Regional Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I'd like to welcome everyone to the July 8th, 2025 Johnson City Regional Planning Commission meeting. If you're here to speak during the public hearing portion of the agenda, please wait until I have opened the public hearing. Once opened, one person at a time, please come to the podium to be recognized by me. Please speak clearly into the microphone and begin your comments by giving us your name and address. Then each person would be allowed three minutes to speak and please address your comments directly to the commission only. I now call the meeting to order at one minute after 6. Commissioner Dutton, would you please lead us in an invocation and the pledge of allegiance? Certainly. Please join me in prayer. Almighty God, as we gather for this meeting, we ask for the presence of your wisdom and guidance. May your spirit inspire us to make decisions that are just, fair, and beneficial to our community. Grant us the ability to listen to each other with respect and to work together in unity. We ask for your blessing on our deliberations. Amen. Amen. Please rise for the pledge. I pledge algiance 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 very much. We have the agenda before us. Do I have any changes or additions or reductions? Mr. Mr. Chairman, I I gather that there is a uh that there is one change that we are removing um item 7.3. That is that correct? 7.3 takes comes off the agenda and those parties have been notified. Yes. All right. Thank you. Any other changes, Mr. Chairman? Uh hearing all the changes, I'd move that we approve the

agenda um as revised. Second. All right. And I have a motion to approve the agenda as it has been revised removing the third item on the uh new business item and I have a second. Any other com comments? All in favor of approving the agenda as adjusted say I. I. Any opposed? Thank you very much. We also have the minutes from the June 10th meeting that have been presented to the commission. Does anyone have any corrections, additions, or revisions? Uh Mr. Mr. Chairman, having reviewed the minutes and found them in accordance with our meeting, um I move that we approve the me the minutes as presented. All right, I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second. All right, I have a motion and a second to approve the minutes as presented at the June 10th meeting. All in favor say I. Any opposed? Thank you very much. Now we'll come to the public comment of our agenda. There have been two people have registered for public comment. Is Miss Elizabeth Row here? Could you come forward, please? and if you could give us your name and address and then you've got three minutes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Elizabeth Row. My address is 217 Chadwell Road in Kingsport. I would like to begin by sharing that I admire each and every one of you and your dedication to serve this community by sitting on this commission and understand how difficult it can be. While this is my first time giving a public comment, it's far from my first experience. I graduated from ETSU's master public administration program and worked as a planner for the first Tennessee development district and then the city of Kingsport as development coordinator before taking my current role with Dr. Horton. It is a blend of my past experience and current role that brings me to the podium this evening. Specifically in regard to item 6.1 on the agenda, the reduction of Dr. Horton's sidewalk bond for phase two of Clearwater Springs. Some specifics not

outlined in the agenda packet. Firstly, the developer did not post the $237,600 bond. It was posted by Dr. Horton. This is a significant differentiation to make as a developer and a homebuilder are two separate entities. The bond estimate that I received for Clearwater Springs Phase 2 did not contain the same verbiage as the estimate that was presented to this commission in October of last year. I received two different emails from staff with bond estimates attached and each attachment was the same, $237,600 with the only line item being sidewalks. In early June of this year, I requested the bond be released since all sidewalks had been constructed, inspected, and approved. It was through this request that I learned that this commission was presented with an estimate that had a different line item, but the same dollar amount. John City Engineering has presented this item to you tonight as a reduction to the bond amount referencing the same estimate bought brought before planning commission. However, I would like to inform the commission that the actual letter of credit issued by Truist approved by the city then accepted by the city only includes sidewalks and asphalt if it is damaged during the construction of sidewalks. To my understanding, there's no argument as to the condition of the sidewalks being complete and accepted, nor any true damage to the roadway that is attributed to the sidewalk construction. The question for you all to consider is whether or not you can deny a request to fully release a bond when all bonded work has been completed. To me, there is no difference in Dr. Horton's bond release request and other bond release requests on tonight's agenda. And I would appreciate the commission's further discussion regarding the agenda item as presented. I do have a recent aerial photo of the site and the bond estimate that I received should you wish to review it. Thank you. Thank you very much.

The second person registered for public comment is Mr. Harold Hunter. Is he here? Mr. Hunter. He's not here. So, uh we'll go to the next item. We have uh four items on our cons consent agenda. One, 6.1, Clearwater Springs phase 2, Dr. Horton sidewalk bond reduction. Number two, Glaze Farm phase one and phase two bond release. Number three, the Landy Midway Road dedication. And number four, a Beachwood Meadows final plat. Does anyone have any questions or want to pull one of those for discussion? Mr. Mr. Chairman, having heard um the public comment from Dr. Horton, um I think we should pull item I move that we pull item 6.1 from the consent agenda uh to discuss separately. I think there's something there that warrants some at least some clarity. All right, I have a motion to pull 6.1. Second. I have a motion and a second to pull 61.1 from the consent agenda. All in favor of pulling that forward say I. Any opposed? All right, that leaves 6.2 2, 6.3, and 6.4. Does anyone want to pull any of those? Mr. Chairman, I recommend that we approve the remaining three consent agenda items as stated. Second. All right. I have a motion to approve the three 6.2, 6.3, and 6.4 consent agenda items as present as not presented, but to be considered on the consent agenda. Any sec? And have a second. Any other discussion? All in approving those three items for the consent agenda say I. I. Any opposed? Thank you. Miss Putney, could you have some presentation material on 6.1?

Just what was in your packet regarding the six item 6.1 for the bond release. Let me just pull up the PowerPoint here. and our engineering department is here as well and can probably answer any further questions. But the item for consideration is a bond reduction for the Clearwater phase 2 sidewalk bond posted by Dr. Horton. the bond reduction. At the time of release, public works would not release the full bond amount of $237,600 and recommended a reduction of $181,000 with a remaining of 56,000 to cover the cost of u milling and resurfacing of the sidewalk, not sidewalks, excuse me, the roads around the sidewalks. Um, and that was at the request and recommendation of public works to not release that full bond. They are here tonight to answer any specific questions relating to that to that bond amount. Miss Bundy, sorry. May Miss Pney, do you have a copy of the bond um form that was posted and accepted by the city? I have it is in your packet um your staff report packet. However, it is not in the the presentation just the new bond estimation se sheet. But in your staff report packet, there is a full um bond report, but it is listed. The one presented was sidewalks, milling, and resurfacing for $237,600. Questions for staff? Miss Pney, when they talk about um asphalt repair, can they get into a little specifics of what that means? Because of course, we're hearing two different things, right? We're hearing one that it looks okay and that it's fine and that there's agreement on that and then here we're hearing that it's not correct. So, can we hear from the city on why it's not? Yes. I will ask um Wallace McCullik to

come up and and discuss the requirements for that sidewalk and asphalt repair. So, so what we're generally looking for out there is um they they do the sidewalks, they they install the sidewalks. And the reason they do the sidewalks and the and the developer doesn't is because when they go in there to construct their homes, they're all over the place with everything. And it's just much easier for them if they if they post the bond for the sidewalk rather than the developer. that way they're not having to replace that sidewalk. The the problem comes up with the roads is that they get they get dinged up during construction and there's pits and gouges and things like that in the roads and and so we've asked them to do a mill and resurface because they ask for the final surface instead of just leaving the base course down. They want the final surface. And so during that construction again when they're all over the place there it just we we the roads are just they don't look new any longer they just look pitted and gouged and that's the reason we did it in a previous time we we held some cos they didn't like that so this this seemed to be a good solution to that do I understand correctly from row that u the original bond uh indicated just for sidewalks and not others scope of work. I'm not sure I can answer that. I just I I know when we did the bond I don't recall what happened then one of the um my staff a and one of the inspectors prepared that bond and we discussed that that we needed a milling and resurfacing

in there just to be able to cover the the the the road repairs. How? Sorry. Go ahead, Bob. Well, just one follow-up question. Bottom line is there's damage that needs to be repaired and the city needs to be protected. That's correct. To make sure that that damage is repaired. That's correct. How often does something like this happen where we have to resurface a road after the sidewalks are put in? For these developments, it seems like it's pretty frequent. Okay. and and I you know you could go out there and yourselves and take a look and just see what they're like. Is the inherent damage that occurs to the road during this construction is it is it attributable to the construction of the sidewalks or this the general work going on in the neighborhood? It's the general work of the neighborhood. It's really not necessarily connected to the sidewalk. That's the only reason it's added to that sidewalk bond is because that's the bond that they post that comes from Dr. for Horton. And so the this the pavement repair is a part of that bond as well because I mean they're posting the bond for both. And this is going to be a city street of course that damage means potentially water intrusion which can um which can infiltrate to subgrade and really really impact the road if it's not repaired. Yeah, that's that's correct. the original bond documentation. Um, if it doesn't clearly state in there that this also covers asphalt and resurfacing, I feel like that's a little bit of an issue. Um, is there another way we can get the $56,000 for this project besides this avenue? Um, basically, if they'll agree to repair the roads, I'm I'm good with that.

Mr. Horton, do we need the Deal Horton representative to commit to that? I I think it would be interesting to hear, you know, um because I for me there's two issues here. We have two we have two bodies that are very important. We have a city and a and a and a great home builder telling us that there's different takes on things. And then we also have a documentation question. Was the original document, did it include the resurfacing or not? um are we adding things on to that original document or not? I to answer from a planning perspective of maybe a question that was asked of Wallace about whether this would be um whether we had a different avenue. Um what what I think what what the engineering department is really seeking is that we do need some kind of steps and we are working to kind of figure out um how maybe there are some better steps um that we can do but at this point you I would believe that you would need to make a decision on what's in front of you versus and if we need to in the next month work with Dr. important to make changes that that would be what would happen because I I'm not really necessarily sure that we should be debating a bond um at the at this level. We might need to come back with further information. Is the JC builds forum which is an an exercise between the development community and the city to improve the working relationship. Is that a venue where this question could be addressed? Yes. Mr. Mr. McCull, are you part of that discussion? We've been going to it. Yes. And of course, Dr. Horton is participating, I think. Is that correct? I believe I've seen them there, but they're invited as well. Mr. Chairman, after digging into after asking a few questions here and I I think the language on the um on the city the original city do documentation is

that it is an estimate sheet. Um, and I think in terms of the uh the protecting the in terms of protecting the city, um, it's it's not unreasonable, I think, to require a little bit of the bond um to remain outstanding to give the city some degree of assurance that um that uh that that the the streets will be um repaired satisfactory and therefore not suffer damage from um from from water intrusion. Um so you know with the qualifications I think going forward this of course becomes a lot easier if we're talking about if on the estimate sheet um asphalt um that you know an amount for potential asphalt repairs is is included going forward. I think in this instance um I would uh move that the um that the bond be reduced as as to 56,000 as presented by uh as presented by staff. Second. All right. I have a motion to reduce the bond to $56,000 and a second to cover the additional work that's due to be done for repairing the streets. Further discussion. I do have one point of discussion. I would like to ask the planning department if you would work with public works to evaluate this question going forward and try to clarify misunderstandings between the city and the developer. And if that's can be done during JC builds, I that's perfectly fine uh forum for where that conversation can happen. And would you report back to us, please? Would you mind uh amending your motion with that suggestion? Um consider my motion amended accordingly, Heather, if you have the notes to do that. Thank you. All right. I have a motion and a second to reduce the bond to 56,000 and ask city uh administration to look at clarifying the situation so these this doesn't happen in the future. Any

further discussion? Heather, would you call the role please? Commissioner Cooper? Yes. Commissioner Goodson? Yes. Mayor Hunter? Yes. Commissioner Oceanbone? No. Commissioner Williams? Yes. Vice Chairman Dotton. Yes. Chairman Dagenheart. Yes. All right. Thank you very much. All right. Now, we'll move to the item 7.1, the first item under new business, which is a Washington County reszoning at 138 Minga Drive. And this would be a county project where we are being asked to give guidance to the county. Mr. McNamer. Thank you, Chairman. Good evening, commissioners. Bryce McNamer, Planner One Planning Division. This is a resoning within Washington County at 138 Minga Drive. This is within the Johnson City Planning Region. Therefore, we are the recommending body as the regional planning commission. Um, we will be forwarding a recommendation towards the Washington County Commission U, which is tentatively tentatively being held on July 28th for final action of the resoning. I've also noted that moving past the reszoning final action, uh there is a possibility of comprehensive development plan that would be processed by the Washington County Planning Commission um at a later date. Looking at the aerial view here, this is situated on the northern side of Minga Drive, the bulk of the property by the star. We can see the outline here. Um, Minga Drive is a local road that is a very brief start and stop between Claude Simmons and West Market. The request is to reszone one parcel approximately 18 plus acres. Uh, currently R1 and R1 and A1 that being lowdensity residential and general agriculture. Um, both of those within

the Washington County zoning resolution. The request is to go to the PRD2, planned residential district, um to accommodate a future residential development. Taking a look at the current conditions of the site, um there are quite a bit of uh various elevation changes. Uh most of the steeper ones being situated towards the northern part. Um also the more dense vegetation being concentrated in this area as this area is uh more relatively flat and open here. Uh there is an existing water line that runs along Minga Drive. The existing sewer line runs approximately parallel about 200 f feet to the north. Um you will notice the green line here is actually the city and county boundary. So the frontage of this property is actually within the city limits. Um we'll get to it a little bit later, but traffic will be assessed further at the time of development permits. Taking a look into the city and county boundary here. Uh this area was actually a within the boundary of an annexation that was processed approximately 25 years ago. Uh when property lines looked a lot different and uh this stem did not exist at that time. Um so this is about half an acre here and this is also at the time when the right of way of Minga Drive came into the city boundary. As mentioned, the current zoning in Washington County is split between R1 low residential and A1 general agriculture. Uh the portion that is within the city and the frontage of Minga Drive is R3, a medium density residential district. Other adjacent zoning in the county is also R1 and A1. Um we can see that that R3 along Minga extends over to Claude Simmons and somewhat along that frontage as well. Um, and this does back over into the corridor of West Market, which is

primarily the B4 planned arterial business district. Um, some of the other nearby zoning we'll see on the county in the county side is R3, which is a highdensity residential zoning district, and R3A, as well as some B3, which is commercial zoning. Um, once again, the requested zoning being the planned residential district 2. looking at this requested zoning. A pretty significant component of this request is that the PRD2 works a lot like our RP districts work uh where the planning commission um will have to approve a comprehensive development plan prior to any uh construction. Now, the difference between the city and the county here is that we have a concept plan requirement at the time of the resoning. The comprehensive development plan comes separate from the resoning. Looking at the specific uses of the planned residential district 2. Uh this is only going to be residential uses. However, single family, two family, and multif family. The density is capped at 6.5 units per acre for this site. That ranges somewhere from about 115 to 120 given the acreage. Uh the setbacks are only on the boundaries of the zoning district itself. So interior there would not be any but along the boundaries there would be 25 ft on all sides and there would likely be a buffer yard. Now as mentioned the concept plan is not required for the reasonzoning. However, the applicant has submitted a preliminary site plan. This will only be for visual purposes only. This is not going to be binding and is not this is not within the purview of the planning commission at this time. Um, however, this does depict a planned unit development of 69 single family units on a common lot. Taking a look at the current land use of the site, this is classified as agricultural. However, if we look at Minga Drive itself, we can see it is almost entirely residential. And as we

get closer back to the B4 zoning within the city, goes into what we would see of more commercial use in this area. Um along Mingo we see a a few patches of yellow which is single family. However, it is primarily multif family. Um all the way over to Claude Simmons and right in front of the frontage of the property. Um these multif family uses vary between we have mobile homes. We also have quadplexes, duplexes, and multiple single family residences on the same lot ranging anywhere from about five to about nine units per acre um when calculated into density. Future land use map 2020 um has this site split between residential and commercial uh does have the commercial cut off about where the zoning is um on Minga Drive and then transitioning into residential as we get closer to Claude Simmons. However, the Horizon 2045 future land use map has this entire parcel classified as neighborhood residential. This is adjacent to the commercial corridor along Market Street here. And if we look at a few of the appropriate land uses, we have single family. Some consider consideration is given to quadplexes and town homes. Um looking into the characteristics, we have single use, moderate density, uh a little bit more on the appropriate side for residential and then moderate setbacks. some of the policies within the horizon 2045 plan both within strong neighborhoods section uh supporting the development of housing choices that are reflecting compatibility of scale creation of place defined by the future land use map um going into policy N221 aligning zoning with the place type maps to increase a variety of housing options sizes and densities and strategic locations and looking back at the bridge plan uh land use element policy 222 action one promoting and coordinating zoning regulation subdivision regulations within the various county governments. In this case, we would be

coordinating to get a similar zoning district as this parcel is divided between the city limit. So, the R3 and the PRD2 having a a similar permitted uses set as well as this a similar density that being seven and 6.5. While the neighborhood meeting is not required in the county, nor does uh staff directly handle with the citizen concerns, staff has been reached out to multiple times um by by surrounding neighbors and and other citizens, stating some concerns mostly about the density um that being too high for the area and the direct impact that that would have on traffic directly on Minga Drive um and how that would impact Claude Simmons itself as well as the um entering exiting onto the arterial of West Market Street and they're dealing with more closely to the development based impacts that being storm water runoff and the disturbance of natural features. Now it it is important to note that staff does recognize the possible traffic impacts and other development based impacts that could happen uh for the surrounding area. uh these will have to be evaluated at the later time with development permits and when an official plan is submitted to the county staff and then eventually having having to be approved by the Washington County Planning Commission. Um our scope is limited at this time. Is this a appropriate request for a zoning district? We are not looking at the plan itself. Um, so with that being said, staff would recommend approval of the resoning. Uh, given that the PRT PRD2 allows residential uses that are similar in scale and in character to what is already existing with the current zoning of R3 along the frontage, as well as this request being consistent with the place type of neighborhood residential as based in the horizon 2045 future land use map. Thank you, Mr. McNamer. Questions for

staff. Does Does PRD2 require single family? It doesn't require single family. So, a given building, if you will, could be have multiple residences in it in this particular Mr. McNab. Uh, I've probably driven down this road a thousand times, honestly. Um, Minga Drive and it is quite narrow. Um, so my question is is I have no doubt that I I I understand the zoning um and the appropriateness of of the location. I see that when the county looks at the actual comprehensive plan with the plots and let's say they do apartments or something, you know, like Mr. Cooper recommended or suggested. What is the city's requirement to follow um any type of traffic study that they show regarding road modification since it is a city road? As far as what the county would require for a traffic study, what they what they determine, let's say they determine that it needs a turn lane or it needs shoulders or things of that nature. I will defer that question to planning director of Washington County, Indie Charles. Sir, Miss Charles, can you come forward, please? You mind? Thank you, sir. And could you give us your name and address, please? Yes. Angie Charles, 1185 West Mountain View Road, Johnson City. And you're with the county planning department. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you. The question, I believe, was regarding a traffic study. Yes. Yes. Requirement and any improvements that might be How has the city previously responded to your recommendations as a county regarding road modifications that your studies determine need to happen for build? Um the county would not require a

traffic study for this development. So we would not be approaching the city for any improvements to that road. That would be outside of our jurisdiction. Okay. Yes, sir. Thank you so much. That's You're welcome. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Any other questions for staff or for any other staff? Commissioner Oceanbine, it is noted that um with the frontage and there needing to be a driveway permit to be pulled from the city rightway itself, that could be a time that we as a city could evaluate that and require a traffic study. However, that would need to be at the time of a site plan in the middle. Okay. Any further questions for staff? Thank you, Mr. McNamer. Have a seat. Is the developer present? I'm going to open the I'm going to open the floor for public comment. Uh do you have any comments that you'd like to share with us under public comment? If you could please come to the podium. My name is Jonathan Lewis. I'm 4605 Bristol Highway, Johnson or Piney Flats and uh I'm with Highlands Engineering where the applicant working for the developer Minga Road Properties. Um just a few little things that I've got. You know, the county PRD2 allows for 6.5 units per acre and we propose approximately half of that at 3.7 units per acre. So, we're we're not really pushing the boundary of PRD2 whatsoever. Um, with the R R3 zoning,

which is portion of the property is currently zoned, 7 units per acre would be allowable. Um, a 25- ft landscape buffer will run the perimeter of this property to limit the impacts of uh to the surrounding neighbors. Storm water management will be provided per Washington County regulations ensuring that that post-development runoff will be at pre-development levels. Um, and the reasoning is consistent with, you know, the the horizon growth plan. it it fits perfectly. Um, as far as the the traffic concerns, uh, the road being within the city limits, um, Johnson City is going to have jurisdiction over the entrance to this development as well as what would occur as far as a traffic impact study, improvements to Minga Road. So, the county will be reviewing the the development as a whole. However, the connection to the city limits will be um um will be reviewed by the city of Johnson City. Thank you. Any questions? And and and any questions that you may have. So I think um so you probably understand we're going to likely require a traffic study in in association with that drive permit should it's about 20 foot wide right now. You know typical it's probably 22 to 24 you know it's probably what it should be. How you know how we get to that point or or what the traffic impact study uh uh shows I don't know. Um, you know, there's approximately, I think, 30 residences that tie onto

Minga, the majority of those being towards Claude Simmons. Um, the entrance to this property will be in the in the probably the first 20% coming off of market. Um um so I think the majority of people are going to come out of there and you know go east towards Johnson City. Um maybe of course you're going to get some cross through but um I guess a traffic impact study will will show that. Mr. Lewis is the intent to tie into city water and sewer or Okay. Yes. So, I'm just curious why not annexation? The the flexibility of the the the PRDS that the county have just matches the the demographic model that the the developer wants to follow a lot more closely than than Johnson Cities. And in addition, you know, it's it's it's a very cut up kind of piece of property. And you know, the layout of lot of of your typical uh traditional subdivision with with lots um is a lot more difficult. You know, it' be better if it were, you know, a straight box, but with all the twists and turns and uh the the PRD just allows for a little more flexibility where that's concerned as far as lot lines. There there are no lot lines. I mean, so explain the flexibility as to your flexibility being that let's say we can take a road from from Minga Road into our property and have more of a meandering kind of path. Um, we don't have to have a uh a set lot size uh so to speak. It's basically just the home size. Um, you know, the homes that we

are proposing, uh, uh, conceptually in there have a 3,000 square footprint. You know, we're not talking about, uh, a small home by any means. Um, so, and to be clear, so you're proposing single family is what you're proposing. You're not proposing multif family or town homes or Further questions for Mr. Lewis? Thank you, sir. Thank you. All right, the public hearing is open. Does anyone else want to speak to the question? If you could come, please come forward and give us your name and address. You have three minutes, please. Thank you. My name is Tracy Bowers and my husband and I live at 269 called Simmons Road and we also own a home at 237 called Simmons Road. We have lived here for 17 years and we are opposed to the resoning of the property on Minga Drive for many reasons. However, the most important reason is regarding the increase of traffic that will result if this development is allowed. More specifically, the increase of accidents that will occur. Our two properties join and front Claude Simmons Road at a distance of about 780 ft all the way to Minga Road. We have seen many accidents occur over the 17 years we have lived there. And we have seen our property damaged. Here's an example of a structure on our property that has been hit so many times we don't try to restore it anymore. This is also a photo of the guard rail that is across from the 780 ft of Cloud Simmons Road that has been hit so many times I don't know how it's keeping a car up anymore. Um, I contacted uh Washington County 911 and through the Freedom of Information Act, I was able to obtain the number of accidents that have occurred in just this 780 ft stretch of road and included

Minga. And I arbitrarily picked a date range of January 2023 through June 1st of 2025 and found there have been 29 accidents. 29 accidents in 780 feet of distance. And those are just the ones that were reported. Uh my husband and a service truck clipped mirrors on Minga Drive one morning on their way to work and they didn't report it. The road is too narrow for two vehicles to even pass one another safely. Even if he only did 60 homes instead of the 69 they're proposing, we would see a minimum of additional 120 cars a day to called Simmons and Minga. and these small county roads cannot handle such an increase. In addition, I personally talked with the Johnson City Planning Office a few years ago about developing the part of our property that does front Minga. We wanted to put three lots to build three homes and I was told there was a significant rise in the road that impeded sightelines and it would make it dangerous for cars when they pulled out of driveways. So I do not see how it now can be se deemed say for 120 cars to access Minga Drive if this development uh happens because they will have just one entrance on Minga Road. Um we consider this area um that red star all of that property the left is mine. We consider it agricultural country living and we want to keep it this way. We would also like to keep our families and pets and neighbors safe as we travel the small county roads. So therefore, we ask you to vote no to reszone the property on Minga Drive. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you, ma'am. Good evening. Ly Ryan, 10 straw flower, Johnson City. I'm a homeowner in Strawberry Field subdivision accessed

via Claude Simmons Road. We've been waiting for some time to have the tunnel issue resolved and we do have a city representative meeting with our neighborhood next week. So, we'll hear more about what plans there might be for that. I'm very concerned about the increased traffic the Mingo Road development will have on Mingo Road and on Claude Simmons. We're already concerned about the number of multif family units that have been approved in our under construction. I'm keenly aware of the housing shortage, particularly affordable housing in our city, and being named the best place to live likely will exacerbate that challenge. I'm not opposed to new development necessarily, but I am concerned that Claude Simmons continues to be a major road for people coming to and from Jonesboro. And I'm not currently aware of any plans to alleviate the traffic issues, road widening, anything for andor the tunnel issues. If you've ever traveled to that area around 5:00, you know what I'm talking about. I urge the planning commission to delay recommending resoning and requ the resoning request in order that road and traffic issues can first be resolved. I understand tax dollars do pay for infrastructure and are a necessary part of planning and growth. I would suggest that Strawberry Field and surrounding neighborhoods have been paying for taxes for more than two decades with the only real improvement to our traffic issues being the addition of a red light at the tunnel. Thank you for your service and thank you for listening. Thank you very much. Yes, my name is Chris Buck. My wife and I uh own the residence at 283 and 285 Claude Simmons Road. Uh we are opposed to this. If you can hold for just a second, please. You guys hear me? Yes. And we are proposed to this resoning and our request is that we retain the current resoning designation and I've

got a list of points that I think are relevant to this request. Uh obviously as highlighted by the engineer, these are not permanent plans. they can they can change and the approval of the request does not provide or guarantee what the ultimate configuration or density would end up being and we've already heard the concerns about traffic on this road even if that was addressed. The main concern that I have is that you would still only have one access point which if blocked by an accident or fire prevents any access or egress from the site. Um removal of trees from the heavily sloped and forested north portion of the parcel results into views of secluded backyards. Uh difficult grading in the northern uh parcel portion due to steep slopes and large elevation changes. Uh could require retaining walls abudding adjacent properties to the north and northwest. Um, in addition, the forested northern section has a significant grading height different differential and current sizable runoff flows through a swale to the northwest across the 283 Claude Simmons Road property and ridge drainage at the peak elevation will be toward my residence at 285 Claude Simmons Road. Um, again, just to reiterate, the the city county approval process does not provide adequate opportunity for current property owners to review any serious impacts until after resoning. Um, we purchased these properties because the surrounding properties were rural, private, peaceful, and quiet with abundant wildlife, and our request is that we keep it this way. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you, Mr. Buck. My name is Jeff Hoffland and I live at 130 Minga Drive. I purchased this

property on May 7th is the day I closed on it. About two weeks later, a sign pops up that they're wanting to try to reszone it. So, it's like within two weeks of when I purchased the property. The area that they're talking about trying to develop is on three sides of my property. It literally circles all the way around me. On the far right side, it is over top of me looking down. On the other side, it is on the downhill side from me on on both the um the left and the back side. So, it's going to be circling all the way around me, which will have significant impact on on how this goes. And as I said, I moved there because it was zoned as rural agricultural. And the zoning that I think they're going for, I think it's I think it's way too aggressive. I think some houses with large lots which if you actually look at what they're recommending in the horizon 2045 they specifically have that area as the residential and there's a strong preference towards single family large lot. They could have up to 120 units. The way that it's developed is there's it's a lollipop. So it's it's on a a long stick. So this development is not actually on Minga. This development is on the backside which is a much more private, much more secluded area. It is not an area that has multifamily residences or anything like that. It is well removed from that. The houses that are in that area are all single family larger homes. The hill in uh on Minga is a blind hill

followed by a blind corner that goes onto Market Street. The other end is the tunnel. It it doesn't make sense. Th this development destroys what this community what the community that is currently there is about. I have a petition that we have 500 signatures. We went door to door. have 190 personal dooror signatures and we did an online signature as well. Many people from Strawberry Fields as well are opposing it all the way down Claude Simmons. Um we talked to every single resident on Minga Drive. 100% of the residents on Minga Drive which is the multif family homes and everything they 100% opposed it. Okay. So there the community does not want this development there. I I definitely don't think it's good for my property, but I don't think it's I think you can see that this it's not not a popular option in this area and I think it's too too broad. Thank you, Mr. Hofflin. Mr. Commissioner and uh commissioners, Mr. Chairman, my name is Michael Doover and I live at 115 Dove Drive, which is uh it's almost on that picture right there. I was actually the listing agent for this house on 130 that uh Dr. Hoffman bought. And during the two years I had it listed, nobody called me about any prospective uh development that was going on. And uh and I was a little bit surprised too after a couple of weeks after Mr. Hoppin bought the prop the house um that the zoning sign came up.

Now I live on Dove Drive there uh right at um Headtown Road and I hear ambulances going down uh Headtown quite often. There was a head there was a a young child uh a couple of years ago, you know, he came up um John Vance and he hit the bank on the other side of uh Headtown and died and his teacher was in the But there's so many accidents that happened and right now um actually I represent a buyer who's going to be buying a 12 acres on Oakland A and they are going after zoning there. They're going to build 250 units right now. Greg Cox, right beyond the uh tunnel uh going towards uh Johnson City um right there at uh Knob Creek and Mountain View. I was just in the development there. There's like 250 units there. Further down, the same sellers who are selling my people who are going to build 250 units on that 11.9 acres which is behind Lowe's right across the street. You the the road is blocked right now and they're they're building probably 350 units right now. So if we add 60 houses to Minga, there's no light. There's no light. There's no traffic light to get onto uh Market Street off of Minga or on the other side of Claude Simmons to get onto Market Street. So adding more traffic, I mean 200 cars, let's say to that traffic, I mean after these apartment complexes get through, I mean people going through that little tunnel. Uh anyways, I appreciate you listening

to me. Thank you, sir. Anyone go, please come forward. Hi, I'm Joseph Elward. I live at 204 Claude Simmons Road, just around the corner from uh Minga. And uh we bought two years ago. And the traffic is marketkedly heavier now than it was then. And you've got all the construction people coming from anywhere down Claude Simmons and going to the construction sites down that are going on now. Now, if you add that, you start putting uh graders and so forth that are coming in on Minga, isn't that going to destroy the road? I mean, the traffic is horrible. It's it's it's less distance. I came to the city with a request to put in a a a lot on the back of mine and they request require 50ft easement for a driveway to get to the back lot. Minga is not even 20 ft wide I don't think right around there. So I mean for a driveway you need that but for a development I'm sorry but thanks for listening. I'm opposed. Thank you sir. Please come forward. Commissioners, I'm Stuart Buck. I live on 283 Claude Simmons Road. I'm a retired architect. This uh density uh being proposed is way out of line is inappropriate for this kind of a neighborhood and the topography that's there. But my biggest concern is the process. I understand it's already codified in law, but you have a process and the county has a process. We as residents do not see what's ultimately going to be there once it's reszoned to PR2. They could put up to 20 120 units on

there as in your report. We do not know that. The current developer says he's going going to do a few. He's going to reduce it by half, but they could turn around and sell the property after the reszone and somebody new can come in and build multif family housing on there three stories high. It's a plan unit development. There's no property lines. There's no control and we have no ability to see it until after it's done and then we have to fight each little step along the way. I've opposed. Thank you, sir. Any more comments from the public? Good evening and thank you so much for the work that you do. I appreciate it. Um, could you give us your name and address? My name is Linda Surell and I live at 252 Claude Simmons Road. Um, part of the guard rail rail is that on Simmons Road uh and that goes toward Mingo Road is on our property line. Uh we um we live over the hill from the property uh that um and we own two adjacent u properties consisting of 7 and a half acres. My parents bought the threeacre part plot in 1946, which was my early childhood home. And we moved, my husband and I moved it here in uh again in 1978 and eventually purchased that plot from them and we bought the adjacent 4 and a half acres in 1986. and our oldest daughter and her husband plan to move here after retiring from the US Army next summer. So this land is my beloved heritage. We love it.

We love every morning getting up and looking out the window and saying how beautiful it is. Looking at the wild turkeys, the deer, uh the the squirrels, the birds, the and uh we are blessed on this land to have such beautiful natural surroundings. Our concerns include the strain on the infrastructure, the loss of our community character. Uh we enjoy our quiet life in the country and our uh closest neighbors and thus look out after each other and uh but we're mainly concerned about the traffic which has been addressed. So thank you again for listening and considering our concerns. Thank you Miss Su. further comments. Let's let him He's coming. He's This Thank you, sir. Britt Bowers. Uh 269 Claude Simmons. And uh obviously joining everyone here is opposed, but I everyone's kind of covered things. things I was concerned about obviously the traffic, but um any of us neighbors to that property would would love to invite you to to walk it with us so you could see the topography and and how difficult we think anyway that it would be to develop anything on that property. Uh, and if you haven't, I know you have, some of you have, we would invite you to drive Minga and Claude Simmons and just see, you know, the width of the road, traffic peak times, 7:30 in the morning and 5:00 in the evening would be good times to to try it out. So, that was my only comment. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Good evening, gentlemen. How you doing? We'll make it short and sweet. I live on 146 Claw Simmons Road and own several housing developments on on both sides of these streets. And your name, sir? Uh Charles Williams. Thank you. Uh on 146 Claw 7th Road, which is uh uh to the left of the let's say you come down drive out to the left. Okay. I own that this particular house right here. I own a rental house. I own a rental house at the end of uh Minga and Claude Simmons Drive and it is a hazardous road. What it is, it has a steep grade during uh rainy weather. I had to put up utility post to protect the house that I own right there because a lot of people drove right through and almost destroyed the house at home. And then plus on some rental right across the entry where this guy's wanting to uh cut into the driveway on Ming Drive on a couple uh uh mobile homes right there. And I've had issues with my renters trying to pull out because the road they were speaking about. Most your roads have to have about a 20 foot or so rideway. A lot of these roads have about a 16 foot rightway right there where they're talking about the bend in the road. two vehicles cannot pass at the same time going one going north, one coming south. You have to give each other a time uh to go through there. Matter of fact, on quite a bit of property on both those roads, but it is a hazardous uh due to the fact that uh the road can't handle it. You got to look one tunnel was built in 1911. Uh two or three homes on that street were about built in early 1900s. I own my my house was built in 18 and those homes were the

roads and stuff were designed back then in the 1800 early 1900s 1800s when mainly back then you know they wasn't much traffic just mainly horse and carriage and that's the problem you have with this type of development there these roads were not designed and that's the the main concern of all these fine folks here is due to the fact is the the amount of drive and plus now like you have people come from Jonesboro, they'll take a left right below Valley equipment and it'll take the shortcut through C called Simmons. And as you know, as as a city developers, it always was a u you take your turn at the one light, you know, the one lane tunnel. You you take your turn, I take my turn. So now it's got so congested, like these one of these fine folks said, the main thing the city did was just put a red light there. And the city of John C has debated on how to try to build that new road from Lowe's over to the new uh school that uh Jonesber built. Uh they can't figure out how they're going across the CSX railroad tracks and that's where the city is going to run along adjacent where the sales owns all the property across the tunnel like you're going towards uh uh Lowe's. I mean you got a onelane tunnel built in 1911. Come on, guys. You're trying to throw and you're already having confusion here now. You're open yourself up to liability capabilities because of the failure of the size of the community roads roads there. But, uh, anyway, that's all I've got to say, Joe. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Further comments from the public, please come forward. Good evening. I hope you can hear me. Okay. Uh my name is Caleb Bear. Um I reside at 313 Robin Road in Bristol, Tennessee. Uh but I do have perspective on this road as I did live throughout my

high school um years on 111 Brules Drive, which is just two or three miles up the road. Um I'm not sure if any of you have lived in a multif family unit or apartment complex. Uh but I have. um if you know of the Island Road Villas um in Bristol right across from the Pinnacle. Uh my wife and I lived there for 3 years roughly. Um and it does indeed um reside on a road much like Minga. There's a blind hill, a blind curve. Um but with a different perspective, it is an actual um city road. It's a two-lane road, beautiful yellow lines. Um, and we've witnessed many of accidents there. Um, not just on a rainy day, but multiple throughout the month. Um, I'm sure you can find that on public record as we looked earlier. Um, but aside from that, there's a huge noise difference um that would come into this area. Um, knowing that from living in a multif family unit, sure, they'll bark noise ordinance at you. Um, but there's plenty of vehicles that you can't control who's going to be living in there. um how many um but there will be a significant noise ordinance um headlights beaming through windows of residents um at all hours of the night because the common courtesy and respect of of local residents is gone at that point because um sure they may vet the residents there but ultimately they can't control the coming and going of 200 plus more cars. So thank you so much. Thank you Mr. Barrett. Further comments? Mr. Lewis, did you have a further comment? No, I just I just think it's worth saying. Please come to the podium. I just think it's worth saying that there are three

adjoining properties to this property. the the the conflicts of traffic out on the the railroad underpass. You know, the realtor spoke of 250 units here, 125 units there, especially when those are all on nine acres. You know, we've got 18 acres with 60 units. um 60 units is a drop in a bucket compared to what is occurring more towards that that railroad trussle. Just thought that that was worth saying. Thank you, sir. Last call for comments. Raise your hand if you have something to say. Seeing none, I'm going close public comment. Commission, it's up to us. What's your what are your thoughts? Mr. I see a couple questions. Yeah. Yes. Mr. McNamera. Minga is considered what type of road? Arterial or collector? Local road. Local road. Um. Okay. That's all I've got. Bryce. Thanks. Before you step away, Bryce. Yeah. Go ahead. I was going to just um Bryce, would you would you mind perhaps just um recapping the process going forward. Um you know should this um should we make a recommendation um to which and it is just a recommendation to Washington County to uh to approve this project. Would you describe again the various steps that this development will have to go through um in order to um achieve a final approval? And I'd add to that regardless of what the recommendation is is whether we if we decide to say yes, what happens? And if we say no, what happens?

So whatever the recommendation is, if it's yes or no, it will still move forward to the Washington County Commission on July 28th. That will be the final action of the resoning. If the resoning goes through with the requested PRD2, a requirement of that zoning district prior to any development occurring is the approval of a comprehensive development plan by the Washington County Planning Commission. So that will go back to what would be the third commission uh considering the type of development and that would be the time that the actual site plan itself is considered and set in stone and then development would occur. And with respect to the driveway um the the driveway permit that'll be required correct at that time at that time we would take a look at it with our public works staff and look at what requirements we can have for the road improvements and what would be required of the developer. Okay. does and who does that go to or is that just an administrative review by staff? With it being split between city and county, it would likely be a conjunction of us two putting our heads together and trying to figure out what the requirements are, but we would have jurisdiction with the driveway permit to say that you need to improve the road since that's within the right of the ride ofways in the city and the frontage is in the city. Would that come to the planning commission again? Not this planning commission. Right. What's uh the emergency vehicle service is comes from where in the county currently? Uh how will emergency vehicles access this particular development? Uh you've got uh partial city, partial county, you got fire, emergency vehicles. Where do they come in from? It would come off of Minga, but it would be through the the service of the county. The development itself is not within the city. Do you have pretty good picture of

what's in the city and what's in the county in that area? You know, that's been a difficult area for development going back a lot of years. I actually heard the same identical argument almost word for word. Um uh when another development was being uh looked at for that this particular area u and it squeakaked through it was called Strawberry Fields. Had it gone the other way, the people that are living here now in Strawberry Fields wouldn't even be here. Uh the it's been a very difficult process moving out in that section because of that 1911 tunnel that's out there, which I hate because I've sat there too many times on and I can um I want to blow it up. I I have sat there wondering about if I could take a stick of dynamite and blow that thing up and what the railroad would do to me. uh too many times. So, I get it. I get it. But I also know the difficulties uh with expansions that we're seeing in the Johnson City, Washington County area and the additional population moving in here. I um uh feel for people empathetically for them wanting to preserve a lifestyle and an environment where they live, but the rush of people coming in, it's always going to be a dilemma, especially when you're you're in very attractive building areas where in this particular case exactly between Johnson City and Jonesboro. It's a wonderful access to uh uh that and Kingsport if you can get through the damn tunnel. But uh uh it it makes it uh one one of the challenges you have on something like this is if the zoning doesn't come

through with a developer who will come in with a low density residential use. You also have a future risk where it could be a high density use as more and more people come in around it. And whereas right now you have something that's going to be compatible with a strawberry field style of development if I understand it correctly about 3,000 square foot houses. uh you know that's a lot better than than coming in here with multif family or multi-story type of construction where you have 15 uh or more units on a per acre basis. Uh so I'm just throwing that out for perspective. Uh and I and I get it, but it's it's it's a very difficult dilemma for people when you're in a growth pattern like this. Do you have a map of city versus county in that area? I mean this is pretty much going to cover everything else is going to be in the county. This yellow box is the only thing that is in the city on Minga on Minga Minga itself and then about the first 200 feet. This is about 100 feet wide 200 feet deep and then on the other side on the right hand side that's city B4. Yeah, this is city. This is county to the south of Minga County and then city on the corner of Claude Simmons and Minga. You've got a you've got a shot that that shows it. It's page four of of There you go. 15. So, the yellow and red is city. Yes. And the rest is county. Yellow and red. Is that right? That's correct. Yep. The R3 yellow highlighted is city. Uh if you imagine that the frontage runs right here and then all of this B4 as well as this R3 city,

uh you made a comment that sort of question as often happens. Um, sometimes the city road department sees changes that occur and then they do a repeat assessment or a road study. Um, do you feel like once this is built or once the final design is submitted to Washington County, let's say it was approved and they know the density that's going to be in there, would that typically trigger a study for a city road? I would turn that over to our public works staff themselves. Okay. If the development were approved, um it would then have to have a traffic study before we give them a driveway permit. So at that time, we evaluate the road, we evaluate intersections. Excellent. So just to be just to be clear, if the traffic study indicates that that road needs to be widened, um if that traffic study indicates a light would be required um to handle the accommodate the in increased movements at Market Street and Minga, then that is something we would require before issuing a driveway permit and that is the developer's responsibility. Yeah, great. Mr. Sorry, just one more question for you. Is it I mean I know we heard from the developer that um in response to uh Mayor Hunter's question there that the um the this this development um would not work within um the city subdivision regulations. Is is that um is is that is that true? Would the would the developer be able to replicate something similar to the and I know we've got a concept plan which is for information purposes only but you know something like you know 3,000 square foot um homes on you know on lots reasonably within city suburre um well if it's stays as a planned unit

development there is no subdivision itself unless there is um establishment of a public road in there um but uh that would have to be something that is submitted to us and to review um for the proper consideration to um if it was like an RP style development, something like that. Forgive me. The one thing that I'm wrestling with and I think um public works answered the answered the question for me, but it is, you know, with with a with a county a county development that may necessitate changes to city infrastructure. Yeah. So, I'm just trying to get my head around that. Thank you, Mr. McNamer. Gentlemen, what other questions do you have? Well, it's not a question. It's just a comment. Um, the the only thing that's bothered me about this is that our our horizon 45 says large lots in this area. And you know my v what I thought we meant when we were crafting this particular uh description was acre plus or minus um more more like well larger lots and and and reasonably large and larger size homes. So it just Well, Mr. McName, can you can you come forward and give us a little overview about the neighborhood residential uh place type? Can you can you talk about that? And was this an area that you thought Horizon 2045 called for something akin

to the NA uh neighborhood residential place type? So with the place type there's different considerations and that's why it's not so rigid with each requirement like zoning is there's more consideration given to single family but other types are given different levels so we can evaluate those in each specific site itself and how it would look in in comparison to um the surrounding area. Now it does say larger lots. However, with this we're not looking at single family lots. We're looking at a planned unit development. However, with the proposal, it is single family and it is still skewing to the residential side uh with a moderate density. So, you can look at different characteristics as they apply within the place type at each location. Mr. McNamer, the Horizon 45 plan has not been approved by the city commission. Why are we using it and giving it the same weight as policy or recommendations that we would from past land use maps that we use here? It just seems like we're giving it the same weight as we are giving weight to policies and recommendations that the city commission has voted on and approved. And this document is still being worked on currently. I'll hand it over to Whitney. Well, and I'll I'll speak up too. I mean, I'm So, one of I'm I'm the bad guy in that regard. No, you're not. But I think we we all that have been involved in this process for two years feel that in some reasonable form Horizon 45 is going to get approved. I sure hope the commission is is prepared to do that. And that that's where I'm coming. Okay. So I'm going to start because I feel like there are two questions that are on the table that I kind of want to

talk to. First one being why are we using the Horizon 2045 plan. It is just because we have been talking about it. You but it is not an adopted policy. Therefore you do not have to treat it the same way but at because we have been doing this work we have been incorporating that into into recommendations. the the policy on on record would be the bridge plan which has that half and half of residential and commercial. So those would be your that those would be the adopted policies. So to to make that just perfectly clear um the other part is how you use this the place type I would I would there's two ways to think about this. One is the compactness of the lot, which in this case um in compactness it's in the middle. Um so you could use that as one of one of your factors when you look at um how we might think of place. The other is it is not this neighborhood residential is also in that area um and we'll get to it later this evening where it's in between a more the compact compact residential and the rural residential. So, it's hitting in that middle area. So, between kind of that smaller setbacks and um or sorry, smaller lots and not not straight middle, but it's inching towards because we did want to provide a wide range of lot types. I'm just going to stand here in case you have questions. I think that's clear. I think it is consistent with the I'm sorry, sir. We've already closed public comment, sir. Thank you. Um

Dr. Hoplin, don't take this the wrong way. Um, it's not meant to be mean or cold-hearted, but you know, in in purchasing land, um, having an expectex expectation or an assumption that people who own land around you will preserve it the way you want it is is kind of a hard ask. At some point in time, maybe with this request, it will be developed in some form or fashion. However, you know, personally, I think I mean to Steve's point, um, many of you live on what were farms. Strawberry Fields, Green or Garland farms, uh, all these were once farms, but, um, this particular request, um, it does bother me. um you know, accessing city services, water and sewer while wanting to remain in the county, the road traffic and it being such a narrow road. Um I I don't think I'm going to be looking to be in favor of this. Yeah, I tend to agree I tend to agree, Mr. Mayor, on this one. I'd feel much more comfortable if it were um if if it was if this development was coming through our process and not through the county's process. Yeah. I don't I don't like the fact that the concept plan is not binding with this with the county's approach. Um we have been very proactive in approving and strictly looking from land use as is as is our charge. But in this case there is a significant safety issue in my opinion. That road is I've been on that road and Claude Simmons and Manga hundreds of times and it really is a single lane road. Um, and until that road is improved or there is a plan in place, I'm going to have a really hard time approving this one.

But as I understand it, the city will in fact uh do a study and make appropriate requirements of the developer uh before before final approval. At the time of the driveway permit, our public works staff would require the developer to do a traffic study and do the improvements. And that is true. However, once we change the zoning, yeah, property could be sold. It could be completely different than what is in this concept plan, non-binding concept plan, but but the study would still be required whatever shows up on the on the property. Is that not correct? depending on what intensity the proposed development is with the site plan at the time of the driveway permit that's when the traffic study but as Anthony Todd noted with the proposed preliminary plan it would be required for this development if somebody puts just two houses on it no there wouldn't be a study but if somebody wants to do a similar development similar density and and the city would ultimately require whatever is appropriate. At what point is a binding site plan put in place in the county process? So it comes after final action on the resoning. So first the parcel itself would be reszoned. It would be given the PRD2 designation prior to any development on that site. The site plan would have to be approved by the Washington County Planning Commission, but after the zoning has been assigned by Washington County. Is that correct?

After final action on the resoning to a planned residential district? Yes. Thank you. As far as u police fire, who who would service this property? It would be all county. Okay. as I understand. I guess another concern of mine is if if we move forward with this and properties around it then annex into the city. It's almost reverse spot annexation. Um which would be something that the county should probably consider and and and that they may have to donate hole service this with fire and um police when it's surrounded by a city at some point in time in the future. That's a very good point. Yeah. And just to comment on a mayor's point earlier is we do have zones that would accommodate the current um plot that we have here um for the 3,000 foot homes and the type. Now they might have to do some changes with roads and things, but you know to the annex question, it it's not like that if they asked for annexation into the city because they're using city sewer, city water, city roads, um that they couldn't build almost that exact neighborhood in in the city limits. So, I I just want to make that point clear because I think we've had good discussion up here and I and and this is a difficult case, but I think there's been good discussion on it. Thank you. Did you want to make that into a motion of some sort? Absolutely. Um so, as far as new business 7.1 Washington County zoning, 138 Minga Drive. Um, I motion to, um, what I'll do is I will motion in the affirmative so that we can vote it down. Is that correct? Um, or or would you all prefer to I think you can you can do it either way. Okay, I'll do that then. I will. Um, so as far as the Washington County zoning

138 Minga Drive, um, R1 low density residential, A1 agricultural to PRD2 plan residential. I motion to deny. No. To recommend to recommend denial to the Washington County Planning Commission. Thank you. Do I have a second? Second. All right. We have a motion to recommend denial to Washington County to reszone R1 A1 property at 138 Minga to PRD. Uh motion to deni to recommend denial of that reszoning. Further discussion. Would you call the role, please? Commissioner Cooper, no. Commissioner Goodson, yes. Mayor Hunter, yes. Commissioner Oceanbine, yes. Commissioner Williams, yes. Vice Chairman Dutton, yes. Chairman Dagenheart, yes. Okay, the motion passed. Thank you very much. Now we'll move to 7.2, two, a text amendment on Washington County zoning resolution. If you could please exit quietly. Yes, please go ahead. This is a text amendment to the

Washington County zoning resolution regarding public services to the Washington County. Yes. This is a text amendment to the Washington County zoning resolution. So, should we have Miss Charles speak on it from the county? She'll come forward. Okay. So, looking at the process, um, all three regional planning commissions take a look at text amendments. Um so there was a recommendation uh prior hearing and then a second recommendation given by the Washington County Planning Commission on July 1st. Um we are also giving a recommendation as will Jonesboro Planning Commission all to the Washington County Commission. This is a proposal to add a definition of public services to article two of the county zoning resolution as well as allowing this use in all districts within section 513. There were initial changes that were caught on the first round. Uh those are included in the staff report. However, after the July 1 Washington County uh planning commission, um a few other edits were suggested by the commission to um better fit in with existing definitions and processes. So definitions article two for public services uses for essential services provided by a unit of government including but not limited to any municipality, metropolitan government and utility district were removed. County, school district, nonprofit, volunteer, fire department, um county legislative body for the direct benefit of the public such as law enforcement, fire service, emergency emergency medical service or ambulance, judicial court or government offices. um within section 513 uses permitted in all zoning districts. It's pretty simple just adding this in 513.2. Uh so there is no existing definition for public services within the county zoning resolution. Um this clarifies the content of what a public service would

be and allows it in all zoning districts. Uh this is a very similar methodology to what we see in the Johnson City zoning code. uh where we have the existing verbiage of municipal, county, state or federal buildings and land uses and those being permitted uses by right in all zoning districts. Staff does recommend approval of the text amendment with the requested edits um from the Washington County Planning Commission. Questions for staff? Miss Charles, do you have anything to add to this? the petition. Thank you, sir. I don't have anything further to add. I think um your staff did a great job of presenting this on behalf of the county um because there are different jurisdictions located in Washington County. The state requires any amendments to our zoning code to go before those commissions. Um, so that's that's why you're looking at it even though at the end of the day it will not impact properties within the city limits, but be happy to answer any questions if you have anything additional. Thank you. All right, I'm going to open the floor for public comment. Is anyone here to speak in favor or against the question? Seeing none, I'll close the floor. So gentlemen, it's not questions to us around this zoning resolution text amendment regarding public service properties in the county. Mr. Chairman, I'll make the motion to recommend the approval of the tax amendment as requested. Second. All right. I have a motion to recommend approval of the text amendment in the Washington County zoning resolution regarding public service properties and a second. Any further discussion? Please call the role. Commissioner Cooper, yes. Commissioner Goodson, yes. Mayor Hunter,

yes. Commissioner Oceanbine, yes. Commissioner Williams, yes. Vice Chairman Dutton, yes. Chairman Dagenhard, yes. All right, we'll move to 7.4, a reszoning request of 21.43 acres on East Oakland Avenue in Johnson City from R4 to B4. I'm sorry, from R4 and B4 to R5. Good evening, commissioners. This is a reasonzoning request at 2875 East Oakland Avenue. This is the first reading for the process where the planning commission will make a recommendation. Tonight also is a public hearing. The first reading will be August 7th with city commission with the final action date as September 4th for city commission as well if it moves forward in the process. The property is at the corner of East Oakland and East Springbrook and adjoins the Johnson City Raetball um center just to put kind of it into perspective of where this property is located. It is uh 21 roughly 21 and a half acres. It is zoned two zoning designations of R4 medium density residential which is the majority of the site with a B4 designation um along East Springbrook. Both of the the zoning districts are being reszoned tonight to an R5 highdensity residential residential district. The request tonight is to not increase density with a higher um zoning district. It is to allow for multi-story buildings that would require a 65- ft building height rather than a 35- ft maximum building height. So that is why there is a reasonzoning request in front of you today. This does have a binding concept plan. There are seven apartment buildings, again ranging from threetory to four stories, six individual town homes that

are along the East Springbrook frontage. 254 apartment units for a total of 260 units, a clubhouse and standalone garages are also being provided, as well as a um a decent amount of amenities with a pool, racket, and tennis ball courts. um dog park and a landscape buffer that encompasses the entire property for adequate buffering. It meets the standards um of the R5 zoning district in regards to um density, buffering, and parking. Any major changes to this plan would require it to come back for planning commission approval. Current conditions of the site are various elevation changes and slopes. It is currently vacant and heavily vegetated. There are water and sewer services available. A traffic study has already been completed for the site and recommendations have been included and are reflected in the concept plan of one egress and two one ingress and two egress lanes off of Oakland and one ingress and one egress lane onto Springbrook as well as a deceleration lane to be included on East Springbrook. The current zoning is R4 and B4 as previously stated and the land use is vacant. Adjacent zoning is a little bit of we kind of see everything. We have adjacent B4 of with commercial uses. We have resident residential single family homes. We have a mobile home park and industrial on the west side of the site. So it we kind of are encompassed with a little bit of everything. in the R5 district along with the density is in comparison with the surrounding uses. The current bridge plan future land use map has this as commercial as well as the entire surrounding area. The Horizon

2045 land use map calls for this specific property be to be regional mixeduse which allows for uh multif family homes or multif family units higher density um and higher compactness and it also uh highlights the use of open formal open space which is what we see with the parks and amenities that this is being provided. So it is in uh correlation with the future horizon 2045 land use map. Taking it back to the bridge plan, it meets the uh policy elements to support quality multif family developments and appropriate locations for the horizon 2045 plan. It has um it meets strong neighborhood policies uh to support different housing choices and um kind of infill development to encourage growth in already publicly served areas where water and sewer is already accessible from this location. The zoning per the zoning code we had a neighborhood meeting letters were sent out for the resoning and the neighborhood meeting on June 16th. The neighborhood meeting was held July 2nd in the administrative conference room where we had one attendee and her main concern was just the increase of traffic. Um she owns property on the corner of East Springbrook in Oakland. um both residential and commercial and was just concerned about the increase of traffic and the property was also posted at the time letters were sent out on June 16th, 2025 due to the request being consistent with the future land use map and the horizon 2045 map. The request also eliminates a split zone property of R4 and B4 and it provides a uh different type of housing options and is well within the density aotment. Staff does recommend approval of the resoning. Thank you very much, Miss Bney. Question for staff.

Just a point of quick clarification. concerning that but the understanding that the density is not shifting and maybe for benefit of folks present that really what's driving the change is the four three splits in the middle of the site and the need for the extra height to accommodate the maximum building height for those correct with the current zoning the maximum building height is 35 ft um and with the R4 zoning the maximum density is 300 they're proposing 260 units and just want a 65 ft building height to have in their development plan of those four story units Further questions for any anybody else in staff? Just just out of curiosity, is there any is is the uh uh water and sewer uh infrastructure adequate to support the amount of development that we're talking about there? Because there's been a lot there over past few years. Uh, has there been any need for any changes? Can uh can we handle it? I will turn that over to Travis Olinger with Water and Sewer. I definitely do not want to speak on their behalf, but he can answer that question for you. Hey Travis, you have some big pipes in there. Yes, sir. Okay, great presentation. Um, yes. Yes, we do have capacity at this location. Um, that being said, we are feeling development pressures at Knob Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant and we're making plans to to address that uh that pinch point that that we're experiencing and and foresee to continue, but uh putting putting plans together to address that, but no issues with capacity at this location. Okay. Thank you, Travis. Any other further questions for staff?

Is the developer here? If you have any comments you'd like to make, we would certainly welcome them. I'm Warren Sugg with Civil Design Concepts. We're a local swim engineering firm over in Asheville. Um, just available for any questions you guys have. I'd like to commend your staff. They've been great to work with um so far on just talking through the process, talking through um what's coming next and and what we've been through. So, thank you for for for what they've done with us already and just available for any questions. We also uh am joined by uh by Tyson Wyatt who um is with Cabinets and Case as well and like I said, I'm the civil engineer. Thank you. Any questions for the developer? Thank you, sir. Thank y'all. All right, I'll open the floor for public comment. Is anyone here to speak in favor or against the question? Come forward, please. Sir, we have your name and address. Good evening. Uh, Brian Row. I live on Twin Falls Drive, which is adjacent to the to the property in question. Um, I I was This is a massive a massive development. I'd rather see it smaller, but I'm not going to stand in the way of progress. I I realize it's going to go forwards. Um it was good to hear that on Springbrook there was going to be a turn lane. Um really need to pay attention to the traffic on Oakland too because we have a phenomenal number of accidents right around there and and I I don't I I haven't seen any plans to to accommodate the traffic. Um, but my main concern is really um there's a wetland area whether I ah there we go. There's a wetland area right here and I I'm very concerned about this because obviously it can't be built on. Um but I wonder what's going

to happen how we're going to be able to protect that wetland area. It it's got a an abundance of wildlife. You know, we've got king fishes. We've got herands, we've got snapping turtles, we got coyotes, even a few bear every now and then. Um, and and possibly, and there was even rumor there was a a bog turtle population there, which is an endanger endangered species. I don't know whether that's been confirmed or not, but my concern is that this area needs to be protected. But I see that there's this green buffer that goes that cuts right through the wetland area. And and I know that you have rules on buffers. Um but but h how are you going to run a buffer through through the middle of a wet land? I I I just I just don't see what the I I don't know what the plan is for that. So that's my major concern. And I'm not going to speak against this, but I just like to be sure that that there are some uh accommodations for for the wetland and the traffic as as as I mentioned earlier. Okay. Thank you for your attention. Thank you, Mr. Ro. Sorry. Perhaps the engineer would like to come back up and I'm sure you can satisfactorily answer the question as it pertains to wetlands protections and the stream buffer that I think you had indicated on the concept plan. You're reading my mind. Uh so yes, we've already had a streams and wetlands delineation done here. So we know the limits of where those streams and wetlands are. Uh right now we're not proposing any impacts to it. Uh if we did have impacts to any of the streams and wetlands, then we would have to go through those proper permitting. Uh so that's the streams and wetlands. Uh if if we all choose to not plant, uh we're certainly open to not putting plants in the ground if that's really what we all want to do. But I think it's it's the

code right now that we have to landscape along that edge. So that's our intention. Um I don't believe plantings within a wetland is a is an impact or a problem. Uh and then along the traffic yet, we've had a traffic uh impact study done. Staff mentioned that and we're um adhering to to the the things that were mentioned in there. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you, sir. Hi, I'm Becky Row. My husband just spoke. We live at 308 Twin Falls Drive. Um, the concern he mentioned are important to us. We enjoy our two acres. um what has not been addressed or what we've what I am concerned about is we have not been told um what kind of barriers uh from the setback would be put up. The property we own is heavily wooded. Um and we already from the trailer park above us, we get kids running through there, you know, at 10:00 at night, we'll have a bunch of teenagers. Um we have homeless people. Now, if they put in 256 units where there's two or three units in there, so you get 150 kids and you according to the zoning, you can put up pine trees or whatever. How many of the hundred kids do you think a pine tree is going to keep out of our property? So if they're down there coming across the stream climbing a tree, climbing on the rocks and they get hurt, it's not the development that's going to get sued, it's us. We can put signs up, but again, kids are not going to read signs. So, we were kind of looking for

some guidance or information on a more permanent type of barrier, be it a wooden fence line, um, a masonary fence line, something other, you know, and it's not just us, it's the other properties own up, too, because that wooded area goes all the way up to where their entrance would be. and there are other properties up there. So, if the kids are messing on us, they're going to be messing around those properties, too. So, we were just kind of looking for some guidance or information on, you know, what what can be done to protect all of that area. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Any thoughts from on that comment? Thank you. All right. Further comments from the public. I'll close the floor for public comment. Riley would did you say a traffic study would be done with this? It has alreadyed. Okay. Sorry, I couldn't remember. And on Oakland, what what kind of improvements, if any, are called for? I think it will be easier to pull up the concept plan. So on Oakland, it called for a uh one ingress lane and two egress lanes on Oakland which are being depicted on the concept plan. And on East Springbrook, it was a one in one out turn lane. I can't recall how close this is to and I can't think of the name of the road that Snyder Science is on. Where where Creekore? Yeah, Creekmore. Where is that in relation to that entrance? it. So the entrance is here and Creekmore is right across from it. So the entrance to the development is

located here and Creekmore is right there. This traffic study indicated a light. Is that right? No, it did not. It did not. Okay. All right. Any further questions? What about the buffer in Riley? Um, in the wetlands, is that necessary considering it? So, the the it's a two-prong kind of question with the wetlands and then the the wood or masonary fence. do when the site plan comes through and it calls for a landscape buffer, a type one buffer, um if there is an already existing vegetative buffer that meets those requirements, um our city landscaper can approve that as is. The developer does have the option of doing a wood or masonry fence and trees or just trees um depending on the size of buffer that they want to provide. So if they want to explore along the wetland and their property um line of keeping the vegetative buffer if the city landscaper deems that sufficient then that could be a possibility. Okay. I mean overall I think this is good infield development. I agree. I mean the existing density is not increasing. We're just going for an extra height. But that's on a the higher part of a 43 split. So that's going to be on the downhill side there. I mean the the the increase in height would not be perceptible to anyone else. I don't I this is a site that's um that that's been zoning this you know essentially for this development for a for a long period of time. I don't think this is controversial. It's a well thoughtout plan. It's a perfect location for this type of

density. I'm in full support of it. Yeah, we've been asking for more infill development for a long time and we've not seen it really as much as we would hope to. Um, I do feel Dr. Rose's thoughts on making sure that there's an appropriate buffer there on his property and uh, you know, reviewing kind of where his house is and where the development is. It seems like there's a pretty significant amount of land that's not being built on to separate, but I appreciate his comments very much and his wife and the developer will hopefully talk with the when it appropriate time to talk about buffering in the wetland area whether it's needed or not. I hope. All right. May I have a motion? Mr. Chairman. Um, I move that we approve the resoning request as presented. All right. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second. All right. I have a motion and a second to approve the reszoning at 2875 East Oakland of 21.43 acres from R4B4 to R5. Any further discussion? Please call the RO. Commissioner Cooper, yes. Commissioner Goodson, yes. Mayor Hunter, yes. Commissioner Oceanbine, yes. Commissioner Williams. Yes. Vice Chairman Dutton. Yes. Chairman Denhard. Yes. All right. Next item is 435 Matson Road final plat. Miss Putney. Thank you Commissioners. This is a simple uh request for a minor subdivision minor subdivision final plat for three lots. Uh the purpose of the plat in front of you is just because it's creating more than two lots. So it is required by statute to have planning commission approval. The property is located within uh Washington County but within our planning region. So we are required um

to see the the plat and it is it has to meet our subdivision regulations. Kind of a zoomed out put into perspective where it is located. The property is located here on Matson Road and in relation Willow Springs Park um and Antioch Road are kind of to the east of the property. Again, the plat is zoned R1 in Washington County. It's creating three lots. There are no new public roads being built and the three lots are meeting the requirements for Washington County um R1 zoning requirements. Staff recommends approve approval of the final plaid at 435 Matson Road. All right. Any questions for staff? Discussion or motion? Public hearing. Oh, no. There is no public hearing. Mr. Chairman, I um move that we recommend approval of the final plat as presented. Second. All right. I have a motion to approve the final plat as presented and a second at 435 Matson Road. Any further discussion? Please call the role, please. Commissioner Cooper. Commissioner Cooper, yes. Commissioner Goodson, yes. Mayor Hunter, yes. Commissioner Oceanbine, yes. Commissioner Williams, yes. Vice Chairman Dutton, yes. Chairman Dagenheart, yes. Thank you very much. Now we move to other business. Good evening. A momentous presentation. Yes. Um I'm Whitney Hodes. I'm the planning manager with Johnson City and I have been um the the shepherd of this process for the last two years. So it is with great pleasure that I present to this to you because it has taken a lot of work to get here by everyone on this board, by the city commission, by the advisory committee and um our consultant

team of Kimley Horn um as well as countless of people who have commented on this plan throughout the process. Because this is the public hearing, I'm going to go over a few items that we've already discussed at your presentation last month, but just to kind of refresh a little bit. So, we have been in this process since August of 2023 and we are at the bottom here at the final phase. We have been given all of the deliverables. They are on the ini uh horizon 2045 website so the public can go and look at those. Um, and we are in this adoption process. So, we have done um we've collected information, we have processed that to come through with um kind of some guiding principles and frameworks and we'll kind of go over those again just real quickly, but the community input um has been throughout the entire process. So, Kimley Horn touched on this last month of how many views that we've had and um on our website, how many hours this has been within the community because we've have taken this to the to the public with pop-up events as well as your traditional um public input sessions. We've had multiple online surveys and ways to participate. And this is blank because I wanted I was supposed to say something and I forgot to type it. Um, so but what I wanted to say with this is that this last little bit of public comment has been the 30-day statutory period. And in that we've received 45 unique um comments. One person actually took the time to comment four times. Um so and those were in your um you have received those as comments. What I noticed from the comments were that overwhelmingly people um responded well

to the plan as far as a guidance to growth or they are do not want growth at all. Um and so that was also in those comments. Um but for the most part they've been really well thought out. the the comments where we have found like people were um providing additional information, we were able to put that into the final draft document and um get that incorporated. So, how we got here, and this is what I want to go over again just a little bit, is we had this community characteristics report that was done a couple of years ago, and that has been folded into this final plan as well as the guiding statement and um planning themes. I think this board spent a lot of time with those both of those. Um and then we came to a conceptual growth strategy which led us to these place types and future land use plans. Now this conceptual growth strategy um this was the framework for which we started with the future land use map and this is just a kind of we have been over that one many times but what it led us to are these place types and there are six 10 11 um place types where these are going to be kind of the guiding documents and I'm going to yes and by that I kind of want to give the difference between a place type and a zoning district and with a place type this is really a vision for the future u for future developments where and it's a recommendation of the land use and building forms it has taken a lot of community participation and it's it will be incorporated into our community plans going forward and so its real main focus is on guiding resonings and capital investments whereas Whereas zoning that

is going to be it's a tool to implement this vision. So when people see a place type on their property, we did not change their zoning. All we did was change what possibly it could be reszoned to. The zoning is a legal development standard. So it's the requirements. It's what we have seen this evening. A lot of that involves staff administration. Um and then we bring that to the to the governing bodies. it is codified in a zoning ordinance whereas this is more of a a plan in a a policy document and that is a law. So it is we would we seek those development approvals. We use these place types in resoning decisions and I think that's really helpful for the public as if they if they're going to the map and thinking is something changing on my property. No. what may you have abilities to change your property and you as a body have the ability to take that information in um because this is a a community vision and as we went through this process it was very iterative it iterative and it came from with the the future land use map staff has looked at it the community has looked at it we've we had public meetings about it we had um online information about it so This is a graphic reference. This is kind of the prettier document because the lines are a little blurry. If you go to the website, you'll be able to type in like a specific address and know that place type. So then that's the horizon 2045 umjc.com website. But this gives you an idea of what we're looking for in the future. What I find interesting in this and as far as kind of land development and see if these will pop up is that a good majority of the city is in this kind of um still residential. So you'll notice that that pistachio color is 35.9%

that's the the amount of property in the study boundary and the neighborhood residential which did come up today is about 40%. So, we're still in we're still seeking a lot more residential which came out in a lot of the public comment of the needs for housing. The other thing is um we've also made some changes because this graphic is wrong and uh when it came to u what the open space employ with employment flex and commercial corridor that actually came out of a public comment. So, I just wanted to make sure that you know people knew that we did take those those comments to heart and did make those changes. Um so how we will use these is the two the two tools that we really that I hope that you adopt tonight um in this plan are the future land use map and the policies the the um as we go I'll get to that a little bit. Um so let's in the policy document there are four types of actions and there are plans, programs, policies and projects and so as you have gone through these and we spent many week many months on them you will see those those verbiages of what staff will be asked to do or what different groups will be asked to do. This is part of the implementation strategy page and th that target date or that target is usually something that's a high priority. So that's what we're going to look to as something that we need to do um we need to do. So this is an example and Jonathan showed this last month of what one of those pages looks like. Um towards the back of that we lovingly call it the matrix. uh and because it is kind of a policy matrix and we'll be using it um as staff uh as we make our budgets as we think about our capital um improvements as we think about what we want to do and I wanted to

share like one of the things that that's in that first portion is that this and I have said this many times to many people this is a plan to plan so this is not gonna this this document does not have all the great things that we want to do in Johnson city, but it's meant to support all the great things we want to do in Johnson City. So, if there was there were several comments um that I saw about um maybe specific neighborhoods or doing a you know a certain um a certain issue that they wanted addressed. This document can't address all things, but what it can do is help start those conversations and help move those things forward. So annually the city is going to look at this as far as what can we do what can what how can we further this vision every five years this is the recommendation from the document is that we would evaluate the policies and assess what have we've achieved what do we do we need to redirect that vision and that it is my hope that every 10 years we start doing this so that we can keep looking out 20 years and that we won't get to the end of the 20 years and say all right now it's time to do it again but that we're always looking to the future because as we all know markets change that different things can happen um and we just need to keep that forward vision in our division and and we will need your help with this. What we're going to look at um up first is the transparency and development process. Um you know we want to evaluate all of our processes. We had a meeting tonight about the annexation. We will continue to look at that annexation process to make sure that is very well communicated to the public and all those that use it. Um this will also include some updates to the website and we want to look at ways to help the public stay informed um in some non-tradition in non-stutorial

ways. So what are we putting on our websites? uh what information can we give ahead of time so that people are more in more informed as they come to you and make um cases for public hearings. We're also going to try to assess some areas where we can start doing some small area planning. Um and those small area plans would be where we're dialing into a particular neighborhood or area of town so that we can take those place types a little further and really get to into some refined um some refined planning. It's very exciting as a planner for that. um which you know what we're already currently working on um the the city is the downtown parking study and a housing policy and these all fold into what we've heard from the public and what we um as a city see as needs going forward. So where we are in this process is we have finished the review period as of the sixth. Um you had a presentation last month. This is the public hearing for public comment. Uh, and we will have a first reading, a second reading, and third reading. I do want to make notice one change. Um, Megan, who's our the who's the staff attorney, and I have really looked through of where that public hearing needed to be, and we could not find why it needed to be on first reading, so we wanted to just put it in our regular um kind of in our regular ordinance reading. And so, that'll be in that second reading on August 20 21st. So, if anybody else wants to come out and there's another opportunity to make comment to the city commission, that'll be on August 21st if this is approved tonight. Um, if not, then we'll redo the schedule. Um, but this is not the last time that we are like this will be a living document and we want it to be a living document. So, in the coming month, in the coming weeks, what we're going to do is um we are going to likely make a few changes to the some of the document

because communication needs to make sure that it meets all of our protocols. The future land use map, the policies will not change. We just want to make sure that we're communicating everything clearly and through um city the proper ways for the city. Um, we also will want to create a website for this that lives in our website, not Kimling Horn's website. So, some of the suggestions that we've heard are, you know, we need a glossery. Well, this will be a great place to put a glossery on the website. Maybe pulling out some of those maps so that they're easier to get to than scrolling through that document that can live on the website. Having some frequently asked questions about what is this plan? Um, and then we also want to archive this process and we want that to be on ours. So, that's going to be something that we do. Um, and then the future land use map will be added to GIS once it's adopted. Just want to make that clear. So now I'm at the point where if you would like to there's the public hearing and if you want to discuss this more, I'm happy to do that. It's very exciting. Questions for staff. Once this is adopted by the by the city commission, who who is the lead to, for one of a better word, bird dog and make sure that each each department, each organization, each whatever is keeping this as if not top of mind, at least a priority day day in and day out it really will it really is going to depend on department. So if we go back to that policy matrix in the policy matrix there is a com a a a column for responsible party and so that responsible party will take on that particular action. Now oversight will

actually be the city administration like that that is part like they're going to ask department leaders how are you meeting what's in the horizon plan. We've already been told that. So I think there's going to be a couple of checks and balances in in the processes to see like how are we meeting these? What are we doing? Um and then I think also it'll show up in our own budgets. um you know because this is a great policy document to say why to justify why you are wanting to go a certain direction because this is a community vision and this is how we're living out that community vision. So the very top of the food chain is the is the city manager's office then basically thank you. Other questions for staff or just as a I guess kind of clarification for the citizens. I've had some questions about I don't see anything about any road improvements. This is not a capital improvement plan. It is not. But what you do see is in the um coordinated transportation section. Again, it's a lot of plans to plan. And so um it what this will do is help the public public works and the transportation which is falls under transportation to have some guidance and direction of what the community wanted to see and how to lead that and it it will need further planning. And I think you had mentioned as well there were comments um regarding you know not this isn't a document to necessarily encourage growth or to speed growth up. It's in order to have conscientious thought out growth because we expect that as Johnson City has done for the past 12 30ome years has grown. Um so it's to be thoughtful in that process and I think that how and how we have

tried to like start in because as we had those policies and could provide you those policies and decisions you were making currently. I think that that has also helped with show how this will be used as a growth guide. We we saw that tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Mrs. Hodgees. I'm going to open the floor for public comment. Is anyone here to speak to the question? Could you give us your name and address, please? You have three minutes. I'm Carmen Cook and I live in Garland Acres over in South Jton City. So, I haven't had opportunity to really get into the uh horizon plan a lot. Uh but we've just recently been named Johnson City top city to live in by uh Travel and Leisure and Southern Living magazine. So, we definitely need a growth plan and we've already been experiencing a lot of growth, but my concern is a lot of it has been unchecked, especially over in South Johnson City. Uh we've I've lived over there for 25 years. That that part of town is ugly. We have a lot of homelessness. We have the highest rate of crime. So, and now on top of that, so the Johnson City residents have been moved to our in 2025 at the end of this year, they'll be moved over there and that's putting that very vulnerable population right there in the corridor for all of those homeless folks coming through there. So, it's basically going to be a nicer building, which those folks deserved, but are things, you know, going to change? And like we've seen with the zoning request tonight, same thing I'm facing out in South Johnson City where uh Bright Ridge brought bought property out there at the beginning of 2024 just conveniently behind my neighborhood and just conveniently after Bright Ridge has to

move from down in Limestone and that will be right in my back door. 2 miles. Now uh Mayor uh Hunter there he's heard our group speak a lot. So, I represent the Johnson City Coalition against Bitcoin mining and uh data centers. So, that's my big concern uh this evening and the future. So, a lot of residential, yes, we've got to make sure that we've got to have the infrastructure to support all of that, but we've got to be very uh careful about uh the type of industry that comes in right on top of a residential neighborhood right across the street. two heavily populated trailer parks with lots of small children less than 0.2 miles away is a school and um then practically right across the street Typton Hannes historic site. So that's my huge concern and I just not for my neighborhood of course it's going to be in my backyard. We know that that raises huge environmental concerns and not just that the beauty of my neighborhood is going to go away but my quality of life is going to go away. I'm not going to be able to sleep at night. It's going to affect my health. It's going to affect the environment in a fivemile radius where you have the Johnson City uh medical center. You have the VA medical center. So, it affects when we think about it from one from East Johnson City to West Johnson City 2.5 to three miles. So, that's my huge concern that I want to bring to this planning commission tonight. Uh Johnson City Commission has given us a one-year moratorum on the development of um Bitcoin mining or any of those industries uh coming into our city. But that's still very concerning because the text changes that have already been approved by the commission are so weak. They make us so vulnerable. So why

Rachel Holly 2411 Circle View Drive. Um I also live in the southside Johnson City with the same issue about the Bitcoin. Um, if if Johnson City has been voted the best city to live in, I really don't understand why we would want Bitcoin mining as a part of that. I mean, I see a great city with with Bitcoin mining in it. It it doesn't make sense. And the way our city is laid out doesn't make sense. you see a lot of the funding going towards downtown um downtown where there's more crime um more I mean I'm I'm not against people drinking if that's what they want to do uh more beer joints um I don't understand that and then you have the east side where you have a dump my mother lives there constantly there's this terrible smell That's nauseating coming through there. And then they're saying it's going to be open maybe 50 more years. Then you've got the south side. Uh like u the lady before me said, um homeless people. Um you're moving John Severe down there probably because it didn't look good for downtown with the homeless hanging out. Um we've got buildings over there. They're dilapidated. There's just nothing nothing there. So, it looks like you're wanting everything downtown and then east and south. Let's put all the bad stuff there. Let's put all the bad stuff there. Let's hide it. Um, we are residents of Johnson City.

I've lived here my entire life and I expect better of all of you if we love our city. I mean, I know that there are people trying to come in, but do we really do we have to accept every person that wants to come in here? I want us to be able to to have our our wildlife like Buffalo Mountain. We see deer. we see. Do we want Why would we want to run that? Do you have comments about the growth plan? The growth plan. I just want the growth plan to include all of the city. Thank you. Further comments about the growth plan. My name is Shelby Holly. I live at 2411 Circuit Drive in South John City. And the growth plan is great ideal, but how it gets implemented and people getting ahead of the game and saying who's going to start it, who's going to control it. And it also controls what you do in this city, what you allow in this city, what you implement in business in this city, and what you implement in residents in this city. And if the growth is going to have to affect roads. It's going to affect the land. It's going to affect the water. It's going to affect power. It's going to affect life for people, animals, and making it policed,

fire safety, everything involved has to be included in this plan and it has to be controlled in a very, very high important status. And that status means that you take every bit of consideration from each one of you. If you could live in our area or if we lived in your area, what we might see in the and be in there and be in those shoes and consider what you would allow and what you wouldn't allow. We're, you can see we're against Bitcoin mining, but we're also against anything that is going to be harmful and it's going to destroy Johnson City because you go, you got a plan, it's talking about growth 20 years down the road. Well, that that controls everything involved and it can't it can't allow a destructive business to be implemented. And you going to have to get on the game of what the zoning and and what the word and the verbiage is about how strong it's going to be to keep these type of businesses that's harmful out of this city. City city is great if you want to stay there, but if you implement something and you don't get strong with it, it's going to destroy it. And 20 years down the road, you won't say, "Well, we we would surely have done this." Don't say what we should have done. Do what we should do. Thank you, sir. Further comments? Seeing none, I'll close the floor, gentlemen. The questions for us? Well, I'll tell you, two years is a long time. You know, I think many of the commissioners have had hot and cold

moments with this plan. Uh, I think we've talked to everybody about it. Um, I will say I have a new respect for city growth plans and the work that goes into these and the detail that goes into these. Um, and so there's been a lot of hard, sweat, and time that each of the commissioners that is sitting here today has put into this plan. uh many of which um you know have been on since the very beginning of the plan and working closely with city staff um and of course uh our contracting business to use to help build it. And so I you know I do have confidence in this plan um with the amount of time that has been put into it with uh you know the popups that were done. Uh, I feel like I saw Whitney at every single event I went to in Johnson City with a tent and signs and stick up posters and, you know, write your comment here. Um, and so one of the biggest things that I felt was I wanted to ensure that the city had input. Um, that was one of the most important aspects to this for me is that no one um could come up afterwards after two-year process and say, "Well, we weren't heard." Um, and I do have confidence that if someone was to say that, um, then they must have not been living in Johnson City the last two years because, um, they were out there online, uh, had a a website that, uh, started off a little bleak and then really turned around and had lots of great information and then was also very interactive. And so, I would just like to thank um, the process because it is way more uh, detailed than I think anybody could ever imagine for a city of this size. um to put forth a document like this. Thank you. I've got some comments. Uh two years into this effort, discussion, debate, and collaboration, we've now got

a growth plan for 20 for the next 20 years. It is just a vision that's could be used to guide our efforts to grow and develop for the next 20 years. The process has certainly not been easy and not every path that we've explored has been without complications and disagreements. Sometimes we got contentious. I'm looking at you, Whitney. Like any long range plan, it's not going to be perfect. But despite those challenges, the final product represents meaningful progress, a good and positive and necessary step forward for Johnson City's future. Horizon 2045 is a testament to the value of collaboration. Citizens of Johnson City offered their ideas, their concerns, and their hopes. We've heard some of those tonight. City department leaders and staff contributed a lot of expertise, experience, and insight. The administration and leadership gave this process both structure and support. the planning commission, those of us in front of you, alongside with the planning department staff, we have worked diligently for many long hours trying to listen, refine, build consensus along the way. I'd especially like to recognize Whitney Hodgeges and the Kimley Horn Consulting Company for their guidance and technical expertise throughout this process. Their work helped us translate a wide range of input into clear and strategic into a clear and strategic framework that reflects this community's priorities. It's not an end end point. I want to make sure that you we all understand that it's a beginning. It gives us a shared foundation to build upon, a direction to follow, and flexibility to adapt to circumstances as they change. It reinforces our commitment to thoughtful planning, sustainable growth, and a community that serves all of its residents, present and future.

Thanks to everyone who played a role in bringing this plan to life. Your engagement and effort have helped shape a brighter future path for Johnson City. Any other comments? That's not anything that was on about a little and it was you that made me think of this. Um, I really want to actually thank our our media because they have been really great at getting the word out about this and helping us reach more people and I don't think that we often thank them and I just wanted to say in this process it's been really very helpful. The media is part of our community. Yes. Any other comments or questions or discussion? I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I uh put a motion forward to approve the Horizon 2045 plan and move it forward to the city commission. Okay. Second. All right. So, we have a motion and a second to move forward to to approve and I'll refer to the text on the screen. approve and certify the Horizon 2045 growth management plan which includes the future land m use maps and its policies. Is that your correct and a second? Any discussion? Hearing none, I'll ask for the role to be called. Commissioner Cooper, yes. Commissioner Goodson, yes. Mayor Hunter, yes. Commissioner Oceanbine, yes. Commissioner Williams, yes. Vice Chairman Dutton, yes. Chairman Dangenheart, a celebratory. Yes. Okay, the motion passed. Any more business to come before us? Hearing none, I'll adjourn the meeting. Thank you.