Regional Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Welcome to the October 21st, 2025 Johnson City Regional Com Comm Commission Planning 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 may come to the podium to be recognized. Please speak clearly into the microphone and begin by giving your name and address. Then each person will be allowed three minutes to speak and we ask you to speak only to the commission. I'll now call the meeting to order at one minute after 6. Commissioner Dutton, would you please give us the invocation and pledge of allegiance to the flag?

Uh please please bow your heads in prayer. Heavenly Father, we come before you this evening with grateful hearts, thanking you for the privilege to serve this community. We ask for your guidance in all that is said and done in this meeting. Grant us the wisdom to make decisions that reflect your kingdom and help us to lead with humility, to listen with compassion, and to act with integrity. Lord, bless our city and all who all who call it home. Let your presence be among us now. and may we all do um all we can to bring glory to you and serve the common good. In Jesus name we pray. Amen. Please rise. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. We have before us the agenda for this evening. Do I have any requests for changing the agenda or make making any additions or adjustments?

Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to approve the agenda. Second. All right. I have a motion to approve the agenda as presented and a second. Any discussion? All in favor of accepting the agenda say I. I. Any opposed? Thank you. We've got the agenda. We also have the minutes from the meeting on September 9th. Any changes or adjustments or corrections? Move their approval. All right. I have a motion to move to approve. Second. And a second. All in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? Thank you very much. Now for the public comment section of the agenda. We have five people that have reg registered for public comment and they have all registered to make comments about the item on the agenda related to the Minga road uh point on our agenda. Uh and also for that we will also have public comment for that. We have Britt Bowowers registered Tracy Bowers, Chris Buck, Tony Martin, and Stan Widner. Uh can you raise your hand if you're here? You're welcome to come to the podium one at a time. Just would which one would like to come first? You'll have three minutes.

Could you please give us your name and address? Yes. Tracy Bowers. Come to the podium first. Tracy Bowers, 269 Claude Simmons Road. Thank you.

Uh we also own the property at uh 237 Claude called Simmons Road. Um, as most of you were at the meeting in July, you might remember that we were opposed to the resoning of this property on Minga Drive, my reasons for opposing this resoning haven't changed, and the number one reason is still the increase of accidents that will occur if this development is allowed. We have seen many accidents in the 17 years that we have lived on Claude Simmons. I know I had showed photos at the previous meeting, but I still wanted to show this one again one more time. This is the guard rail on Claude called Simmons that has been hit multiple times. You can see um I also had stated in the previous meeting that I had contacted Washington County 911 to see if I could obtain the number of accidents that had actually occurred in the 780 foot stretch of road in front of our two properties and Minga Drive. I had picked a date range of January 23 through June 25 and had found that there had been 29 accidents just in that 780 foot distance. When we got the notice this was coming up against uh the resoning again, I reached back out to Washington County 911 and since July, there have been nine more accidents in this exact same stretch of road. I am aware that our area is growing and there is a need for housing and I also believe that property owners have right to develop their property. However, this property on this street is not the answer. My understanding was no changes have been made to the resoning request of this property except that after speaking with Chris in the Washington County Zoning Office yesterday, he informed me that no concept plan was submitted this time. Previously, a concept plan was submitted showing 69 homes. The PRD2 zoning for this

particular property allows a maximum of 120 units. This certainly makes me question what exactly are they planning? With no binding concept plan required in Washington County, if this resoning is approved, I feel like we're potentially victims of a bait and switch. Uh 69 homes were unthinkable. 120 is crazy. Minga Drive is too narrow for two cars to safely pass each other now and certainly cannot support an additional 150 to 250 cars daily. I'd like to take just a second and ask that if anyone in the audience is opposed to this resoning to please raise their hand. Um, you guys voted against this resoning in July and nothing has changed from that meeting to now except more accidents occurring and so I'm asking your decision to vote against the resoning not to change as well. Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you, ma'am.

Is there a Brit Powers here? I'm Britt Bowers, also on 269 Claude Simmons. I uh I'll be reading this statement for Jeff Hoplin, our neighbor, who lives at 130 Minga Drive. He couldn't be here uh due to the last minute change of the meeting date. He was going to be here last week. This is from Dr. Hofflin. As we all know, the resoning of 138 Minga Drive um has been resubmitted by the developer. There have been no changes to the request since the prior vote. I am unclear as to the reasoning for reapplying this soon after previous denial by this planning commission with no changes. Minga Drive is a small cut-through road from Claude Simmons to 11E. It is a narrow road with no shoulder. The electrical poles sit very close to the edge of the road with no allowance. This road has many limited sight lines. Since most cars use Minga Drive as a cutthrough, they are often traveling at excessive speeds. I know all of this because my driveway is adjacent to this property and runs parallel to the only entrance the development would have. I have personally had several close calls with possible accidents simply attempting to pull out of my own driveway. The proposed zoning would allow up to 120 homes to be built. A development with with such high density will add a significant amount of traffic to an already busy and dangerous road. In addition, the only two ways out are either 211E, which is hazardous to pull out on, especially when making a left turn, or the one-lane tunnel at the other end of Claude Simmons, which is already overloaded with long waits. Other developments have already been approved within this area, which will

worsen traffic in the very near future. Minga Drive is a local road within the Johnson City limits, while the proposed development is in Washington County. the city would be providing utilities without the benefit of property taxes. Also, the addition of this many homes may also place a strain on utilities. Uh during my time collecting signatures for the petition, several residents voiced concerns about issues with water pressure uh after uh a new single home had been added. Uh the addition of such a large number of homes does not correlate with the existing housing densities along Minga Drive. Although there is some medium density housing on Minga, the maximum number of units is 14 and this is obviously nowhere near 69 to 120. Uh in closing, I ask uh that you once again deny the reasonzoning request. Thank you guys.

Thank you, sir. Mr. Chris Buck.

Could you please give us your address, sir?

Yes. Uh, my name is Chris Buck and uh, I am the owner of 285 Claude Simmons Road and 283 Claude Simmons Road. to e echo what Tracy and and Brit said, the the two main objections that I have to this resoning is one, it's a little bit like a Trojan horse. We're not being asked to vote on here's what the proposed development is. A lot can change. Unfortunately, the current process does not allow us to review any serious impacts until after the resoning would happen, especially the impacts of final uh density and conceptual grading plans. There are numerous other issues resulting major traffic flows on a small underdeveloped rural road with problematic sight lines and outlets to larger alterials. The site plan for 69 units has only one narrow access point which if it was 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 partial results into views into secluded backyards of of current property owners. Um, which leads me to my second point. One of the things that the the Horizon 25 plan outlines was how do we support growth in this area while maintaining what makes this area so great and this reszone would not be aligned with that vision in my opinion. So, I humbly ask you guys to consider denying this resoning proposition. Thank you very much.

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Tony Martin. Thank you. I'm Tony Martin. I live at one St. An's Court, a residential community a quarter mile from the property under construction under consideration. I've been there for 27 years. In the past two weeks, I've heard from many of the residents in our homeowners association about this resoning, and they're opposed to it because of unsafe conditions, it would add. with 69 homes on Minga Drive, especially to school children catching a bus, elderly residents driving an error county road not built for such a development. Earlier this year, the commissioners rejected a plan to construct 105 town houses on another nearby road, the one we live on, Indian Ridge, because they considered it it would be unsafe to add that many folks and cars on that street. Indian Ridge is a popular cutthrough from State of Franklin. Much like that rejected proposed development, Minga Drive will be unsafe if we open the door to another developer, which will clog our roads, over overload the city's infrastructure, and create other burdens for the existing community. On Indian Ridge Road, the traffic is backed up several times a day from cut through traffic. And this addition of homes um would just make that worse. probably a light is going to be needed soon at 11E because of the traffic congestion. I urge the city to look beyond the short-term benefits to this development because there are downsides as well. Whenever we set the bar for development and growth, we tend to go down from there. So I ask, what is the plan for developing neighborhoods in the future in Johnson City? Who will pick up the bill for widening roads, traffic circles, sidewalks, other things that were promised from the Dr. Horton development on Indian Ridge, but have not come through yet. Let's not settle

for quick and easy answers to developers. Let's set the bar high and lay the foundation for the Johnson City that is the best it can possibly be. The Wall Street Journal recently listed us as a top place to move and live. Let's not squander that. Let's use that leverage to attract the best builders, the best developers, and do what is best for all the people who live, work, worship, pay taxes, and call Johnson City home. My neighbors and I ask that you vote no on this zoning request until further study is done to ensure the safety and well-being of the folks on Minga Drive in the community at large. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Martin.

Finally, Mr. Widner. Good evening. My name is Stan Widner. Address 9 St. An's Court. I own the contiguous property to the to the uh uh Minga property under question to uh today. Um I think we should point out that this commission at the last meeting January 8th denied reszoning to PRD. What has changed? The zoning office says nothing. It also should should be remembered that the plans that are announced for your consideration are non-binding. Once PDR is granted by the county commission, that can change. You know, I remember when the uh Washington County did not have a zoning, they voted that in a number of years ago and a lot of people didn't like that because the government tell me what to do with my property until you get a development like the Minga property next to your land. Then people began to realize how important you are to the community. to keep things contiguous, to keep things balanced. And that's what we're asking for tonight. The people who live there,

they live in a in a unique area. Uh it's country, it's rural, and to put a development in there like a PDR would destroy that. my land. I'd like to see it split into five acre mini farms eventually to maintain that country attitude through there. I'd have no no interest in developing subdivisions or PDR community for it. We need I think PDR communities in Washington County as fast as we're growing. We actually have a rush hour now and we need that. But not in the middle of a wonderful rural community like Mango Road and Locos Slain. Find a place in the county that's appropriate for those places and then you can do that and we trust that you will. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. That concludes the section of our public comment. Now we'll move to our consent agenda where we have three items. They're all three bond release bond issues. Two of them are bond releases and one is a bond reduction. Uh two are one is with Archer Point, one is a phase two bond release at Clearwater Springs and one is a bond reduction at Keebler Meadows. Does anyone have any questions that they want to bring those forward for detailed discussion or questions with staff? Mr. Chairman, I have no questions. I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented. Second. Second.

All right. Well, I have a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda items as recorded in the minutes in the in the packet. All in favor of approving the consent agenda items say I. I. Any opposed? All right, we'll move forward to the new business items and that takes us back to the uh 138 Minga Drive, item 7.1. Miss Putney, would you please come forward for staff and make a presentation?

Yes. Good evening, commissioners. Just two um comments before we get into the presentation. Um, we did receive an email that was presented in in um, addition to the public comment that was provided to the commissioners prior to the meeting. And just a background of how we got here today, there this was a uh, request in July where the planning commission heard it and recommended denial to the Washington County Commission. The applicant withdrew the application prior to it going to the county commission. So the withdrawal of that application makes them come back and start from square one. So that is why we are rehearing this uh proposal tonight. Just to orient the commission with a timeline. So tonight, October 21st is the recommendation and public hearing for the planning commission. The county commission will hear it on October 27th for a final action. And then at a date to be determined if it is moved forward by the county commission, the county planning commission will approve a comprehensive development plan as the final step of development. Just as a reminder, the property is located and depicted in the red star, roughly 18.17 acres off of Minga Road. It is currently low density residential and general agriculture. So it is split zoned and the request is to a PRD2 which is a planned residential district to accommodate a further residential development. The property does have various elevation changes. It's steeper to the north and downwards to the from the east to west with dense vegetation to the north of the property. It is within our urban service area. So we do have services

that could be provided to the property. There is a water line along Minga Drive and sewer line roughly 200 north um 200 feet north of the water line and for traffic and we'll have uh we have our engineering department to answer any further questions but at the time if this moves forward of a driveway permit since it is a city road a traffic analysis and impact study could be required um per the developer and any uh improvements to the road would be at the cost of the developer that but that would come at the time of a driveway permit to the city. The property is a portion of the property is in the city limits. It's roughly 0.5 acres as depicted in the red outline. So the entrance into the property is in the the city as well as the right of way and it is zoned R3. So the current zoning is a little bit uh it's split zoned. The lower side of the property is the low density with the upper side as agricultural and the small portion of the city is R3 and there as is previously stated the request is for planned residential too. RP R PRD2 is a density of 6.5 units per acre. So it's similar to RR3 or an RP. And at 18.17 acres, they would be maxed out at 118 units. Setbacks are 25 ft from the boundaries of the track and additional transitional yards of 15 ft when bordering less intense district uses, which would kind of be the surrounding uh Washington County properties. The current land use of the site is agricultural. Along Minga Drive, we do see multif family, single family, and commercial closer to the West Market

proximity, which is depicted in the the red and your multif family in the orange and single family in the yellow. The future land use does call this for residential and commercial. Minga Drive as well, residents, residential and commercial. And the horizon 2045 plan does call for this to be neighborhood residential as it is adjacent to a commercial corridor. So the P RD2 is in line with the neighborhood residential future land use map. It allows for singleuse residents uh a mix kind of in the middle of compactness. So low and high density uses mainly residential and kind of in the middle setback. So very similar to what we see in our R3 districts, the Horizon 2045 also has policies that support neighborhood residential for the land use map um for housing choices that reflect the compatibility of scale and creation of place for single family homes and it aligns with the place type maps to increase a variety of housing options, sizes, densities, and locations. Citizen comments and concerns very similar to what we heard in the July meeting are density, traffic um in the impact to Minga Drive and how it connects to West Market Street, storm water runoff, runoff from any development as well as those natural features of grade and forested areas. And again, I will reiterate the the difference between this and the last pro uh proposal is there was no concept plan or a proposed plan for the planning commission to look at. Washington County does not have a requirement for a concept plan at the time of resoning. So that it has not been provided to staff.

So staff um recommendation it is consistent with the future land use map, but other factors to consider are the increase and impacts of traffic volume and congestion which can cause safety concerns and that would be again addressed through the city driveway process. And it has not the request has not changed since the original denial by the planning commission on July 8th. And there is a public hearing for this questions of staff. Help me understand what is sorry the city's driveway permit process. What what is involved in that?

Yes. So I will actually defer to our public works engineering department who can thoroughly walk that through and I think Lawrence Perry can answer that. I didn't hear the question. What was the question? I'm sorry. It was to to explain what the city driveway permit process is.

So, it's a public Minga Drive is a public road. So, they'll need to access the public road. So, they'll put in an application and at the time of development and also at the time of development, we'll ask for a traffic study to be done that the the the developer will hire a consultant to do that traffic study. They'll follow kind of the T dot process and it'll let us know it'll inform the uh it'll inform the developer what they'll need to do to make the public road system uh safer for the residents that'll be using the development and for the city of Johnson City that the other residents are driving through there. So, uh but they'll apply for the driveway permit and I'll be doing the review to make sure that it meets our needs and we'll we'll review the traffic study to see what impacts it's going to do to the road system. And again, the developer will pay for the traffic study and for the de uh improvements to the road system.

So that doesn't happen until until the time. So if we approve until Yes. then it would have to happen, right? Yes. Yeah. At the time of development. All right. Let me ask an further follow-up question. How far how far how far does that traffic study extend? I think uh Anthony Todd would probably kind of be able to define that, define the the limits, how far out we want to go and work with the consultant to kind of determine that. Like I said, we're going to be using the T dot process kind of deter. I mean, would it extend out to West Market Street? I think that's what he said last time. So,

okay. And if I can follow up one more time, you might have said this, I might have missed it, but um they would have to pay to have the improvements done or does the city pay to have that done? The developer would pay for the road improvements as well. The road improvements. Okay. Do we have any data in house currently for road traffic on Minga Drive from previous developments? Not that I know of, but uh again the we he'd hire the consultant. We'd work with them to kind of define the limits and figure out how how it's going to impact the road system, how far out it needs to go. Thank you.

I guess what I'm curious about is the time timing of all this.

Yes. One of the concerns you have, if you have a development like this, you're probably talking about with the what the absorption rate of 60 70 homes up to 100 homes, you're talking about a five-year process, maybe a three-year process. I don't know, depending on what the growth we have now, could be even a little maybe a little shorter. If the road is improved, you go through stages of a road study and then you initiate a road design. And this has to be accepted by the city commission and county commission both, does it not?

I think they would submit the plans and we would review them to see that it meets the city. I'm sorry, I can't quite hear you. I believe he would submit the plans to the city for review and then the city staff would review them to make sure that they meet the requirements of the development

and and we would work in conjunction with the uh the county because the developments in the county. It's kind of a different animal where they need to be reviewed by our our staff for the construction plans, but when they actually pull the home permits, they'll be pulling the home permits in the county. And so we typic we have a typical local street cross-section that we'd like to see with sidewalks and curb and gutter, but the county doesn't like to maintain all that kind of stuff. So we work with the county uh highway department to make sure that it meets their needs as well as ours. So it typically like at Thompson Road, I think it was the Thompson Road development, they had we we got rid of the sidewalks and curb and gutter. They had kind of a shoulder.

Flamingo is a county road, isn't it? No, it's a public city road. Yes. So they'll be accessing the city's road. So that's why we do need to do the driveway permit as well as the review of the construction plans. So they do they've done they're going to do a preliminary plat, but it's not a prerequisite to the development getting started or is it? It would typically is it a prerequisite or not? It would typically be, sorry, I'm jumping. In a situation like that where off-site improvements are required um to enhance the infrastructure to support a specific development, a municipality would typically require that those improvements be complete prior to any certificate of occupancy.

So, they would go I guess they would go through the preliminary plat process where they're showing where they how they're going to subdivide the lots, how they're going to build the road. We'll work with the county to make sure that it meets our needs and their needs. And then they'll do construction plans and then Ultimately, they'll build the road and then they'll submit for a final plat and bond any outstanding issues, but they'll our requirements is to have the road to binder and to have all drainage improvements put in like the detention pond and uh it but it does get really really messy where you have city infrastructure.

That's kind of where I'm going with it. It's it's it's kind of a messy process. In addition, uh I you're you're you're are you saying you're requiring the developer to improve the entire Minga Road section there or just in front of their development? The traffic study will define the improvements. I'm sorry, I'm still having trouble. The traffic study will determine the uh the length of the improvements along Minga Drive. Yeah, but who will be paying for it?

The developer will. He'll pay for the traffic study and pay for the road improvements. So you're saying that if the traffic study comes back and says the entire section of Minga Road from Levy to Clon Simmons has to be improved that the developer will be required to pay for that before they can get the development rolling. That's what I hear you saying.

Yes. I mean meetings can be had and and things can be worked out, but that's that's something for city management to talk about. But for right now, yes, the developer would be responsible. We would be under the understanding that the developer would pay for the traffic study and for the road improvements because this development is going to be impacting the road system.

I have a question regards to the cost of I I think Miss Putney said that it was 200 ft um that you would have to run the sewer or bring the sewer to the property. Is that right? Did I say that right? Yes. So, let me back up here. Sorry. Let me get my There we go. Um, what the water line is along Minga Drive and the sewer line is 200 feet north of that water line. Okay. So, we would the city would be responsible for running that. Is that correct?

If it is on part of the public infrastructure side, then I believe so. Yes. and and and so there's no tax revenue or anything for the city because it's in the county. So, it's basically going to be a cost to the city with it being in the county and connected to city services. They do have an increase in tap fees and and usage fees. So, they do kind of recoup that with the higher usage fees and tap fees. Any other questions? Okay, thanks guys.

Questions for staff? Any other questions for staff? Thank you, Riley. I'll now open the floor for public comment. Is the developer or his representative here? Would do you have any comments for us or you have any thing you'd like to share? Please come forward and give us your name and address. And if you have anything you'd like to share or if you would like to suffer our questions. My name is Jonathan Lewis. I live at 4605 Bristol Highway in Pine Flats.

Thank you for coming back tonight. So, at at the first meeting, we heard the issues of of the public concerns surrounding the resoning. We return to address some of those issues tonight better to better provide a clearer understanding of the development itself. The city will require a traffic study and the developer will be required to address the findings. The results of the traffic study will most likely be a widening of Minga Drive for about four to five feet to get to the 24 foot uh standard width of road. Currently, it's anywhere between 18 and 19. There's plenty of room to do this within the current rideway and this is what has been done with the past in the past in Washington County. Just like he mentioned on Thompson Road, we basically if there is a road that is not up to standard, we widen it for the entire length. Um the developer is prepared to do that. This should take care of the issues with Minga Drive, which seem to be the majority of the issues that the public had at our previous meeting. The density and use proposed with this reszoning follows the city's horizon master plan and the city staff's recommendation. The the commission the last time acted as as if this had no bearing and they even questioned the re revolency of the horizon plan. They basically said that if it were annexed, the city may look upon this more favorably. If it were to be annexed into the city, which would be the next step and reszoned, the reszoning of currently in the city is R3. R3 allow allows for a greater density than PRD2. Um

it it's a total of seven units per acre. This was result in 127 units and it could be an apartment complex. The PRD PRD2 county zoning allows for 6.5 units per acre. Um, however, the most single family homes that that could possibly be built on that property would be around 60 units, 60 to 69. There are only three properties that are properties adjacent to the subject property to be reszoned and it is far set off of Minga Drive. There's no development right on Minga Drive. It's several hundred feet off Minga Drive into where the development would be. Um, but at the last commission, you know, uh, there was 25 people who got up and spoke about how it's just going to destroy their property. I think that any development in there is going to see the exact same opposition. But this being a PRD with a 25- ft surrounding landscape buffer, less density, the the homes that are proposed are 3,000 square foot footprints. We're not talking about a Dr. Horton development here. Um so when um there the only three properties are currently adjacent to this property. One is 20ome. They're very big properties except for the one that actually comes off of Minga Drive. The others um enter their property off Claude Simmons and are far the residences are far removed from this development. Um let's see the units proposed for the 18 acres

amounts to about a29 acre lot which is standard subdivision R1 uh um kind of development. Um, you know, it was treated like this 64 60some unit developments would be the straw that breaks the camel's back on Claude Simmons Road, Creek Road, all the way up to the traffic tunnel. If that is the mindset, then there should be no development in this area. We're following the horizon. We're following the city staff's recommendation. So, uh, that's all that can be asked of someone who owns this property to follow city staff's recommendation and the planning, uh, master planning for this area. Uh, the sanitary sewer is on the property. Um, there would be no extension to the property. It currently runs through the the valley as like she said 200 ft off of just to just to clarify that. Um there's approximately 700 1,760 linear feet of widening that would need to occur on Minga Road. Um once I've already said the develops not there's no road frontage lots off of Minga. It's far set off of the road. you know, all of the developments along Claude Simmons, uh, Alexander's Grove, Strawberry Fields, Miss Hills, they all met the same opposition. Um, so I ask that the planning commission look favorably upon their recommendation to the county because we have met the rules um of the planning. we have their recommendation. Um, and with the traffic impact study,

all issues that come of that from that study will be addressed by the developer at their expense. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Any questions for the developer? Sure. Jonathan, before you go, perhaps you want to come back. I think the um you you are aware that if um you know through the the city's the city's resoning process um a binding concept plan would be required. Right.

So there's a significant difference between the city's process and the county's process. Your recollection and my recollection of the deliberation from the July meeting are a little different. My recollection is that um that uh the the what the commission what the commission said is that the commission does think that a development in this area would be appropriate but not a blank check you know not a cart blanch to um to max out the density here. I think what I my personal feeling and what I heard from among the commissioners was that there was an extreme discomfort with with giving that cart blanch. So absent a uh absent a um binding concept plan, I think it would be very difficult for any of us to support um a uh um an increase in density because we just don't know. We just don't know what's going there. And that prudently is what we have to do. We have to weigh the uh um the horizon 25 2045 growth plan and we have to weigh the infrastructure and I think there are some significant concerns with the capacity of the infrastructure not just Mingo Drive but the intersections as well. All of which frankly should be considered holistically not peace meal where Johnson City is having to look at a piece of it here as part as it pertains to the infrastructure with the county um approving plans somewhere else. So I think that's just a point of clarification. I agree. And the developer is a home builder. Uh construction partners uh of Johnson City, they don't build apartments. You know, they're a home builder. That's what they want to do. They don't want to uh um and you know, like I said, they're proposing 3,000 foot footprints. Just the footprint. These are going to be half million dollar plus homes. Um so uh it's our opinion that something like this would would fit in perfectly.

They'll bring it back with a binding concept plan as part of an annexation process then. Yeah. The unfortunately the county it is in the county and they don't require that. Um but the the the same plan that we we uh presented the last time is the same plan that we we're going with. Um, so any other questions? Thank you, sir. Thank you.

All right, the floor is open for anyone else that wants to make comments to You're welcome to come forward if you'll give us your name and address. You'll have three minutes. There's plenty of time. Good evening. Um, my name is Linda Stern Surell and I live at 252 Claude Simmons Road and I request that you deny the pro proposal for reszoning the property at 138 Minger Road. Um, and my parents bought the original 3 acres I lived on 79 years ago in 1946 and named it High Hollow. I enjoyed a magical early childhood there. And my husband and I moved back and raised our family at High Hollow in 1978. And we we purchased Tai Hollow from my parents and an additional adjacent 4 and a half acres from Andrew Minga in 1986. Since then, our daughters, granddaughter, and now my grand niece have spent magical childhoods there. Future generations of my family have expressed their plans to return to High Hollow to enjoy our quiet, beautiful countryside full of native flora and fauna. This is our beloved heritage and community. What disturbs our quiet, magical little farm in our community is the high volume of accidents on our road where it was once safe for us to walk, ride our

bikes, or stop our vehicles to chat with our neighbors like Andy Mingi is now totally unsafe. The guard rail between our property and Ming Drive needs replaced as it had been hit so many times. We have witnessed one death due to hitting the utility pole near our mailbox. Less than a month ago on September the 25th, I walked down our pasture and found a jeep that had gone over the guard rail. As the Jeep wasn't visible from our house nor the road, you can imagine my anxiety until I found no one in or near the Jeep. That time only a sheriff deputy and a tow truck were needed. With the number of houses that would be allowed if this property is reszoned, I fear even more frequent accidents on Minga and Claude Simmons roads, plus an additional strain on both our county and city infrastructures. Again, I request that you deny the proposal for reszoning the property. Thank you for your service to our beloved community.

Thank you, M. Hi there. Uh, my name is Michael Doover and I live at 115 Dove Drive um up on uh Headtown Road. There was the map up there of the property. I was the listing agent for two years on the sale of that house on at 130 Minga that uh Dr. Hoplin uh purchased and I knew of nothing. Uh nobody had contacted me. I was trying to contact the the owner at the time of the who you know just to see what's going on and there was no word. So two it was two weeks after Dr. Hoplin closed. But um Larry England is a colleague of yours and he's a friend of ours and we we found out that so Mr. cells owns the big acreage right by the tunnel and there was two houses I don't know if it was Greg Cox uh cleared just up Ron Street uh there was two houses because they were we were expecting to hear that there was a bridge going to be placed over the railroad track but we found out now that uh and I might be might might have changed that CSX will not allow a bridge to be even put over top of their uh railroad tracks. So, every week I'm like right on Dove Drive there. I can see it on this computer. I'm on uh uh heart uh Headtown Road right there just on on Dove Drive. And it's every week I see an ambulance go down that road. I mean, I can hear the see the sirens, fire trucks, ambulances. And so my concern right now, you know, even coming over here tonight, I go through the

tunnel and it's wrapped around down to the FBI station practically. I was uh I was representing a buyer at 1072 Oakland, which is down Mediew down to Oakland, and they were asking one, we were under contract for 1.8, now it's up to 3.6. They cancelled my buyer. But right now, you know, Greg Cox, they're building all of that those highrises for uh right on Ron Street. All of I mean, there's like three 300 units there down on Oakland right by Cheddar. There's another 350 units. It's just going to add so much traffic uh to it. I've been bugging Rusty Crow for years. I've lived I've lived at this location for 10 years. I've been asking him for Claude Simmons. Can we just widen the road even a few inches? He goes, "Well, we're going to have to talk to all the clients." I go, "Well, I'm a realator. I can go to I can go doornocking and ask, hey, would would you mind if we added a foot width to the road?" So, recently, uh this summer, I think they added about three inches to each side, which is okay, which is good. So, my concern is uh the traffic that tunnel the it's just going to if if this is developed right there. First off, there's no traffic lights. Oh, thank you. I apologize. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Any more any more comments? I'll close the floor for public comment. Okay, ladies, ladies and gentlemen, the questions to us. I'll go first. I, you know, this is request that I have an issue with for a number of reasons. Uh, first, there's been no change to the request that we've already made a decision on. So, I was curious to even see it on the agenda, you know. Second, a portion of this property is within the city limit. the rightway, the front portion on Manga, but yet the developer is choosing not to bring it to the city. And why is that? Well, I can speculate that it's because he doesn't have to he or she doesn't have to submit a concept plan as Commissioner Dutton alluded to earlier. May not be the reason, but that's likely the reason. Um, obviously safety is a a big concern with the neighbors on the surrounding properties. Um, but I guess the biggest issue for me is yes, while we do have an housing issue in Johnson City in our region, and this is inconsistent with the future land use plan, when we look at the 2045 plan, it talks about this property being single family but larger tracks, which means smaller density. And so this property is on my commute home. So I drive by Minga Drive multiple times a day, including today. I went I went by it today just to look at it again. And when you look at the surrounding properties, they're all

small farms. Um, and Miss Putney did a great job. And if we look at our packet, when you look at the north property, it's A1. When you look at east of this property, it's R1 and A1. When you look at west of this property, it's R1 and A1. All low density. Now, there is a uh to the south of this property, there is some medium density that's R3 and R1 and B4, but that's my biggest issue. it's not cons what's being proposed is not consistent with the adjacent properties. And so if if the developer was bringing a development that was larger tracks, many farms, um I don't think this commission would have an issue with it. I don't think that the neighbors would have an issue with it. So I would disagree with the developers comment. Um, so I I'm going to be voting no for on this issue tonight and that's where I stand with it.

I think that's very well put. Um, Commissioner Williams, I I mean I So I I agree with you. Um I I think I mean again we're you know we're being asked to um recommend approval of a development that could be you know with with zoning even though the developer is saying we're not going to put that many units in there you can't but the the underlying entitlement would be there without a binding concept plan to modify to correct to to make it otherwise. Um, I think it would frankly be irresponsible of us to um to to to approve something like that that is so clearly incompatible with the existing infrastructure in the area. And as we talked about, I mean, I think even with a even with a um even with a um a suitable development that is compatible with the um surrounding land use, which would be still be consistent with horizon 2045. I still think there are concerns with respect to um the infrastructure and again I and this the this this notion of city infrastructure and and and modifications to city infrastructure and um and a separate um a separate entitlement process for a piece of property in Washington County makes me extremely nervous and uh yeah I certainly can't support this um this request.

Any other comments? I think in general, like I'm a I'm a pretty big advocate for more housing. We know we need it. We need all kinds of housing. We need entry level starter homes. We need luxury homes. That's that's the future. We know that people are moving to this area. And I think Ben, your earlier comment about looking at the traffic flow in this area holistically, not just at one road. Um, you know, I trust that our systems are in place to protect our citizens and our safety. And it I was happy to hear that the developer would be prepared to um increase the linear footage of of Minga, but that's a that's a small stretch of road when you look at the overall ecosystem of traffic in that area. And it's it's been quite challenging over the last couple of years to remedy and to um to just make it easier to get around that part of our community. So I'm I'm just hesitant. I don't like having um no change from the previous meeting. I wasn't at the previous meeting in July. Um, but despite my very strong desire to have more housing, and in most circumstances, more housing is just what we're going to need to vote in, I'm uncomfortable with the strain on traffic and safety in this area. So, I I too would be voting no.

Any other comments? I echo what Commissioner Williams said. Um, you know, I I struggle with the fact that there's no concept plan. I mean, we have no idea what they're going to build. Um, and and I do totally agree with you in the fact that it just doesn't seem like that's the place for it. Um, so I I'm I will vote no on this as well. I think I see where this is going and I'll look for a motion. I'll make a motion that we deny um res recommend denial or excuse me

recommend denial. Yes. That I recommend denial um of the 138 Minga Drive to the PDRD2. Second.

All right. The motion is to recommend denial to Washington County of resoning 138 Minga Drive from R1 A1 to PRD2 and a second. Further discussion and I would note for you that if we make that recommendation for denial that can be overridden only by a two-thirds vote at the county commission. Any further discussion? Would you call the role, please? Commissioner Aldridge. Yes. Commissioner Bombgardner to deny. That's Let's make sure we're clear. This motion is to deny.

To deny. So, a vote yes is to deny. Recommend denial. So, would you please call the role, please? Commissioner Aidge, yes. Commissioner Bombgardner, yes. Commissioner Goodson. Yes. Yes. Commissioner Kelly, yes. Commissioner Williams, yes. Vice Chairman Dutton, yes. Chairman Dagenheart, yes.

All right. Now, our next item is will be presented by Miss Maggie Darden. It is a grant for parks and recreation department from TACK. Some good news. Is it okay if I give folks a moment to step out? Yes, we can take just a second to let the

Although they would be welcome to stay Oh, shoot. I forgot something. I needed to read this in the for

ready. You're welcome. Ben said,

commissioners, my name is Dr. Maggie Darden. I'm the planning and project manager with the parks and recreation department. and I'm here tonight to present to you for your consideration um a grant that we have through the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation called a local parks and recreation fund grant. So to answer your question of why am I here, Tekk is asking that we make the rounds and present this to advisory boards and to commissions so that people are informed about the project that we have going on. And so what I need for you all to do is to deliberate on this presentation um and then we will go to recommendations at the end of this. So to tell you a little bit about our timeline of where we are today, we started this process all the way back in January of this year by submitting an intent to apply. Um we were approved to even submit an application to TK and then um we really wanted to get community guidance on where this plan would go. Um this was identified as a need in the parks and recreation comprehensive strategic plan which is why we put this forward to Tekk. Um from that we ran an online survey so that community members who would not be able to be in attendance at an in-person community input meeting could still give us their input. We presented that input back to the parks and recreation advisory board and to city commission to seek approval for the remainder of the application process. So we applied and then Tex said congratulations we have awarded you $445,000100 $445,125.50 as a matching grant to the city. So where we are today in this process is we are completing the steps to execute our grant contract which includes coming here before you all presenting this project in detail and answering

questions you might have about that. After we meet the terms of the contract, we'll start to make it happen. So, I want to give you a little overview of what the online survey um what we asked of residents in the online survey. This was a check all that apply of what people were interested in seeing in this playground. Um they wanted to um create a really nice comprehensive new playground facility. And one of the things that came out of that um was the desire to develop an inclusive playground. So what that means is um it has diverse features such as slides, swings, climbing walls, balance beams, and sensory elements poured in place surface with ramps and trans transfer platforms. We had a a playground manufacturer present concept designs to us. we had several um so that we could take those to the community input session and I found this to be an extremely poignant point of information about what accessibility means to our community. So on here you'll see out of a thousand children 85 have some type of disability with one of those 1000 having a physical disability which is what people so often think of when they think of creating an inclusive space. 41.5 out of those 10,000 children are going to have some type of cognitive de disability. So, we want to design a playground that will meet the needs of all of our children who are learning and growing in Johnson City. This is one of the images. Um the playground that we are working on that we would like to um move forward with with redesigning is Willow Springs. Um, and so right now Willow Springs is Johnson's depot in reference to Henry Johnson. And so we want to pay homage to the train theme that currently exists.

It's something that the children love that the family said they wanted to keep. So this is just one concept design of what that would look like. Here's another of the 5 to 12 playground area. It's pretty cool. It's pretty tall. Um, still has those train features incorporated into it. Um, it gives children something a little bit more than what they currently have at Willow Springs to play on. And then we also want to bring a splash pad to Willow Springs. We know our community love our splash pads. So with that in the theme of making an inclusive space, we're really interested in a water table, which is what you see on the lefth hand side of the image, and some sprinkler features as well. So this is what the playground currently looks like. I'm going to put that on there so that you all can have a reference point if you haven't been able to go to Willowis Springs lately. Um, it is in need of some TLC. This playground was in installed in 1997. It was a partnership between the city of Johnson City and the Junior League of Johnson City, which we have continued to support as well throughout the redesign of this project. It's a pad structure. We're going to keep the um scope of this. It's going to be very similar. This is um the new ad of a splash pad. It'll be a smaller size splash pad to match the current infrastructure at Willow Springs. Um and so what we'll what we'll do is we'll have a playground area for 2 to 5year-olds, so toddlers um 5 to 12, an inclusive playground and swings as well. Um so that we can keep all of those really great features that the community asked us to keep. So, I'm happy to answer questions. Um, and here are your decision opt options for today.

I think this is awesome and I think it's very needed in our community. So, I commend you all for proceeding with this. What's the timeline?

Excellent. the timeline um depends on when we finalize and execute our grant contract. Um and so what we what we're anticipating um we have some more hurdles to clear. So we have to submit planning commission meeting minutes. Um but we're anticipating that we'll have an executed contract by the end of December. Um from there we have to participate in our purchasing process. So it could depend. We really want to install it in a low traffic time and as quickly as possible. Um, so we're really trying to move really fast on this. I don't have a set timeline because we have these purchasing factors and construction factors, but as quickly as possible.

Okay. Does this have to go to the city commission too? It has. Yeah. Okay. But it has to come through us first, right? It has gone to city commission in the earlier stages of this to seek approval to apply for the grant because it's a matching grant. It was a $445,000 matching grant. So they they approved that. Um and now we have to present the scope of the project in detail to planning commission. Does it have to go through so many readings or just one meeting? It has to go through one meeting and then your minutes uh the second meeting would be the approval of the minutes. So we'll have to have documentation of both of those.

So can you go back a slide I think to the site plan? No the slide where you had Oh this one this the decision slide. Yeah. Great. I like that slide. So we need to we need a motion. I'll be more than happy to make a motion to approve to approve the funding um for Willow Springs Park playground and splash pal amendment. I'll second. Okay. Any discussion?

I think it's a wonderful concept. I'm excited for the project. I'm a Rotarian, which um Miss Kelly came and spoke at our club today, but we funded a um a boundless playground not too long ago to help serve our um disabled children that could have come have a place to play. So, I think it's a you want to get out there and use that splash pad. Yes. Yes. So, job well done. Thank you for all your hard work. I congratulate you on getting the grant. Fantastic. Further discussion. We need to call the role for the vote. Commissioner Aldridge, yes. Commissioner Bombgardner, yes. Commissioner Goodson, yes.

Commissioner Kelly, yes. Commissioner Williams, yes. Vice Chairman Dutton, yes. Chairman Dagenheart, yes. Okay. Now, I think we have a uh an item that's going to be presented by Miss Bell. And I think we have a recusal for that. Yes, fellow commissioners, I'm going to recuse myself from this vote since I have a conflict of interest.

All right. Good evening, commissioners. We're here today to talk about um a project that has already come before you. So, I'm going to give you a little bit of history about it and then what we're doing now so that you can make an informed decision. We're looking at a second amendment to some protective covenants that run with the land for the subdivisions of Garden View and Highland Heights, which is in the project area along um John XM Parkway. And specifically, we're looking at Morland Drive. And you may remember in November on November 12th of 2024, you saw this um development plan or concept plan that was approved for 12 homes along this um and I'm trying not to point it's going the the road that's coming up from the bottom of the plat is John Xum and then the road that's parallel with the bottom is Morland Drive and it's a development that's planned to come in to provide those 12 homes with the Holston Habitat for Humanity. um development. This was approved pursuant to the current R4 zoning restrictions, the minimum standards. As the prog as the project developed, we realized there are protective covenants that run with the land for this particular area. And it was approved these protective covenants were approved quite a while ago, April 17th of 1959. it encompasses this this area either partially or wholly depending on some documents. We can't 100% say that it it encompasses all of it. But the issue that has come up is when developing a when creating a development when you're trying talking about the construction you have to meet the current zoning requirements. They are not the same as they were in 1959. Most notably, there was no R4 zoning. And so the restrictive covenants

allows for the same allows for the advancement of the permitted activities within each zoning period pursuant to how the zoning code is updated, but it specifically enumerates the restrictions for R1, R2, and R3. And so it's it creates a an issue within this community about which restrictions and which um setbacks and and standards need to be followed. So what the proposed changes are is to incorporate those minimum standards just as they have been previously for the R1 2 and three for the R4. So what that will change is the or what that will add because there was not previously the the setback for an R4. It will add the minimum lot area setbacks and the maximum height and the maximum allowed occupancy for buildings and structures on a particular lot. Like I said, it will not change the activities that are affected by the zoning code because those have been allowed to change as time has passed the way that they're written. Because this particular protective covenant was set in place by the Johnson City Housing Authority under a redevelopment plan back in 1959, it requires amendment by going through the regional planning commission, the housing authority and then the um city commission. It also requires a majority vote of the property owners in this area. So, it's quite a large undertaking for an amendment, but it is one that just kind of brings it into what the modern times are and make sure that it allows for the following of the minimum standards that we require. So, your decisions at this point is to whether or not to adopt the second amendment or approve the second amendment so that it can go before the

additional governing bodies. disapprove it and if you are disapproving it then to enumerate why. All right. Do we have any questions for staff? Could I would I have anyone that would be interested in making a motion? Well, a motion to approve. I'll second. I as Miss Kelly said early today or tonight, we need all sorts of housing and especially our serving our low to moderate income families. So, this is a very important project. So, I'm in full support of it. Okay. I think I heard somebody say they made a motion. Did I hear somebody say they made a second? I'll I'll be happy to second.

All right. I have a motion and a second to approve the amendment. Any further discussion? Would you please call the role? Commissioner Aldridge? Yes. Commissioner Bombgardner? Yes. Commissioner Goodson? Yes. Commissioner Williams? Yes. Vice Chairman Dutton? Yes. Chairman Dagenheart.

Yes. Okay. Before we adjourn, I'll make some announcements. Uh I want to recognize Commissioner Timber Aldridge for her candidacy recently for the interim JC city commissioner. Heard your dedication to the city is a model for all of us. I want to tell you how much I appreciate you. You've made you did yourself proud and I'm very proud to call you a friend and and associate on the commission planning commission. I'm really appreciate your hard work and your dedication. uh you should be looking forward perhaps by the end of the year to a revision proposal that is under review by the by city council of the bylaws of the planning commission. Those have been drafted by the your vice chair and have come from the uh officers committee and are in the hands of council for their review and and they'll be coming back to us as soon as I get a chance to review them. Uh, I suggest you put a hold on your calendar for the hours of 4 to 5:00 on next month's planning commission meeting date. Probably from 4 to 5:00 for a training session on variances. That's probably going to happen. I'm not sure that's absolutely carved into stone, but that's the that's the plan. Recently, I asked you to rank your preferences or your priorities on projects that were in the Horizon 2045 plan that are attached to the planning department on which ones you thought were the most important. And I've given you some information back of how those ranked out in terms of the most important in the view of all of us acting as a group. I've asked staff to take that under consideration and we might sit around the table and talk about that maybe around the end of the year uh and and get the view of staff in terms of what that might how that might influence

their choice and plans for projects next year. That's not an instruction. It's just a foodforthought discussion that we might be able to fit in before the end of the year. And I would like to introduce you to Sarah Fifel who's sitting in the front row. She is a new staff member that started about three or four weeks ago. I'm guessing and she is our new staff person that has started recently. And another staff person is in sight and will probably start before the end of the year. And I can't begin to tell you his name. He's not a Fifel. Did I say that correctly? So, we got two new people starting. One's already here.

And that's unless somebody else has an announcement. I'll call us adjourned. Thank you.