Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the September 18th, 2025 meeting of the Mount Juliet Municipal and Regional Planning Commission. Like to welcome everybody here. Good to see a good turnout. Um there are a couple folks missing from the planning commission tonight. So I'm going to read the quorum requirements. uh presence of five members of the commission shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. The chairperson may at his and her direction wait up to 30 minutes after the scheduled meeting time for a quorum to be be present. In the event that a member is required to leave a meeting prior to adjournment, the departure causes a loss of quorum. No further official action may be taken until the quorum is restored. other than an adjournment. Uh a majority vote on those commissioners present in no case less than four affirmative votes shall be required to defer any item of business requiring action by the commission. Uh I'm going to take a liberty here real quick just to say a couple things to people that I know too that are listening. Um happy birthday to my granddaughter, eight years old and my brother who's 66. He's old. Um and happy anniversary to my wife too. Everything seems to hit on the same day. So, I take that liberty and uh say all those things. Um, next order of business is setting the agenda. Um, I see the agenda as it stands. I don't have any changes unless anybody else.

Yes, sir. Yeah, Bobby. I was just uh wanted to consider maybe adding some things to the consent agenda if if it please the commission. And those those would be 7B, 12 A, 12B, and 12 C. I I I don't know that they're all that controversial, but uh if if if they are to anyone, uh 7B, 12 A, 12B, and 12 C. And on the annexations, none of them are asking for a a different zoning. They're just coming in as RS40. Is that appropriate,

John? 12C. I think the applicant was going to defer at this meeting. So, if they're here, that's correct. Well, it would just be three then. you need to come up and name and address. Yeah, I'm the representative for 8526 road 12 and we would like to just withdraw it um indefinitely. Okay, good. Withdrawn.

Jonathan Rivers. Oh, 8526 Saundersville Road. Okay. Thank you. That's withdrawn. Any problems moving things forward? Okay. We'll amend the agenda by adding 7B, 12 A, and 12B to the consent agenda. Second. What is amended? What is amended? I don't think we need to. Do I need to approve it or Oh, I don't know. We need to vote on that or not?

We're good. As long as there's no objections, we're good. No objection.

Keep me straight. Keep me straight. Okay. Uh, now here staff reports. John, Jill, [Music] sure thing. I would like to point out uh you had before you here. It's information on our upcoming training session um November 12th at Music City Center downtown. So just uh if you intend to in intend to attend uh keep it in mind it's the 12th and it'll be downtown. Go ahead, President.

Do we have an alternate for those who can't attend? Because I I'll I'll be out of town on that date. So, I think I talked to Jennifer, but I hadn't heard anything. We don't right now, but we'll have one. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Sh. Sorry. Is there any uh pre-work that we should be aware of? No. Okay. Thank you. This is a regular meeting Cumberland region tomorrow. It's a it's a big meeting. Yeah. So, lots of opportunities to learn. Awesome. Looking forward to it. Okay. Sh. We have no report tonight, sir.

Okay. Don't want to be missed. Todd, do you have anything from this publication? Uh, old Lemon and Dirt Roads back open. Looks great. That's it.

Okay. Thank you, sir. Okay. At this time, we'll take citizens comments. The public is welcome and encouraged to make comment about any item on the agenda. There'll be two opportunities for comments. Uh you may speak now or you may speak when the item is presented to the planning commission. And we ask you limit comments to three minutes. Anyone wishes to speak now, as come forward, uh state your name and address for the record. Seeing no further comments, uh we'll move on to the next item agenda which is the minutes of meeting from last meeting. Okay. Any edits to last month's meeting minutes? No move to approve.

Move to approve. Second. Okay. All in favor raise your hand. Signify by saying I. I.

Opposed. Abstain. Passes. Minutes are approved. Next here. The next item on the agenda which is the consent agenda. Um read through them. Item 6A, the development letter of credit 1628 from Mount Juliet Elite Clemens Road Turn Lane in the amount of 42,5224 can be released. Item 6B, review the final plat for Waterford Park phase 4 located off South Rutland Road. Item 6 C, review the final plat for Hamilton Reserve located at 12465 Lebanon Road. Item 6D, review the preliminary plat for Bass Creek located at 448 Bass Lane. Item 6E, review the mass grading plan for Vintage Vines located 855 Pleasant Grove Road. Item 7B, which is review the site plan modifications for the St. Stevens Catholic Church. Need help with that word? Colarium, uh, located at 14544 Lebanon Road. And the next uh item 12A, review the annexation including plan of services for 3150 Nonville Road. That is a recommendation item. And item 12B, review the annexation including plan of services for 2964 Old Le Dirt Road, which is a recommend recommendation item as well. Um staff comments, John. Uh my only comments with the consent items would be whatever's in the staff report, the conditions in the staff report and the recommendation in the staff report. So that would be all.

Okay. Sh. Uh we recommend approval or positive recommendation for all items on the consent agenda with our comments. Thank you.

Okay. I always come back to you, Todd. give you a chance to talk to. Okay. Okay. Take citizen comments at this time. Any s citizens want to talk about any item on the consent agenda? Please uh step forward to the podium and give us your name and address for the record. Okay. Seeing no comments, uh we will close the plan commission meeting and open up public hearing on item number 6B. Review the final plat for Waterford Park phase 4 located off South Ruther Rutland Drive and review the final plat. Item 6 C, review the final plat for Hamilton Reserve located at 12465 Lebanon Road.

Question, not a question. Maybe a correction on 6B. Uh on our summary, it it says phase five, phase five, but over here it says phase four. Is it phase four or phase five? Okay. Okay. Yes.

Okay. Okay. Also, I've been stand corrected. I'm adding 12A and 12B, which is review the annexation including plan of services for 3150 Nonville Road and 12B, review the annexation including plan of services for 2964 Old Lebanon Dirt Road. Uh, any citizen have any comments on those? Please step forward. Name, address for the record. Okay, seeing none. Any comments from the planning commission? Nope. Okay. Looking for a motion.

I'll make a motion for approval for positive recommendation where applicable with staff comment. I have a motion. Second.

Motion and a second. Uh all in favor signify raise your hand and saying I. opposed. Consent agenda passes. Okay. Okay. Okay, we'll now hear the next item on the agenda, which is item 7A, review the site plan for 230 Monday Memorial Drive, John. Thank you. Okay, this is a uh it's 2:30 Monday Memorial. This is a warehouse with some office space. Um it's a 80,000 square foot 80,500t building. Um, I believe there's 6,000 square feet of office use within this warehouse building. Uh, this is on a five about a 5 and a half acre site. It's surrounded by industrial zoning. Um, Mundy Park to the east. Um, you know, honestly, this one I could have could have probably been on consent. It's it's buttoned up pretty good as far as planning comments go. It's not on consent because they have two I don't even know if you call them waivers because the planning commission has the ability to to grant alternative materials uh for industrial facade industrial building facads and what they're doing here with this it's all tilt up concrete panel. Um so they're asking for that. Um and then number two would be planning commission can allow this too is in in

screening for industrial um it calls for burming and and and things like that when it's up against residential commercial. This one it's given the surrounding uses a staff supports no burm. Um, and staff also supports the the uh facade materials in this instance being that it's an industrial warehouse and it's an industrial district. Um, that being said, I actually think they did a pretty good job with the building with like architectural variation. Um, there's relief and there's patterns and there's windows and yeah. Okay. Uh, so staff does recommend approval with our conditions.

Okay. public works. I did want to point out comment number five, safety analysis was required this week. We did receive that. Todd reviewed it. Uh we had no issues uh proceeding with this project on the agenda and outside of that uh we have no further we recommend approval of this project with our comments. Thank you.

Okay. Um just a bit of a hot button issue right now, so I'll address it. Um the Belinda City truck route is still in effect for this development. So all of these trucks will be headed into Providence to get on the interstate as opposed to headed towards Summit Boulevard, which is recently extended. Yeah, that that's it for me. Okay. Uh ask for representation for this project. Good evening. My name is Robert Pasarella. I'm the civil engineer on the project. Address for the

address 516 Heather Place. Okay. Any comments you want to address planning commission with or everything good? Everything is good. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Hold on. We'll see if there's some other questions from the commission. Thank you. Um at this time, we'll hear citizen comments on this item. Please approach the podium. State your name and address for the record. Seeing none, we'll proceed. Any questions from the planning commission? The road that you had mentioned that goes in front of the what? Summit eras has that been extended regist. Okay.

Yeah. Sorry. More for general to get kind of that info out. that road is going to be open in the immediate future if it's not already. Um, but the the neighborhood or the road takes a shift in land use in between where that's connecting and right here, you know, Monday Memorial is the end of the truck route and in between it becomes residential in nature.

Yeah. which was our big concern. And you know, they've committed that and it's already signed this way. All trucks on Monday Memorial have to turn right and head back into towards Providence. If if they choose not to, that's a ticket of bull offense. Sure. When it connects, is it going to run along the interstate there the whole way and go through the parking lots on Monday by the I guess Oh, it it's not connecting to Monday Memorial. connecting to Blinda Parkway. Got it. Understood. But that's still not going to be a path to get to the interstate. Correct. Okay. Understood. Four for trucks. Yes. Yes. Passenger vehicles are more than welcome to.

Understood. Okay. Thank you. Like that's a good improvement that a lot of people would want to hear about and understand is been made in the immediate future. They're trying to come through for their final plaque now. Let's say timeline. want to try to complete paving is part of the Beck with Point warehouse development that the public road was being extended. I think optimistically if the weather holds out probably two or three weeks they want to try to be done. Thank you. Okay. Anybody else? I have one comment.

Sure. Since uh this board has pro has approved a an industrial building, the Wilson County has raised its adequate facilities tax for commercial to 50 cents a square foot. So this will be probably one of the first that you've had to deal with and it's supposed to be a time of permit and that's that's up from about 10 cents a square foot. So it's going to roads. So that's good news. Thanks. Okay. Thank Mr. Franklin.

Okay. No more comments. Looking for a motion.

Motion for approval.

You have a second. Oh, make approval of staff comments. Okay. Did I get a second? I've got a second. Okay, good. All All those in favor signify raise your hand and saying I. Opposed. Stain. Item passes. Approval. Next item is number 8A on our agenda. Review the land use plan amendment from medium density residential and schools to thoroughare commercial for Hamilton Reserve located at 12465 Lebanon Road. Go ahead.

Previously on the consent agenda, um you all passed the final plat for this property. So when we wrote this report, it was kind of um dual-edged because it was written as the single lot, but the possibility of it being subdivided into the two lots, which essentially was created with the passage of that final plat earlier. Um this is a property consisting of 12.29 acres. It is for a land use amendment and a breezone. Currently the land use as it stands right now the uh first lot to the south is thoroughare commercial with medium density residential being on the second lot. They are requesting a classification of thoroughfare commercial for both lots one and two for the entirety of the 12.29 acres. The current zoning is CG on the southern lot which is lot one and then on lot two the northern lot is RS40 single family residential. They are not requesting any change on the first lot. They want it to remain CG as it stands. Lot two, they're requesting to change the zoning to CRC, commercial retail. So therefore, they have the ability to have a commercial lot for both one and two. Um the uh zoning as it stands um appears to meet within the future land use plan. Um let's see here. They um there was no concept plan or anything came forth with this, but there is an intent from our previous discussions with the applicant that they are looking at doing some sort of commercial. We just don't know to the full extent of what that's going to be. Um but expect to see that in the future with the passage of this if it um gets approved through you all tonight. staff uh generally follows the land use plan, but with this one being slightly different, we do recommend a positive recommendation of the land use plan for the remainder of the parcel so it's consistent with the area. Um there is thoroughare thoroughare commercial all up and down Lebanon Road and all

probably a good distance up nonable road that goes all the way past and almost up to uh Winry Trace. So we do recommend a positive recommendation for the land use plan and the reszone to the board of commissioners. Um should the uh reszone be approved by the board of commissioners then everything should pass as recommended. Thank you. Okay. Thank you BS. Any comments? Shane, we have no comments.

Okay. Uh, do we have representation on this item? Recognize that guy. Name and address for the record. Civil.

Appreciate staff's recommendation there. As you can see in the in the map that they've presented and I think in the packet that was submitted, you know, what we're requesting on the land use is in between a thoroughare commercial land use and a highdensity residential to the west in the form of the town homes that are are currently there off Marketplace Drive. Feel like it makes a lot of sense. Um, we've looked at this site multiple ways from commercial in the front, even some kind of medium to high density residential in the middle, and it just it works better as a 100% commercial site. So, appreciate y'all's consideration tonight and can answer any questions y'all may have. Okay,

this is about the uh school property. It barely touches like a corner meets up with the school, but mostly it's everything behind the town homes.

Like it was more on the school property line than it seems maybe. I don't know. No disadvantage there for that doing that. No ma'am.

Okay. What's the future access to this parcel? Because it looks like the the front fronting Lebanon Road is separate, correct? Would would uh people going to this commercial property have to take marketplace and then hang a right there beyond the town homes? So there is a and maybe Todd can speak to this a little bit too, but the discussion has been a shared access through lot one toward out towards 70. Um and then try to somewhat align those drives, right, Todd? With a an access point that's on the south side of 70 there for the uh the develop mixeduse development across the street.

Maybe a little early to have the access discussions. uh not knowing what the commercial could be. However, you know, I' I've been encouraging using that, you know, there's that existing driveway that runs along the u the storage back there that heads towards that that single family home in the back. I've been encouraging getting a shared access easement to use that as well as they will likely get a curb cut on Lebanon Road itself. What that curb cut looks like to be determined. Okay.

Um however, they do have frontage on marketplace. Um we haven't looked at what that access looks like. We haven't evaluated that for for safety. I know there's that town home development there. So I I can't say whether we would support an access on marketplace or not. Okay, understood. I see that. I didn't see that little that road that leads along there. That's someone's driveway currently. Unclear. Um yes, it it is. Whether there's additional easements entitling use to that to be determined.

Got it. Okay, that sounds like a fun fun conversation. Uh it is the the property owner I believe is is the same. Oh, okay. The hind and the front. Got it. Understood. Otherwise, that would be a non-starter. We can't just tell them use someone else's property. Sure. Use their driveway to get to commercial property.

However, if it comes through as a straight zoned project and that's a separate parcel, we may be restricted to only allowing the accesses on their own frontage unless there is an existing easement for that driveway. Thank you. Any more questions of the applicant? I've got one. Joe, is there an idea of a concept or potential tenant or use of the site? Uh, we've had a couple name I'll call them name brand national re retailers looking at the parcel.

Okay. Appreciate hopefully be back in front of y'all very soon. Okay. Okay. Thank you. At this time, we'll take citizens comments on this item. Anybody want to make comment, please approach podium. Name and address for the record. Seeing none, we'll move on. Um, any other questions or comments from the planning commission? No comments. Okay. Do I hear a motion on this item?

A motion for positive recommendation. We got a motion for a positive recommendation. Do I have a second?

Second. Okay. Um all in favor signify raise your hand by saying I. I opposed. Ain item passes. And because that passed, we'll move on to item uh 8B on the agenda, which is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. Review the reszone request from RS40 to CRC and CG for Hamilton Reserve located at 12465 Lebanon Road. This is the item we just heard. Um, any more comments from planet? No, sir.

Okay. Nothing more from public works. Okay. I won't ask the applicant to come up again because we've already heard all this. Uh, any other comments from the planning commission on this item? No. Uh, for this particular item, any comments? Uh any citizen wish to speak on this item, please step to the podium. Name and address for the record. Seeing no comments, I will look for a motion. Make a motion for a positive recommendation. Okay, second.

We got a second. Got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by raising your hand and saying I. Opposed.

Abstains. Motion passes for a positive recommendation. Move on to our next item which is Tate's Landing. Item 9A. Uh review the concept plan for Tate's Landing located off Watermark Way. Um, this one I understand, uh, city attorney Samantha, this is a non-vote item, just a discussion item, or is it a full vote? It's just a review of the concept.

Do they usually? So, it's it's a uh it's a variable lot subdivision they're asking to do here. And part of that requirement is that they submit a constant plan with the reszone request. Get voted on. I don't believe so. We've only done a handful of these actually. Okay. We did not vote on this. So, we just handle it as a discussion. Yes. The code actually just says that the applicant just has to be prepared to to demonstrate to you all that they complied with some things. But if staff tells you they have, then that is all right. It doesn't require you to vote on it in the code. Okay. So, we go through the normal process. We just don't go to a vote. Correct.

Correct. Okay. Um interesting loophole. It's interesting. Yeah. And it's just to support the annexation and resell as a concept just so we understand what they're doing. Um do we have representation on this item from the applicant? right there, Mr. Addicts. Name and address for the record, please.

Addex Heritage Civil, 2055 North Mount Juliet Road. Appreciate y'all's time tonight. Um, as as before, use concept plan for Tate Landing um showing 17 proposed single family lots um at the end of Watermark Way uh to be extended. Um we've worked with staff on this item for the Watermark Way extension and also the what is shown as Ripple Creek Drive extension uh that would run north south. Um that that roadway is really set up more as a residential collector. Um just setting it up, you know, possibility if any additional property to the south develops. Um at this time we don't know if it is, but we're trying to set that roadway infrastructure up if it does happen. Um, I think we're in agreement with all staff's comments and conditions on the concept plan. Appreciate any feedback y'all may have.

Um, facade there, the secondary, the masonry and secondary facade. You're going to stick with the staff recommendation on that?

Yeah, we can follow that up. Yes. question and I I have to interrupt real quick. I did not go to staff first. So, let me go to them first, then come back to you. You want me to tell you a little bit about it? Um, like I said, variable lot subdivision. So, what that means is they're going to be asking the other items on the agenda are for a reason and the base zoning is RS20. So this concept plan is how it's to assist you with that approval on that RS20. They're held to that concept plan. You know, it's any it's kind of like a pud and that that it's like a preliminary plan for that. They're held to that. They have a base zoning of RS40, but this plan is part of it and binding in that way. So it's not like you're just going to get RS40. you know, they if they if they they either have to comply entirely with existing RS20 regulations or build this plan that you have before you now. Um, and with the variable lot, you're allowed a little bit different spacing requirements. It's more I would say it's more like a cluster type development where you try to cluster the houses a little bit and kind of preserve open space areas as best you can or existing trees. One of the things that's required as part of a variable lot is a tree survey. So like when they come back with a preliminary master development plan, they have to have a tree survey. They have to have an inventory. They have to save as much as possible. Um so that being said, that's what's before you here. It's 10 acres and I believe they're doing 17 lots. At 17 lots, it's RS20. The overall density of this piece of property is going to be it's capped at whatever RS20 is, which is 2.2 units an acre. So

even though the lots are a little smaller than your 20,000 square feet and this and that, the overall density is still capped at RS20 density.

Um, so we got 17 lots. Um, I believe even with all this, our average lot size minimum 15 and our our minimum lot size 10,000. They they meet that. They've got 10% uh improved open space with amenities. Um the actual density is 1.7 units an acre. RS20 allows 2.2. So by right they could go ahead and develop 2.2 if they have the space for it, you know. Um but this plan shows 1.7 units an acre. Um acre of open space. I'll go through the variances and waiverss and whether or not staff supports them. Um the first one is a setback to any building lot or any lot line. They're asking for a waiver from that. It's they want 15 feet in L of 20 ft. Staff does not support this. This isn't a pud. That's a bulk requirement. And this isn't a pud. So I don't even believe you can ask that. It's a I mean it's part of the RS20 zoning. It's not it's not a put. So staff does not support that. That's got to be 20 ft. Um 50/50 masonry. I think Commissioner Armiststead brought that up. More typical with these residential ones, we see 6040. And so staff recommends 6040 for all sides of the structures. And then I'll let public works talk about three and four. Now, mind you, three and four, part of the variable lot regulations is that you don't part of it is to preserve what's naturally out there and put one of the regs is that you don't you you you don't put I believe it's building envelopes in anything more than 12%. Um, the point of the variable lots is the regulations is to kind of

tamper with the land as little as possible, I guess, is what it all comes down to. Um, but I'll let public works recommend on those. Staff does recommend approval of this plan as it is though. It's, you know, pretty good overall. Um, you know, it would just be the waiverss then that if you agree with us on those, then that would be the the relief that they're getting. Um, and really for planning, it would be number two. The facade materials is the only one that I support. Um but other than that, we recommend approval with the or discussion item. So we'll leave it at that. But there's conditions in here. So

yeah, for for these conditions for the concept plan, I guess the waiverss aren't necessarily binding till they come in next. Yes. And I actually I do appreciate having a concept plan because it gives us an idea of what they're doing with the reszone. So it it's helpful to us understand what's going on. Correct. I think it's one of the few times I've seen it. Yeah. But I I think it's it's helpful. Yep. Yeah.

John's correct in what he was talking about. Uh steep slopes. Um you're not allowed per in the land development code to vary from 15 to 20% slopes is the max you can build on. There have been times in puds where we've assessed uh disturbing slopes in a cut condition only with code pretty is clear on what you can and cannot disturb and as this comes in it's going to be essentially a varition or straight zone. There's little variance that we can provide. So, at this point in time, I would have to work with developers on on this, but we would not support either three or four since it does go against what's stated in the code. Um,

okay. As John mentioned, we don't have any further comments at this point. It is a concept plan and full-blown comments would come as it goes through the annexation reszone process come back as a preliminary plat for our full review and yeah there's probably some road questions you got for Todd but we did which we did talk to the development about so I'll leave those got any questions about that or any statements he's got I'll leave those to him. Thank you, Shane. Doc, you want to chime in on this?

Yeah, just a a few things to keep in mind. Um, both Watermark Way and Raven's Crossing are stubbed pretty much across from each other. Uh, it's not a massive leap of faith to say that it was intended for those two to connect eventually. Um, however, it's not in our future transportation plan for those roads to connect. Uh, so they're not outside of compliance by not proposing that that watermark way continue to their boundary. uh partially because they aren't allowed to ask for variances. And if they did connect to that boundary, watermark way would automatically become a residential collector, even though it connects to a road with a 50 foot right away. It would require 65 because we can't stub roads temporarily outside your development boundary without it being a collector or higher. Um it it's not a critical connection to be made. Um quite frankly, it there's a argument to be made that it's traffic coming and and prevents people from coming from the the signal straight through the the neighborhood as they have to meander around instead. It'll keep them going slower. Um, I do support Ripple Creek Drive being a collector as if the tape property continues to subdivide if I would expect it to see more significant traffic than than Watermark Way, even though it would have to empty to Watermark Way until connections to other neighborhoods could be made.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yes.

So, it looks like that this plan was labeled a concept plan and Jill and John and I have been discussing and looking at the code. It looks like this should actually be called a master site development plan, not to be confused with the PUD. This is different under our code, the variable lot residential development, they all they get different standards and you and the planning commission has to approve what's called a master site development plan and that's what this is. So the labeling of a concept plan which we also do have in our code but that is something different. So the planning commission does have to vote on this. The BOC does not on this piece. They would vote on the annexation but

so this is a voting item and um I recommend having the title changed on it so there's not any further confusion. You good with changing the title? Yes. Okay. Uh, okay. Thank you, Commissioner George.

Yeah, I've got a couple questions actually. Now, um, back to staff, the 5050 or 6040. Do do we know the back half of Nicholls, what that masonry secondary material percentage is? And I guess where I'm getting at with that is is one thing we've seen in the past, but not necessarily to this specific is that you're going to have, let's see, 17 homes that are de facto. They're part of Nicholls. They're going to be using the roads of Nicholsville. They're going to probably argue, I would argue, they're going to use the amenities of Nickel Nichols. The construction is going to run through this subdivision. And that's where I start to really have a lot of concerns about this project as a whole is where it's going. The amount of construction traffic that you're bringing to a recently finished neighborhood, the amount of homes you would be adding on top of a new culde-sac because now instead of a stub, it'd be a culde-sac. And I've got a question about whether the amount of lots that are now totally incorporated in watermark way if that goes beyond our requirements for a culde-sac. Those are the issues that I have with this.

Happy to answer the last one. Uh the way Watermark Way stubs uh there's only one residential driveway before you have multiple access points. Uh so the total would be 18. that used to be in violation when I brought through my subdivision regulations. I upsed that to 25 to match what our standard is for an access lane. So it is under the maximum allowable number of units on a culde-sac. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, sir. More body.

Commissioner Franklin. Yeah. I have a question for staff. Um, so this is straight zoning RS20 period and so it's right of development essentially. Um, so there is no variable there is no variances really that we can do. I don't I'm not even sure Boza could do any other than that. Okay. Okay. Is this part of Nickels fail or is it going to be its own HOA or no HOA or what supplying here? No, but they're going to use all everything.

Yeah, definitely not part of Nicholls. It'll be its own standalone HOA. I think our applicants might have something else to say. No further comment from the applicant. Okay. Uh at this time we'll hear citizens comments on this item and it's been a while so referred 9A. Review the concept plan for Tate's Landing located off Watermark Way. Uh please approach podium. State your name and address for the record. Seeing none, any more comments or question from the planning commission.

So, it sounds like we have to remove the slope disturbances, right? Or that's just not allowed. See, in this scenario, they can't ask for that. So, how's that change? I guess because of that it sounds like there's going to be a pretty significant change to the layout everything potentially right to my understanding when they submit the preliminary plat it would have to conform to the land development code without exceptions maybe whatever building you know facade stuff but from our end site development that we can't there's no variances

all right I just wanted to make sure that if we happen to approve this so we don't push something through that we shouldn't have. Okay. Thank you. So, so you're saying if it can't comply, they may lose lots essentially. That is correct. So, we're we're we're looking at a development that's going to essentially be a lot of probably basement homes, maybe fewer than 17 even. I would have to defer to the applicant on that, but I think when I looked in in the plan, it said the slope is 12. The the way the code reads is if you're between 15 and 20% you're level as a critical lot. You can build within those lots. Outside of that, you're not allowed to do anything on slopes steeper than 20%.

But the only way to remedy that is by losing lots in many cases. Correct. Okay. Or building land up. Or is that not an option? You definitely cannot fill on steep slopes like that. No sir. I would not recommend that. No more comments.

Oh, John finally got an answer. Well, not a whole answer because that the Nicholls pud left the facade up to the FMDP, right? like to be discussed at FMDP, but googling around on Google Earth down there, this is going to have this subdivision here before you is going to be have more masonry than Nicholsville. Nichols Veil looks like it's a front only on a lot of them. Backside probably. Yeah.

Yeah. I I'm looking at ones right here that the whole sides are are siding. So, yeah, this is this is going to probably wind up with more masonry. Good. Oh, if you look at it. Okay. I think maybe when that was approved, we didn't even have the 100% masonry requirement. It goes back a few years and I think predates the masonry full masonry. Sounds like

nickel does. Okay. 60 40 slope. That's that. Okay, good. Good. Okay, thank you. Okay, do I hear a motion on this item?

I don't especially like it, but I'm going to make a motion to approve it. And I'll tell you why. It is consistent with land use plan. It uh you know they're they're asking for something that they may it's probably going to be more like 14 or 15 lots it looks like to me. And wish it was part of Nicholls Veil, but I don't know that we can make that happen. I don't there's anything in our power to say you can't develop. You have to develop with adjacent property owner. So, I'd just make a motion to approve this concept or whatever you said it was master development plan with

like to amend that with with recommendations and 60/40 not 50/50 staff comments. Amend it that way. Got your hair a second. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by raising your hand and stating I

oppose. Abstain passes. That was a fun one. Let's see. Next item on the agenda is item 9B. re review the annexation including plan of services for Tate's Landing located off Watermark Way. This is a recommendation item. Back to the board of commissioners. Any staff comments from planning? This one's pretty self-explanatory. The 10acre lot that we just discussed annexation. So staff recommends approval or positive recommendation. Anything further from public works? No comment. Okay. Any further discussion from the planning commission? Okay. At this time, we'll take uh citizen comments. Uh if you have any comments, please approach podium, state your name and address for the record. Seeing none, I look for a motion on this item as well. A motion for positive recommendation.

We have a motion. Second. And a second. All those in favor, raise your hand. Oh, yes. Did I miss something?

Oh, excuse me. Sorry. I knew you keep me straight. That's why I asked you earlier. Um, okay. At this time, we're going to uh close the planning commission meeting, open a public hearing on item 9B, review the annexation, including a plan of services for Tates Landing located off Watermark Way. I think staff comments hold for this as well. Uh this time we'll take citizen comments. Any citizen wish to comment on this item in the uh public hearing, please step forward. Name and address for the record. Seeing none, we will close the public hearing and reopen the planning commission meeting. And I believe we are looking for a motion on this item. So, make a motion for positive recommendation.

Got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by raising your hand and saying I. I. Opposed.

Abstain. Motion passes for a positive recommendation. Next item on the agenda is item 9 C. Review the reszone request from Wilson County R1 to RS20 for Tate's Landing located off Water Mark Way. Go back to planning. Okay, this will be it's in Wilson County, so it's R1. It'll be RS20 is what they're asking for. The land use map is medium density, so RS20 is congruent with that. Um this is uh this this kind of illustrates the variable lot subdivision kind of the merit of it. You're not approving this reszone blind. You kind of know what they want to do with it. So um staff recommends approval or positive recommendation. Sorry.

Public works Jay. No comment.

No further comment. Okay, at this time we'll hear citizen comments on this item. Please approach the podium, state your name and name name and address for the record. Seeing none, any comments from the planning commission? No comments. Okay. All right. Looking for a motion on this item.

I got a motion. I got a second. All those in favor signify by raise your hand and saying I.

Opposed. Abstain. It's a motion for positive recommendation on this item. Next item on the agenda is courtyards at McFarland. Item 10A, review the annexation, including plan of services for Courtyards at McFarland, located at 5025 Old Lebanon Dirt Road. planning John.

Thank you. So, you I'm sure you remember this one. It was before you a couple couple months ago. And I believe the planning commission provided negative recommendations on the land provided a negative recommendation to the board of commissioners on the land use amendment. And because they provided a negative recommendation, the preliminary master development plan and the annexation was not heard at the planning commission because the land use did not receive a positive recommendation. In the intervening time, this item, the land use amendment was sponsored by a commissioner and brought before the board of commissioners where it went before uh where it was passed at first read. Because it was passed at first read and the planning commission did not weigh in on the PMDP and the annexation, it's now back before you before it can go to second read and receive approval on the land use amendment at at the BOC. So essentially what you have here in front of you, you've seen before. The big change is before it included some park land area that there was discussion on whether or not it was going to go to the city or blah blah. I still don't know the outcome of what what what that's going to be. But I do know that in this plan that land is now removed from the pud boundary. It stands alone as a as a straightup RM8 multifamily age restricted multifamily development. Um I believe the applicant has slides they'd like to show. So instead of me drolling on about this and you've seen it before, we'll let that happen. Um my recommendation on this is uh I I just would say if you choose to forward it with a positive recommendation just include the conditions that we have here. Um and like I said the BC has

passed the land use on on the first read. Um I will say that some of the issues that we had with this initially and my from my end the park the you know what was going what was going to be first of all is it commercial pud is there going to be a park these things have been have been addressed and from my perspective planning's perspective the difficulty here is that it's just what they're requesting to do is does not meet the future land use But the future land use plan with CMU mixed use which would allow this type of use in there anyway. You're just not getting the commercial component with it. You're just it's a it's a residential subdivision now. Um age restricted at that. Um so I guess before we move on, I'm going to go over the the waiverss here. Um because there's a few of them. Oh, sorry. Do you want me to continue or Well, I don't have to do it later, I guess, if I speak on it all now, right?

Well, it would I'd like get the applicant to come forward and make his presentation and come back to comments. Good evening. Jay Sure with Raiden Smith, 315 Woodland, Nashville, Tennessee. Uh here to represent McFarland Courtyards of McFarland. Oh, do I get to control it? All right. Does this have a pointer on it, John?

Oh, there it is. Okay, awesome. So, I'm here with Dwight O'Neal, president of EPCON here in the Nashville area. And as John said, we did come before you with a land use plan amendment and then subsequently went to the board of commissioners and received uh first reading approval. So, we're back in front of you to talk about our plan development. Courtyards at McFarland Farms is a 55 plus active adult community. All of these homes will be sold. Um, we have three different types of home products within it that I'll go through uh shortly as we go through the slides. Each of the homes, one of the unique characteristics about their neighborhoods is each of the homes have private courtyards adjacent to them. This is the only outdoor space that the residents maintain. Every all the other open space throughout the neighborhood is maintained by the HOA. Um the front yards, the backyards, there really is no true backyard. There are no backyard patios. There won't be any swing sets. The only outdoor space these residents have to entertain is is these courtyards. Everything else is open and for everybody else to use. Uh the bylaws in here also pre prevent u multiple ownerships to prevent rentals that is in the um bylaws of the neighborhood. So let me walk through some of this. This is our site. We're in between the east division and old Lebanon Dirt Road and the larger McFarland Farms mixeduse development is just below us. We are seeking uh reszoning for 29.9 acres to RMA PUD and RS40 for 7.9 acres 7.09 acres which will be dedicated as parkland to the city and improved as part of the construction of this neighborhood. Uh this is our existing site. Uh we've got East Division to the north, old Lebanon Dirt Road down here to the south, and the

McFarland Farms neighborhood just below us. We have an existing cemetery on the site, a small wetland, some scattered trees, and then the remainder is open. And this is our usage of the site. We're dedicating 2.34 acres of rideway along each division. This will allow the city when it comes forward with this road improvement project not to have to obtain rightway. We're giving the full rideway needed for that improvement on our side. It's also going to allow us to make the road improvements to each division that staff has outlined in the conditions of approval. We're dedicating 7.9 acres of a park and improving it for the city as part of this development. And then we have 29.91 acres of residential development. And here's our master plan. Just like the other drawing except it doesn't have the other acreages on it, but it does outline the homes and our different types of homes. We've got uh alley loaded town homes that front old Lebanon Dirt Road and East Division along here. We have alley loaded single family detached homes in the center with another public road with on street parking that stubs to the adjacent property. We will have a wet detention pond located right here with a fountain that'll have a walking trail around it. And we have nine um front loaded or side loaded of our larger product along the new street that we will be constructing from East Division down to Old Lebanon Dirt Road. All of our entrances line up with the neighborhood across the street. We have one entrance here, our secondary entrance here, and even the entrance to the park that we'll be improving lines up with the entrance across the street at McFarland Farms. This breaks out our roads and access within the within the neighborhood. We have a public road that we're building

again from um East Division down to Old Lebanon Dirt Road. another public road that comes through here. The purple uh illustrates our alleyways that shows where our rear loaded access homes are. And then the blue represents a private one-way drive that gives those town homes front door parking and uh for visitors and for access to the front doors and uh allows for circulation around the front of the homes. This is our pedestrian network. We've got we have over got my notes here correct. Um 9,000 linear feet of sidewalk and trails within our neighborhood. The park has over 2500 linear feet of sidewalk and trails in it. It all interconnects so that you can walk from the neighborhood over to the park or when you're in the park, you can make this quarter mile loop around the wet detention pond and back is as is a walking loop. We make a uh pedestrian connection from east division through the park to the existing cemetery that the HOA is going to maintain as part of the development. We're going to improve it, put a new fence around it and clean it up, but and then it will become part of the HOA property. This breaks out our open space. Our neighborhood stands on its loan own. It does not use the park as any part of its open space. We have over 29% open space in the neighborhood, which totals to 8.76 acres, I believe. Our amenity center located in the center of the neighborhood right here. We're going to have a clubhouse, swimming pool, pickleball court, outdoor seating area. The the photos show uh show amenity areas from other EPCON neighborhoods that they have built. And then this one would be built to the same quality. These are our homes. Um these are the

nine larger homes that they built in here on the 66t wide lots that would have uh front-facing garages. on this side of the street, they would have access uh from the front-facing garage to the new public road. One of staff's conditions is that that that access only be on one side of the road. So, the two closest to the uh amenity center would have side garage access from either the alley or the private drive adjacent to the amenity center. This shows the architecture on the uh single family detached alley loaded homes where the garages are in the back. This is what the town homes look like. These homes would be facing east division and old Lebanon Dirt Road. Again, they're all alley access, so you would not see any garages or service. And then this is an example of one of EPCON's um amenity centers uh to show representative image of what our architecture would potentially look like on ours. So we look forward to a positive recommendation hopefully. Um and we are in agreement with all the staff's conditions of approval and comments. We've worked very closely with them to get to this point and we're very excited to be here and I'm happy to address any of your questions. Okay,

I have one. Yes, sir.

Commissioner Franklin, um, you know, as impotent as I am to this community, I've tried to get Mount Juliet to pave my driveway multiple times, and every time I call down there, I can hear him snickering on the other side of the phone saying, "We don't pave people's driveways." But on this public rideway road in the middle that's in green, would you consider just to go ahead and make that a private drive? And I'll tell you why. Um, first of all, police going to be down there all the time with conflicts about who's parking the boat, who's parking a trailer, how long that car has been sitting down there. and street parking laws in the city are going to be a whole lot different than what your community is going to want. Second, all the Fords down there are going to leak oil. I'm just kidding. I drive Ford, but I mean, you know, it's going to tear up our road. So, I'd rather them tear up your road because when, you know, let the homeowner association pay for all the Ford sitting there, that would be my main concern. I I kind of like the way your public road goes through there. And I also like the way I think it's going to flow very well. You can always turn right getting out of here wherever you want to go, east or west. I think it's wonderful on your external traffic, but your internal I wish that that green road there would be private.

That's a question. That's a qu. Can I make it private? Yes. Would you make it private? We can if it's allowable by the city. Yeah, I mean staff supports uh the remaining of the streets that are shown as private being private. It was just in the staff report we'd have to adjust um adjust the language, but we'd still support that. Meaning all the roads internally be private.

Uh I believe road A would still be public. I think the yellow road everything got and that makes sense. It's connecting two public streets, but this one down here to me, you're going to thank me later. You don't want your police down there trying to squab and and trying to tell these people. It really isn't illegal and they're going to be mad. Just let the homeowner association figure out how they want to manage all their side parking. I mean, that it's going to be a problem. People that park on the side of the street, I'm telling you, it's always a problem. Public streets And your HOA says specifically you can't park in a driveway. Yes, ma'am. Overnight. Overnight. Yes. Okay. So, what if you have

That's correct. So, what if you have a visitor? And I know there's Well, that's that's the purpose that Well, there is no access from the rear of these homes except through the garages. So, your visitors would not be able to park in your back driveway and then enter your home. Everybody has a garage. Yes, ma'am. Everybody has a garage. That's right. All right. And the courtyards I am I misunderstood obviously. Um if it came by the first time I was thinking that there were shared courtyards at one time. No, ma'am. They're not shared. Each each home had even the town homes had their own individual courtyard. Um. All right. So, they are individual and private. Yes, ma'am.

There may be windows from one person's home into the other's courtyard. I would imagine on that. No. No, sir. They're not. The homes are designed so that so that the adjacent house cannot see into a courtyard that's not theirs. Interesting. Okay, that's an improvement. And your clubhouse that changes my opinion a little bit. And all good comments. Just a reminder, this is for the annexation and plan of services. We we get our shot at 10B as well. So this is just annexation plan of service.

We can answer them all now if it makes the next one go faster. Okay. And John planning, I think I cut you off. Did you have anything more to say? No, I would just say staff supports the annexation, of course. Okay.

We have no comments at this time for annex time. Okay. Any other comments on the annexation and plan of services? Okay, thank you. Okay, at this time we'll ask for citizen comments on this item. If you have any comments, please step up to the podium, state your name and address for the record. Wish I had a recording of that so I could just do it every time. Seeing no citizen comments, uh, looking for a motion on this item. Oh,

oh, public hearings. I did it again, didn't I? Thank you. Okay, at this time we'll close the planning commission meeting and open up a public hearing on item 10A, review the annexation, including plan of services for courtyards of McFarland, located 5025 Old Lebanon Dirt Road. Uh if there's any citizen comments related to this item, please step to the podium. Name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments, we will close the public hearing and reopen the planning commission meeting. And at this time looking for a motion on this item.

Quick question. One more question. This is consistent with the land use plan because the legislative body approved it. Not yet and it is not first read. It's been through first read. the land use plan okay amend it now if the land use plan gets amended then it would be but as of right now it is not but they did vote for it once positive

commissioner George I just want to add a little color because I did watch this when it went to the bo there were some commissioners that had a concern that the planning commission had not reviewed the putt so I would not take their approval on first reading as an approval of the land use amendment more so is an approval that they wanted us to hear it and I think that's very clear to remember. Wasn't they approved the land use minutes that they wanted the planning commission to consider the putt? Okay, that's very different. Very very different. Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner George.

Okay, I'm looking for a motion on this item. I'll make a motion positive recommendation. I have a motion for positive recommendation. Do I have a second? I have a second. Okay. All those in favor of a positive recommendation, raise your hand. Signify by saying I. opposed. No.

One, two, three, four, four, two. Passes. Was it 33? 33. 33. So, what we do with a recommendation item? Just a negative recommendation. Yes. So someone I would recommend someone make it in the reverse. So that way I'll make a motion for a negative recommendation. I'll second that. All those in favor of a negative re recommendation raise your hand and signify saying I. Three. All opposed. Abstain.

So we're kind of in a tough spot here. Um, generally when this happens, I would recommend that an item gets deferred to a later meeting so that way the amount of commissioners that are here changes. So the vote would then potentially change because it hasn't passed either way. So it's just both motions failed. So nothing's happening. So we choose to then defer this item for when we option at this point when we have more commissioners to vote.

Okay. Item 10 A. So deferred. Now with that being deferred, item 10 and B still is heard.

I mean, hypothetically, you could still hear it, but you might want to ask the applicant if they want it heard right now or if they want to wait, okay, till this comes back so they can all be heard together. I think we would prefer to defer. Okay. until we have more commissioners. Okay. I think there'll be more of us here at the next meeting for sure. Thank y'all. Thank you for your time.

Yes, sir. So, item 10 A and 10B are deferred. It happens. Uh, next item on the agenda is a reszone item 11A. Review the reszone request for OP from OPS to CTC for 1316 Clear View Drive. This is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. Uh, planning.

Thank you, Commissioner. This is a parcel that sits on the corner of North Mount Juliet Road and Clear View Drive. Um, previously housed a single family residence prior to the 2020 tornado which um came in and unfortunately took that residence away. Since that time, it has been an undeveloped parcel of land. Previously, the owner applicant had came in and requested a site plan approval for what was going to be a bank and a restaurant. since that time. I think just due to circumstances beyond their control, I don't think that is a plan that they're moving forward with at this time. Um, but they would like to move forward with a change of the zoning from the current ops of office professional to commercial town center. The land use um in this area is neighborhood commercial which is consistent um the CTC is consistent zoning and supportive of this type zoning for that area. So, um there is, as I said, no current plan submitted along with this area, the um areas along the adjacent zoning districts in the OPS to the north and south. Um and then you also have RS40 lowdensity residential to the east and AR40 agricultural to the west. Um staff does support this resoning request because it is consistent with the land use plan and we recommend a u positive recommendation to the board of commissioners.

This was part of that bundled last last meeting. Okay. Okay. Public works. Any comments? No comment. Okay. Like to ask for representation on the project on the you come forward. Name and address for the record, please.

7 Channel Road, Mount Juliet, Tennessee. Uh our plans on the project are to move forward with a pro uh a two-story building. We'll be back in front of the planning commission. We're focusing on trying to do restaurants that aren't in Mount Juliet currently. And so it'll be the design will be very sensitive to the neighborhood environment. We have a product like this in Providence that we did, but the the exterior of this will be different. So, we'll we'll be back with a lot of details. And it's basically we had to pull it because of interest rates just made it un unviable three years ago. So, uh any questions?

Questions? No questions? I think we're good. Thank you. Thank you. This time we'll hear citizen comments on this item. If you have a comment, please approach the podium, state your name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments. I would like to hear a motion on this item. I got I got one. Yes, sir. I'm sorry. Didn't go didn't go to planning commission. Good to stop me.

I I will say I'm glad that we're finally getting this last track of OPS con a little part of it at least converted to CTC. It makes sense. It's entire rest of Mount Juliet Road. Um so just a shameless plug. I'm glad we're stepping towards what our land use plan is really calling for. Okay. Any other comments? Okay. Like to hear a motion on this item. Motion for a positive recommendation. Second. Second. I got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify raise your hand by saying I. Opposed.

Abstain. Motion passes. We're heading for the heading for the gate here. Uh, next item is 11B. It's another reszone. Review the reszone request from RS40 to CMU for 6600 Central Pike. Like to hear from player John.

Thank you again, Chairman. Um, this property uh currently is residing within the county limits. Um, it's 6600 Central Pike. It is currently within District 3. The property currently houses a large shop, multiple tractor trailers, and various automobiles. I believe it's been in the past, it's been utilized as a mechanic shop and possibly also tractor trailer storage. The current request is a zoning change from RS40. Um, excuse me, I misspoke saying it was in the county, it is in the city. Uh, they are requesting a zoning change from the lowdensity residential of RS40 to commercial mixed use that better adheres to the use of the property. We tried to go back and look to see maybe when this property um began the current use that it's had and we've not been able to find anything as to when what time that they started utilizing this for the mechanic shop and so forth. Um the future land use plan identifies this area as mixed use. Um so the CMU zoning request is consistent with the land use plan. So no change of the land use plan is required nor requested. Um, so in saying that, staff recommends forwarding the zoning request for this property uh with a positive recommendation to the board of commissioners for the commercial mixeduse zoning request. Oh, also this is in an area to John is right of the where the central pike interchange is going to come through. So, a portion of this property may be uh needed for right away, but that's something that public works probably has more knowledge of

portion of this property as well as access will probably be affected by that. Um, question by changing it to CMU, does it trigger any improvements to the site? Anything that needs to be done differently or we we we had a similar conversation about another property a couple meetings back. Does this trigger anything where they have to make any improvements? Anything like that? Yeah. Not to my knowledge until there is a change of use. Okay.

Of what the property is or what it's being utilized for um at such time that they do have a change of uh the use of the property whether it be um change from not utilizing it for storage for tractor trailers nor the mechanic shop. Then at that time they would have to come into compliance with the code. Okay. Okay. I just want to make sure we weren't tripping up the property owner. I would just add that it functions more like a commercial site now than a residential site anyway. So I drive by it every day. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

Mr. Franklin the question of the non-conforming uses on that property. If they reszone the property, shouldn't they be forced to bring it up to the the zoning classification? Do do they not relinquish their non-conforming use status in a reszone? No, not until they approve it. Not until they need to improve it. I mean, if it were approved, would they have to bring it up to that? They're grandfathered in just to remain as is as when the zoning changes until they make improvements to the site. Then they'd have to comply entirely with CMU till they change it. Okay. Until they change the Till they till they make improvements. change the what they're doing there, the use there, something like that. Okay.

But if it stays like it is, it can remain its grandfather in Okay. One opportunity to any representation from the applicant. Name and address for the record, please. Good evening, everyone. James Hwitt, 6432 Central Pike, Mount Juliet. Uh, I will say that I actually inherited the property, grew up on the property, it has been a diesel shop, parking for about 50 years.

And also, as many of you know that drive by it all the time, the eyesore on Central Pike. Um, we don't plan on being there forever, but we want to get things in line in preparation for impro improvements that happen locally. The pending interchange, which we're all excited about, slash not excited about. Yeah. Uh but yeah, so that's kind of the story, but yeah, that's where we're at. Your your neighbor across the street shares the same feelings about that interchange as you do. Yeah. Excited, but not I know them well. Yeah.

Okay. All right. Um any comments from the planning commission? No. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. And it's been a busy night. I've forgotten whether I asked for citizen comments on this already or not. I have. I don't think so.

Nope. Okay. At this time, we'll take citizen comments on this item. Any citizens want to uh comment on the reszone, please step over to the podium. Name and address for the record. Seeing none, I'm looking for a motion. Positive recommendation.

Motion. Motion and a second for a positive recommendation. All in favor signify by raising your hand saying I. I. All opposed. Abstain. Passes for a positive recommendation. Okay. do our last item on the agenda for tonight, which is item 13A, a recommendation item, which is review the reszoning ordinance amendment to article 5, six, and seven, building height. John planning

I'll just uh say that this is a zoning ordinance amendment so it's a recommendation item to the board of commissioners but uh and it's regarding building height um and our max building height in the tables but I will defer to Chief Folks who's here to speak about because what we're doing here is we're going to in lie of height maximums in our bulk regs and our bulk tables here in the code um we're going to reference building codes, fire codes, but I'll let Chief Folks talk more about that. He's he uh certainly knows more than I do about that. Chief, welcome to the meeting.

Thank you, Commissioners. Good evening. And uh as John mentioned, this is just basically removing all the height requirements out of the out of our code of ordinances, the land use plan or the land ordinances. And um it basically is putting it back to the international building code, international fire code, and international residential code that dictates those ordinances. And it's based on zoning, it's based on occupancy type, and it's based on u basically the construction of the building, whether it's wood, steel, concrete, uh those kind of things. And it's based on sprinklers as well. Uh we've had several, this kind of came about as we were taking the requests for proposals for this property here. Um in the adjacent area they were mentioning that they were wanting more density and uh were restricted by the sixtory height requirements uh at about 70 ft and that has actually been um I guess varied a couple of times. you know, Amazon is 92 92 feet tall. And so it's uh it's been varied a couple of times. And so the the idea is just to get rid of the restrictions that are within the the codes here and just put it back to the international building codes and international fire code, international residential code as warranted.

All seems to make sense. Will that compliance with even stricter building standards? Uh it'll pretty much be the same as far as the building standards go because we go by those codes now. Okay. Um it just basically takes away the provisions of developers thinking we're restricted to six stories. Developers could develop, you know, if we had a 20story hotel that wanted to come here. They would just have to meet all the requirements of the prevailing codes and and would be able to build the hotel. So kind of it kind of opens the door but with restrictions. Yes. Okay. Mr. Frank.

Yeah. I just had a question about note three, which I think is a great idea by the way. I'm all for this. It's save a lot of people a lot of time. Where it says the fire department will approve. Let's say it's hypothetical. Worst case scenario, we we get somebody that really has an impass and just can't is is where would where would the appeal be heard? Would it would it be a boza appeal? I mean, this just basically says buildings to be approved by a fire department. What happens when one odd that is?

Yes. If it's in the red part, it would it would actually be cut out of the code. So, that's currently in our code. We're taking that out. So, that go cut that. Okay. Great. Okay. Right. Now understand. I think that that was an an item for buildings above that 35, which is our old height limit, but that's cut. It's it's it's it's allowing flexibility, but it's no longer necessary if they're going to defer to the fire department codes anyway. So, yeah. Cut out of there. So, there is there will in any of these cases, there will be no there is appeal. There isn't. Not even BOSA,

I guess. I don't know. I wouldn't think so. If it's compliance with national code, I would think national codes, national code. Yeah, it would be it would be a code violation or a code issue and that's where I mean they would be in opposition of the codes if they're not complying with the building codes. So, it wouldn't be under our perview. It would be under Okay, gotcha. You answer my question. Thank you. Yeah. And

good comment. And going back to where this kind of and the reason I'm here kind of presenting this is I think the reason that these restrictions were put in place back in the day that they were put in place is um the fire department's capabilities at the time were not what they are now. I mean, I think our staffing on shift at that point was about six personnel uh total when the fire department came about and that's when a lot of these things were put in place and we now have 24 people per shift um and fully capable of attacking one of these fires if we were to have a fire in a high-rise any type of high-rise occupancy. If somebody decided to build a a 20story hotel, would that require the fire department to ramp in any way, shape, or form?

No, it it would not. We we are trained to do high-rise firefighting. We have high-rise packs now. Anytime you get above three stories, you're fighting high-rise fire. The access by ladder is very limited. We go into the We go into the stairwells and hook into the standby connections and supply water to those. And that's how we hook in. And and so and any new buildings that are built thankfully now also require that breathing air systems are put in place uh for high-rise structures as well as part of the code. So we would actually have bottle fill stations up on those. I think they're required every other level um in a lot of those buildings that are considered high-rise to fill our air bottles as well as have water supply. Thank you. Awesome.

Anything else? Okay. Thank you, Chief. Okay. I don't think we will, but at this time, we'll hear citizens comments on this item. If you have any comments, please approach podium. Name and address for the record. Seeing none, we'll proceed. Looking for a motion on this item. Recommendation. Second that. We got a second. Motion a second. All those in favor signify by raising your hand and saying I. I. Opposed. Abstain. We have a positive recommendation. Looking for one last item of business and I'll take that honor. I'll make a motion to adjurnn.

I've got a second. All All in favor? Opposed? Abstain. We are adjourned. Thank you.