. Well, I was just waiting to see.

Okay, so go ahead, Barry. The We talked about paving the parking area at the rugby field. How big will that parking lot be and how many cars will be in that park? Could paved parking stalls will be in that? I should know the answer to that. specifically, but looking at that it's about 50 or 60 parking spaces. So 50 to 60. Yeah. How many t do we know? And this is a staff question I guess. How many cars are typically there on a given practice or game day?

I don't think we have that information. I I I do know when there is a a heavy event there that people are parking all up and down Avon and into the Durham Farms neighborhood. So, I'm not sure how many cars uh that is, but this does double the size of the current parking facility if that helps. It's we're adding a parking lot the same size of the existing one. Okay. the has there been a traffic study done or did I hear you guys say that or there has not been one done?

Uh when we started this project it was right at the end of the school season and so that will be a requirement of the next phase of the development and you know there could very well be uh off-site improvements that are recognized during the traffic study that we are you know if it's turn lane or if it's you know other improvements. So that is during the site development plan phase is or the final development plan phase is when that is specifically required. If your traffic study requires that there be improvements to the road, will that be in addition to the $3,500 fee that's being committed tonight?

Yes. Did and did I hear you say you get that you're planning to improve that roadway or rebuild that road? Right now Durham Farms has developed part of a half section. They've got improvements at all their intersections where houses front to Avant Lane. They've built the full section. There's some little missing pieces of widening and curb. Um, but what we're proposing to do is along the entire frontage of our development, widen the road to the full half section, build curving gutter and build a detached sidewalk.

So, am I just want to make sure I'm hearing correctly, we're going from an an old country farm road to a new modern curb and guttered road. That's correct. Okay. Um, this is a staff question. the $3,500 fee that's per lot. Does that money just go into the general fund and yeah, we got it, but nobody knows where it goes to, or can it be escroed to go towards improvements to help these

these fine folks here? Yeah, it's a it's a new thing that it just we're just aware of today uh with the 3500, but uh in the motion should include these things that I called out earlier. Plus, um normally that wouldn't which we're not negotiating, the planning commission is not negotiating uh with the developer on a off-site fee. That's really something for Bulma. Uh but just to further clarify it, um I I would I would guess it would might need to also add that that would go to improvements that would benefit the transportation system out in that area. In that area. Yeah. Which could be Avant, could be could be Drake's uh Drake's Creek.

Because I know in previous times people would pay stuff and it would just kind of they paid it but the money just kind of went into this big general fund and no one ever knew. So it it can go towards we legally can say this money has to be escroed to go towards this. Uh yes. Okay. Uh and currently it hadn't really been spelled out but you know and Bulma could change how that functions with the 3500 but um unless something separate was set clarified it would just be paying $3500 when you get your building permit. uh is what we would love to see all those dollars go to Avant Lane.

Yeah. So So Bulma could come back and say instead of paying $3,500 as they get their permit, we want $200,000, which is what that money would equal, and it's going to go straight to improvements to They could clarify that. Yes, sir. But that that's their purview, not ours. That that would be correct on that particular issue. Yeah. Did I hear you say that you're going to add another alleyway than what we saw?

No, we're just changing the type of homes that are on the opposite side of that alleyway. Um, we had previously proposed that the only alley homes would be the ones facing Avant and staff had requested that we make the homes on both sides of that alley um be alley loaded garages and we've agreed to do that. So, the the homes that face Evant, if if I'm going to visit them, I would pull up and park in the alleyway, correct? Or where where would I park? Uh there they they will have driveways with parking in them. Um there will also be on street parking available because we don't have any driveways in front of those homes. So, but their home will the front of their home will look out to the street.

Correct. Okay. See, and that's all I have. Thank you, Commissioner Cerr. I saw you were in the queue. You still No, he answered my question. Thank you. That's fine. All right. Commissioners, any other questions before we move on? Any other comments? Any clarifications? Charles, you wanted more discussion. Did you get enough? Can I make one more? Can I ask one more question? Yes. Go right ahead, Barry. Maybe it'll help Charles here

to u director free. What are our legal obligations when someone wants to bring property into the city? Do we have a legal obligation if they meet all of our requirements to to do this or can we say we're just sorry we're not interested at the time.

Uh no, we're not legally obligated to to annex. Let me kind of explain. Let me get a little closer. Make sure everybody can hear me. Okay. Um the way the the way the process works is this evening uh the planning commission you have before you right now pending a vote uh to move forward with a recommendation. It would be a recommendation for really two things and we've just kept them combined because uh the applicant has requested annexation but it's annexation contingent upon getting the zoning. If they can't get the zoning then they don't want the annexation. Uh and um so they're coupled together. So it'll be one vote. Uh that would be um you know it would be like a motion uh to approve uh the plan of services and annexation to recommend that to Bulma as well as uh to recommend the combined development plan uh to Bulma as well. And then that moves on to Bulma goes to general committee next week to Bulma general committee. And then that moves on to full Bulma. And it gets a little bit confusing because it's actually two resolutions. The first resolution that goes to Bulma is the plan of services that would be you all would be react u uh acting on to say, "Hey, yeah, we we're we're good with the plan of services or we're not good, you know, with it." And then Bulma uh will uh take action. There'll be a public hearing on the plan of services. And then at that point if if they uh uh adopt that then at the next Bulma meeting then there'll be another resolution and then that's the annexation resolution and then they vote on the uh on the annexation at the same time that this annexation is going through the combined development plan is going through as well. So, uh, and there's a timing issue where, uh, the annexation would need to take place right before, uh, the vote for the combined development plan. Uh, the way

the timing work that kind of explained it a little bit, but the, uh, there's nothing on the city's behalf to to have to, uh, because someone asked for annexation, you know, uh, there's nothing, you know, impeding on the city that you have to have to follow through with that. So, anytime somebody asks for annexation, we look at all the things that we we do look at uh and determine. Uh there's many times this one is a little bit different because of the the proximity and uh it's in our future land use plan. It's definitely clearly within our urban growth boundary, but we have a lot of requests that I get calls for people that are closer out to Long Hollow of Pike and they want to be annexed and that's not something uh that uh we're really interested in because you know as we discuss plan of service and really while plan of services are that's saying here's how we're going to serve uh that little section uh out there off of Avon. In this particular case, there's really nothing different we're going to do. We're already serving all the way around that we go all the way out to Drake's Point. So there's not necessarily any new services that we're not providing to citizens out there that we couldn't provide with existing staffing. But if you're looking at something that's further out like, you know, near Long Hollow of Pike and it's, you know, kind of a non-ontiguous annexation that isn't even attached to the city, then that'd be a little bit different. Then it'd be like, oh gosh, now we're looking at having to do a new fire station or we're going to have to add more policemen or, you know, we're going to have to add other services. Uh that's not necessarily the case case right here. Uh but there's no there's no reason that the city has to uh uh take an annexation. Uh this is just something that's consideration and this is a recommendation from the planning commission and then it's going to go to Bulma, the elected officials, and then they make the final the final determination. Is that helpful? Barry, you can explain.

I just wanted to make sure there was not a state law somewhere. No going to end up violating one. No, not that not that I'm aware of. No, I don't I don't believe so. Okay, no further discussion. So, now we're to the business side. I entertain a motion if anyone has one to offer.

Uh again, your comments earlier were what fueled these people to make their questions of him. So, we're hoping all of your questions were answered by this back and forth dialogue. If not, there's no further I think. Well, okay. There's no further opportunity for you to speak directly at this time. There'll be other opportunities. Yeah. Now, you did hear him mention that he'll have community meetings in the future if it moves forward one way or the other either in the county or in the city. I think the numbering would have effect.

Okay. Thank you. Again, we're back to the business side. So, any motions from anyone up here? Anybody going to offer a motion? Okay. Remember on the motion, it also has to include a few of these things that Keith had brought up.

I there are nine items there. I uh yeah, the comment was made that this piece of property is going to develop. It's going to happen. And uh I kind of agree with Mr. Evans. You know, we proved it on one side, but we're going to tell the other side no. Um I mean, this may be a failed motion, but we need to make a decision of some kind. So, I'm going to make a motion that we approve and recommend to the board of mayor and alderman the annexation. We approve the uh uh list of the services provided, community services that are going to be provided and we include items 1 through nine on the comments as far as uh the finding of facts that are listed.

Can I add one thing? number four they've already excluded from those. I I don't know how I'm okay with the developer doing that because I understand where where they're coming from and I could have I have no problem with deleting item number four from planning staff. Not anything against the staff. They they do a good job of providing architectural services to development for the community. But I have no problem with agreeing with the developer on that one. Okay. And I will make that motion. And also in your motion, can you mention the fact of that the that the developer is also offering to pave the parking lot,

a $3,500 lot? Yes. We well that we accept his and it be right monies to be used to the benefit of the community that he's serving there. Yeah, that's okay with paving it if they want it, but I personally I think you should leave it as a gra an impervious surface. We're talking about storm water. Make it an imperous impervious service. But if you and the staff agree and the city wants it paved, I'm okay with that. And also one more finding the fact that it's in compliance with the future land use development

and it is right. And it will be and it is. Yes. It will be in compliance. I'll make the motion. May I get a second? We'll go from there. We make a decision. I'll have a discussion point before. Go right ahead. Yeah. So, so uh I want to go back to those nine questions or those nine statement of facts that you mentioned. Uh Mr. Hasty. Um I read these as questions, not as a set of facts. And I think if you read into the questions, the set of facts will conclude that some of these are concerns that we have about the development. Hey Todd. Yes. Are you looking at page eight or are you looking at page seven? These nine here. Go to the next page.

Go to the next page. Those are the ones that are the statement of facts. Okay, I got you. Under the Yeah, good. So that that's good because I made a couple notes there, too. Okay. Uh when you say there are no significance adverse effects and this is for the planning staff

help me get there. I mean I drive the I drive the traffic every day. I see the overcrowding. I see the cars parked all up and down lane. Where what is your definition of adverse impact? I think what it what it would be in this process with the planning commission making the recommendation and then Bulma doing the final action on it would just be their determination on waiting uh because every every development is going to have some adverse impact. It's just weighing out is the adverse impact which any development is going to have is it is it outweighing any community benefit and it's just trying to determine you know what that what's that

so yours is not a conclusion a concluding on fact you're you're stating facts you're not trying to make a draw a conclusion for Bulma is that no that's corre that's correct so this is just okay this is for each uh planning commission member uh to kind of contemplate for themselves on on what this is and then what those what those nine items are are questions to kind of ask yourself as you're reviewing this to kind of as a guide. Uh but those aren't those are just the um uh uh uh to help you in in reviewing kind of your determination. So it fra it frames the facts. It frames at least your your thought process or at least

some of the things you should consider. Um, and again, I I'll I'll let it go at this point other than to say I I have concern about the development. Uh, I'm voting no. I I see the impact of this and I see the future impact. Give it one, two, three years. Still going to be a problem. Um, so again, I that's my last comment on this, but I just want to raise those. Thanks. Thank you. So, we have a motion in front of us. I have not heard a second as of yet. I have heard a second now. So now we will go I'm sorry sir at this point at this point sir at this point

at this at this point sir it is purely up to the commission and it's not including you homes really is about00 okay so we have a motion we have a second now we will go to the electronic vote Motion to approve. Pass with five yeses and three nos.

Go right ahead. Yeah, let me explain. So, so like on that on Todd on the and what you'll that's okay.

Okay. Yeah. So, now we have to go to the next one. Okay. Let me explain something to Todd. All right. Yeah. Hey, Todd. So, so in what you were asking what you were asking while ago, the the that list that Zachary had right there, uh, that comes out of the zoning ordinance. So, that guidance comes out of the zoning ordinance. That isn't a list that we're making up as staff. Yeah, that's what I just I just want to make sure. Yeah, totally. So, thank you.

Okay, y'all. Okay. Sir, sir, can you go outside into that conference room and take that conversation up? Thank you. It's right out there on your left hand side. All right. Next item number nine, zoning ordinance text amendments. Lee, planning staff Keith Free, would you like to speak to? Yes. All right.

This is on the zoning ordinance. Yeah. All right. So, we'll go through. We've got all these different um updates of the zoning ordinance and everyone has uh had uh the draft changes uh and then we have an executive summary uh as well to kind of go through some of the major changes. I'm going to do this fairly quickly, but grab my attention if there's one that I land on uh that you want uh to go in a little bit deeper on. And then this is the zoning ordinance. And after this uh it's a subdivision regulations, which totally separate document, but this one is just going to be the uh uh the zoning ordinance. And I'll just start with item number one. Uh this was just minor uh grammatic grammatical um uh and organizational errors throughout the document. Uh it was a lot of just uh things uh that were just misspelled or incorrectly placed. Uh and there's a lot of those throughout the entire document and so a lot of different cleaning up. Uh item number two, uh the rules for construction of language were added. Uh we added some things to explain uh when there were questions about definitions or questions about how we're interpreting something. just some clear language that could help uh clarify that uh if there was something that was just a little bit vague. So, it's uh it's kind of I think it'll be helpful uh in the future as we're looking at at at different things. Uh item number three at

Did you see that the add-ons too? Yeah, I'm going to do I'm going to do Yes, let me speak to that. We're going to go through the executive summary. Since we did the draft, I've found several things. we also need to go ahead uh I'm I'm proposing to do and I'm going to go through those after I get through get through uh this list. Okay.

Uh and then uh you know uh when we're through there if there's something that we didn't cover uh that anybody has a question about or any proposed change someone would have uh we can go into that as well. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh the next one is item number three at 2.6.1. Uh this is going to give uh the me the author the direct planning director the authority to correct minor errors and uh gives me the ability to correct these errors and uh within the within the approved document. any errors that I find there might be misspellings or just very very obvious things uh and there'd be a process at which if if something did get changed uh then it would be uh noted in the document and documented you know clearly within the document. This will save us from bringing something back if there's just some obvious uh obvious error uh that occurred. Also on number uh item number 433.2 two publish notice. Uh we've got new requirements uh from the state uh that require uh when there are bless you when there are zoning uh text amendments or zoning map amendments that require a 21-day notice instead of a 15-day notice. Uh so we corrected that throughout the document. Uh 3.34 on table number two. Uh we updated annexation to reflect uh the new state notice requirements. Uh this annexation that we went through this evening and are going through that process. There are new uh requirements uh on notice. Uh and uh this is just making sure that we clarify that within our document. Also um 3.5 on item number six vesting. This is clarifying the vesting rules. And what this is is currently the state has vesting laws and the vesting laws are

triggered unless this unless a a community in their zoning ordinance clearly dictates how the vesting is to operate. It functions where when you uh get a plan development vesting starts. When you get construction plans vesting starts when you get a preliminary plat vesting starts. When you get a final plat vesting starts. So, it's got all these starts and stops with vesting that make it very confusing and just keeps extending things out. And so, what we've done here is we've clearly defined uh where vesting starts. And for a project, then we're saying that it starts uh with the preliminary development plan and that's when it starts because you've got site plans and all kinds of other things, you know, following it and then but the clock starts uh earlier on. Uh so that's kind of what that what that whole process is. This cleans this up a lot better and it doesn't leave these just neverending uh vesting issues. Uh they don't just keep on going and going and uh through the protection of vesting. Although with our changes, everything has the proper vesting that the state law allows. So we're not doing anything that's contrary to state law. We are conforming with it. We're just declaring what what we're calling uh vesting and how that those vesting rules work. 4.1 uh.3 uh violations. This is just something the city attorney requested for clarifications. Uh when we cite something, which we do often, uh uh eventually it can be cited daily. So if we have an issue, we might cite it once and then if we keep having the issue, then we might just start citing it every day. And this is just clarifying. We already have the authority to do that, but this is just uh codifying it uh within this uh within this document.

Uh 62 table three. Uh this is correcting any discrepancies uh that we had in that table. Also, it's adding outdoor storage uh areas and smoke shops. Um, currently, uh, outdoor storage is allowed, uh, in commercial and industrial and heavy commercial zones, but it's not really clarified. So, basically, there's a lot of opportunity that you could do outdoor storage in a commercially zoned uh, lot uh, without even a building on it. And uh, and so we kind of ran across that in something here a couple of months ago. And so this kind of complete fixes that loophole and it allows outdoor storage only in heavy commercial and industrial. You can still have outdoor storage, but you need a building and everything. You can't just do outdoor storage in on a commercial commercial lot. This hadn't been a problem, but we did run up to a case just here recently that's that's uh that's uh that's doing that. Um, also smoke shops. So, this is smoke shop, tobacco shops, vape uh vape shops. Um, we're pulling that out. Currently, that's just allowed as a retail use in a commercial zone. And then what we're doing with with this change is we're separating it out and uh creating it by its own definition for these types of shops. And then we're limiting uh to where those can be located. And they can be located, I believe, in general commercial and and heavy commercial uh but only with a conditional use permit. And we've put some limits so that you can't have a u a smoke shop within a,000 ft of another smoke shop. All existing

vape shops or smoke shops that already exist, they'll be grandfathered in and non-conforming and can continue to operate. But this would affect any new uh types of types of these things. U part of the reason for this is we really don't have that issue here yet. Uh but in a lot of other communities there's just a congregation it seem of of those types of of shops uh that end up you know once a couple go in then there's three or four and uh you know that uh uh and those things uh have u have regulations as well uh state regulations associated with them. So we felt like it was appropriate uh to call those out. uh 62 note 13 uh clarified the max vacation rental per lot. Um it's fairly clear that you can only have one vacation rental per lot uh in the areas where they are allowed, but the language wasn't as clear as I wanted it. And this just makes it very clear that you can only have one per lot. Uh so it just kind of clarifies clarifies that. Uh 62 note 14. uh adding some more clarifying notes about outdoor material store storage uh kind of associated with what I talked about talked about earlier uh 63 table 4 this incre this is a increase in minimum lot sizes uh and width uh in the SR3 zone doside neighborhood zone uh and also the multifamily uh zone as well. So, what we're doing here, we've talked uh we've had a few projects in SR3 and multif family uh where we talked about the um the number of lots that we're be able to create out of one lot was a little more than what the planning commission thought, you know, maybe should be

allowed. And what this does, it increases the minimum lot size and probably even more importantly, it increases the minimum lot width uh in all those instances. And in multifamily specifically, uh you can do single family, uh but where currently you could do single family on a 5,000 square foot lot, then uh with the new requirements, uh it would be 7,500 foot lot. So this would make a make a pretty good difference uh on some of those things. uh 63 note 9. This is just further clarifying for HPRs and horizontal property regimes. And then remember what those do the horizontal property regimes uh they allow um uh for our zoning requirements. Even though horizontal property regimes where you don't have to div you don't have to go through the subdivision process when you're dividing property, you could do it all as one lot. uh we do put the standards uh that you could still do that but you have to meet our uh bulk standards for that zone. And so this is something that in we're not aware of any other community that's done this. We did this I think about three years ago uh when we when we made this change. Uh but this protects from a lot of the things specifically probably a good example is in Davidson County uh where a lot of the kind of tall skinnies that's how a lot of that got created was using horizontal property regime and there's just not an opportunity to to do that level of density here using that as a loophole uh to do it. We've kind of tightened and closed that that particular loophole. 7.2 two, table five. Uh this is uh this is again to correct some disparities uh discrepancies with outdoor storage

area and smoke shop uh on that particular table. Similar to that other other table 7.2 2 note 25 uh clarifying parking lots and parking structures. Just making it clear if you have a twostory building uh that the first floor uh could not be a uh parking uh parking lot. Uh this has to do with some things with residential uh in in some of the different zones. 7.4 4 table 6. Uh this is increasing the lot size and the minimum pvious in docside neighborhood. I talked about the increase a little earlier there in dockside neighborhood. Uh currently the minimum pvious area is 0% and we're increasing that to 10%. Uh that was a little 0% was a little bit a little bit low on that. 8.4 general standards just added language that needs to be removed from the draft. That's just getting rid of some things of very low impact. Uh the next the next item reconfigured and rewrote uh 8.9 for clarity. Uh 10.3.2 um we we kept the same language but we just moved it around uh within the document on that 10.34 and 10.35. Uh this is language concerning daycare cent's character uh that it uh um yeah what this is is that if you had a daycare center uh in a residential neighborhood that it would uh that it should follow the architectural design of a residential area so that it wouldn't look commercial. uh because daycare centers can be allowed uh with a conditional use permit in a residential area. Okay. Then we'll go to this next page.

Those next two 10.37 and 10.38 uh that just has to do with uh adding language for wastewater for uh motor vehicle service stations and kennels. It's just uh some things in there like what are you going to do with the K with the waste from the kennel when you spray all that off? The same thing with u a motor vehicle service station when you when you u holes off the floor and everything. Where does that go? And that's really just a water quality issue. And then 10.3.16 on smoke shops. That's just adding uh add the use with regulations. Uh that's what I talked about while ago and that's just getting into all those specifics. This next change uh number 23 10.4.1.5b. Um this is a big this is a big change. Uh this is on accessory buildings. We're proposing to increase the square footage of residential accessory buildings. It it's not for ADUs. This is just like a detached garage or an out building. Uh so if you're under 15,000 foot lot going from 800 ft² to 1,000. If it's 15,000 to third to under 30 going from 1,200 to 1500 square ft² from 30 to less than an acre going from 1500 ft² to 1,800. And if you have more than an acre going from 1,800 square foot to 2,000. One of the reasons that drove this from the staff standpoint, we just had a lot of people going for these items if they're over a 100red or 200 square foot, you know, going to the BCA to get relief so they could uh, you know, make a little bit larger building. Uh, and then looking at it, it seemed reasonable to increase these. This just gives people a little

bit more opportunity uh to do a larger outbuilding in their rear yard. Uh but it's the increases aren't excessive. Uh but the staff feels these are reasonable and then we feel like it probably would reduce the number of requests that go to the BCA uh on these items as well. And most of most of those items, if I'm correct, Timothy, uh most of those items that go to the BCA related to this, uh they actually end up getting approved in in most cases unless it's really excessive. This is a big change. 10.4.9 and 10.410 uh EV charging station requirements. Timothy uh uh did all the work on this one. You know, we didn't really have anything um with EV charging stations. It's kind of slowed down. It's kind of hot and heavy. And now it's EV for some reason. I don't know why. that was.

So, we were concerned because we had some that actually got approved that we just weren't crazy about. And the ones over there, I mean, it looks okay, but uh the example is the one in front of Chicken Salad Chick, the Tesla over there, it's a good-look charging station, but the location of it is just not I mean, it's right out there in our beautiful parking lot with the landscaping. And I think that came before the planning commission to work out, you know, some of the issues we had to work out with that. What this does, uh, for any future charging stations, it pushes it back up on the property. So, there's not really an opportunity to put it, you know, way out front facing in the parking lot. Uh, it tries to get it beside buildings and things like that. So, I think this could be uh could be beneficial. And, you know, part of those, even if they look good, I mean, they're they're monstrous structures. So if it's a shopping center

where do you put it? I mean we we don't want it towards the street but they're not going to want it at their front door either.

So yeah for for uh if you have a big shopping center with large acreage like where the Tesla facility is. You can have it there but it's going to push it like like that Tesla facility would be pushed closer to the building further away from that. It's a private street, but still considered a street. Um, so they they could still do it, but it's going to push it deeper. And then for shallower lots like your typical outlots, um, it means that you can you can do a small charging facility that's got six ports or less and is, you know, if it's within those dimensional constraints, it's got to be 50 ft off of that street. Um, if you want to do a larger one, if you've got the room, you might could do it on the, you know, behind the building, uh, closer to to the rear property line.

So, so under the new zoning ordinances, the Tesla at Chick-fil-A or at Chicken Salad Chick would be pushed closer to Chicken Salad. Correct. How much closer? because well it's got to it's got to be within within 100 ft of the front of the building but it's also got to be at least 80 feet from that street right of way. Okay. So if and I I didn't I didn't do a case analysis that of that particular one but there there's some happy medium there where they could squeeze that in. Okay. It's got to meet those both that both of those constraints.

To Keith's point, thank you Timothy. To Keith's point, I don't think we're going to see a barrage of of permit requests for charging stations for the next two or three years at least. But if I'm a tenant in that shopping center, then a lot of my parking is going to become further distant from my door potentially. I mean, that Tesla, that's a big chunk. That took up how many parking places? Uh, I think they took up about uh eight or 10. But the other thing

that got moved closer, if I'm chicken salad chick, I'm out there waving a croissant at somebody saying, "Wait a minute. You're you're blocking you're blocking access and maybe that's between the tenant and the landlord." But I that one just seems like it's going to be a little bit of a challenge to me to and this does um this requires for a for a larger type facility like the Tesla, it does require site plan approval. It still has to come okay before you all and you're going to have opportunity to look at that. Okay. So, okay. Thank you.

Yeah. Thank you, Timothy. Yeah, there'd be there'd be a little bit of flexibility with that. All right. Uh 10.411. This just reorganizing some things about fences and just making it a little bit a little bit clearer. It didn't it didn't really change change anything. uh 10.51 on table 12. Uh this is just uh for tennis courts, basketball courts are similar. Uh and looking over this, we uh we we're removing the rear yard encroachment uh on that table. It allowed a basketball court or a tennis court to be right up against the lot line. So, we hadn't really had a problem with that, but we just kind of caught it. So uh to remove to remove that uh 11.2.7.2 uh the chart parking uh dimensions this is just something just with the um uh the math of uh how the angles of the parking work and we just corrected some things that were not correct uh on that chart. 11.4.10 uh this is on buffer yards. This is just clarifying what we're already doing as a staff uh in Docside neighborhoods because Docside neighborhood is a true mixeduse development. So we don't want to buffer mixed uses residential and commercial within a mixeduse neighborhood. We'll end up you know having 20 foot buffers all over the place and you know really not maximizing uh that true mixeduse nature of that area. Um 11.4.113 outdoor storage area. It's just uh talking about the buffer area clarification. If you have that then it's there was kind of some ambigu ambiguity um uh about how much buffer was required. Uh we felt that there needed to be buffer there. So we just clarified that 11.42

tree preservation. And this is just clarifying planning uh locations of uh was this one Timothy that about if we couldn't do it then doing it up on the property. Yeah, this was one where we're in the process right now of doing some plans uh specifically right now we're doing Rockland Road. So there's some things where we're doing some beautifification uh plans uh on that area for trees. So, if there's an occasion we don't have room um uh or there might not be room for a development to put their trees on their property, we might work out something to put it on the right ofway or vice versa. If we're doing a project, then when we can work with a property owner, we may put our tree on on on their property uh in order to do on some of these tight spaces uh to do these beautifification projects. So, um and 12.2 2.1 we added dockside neighborhood single family residents under design review. Uh we need to make sure we're looking at what those what those are. There was a little bit of a loophole uh in that. Uh table 16 at 2 12.2.4 uh increase the percentage of brick or stone and doside neighborhood. Uh currently it's 0%. We want to in increase that to 30%. And the idea with 30% is in that'll that'll get the at least the lower half of uh buildings in Dockside neighborhood. That would be brick or stone. And that's kind of what that is right now. There is no uh no requirement.

Keith, I want to ask you on that. The brick requirement, does that have to be in the front or back or does it matter? Uh it needs to be every side. Every side. Okay. Yeah. 30% on every side unless uh unless the planning commission grants a waiver. Oh, okay.

Also, that next one, 12.3.6.2A, uh that's clarifying materials. We're uh on Dockside Neighborhood, uh we're just clarifying that we're also allowing uh the Hardy board uh as a as an approved material in Dockside Neighborhood. And part of that is that nature of things will be residential and then it'll be commercial and then there could be commercial residential trying to keep a um more residential character but yet still commercial but not uh not any kind of excessive commercial look you know within that area. So this gives gives that opportunity to do that. The next thing as well 12.3.6.5A 6.5A uh the glazing percentage in Dockside neighborhood uh decreasing that from the typical 60% uh that we already have and that's typically what we have in our commercial zones down to 30%. It's just within that mixed neighborhood. we're going to have older houses and, you know, houses that get built that then get converted to commercial. Uh, and that a 30% glazing in the front is more compatible than a storefront glazing uh for that type of type of use. Uh, chapter 13 that was completely reorganized. That was the sign ordinance. Everything I I'll call out some things that changed uh here as I move move down. Uh but generally we totally moved everything around. Uh it was just kind of all over the place. It it didn't really flow really well. So there's a lot of changes to it, but it's mostly just moving around what we you know what we already have. And I'll call out some of those things that are that are a little bit different. Let me see. But not right now. Yeah. Yeah, I will. Yeah, I will. Table 18, we added the dockside neighborhood allowance up to 80 square foot. So, we

had this thing where if you had a multi-tenant, then you can do a larger sun, but you can only do the larger sun if you had at least 1.5 acres. So, we found that there were a lot of properties, yeah, that were multi-tenant that we want them to get them all on one sign, but this was keeping that from happening. And uh we ran into this on our sign grant program that it was kind of an obstacle uh as well. And uh this change this change might encourage some uh folks uh to do a new sign uh versus some of the older kind of signage uh that's out there. 13.5.16 increase the distance from 386 to from 200 feet to 2,000 ft. What this is is there's really only two properties that that could meet the requirements of this. This is the uh artistic uh commercial artistic signage and really it's only something that I believe the streets of Indian Lake and maybe Glen Brook Village uh or Glenbrook, you know, could meet. It's the idea that they could have an artistic sign. We already had that on there, but it had to be within 200 ft of 386. And by moving this to 2,00 specifically for the streets of Indian Lake, you know, where they've got their sign, they can't really even fit all their things on their on their sign, but they're maxed out. But then what this would give the opportunity is if the streets of Indian Lake wanted to come up with a sign to replace the one they have, they could come to the planning commission and go through this process to do it. And right now, they can't do that because uh there's the limit of 200 feet from 386. So, and it doesn't mean we want to necessarily give it. It just depends on, you know, if they propose something. Uh, but I don't have anything that they're proposing, you know, currently. Uh, but the one that we have in there that we changed a few years ago, it was in there because

they wanted to do something and I think they even came and got a site plan approved for that big sign

uh out on 386. So, we'll see what happens with with that. And this is something from an economic development standpoint. you know, we want to do things where we're we're balancing our our our uh regulations and specifically in this case, our sign regulations to make sure we're keeping the bar high for what our community looks like and the appearance and all of that. But we also want to be sensitive to uh from the economic side with the businesses to do something fair, especially with uh larger developments, commercial developments, you know, that have a have a lot of uh businesses in them. Number 38 13 uh.8.3. This is a change of use uh requires new conforming uh signage when use changes. This is something on the add-ons I'm going to talk about on my add-ons. I'm pulling back from this. So on my add-ons I'm pulling back from the intensity at which uh we were proposing this. What this was and I'm I'm going to request that we drop it back. what it was. It was going to be, hey, anytime the property changed hands and you had a grandfathered sign, they had to replace the sign, which we could do, but uh I think it was just reaching too far. So my add-on to change this would be anytime a business changes truly changes use not from a restaurant to a restaurant but from a restaurant to a dentist office or whatever then you've got to get rid of your non-conforming sign and you've got to get a conforming sign ground sign specifically. It could be wall signs too. And so uh that's one thing that we're we're we're looking to do. Final page. We're getting close here on these. Number 39, 13.8.4. Uh abandonment. Uh this is talking about this is a pretty high priority uh

change. This is abandonment on a non-conforming sign. If it's been discontinued uh for 90 days, then the sign loses its non-conforming status and must be removed. Uh we're we're currently we're allowing people to put blanks. So when you see those white blanks, we let people put white blanks. Uh you know, if there wasn't a business there, uh then uh um then that sign loses its non-conformity in 90 days and they need to they need to remove the sign or bring it into conformity. So he might need his mic on about that. If it's a multi-tenant Oh, let me get your mic on. So that Oh, sorry.

So couple of questions about that. If it's a multi-tenant retail building and one tenant vacates and it that space is vacant for 6 months, nine months that doesn't impact the whole center. No, that's correct. That would be something in those that kind of thing. Uh which would be a little bit discretionary authority. You know, we would see that as well there was a couple of those businesses that are out, but it's really the totality of the the whole thing. So it it would be very difficult for a multi-use tenant sign to meet that criteria.

So next question. Let's say we have a retail building that single tenant building tenant moves out and it takes six months to find a new tenant. Then if it's an old sign, sorry Mr. New tenant, you got to build a new one.

That's correct. And that and that is a that is a new hard line, you know, so just so everybody understands that's a pretty hard line. Um but u it's one I think what we've seen is the bringing especially with this sign grant program we have. Uh bringing sign non-conforming signs into compliance is really making a pretty big difference out there visually. And uh I think as long as we're consistent uh in our enforcement of it, I think it will be accepted, but understanding it could create some difficulty for some folks and that there are some timing issues. There there will be some there will be some landlord and tenants that will not be happy over that one. So now

when you when you define use, if it's again just using retail since that's where most of the signage is and where we're going to have the most issues. Let's say it's clothing store today and tomorrow it's going to be a record store. Is that a change of use or is it it's still retail? That's still retail. That's still retail. Yeah, that's still retail. Okay. Now, if you were changing that to a restaurant, yes, it would have to be removed. Okay.

Okay. Thank you. Uh 14.7 compliance with non-conforming status of structure. Uh this was real low prior. It was just some language uh to clean up some stuff. 15.5 removal of unneeded cell tower requirements. There was some things Timothy poured through on the about requirements in there for cell towers and there was just some things that didn't make any sense. I think he discussed it maybe last time that we approved that fresh run cell tower. There were stuff that we were responsible for that we then it clearly said we weren't responsible for it. So this this kind of clarifies that uh and cleans cleans that up. And then uh 16.3 we just added some definitions uh for the EV charging stuff. U some things about signs, smoke shops, and visual visual vision clearance uh triangle. And then the last thing, appendices. We're just removing the subdivision letter of credit template because it needs to go into the subdivision regulations. Before I go to the add-ons, and I'll do it really quickly. Is there any anything anybody has any questions about the stuff that we just went over?

Um, at 15:15 we skipped over cell tower certification requirement, but is that for a licensed engineer to sign a letter saying there's no explosive materials on site and that kind of stuff. I'll let Timothy explain that one. It is not that certification. That's still required. This is a requirement that a engineer every 5 years certifies that the tower uh is still is still a viable tower. It's not going to fall down. Okay.

And we we have not we've never gotten those before. Um, so what this removes that requirement that they that the city collects that every 5 years, but it still retains the city's um ability to to require that if at any point there's a problem that crops up, we can go in and say you got to provide that certificate to us. Love it. Thanks for doing the due diligence on that.

All right. Anybody else? Okay. If not, I'll go ahead and go roll through these add-ons. Uh these are just things that we uh realized since we did the uh since we did the draft. Bless you. 3.4 3.3.4 table 2 add to table two the BCA appeal of a planning department interpretation. Uh only have published not mailed. Yeah, this is just cleaning something up on table two. uh uh on uh checking that box is what that was. It was some incorrect incorrect information on there. Uh the next one 3.3.4 table 2. Uh this is also cleaning up that table. Uh there was a box that's not checked uh for the uh in the annexation on mailed notice. So we just need to uh clean that up. Uh 4.11, this is remove assigned permit language and reference 3.13. What that is is just referring to something uh in the document where it refers uh to uh to another another part of the document. Just a real simple simple change. 6.2 7.2 to uh this is just clarifying on that smoke shops how that thousand ft is calculated and it's uh calculated and measured along the streets and we just want to make make that clear.

Keith, I have a question on the smoke shop. Yes. You mentioned,000 ft from another smoke shop. Does does that th00and u feet requirement also apply to schools and churches and those things? I think it Let me hold on just a second. I think it did. I think it was a,000 ft. We'll We'll find out. We'll find out here real quick. Caitlyn's looking at that. I thought this one was just to avoid having multiple vape shops within Yeah. too close together. Th

This add-on, this particular add-on is just clarifying how you measure it. But the earlier one we talked about I think has that Caitlyn. So the separation it shall not be located within a thousand feet measured property line to property line for a public public or private school, daycare center or home uh youth center, community center, recreational facility, a park, church or religious institution, hospital or any other similar uses where children are regularly gathering.

Okay, great. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. Um got that 13.2.1 under design review and conformance ad denials may be appealed to the planning commission. So that's talking about I think when staff is doing design review uh just to clarify that if they don't like our answer on it, it can be appealed to the planning commission. It was just not clear, you know, if they had any any options after that. The next one, table 17, 13.3.1.2. Uh, this is just E's and P's got switched around on that table. And we just got to clarify uh clean that clean that up. 13.5.1.2. And this is just adjusting the numbering to clarify that clearly that changeable copy uh is under the ground sign principle. So the way it was kind of reading in the proposed draft almost made it sound like you could have changeable copy and you could have a principal ground sign, but your your principal ground sign can be changeable copy, but you can't have you can't have two signs. So that was just just kind of clarify uh clarify that and just removing some other language that wasn't necessary because it's already covered uh under ground uh ground sign principle 13.5.16 just note below G for major regional development artistic sign uh would read Bulma not BZA uh that was just um under under an image it was saying that you had to go to the BCA but uh or go to Bulma but it should have Bulma it should have read Bulma not not the BCA so uh 13.5.2.5

add language that ch changeable electronic copy signs may be allowed as a wall sign for indoor theaters to display current and future showings with approval from the planning commission. This was something that is really kind of the uh Hendersonville performing arts uh over there. Uh we don't allow any changeable copy, new changeable copy to go on walls. Uh but where you have a theater, there'd be an opportunity where you could do digital or manual changeable copy, but you'd have to come to the planning commission to get that approved. We just felt like there needed to be an avenue that if somebody wanted to do something like that uh and hopefully it was quality then they could bring it to the planning commission uh to do that

exclusively for indoor theaters. That's correct. Okay.

That's correct. Because we did we did talk about and I think we talked about it at the work session. We talked about um we talked about have we ever seen a good digital wall sign and we just couldn't think of one that was really you know something that we would want and so uh changeable copy is not allowed on wall signs but this is the one exception. It does give at least a pathway uh to that uh 13.5.2.7 and this is just removing incidental signs under wall signs. These types of signs are really typically only ground related and not wall signs. 13.5.31E uh that should should should remain shell should be shell uh instead of May uh for a monument style sign. So we just wanted to uh make that make that clear. 13.5.42 42 add zones after commercial and industrial kind of got lost in there uh because it was a couple of pages in just to clarify that just simple simple little change and we're almost there on this one. Uh 13.5.4.3 add zones after residential also uh in both of those uh both of those things there's I think two places uh 13.8.3 8.3 uh change of use remove the ownership change uh triggering compliance with non-conforming signage. Uh like I was talking about earlier, we don't we don't want to go that far. Um 8 13.8.51 and two voluntary replacement signage provide clarity of no cost for sign permit add if available uh for uh the sign replacement grant funding. So, we just wanted to make sure the way it was written, you know, we don't want

somebody saying, "Hey, you're saying I can have a sign for no cost." Uh, so we want to make sure that's the permit uh on that. And on the funding only if it's available. So, we just kind of wanted to throw that in there. And the final thing was the appendices, letter of letter of credit, removing a reference to subdivision from the language. And that is all of the add-ons. And so, uh, with this, um, I'll open it up for if anybody else has any anything else with the zoning ordinance they want to, uh, want to get into. Uh the motion moving forward with this would be, you know, adopting recommending the uh changes to the zoning ordinance outlined or to the draft of the zoning ordinance changes as well as the add-ons uh that were listed in the staff comments. And then that would take care of all these things that I've that I've went through. So move

I I did want to recognize how much work that this is and thank you for that. I went through the document um in pretty close detail and you guys have done a lot of work. So I I appreciate that. Thank you.

Thank thank you very much. I will recognize that uh uh that Timothy did a lot. uh Caitlyn, the whole staff did. Uh Jay Ritterbeck uh did quite a bit on this as well and uh the whole staff really uh really chipped in as well as our public works staff as well. Uh look through this. So we're hopeful that there are no changes that we really need to make in the in the next couple years. This should should take care of all of those all those different different things. We have a motion. I'll second the motion and we'll vote by roll or by electronics.

Keith, how often do planning departments typically do this process just on an as needed basis? Uh typically uh planning departments, you know, they would do a revision like this probably every five years, but they would always have one a couple of things every year, but usually a major revision every five years. Uh for us, we did a major revision about three years ago, maybe three two 2022, 2020, 2022. Yeah, we did 2020 2022 and now

2025. Uh so this should be they were all pretty pretty significant but we had a lot of we had a lot of different adjustments that we wanted to make because over a period of time communities change and the uh the desires of the community change about what it wants and the vision is for the future and uh you know the zoning ordinance does need to change to address some of those different things.

Thank you. And I'll echo what Commissioner Kerr said, applaud the effort and applaud the frequency that you're diving into this detail because I think when you make smaller incremental changes, it's much easier to manage the evolving needs of a community rather than making grand changes every six or seven years. So well done. Thank you. And that motion passed unanimously. So next we have a resolution before us adopting the proposed. Really quick chairman motion passed with eight yeses. Okay.

Next before us we have a resolution adopting the proposed revisions to the Hendersonville subdivision regulations. Uh project zoom 006823-2025 uh leads to planning staff is Keith Free. So, speak to this one, Keith. Yes. Off drop or anything?

No, I'm I'm good. This is only 15 of these and there are no add-ons. Uh, and I'll uh I'll go through this I'll I'll try to go through it fairly fairly quickly. I will say we we did this subdivision regulation a few years ago. We did a major revision of it. this revision uh the majority of the revisions uh uh came from the public works department on addressing some different things but we had some planning things in here in here as well. So I really appreciate uh their efforts uh to get this uh throughout the whole document. There were minor uh changes uh for errors. A lot of things added regarding wastewater language throughout the document. Uh 1.12 on setback deviations. Uh add an example uh and mailed notice. Uh we added recorded to the example and changed uh from publish to mailed notice uh from shell to should. So, what this is, you know, we had that setback deviation. And so, what we're going to do is if we have that again in the future, we did a courtesy mailing. Uh, but this will this will make it where we're going to notify the adjacent property owners, you know, whenever we have a setback deviation because if I live next door to uh a setback that was being changed, I would want to I'd want to be aware of it. Uh, so we're doing that. Uh, and I think that's something we talked about uh, here at the planning commission that we did. Uh, this is going to give uh, give me the as a director the authority to correct minor errors just like uh, we did with the um, uh, the subdivision the the zoning ordinance. Uh, on 2.2, this is uh, what I talked about about vesting. This vestifi uh clarifies the festing rules uh and uh just like we did in the zoning ordinance and we did

the same thing here. So it mirrors it uh mirrors that exactly uh 2.34 we rewarded the shity language for land disturbance uh permit shies uh was rewarded. It's a simple change. 2.4.5 4.5 we removed decreased the number of units and added water quality language. That's just a minor minor change in there. Uh we on 2.55 added construction plan approval time limits. This is a pretty big change. Uh uh we have not had a time limit of when a construction plans actually go bad. So they could last for years. Plus we had that whole thing with vesting uh which a construction plans you know could uh could start restart the vesting clock. Uh so this uh this this addresses that grandfathering in all open projects.

Yes. All open projects are still vested as they were vested. Yes. These are these are going to c these are going to catch new projects that are being submitted. What is the time for vesting? for the construction. It's a good question. What uh can you uh look and see what that is in the So, the way it works is you've got the preliminary plat. Can you talk a little closer to Mike there? Thank you.

The preliminary plat is good for three years. The construction plans would come through at that point. So, if the preliminary plat expires, then the construction plans also expire. If a final plat is in place and it expires, the construction plans also expire. So max for the time limit for the preliminary plat and the final plat is 3 years each. So max is six years total. Okay. Thank you. So it so it just it links them together. Uh so that construction you'll never have a situation where you still got a valid construction plan and your preliminary plat or your final plat you know is no longer valid. Makes sense

which isn't the case now which is can really it creates confusion and it created a lot of confusion I think with Fountain uh no Falcon Ridge. Yeah. So all right thank you commissioner 2.3, 4.3, and 2.6.5. Remove the allowance for time extensions for preliminary and final plats instead of having a bunch of time extensions on all of this. Let's just we're just changing it where it just goes with the vesting because really it's vested by state law anyway. So whether we approved an extension or not, uh, you know, but we can we and then it just gets rid of the extensions where you could give an extension on vesting. I think that's still in there that you could maybe give an extension, but it it doesn't do it the way that it is that it is now. Um 3.2.41A 41A lot compatibility would not apply to subdivisions totaling less than five lots. So, you know, when we're subdividing uh lots, when we're subdividing lots and we do lot compatibility, if if it's only four lots, there's really not very many lots to do lot compatibility. So, and sometimes it can really skew it can skew the numbers uh you know if you've only got four lots. So, this is saying lot compatibility would only occur in phases where you had more than four more than more than four lots. So, you'd have to have five lots or more. Uh is kind of what we is what we've run into.

So, today it's what what are the standards today? Yeah, there's no there's no limit on the lot compatibility. You you could be a three lot phase in a subdivision and we do the lot compatibility, but um we haven't really run I don't think we've really run into any that small, but we've kind of run some different numbers. And if you had some odd lots, it would really it could turn out to something, you know, kind of odd when we're we're calculating. If you had those that had two and three lots, are they being grandfathered in at all or is there anything to grandfather?

Well, the lot the lots are okay. It's just creating new lots.

So, it's just about creating the new lots. So, when you got um I'll just kind of explain it real quick. So, when you got say a phase in a subdivision that has 10 lots and they're all whatever size that they are and then you've got one lot that may be a little bit bigger than the others and you want to divide that and create two lots. And for example, if it's SR1, even if you had 40,000 square foot, 20,000 square foot is the minimum requirement for the lot size. So you might think, oh well, I can divide that into two lots. Well, that's where lot compatibility comes in. Then we run the lot compatibility and then we determine, yeah, you can't do that. Even though you can meet the minimum um zoning requirements, you can't meet lot compatibility. And really all lot compatibility is uh trying to make sure that we don't have, you know, this neighborhood that's already fully developed and then somebody's coming in dividing up lots and they create lots that are off skewed and they're really not, you know, appropriate and it, you know, and that's really that's really what lot compatibility is.

Okay. I think Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. I didn't know you had a question. No, I didn't. Oh, I just making comment. No, Jill. John. I'm sorry. I said, you said Jim only got me started. John. Yeah. I got a question. I'm not sure if this is the the time or place to do this, but we we've had occasion in the past two or three that I can remember specifically where we have larger lots that the buildings are torn down and they divide the lots into smaller lots. And the process to do that as I understand it is that lot has to be somewhere near the size of the lots the average size of the lots around it. Yes.

And from my perspective I I see no advantage to the community or the city to lower uh to reduce the size of a lot in an existing neighborhood smaller than the average of the lots that are around it. Right. So do we have a a standard number on that that we use or we do um when we calculate that then you know there's all kinds of calculations we use but I think it's 90%. So basically if on the average you do something that's 90% of the average then we allow you to subdivide the lot.

Can we make that 100%? How do we do that? Well, you could just through this process, you could just in the approval of the subdivision regulations, you could just add that on there that approvening it with the draft uh with this one with that change to uh increase that from 90% to 100% regarding lot compatibility. I would like to add that to the motion when the time comes. Okay. And then that would that would do that. Really what that would do is you would you would truly have only average lots could be created not just close.

Yeah. It'd have to be right on the the 100% would just do that. Is that that is correct, right? Okay. Yeah, that is it. The only thing, John, and just as a point, what if you ran into a easement issue in there and that screwed the lot size up? Do you really want to wound that land owner with that problem? You understand? Uh, don't think so. I'm just I'm just asking if there was an easement, if there was something that came in and took that lot down to the 94th 95th percent. Wouldn't that be a BCA thing?

I don't know. I'm not sure. If we put 100% in there, are we eliminating that from a BCA thing? That's not a BCA. Yeah, you can't. Go ahead. Yeah. Yeah. You can't you can't take that to the BCA. Okay. Uh that would I'm just making sure you're getting the intent you're wanting out of this. Well, the intent is to keep somebody from putting two little cracker boxes in between two nicer houses by virtue of the fact that they there's three lots. Yeah, that are smaller and I understand what your intent is. That's happened in several places. So would 90% get it or you know because there a lot of times there's these unforeseen things that I'd rather see it 120% frankly.

So so there are just stop that all together. There's really two criteria. It really wrecks neighborhoods. There's really two criteria um that we calculate for. One is 90% pertains to the average lot frontage. But then we also look at the requirement is um the the average area of the lot. Uh you multiply that by 75%. Oh 75% for area, 90% for lot frontage. And and I'm still not understanding why it's not 100%. I mean, is there do we want to make the lot smaller in neighborhoods so that we could put more houses in them? Is that our objective? Or

do we want to maintain the neighborhood like it is? I mean, I'm not understanding the the the reasoning here. Yeah, this is this is this is just not that it can't change. It's just been it's just been longstanding, you know, calculation. Uh but um then that would be then that would be changing both of those to 100%. Yeah. So what would you say 75 and 90? Yeah. So changing the 75 and 90 to 100 and 100 on that on that calculation because you'd have to have 100

just to make it not possible. I mean, why why would we do that unless there was three acres out here that somebody was sitting on and then uh we would still match the the lots around it. Point being, we're we're about built out. We know that. Uh we have lots and lots and lots of houses that are being remodeled nicely. Yeah. In town. So, why would we take away from that quality to to build smaller houses on the same lot? I I I just don't see where we're helping anybody by doing that. Yeah. the hund the 100 and 100 would the 100 and 100 would reduce the potential of subdividing a lot an existing lot. So yeah,

that's my objective. I maybe I'm off base here. It would reduce it, but it would also level it up equal with the other existing lots. Mhm. So you really the only way the only if you did it 100 and 100 then the only way you could ever subdivide is if I'm just I'm not this isn't the calculation but you had a threeacre you know not three acre you had an acre lot and then you know all the other lots were you know a half acre half acre

you know what I mean it'd need to be something that was pretty significant to bring those averages in but if it was something where all the lots were 20,000 square ft and then yours was, you know, uh 45. It it depending on how many houses that we're calculating, it it you it may not be possible uh to do it, but I I know what you're I know what you're saying. It would reduce the number of new lots that could be created from existing lots, which is again my objective. I totally understand.

Key question. Let let let's just as an example, let's say you had a lot that's 1.3 acres and you had one lot that's.9 acres. Same subdivision, right? Yes. What are you measuring the 100% on? Is it the 0.9 or the 1.3 or or an average of the two? It's the it's the average. Okay. We're calculating all of it. So you take every lot. Yep. And you do a simple average basically and come up with square footage. That's correct. And that has to be 100%. That's correct. Well, you throw you throw out outliers. They're like more than 50% above the above or below the throw out the high and the low. Go with the average.

And then on the width, we do the same thing where, you know, we're looking at what are all the widths of all the lots at the setback and then averaging what that would be. Is that in line with what you're thinking? Okay. Yes. Okay. What about the house compatibility? I haven't gotten there yet. What if the house is built across a lot line and you consolidate two lots into one? I mean, you've got a lot of variations. And I know there are answers to all of that, but but my objective is again

to let's let's not let's not take an existing neighborhood and take a house that's on a nice lot and because it meets those average requirements, all of a sudden we have two smaller incompatible houses in that existing neighborhood. Okay. It just doesn't seem that that serves anybody's purpose except the the person building the houses. Yeah. Comments, too. Go ahead.

My question with this is we're basically talking about the two peninsulas is is where we're So, how many how many lots do we c put into that calculation? cuz other than hidden point there's I mean there's a lot of a lot of lights back through there. So how many how many do you use to get your calculation? Yeah, I'm I don't want to belver this because it's getting close to 10:00 but sorry it's for another discussion.

No, it's okay. It it's driven it's driven by the phase. So, if you had a 100 lot subdivision and it was broken into uh four phases and there's 25 lots in each phase, wherever your lot is you want to subdivide, just that phase of the subdivision, that's the only area within a certain area within that phase. That's the only area we're looking at. We're not looking at the entire subdivision or a mean of like uh the uh entire peninsula or anything. So, it's real specific to that section and phase of your particular development. Has to It has to be within a named subdivision. Yeah. Which mean there are some lots out there that aren't in a subdivision, right?

Well, that's kind of where I was headed. Not not many but

and then the reason for four lots or less. We have a lot of lots that get created that are two acre lot you know two threeacre lots and there's three or four of them you know but they're not really for development you know and then that lot we don't want lot compatibility to kick in on these super larger lots that are just getting ready for development at some point. We don't want to hamstring those those things, but we do want to address lot compatibility at the street level so that if your neighbors, you know, tears down the house and wants to subdivide the property, it's compatible generally with your lot size and the lot the lot size of the uh other uh homes in your particular section of that subdivision.

And this does apply just to residential and not commercial.

Yeah, that's correct. Okay. Okay. So, you just would need to add that as a an add-on to that. Okay. All right. Uh, this is also about lock compatibility 3.2.41C. Lot compatibility. Right now on culde-sacs, the way it's written, it doesn't really matter if it's a culde-sac. We're counting the other lots that aren't culde-sac lots, you know, in that. And so what we're suggesting here is when we're doing lot compatibility for culde-sacs, we're just counting the culde-sac lots in that particular section, which we feel would be a more fair approach. Uh, which probably would even be still be u good to add that especially if we're doing the 100% uh on this um 3.2.6 6.5. This was driveway and sidewalk requirements. Uh I think that had to do with slope uh was something that public works had on there. 3.3.56 traffic impact study uh remove the language and refer to a separate public works document. Uh they've got their traffic impact study uh uh document they have and it's referring uh referring to that. Uh 3.10.5 10.5 add notes about underground and above ground utilities. That's just a simple wording. 5.2 add definitions for city engineer or designate, permanent storm water control measure, public work uh works director or design, uh storm water management facilities, and water quality repairarian uh buffer. Uh so we're going to add those definitions and then the appendices. We're just going to remove the annexation flowchart and uh remove the construction and going to remove construction plan checklist. And that's

everything that I had. Was there any other questions uh about the subdivision regulations? Charles, I see you're in the queue. I see you're going to remove the construction 10 plan check. You say you're going to add a new one. What you said? That's what it says on there. What is that on? You going to just remove it? It allows for the flexibility if we need to update the checklist. Oh, that's right. Yeah. Okay. That brings up another question or so. In the packet on the footnotes for these documents, it refers to an ordinance number for the subdivision regulations.

This doesn't go to the alderman, does it? No. Yes. This is just a document from the planning commission. That's correct. That is correct. So, If it's an appendes to the document, wouldn't you have the option of changing it anytime you want to anyway? Well, it would still have to be it would still have to be approved by the planning commission. Planning commission. Yeah. And that's why I wanted we wanted to take out the checklist because those things can change and we didn't want to have to if the checklist changed then bring it back to the planning commission. You know, if we had add something to the to the checklist. Okay.

Yeah. Just we'll just reference it. But also several places in this document you refer to the city of Hendersonville construction spender standards and specifications. Yeah. Where are those? I have a state of them and I can't find them. That's a that's a good question, Stephen. So, they were posted online at one point in time and then um our website changed. I can't remember exactly maybe a year and a half ago and we've been working to revise that site to get it reposted again. So, um that change hasn't occurred to get them reposted. But

okay, you know, those are documents I know that are not necessar that you want to protect as far as the subdivision regulations are concerned, but if you got an engineer coming to town to dei to design a subdivision, he's expecting to find all he needs to know in your subdivision regulations and zoning ordinance, you know, and those documents sometimes are very difficult to find, you know. I mean I I mean I don't know what they are but I mean

and when we do receive a request for our standards we do share that that document with the developer but again I understand your concern and we again we have been working to get those reposted on our website. Okay. Is that all Charles? Yeah. Okay, Timothy, do you have anything you were saying? Oh, sorry.

Okay. All right. So, now we need a motion on this resolution and I would suspect John, you would like to offer it since you have an amendment you want to add to it. So moved that someone will help me with the wording for what just

it would be uh to adopt uh the proposed changes to the subdivision regulations. Yes. uh including uh removing on compatibility uh calculations for lots on compatibility standards removing the 90 90% and 75% calculation and replacing uh those with 100% calculations for lot compatibility. Yes. So moved. So moved. There's his motion. Do I have a second? Second. We have a second from Mr. Kerr. So, we'll vote this by electronic.

Motion passed with eight yeses. Thank you. Good job, Keith. All right. Next, we have staff level projects approved. Do I need to go through and read these to everyone or have has everybody seen this? Anything that uh Keith you want to talk about on these? Uh no, Mr. Chairman. What about the pending? Anything you want to speak about on those? Uh no, Mr. Chairman.

Okay, we'll skip over both of those. They all of you all can read those for yourselves. Then the last thing we have is projects that are currently deferred by the applicant. Uh Keith brought this up today to me in our meeting. Wanted to make sure everybody was aware of this. They're going to start trying to post these on our agenda so that people know that are anything that's been pulled and is pending, you know, has been withdrawn by the applicant and asked for a later date, they'll show up here. That way, people will know about it and the community will be able to keep up with its progress. And you can see the one that was pulled last time, JLR, uh, is expected to be on the agenda on the October 7th meeting. Okay, any questions about that? All right. So, we'll move on. Next one's planning director comments. You have anything else you'd like to say?

No comments this evening. All right. So, I'll take a motion for adjournment. Motion. All right. Do I have a second? Barry, you should have volunteered for it. You're the one talking time. All agree. Yes. No. Okay. Any nos? We'll move on. Thank you. Have a great night, y'all. We can build a mule log. Be good.