Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hey, that's a Good evening. I'd like to welcome everyone to the January 8th, 2026. So, I'll make sure I get six right. I'm still probably living in five. And I will call to order the town of Smyrna Municipal Planning Commission. Uh tonight, Steve's going to lead us in prayer. And Mark has the pledge. So, if you'd all stand with us, please bow your hands, please. Dear Lord, thank you for tonight. Thank you for the town of Smyrna. Thank you for our citizens, our staff, and uh the the residents that we have. Lord, we ask that you be with these proceedings, that everything that happens here would be pleasing in your eye. uh be with the uh leadership that brings these items forward and that we would um represent the town in the the best way possible. Lord, we ask that you uh bless us uh nourish us and take care of us. In Jesus name we pray. Amen. Amen.

Face the flag. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Next agenda item will be citizens comments tonight. Okay. And we'll move on to the approval or corrections of the minutes of the December 4th, 2025 regular meeting. Counselor, are the meeting minutes in order? Commission has any changes like

Okay. Anything from the commission in the way of changes or comments? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve. Have a motion to approve the minutes. Do I have a second? Second. Motion and a second. Any further discussion. All those in favor of approving the December 4th, 2025 regular meeting minutes, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed. Minutes are approved. We're now on to old business. Annexation, zoning, and plan of service request. Sunny Patel, 8216 Florence Road. Annexation and P zoning. Yeah, this is a request that you all have seen before uh a couple times and has been deferred to tonight's meeting. This is an annexation of a portion of land. This the portion of this property is already in within the town limits and um has a a gas station and some other uses there on it there on Florence Road. And so they have requested that the remainder of the property be annexed into the town uh with a planned industrial development uh portion or that that portion be zoned for a planned industrial development. It's currently zoned RM and Rutherford County. Um there is a existing house on the property. Um surrounding zoning is C2 in town and RM and Rutherford County. It is surrounded on all three sides by by county uh zoning. Uh Ly's plan would support medium density single family residential in this area. Major thoroughfare plan does designate Florence Road as a minor arterial. This portion of the property has no frontage on that road as a core owns the property or or owns the area between this parcel and the road. Um, this requested plan industrial development is for 35,400 ft² of conventional self storage and covered outdoor storage in nine buildings and for the existing house on the property to be converted to the storage office uh as well as some additional rental spaces within that building. Uh, their required minimum fire flow is 1,500 gallons per minute at 20 PSI. Uh, a fire hydrant is required within 400 ft of all buildings. uh we'd ask them to show a water man extension across Florence Road in order to provide for fire suppression and it must be and must be installed as a part

of phase one. Uh they have now shown those um those those water line improvements um and and the hydrant being shown there with a note that it would be installed as part of phase one. um we'd ask them to include they had uh there was a utility location sheet that was separate from their their book, their pattern book. We asked them to include that and that has been done as well. And then uh the other item that we talked about last time um was the uh show tree preservation uh within 20 ft of the eastern property line for where that is not feasible due to grading uh show a type D landscape buffer requirement. Um, and that has now been uh the buildings have been shown. I don't think it's shown on the the map that's on your on the screen there, but in the packet of information that you have in front of you, uh, that has now been shown is on page which page? Yeah, page 13. And the other and one other issue I know we talked quite a bit about was the width of the drive valves in between the buildings to be sure that you know as as some of these buildings are uh enclosed buildings but some are uh open for for you know park boats and campers underneath and that sort of thing. Um and they have widened those those areas those drive aisles. Um they're all at least 28 ft. Some of them are are 30 feet in in width there. So, uh they've been widened quite a bit and and it works. The auto turn for the fire department also works with those water aisles too. So, uh that is another issue that you know we have discussed at previous meetings that uh has been uh

looked at and addressed. So, believe that's all that I have. Kevin, for clarification, the fire department is satisfied that they can maneuver through here now. Yes. Uh, are there any concerns about either buildings B1 or or B6 as far as being able to as far as the fire as as far as, you know, any type of fire suppression to get around the building completely?

Um, I I can't I would have maybe Mr. Buyers can address that. I don't think so. based on our last meetings, they they were okay with with the plan that was shown, but um do you know some of these are like building B6 is an open building? That's what I was getting ready to ask is B6 and maybe B1. Are those both open? B1 would be the only one that I guess could would be closed. Yeah, B6 has an open It's not an enclosed building. It's open building. So they they could go through through the building if they needed to to get to a vehicle that may have a fire or something.

Uh other questions uh from the commission or comments? This is really just a comment, but um from a signage perspective, uh we had issues with the sign on this property when it was originally built. That's correct. Um so there is some limited spots to where it can be. I know they got to do sign permits, but just kind of keep a note on that. And this curve, this corner is kind of a bad area for signs anyway. So, it's a little tricky. Yeah, but I I remember having to have one moved out there before. Yeah, they built it too close to the road.

Other questions or comments? So they've made all the changes we asked them to make. Correct. Staff feels comfortable with that? Yes.

Okay. I would make a motion to approve with staff comments. Then I have a motion to approve with staff comments. Uh from Mark and a second. Was that Ken? Second from Ken. Motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of approving this motion, please signify by saying I. Oppose. This motion is approved. Uh, under resoning request number one, Highgate HH Development, Blair Road, Portico Place, reszoning C2 to add H2 overlay. This has been withdrawn. That is correct. And so there's no action tonight from the commission on that.

That is right. The next uh item is Vintage Harbor uh Brook Owner LLC, Windage System Block Owner LLC, Walder Investor Family Limited Partnership LLC. Um 500 I'm sorry, 5,000 Needm Drive, 4,000 White Birch Avenue and Needm Drive, PRD amendment to a PUD. Kevin, uh my notes indicate that this group is requesting a deferral on this. That is correct. Okay. Any questions concerning the uh deferral request? Motion to defer until next week. 30 days. Is that what they ask for? Next meeting. Third of February. I'll second it.

A motion to defer uh to the next meeting with a second. Any further uh questions or comments concerning this deferral request? All those in favor of of approving this deferral, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed. This uh motion is approved and this has been deferred to the next meeting. We are now on to site plan. Uh first is Bailey Equipment and Inter Logistics Trident and Drive owner developer Caravan Ventures LLC.

Same as last one. We've seen this a couple times and been continuously making changes on this to address some concerns that staff has had on it. Um, just to reiterate some of these uh comments on this, the Bailey Equipment and Interlogistics is proposing to build a 48,250T warehouse and office building located on Trident Drive. 45,000 ft of that building would be warehouse space with the remaining 30 3,250 ft for office. The property was reszoned from C2 to I1 in March of last year for to permit for the user's occupancy. A single access point would be provided off of Trident Drive. Vehicular user on the site uh just over an acre at 1.25 and that would require 4350 ft of landscaping. Applicant is proposing for 10,500. Park required of 30 spaces and they're showing for 37. So, uh the plans actually did change quite a bit since packets did go out. So, some of these numbers have been adjusted. Handicap parking it does require two spaces based on those numbers and they're showing for two as well. The landscape plan did change as well. The plan shows maple trees along I24 and oak trees within landscape islands and parking lot areas. Magnolia trees are shown along the front property line on Trident Drive. Previously, they were shown within the rideway then pulled out of the rideway. The shbury is needed for streetscaping and within the site in order to meet designer view and all the trees shall be kept at least 10 ft away from the utility lines. Uh so at this time the landscape plan does not meet designer review but progress has been made towards getting closer to meeting what designer view requires. Architectural character is one of the bigger items that we were looking at last month. Um so I've got updated numbers on this as well uh from what is in the packet. The elevations show the building to be finished with various metals, fiber cement board siding which would provide a woodlook product when

finished on the front glass glazing and brick. The property is owned industrial which allows the use of metal as a primary material when not visible from an arterial street. However, this building will have visibility from I24 and Lee Victory Parkway. Per designer view, this building will be required to meet designer view of at least 75% primary materials on all wall elevations. These primary materials may consist of brick, stone, glass glazing, and or tilt panel concrete. The front elevation, which is the northeast of the building, does have 42.7% metal, 16.6% fiber cement board, and 40.7% breaking glass glazing. The side of the building going counterclockwise around. If you're looking at the picture, uh, northwest side shows overall 50.4% metal, 5.1% fiber cement, and 44.4% brick and glass. As part of the meeting that the Upkin has had with staff, they went ahead and blocked an area, as you can see on the plans on the elevations that they deemed were most visible from these roadways, notably I24. So within this area that they deemed most visible on the same northwest side, 50.4% metal, 5.1% fiberment, and sorry, that was overall. The area deemed visible from I24 would be 21.6% 6% metal, 78.4% brick. So that would be design review. The rear southwest shows 23% metal and 77% brick. The side, which is the southeast, shows overall 29.2% metal and 72.5% brick glass. The area deemed reasonably visible from I24 shows 24.3% metal and 75.7% brick and glass. As presented, these elevations do not meet designer view. Um, all these wall faces are going to be

visible from either Le Victor or I24. So, all of these wall faces should meet designer view at this point. So, changes have been made to come closer into compliance with what design requires. We're just not at that stage quite yet. So, with that, all the standard comments one through seven will remain at this time. Staff plan oneform informationational comment that any retained wall over four feet would require a building permit. It's going to remain. Number two, the elevations do not meet design review as you mentioned. Number three, the sedentay should be downgraded for head walls feeding into the pond to be effective and this is a public works public works comment. So that will remain. Uh number four is also a public works comment regarding the draining and the applicant working with the adjacent property owner to get that sorted out. So that comment will remain at this time. Number five was a remaining comment from last month where we discussed the fire department concerns for access around the building for uh safely putting out fire if needed. What the applicant has done at this time is they've shifted the building in to the center of the property a little bit created a drive around the full length of the building. Fire department has looked at this, reviewed it based on the submitted auto turn and they are okay with what is being proposed here. So um that was one of the major major items from last month that was still need to be addressed. So that has been now sufficiently taken care of. So comment number five can be removed. Number six, the submitted landscape plan does not meet designer review uh for streetscaping. Mainly the we ask to show the streetscaping along Try and drive and I24 being designer view and all landscaping shall be on private property not within the rideway. Comment will remain. Number seven, there was previously a pallet storage building shown behind the fence in area near the back of the property. We asked them to provide elevations for this. the applicant has removed it from the site and noted that it will not be back on the site. So we do not need elevations for it anymore at this time. So comment number seven can be removed. Number eight is utilities comment uh will

remain for a chance for utilities get a chance to review that. And number nine regarding outdoor storage more so of anformational comment at this point in time was more so addressed when we saw pallet storage on site. We just ask that the outdoor storage shall be screened for the zoning ord requirements. So at this time we're going to leave that more so as aformational standard comment for the applicant if any kind of outdoor storage does show up in the future mind that hey this is a condition as part of the plan commission that that not be outside should be screened. So comments number five and seven can be removed and the rest will remain. So as a result at this time staff does recommend deferral uh due to the elevations not meeting desired view. Like I said applicants working with staff on this to get closer but we're just not quite there at this time. So that's what we got.

Mitch, I know we've been very consistent as far as meeting design review. Um, and with a deferral, is it your opinion that if it were to be deferred that we'll get there uh, as far as the applicant meeting design review or is it going to be something where we're close again but not there? I was able to speak to the applicant today on this and it was my impression that they are willing to proceed forward to meet design view. They're here tonight and they can probably address that better if otherwise but that was the impression I was getting

other questions or comments from the commission. I think that uh the staff's recommendations once again to your point, consistency is going to matter and um this does not meet our design review at this point. Whether they're willing to do it or not, I'd like to see it before we did anything that stepped up and said we'd be willing to approve it. So with that, I would make the motion to defer it at this point until the next meeting. Okay.

I have a defer motion to defer until the next meeting. Do I have a second? I'll second it, but I also add that uh I agree with everything you guys are saying. Design review and meeting design review is going to be and for me it's the only way forward. Okay. Anything else? So, I have a motion and a second uh to defer until the next meeting. All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I.

Opposed. This motion is approved and we're deferred until then. Okay. Next up, uh, under new business, a reszoning request, Derby Run, Antique Avenue PRD amendment. Okay, this is a request to amend an existing approved uh, PRD um, called Derby Run. it uh it has frontage on Rocky Fork on Road and and Inz Drive. Uh that's where it's accessed currently. Uh this is a portion of the property that would not uh they what they're proposing to amend would not have access to those two roadways. They're proposing to um to extend an existing county road called Antique Avenue um and and add some additional lots, four additional lots um to the end of that uh that extended roadway. Uh the surrounding zoning is um is the Amberton and Cedar Hills BRDS uh in town and RM and Rufrey County. Uh the land use plan would support medium density single family residential in this area. Um there are no roads shown on the major thoroughfare plan affected by this plan. Uh number four was a comment from our fire department. There was some concern regarding uh the driveways uh because of the length of the driveways. Um, so because of if they're over 150 ft, you would have to have fire code compliant um, apparatus turnaround on the site itself. Um, and that driveway would have to be kept open all the time, support the weight of the apparatus. Uh, they have amended their plan to so that those driveways uh are less than 150 ft. So that's not an issue anymore. So we can remove that comment. U we' asked them to show the proposed

maximum house square footage on the plans. They're showing about a 4,800 ft u kind of building envelope. Uh and that would require a heftier than typical single family fire flow. It would be a,00 1,750 gpm instead of a,000. Uh that could be cut in half if the fire sprinkler system has been installed. the the P the approved PRD has a certainly would not does not have that as a square footage for minimum. Uh it's 1,600 is what was in the original PRD approval. Um so and they have indicated that the building square footage u has not would not necessarily be 4800 ft even though they're showing that as a building envelope. So we have basically we will work with them through the process if this is approved. Um and they'll have to see what the fire flow is. This is served by consolidated utility district for water and so we'll have to see what kind of fire flow they have there and they'll have to set their square footage accordingly as far as the maximum but I did want we did ask for that. That is something that again they don't know exactly what the square footage is there yet or the maximum square footage would be. Uh we did ask them to contact Rutherford County regarding the connection since this is a a county road to regarding the connection to uh they're actually going to extend that road again into the town. There's actually a piece of it they're going to have to build in Rutherford County because it when the road was originally built however many years ago they did not extend it to the property line at the time. So, I did reach out to Rutherford County today confirm that they have been contacted and and are aware of this project and so they're working through that with them um as well. Um there number seven was really kind of an kind of anformational comment. the sewer to this is going to be they're going there's a road seab biscuit court that's

going to have to be built um with the sewer extended on that before sewer would be available to these lots. Uh and then number eight was from utilities department regarding the utility easement width. They actually rerouted the sewer connections so that that easement is no longer needed and they are showing the easements as where they are or will be needed. Um but they would not be needed between those two lots any longer because rerouting the sewer. So um these lots there there's four lots. They are increasing the the number the density because they are increasing the number of lots in the development. These lots are large lots. Um now get to my plan here so I can see the the actual area but um these are much larger than what you we would typically see. Um the smallest one is about 610 of an acre up to almost 2 acres kind of is the range here. So, um, this area was in the original PRD was unimproved open space and so they're not they're not taking away any any amenities or anything that are being provided as a part of the development. Uh, they are taking obviously they're removing some of the open space of the development but not any improved open space. It's just was just unimproved open space. So, um,

so it does it doesn't reduce the PRD. I mean, it reduces their the unimproved open space, but it they still meet all the requirements. They still meet the requirements. Yes. And this wasn't a detention area or anything like that, was it? No, there is an area. I see it. Yeah. Right. Yeah. There. But that's not the detention ponds are not that's not one of the detention ponds. That must I think we assume that's probably just a borrow. Okay.

Borrow pond until refill. There are also because of our requirements, they are abuing RM. And there you are showing the buffer that is required under our requirements. Now um for for that buffer shown on page C2.1 there's some existing tree lines we're going to keep in some places but there there was no trees there so they were going to go down

I'm going to be honest We don't see lots this size. We don't see these kind of options very often. So, I appreciate you bringing it over. We don't see this very often. Even if I may captain knows the original run is something I was involved with. This is a new section, but I'd rather just remove myself from all of it as uh as well as items one and two on the final plat section. So, if you'll make note of those three items, I appreciate it.

Other questions or comments? I think Steve makes a valid point. Um these are the type of products that I've um have heard over the years that are being requested. Um what what was the minimum square footage on the home? You say 4,800 square. The 4,800 is the it's it's kind of that's the is that the top end? That's the that would kind of be kind of the max with the building footprint they're showing. Uh again, it's going to kind of somewhat be dictated by um the water flow, the fire flow in that area as well.

Well, I would say some of these lots uh if not all of them exceed what we're seeing as far as county development goes. Sure. Um so from that perspective, I'm okay with it. Yeah. These are larger than R1 lines. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I think in my opinion, it's it's because of the PRD and what they had, if they had stayed with just the same density rate, this could have been 10, 15 homes probably. So, the fact that they're going to come in with four lots, four homes is is awesome. And the the uh subdivision itself still meets our rags and ordinances with this as far as the open space as well as improved and things like that.

That's correct. Okay. Other questions or comments? Hearing none. I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve with staff comments. I have a motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Got that, Catherine? Yes. All right. Good. I have a motion and a second. Further discussion. All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed. This motion is approved with one abstension. Okay. Next up, we have a sketch plat. Uh this is the Enclave at Lee Road, 5198 Lee Road. Owner, developer Chia Dong and Mark Hansen. Yeah, this is the R3 uh annexation that came through a few months ago. Um this is um the sketch plat for for this property. This was essentially a like a concept plan to give you all kind of just a look at it where the utilities are going to be the detention uh sidewalks all those things without full engineering being done. Um it's 43 lots, 19.8 acres. Uh it is on that there's an existing house on the property would be removed. It's addressed at 5198 Lee Road. Uh we had a few standard comments really one through five. All those would would need to remain. Uh number six just note that Lee Road is a collector and they are showing right away dedication there uh for that roadway. Um minimum fire flow is 1,000 gallons per minute up to 3600 square feet under roof. And so they'll have to again this is actually served by the town and that should not be an issue for us. Um number eight regarding the road names and 911 approval for those names that has been done and so that comment can be removed. Um there will be some offside sewer that they're going to have to to extend across the property uh on the south side of Lee Road. Um that that is shown on the second page of your plans there. Um we just ask for documentation that easement's been obtained uh prior to any construction obviously. Um so that comment needs to to remain. The water

line on Sprien way is 10 in. They're showing 8 in. So they'll need to um correct that. Um the water service lines to each lot must be at least one inch. That's just to just to safeguard if for some reason either the ex exist the the initial construction or or additions get to that 3600 ft threshold um so they would accommodate a sprinkler system if it had to had to happen. They're showing that on the plans now so that can be removed. Um there's some existing rightway or sorry existing utilities u along Lee Road that will need to be relocated. we would ask them to show those relocations and so um they are they're showing that so so they'll go ahead and be moved out of the rideway as part of this project. Uh we are looking at a improvements to Lee Road the town is and so that's at least that piece of the rideway relocations we would not have to do as part of the road improvement. So um so anyway so that that that is being shown now as so comment um 8 11 and 12 can be removed and with the remaining comments we would recommend approval.

Okay questions uh for staff or any comments on this? Kevin, will this uh with the improvements that are planned for Lee Road, will this fall into that improvement area? I think it's it's it's a little east of that initial phase. Um because this is this is directly across from where uh the school board has purchased property. So, this is this is Yes, sir. And the school uh they would do we're not going to do anything in front of the school, right? We're stopping just west of that. Yeah.

property. Yeah. So, this is directly across. So, this would get the rideway in place and again relocate those utilities uh but would not would not be a part of those road improvements at this time, at least this phase of the road improvements. Do you or staff see already? I think maybe any potential need for turn lanes on this property. Yeah, it's already I think that's because of the school primarily. I I absolutely think that there will have to be a turn lane, a minimum of center turn lane or something like that. The traffic study that the school board did recommended a roundabout there. We don't know how feasible that is with the rideway needs. I'm not sure,

but that is something they looked at as well, but yes, absolutely. There's going to have to be improvements to this property, and I think we need to evaluate that with the school board and the county uh as far as what those needs will be and who's paying for them and all of that. But um well it's a sketch plat so I think they're probably just looking for some

right and and this is again they are they are showing the rideway dedication and then moving those utilities. So they that's probably for this developer at this time that's probably all we would would look to ask to do for them to do. Um and they they are tying into the existing development to the west as well. So there would be an alternative to Lee Road is for traffic flow as well. Kevin, is this all of this portion of ERO that's included in this? Is this already annexed? Yes, this is already our our portion. So, it's blue line Charles or green or whatever. Yeah, you had to do that.

And the right ofway dedication is sufficient for all the things you need adjacent to a school. Sidewalks, turning lanes. At this time the rideway the road is classified as a collector 60 feet rideway so 30 feet from the center is all we can really require. Um well as far as is it adequate enough we'll have to work again the construction plans haven't been done. We we really don't know exactly how much rightway we may end up needing. So I guess in there's open space shown along that roadway. So if we we're not getting we have to purchasing per portions of someone's home, their land or anything like that. As the schools come forward, is the collector status stay in place or does that change?

That's something we may want to look at on our thoroughfare plan certainly. Um we did not change it when we looked at it this last year. Um the schools weren't known at that time. So um that's my point. Yeah. Right. I don't want to miss an opportunity here. Sure. Yeah. So, so I'm clear. So, did you say that there if we ended up having to widen this, there is enough in this plan, there's enough room for us to do something or not? Yeah. You Yeah. Well, we don't know what the plans are going to be right now as far as how much?

I'm not talking about like immediate. I'm just saying in the future if we have to widen this road, are these houses far enough back that we would have that room?

Scale. They probably don't like it. You have from the proposed rideway um to the actual lot lines there is approximately almost well a good 25 26 ft kind of shown as open space area. There's actually a they're even proposing a 30 foot waterline easement for CUD which is this is in our area but they did have a water line through there. So you have an additional 20 plus feet of room there that's shown as open space um before the actual lots start. So I think

so potentially if we had to make a turning lane threelane this we would have space to do that. We would have room to do that even if we had to end up purchasing some of that open space. We're not going to be purchasing homes homes or Yeah. portion of someone's land that their is their home. Yeah. And that's obviously making the assumption that all would go on that side, right? Which correct. Obviously, it's going to be going on both sides. Yeah. I just wanted to make sure we're not kind of himming ourselves in, right? Yeah, that was my point, too. Just get in front of it. Mhm.

Okay. Anything else? Do I have a motion? I'll motion to approve with staff comments. A motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Second. Motion in a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed. This motion is approved. We are now on to final plants. The first item is the courtyard at Stewart's Creek phase 3 Rocky Fork Amable Road Restoration Drive owner developer EPCOM Stewart Creek LLC. Yes, this is a the final plat. This is the last phase of the courtyard of Stewart Creek development phase three. This section is 37 lots. It's 48.57 acres. is this this is the section that had a tremendous amount of open space because of the the steep topography that's on a lot of this property. Um so it's this is again 37 lots. Um we had a few comments uh they're really relatively standard comments one through four. U we did have a comment number five regarding show that existing utilities in phase two that are being extended into this phase and they have done that. So we can remove that comment so that we just be those four remaining comments that are left and with those comments we would recommend approval previous in place or are in place.

That is correct. questions or discussion from the commission? We have not.

Okay. Uh Mark will be abstaining. Do I have a motion? A motion that we approve with staff comments. I have a motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Second. Motion in a second. Further discussion. All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I.

Oppose. Motion is approved with one abstension. Next, under final plats, Doby Run phase 2B Inz Road and Grey Ghost Way owner developer Charter Commercial LLC.

Yeah, this is the final uh final plat for Derby Run phase 2B. Again, this is a portion of the development we just looked at for the PRD amendment. Um this is the existing approved area there. Um it's this phase it's 8.76 acres, 27 lots. Uh again, we had um a few standard comments. Um all five of those would would need to remain there. Um but it is consistent with the approved preliminary plaid and and the approved PRD. And so with those remaining five comments, we would recommend approval.

Questions u for Kevin or any comments concerning this final plan? hearing. None. I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve the staff comments. A motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Second. Motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed? This motion is approved with one abstension. Next and finally under final plats, Sam Ridley Dr. Horton HPR Jeannie Lane Mlo College Boulevard owner developer Wild Building Construction Inc. This is uh the HPR plat for the town home section of this development. This was uh you all looked at the final plat for the both of the lots for this development last month and this is just the HPR plat just for the lot one. Um it's 18.64 acres in that one lot. Um again we had several comments. Most of these are some of these are specific to this site uh that would or still need to be addressed. uh comments one through really one through seven. Again, three of those, five, six, and seven are specific to this plat because there's some tight areas with some setbacks and some easements that are close to the structures. Um so those are just some standard comments that we really they're not really standard comments, but there's comments specific to this that it really are not things that they can really address um other than in the field as they're developing. Um um comment number eight would still need to remain. We asked them to show the crosswalk across Mlo College Boulevard uh from Genie Lane to the entrance to Milo State Community College in the rightway. They're showing the crosswalk across Genie Lane from this site but not across Milo College Boulevard at Genie Lane. And so asked them to show that and then to label the width of all the easements. Um they may have done that. I didn't have a chance. There's a lot of easements on this property. I wasn't able to verify all those. So, I want to keep that one just in case there's anything left on that. So, but with those remaining comments, staff would recommend approval.

Questions for Kevin on this? Um, were there sidewalks on MLO? Yes, there sidewalks on M low and you need precine lane are already built but and then Mlo College Boulevard obviously the internal sidewalks that would connect to those but we just wanted to get those a crosswalk across to that the uh parking lot area at model across the street there. Other questions or comments? Five through 16 have basically no backyard. They can't put the backyard is all easement. Yeah. Yeah. Wow. It's all drainage ement.

This was originally zoned R six. Correct. It was R six and got the PRD zoning for the town home and apartment mix. Originally, if part of the reason the original PRD came in is because they were going to build some single family in there as well. that developer walked away and these and these he came back and amended it to to do all town homes and apartments. And as I recall, we went down in density. Correct. Uh in what we would normally see under what an R six would be an R six. That's correct. Okay. Yeah. This is another one that's probably been R six for decades. Yeah. Long before we were here.

So they'll be okay though. On note six, the AC units have to be in the back. Those will be okay with the AC units in that easement space. Um, yeah, we'll have to look at that. I think that because they back up to Genie Lane, too, where there's going to be a possibility fences or anything like that. That might be something we have to look at for that building specifically um when they come in for building permits. Typically, they'll be behind there. There'll be the fences behind it, that sort of thing. But that that may be difficult on on that building because of the easement.

Is there a note we can add uh to staff comments concerning this? Yeah. Will we amend comment seven to uh AC units on those unit on for those buildings for those? It's 5 through 16. Yeah. Mhm. cannot be located in Can't cannot be in the easement. In the ement. Yeah. You go with that, Ken? Yeah. It's going to be tough, but it's going to be tough. Yeah. Yeah. I don't know what they'll do with their problem.

And the driveways are already at the limit. This one was approved for probably prior to our I I think I can't recall I think it was approved prior to the for there are double if we could push the house forward towards the road just a touch make that a lot easier for everybody. It might be a possibility. We had to have at least 20 ft or 19 ft rather um from that private roadway to get the in double width to get the at least two spaces in the front. Um we can take a look at that.

Yeah. I mean obviously if they did have to move it forward, they still got to be able to get firet trucks down through there and all that. So, right. Are they asking for anything that was not in the original approval? No. And they've got some off-site parking in here as well. Yeah, there's there's some Yeah, there's some guest parking and that sort of thing scattered around. I say offsite, I meant guest parking, right? Not not in not not in the driveway parking. Yeah.

Yeah. I remember when this came through the first time um for the second amendment I guess or the first amendment when it went from single family to this you know first we we didn't really want all apartments obviously we didn't want that and we really liked the single family but when that fell out we kind of felt like you know this is the next best we don't want apartments

and so ideally we would have liked less density but this was better than the alternative It's a good point because I don't I had a conversation with somebody today about this very thing and um understanding zoning rights was the topic and when people own land or own a property that is zoned for an appropriate product this body nor does the town anybody have the ability to tell them they can't do that product there it came up about the Kroger site we'll talk about that one a little bit too but uh Uh I hope the public understands there's some times that we look at things like this and we go we'd much rather have a different product but that uh the owner of that property has the zoning to do this product and we cannot stop that. So all we can do is make sure it's a good product. That's all we can do.

Anything else? If not, I will entertain a motion.

Anybody? Motion to approve with staff comments. I have a motion to approve with staff comments. Do a second. I'll second. Motion and a second. Further discussion. Dang it. Thanks. All those in favor of approving this motion, please signify by saying I.

Opposed. This motion is approved. We're now on to site plans. Our first one is Amalable Fraza phase two, Amalable Road, owner developer, Unico TN LLC. Amable series. This is a property that recently got reszoned to uh from PC to C2 to allow this use of a uh general retail restaurant space building. It is located off of Almville Road behind a car wash facility. The proposed development would be 8,700 square ft for six potential tenants. Maximum 1500 square ft of this total building may be used as restaurant space due to the limited parking that is shown on site. There is an existing drive providing access from this site uh from Alenville Road with no direct access ontoville road. Vehicular use area on the site.35 of an acre which does require 15551 square feet of landscaping. The applicant is showing for 2,000 square feet. Parking requirement of 44 spaces which they are showing for and that does require two ADA spaces which are being shown. The landscape plan shows trees within landscape islands and foundation planting shrubs along the front and south side of the building. Additional landscaping is shown around the dumpster enclosure area as well. The uh landscape plans were revised since packets went out last week. Architectural elevations show the building to be finished with brick, glass glazing, and ephus of ephus cornis rather. Three colors of brick are proposed to be utilized to provide a variation in the design. And primary materials of brick and glass glazing make up at least 75% of all four wall elevations, which does meet design review as presented. Standard comments 1 through 7 all remain. Staff comment one, the maximum of 1500 foot of restaurant space is allowed for this entire building. More so left for

information or anything else. Count number two, if one if more than one restaurant is planned, an additional grease traps will be required to be installed. Count number three, we asked them to label the size of the existing water manes, the upland noted that those will be provided before the building permit is applied for. So counts one through three will remain. Comment number four, we asked them to add some additional landscaping to meet desire view, which they have done. So comment four can be removed and number five we ask them to show the drive aisle width which they have done as well. It can be removed. Uh staff comments one through three remain and with that staff order plan approval. questions uh to Mitch or any comments. Sounds like we may be ready. So, if anyone uh would like to make a motion.

I'll make a motion to approve with staff comments. Have a motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Second. Motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of approving this motion, please signify by saying I.

Opposed? This motion is approved. Next we have Brew Yall20 Sam Ridley Parkway West owner developer Ecuador Property Company. This is a coffee drive primarily drive-through coffee facility uh located within SWS Landing development on lot 6. The building is proposed to be just under 1,000 square ft at 950. Two drive-through lanes are shown with the ability to accommodate approximately 29 vehicles if fully stacked up. There is one bypass lane shown as well in the currently operating location which there's only one operating location of this uh brand. There are approximately about 12 to 14 vehicles what they know at that facility that stack up on average at any point in time. So uh the 29 should hopefully be adequate enough to accommodate for that stacking. This would be company's second location with the primary location in Mobile, Alabama. square footage of vehicular use area 6 of an acre is proposed and that would require 2,614 square feet of landscaping. They're showing for 5,827 ft. Park required is 10 spaces. They're showing for 14 and that would require one handcap space and they're showing for two. Landscape plan shows a variety of trees and shberry proposed to be planted along the eastern and western property lines adjacent to the neighboring developments. Trees are also shown along the access drive on the south side of the property and pilot place in the north. Trees are shown within the pilot place rideway previously and they have been removed out of that rideway. So last part of that comment can be removed. Architectural elevations show the building to be finished with brick glass glazing and awnings finished with metal. As shown, all four wall faces do meet designer review with nearly 100% primary material finishes on all those elevations.

Standard comments one through seven all remain. Staffcon one was a utilities comment has been addressed. Number two, there was landscaping previously shown within the right ofway and that can be removed as well as they have relocated that landscaping. Number three, we wanted a a something showing the stacking of those vehicles. See how far back and how many vehicles we can get. Uh they have submitted at this time. Uh so that can be removed as well. There was an extra comment in relocating the trees. Uh staff did want to make sure that vision triangles are kept clear for any motorists leaving the site. So we just ask that vision triangles are provided as part of the next uh permit set for civil and just make sure that there are clear vision areas left for all motorists and pedestrians and everyone alike. So uh with that one extra staff comment, all the other staff comments been addressed and staff would recommend approval. questions or comments concerning um

so you're comfortable with stacking? I I have to admit I don't understand this business model, but the one that we approved by the Home Depot, they are busy all the time with with two rows of incoming and just incredible. So they've got the two stacking lanes and if if it were to back up any further, it's going on to the shared access road, not backing up onto the main public rideway area. So that gives us a little bit more sense of

Yeah, I think I think this one is maybe even better from that perspective as far as the stacking goes. And I have noticed the one that you're referring to, uh, although they are and do stay busy, you know, that very first week or two, they had a lot of promotions going on and that led to a lot of additional stacking there. So I from that perspective, I I think this is even better. Yeah, I'm seeing it, too. The competitors uh around town all have busy lines of coffee traffic. blows me away because I don't do any of that especially the holiday. Yeah. Is this a ride out only? I believe

from the north or south side leaving the site. Is that a ride out only? Yeah. On which there's two exit points. Yeah. You mean the Sam Ridley side? Yeah. I'm sorry. From the south side. Yeah. The south. Yes. Go next door to the other restaurant. Which is it going in there now? City barbecue. City barbecue. That's the one that's already almost Yeah, it's under construction. Other questions or comments? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve the staff comments. Motion to approve the staff comments from Ken. Do I have a second?

Second. Coffee drinkers. I thought I thought it was a brewery at first. So, I'm a little disappointed. You thought it was a brew, y'all. Well, that explains that cooler under your desk. I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of approving this motion, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed? This motion is approved. We're next on to Kroger Shops, Bulldog Drive. Owner, developer, S E K, Smyrna LLC. This is a out building in the parking lot area, if you will, of the Kroger Shopping Center that was previously approved uh back in April of last year. The proposed building is 10,000 square ft with approximately six tenants that could be located inside this facility. square footage of vehicular use area is overall for the entire site we're looking at 8.33 acres. Uh that would require83 acre for landscape and they're showing for just under an acre meeting the requirement. Parking for the overall space is 529 space required and they're showing for 563. If we look at this site only it would require 40 spaces and they're showing for 46 allocated just to this building. Handicap parking is 11 spaces required now showing for 23 spread throughout. Landscape plan shows landscaping similar to the approved uh Kroger site plan. Foundation plantings are shown on the east and west side of the building along the along with trees and shrubbery shown within landscape islands. Architectural elevations show the building to be finished with a mixture of brick, stone, glass glazing, fiberment board accent metal used as a cornice cap. All four elevations have at least 75% primary materials meeting the design review. Um there there is a staff comment here asking to clarify the limestone which would be the stone material that is in reference here. If we do count that as overall explain that a little bit here more later. Uh that doesn't mean design review. If you remove this limestone which is more of a glued-on type material uh it would be low it would be below the requirement uh design review requirements. So just keep that in mind when we get down to the staff comment. Help explain that a little bit later. Uh standard comments

one through five would all our main and staff comment one. We are on the clarification of this cast brick and the limestone veneer. We asked if they were stone products or if they were faux which would be glued onto a concrete wall. Uh it is more of a product that would be provide more of the accent finish that we're looking for more than the actual material itself. So, uh, staff's concerns in this was more so that the product fades over time, whether it falls off, how it gets replaced, etc., if that were to happen. So, we were going to leave that up to the commission to decide whether they see the product they're they're proposing tonight fit or whether you'd like to see the actual product of stone being used on this building. So, that is staff comment number one. Comment number two, we asked if they could relocate the handicap parking stalls closer to the middle of the building. as they are shown, they're more so towards the one side of the building than the other side. So, if you have someone that needed to use the ADA parking stalls, they'd have to go across the entire front of the building to get to the other end of the building, we staff asked if they could be located more centrally so they can have easier access. Um, the applicant provided more of a reason of it was optimal in the situ in the location shown. Um, at the end of the day, they are still showing the handicap stalls. So, I'm not sure what much more beyond that we can ask of them at this point in time. Come number three, uh, we asked to show visibility triangles at the south end of the drive aisle behind the building. Staff did have some concerns about the traffic safety at the intersection. You should have in front of you a uh, traffic vision triangle that they did produce here. So, with what they have shown where the stop bars are located, uh, staff is now fine with what is being proposed. So, comment number three can be removed. And then com number four, we asked to relocate the dumpsters and dumpster enclosures to the north end of the roadway and closer to the building. Where they are shown is closer to lot

six where that is shown more so in that lot ac across the drive aisle. I don't know if you can show the cursor exactly where it's at. So the dumpsters are shown back in that corner. Do we have that? We don't have it blown up.

Blown up. Um there are more shows sewn across the drive aisle. So whoever employees would have to cross the drive aisle to get to the dumpster to throw away trash or whatever it is. So we asked that it be relocated back to the same side of the drive aisle as the building is. Uh the applicant's response to that was due to the angle of the dumpster enclosure. It wasn't feasible the way the site's designed and there's a island behind the building. the island isn't wide enough per the applicant to accommodate for a dumpster enclosure set an angle and that was the response that staff received to that. So, um we're still not particularly a fan of the way that they are shown and the way it's being proposed here tonight. So, with those comments one, two, and four, uh staff would recommend approval. So Mitch, um, they meet all four elevations have 75% primary materials, but then you have the question about the cast brick. Is that with or without that?

With with the material that they have proposed, it doesn't meet design review as it provides that finish appearance that but if that fell off, didn't stay on, wasn't replaced properly, then they would fall below design review. If you remove it as a primary material, only the rear would meet designer view at that time. Wait, let me get my head around this. So, is cast brick or LG format modern limestone veneer do those materials or does that or product does that meet design review?

It gives the finished appearance of it's the it's material that sticks more so to the building itself. It's not technically a standard stone or standalone brick and material you use in construction. It's a faux stand alone essentially. It would have to be connected to the hard structure of the building to stand at all. Correct. Okay. Sort of a foe. Yeah. It's like a faux stone kind of veneer type look. How's this? How's this? Is it just hardier than ephus? Because isn't that pretty much what ephus is? It's That's what I was saying.

It's a harder harder material than it's to put on with a mortar. So, it'll if it pops off, it's been hit pretty hard. But the term cast brick, the only time I've ever seen that is on concrete tiltups where they pour in the form. It looks like brick, but it's part of the concrete. But this building would be you wouldn't want to do this building in a cast in a I mean a tiltup. It's too small for that. I'd like to see what it is. And to your point about the drive aisle, I don't disagree with that at all. I mean, you don't want people crossing a drive aisle from a business to cross over and go to another dumpster. I'd like to see it encompassed with the building. Yeah, I was kind of also I was thinking about the handicap stalls and although I think it would be better to be re relocating them closer to the middle of the building, if they're not efficient or they don't work, it's going to hurt the business more than it's going to hurt anything. So,

just looking at it initially, I believe they probably can be relocated. Um, that's just my looking at the plans, interpreting it. Um, whether it actually came or not, they were they were trying to avoid the doors coming out of the individual spaces. I think

um there's a landscape island. If they move that, they could probably make it work. But you do have a here's handicap parking with with handicap access ADA compliant access to the entire building. It's not not there's not an issue there. I I guess currently in our definition of primary materials that meet designer review, we don't have cast brick or limestone veneer as an option, right? That's brick or stone.

Yeah. So, in my opinion, that's not an approved item for that. Um, back to consistency. Yeah. If we wanted if we wanted to consider this and make an make a change, then that's a whole another process. But essentially it's it's not meeting design review with that. I mean cast brick if Ken if your description is is accurate that almost sounds like a almost what you would see in a way of a stamped concrete or something like that. That's I was thinking about my they do on tilt up.

I was thinking about my pool deck. I was like it's basically stamped concrete. Looks like brick. That's not brick. That's the term I've cast brick when I've seen it in that type of construction. If there's a new product out there, they're calling cast brick. Haven't seen that. Sounds like it's pretty durable. Maybe. Yeah. You know, but uh I guess time will tell, right? It's Well, we had a conversation earlier about consistency on design review to the chairman's point. And so, for those reasons, I think we have to kind of stick to our guns on that. But

there's several um builders that are try getting creative with what they can do with concrete at this point just because there's so many options. And to Steve's point, it may be something we got to look at going forward. That may be new material that we do find acceptable at some point. We need to know more about it. Yeah. As long as it's solid, sturdy, but right now we don't cover that. Right.

We just have to go through the BCA to get it on or is that a change or Yeah. Well, what I what I was going to suggest is, you know, potentially we could we could move this forward that it has to meet design review and if they wanted to bring an example of cast brick and to us and asked us to consider adding it as a primary material, we would have changed anything here if we added it as a primary material. If we're going to add Yeah. If we're going to but that way we can consider that. Y

but they still they've got to meet design review whatever it is. And if they want us to add a product or material, I mean, I I'd be open to listening and seeing it, maybe making a change. But at this point, I don't really know what it is. And it doesn't meet our design review. So until it this has to meet design review. And if we change design review, it has to go through council, doesn't it? So there's about a two and a half month process. Absolutely. To get that done. Yeah. But there's a path forward. There's an option, right? I'm not I I'm not saying we couldn't do this cuz I don't really understand it, right? I mean, I understand what you're saying, but I don't really know if it's durable enough. Good feeling about what it is. But the other

we're not we're not trying to kill it at all. We just know we're trying to be consistent. So, the other approved structures that are already in permit and that are going under construction, those are brick and most of brick, right? Brick and stone. Yeah, brick and stone. Yeah, this material was not on those those we got to look at. I think, you know, based on the way it sounds, it's probably hardy enough. I think the issue is is how does it hold up from a attachment attachment standpoint because I think that was our biggest issue even with Ephas, right? Was Ephas looked great at first and looked fine for a while, but once it got dirty, once it got a hole, once it started busting, it it didn't hold up well. Plus, it so that's going to be part of the conversation.

Red H has an allergic reaction to Ephus. It's got to stand up pressure washer. do it. I mean, we couldn't get him right after he said it. I hope he's watching. If he is, our phone's fixing to blow up.

Well, if you're that I think that takes care of that issue. We had to The other issue we had was the concern of the dumpster locations and all that. So, all right. Yeah, I think your your comment covers that though, right? Yeah. Yeah. So, unless there's opposition, I'll make a motion that we approve the staff comments. I assume number one just gets crossed out because we've answered it, right? We probably just amend it to say reflect it is required to meet building is required to meet design review requirements and they can come back to tell us what they're going to do and I'll give you a second on that motion.

Okay. So with the motion Okay. So I have a motion in a second. So now it's further discussion. So with that, what we're what we're saying is that this building must meet design review and it must meet the approved materials that are in place uh that we have in place today, which would include brick and stone, not a faux or a cast type product. Is that correct? Correct. All right. All right. So we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of approving this motion, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed.

This motion is approved. Okay. Uh we're now on to Medical Park Plaza. Medical Park owner developer JK Properties, a Tennessee general partnership. This is a site plan for lot four of the commercial subdivision on Medical Park. The This is the second to last undeveloped L parcel in this subdivision. It's proposed for 8100 ft² multi-attendant commercial building. Access to the site is shown via a single access point off medical park and two access points from the parcel to the north. Maximum of 3,000 square ft may be utilized for a restaurant due to the parking shown on site. Similar to the uh one of the previous site plans we reviewed. Square footage of vehicle use area 6 of an acre. That does require 2,622 feet of landscaping. applicant is showing for 3,750 square feet. Park required of 51 spaces are showing for 56 and the handicap requirement of three ADA spaces which they are showing all three as plans have been revised. The landscape plan shows a type-C landscape buffer comprising of two rows of offset evergreen trees supplemented with shrubbery planted along the southwestern property line budding the R1 zone property. Trees are shown within landscape islands with shrubbery at the base of the building. Architectural elevations show the building to be finished with brick stone, glass glazing, and stucco. The elevation on the front shows the mixture of all materials with a secondary material of stucco making up 23% of the facade remaining 77% of primary material mixture. All the elevations other than the front are finished with entirely primary materials which does meet design requirements. Standard comments 1 through seven all remain at this time. Staff comment number one was a utilities comment which they have indicated they will show upon getting a building permit. So that count

will remain. Number two, they were deficient in the number of ADA park ADA parking spaces that were shown on site based on the required number of parking spaces that they had provided but that has been addressed at this time. So that could be removed. And then count number three, they are showing trees along medical park uh which would be required as part of design review. Uh however, due the presence of underground gas line in that area, we don't want to mix landscaping with underground utilities. So we just ask that they substitute the trees that are shown with some kind of a shrubbery material which doesn't interfere with the underground gas line in that area. So revising comment number three to indicate that as such and staff would recommend approval with staff comment one and three and then all the standard comments.

Okay, questions uh for Mitch on this little confused about the sidewalks. Um they don't really have a sidewalk going into the across the front. Yeah, but to get but to get into the development there doesn't seem to be Yeah. You got this here. Yeah. Okay.

The streets right here. They show on their detail pages uh A2-2 lower left hand corner cut stone. So that's a stone that's veneered onto the surface the same way we're talking about some of the others. I'm just for my own knowledge, this is approved, right? That's how we interpreted it. Okay. Yeah, cuz it's a mortar base that holds it on. It's created to the structure stone. Yeah. That's kind of how brick is too though, right? It's mortared together. Well, it's mortar stacked where this is I understand it's mortar attached back.

Yeah. Still essentially mortar held out. But this looks like it's a dry stack setup from a up and down. It's the adhesion is under the backside, but it's been do with been building that way for years. So, it's still a stone product. Yeah. Okay. Mostly they show another coffee shop. Maybe you're missing a business opportunity. Any other questions besides anything to do with coffee?

Move to approve staff comments. Have a motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Second. Motion and a second. Further discussion. All those in favor of approving this motion, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed? This motion is approved. Okay. Next, we're on to zording zoning ordinance amendments. First under this is climate controlled self storage facilities.

I got you on these. So, several of these ordinance amendments have came as a result of our joint quarterly planning commission council meetings. So, that is what is being brought to you here tonight. The uh rendering for what is going to proposed to be going in the ordinance should it be approved. So one of the items of discussion was the climate controlled self- storage facilities being brought into commercial districts due to the nature of the product that's being produced is more of a commercial appearance more strictly industrial. So throughout the discussions uh we have made the proposed amendments to include them as a special exception within the C2 and C5 districts. Uh so it still help require BCA review on that before anything happens on it and before it's brought to you and as part of the special exception uh we've also added within article 7 the special conditions that we have discussed as part of the meetings and parking requirements for those as well which is different from a standard self-s storage facility as well. still would require BZA reviewed. Yeah,

I appreciate you bringing this forward. I guess the question I've got is the the unit we just recently approved down Lowry, would would it have been approved under these? Do you know? I'm not sure. Oh, can't remember what the that lot size that was the only thing I was thinking about. May not have been 2 acres and I don't know about the individual storage unit size on there on that aesthetics and uh yeah, that would have

a lot of that we got from from our overlay. Um, and then some of this is not from our overlay with things that Mitch when he was doing his research and other communities and some of those things. So, like the the distance from the major intersections and things of that nature. Yeah, I reason I asked that question was I think that was a very nice looking product. it came forward and um was a lot of discussion but it really was a good-looking solution and if there was a variance from what we're proving here you know what was the difference and I think you're probably right it's probably lot size and maybe a few spot a few I don't think they had any much larger than 600 but they might have yeah and because

I'm not sure we got into that much of a discussion we didn't talk about not in the meeting I met with it was Rob Mulchin with SEC that did that and I met with him individually a couple of times and Um, that's the reason kind of asking just to see if see if we were going further than, you know, what we had already approved or if we were kind of right in line with that. Well, I think by recollection of the discussion, I think the two acres part of this was to limit we didn't want to allow them everywhere. You know, we don't want them popping up all over the place. And so um the lot size as well as the the other requirements was to try to limit that but they wouldn't be on every intersection you know.

Well that particular parcel had some issues some uh challenges I guess the best way to say to get anything on that site that would have made much sense. We'd looked at town homes there at one time and glad to say that this product came in place of it because you know it's a good looking building and even though the summary at the top says alone by C in C2 zone by special exception it's really C2 and C5 right yeah I'll trade I'll trade C5 for car lots for storage units all day long climate controlled climate control. Absolutely.

What if the car lot's climate controlled? I don't think we have anything else. You could argue. Um, okay. So, yeah, with this um the commission has a decision on whether or not to make a recommendation, positive recommendation to council on this um ordinance amendment. Correct. Correct. Okay. Any other discussions or questions on this? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Um, is there a motion to make a positive recommendation? Okay. Do I have a second? Second. Motion and a second.

All those in favor of making a positive recommendation to council concerning climate control self- storage facilities, please signify by saying I.

Oppose. This recommendation and motion is approved. Next, we're on to solid waste services. This is something that we hadn't discussed at the any of the joint meetings, more of a staff level brought to you. The we did have an instance where we had a business pop up without getting permits and shouldn't have been in the location that they decided to operate in. So, uh, in further looking at this, we also had an instance that came to BCA and looking at this more similar style businesses popping up. We felt like it'd be a good idea to have these appropriately located in within an industrial airport style zoning district. So, in doing this, uh, we've clarified what a solid waste service business is, whether it be the roll-off dumpsters or any other kind of trash hauling facility. Um, and it's disposed off site. None of this is brought back to the property. And we're containing these to within all the industrial districts and within the airport as well. That's still along the lines of industrial style activities going out there. So we've defined the solid waste services as part of this and then clarified the use listing of what it falls under more so the warehouse good transport type of services which is allowed within those industrial airport districts. I actually contacted Kevin about this. Um,

excuse me. We've had two instances of of folks in the town trying to open a rolloff dumpster business essentially. One of them was in a residential area that he wanted to use additional lot that he had and the other one was in a a C2 area. And when I approached Kevin about it, we kind of asked, you know, where does this belong? And we found out we really didn't account for it anywhere. Um, so that's why this came forward. Well, that's a good catch. Yeah, because I know the one you're talking about and it was right right off of the gateway. Yeah. And and just for clarification, just so everyone understands, this is not a landfill. This is

landfills. We do have landfills. That is that is one thing that is covered under our ordinance and it's in the heavy industrial only and and and other all kinds of other requirements. This is not this should not be where any trash would actually be stored. This is just for a company that has a they have trucks and they pick up trash, that sort of thing or the rolloff dumpsters, things of that nature for their to work out of is all this would be. Okay. It's not storage of any trash. It's the equipment they would use to all the trash. Correct. Okay. It's listed with is perfect. All right, good discussion. Uh, do I have a motion?

So moved. Staff comment. I have a motion to uh recommend approval of of this zoning ordinance amendment from Mark. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. Sita second. Further discussion. All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I. Opposed. This recommendation to council is approved. Uh, next tempor temporary outdoor sales of food or retail merchandise.

This is more so of a alignment with the uh municipal code with the zoning ordinance. So there's no confusion back and forth of who takes precedence, what's actually correct, what's not. So brings along the lines of the vendors that are set up are concerned transient vendors. Spells it out clearly. They're required to obtain permits. On top of that, the property owner is also required to obtain a permit and they are also held liable for any other activities that the transient vendor conducts on their property that is not per ordinance requirements. So, what this does is it takes out some information that is not applicable or outdated and further clarifies the owner permit that is required as well as the transient vendor permit required for the actual person who is conducting those sales on the property. Um and then further details the requirements of the I said the vendor requiring to get their permit as well as the property owner and that that permit shall be displayed prominently. So anyone from PD or codes enforcement show up clearly able to see it displayed whether they have a permit or not.

How does this work with um Girl Scouts in front of uh Kroger or Walmart or something like that? Nonprofits are exempt. They're they're exempt. How about squatters who set up tents and stay there all summer long? This would clarify it for them. So, they'd be Is there a time frame?

The transit vendors have 14 days per permit. I don't believe there's a limit on the number you can obtain, but uh the way we've got it set up here is more so for clear enforcement ability with this for the actual property owner. property owner's permit is going to be valid for the entire year until December 31st. No matter what day you get it, it's only valid until the end of the year. So, we don't have to keep track of when they receive their permit, which is pretty clear and obvious. The vendors themselves, their process is not changing what they've always had. just clarifies it more so so everyone's on the same page that they're considered transit vendors and they're still are supposed to meet the other requirements such as leave at the end of the day and those kind of things

not happen. Yeah. Well, they're leaving. They're just zipping up the tent. How would you handle transition? Would you give a 60-day compliance period or for say say there's a food kiosk on a gas station, the owner needs to come in compliance. The vendor needs to come in compliance. Would you typically give a a 60-day uh compliance period or the ordinance is active immediately? Correct. Once that goes in. Yeah. I would assume

they've gotten the permit. They know the rules, right? So I I would assume they would be they would get the normal process where they certainly given a certain number of days and right we would certainly anybody who's active we would let them know this has changed and now you have to get a permit and give them time to do so. Um but if it's not obviously at at some point if they don't do that then we'll we'll go through the court typical process for citation go to city court and all those things. So, the common sense transition approach. Yes.

Yeah. I don't I don't think there's any codes enforcement. I may be wrong, but I don't think there's any that we immediately jump to fine or uh we always give a warning, even if it may only be a week. We get they always get some time to come into compliance, right? So, we we don't ever just go straight to violation. Correct. Unless it's a repeat offender. That's Well, but then they've already had a warning, right? cuz I already had the warning and they just keep kind of defying us. Certainly, we do that. Then,

um I do have one question just just to clarify and this is probably more personal than it should be. Um where it says any temporary outdoor sales of food or retail merchandise located on property owned or leased by the town of Smyrna are exempt from these requirements. Would that include like the summer festivals, fall festivals, i.e. depot days, simply Smyrna? Correct. Yeah, any of those. Yeah, we're not going to require those vendors. That's a separate process. We're not going to That was the specific intent. Okay. Just making sure I know any bad news. Lots of questions about that. Sim is still good. Well, not only that, but although the um the food trucks that would be there still have to have permitting.

Yeah. So, the food trucks fall under the same thing. If they are set up in a town event, town sanctioned in the parks are approved on that vendor list. They don't have to get permits through user. Same situation. Yeah. They're ask it's actually different if it's a Barbie man. Oh, okay. Wonderful. Thank you. All right. I'm going to come back to the Girl Scouts one more time. You wear a bunch of cookies over here. Yes. And I'm worried about the the PR. We like tag along like we got a patty wagon out front with a bunch of Girl Scouts and how about portable car? I can't unsee that.

Okay. So, it says here, "In addition, temporary outdoor sales are allowed in any zone when a company or nonprofit entity has a privated event with no sales to the general public." Where's my give back? However, where is is there a give back here? With no sales to the general public, I don't I don't think that language is intended for Girl Scout sales at Walmart. That's more intended for like the hospital having an event in the parking lot. But it says why having an event. So this is the zoning and well there will have to be a companion on the municipal code as well that that deals with this as well um for the permits.

Yeah. I don't think we require nonprofits to get the transit vendor permit under the municipal code. So I think it's spelled out. So that's where that's the give back in that companion or complimentary whatever ordinance. Yes. Okay. All right. I just want to make sure I do not want to be the person to vote for this if that's we're going to lock up a bunch of our scouts nonprofit or any other nonprofit. All right, other questions or comments? I'll take a motion on a recommendation here.

Motion to recommend for approval. Have a motion to recommend approval of this ordinance amendment from Steve. Second. And a second. Further discussion. All in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I. Opposed. All right. Will I send a positive recommendation to council with this approval? All Girl Scouts call Tim. No, they're going to be calling you. I'll be actually I'll be calling you if I don't get my cookies. I think we can expose your address and then they'll be knocking on your door with a cookie sale. Okay. Yard sales.

Yes. So, this is more so for clarification since we didn't have a definition in the zoning ordinance or regulations on yard sales. We receive questions on them annually and we've had some issues with people more so operating them as a business rather than your traditional yard sale you'd have once a quarter, once every other year, what have you. So, this clearly defines what a yard sale is within the zoning ordinance as well as the provisions that apply to those. So, they're going to be loaded to four events per residential address per year. So, you know, codes enforcement out driving. You see, same person set up multiple weekends in a row. You know, something's going on. So, that will is how that's going to be addressed. The yard sales may not be exceeding three consecutive days or two consecutive weekends. And if there's an event where joint sales are being conducted between multiple homeowners, that joint sale for everyone that's participating in that event will count as one for each of their addresses that are participating. So more so just creating this definition and specifying what a yard sale is.

Sales with addresses is a little hard to keep up with. that say the ones we have the issues with will clarify and simplify it but yes it's put something in definition for what they are they can take turns yeah I think keep in mind that anytime we do something like this there's a specific reason reason behind it there's there's there's a violator or violations that we're trying to resolve so um not trying to stop people from having yard sales or any of that. There's specific issues we're trying to fix

in doing the research too. These are pretty standard regulations across the board for multiple jurisdictions. So, we felt safe with this is part of the discussion we've had at joint meetings as well.

Point out to we're not requiring people to get a permit to have a yard sale or anything like that just in case that is a concern. Uh we don't want to do that. We also don't want to have to administer that. So, um, so this this this is just basically saying you can do it four times a year. Most people don't do that many anyway. So, it shouldn't be an issue for for anybody other than the concerns we have with the the violators that are not really having yard sales or running businesses out of their home and calling them yard sales. These days with Facebook Marketplace, I think yard sales are less and less anyway. People are selling stuff all year long. Some people some people just like putting it on the table and waiting for that quarter. That's true. They like to negotiate.

Yes, they do. Yeah. Just for those that like to be creative and would like to do it more. Should the definitions also include garage sales or estate sales? Cuz I could see somebody really want to do it. It does. It does. It's in the definition. Yeah. Garage tag sales. Ro sales. Okay. Never mind. Moving. I retract that. Good job. All right. Do I have a motion concerning this uh zoning ordinance? Make a move that we recommend it to the council for approval. Have a motion for recommendation of approval of the council. Do I have a second? Second.

Motion and a second. Further discussion. All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I. I oppose. This recommendation and motion is approved. We are now on to am I saying January bond review report? That's correct. Wow. All right.

All right. Um so first one is uh point subdivision. This is the commercial development along of Sam Ridley there. Um this is the end of their maintenance period. They did respond. They would try to get uh the last few items knocked out. They only had about five kind of minor things really to get finished. So hopefully they'll be able to do that. Uh if they get that done by January 27th, we can release otherwise extend three months. Uh Pencil Place Town Homes, this one is this is the first year we've had this one. Um they are and have been making progress. Um but they are not finished yet and they're still building u in those in that development. So, uh would recommend a one-year extension on that one because we've that's again we've only had that one year. A WT over 2A. Uh again, end of the maintenance period here. We can release if they have everything finished by February 10th. Otherwise, extend 3 months. They're hoping to get those this finished up here in January and and they are working toward release. Uh Blakey section one phase one. Did not hear from the developer on this one, but again, this is an end of the maintenance period. Uh if they get everything done by the 13th, we can release. Otherwise, extend three months. Hidden Hill section 6 phase one. Um excuse me. We would recommend a six-month extension on this one. Uh there are there's an adjacent development that's underway and and they are um he's worried about the topping getting destroyed because they're coming through his section to get to the new development. And so we understand that. would recommend a six-month extension uh on that one. And that is the report.

Okay. Any questions concerning the bond review report? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve the bond review. Motion to approve the bond review report. Do I have a second? Second. Motion and a second. Further discussion. All those in favor of approving the January bond review report, please signify by saying I. Opposed. The bond review report is uh approved. Staff comments and other business.

A couple things. Just one to remind everybody of the joint meeting with the council on the 29th of January. That's 3 weeks from today. Uh it's our quarterly meeting there. It's at 3:00 here in town hall. Um and then we will be getting the information to you all ahead of time certainly on that what we're going to be talking about week or so ahead. Um, and then the other, uh, thing, um, just to remind everyone, we talked about this last month, just remind everyone again, uh, we need your ethics commission statement of interest forms. Uh, you can do that online. If you do do that online, please send Katherine that information so she can have that record of that. Um, if you do not want to do it online, you can do it in in paper form. If you do that, please get that to Katherine no later than next Friday, the 16th, because we do have to have it via snail mail to the state no later than the 30th of January. So, that gives us a couple weeks to get it there. So, we've got I think four of you. We have We need three of you.

I was going to ask, can you just tell us who you need cuz I don't know if I've done it or not. Okay. I believe it's you, Mr. Scur, Mr. Hill. Okay. Yeah, we got Miss Haley at tonight. So, all right. There's another topic we need to discuss. Charles. Yes, sir. I learned today that uh this would probably Is this your last uh planning commission meeting? Yes, sir. It is. Understand you're retiring. Yes. Congratulations on that.

Thank you. Appreciate it. And I got to tell you from my perspective, you've brought a lot of knowledge, um, expertise, um, consistency, uh, to planning and and with the roads. And from the day you got on, I felt like you we were always in great hands with you. And I think the thing that I admire the most is the grace uh that I've seen from uh from from you when you've been under fire because everybody's a road expert,

but they don't come anywhere near close to the knowledge and the expertise and the value that you've brought to the town of Smyrna. For for that, I just want to say how much I appreciate all you've done for the town. Well, thank you very much. Uh is that it? No, no, I got another thing. Yeah, go ahead. There's a gentleman sitting on the back row back there. You see him in the blue shirt? You know who that is? He's here for the birthday boy today. Kevin Riggsby's birthday. I've met his father back there on the back row and he is a wonderful gentleman. So, I just want to point him out and thank him for coming to our meeting tonight. Happy birthday, Kevin. Thank you. Happy birthday, Kevin. Would you like us to sing now?

No, thank you. You heard him sing. Steve said he would do an interpretive dance. Interpreted dance. That I won't say. We're gonna have to go off air for that. All right. With that, we stand a journey. Sher Elvis is