Regional Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the July 14th, 2026 Johnson City Regional Planning Commission meeting. There are two opportunities for members of the public to address the Planning Commission during this meeting. During the public comment period at the beginning of the meeting or during the public hearing, which is heard at the time a specific agenda item is brought forward for discussion. The public comment period is intended to allow members of the public to address any comments to the Planning Commission, whether or not those comments are related to a topic that is on the agenda. Public hearing comments are limited to certain classifications of topics and those agenda items for which there is a public hearing are indicated on the agenda. To be eligible to speak during the public comment period, you must have registered to speak at least 12 hours before this meeting. Public comment is limited to 12 people to make sure the Commission has time to conduct its business. To be respectful of everyone's time, we would ask that you speak only once on any given topic. Speaking time is limited to three minutes for members of the public, with applicants given 10 minutes to present their case. For both public comment and public hearing, I will open the floor at the appropriate time. If you come forward to speak, please introduce yourself by giving your name and address. Your comments should be directed only to the Commission. I now call the meeting to order at 6.02. Commissioner Williams, would you lead us in the invocation pledge, please? Please pray with me.

Dear Heavenly Father, we thank you for this beautiful summer day. We thank you for your love and your grace. We're thankful for this great city and we ask that you continue to pour your blessings down upon us. We're thankful for the planning department and our city support staff and these men and women that serve on this commission. We ask for your guidance and your wisdom as we make decisions tonight. And we pray those decisions will bring glory to you. And we ask all these things in Jesus' name. Amen. Please stand for the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you, Commissioner Williams. Okay. The first item on our agenda this evening is the approval of the agenda. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? I move we approve the agenda as presented. Thank you.

I'll second.

Thank you. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Thank you. The approval of the minutes from the last meeting, if everyone has had the opportunity to review those minutes.

Is there a motion to approve the minutes? Mr. Chairman, having reviewed the minutes, I'll make a recommendation to approve it as presented. Thank you.

Second.

Thank you.

We have a motion and a second.

Any discussion? Okay. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Okay. Any opposed? No. Okay. Public comment on the agenda. We gather we have one gentleman who missed the cutoff. Why? He's not here. There is no public comment this evening. The consent agenda, has everyone had the opportunity to review the items on the consent agenda, which is the Keebler Meadows Phase 1A bond reduction, Keebler Meadows Phase 1B bond reduction, and the Phase 1B bond release? Does anyone have any questions, concerns, want to pull anything from consent? If not, is, sorry. I would move that we accept the consent agenda as presented.

I'll second.

We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Consent agenda is approved. Thank you. New business, item 7.1, Keebler Meadows phase 1c final plat.

Good evening, commissioners. I'm Whitney Hodges. I'm the planning manager and I'll be presenting this evening. Just to kind of orient to you of where this is, this is in Keebler Meadows. It's phase 1c. So it's kind of that front section. It will be seen along Sam Jekins Road. In your packet, it's for 53 homes, and there will be an extension of two public roads. So in your packet, you did receive the final plat, and this is just for if we need information, I wanted to put those up there. But they are meeting the subdivision requirements, just to give you some site data for the setbacks. They're meeting their lot width requirements, and like I said, those two streets that they'll be extending, and water and sewer is available. They will be posting a bond of $338,000 before this plaque can be recorded. Staff recommends approval with that bond amount, and these are your decision options.

Thank you, Ms. Hodges. Does anyone have any questions of staff? Okay. Seeing none, but understanding that the applicant is here, does the applicant wish to say anything? No? Okay.

Well, that looks relatively straightforward, I think. Mr. Chairman, it's pretty straightforward. There's not any deviations from the, from Leroy Pratt, so I'll make the approval to present. the final plan and accept the 338,000 bond as presented.

I'll second that.

Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Okay. Heather, would you call the roll, please?

Commissioner Aldridge? Yes. Commissioner Baumgardner? Yes. Commissioner Dagenhart?

Yes.

Commissioner Goodson?

Yes.

Commissioner Westmoreland?

Yes.

Commissioner Williams?

Yes.

Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Vice Chairman Kelly? Yes. Chairman Dutton?

Yes.

Motion has passed. Thank you very much.

And moving on to 7.2, Yorkshire Phase 1A, final plan. Welcome back, Gwyn.

It's interesting. Good evening again. On this plat, we do have some things that we need to talk about. So what they're requesting is to approve 48 lots with three new roads. Yorkshire is off of Rockingham Road, which is kind of, it's in the city, but it's north of the city, kind of where that area where Rhone Street turns into the Kingsport Highway. This is also in your packet. This is just the title page, but the rest of the plat, which is three or four pages, is in your packet. I cannot make that. Oh, sorry, this bigger.

Yes, I can make that bigger.

Like this? Thank you. Okay, let's go through it. There we go. Better, I hope. But this is the title page of what they are looking to achieve in their final plat. This is an RP2. It was originally approved in 2022 as a concept plan. I believe a couple of years later, preliminary plat was approved. The front setbacks, lot widths, they're creating three new roads and water and sewer is available to the site. Their bond amount for construction of their roads for the incomplete work is $724,789, which if approved, that would be the bond amount that they would need to have. With this one, there is some incomplete work. The water and sewer has a punch list. It's up here. In the staff report, I said that I would bring that to... to the commission to know what that would be. These are the items that still remain as well as the Rockingham Road. One of the things that we need are rights of entry and rights of entry are essentially permissions to go work outside of a right-of-way so that we can acquire the right-of-way later so they can build those transportation improvements from their TIA. They do have, they're missing the signed copy of one, but I did receive an email from that owner that said that they just needed a little more time to make sure that the agreement was what they needed and make sure to get all the edits in. If, because you do have the same decision options that you have before except I added one, because there are outstanding items, should you choose to make an approval, staff would recommend that you add this as a contingent so that we make sure that these things are achieved. So it would be to have before the plat could be signed. And Commissioner Williams is your secretary, would also sign that plat. So before he could sign that plat to be recorded, these things would need to be complete. And those are the posting of the bond, the signed rights of entry. And there are two parts here where they do need to complete the water and sewer punch list, as well as they're going to have a plan for their stormwater that they are working with the city through. these are your decision options.

Okay, thank you. But so, you know, it was interesting to note a lack of recommendation, but because of incomplete items, which I think is unusual. I haven't seen that before on a final plat.

It is unusual.

Thank you. So just to be clear, We don't have the rights of entry yet. We have someone who's indicated that we have a draft and we have someone who's indicated that they need more time.

We have all but one. It's just that last one.

Okay. But they said they need more time to review. And quite a punch list then on the water and sewer too.

And the applicant is here. If you have some questions for the applicant, I think that would be an appropriate thing to ask, especially about any of the outstanding items.

Okay.

You can ask me a question.

So you said the one signature that we're missing, is that the same one that you got an email copy of? Yes. Okay. So they have signed it and you've seen an electronic copy, but you haven't seen the original. Is that correct? No.

They have not signed it yet. They are still reviewing it, but they don't see any issues with signing it. They just have not done it. It's one of the one of the things that we needed. There are many things that we needed, but one of the things that we needed in order to feel really confident about the plat is these are these rights of entry, because we want to make sure that we have the authority to. for them to do the work that is required by their TIA and if there were to be an issue for us to be able to do that work.

Whitney, would you mind to put the water sewer punch list back up just so we can repeat that? Thank you.

Whitney, procedurally it does seem a little interesting make an approval when there is a bit of a punch list. So does it make more sense for us to defer action until we have a few more of those things done? Is there a staff stance on this that we can support?

What I can tell, because for me, there are outstanding items from the subdivision ordinance that are not being met. There is a certain level of comfort, and then there's a certain level not. And so the applicant asked us to bring this to planning commission to make that decision, and so that is fine. that is what I'm doing because, and I want to make sure that you're aware of what, what is still outstanding.

I've got another question. So the final plat that we just approved, it also had a bond. It also had some complete incomplete work. So how did these two requests compare where that final plat that we approved also had an incomplete work?

I'm going to do my best. So the incomplete work that is typically with a final plat is usually that last surface and sidewalks and some things like curb and gutter, street lights. Those are the typical things and the typical things that we bond. This one is not typical in that we do have a water and sewer punch list. That is not typical. The other thing that is a little abnormal is that... The stormwater features are not complete. And Public Works has worked with the applicant to work on a plan to make those complete. As you know, we've been looking at the subdivision ordinance to see if we can make changes to make this a little easier. And that's one of the things that we're working through also. So I think that there was some ability to say, hey, we understand that. that maybe we need to change some processes. And if you can do these things, we can kind of follow you with that path. But the rights of entry also is the, because that is one thing that we need in order to make sure that we can gain access.

Could we talk to the applicant to find out why we still have these items incomplete? I'll step aside.

I'm Robert Thomas with Thomas Construction, 9 Wesley Court here in Johnson City. I'll just kind of take them one at a time. The rights of entry, we have had a... terrible problem with people being out of town vacation this type of thing the last one we are waiting on they've sent an email that they don't see any issue we're actually going out and surveying their property for them tomorrow and showing them exactly where the improvements are the right of the entry has a lot of things in it it it holds basically holds us harmless the way it's written. And they've got concern over that. So we're trying to work through that. I don't foresee any issue at all getting that. We're not asking you to approve it without it. We're just asking you to approve it contingent. The water and sewer punch list we got last Friday, started on it. A couple of things have been added. There was a tap to be set that wasn't on the plans. We agreed to. Adding a gate valve and a blow off was not on the plans. And the rain this weekend has made it impossible. It is a mud hole. And we are actively working to get that completed in the next few days. The stormwater issues, These are very large ponds and they're being used as sediment basins until this project is all, you know, safed up. If we put all the filters and everything in, it will destroy them. And we have to have access to clean the sediment, that type of thing. So we've met with Public Works Monday and come up with a plan and a timeframe that we've been told they're comfortable with. And then the bond, we know that's typical on a plat. Any other questions? I just really appreciate your support to keep this moving forward. Any other questions?

Thank you, sir. Thank you. I have a question.

I'd like staff to come back up. Whitney, could you please come back to the podium? What's the dollar amount for the bond?

$724,780.

So the bond amount for this case is not terribly different than the bond amount for the previous case. Is that correct?

No, they're bonding more. They're having to bond more than the previous case.

Okay. If you can go back to the previous slide. That punch list for the water and sewer activities, that looks like a long punch list, but the activities don't seem to be terribly complicated activities if I glance down that list. Would that be consistent with your view?

I'm going to have to ask Travis to come up here.

Travis.

I barely change a light bulb.

Travis, would you suffer my question, please?

I would say, Commissioner, that the majority of the punch list is is somewhat However, the largest items are installing gate valve and blow off and testing the lines within the right of way that's being dedicated and the lines that we are thus accepting. Those lines have not been tested and that's the biggest issue. So it's technically not functional or operational, but the balance of the items are minor in nature.

Where are the big dollar ticket items on that punch list?

It would be the item 5, install an 8-inch gate valve with 2-inch blow-off and test water lines up to the extent of right-of-way dedication in that Road 4 and Brummett farm street stubs.

Okay.

Could you perhaps give us an indication of the time frame that that may take? I know it's typical, but then when you're testing things, what sort of time frame would you typically ascribe to that activity?

That could be done. I would estimate probably five days to get that done if you have decent weather. Because the test period, there's a delay in that.

Thank you very much, Travis.

Travis, I'm sorry, one more question. The other items, I know you said that was minor, like what would be an estimate on the completion if all goes well, if weather cooperates, you know, those kind of things?

Well, I really hate to speak for the developer here. It just really depends on how many crews you have out there. You know, they can all be done at the same time. Okay.

Like just customarily. Yeah. Okay.

Thank you. I think if you work diligently at this, you could get it all locked out in five days.

Okay. Thank you.

Yeah, my only thought is to caution my fellow commissioners not to look at that list and think that list looks exhaustive just because it's a lot of long and a lot of words. I think there's some activities and tasks on there that all need to be done, and I'm quite confident in the contractor that they will be done, but they're not necessarily overwhelming tasks or complicated tasks. Some of them are costly. Some of them will take time, but they're not an overwhelming engineering list of tasks to be done.

You're welcome. Noting notwithstanding that this is unusual. I don't think we've seen this before.

This is an unusual list.

What's unusual to be in this predicament? I mean, I've got to be saying, just speaking for myself, it feels like we might be a little... premature on this one. I mean, there's the rights of entry that still aren't finalized. We're wrestling with some indemnification language by the sound of it and the implications of that in the rights of entry. So I think that's significant. And I think notwithstanding that none of these items are particularly are particularly onerous and testing and installing an 8-inch gate valve. I mean, that could be a weakness, that could drag on. But just in terms of what makes me slightly uncomfortable is that as we're looking at, we're kind of, we're varying process and something which in approving a preliminary, a final plat rather, is typically pretty administrative. It's, do we meet the subdivision ordinance? Are we consistent with the preliminary plat? And that test, the test is that simple and assuming that's the case, then it's, um then then then it's approved and it's more from a precedent perspective if we start varying well now you know the next the next time we're sitting here and so on so we varied you varied this before but now the punch list is just a little bit longer i don't know i mean that from from a city perspective the question is where do we draw that line to me it's a lot easier if we just then it's cleaner and much more consistent if we just say well the subdivision ordinance says this, so that's the test we use. The chair makes a good point.

I hear what you're saying, but I also would be comfortable on a contingency level, given that they're bonding it. It's a week's worth of work to complete, but I completely understand what you're saying about It's a longer list than normal, and particularly with the right of entries a little different. But I would be comfortable either way.

Is there any further conversation? Does someone like to share a different thought, or would someone like to make a motion?

I think that the contingency... the approval based on the contingencies is an appropriate approach. I know from a timeframe and from this developer, they've got the skill set and the expertise in order to go and get this done. As far as this punch list, I agree with you. Many of the items are minor. They can be taken off the list pretty quickly. That's a pretty high bond. It's covered. So I don't see any risk here of not going forward. So as a result of that, I'm going to make a motion to approve it, subject to the contingencies on the punch list.

Just for consistency, would you read those into the record too?

I'm sorry?

Would you mind reading, I put them up here, would you mind reading those into the record?

I sure will.

And excuse me, before we do that, you also mentioned there was a stormwater retention that's not up there.

Is that correct? There is a plan. They would be contingent upon working with staff for the satisfaction of the city. Okay.

Sorry.

Good evening, Chairman, Commission. I'm Nick Geist, Distance City Manager of Republic Works. We've been working with a developer on this issue, and it comes around to discussion of sediment, sediment versus stormwater detention and the appropriate time to transition. So what they have currently based on our observation out there is that sediment containment, sediment basins are necessary at this point. We are comfortable agreeing on, we've worked with the developer, we met with them to agree on a schedule based on contingent on this approval and these items getting done, transitioning over to their permanent stormwater retention, stormwater basins going forward.

i apologize mine was only for clarification for the motion in listing these things is the storm water already contemplated in the sewer water sewer punch list or does it also need to be added it is not in there it's not contingent upon the approval here tonight oh i understand now sorry well i think for us to make sure because if we if we're approving something contingent we need to be very precise about that so

So there's an additional bullet point that should read to the effect of, I'm paraphrasing your motion here, but there is a motion on the table to... approve the final plan contingent upon the developer posting a bond for $724,789 submitting all rights of entry necessary to complete all road work and I would modify that to submitting all executed rights of entry necessary to complete all road work completing number three completing to the satisfaction of the city or water and sewer punch list items noted on the previous slide And then we would add an additional bullet that would say, complete to the satisfaction of the city, all sedimentation and storm water pond improvements required to protect the site from storm runoff.

So doing so will delay the plat for months. The transition plan out there from sediment retention to stormwater retention. It's probably a 60-day time.

So modify that language. That's not the intent of that. That's correct. The intent of that language is to allow you that, but then complete to the satisfaction of the city, the stormwater improvements required. to transition from sediment? Is that what we're saying? Yeah, we could go with that. To transition from a sedimentation pond to a stormwater pond.

That's still going to be probably approximately a 60-day window of getting from your sediment, your temporary measures, to your stormwater.

Ordinarily, that would be complete before we'd approve a final plaque, correct? Yes. So now we're not just talking about a couple of weeks. We're now talking about something that's a 60-day window.

So one of the reasons that this is being asked for and that we have been asked to especially work with the stormwater portion is that they would like to proceed with being able to record plats. Right. And noting that there is some things in our subdivision ordinance that we might need to look at, as Nick was saying, between that transition of temporary to permanent. If you were to consider contingent, one of the things that as they come through with, because this is just the first phase of Yorkshire. And so there are other phases that you can also tie that work to it should you want to. And if you needed to ask the developer to come back in August for an update of what's going on, I think that's also something you could do.

just to be to be clear so what we're trying to i mean there's a motion on the table there's a motion actually on in the interest of disclosure i'm not going to support that motion because i think it would be a lot cleaner if we just say come back when you comply with the subdivision ordinance and then we don't we're not we're not in this position but in the spirit of uh getting a motion to the floor so that we can vote on it perhaps a better way to put it what does that what does that fourth bullet need to say

I mean, we can get to agree upon schedule to complete stormwater, permanent stormwater retention or stormwater basins.

Okay. That would be sufficient.

Megan, so we can say, okay. All right. Do you have that motion with all four bullets now?

Oh, heck no.

No, I was asking Megan.

I don't know. I feel like I'm kind of writing an epistle here instead of making a motion.

Yeah.

Megan, do you have that?

I do. Do you want me to state it?

If you would read it into the record, and if it's okay with Whitney, I will thumbs up it when you're done, okay?

All right. So my understanding is that the motion on the table is to approve the final plat contingent upon the developer posting a bond in the amount of $724,789, the developer submitting all executed rights of entry necessary to complete the red work, and the developer completing to the satisfaction of the city all water and sewer punch list items noted on the previous slide and the developer and the city come together and have an agreed schedule for the storm water retention management plan yes okay well done steve thank you thank you very much so we have a motion what she said yeah we have a motion on the table go to see if megan do we have a second

I'll be bold and second that.

Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?

Just so that I fully understand, we have about up to 60 days of work potentially in front of us. Do I understand that correctly? Yes. Okay. Yes. Thumbs up is fine.

Yeah.

Okay. Seeing no further discussion, Heather, would you call the roll, please?

Commissioner Aldridge? Yes. Commissioner Baumgardner? Yes. Commissioner Dagenhart?

No.

Commissioner Goodson?

Yes.

Commissioner Westmoreland?

No.

Commissioner Williams?

Yes.

Commissioner Goetz? Yes. Vice Chairman Kelly? No. Chairman Dutton?

No.

Motion has passed.

Thank you. All right.

Motion passed.

Well done, Megan. Thank you for the support there. Great describing. Okay. This moves us on to agenda item eight, reports of offices and committees. We have an intern presentation on accessory dwelling unit research.

Pearson is... Yeah, he's right behind me, I'm sure. But I just wanted... He's hard to miss. Yeah. But I just kind of wanted to introduce why this was here before you at this kind of meeting is that you guys have said that you wanted to see more information about accessory dwelling units. And that's one of the things, one of the many things that Pearson has been working on during his internship. I believe he started in February and his internship will finish at the end of the month. And I wanted to make sure that he got to present just like the rest of us. So he's going to present his information, and then you can use this, and we can use this as we go forward when we're looking at that. We also are going to, the staff person that's going to be working on this, you haven't seen a lot of, but it's one thing that he's passionate about and part of his job, which is Wayne Lyons. And so that's why also Wayne is in the audience this evening. So without further ado.

Good evening. My name is Pearson Mills. I am a intern in the planning division for the city. And tonight I'm going to be talking about considerations regarding a future accessory dwelling unit or ADU ordinance. So first off, what are accessory dwelling units? The American Planning Association, or APA, defines an ADU as a smaller independent residential dwelling unit located on the same lot as a standalone single-family home. And you can see on the left side here examples of what ADUs may look like. They may be detached, as in the top left, attached, or within the home or principal unit, as it's sometimes called. Within Johnson City, there is the 2025 Housing Needs Assessment, which outlines a demand for more affordable or smaller-scale housing within the city, and ADUs are examples of both of those categories. Additionally, the Horizon 2045 plan has a policy with actions specific to ADUs, and those policies are listed there. So why ADUs? According to the APA, ADUs can increase housing affordability, create a wider range of housing options in the community, enable aging in place, and they can be a better use of existing housing fabric and infrastructure. Additional benefits can be that they can provide college students that come home from school with their own space, and they can be an additional income source if rented out. So, federally, ADUs have been mentioned recently in the 21st Century Road to Housing Act that passed through Congress and several states across the country already require municipalities to allow ADUs. Currently, ADUs are expressly prohibited as an accessory use in the Johnson City Zoning Ordinance. From this, staff researched 13 comparable cities and their ADU ordinances. These are the 13 cities that we researched and they were selected for their size and character and their location within the region. And nearly all of the 13 allow ADUs in some form. Common characteristics of these ordinances, these are ones that are found throughout the ordinances, is that no more than one ADU is allowed per single family home. The ADU should not exceed the height of the principal unit or the main home. The ADU must meet minimum setbacks of the zones or whatever zone the ADU is placed in. It cannot be separated in ownership from principal use. It conforms to all applicable building codes, making sure the ADU is safe to live in and occupy. It may be serviced by the same utilities as the principal unit. and it can either be attached or separate like in the graphic earlier on. And home occupations are commonly allowed within the ADUs. These are some of the characteristics that the ordinances vary in. And I will go over a few of these in more detail. The first one, I'll go over owner occupation, parking requirements, type of construction, and short-term rentals. So for owner occupation, several of the cities such as Knoxville and Franklin require that either the accessory dwelling unit or the principal unit be occupied by the owner. For parking requirements, Cities such as Chattanooga do not have minimum parking requirements for their ADUs, while cities such as Knoxville and others require one off-street parking space per ADU. For type of construction, cities such as Chattanooga and Morristown prohibit shipping containers and recreational vehicles being used as ADUs. And additionally, Chattanooga requires that the ADU have a permanent foundation or be attached to an existing permanent structure, i.e. the house. And with short-term rentals, only one city included in their ordinance that ADUs couldn't be prohibited or could be prohibited as being short-term rentals, and that was Charleston, South Carolina. But that doesn't mean that other cities didn't restrict short-term rentals in some other form. And staff is here for any questions or discussion that you may have.

Great job on the presentation, Pearson. Well done. Does anyone have any questions?

I actually had a question. Kudos, Mr. Mills, on your presentation. You did a great job. Thank you. I was just wondering, in your research, did you get a chance to explore the percentage of ADUs that were short-term rentals versus owner-occupied? Does it tend to skew a certain way? That's a very specific question, so if you don't know the answer, that's totally fine.

They can be both short-term rentals and owner-occupied. Like, one, you know, could be short-term rental while the other is owner-occupied. but I do not have any data as to the proportion of short-term rentals.

That's all right.

Thank you so much. Great job on the presentation. Thank you for the information. I'm very excited about the 21st Century Road to Housing Act that was just passed. So that's very exciting. And I'm just glad to see that we're making forward motion on some of our goals in the Horizon 2045 plan. So thanks for the time that you spent working on this during your internship with the city. We appreciate it.

Thank you. What's the timeframe for taking this forward, Wendy, as we actually look to start to codify some of these concepts?

So, um, you will be getting a email, um, that has links because of the way Pearson wrote it. It was, they're really tiny writing like old eyes. Don't old eyes. Don't read it so well so that you can click on the links and, um, blow it up a little bit. And I'll send you that, all the information. But as far as timeline, I'm going to let Wayne kind of run with this one and get that. And so it's also on to you guys with when you would like to see it. But we are kind of processing forward with it to bring it to a workshop and something that you guys can kind of chunk out.

We'll keep checking you on that through the executive committee. Pearson, thank you. I mean, any more questions?

I just thank you for your contributions during your internship. I hope you pursue public service as an occupation. Really appreciate your presentation today. Thanks.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Alright, ladies and gentlemen. I think that is it. We have cleared the agenda. So it is 6.41, not a record this evening, but we will adjourn.