Municipal Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, John, you ready? Maryannne, you ready? really. Okay.

Okay. We're going to get started here. It's 502. Uh we'll call this uh Monday, October 27th, Gallatton Municipal Planning Commission meeting to order. Uh to start, Albert, do you mind saying the invocation? Okay. Gracious, wise, and merciful father, we come before your presence with bow heads, humble hearts. As we come together again to conduct the business of the city, we ask you to watch over this meeting. We thank you for watching our community. As we stand bow here, oh master, we're praying for those people in Humphre counties and other areas who have lost loved ones. Please keep them lifted up in a mighty way. We continue to watch over us. Master, we do the things that you find pleasing in your sight. We ask it all in your son's name Christ. Amen.

Amen. John, you mind doing the pledge? Sure. Join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Maryann, do we have roll call? Sir, chair Harris. Vice Chair Morell here. Mr. Per here. Mayor Brown present. Councilman Fan here. Mr. Strower here. Mr. Thompson here. You have a quarum.

Thank you. Uh [clears throat] secretary, do we have meeting uh minutes uh for approval? Uh yes, we have minutes dated September 8th, 2025, planning commission work session meeting and uh September 29th uh regular agenda meetings. And I move that we approve these without any changes. Okay, we have a motion. We have a second by uh Councilman Fan. Any discussion on minutes? Okay, seeing none. Uh all those in favor of approval of the minutes say I. I. All those opposed?

Okay. Minutes are approved. Uh next we will move to the public comment on agenda related items. Uh please note that there uh may be a few items in the regular agenda that may have uh public comment. Um but this is an opportunity to comment on agenda related items that do not have public comment. Uh so at this time I will open a public comment on agenda related items. And uh when you come forward, please state your name and address, please. Address. Yes, sir.

Uh my name is Joel Stampley. I'm an attorney at Belure Sykes Harrington in Brentwood. Uh 327 Springs Way, Sweet 110 Brentwood, Tennessee 37027. Uh represent um Michelle and Pas Pascal. uh they are the neighboring owners of the Kensington down uh item which is item I believe number 10 on the agenda and we just wanted to address some few concerns. I understand that the final master development plan is pending today uh and is item number 10 uh phase five. Uh back uh I'll be brief back in this time last year uh my client reached out to us and raised some concerns with uh the proposed plan. We the the my client met with the developer. They've ironed these plan or these items out. Uh and we subsequently sent a letter to uh city of Gallatin uh care of Susan Haulay, the city planning commission care of Matt Harris, Brian Rose, the city planner, and the developer regarding these three three items. Uh one was regarding the burm. Uh predominantly the burm to be constructive was for you know privacy and other other issues. Um the the exhibit which I believe is 102 and it's page 121 on today's agenda. The exhibit shows that the burm uh the way it's constructed. So the burm's in the middle, client's property say to the right, the developer's property is to the left. The developer's property is is raised above the crown of the burm which it more or less defeats the purpose of the burm. it's sloped down in essence that the homes that will be developed uh more or less look down upon the client's

property and that kind of defeats the whole purpose of any of any uh privacy. I mean again a burm you would think it would be more flat then slope up and then it'll have a swell on both sides. Uh another issue that the pro uh clients have raised is that there's water intrusion already on the northeast prop portion of their property. it pools for days and it won't go away uh until after a week or so. And the way this is currently currently constructed, the addition of the burm and its soil coupled with just the row of homes for phase five will only add to uh purportedly would only add to more water intrusion. um just the building of homes obviously will take away from green space and and soil to absorb and soak up that water. Now the way what we understand is it'll more or less f you know water I'm not a civil engineer water's lazy it's going to find the path of least resistance it's just going to force it through and just could be a river could be a stream on the property we don't know uh and so that's another major issue I would say if it if our client's property is constantly just being soaked and bombarded whenever it rains like today and then the last item uh that we have is that regarding the stubouts We had previously agreed to the stubouts would not encroach or or or abut the property. Uh there's going to be a little uh I I don't want to throw out a foot, but there's going to be some a buffer, I guess, between the property and the stuff out road, but in the comments in the agenda, it it reads that uh I think it it read that city norms or city customs is that it it touched the joint the adjacent property. And again, those those are three items that we did not agree to. We ask that um

basically deny the the final master development plan as is. You defer it to another time where we can just iron out these few final issues. Um I they're my clients obviously I'll advocate for them. I would be upset if I was the homeowner. Those are big ticket items in my opinion. I don't think that's unreasonable. Um, and to at least get a city of Gal with an engineer just to maybe confirm check off that there this will not lead to water intrusion. We figure out the slope where it's not looking down. Again, it just defeats the entire purpose of the BM. And then we figure out the stubouts. Um, and I'd like to obviously allow my clients to speak as well. It is their home. It is their residence. But if you had any other questions, I happy to field them or bond them off to my to my clients.

We're not allowed to speak during public comment. No worries. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak?

Good evening. Um, I'm Michelle Givvants and my address is 1335 Long Hollow Pike and um, yes, those are um, our attorney just stated the issues that we have. Um, I did not realize that these um, houses were going to be raised up so high that the ground level was going to be raised up four feet from the existing ground level. So it would be actually above the burm until Friday when the agenda was posted because it was that page wasn't on the work session agenda. And so when I noticed that um that really kind of was shocking to me because if you could imagine like back in 2017 and 2018 when the developers first met with us and said to us, "Hey, you know, we're going to do this BM. We're going to put extra plantings. you're going to have a 25 foot buffer yard. It's going to look really nice. And obviously we're thinking, okay, you know, like we don't want that development, but you know, they're going to try to do something nice for us and put this BM in. [clears throat] And so that was when a year ago when the BM didn't happen at all, they tried to completely erase it that we got lawyers involved and basically said, you know, they promised us this. It was their idea. Um, so now when I'm on Friday looking at the agenda and I see this page that's showing especially the the corner lot number, I think it was number 15. Um, that's on the norththeast corner of their property. Um, that um lot is going to be 4 and a half feet above um where my my land is basically. So when I'm just

kind of walking my dog along and I'm gonna be walking my dog and there's this nice three-foot BM and I'm going to look and there's going to be the bottom of the houses four and a half feet above. So basically at my eye level is the bottom of the house. I mean they're bringing in tons of dirt to have to do this. So I'm like what? This is ridiculous. What is what is this? So, you can imagine on Friday when I saw that page that had just been put in, thank you city planning department for requesting that page to be like shown to us so we could see what they were planning to do. Um, anyway, that was just like I this is not cool. Um, also I do walk my dog every single day along the perimeter of my property, so I know where the water pools when it rains. And that corner right there with you know on the opposite side of you know where that lot number 15 is on my side of the land that is where the water sits after it rains because that's the lowest point. And if you look at all of the elevations on your engineering stuff there you see that that is the lowest point and that is where the water ponds. So, when they're putting this burm and they have all these rooftops and they have this house that's right there that's raised up to like who knows how tall it's going to be, almost 30 feet in the air for the roof. And then they have um berm and then a swale and the water's going to go rushing down to that corner where it's the lowest part and it's going to go onto my neighbor's property and my property and it's going to wash away the bottom of that burm because that's what the water's going to do. Like that's naturally where it goes. Now, they're already going to artificially raise the whole entire development up higher for the p the pads of the of the houses and the water's going to rush down onto my property right there. So, I have a big concern

about that. Um, and then about the pavement to the property line. Okay. So when I first started coming to the meetings and we were promised, you know, there's going to be a buffer and da da like I was really naive. When you hear as a lay person like, oh, you're going to have a buffer, there's going to be a 25 foot foot buffer from the development. You think like, oh, that's a buffer. Cool. But really, it's not. Like, it's really a place for them to put their utilities and it's a place for like an easement for like all of the stuff, including a road. That is not a buffer. When you're putting a road all the way to the property line of somebody, that is not a buffer. You don't cut through a burm and cut through a buffer yard and put a road there with sidewalks so that all the people who live in this new development that's going to get built can walk their dogs and the kids can come with their footballs and walk on the sidewalk straight onto this like big open mode field that I have and and play like that. It it it's just very inviting for that. And that is not why we bought a piece of property was to provide like a playground for the kids in the development next to us that we had no idea would, you know, someday come there. Um anyway, these are big concerns. Thank you very much for taking these into consideration.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Scott German 1335 Longo Park. Um so for for the history of that piece of land uh if you haven't following it um what's happening now and what's happening to the developer it's basically their own fault because when we dealt with them from day one uh that's one and half acre who sloped down to our property was supposed to be sold to us and at the last minute they changed their mind even if we had a verbal agreement at that time and took that one and a half acre out of the deal to be able to put the houses there where um the initial deal was making sense because uh the property we have now to the one and a half acre was the top of the year. So basically now uh they have to bring like Michelle say they're going to have to bring tons and tons of dirt to get 4 feet high to be able to be level on that one and a half acre. Uh again how much dirt they going to have to bring. It's just ridiculous. uh the water um you know engineering I sent them last week a video of what's happening in Carolton with this kind of burn uh when it's raining it's a river it's not you you probably saw that video I sent it to Nick it's a river so they have the same kind of burn they want to do there the same kind of swell and when it's raining it's becoming a river because again mother nature doesn't follow the rule we have on the

Do you know like the lawyer said the east the least path of resistance that where's the water going to go? So we're not unresable. We you know we did our best we got promises thing promises in written uh that would have a giant burn for privacy and now they change everything again. Uh, like Michelle said, what the point of a free foot burn for privacy when the land behind the burn is 4 ft high? That make no sense. And the staff, I would like you to uh to do too. Um, I would ask you to defer the item so we can work on that like we've been doing for years now uh with the developer because at the end of the day we want to be able to work with them and that everything was promised to us is done and everything go fine. Um if you have been following the council, we're passing right now uh a new resolution on safety got brought brought to us by code and fire who required that road. Um when there is parking on both sides of the road will be 34 feet. So uh with the ordinance we have on Garen, people can park, they're going to be able to park on both sides of that road with only 25 ft. So I would ask you to uh go with ask them to rethink that and make 34 ft so we can be current with uh when we're going to pass that ordinance who's coming on second reading soon. Appreciate your time.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak?

Seeing none, I will close uh public comment on agenda related items. [snorts] Okay. Now, um we will move on to the consent agenda. Uh items on the consent agenda are items that staff deems are uh don't need a lot of discussion. Uh they're normally items like preliminary plats and final plats uh that are pretty basic. Um this time we have items one through eight on the consent agenda. Um, is there anyone on the commission or staff wishing to remove one of these items off the consent agenda and place on the regular agenda?

Okay, seeing none, uh, I will entertain a motion on the consent agenda. No, I'll go on record as recusing myself from items four through eight of the consent agenda. It's all related to one property. Okay. Anyone else? You want to vote on this separately? you invite the vote items one through three and then four through eight since he I think the way we've done it in the past I think we can vote on it and she just notes that he recused himself on those items. Correct, Ben? That's the way. Okay. All right. All right. [clears throat] So, I'll entertain a motion for the consent agenda. Motion to approve.

Okay. We have a motion from Mike, second from Councilman Fan. Any discussion? Okay. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed. Okay. Consent agenda passes unanimously. And we will move on to item number nine, Gunhill subdivision 513 and 517 Nichols Lane final plat. Jim.

Thank you, Vice Chairman. Jim Carpenter, staff planner. The owner and applicant request approval of a final plat for Gunhill subdivision creating four lots out of three parcels totaling 7.69 acres zoned R20 Legend City Residential District located south of Nickel Nichols Lane and east of Lock 4 Road. So, the first version of this that was at work session uh had this access easement here that connected to the driveway for this property on Nichols Lane. Um the final plat proposes basically that same access easement, but instead of both uh the created lot three and lot four uh going to this house, uh one would be going left uh plan left to this home at the corner and the other one uh would be going this way. Um staff has added conditions of approval um namely 6, seven, and eight that would change this layout. Um currently, uh this is not consistent with the subdivision regulations. Um and so basically, um access would have to come from lot four for these two lots. And then if a home were to be built on this lot, this driveway would have to go away. Um, with the conditions of approval, uh, staff recommends approval of resolution number 2025-123.

Thanks, Jim. Is there a member from the applicant present? Dakota Beasley, uh, Green Lid Design. Um, we have looked over these uh few action items here and discussed with the owner of the property. We are in agreement with all of them, but would like to discuss, I think it's 7 through nine, about the access. Um the owners are willing to do this um with I think that's lot four up there coming off of lot four road

um but we feel a better product would be u a single access off of Nicholls for all four lots um if we can avoid um public rideway or private roadage all through easement but we understand that's not quite an option through the regulations this something y'all discuss with engineering. Yes.

Uh Brian R, our engineering department. So there's two issues here. The first one is the subregs. It's section 1-1130.109. In order to do uh a lot without frontage, it can only have one access easement across another property. That access easement has to be at least 50 feet in width. The other issue is our Gallatton on the move. Uh, lock four is a minor arterial and nickels is a collector. So, the driveway spacing will be an issue with this. So, we kind of gave them some direction. Uh, one of the ways this will work is if we remove one of the the driveways on lot one and then have it configured like the comments. The other issue or the other option that they could do would be to create a private road which is part of that flag portion of lot three and then they can feed driveways off of that and remove a driveway as necessary to meet the Gallatin on to move driveway spacing for that. would um I'm I'm assuming if the the driveway on lot two is being is asked to be removed, I'm assuming that the the easement or slash the private road would also be too close to the intersection.

Correct. U they would have to get rid of one of the driveways as well on I can't see is that lot lot two is right at the corner. Lot one is lot one top right. Yeah. And then also in the mix possibly is a plan for a roundabout at this intersection as well. So that complicates things a little bit. Have we determined that there's enough rideway there for the roundabout? Speak to that. Baron.

So there is a developer agreement that um we had with with the banks of Lock Ford developer and so if any rightway is necessary to get that roundabout in place then um it's it's similar to what's going on at at the Hancock. Um the city will help with on on that behalf for for the ride of way and then that'll be done later with this. Sorry, that will be done later not with this. Correct. Correct. And that's and that's why the the driveway that's going closest to the intersection of of Nicholls Lane and Lock Four. That's why we're asking that to be removed because we want to see the roundabout there as part of the off-site improvements for the Banks project. Yes, sir.

That was that was going to be my question is I know we don't have any details on the roundabout. Well, any concrete details on the roundabout yet, but what would the driveway spacing on Nicholls Lane if they were to do a communal road? uh 50 foot wide road. What will the driveway spacing need to be from the beginning of the roundabout? Because I assume the roundabout is going to consume land to the east of the current intersection, not to the west towards the creek. It's going to kind of push it off to the east. So So Nicholls is a collector and that is 185 or 235. Yeah.

What is it to the farthest? How how close are we to the radius return on that farthest uh property corner? That I don't have the answer to tonight. I'd have to measure that. That looks like right at close to the 185 or the width of of lot one is 158 plus No, it's total. No, it's total 15. 200 something maybe 200 feet. Okay. It's just based off of the measurements here.

I really complicate things trying to look at something in the future that's not to be done. Could the could the communal road be designed to be one of the access points on the roundabout? That's like looking way too far in a crystal ball in the future.

I'm going to jump in here with this Dakota's presenter in training. So Andy Leads 114B. Um, I doubt we're even close if the developer of the banks is responsible for the roundabout because there's some topography on that lot and the corner too. I don't know if we're opposed to it at all. We're actually trying to work. We feel like what we're presenting is better than having access off of lot four road. And I don't know if the engineering would disagree with us. It's just the city has their ordinances that it conflicts with. And I would like to state too, this plat in front of you is only creating one lot because lot four is a lot of record. It just doesn't have road frontage.

This only creates one additional lot in this little area right here. What driveway would y'all be using as shared? the one furthest away driveway on lot one that's existing

and the and the I guess what Brian was saying the issue is that lot four doesn't have 50 foot of road frontage doesn't have any road so what we've turned in it gets a little bit not complicated but there are easements that make every one of these lots legitimate in practice people are going to go the pathway of least resistance. Yes. So, they're all going to go over to Nicholls. Yeah. And not over to lock four unless they're going to go to the marina to eat. Uh just just spit

what we're proposing would take away and the owners are willing to take away the access on lot four for lot two or yeah lot two, but we're not going to do it at their pearl. So right now what we've turned in gets them this subdivision and we're legitimate and we comply with the city subregs. Just trying to think outside the box for what might be better in the long run. Now I know y'all mentioned that y'all could have a shared access for all four lots off of the driveway in lot one. In practice, we can, but not according to the city's.

But what I'm saying is you could utilize that as access. Can you not fit a 50 a 50ft access easement even though it doesn't get used on the on lot two for lot 4? We can do that. We can. Yes, we've already got that drawn in with the res middle. So there is a 50- foot access on lot two that So I see you're sort of saying do like we do in the county. Yes. put the access easements on but build one road. Yes, I'm fine with that if the city would

I mean you you end up with an extra easement on the plat that's used for access but absolute worst case if they had to use it but I mean then that would be an access to lot four but I don't know if this I don't know if engineering is open to that. My my understanding is those lots, those interior lots three and four uh either have to individually have each have to have an access or um it has to be a 50-ft built to city street standards access uh to be a shared common access.

Well, I mean without convoluting it, we'll just I mean we're in agreement with all comments. We just wanted to try to see if there's something that would make it more palatable. But if not, we're in agreement with all comments. I understand why you're getting in front of this before these big changes go into the intersection at Lock 4. It's important. Um Yeah. And and who knows when that'll happen. And right now, even if we build this out the way that in accordance with the city's comments for approval, if the developers have to come to whoever owns lot 2 at the time, there's going to be plenty of room to scoot that drive back

and get them right away there. I mean, obviously up to them to negotiate, but that house sits far enough back off the road, it shouldn't impede the roundabout. Okay. So, the but the condition is only removing the driveway on Nickels. Nickels. The way it's worded, I think it's worded that driveway comes out when a building permits pulled on lot four. Yes. Okay. Any We're in agreement. Okay. All right. I don't have any other questions. I mean, if y'all are in agreement,

any discussion or questions? Entertain a motion. I mean, outside of the I mean, it sounds like y'all's got it somewhat figured out. Um, I I'll entertain a motion. I'll make a motion to approve the staff's 11 conditions. Okay, I'll second that. So, we have a motion in a second. Any discussion? Okay, seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. All those opposed? Passes unanimously. Thank you. Okay. Now we go to item number 10. Kensington down Kensington Downs phase 5.

Can I just Yes. Sure. Uh I genuinely do not know if I have a conflict on item 10, but we've done buffers in the neighborhood. So on chance that we're associated with this one, I would recuse myself. Okay. Thank you.

Good evening. Kimberly Atley, staff planner. The owner applicant request approval for a final master development plan for Kensington Down phase 5. It's located west of Greenley Boulevard in north of Grandstand Boulevard. 26 single family detached lots, three open space, two public rideaways. It's on 6.282 acres zoned R8 PRD and approximately 6,000 square foot minimum of 6,000 square foot lots. There's two parking spaces uh in combination of the garage parking and the driveway parking which meets the minimum. Uh we do have the um I'm going to skip over here to the buffer. They had uh they were requested for the PMDP to have an enhanced buffer yard including a burm and on the PMDP I'm trying to get to it. There it is. Um during this time uh the FMDP shows that the canopy also along the eastern side back up the eastern side is hold on right there. The eastern side of the property preserves the buffer line and this is required from the PMD approval. So they are preserving their property line there as well. They also going to be doing their street trees. Um there's going to be there has been ongoing discussion in regards to the stubout of the um on the north and the east side as shown in the stubout. As you could see um this will continue the rideway to the property line but not to the pavement in order to preserve the uh buffer yard. they have extra um um landscaping there. But during the

construction process, the engineering department will work with the developer to ensure that if the extension of the road ever happens that it will and it will be doable. So they're they're leaving that preserving that room. So the engineering has requested that the large oak trees and the stubout area be replaced with something smaller with evergreen or or shrubs. Uh today's discussion is on the end.

That's all I have.

Thank you. Is there a representative from the applicant present? Luke Tally with CSDG. Uh we are in agreement with all comments and uh happy to walk through any of the conditions. I know like uh Kimberly mentioned one of the condition conditions was where the roads for the stubouts need to terminate. So we're happy to do what uh planning and engineering want with that. That's uh no bother to us. We'll bring them as far as possible within the buffer or leave the buffer as is as it's shown on the plan. Okay. [clears throat] I guess do you have any feedback or comments or responses to some of the comments that were shared earlier in the meeting?

Yes, I know there were a few things. So, please uh you know ask any follow-up questions as I go through it, but uh guess one of the concerns was the uh directive of uh imperous surfaces being push pushing water under their property. So, kind of an additional part of this burm that we've uh designed is the ditch that's on the inside of that burm on our property side is going to be capturing any of that impervious drainage and bringing it back onto our site and ultimately to a uh water quality pond. Okay.

Uh also, as part of the design of that burm, uh it was designed, you can somewhat see it on this, there's a an existing spot elevation shown about every 25 ft. And so we took that elevation, simply added three feet or more to it to create the top of that burm and then did what we could to grade back into a ditch and still leave room for a house on the other side. So that's that's kind of the thought process of how we got that three-foot burmer uh graded within that. And I know they mentioned uh it to their to them they seem that the houses would be requiring an huge amount of fill to create this effect of the houses being up in the air like that. Uh that's not actually true. I guess from our calculations the this portion of the site balances within itself. So that's that's kind of a

something I wanted to clear up there. We're not intentionally forcing these houses into the air. That's the lay of the land. And uh you know where these stub roads end up kind of right there at the property line. We need to be at a near existing grade even with the burm removed. So that area is kind of hemmed in by existing conditions as it is. Have y'all confirmed that you can make the tie in? Yes. If Okay. With the burm there. I asked if they've confirmed if they can tie if if the property ever develops in the future. Whoever [clears throat] ties to that stub, can they make it? Didn't hear you yet. I'm sorry.

Um I mean if I if I recall this the burm was agreed was agreed to during the PMDP stage.

Correct. And that was uh something that Jillian and the planning office brought up to us was there was that color rendering showing the burm as it was presented seven eight years ago. And so our our intent with this design was to to show that being possible. It never showed any dimensions in that but 3-foot was generally okay or agreed upon. So that's that's kind of the the look that was presented you know years ago that we tried to match there. Okay. Um, does as far as the condition goes about about the stub with p like where the pavement stops, is the condition stating that you want the pavement to be at the property line or is engineering comfortable with it stopping short of the like at the buffer and having the 20 foot buffer?

Sure. So the way that the condition is is written is that during the construction plan review process, we want to be shown how that roadway could be extended and fit within the exist with the proposed ride ofway or with construction easements. And then when we come through with the plat, if it's I think when they had their initial submitt, they were assuming a 10-ft construction easement on the outside of the rideway. Well, during the construction plan review process, we'll determine if that's sufficient or not. It could be 15, whatever it is. We want to make sure that that could be constructed within those easements at some future potential date.

Um, and then we would want that to be reflected on the final plat as that as that came through. Okay. So, ultimately it's showing it in their planning profile that they can construct it vertically and horizontally. Correct. and we would want to see um how how the burm would be you know tied tied back in. Okay. So ultimately engineering is comfortable with the buffer remaining as long as they can prove that they can extend it in the future if the property overdevelops. Correct. Okay. The pavement will not go into the buffer yard. Correct. Just to reiterate and there's not a condition that asks for that.

Okay. All right. There any questions? I am in agreement with that approach. I I like the idea of the buffer being there as long as they can construct it in the future.

Y'all agree with all staff comments? We do. Some mentioned about parking concerns. Has that been addressed as well? Uh there was a comment from the fire department actually that mentioned uh parking should only be on one side of the street. So we'll we'll have signage that will be you know detailed in the uh engineering plan review on which side of the street that is where there will be no parking allowed and that's more for their apparatus to be able to maneuver through. Yeah. Other than that we meet engineering standards cross-sections.

Yes. Okay, I don't have any other questions. A motion.

Okay. So, have a motion by Albert. Uh motion of approval with uh planning's 11 conditions. I hear a second. Second by Councilman Fan. Any discussion? All right. Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. All those opposed. Passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. We move on to item number 11. This Myers Hill Reszoning with preliminary master development plan. Jillian. Yes. This is you.

Yes. The applicant uh requests approval uh to zone a 77.55 acre parcel that was recently annexed into the city. This is uh adjacent to Hicks Lane in Dobbins Pike. This is a 190 uh single family uh detached residential development uh with public infrastructure and a connection both to Dobins Pike Hicks Lane and uh a stubout to the adjacent Triple Creek uh park. This project's been before you uh a couple different times. It did come through about three years ago and didn't make it through uh the approval process due to concerns about Hicks Lane. Um they are indicating improvements to Hicks Lane uh occurring in conjunction with this development. We have added conditions that address that not just for this part of the property but all the way out to Dobins Pike. Um and it is also noted on the plan. Uh they have also revised this plan to have alleyfed product and to limit the number of driveways on road A which is the connection from Dobbins Pike to the park um that goes through a small roundabout uh that would go down to Hicks Lane. So we have seen a number of improvements uh in that way to really uh take into account that this is adjacent to the park and providing that secondary access that has been discussed over the last few months. uh they do provide a number of amenities although we have asked for some clarification on some specific programming for those amenities in the open space area. That's something that uh moving forward the city is looking at in more detail uh making sure that uh open space is is planned very deliberately. Uh and then their architecture they have indicated that the homes would be 70% uh brick and stone and then they did provide an exhibit showing potential park uh connection in

the future if the city wanted to make that happen. Uh this is uh the first voting meeting for this item. So there will be a public hearing on this item. Um there are 10 conditions for your consideration and this would go on to city council uh with your recommendation. Thank you.

Okay. Thanks Jillian. Is there a representative from the applicant present? Actually, one second. Uh, we need to open up a public comment on this item. So, at this time, we will open for public comment. All right. Seeing none, we'll close the public comment. Now, is there a representative from the applicant? Uh Jim Harrison, CSDG. Uh want to thank Julian uh for going through those. Uh we are just to kick things off. We are in agreement with all comments. I did have one clarification uh about one of the comments that is about the playgrounds. Um we feel like that playground probably ought to be put in one of the pocket parts, not all of them. Uh that was we feel like that's probably more appropriate for this size of development. We would centrally locate that. That's the only clarification I had. Everything else we're agreeing to. Uh, Hicks Lane paving we are agreeing to. That's really the one thing that changed in this um um since the project was bought brought forth three years ago. Uh the road department, the county road department went in there and cleared out and graded the road. So now it's possible to pave it all the way through. So we're committing with this to do that. I did I wanted to just back up a minute and spend just a minute or maybe five minutes to go through some things we're seeing as part of this development if that's all right.

I won't take too long. Um first I want to I've already said thank you. Thank you to engineering. Thank you to planning. Thank you to leadership working on some key things with this site. Um Jillian, if you can open up that overall view. We had a colored version, but I'm gonna try to talk off of the the one that shows the park.

Yeah. Yeah. Uh, one of the key things with this that's really important to us and we at CSDG, our mission is to design people center spaces where real life happens and part of where real life happens with this is the park and people getting in and out on the weekends. Um, we were very thankful for leadership coordinating with us, helping assist us to create a what's a second and third access off to the west. Uh, we have coordinated with the rightway owners to the to the south of this site to make sure we can get rightway dedicated there. Um, but we feel like it's very important. We actually have coordinated with the engineering about how much traffic might be coming out at those peak accesses. Uh that's one of the reasons we we converted a lot of the lots to alley loaded so we didn't have driveways along that main road that's running down the middle of the development. But the biggest thing that we're excited about is the this second and third access to the south or basically back towards Albert Gallon. Gallatin, as you look at it on the screen, and then back to the west at Dobins Pike, provides three different accesses for Triple Creek Park, which means that park has a much better chance of functioning and operating well once it fully builds out. That's a big deal. So, we want to be part of that. It's one of the reasons we put a roundabout at staff had recommended a roundabout. We think that will keep traffic moving on those primarily Saturday afternoons or Saturday uh mornings or Sunday afternoons. Uh but I just wanted to point that out. That's that's something that had not been worked out previously and I just wanted to thank staff for helping us work through that. This property is in a key location where that needs to happen because it lays west of all the land that the city owns for around Triple Creek Park and there's a

significant portion of that land that has not been developed yet. So, the field number in there will expand over time. Um, we will provide quality homes. U, Jillian touched on that. Um, um, we've got 42.9% open space. I I will recognize that some of that's in the cell area, but the one of the fields that overlaps that area is actually going to be within that area. So, we are utilizing that. Um, within the open space, we have three key locations for pocket parks. That's where I was talking about earlier. We'd like to pick one of those that's more centrally located for a playground for that pocket park. Um, we actually have uh protected the natural areas, which is a normal thing to do, but we've added additional space around them. Um, you know, we've created walkable neighborhood with the sidewalks. Part of one of the comments we're agreeing to is about extending a trail along that that stream that bisects the site to connect open space areas. So, we're agreeing to that. Um, the other thing that we've done with this is the two large field areas. One of them is located on the southeast corner of the development. One of them is located kind of the northern central part of the development. Uh those are all very important for us and we feel like they'll be important to the people that live there, the families that live there, having a place for the kiddos to go play, having a place for the parents to sit on benches beside open spaces that are in landing spots where people could walk through the community. We think that'll create a great neighborhood. Um we are at 2.46 units per acre which is on the low side of the two to five units per acre which is recommended per plan gallon. Um but uh we're really just here to answer any questions you may have. Uh the bottom

line is we think this creates a a great neighborhood for families to live. It creates housing for families that live and work and play in our community. and that's important as well. Um, so I just wanted to highlight those things and make myself available to answer any questions. And again, I want to say thank you for staff. I think we've made this plan better together by making comments.

Thanks, Jim. Uh, I initial question, this may not obviously has to do with this project, but is there a master plan for Triple Creek? There is a parks faster plan, but we've been bound by the land around it being private. Yeah.

And so when we talked about this before, um I mean I I met with the developers and said, "Is there any way we can figure out this connection if you're going to develop it?" Because um I mean, the city would love to have the land, but they're trying to, you know, the owner wants to maximize the value and develop it. And I understand that. And so I'm grateful that they're willing to work with our existing parkland because that access has long been a big challenge. Um I think that um yeah the the master plan does not include this property because it's not our property, but it does it does have a parks master plan.

Okay. I was just curious. Um yes, sir. Well, I just want to say I I like this plan and I like the open space that's involved with it. even the smaller lots because I mean this is an opportunity where people have the smaller lots and if they want a place to throw ball they're right next to they got a big place couldn't work better but what I'm really excited about is that you did the alley loaded um along that main corridor so if I understand this plan correctly you have almost no driveway connections on the main corridor A except maybe up no none

actually none uh and a roundabout to boot so I I will just kick it off by saying I'll make a motion that we approve with staff's 10 conditions but modify condition seven to remove the word both. Okay, I'll second it. All right, we have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Uh I agree. I think that from the first time this plan came through, it's a huge improvement. Um and I think the fact that you're working with the county, too, to help with Hicks Lane goes a long way. So, um All right. All right. So, we have a motion to second. There's no other discussion. Second in the motion. Mike. Okay. All those in favor say I. I.

All those opposed passes unanimously. Thank you. [clears throat] All right. Next, we will go to item number 12, Frank Property Annexation and Plan of Service.

Yes. The owner and applicant are uh requesting annexation of a 5.09 09 acre parcel uh with the adopted uh plan of service for this property. This property is surrounded on all sides by the city. Uh this is one of the last little pockets in this part of town along Highway 25 east of 109. This item did get the petition uh to apply approved through city council and so they applied to planning commission and with your recommendation this will go back to city council for final review and consideration. Uh no plan or zoning is attached to this request. This is just for the annexation. Um and this will require a public comment and this would go to uh city council following your recommendation. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Uh this item has a public comment. So we will open that at this time. If there's anyone wishing to speak in this public comment section, uh please come forward at this time. Seeing none, we will close the public comment and then we will call for representative from the applicant. Okay. So, seeing none, um, is there any comments or questions?

Just if I remember correctly, this was from the working session. This was the last lot that hasn't been annexed. It is. Um, so you can kind of see on this map all the color that's all city. Yeah. So the blue is this one parcel. So yes, on all sides. Yeah, this in my opinion this makes total sense. I mean, I'll make a motion to approve. I have a second. Well, John made me to it. So we have a motion from Mike, second by uh John. Any discussion? Okay, seeing none, uh, call for the vote. All those in favor, please say I. I.

All those opposed. Passes unanimously. Okay. Go to our item number 13. Gregory Roundtree comprehensive plan amendment. J.

Yes. The owner and applicant is requesting uh the planning commission to consider an amendment to plan Gallatin. Uh this would be to the character community character map as well as the sub area designation map. Um this property is adjacent to Roundtree. It is just north of the meta facility. Uh is approximately 325 acres. This annexation was considered by planning commission last month for annexation and is going through city council right now. Um but uh in lie of anticipating industrial development on this property, uh they would like to amend the comprehensive plan to accommodate that future development. Uh this hasn't been zoned yet. It's not been annexed yet, but because our comprehensive plan, it considers a her entire urban growth boundary, it does not have to be annexed to be considered. Uh keep in mind since the city council did also adopt our comp plan, this will also be considered by the city council in a at a future meeting. Uh so for first we have the character map. Uh as you can see here, this is where our discussions of rural, suburban, general, urban come up. Uh this property is just on the portion right up here. It is split between the suburban and the rural character areas. And in order to support the industrial development, they would like to change it to the general urban. As you can see south of it and along airport road, most of our industrial development is in the general urban character area. But because General Orbin also has many residential uh capabilities as well in terms of density, uh staff in particular thought that extending this sub area, the number four sub area, which is specifically the Gallat the Gallatin Gateway Industrial Center sub area, extending that into this property uh further supports that intent for industrial development. So, we think both of these are are really

necessary uh to do what the intended to really um make it clear what our intent is with this property. Staff does recommend approval of this item. Uh and there is a public comment with this and like I said, planning commission adopted a get plan gallon, but the city council did as well. So, they will consider that. This was advertised 30 days in advance uh in the paper as required when we amend the comp plan. Okay. Awesome. Thank you, Julian. Um, is there a representative? Actually, no, hold on. Public comment. Okay. Uh, at this time, uh, we will open up public comment for anyone wishing to speak on this item.

Hey everybody, Rosemary Bay Skeleton, Economic Development Agency, 132 West Main Street. I encourage you to vote in favor of the uh change to the uh comprehensive plan. Um this is an area that in hindsight should have been designated as industrial and it actually was the city council who noted that we had no industrial areas that we could attach. So, um, but going forward, I hope that you'll, uh, look at this approvingly and the council wanted to make sure the comp plan amendment had been made before they vote on the annexation and then in the hopefully soon vote on the uh, resoning as well. They just want to assure that if it's annexed, the uh property owner cannot change their mind and go from industrial to residential. So this would assure them that that would the purpose is to go industrial with that property. So thank you very much.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Like I saying none, we'll close the public comment and then uh now we will call for [sighs] representative from the applicant Andy Leath Greenley Design 114B West Main. So the only thing I want to add, I think the question brought up was brought up at the work session. Why are we doing this now? And at the time my employees act didn't have the answer but we were asked to do this by the city and I believe the reason the city asked us to do this is to go ahead and put it out there that we are going to in fact ask for industrial zoning when the time comes.

That's why we're willing to change the comp plan now to say hey before this gets in the council and under discussion our owners willing to make the commitment to change the comp plan to ask for industrial zoning. Okay thanks for the clarification. Uh, any questions? Yes, sir.

First of all, I want to say I'm in favor of this. This needs to happen. I just have one question about the process. Can you go back to that page where you showed the uh the character sub areas? Um, that that one right there. I'm not sure I fully understand why we're adding a really specific blob onto that. When when we did this, this was supposed to be kind of abstract concepts of general area, not very specific polygons that outline an area. Are we going to start making this a a secondary map to our um character map? I don't I think that's a great question.

I don't I mean I don't think so. So I think it's just because there was a lot of kind of hyper concern about say this doesn't happen 20 years from now. If somebody looked at and saw General Urban then they could come in there and bang their fist and say they're entitled to build downtown Gallatin out there. and and it seemed like putting some kind of subtype would I don't know give some certainty to all of the interested um stakeholders in that area to know what would be there at some point in the future. Is that fair?

Yeah, I mean I think what this map doesn't give you is that certainty. um it leaves the discussion open for interpretation, right? But that can go both directions. And if you look at the map and say, "Hey, you know, that area is outside the gray area, then you know, you might interpret that that, you know, it's not necessarily designated for something that would be industrial." So this kind of just helps clear that up for anyone who's trying to make that argument. Um and so we just feel like, you know, rather than leaving it more questionable, it's it helps to say, "Hey, this area is for sure under that gray area." And um there's no there's no question at that point.

I do I truly do understand what you're trying to do there. I just know that this was supposed to be an inklop map. Yeah. No, we we get that. We don't. And of course, we sort of looked at it al I the way I sort of look at this map is you you have a few ink blocks and then you have some little um corridor areas that are not quite so ink blotss. You know, they're they're more specific. So, this is maybe one of those more specific time times when you do get a little bit closer to to what it actually should be versus on any block.

I think it's since we've actually completed the plan that the regional planning authority went away and so we didn't when we completed it have properties coming into the city with no zoning. And so I mean I guess that's something that's a little bit different than it was when we completed.

And I'll just make a comment. I mean, I agree with what Councilman Juvant said last time that, you know, it I think it would be good to have an industrial designation on our character area map. I think that's that that's the step that I would like us to move in. And frankly, you know, once we're kind of through with this code process, I do want to start up a comprehensive plan amendment that would allow us to make some mapping changes that get get us in that direction. But

you look at we need more time to be able to do that and right now we don't have that with this application. And again, I think that has to do with the timing of that because when we did that plan, there was a whole lot more land that looked like it could become industrial, but it got used up. We didn't see the see the um not used up. It got well, you know, well invested in, but but but I mean, we just we thought there was plenty out there sort of that already had industrial zoning. So, I I don't either, man. I think this is very much in line with what we've been presented up to this point. So, I'm entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion. All right. I'll second. All right. Motion by Albert, second by Mike. Uh, any discussion? I see none. We'll go to a vote. All those in favor, please say I. I. All those opposed passes unanimously. Thank you. Uh, next we will go to item number 14. Codwell Place amended preliminary master development plan. Brad.

Uh, good evening, commissioners. Brad Hickman, staff planner. The owner and applicant request approval of the amended preliminary master development plan and revised final master development plan for Caldwell Place on 18.39 acres zoned MRO multiple residential and office district located east of Cages Ben and south of Nashville Pike. Uh the impetus for the developer to bring this back was uh to lengthen lots to provide porches for some of the lots or for some of the uh town homes I should say. Um as far as issues, there were some issues around labeling. Uh would like to see hydrants with the no parking signs and painted curbs within 15 feet as requested by fire. Um there is a sidewalk running around running along C's bend to the south of the property. Um that's that has some difficulties in the rideway that a I believe engineering can speak more to this with the applicant. They may need to make an easement to have that sidewalk get around those grading difficulties. Um, uh, the planning department recommends approval of the resolution with these nine conditions. We do recommend it as a minor amendment and there is public comment.

Thank you. Uh, as Brad mentioned, at this time we'll open up uh, public comment for anyone wishing to speak on this item. Seeing none, we will close public comment. Is there representative for the applicant present?

Luke Tally with CSDG. We are in agreement with uh all comments except number three, and that's the one regarding the uh the sidewalk extending to the property line. uh would like to talk about what's somewhat more practical in that area. I know there's a a property to the south that has a drainage ditch right up against the uh road, Cages Bend Road. So, if we were to pull a sidewalk uh all the way to that point, it would essentially dam up that drainage area. So, what we've discussed with engineering and planning is building that sidewalk up to a point where it's feasible to allow the property next door to make that tie in when drainage uh is more figured out on that their property.

Okay. Uh engineering have any comments or statements related to that? Uh just to kind of echo that I mean it's it's our requirement to have sidewalk along the public road way frontage. Um somehow this this segment was was missed when this was initially coming through. We we noticed that and that's where the the comment came from. Um and you know if it's built to the extent practical and then if we have easements or things in place to where um if the adjacent property develops that it can be tied into um that's what we'd be looking for. And then any part of this sidewalk that is outside of the public rideway would need a pedestrian access easement over it. Okay.

Are y'all in agreement with that? We are. Yes. Is that already stated as a condition? We'd have to rewrite three. I think we would have to rewrite three. I think the only difference or the only thing that would need to be added would be to the extent practical. So you're saying simply add the wording to the extent practical to condition number three.

That should that should accomplish that because right now we're saying extend it along C's bend. So that's that's saying the entire frontage need a major minor motion. We do. Uh at this time I will entertain a motion on whether this is a major or minor amendment. Make a motion that it's a minor. We have a motion and a second that it's a minor amendment. Any discussion? Seeing none. Uh, all those in favor of it being a minor amendment, please say I.

I. All those opposed, so it's a minor amendment. Um, I I I'll take a stab at a motion. Um, I think this is a very much an improvement, which is why I voted that it was a minor. Uh but uh I will make a motion to approve with all of staff's conditions except amending item number three to extend 5-ft sidewalk along C's bend from lots 37 to property limits. What' you say? To the extent practical to the extent practical. Period.

And then keep the rest of the same. And we have a second from Albert. Any discussion on that? Seeing none, all those in favor, please say I. I. All those opposed passes. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Next, we will go to item number 15, Lowe's of Gallatin outdoor sales display plan, amended PMDP. Brad.

Uh, the owner and applicant requests approval of an amended preliminary master development plan and revised final master development plan for an 18,468 square foot outdoor display addition to the Lowe's Home Center on a 14.8 acre lot uh zone PGC plan general commercial located at 1301 Nashville Pike. Uh we can see on this submitted plan the additional storage areas they want are in this area here along these areas here and in the rear of the store here and here. Uh the applicant has submitted coming off of North Blue J Way when you come into the entrance there uh three proposals for three different fences to screen any of the storage that would be in this area here and also from Brown's Lane as you come in from that entrance. Uh it's difficult to see with the smallest here, but there is a row of shrubs blocking partially blocking the rental equipment parked there in the parking spaces. Uh this was the original PMDP showing storage here and here. Um it has expanded quite a bit in the meantime. Uh they did have a little added with the tool center, but just here uh not where the existing tools are now in this area. We do have some current pictures of the Lowe's parking lot. Here's over by the

tool center um up near Discount Tire further down the the adjacent to the access way that goes from North Blue J up to Brown's Lane. Um, and we have over here north near North Blue J. You see the open tractor trailers. Just some examples of the current state of the parking lot. Uh,

and I'll clarify that's those were pictures from about three months ago when we started having these conversations three or four months ago. Uh, the planning department recommends denial of this resolution. Hey, thanks Brian. Uh, at this point we will open up public comment for anyone wishing to speak on this item.

Seeing nobody wishing to speak, we'll close public comment and we'll ask a representative from the applicant to come forward. Evening. Uh Todd Bart talk with Lowe's Home Improvement and uh thank you all for having me here tonight. I am open to discuss any of those screening issues that we have. Uh, I know that you have recommended denial, but we're trying to do what we can do to keep the store successful and still um meet the intent of the code in screening. As I was here before, I'd asked for a little bit more information. And you know, we can we could throw up whatever it is that you um what you all would like to see, but without any in you know, that's why I asked them to put three three different types of fencing in. And you know, when you look at the uh screening for the equipment, you know, they wanted to draw, you know, 15 foot cypress trees in there. And I said, "No, no, let's show them what we're going to plant." and then knowing that they they will grow and uh and block that view. So I think there was some other intent to have uh uh some of the view triangles coming out of the parking for the you know the solid fence and that was one of the reasons why we put the the vinyl coated chain link fence in there as a as an option which gives you a little bit more visibility but does still screen. We can also attach uh the fabric on the back side of the the fence to keep it more opaque.

Yeah, I I apologize. I was not here for the work session. Um I was out of state. I I for me I think it's less about the screening and more about like I think we're doubling the amount of outdoor storage on the site. And I I know my question to to staff was, okay, do we still meet I mean I was wondering if we still met parking requirements with the amount of storage that's being placed. I I've been told that we do or y'all are um I think y'all are pretty well overparked. Um my my question is with the outdoor storage like with the mulch, do you is it one of those things where it's an it's an inventory thing where you have to hold so much inventory and that's why there's so many pallets there or is it like okay we just ordered too much and now we need a place to store it.

It's a logistics thing. it right obviously for us to have 10 trucks show up and unload it at one time and stack it in the parking lot is a lot less manh hours to have a truck come every day and then have forklifts drive out there and unload and do that. So it's it's it's how Lowe's is doing it. It's way above my pay grade as I said last time in the in the fact that you know I don't make the rules. I just try and uh abide by them. And this is this is just the way that that Lowe's has decided to operate all 1700 stores where we can.

Okay. I'm assuming that we don't have room behind the building to store it. Uh there is room for storage behind the building, but it's used. But but then you're driving a forklift all the way around to get material and bring it back out there every time we because that's where we do our quick load. Okay. Right there. But with this, you're driving a forklift through the parking lot where customers are walking and going back and forth to the store. No, that's why we put it in there like that is we're not driving forklifts when we're unloading them at in the evening hours getting them on site and then the quick load is where our two employees are out there and somebody drives up that's bought 15 bags and

that makes sense. I go ahead. I didn't realize until you showed those pictures tonight, well, prior to seeing those pictures tonight, I thought this was a question of can we do this, but this is a question of it's already been done. Is it okay? Right? I mean, this is already in place, all this stuff.

They're they're asking for permission to make it okay where it's not okay, but they've done it anyway. So, it it was noticed as a violation of the of the ordinance because they're not following their site plan. uh approval where you know there they didn't have the approval to store all this stuff out out in the parking lot uh per the original site plan and so and accordance with the zoning ordinance even um you know it's it's listed in your report Gtown zoning ordinance section 11.02.050 050 maintenance and use of off- streetet parking facilities which states all required off- streetet parking facilities shall be maintained for duration of the use requiring such facilities. Such facilities are to be used solely for the temporary parking of personal vehicles. Personal vehicles include passenger cars, vans, pickup trucks, recreational vehicles, trailers under 20 feet in length, and boats. Off streetet parking facilities may not be used for the sale, display or storage of merchandise or for the storage and repair of vehicles or equipment. So that's the section that we're quoting out of the the zoning ordinance in addition to the fact that it's not, you know, approved on their approved plan part of their site plan either.

I I didn't realize until tonight that this was an ask for forgiveness item instead of ask for permission item. But if this had been on the original site plan when we looked at Lowe's and they wanted that much outdoor sales area, um I know I would have required or suggested the requirement of um uh an opaque barrier. And if there's not an opaque barrier, if you can't get a 15oot Leland Cypress in there, then you're limited to a a 24-inch wide opaque barrier, which is called a a brick wall surrounding some of these outdoor sales areas. That's the only alternative you have when you can't get a 15 foot wide greenery barrier.

I don't know how to deal with the stuff on the lower right. Yeah. I mean I brick slash combination brick wood fence. Yeah. Opa opaque barrier. What was the I mean, do we have a square footage of the originally approved like amount of area? Uh, I believe Brad had put it in the report. It was 11,520. Is that right, Brad?

And what are the what's the new request? Uh, it's for 18,000 more. 18,000 more additional. Yes. Um and you can see here like showing before the highlighted area these these gray areas. Yeah. It's it's storage there. So and along

I mean I don't get me wrong I I want the store to be successful. I mean I I don't want it to hurt. I mean I I go to this Lowe's all the time. all the time. Um, and I can I mean with the I don't know why we didn't ask for or create that right there. I don't know why we didn't add that to the site plan whenever they did the tool rental, but it was it wasn't added when they when we did the tool rental add-on. Oh, yeah.

To the building. I don't know why the tool rentals weren't added as an outdoor storage area. What they added when that happened was just you can see underneath that blue little sign off to the right. That's the only little area that was added back then. Um if I may. Yes, sir.

So, [clears throat] we've done away with the tool rental and the only place that we have tool rentals is in the most popular area and the most, you know, most profitable. And this store is one of the most profitable. You guys have a lot of building going on here and we're we're we're killing it on the tool rental. Uh they took all the tool rental equipment from other locations and you know have distributed them to the highest performers. Okay.

I just I like that picture right there. What it screams to me is I mean you're correct. It's a logistics issue. And I don't I don't know if it's like, okay, let's order one less truck. That way we're not utilizing it, but I mean to have stacks and stacks and stacks. I I to me like if I was running the store, I wouldn't want that. I I think that looks tacky. But that's just my opinion. I I mean that we're more than doubling the outdoor storage. And again, I want the store to be successful, but I just I don't I don't know if there's a happy medium like How how long is it taking for that to go away? Or is y'all just ordering that for the whole season?

We ordered that for the whole season. So that's three months worth of material that sits out there and the only thing we could do is limit it. Yeah. And we'll bring a truck a day. Is it I mean have y'all did y three months ago? Obviously that was three months ago. Is it still there? No. Okay. Okay. So, y'all sold all of it. Sweet. Yeah. And that's what I was going to say. I mean, as someone who shops there a lot,

um, my exposure has been that it really fills up and loads up, particularly in the spring season, and it is chaos, especially if you're on that garden side trying to deal with everything. Um, and part of me worries about what that looks like when you're you've got less space and running out of stuff when everybody everybody tries to get it like about the same two weekends and it is absolute chaos and they have it very very loaded up. Um, but then I feel like it goes away but I know three months flies in a second. So I mean maybe it was three months but yeah some of the

but the I guess the request is that those storage areas be allowed for was it 120 days 180 days 120. So the the the map had showed several different hashings and so those had different time frames uh as far as what they were requesting. Brad, do you want to try to recap what what those were again? Yeah, we do have permanent storage and temporary. So temporary is [snorts and clears throat] temporary, I believe, is here, correct? Yes, that's correct. And then the tool storage would be permanent here. And then we have temporary here. Yeah. Or is that permanent? Uh

I think it says on there that one is temporary. Temporary. Yeah, I believe that temporary bagged goods sales and display.

These two, those two are permanent. The one to the left is permanent. Temporary. One of these is one of those is. Yeah. The one on the right is temporary. The one on the left is looks like I guess it's just permanent. says outdoor storage. It was existing. This is that was existing. This one's this one's these are I think taken these spots are new.

We're asking for uh permanent [snorts] because of the fact that we've if we can get it permanent. We don't keep material out there if we're not selling it. You know, in the middle of winter, we're not selling mulch. I mean, the only I will say the the good thing about where y'all are storing it around the bottom right is that's right the foot of the retaining wall. Yeah.

So, I mean, you you're looking over it, it's not like it's blocking the view of the store. Uh, and the fence along the left side, like I may out of all the times I've been to the store, I've maybe used the entrance off Blue J like only like once or twice. everyone comes off of the off of Gallatton Road. So, you're not that fence in my opinion is not really even doing anything. Um, and I also don't know if it makes sense to wrap it like around the bottom because then you get into a sight distance issue with people leaving the store. I'll say this, in my opinion, the left side of the building um is probably the least obtrusive area where storage could happen. Um, frankly, I think

Can you circle what you're talking about with the pointer or do you have that? Yeah. Up up up next to the building. Yeah, next to the building. I agree with that statement. So, what if So, so it's out of the way of your parking areas where people are generally frequenting.

Yeah. Um, I if it were me, I would want to see them do some sort of shelving units that allow for vertical stacking in those areas. Shield them, leave the driveway open, but I mean, you know, do some sort of fencing shield that at least blocks the visibility of it. And then, you know, see see how much they can get into that area. And if you have to limit to multiple deliveries, I don't think that that's a terrible thing. I don't I don't see why the entire season worth of materials has to be stored on site from the get-go.

Do y'all do y'all have any issues with uh mulch going missing? No. Out in the parking lot? I mean, if it is, it's insignificant. Yeah. I mean, we get shrink is always an option. always a problem.

I mean, how what what is the what is the left I guess in in the bottom left? You see there's there's two rows of parking that are left open. What is that area compared to the area that's in the bottom right for temporary? Because my other thought is instead of doing having multiple locations everywhere on the site plans, the stuff in the bottom right gets shifted over to the left and you're able to consolidate everything into one location and you can easy more easily not only screen it, but also potentially put a temporary fence around it to where it's clustered and it doesn't look like it's scattered all over the parking lot. over to the left versus the right where the retaining wall is screening it.

I I'm I'm just trying to get clarification.

Yes. I mean I what I I get from that I understand the retaining wall is screening it. Yes, I understand that. But whenever you're coming up from Gallatton Road, you're looking to the store to the right. Like yes, you can see the stuff to the left, but there's already stuff over there to the left. So people are used to seeing stuff over to the left. I think. So my thought is you basically consolidate all your outdoor storage into three rows of parking and you only have the tour. The tor rental stuff makes sense to be over where you're showing it because it's it's right out the door of the tour rental. Like I don't think it makes sense to move that. But the rest of the stuff I mean you're already storing stuff over there temporarily anyways. So then you can consolidate everything and it's I don't. It doesn't look like it's scattered everywhere.

Yes. Add to add to your concern. My concern also is in the lower right behind the tire store. All those rows of palletized mulch and other goods that you have right there. Yeah. That's a traffic area. When people pull into the store, I know when I come in there, I come through and I turn right and go, if I'm going to go over to contractor sales, I'll turn right and go down through there. Now, we have forklift movement and loading people. Is that where they load people right there? That should They don't do loading there. That's just when after everyone's left the parking lot. If that needs to be restocked on the lefthand side, they'll pull it from there with the forklift. They're not loading while people are moving.

That that and and that's also why we're unloading the trucks at at that time. That's a really think about this too logistics. Logistically, if I'm bringing a truck in every other day or I'm bringing them all in at one time at night, that's less traffic on the city streets. It's less

you know, I mean, it's less impact. And that's what we're after. We're after trying to get We don't want to be that company that, oh man, every day I have to follow this Lowe's truck down to the Lowe's, you know, and he nobody wants that. So, we're just trying to get it in, have it there so that we can sell it. And five bags for 10 bucks. It's a it's that's why we move it so quickly. Yeah. CJ, so if I understand right, what you were suggesting is to take what's here and plop it right in between those two segments where there's a gap and it's parking right in there.

Correct. instead of leaving it spread so far all over there and then put a fence all the way around that whole thing. I mean, that would make the most sense to me. But is that what you were saying? Yeah. and just block off those driveways completely and just let there be an entrance and an exit or something where people can get in there and load it up or that Lowe's can pull it into their where where people have to come into the store and get it or I don't know. Cost them a ton of labor.

If that had a screen fence around it, at least then it's not just sitting out there and ugly, you know, for all to look at. I mean, didn't they So, go back to one of those pictures. Are we talking about a temporary fence or a permanent fence? Uh, no. I'm talking about a temporary fence. Okay. Keep going. Keep going. That I mean, you go back. You already have a you already have a temporary fence. Yeah. Let me give you that. Where's the temporary? So, that's right in front of all the pallets. That's a chain link fence, but it's not screened. But what we'd want to see is it being screened. We can put the cloth on it.

I don't I mean it's only there for I mean if you wanted to screen it, I'm fine with that, too. But I mean I I think that this would more solidify their area of outdoor storage as opposed to having it everywhere.

I mean, what are the what are the semi-truckss for or the semi-trailers for? Uh typically those have either straw you know, hay in it for seating. There's other material that's in there, too. This whole This area is already being used by stuff anyways. So, I I think consolidating it would be would make more sense to me. I mean, that's at this point I'm just throwing my opinions out there. But even if we consolidate, we are increasing their exterior warehousing storage from 11,000 square feet to 29,000 square feet.

And this is all a problem. This is all this whole change with Lowe's and all their stores is a result of the supply chain issues that we've been having over the last two or three years. Just in time supply just doesn't work anymore. I know I'm in business. But but I'm trying to think what other businesses are out there that we might encounter that want to start using their parking lot for inventory for warehousing and I'm just trying to think through it. Are we setting a preced part of the concern that I still have too is that this property is zoned PGC. Is that right?

Um which was not zoned for like construction sales and service. It was zoned for retail. Right. and and we we counted this as a retail establishment because it is largely still a lot of retail sales, right? Um yes, there is a construction materials component to this whole thing, but a lot of it's still household goods and other things. Um you start storing a lot of things outside and it looks and feels a lot more like a construction yard versus a retail establishment. And so I I still think I don't know that you'd have to do a an every day or an every other day, but you know what about you know once every other week or something like that you have a delivery and you know 6 to 12 times in a season you you know get get a delivery and it uses up a lot smaller of an area than what you might need if you had every bit of your product delivered all at the same time. I think there's there's that's an option as well, but trying to store everything does make it feel a lot more like a construction sales and service type of a use versus a retail establishment and and the zoning is not such that it it provides for that.

Oh, at the very minimum, this needs to be voted as a major it's an amendment. So, it needs to be a major amendment that goes to council. It's not a minor amendment. It changes use and it changes circulation. It's a good point. The problem we typically have is when when there's a warm spring day and you know it's been raining for several weeks and everybody comes at one time and we go through that mulch really quickly. Yeah. Then you come to the store and you want to buy your 20 bags of mulch. We don't have

Yeah, that's the problem. Then you go to that guy over in the orange box and buy it and we don't like that.

I mean, I knowing that it's temporary. I mean, that makes me feel better about it. And again, like I I I just for whatever reason feel more comfortable knowing that it's consolidated. I don't want to move the tool rental. And I think that we could probably do a better job of of screening it as opposed I don't know how tall those bushes get, but um I mean I I like the fact that you're trying to screen it along the backside, but it definitely needs to be screened. I don't know what that looks like. John, you're going to have more knowledge on the actual plant material. Um but

we've been very successful with aravites. Um they grow fast, they grow pretty tall and they create just a green wall. Okay. Because we pl uh plant them about six feet on center and they grow into each other. So So is that what the holly is? No, it this group didn't want to do that um because it it would grow too tall. Yeah. So, when you're driving in, it's going to block the tool rental sign. So, um but we have done it on other projects where council has asked us to seriously screen the material.

Yeah. I can't remember. What's um Isn't there a a vacant lot to the right of the store? Yeah, it's where a hotel is planned. Oh, that's right. It's a shame y'all didn't grab that lot for inventory storage. It was a quarry at one time.

You know, there is another You asked the question about other stores with similar issues. There is another major big box, not just a home store down the road that does similar parking lot setups um in the spring particularly or I don't know if they have permission to have that there or and I'm not trying to put anybody on the spot. I'm just saying if they do then that gives us something to follow and if they don't I guess we have to [clears throat] but

but I don't mind I do not mind the spring the mulch the bags that that is kind of the ambiance of the season and kind of like what makes people happy to see the flowers and the mulch and the trees and all the plants and um even the piles of not the piles of rock but the bags of you know rock piled up and other stuff that you get in the spring. It's the, you know, assortment of stuff that's there more often that [snorts] doesn't make people like me happy that I I'm a little challenged with. Like I don't even mind how you have the lawnmowers and stuff lined up out front. I should probably stop talking.

Main reason that the planning department's against this is because of the zoning. Well, just that it doesn't meet the the the regulations that were set forth in the beginning and with the zoning ordinance and the site plan. Um, I mean, aesthetically, we want our sites to look good, you know, and that that's part of what the zoning is set up for. And, you know, when you have stuff strewn all over the place, it's it just doesn't look good. which is why I mentioned potentially consolidating everything, at least the temporary stuff over to one side. And then

if we bring it in all at once, as it sails, it's going to condense. Would that be correct? Yeah, we're going to condense it. Uh no, we were asking for the 17,000 square ft. We're we're doing that because he he's saying as the material sells off, the temporary area condenses over time and then to the point to where after the 120 days, you no longer need it and it goes back to parking. That's correct. Yeah. And is that what you're asking, Steve? Yeah. That are you bringing are you bringing the the whole season's inventory at one time? Yes, we're Well, yeah, but we have to replenish it. I mean, that's how quickly we go through it. Yes, we're bringing in that whole area.

Do you replenish the whole [snorts] inventory or do you replenish it as needed? Uh, it's an as needed, but what we bring it all in just in case we get hit like we have in many stores where we'll sell out on a weekend that whole 17,000 square feet of bags of mulch. Okay. I got a question. If you own low stock, should you abstain? [laughter] No, but thank you. That's a question for him. It's if you've owned it, it's pretty good stock years.

Give me an example of another store. Uh instead of talking about Lowe's here, what is another type of a store out there that supply? Thank you. That's a good example. if all of a sudden they wanted to increase their exterior warehousing, inventory, storage, I didn't know. Um, what are we going to tell them when we say no? So, here's here's my thing is I think what it comes down to. Go ahead.

I don't think that any possible effect on the stock from whether or not you require fencing is I I don't think that that's a realistic uh expectation that it would affect the stock price one way or the other. So, I don't believe you'd have to uh recuse yourself, Brian, unless you just Yeah. I mean, he's asking if he if if he's if he owns some sort of, you know, interest in the company, does that require him to recuse himself? Okay. Uh, you own a hubcap on one of their I think John

I think it's if you own 10% or more. I think I bet you're safer you wouldn't be here with us. All of our 401ks have some flows in there. So that was the problem that Yeah. So I'll [snorts] circle back. What are we going to tell Tractor Supply when they want to increase their exterior warehousing inventory space for supply chain issues by 300%. Because that's what we're doing right here. I think it would come down to whether or not they meet parking requirements and that's it. I mean, that's a huge deciding factor in my opinion. And I I think the fact that this is temporary and not permanent, I think goes a long way as well.

I mean, I the thing is I mean, you pull up to this this is a this is a retail establishment that you expect this at. So, this is not like it's out of the norm. But, as Brian said, it's it's retail. It's not construction warehousing. It's not, you know, it's not a construction yard. Correct. But it's a it's a a use that is active in its place functioning. I mean, yes, it's retail, but I mean, it's a it's a contractor store.

How many parking spaces are they required? Did you have any idea for Lowe's? Did you ever did you look at that? I believe it was around 250 and they were authorized for over 500. Oh, so just warning you under that line of thought they could take half their parking space and say we're going to use half of it for inventory warehousing. No, it would still it would still depend on I mean that's if the that's if that that's if like Tractor Supply that's if they overparked themselves by 100%. They generally did the they did in the past. Yeah. I mean I the numbers were

the numbers were 286 spaces required and 541 parking spaces provided

and the classic example was Walmart always until storm water came along and it became a real issue about impervious service. Walmart was notorious for creating far more parking than they actually needed. And the the logic behind it was that if you had a big giant empty parking lot that was only 20% full, you felt like you were parking near the door, whereas you might actually be parking two or 30 hundred feet away. Now, when storm water came along, parking started getting down to just what they needed because it would got expensive to have imper imperous surface. So, I'm just concerned about what we tell the next person that comes in and wants to convert 50% of their giant, enormous, excessive parking lot into exterior inventory storage. And I just think we're setting a precedent here.

Who' you say, John? Oh, well, that was they always site Walmart. I'm not picking on them, but Walmart always created far more parking lot than they actually needed more spaces. But once storm water came along and parking lots started costing a lot in the way of storm water mitigation, people backed off of that and started just creating just what they needed. I bet our current Walmart has far more parking than they actually have to have. Well, I mean, that's why they started developing all the out parcels.

Old Kmarts used to be the same thing. I'm not picking on Walmart, all the big big stores like that. I'm I'm inclined to agree with staff on this and say no. And I love to shop at Lowe's. Um we got to come up with a solution here, but I not as it's as it is here. Another option is if the applicant wants to still work towards a better solution. I mean, they can always request a deferral and we work work some more things out and then come back next month or something.

Yeah. That's not like I want to find a way to make I mean because when you compare it like like I was thinking about the one that you mentioned which I hate to mention any of them out loud but there's another one in town and their storage area is as big as their store but their parking lot is very very very small. So can you give me a clue who where where you're talking about near the Dairy Queen. Oh, yeah. That's the one parking lot in town you see that's always full. And I don't know if that was built like that, you know, if that was built with that intended. Oh, it was always a huge parking lot. We used to go do donuts.

Pardon? Forgot. We're being recorded here. Oh, that's true, too. He's He knows all of them. He's over here feeding me a bunch of them that make me think about it. Okay. I guess that's kind of the evolution of doing business. It makes me think as we update the zoning code that we need the seasonal store. Well, we just actually did one with the Oakrove Farms where they have an outdoor seasonal storage area. So, would you please request deferral so we can come up with an answer for you? I'm sorry, I can't hear you very well. Would you please request deferral so we can come up with an answer?

Trying not to. I know,

you know, because I haven't had much luck with staff giving me any direction as to how I can solve this problem because I could come here 20 times without and every time get shot down. I'm really looking for either direction or a yes. I I would ask what solutions have you all reached in other communities to make this work to meet the meet their codes and regulations? Um, this is honestly kind of a new exposure for us and we want to help, you know, Lowe's continue to be very successful in our community and your logistics makes perfectly good sense, but I'm certainly not a designer or a or solutionoriented like like I'm sure some people are and it's not the planning staffs. I mean, they can say, you know, this falls within our code, or no, this does not, but I bet there are some solutions that you guys have already created in other communities that could help make sense here. I don't know. Um,

they vary. They vary from, you know, temporary fencing like we have here around the area in which we're putting that that storage to um the solid wood fence. The the problem we have is that we're trying not to block the view of our store. We're trying to not block traffic views coming out of parking areas. So it it becomes very complicated. It it it's a complicated solution. And one of the other ways that we've been doing it is with vegetation. Yeah. Like I said with the arrivites and that's one of the things that we can do. I mean to me create the green wall.

The landscaping is always nice. It sounds like that probably the direction if I were in your shoes would go would be to try and um not have it distributed all across the site, but maybe some on that left wall and some up by the retaining wall. And then figure out what is more seasonal and what's not. And then what those um what what can be done to make it most aesthetic. Um, and I'm I'm just kind of trying to summarize based on what I've heard. Um, and your business has evolved and changed since you've been here. I know that. So, absolutely. Yeah.

Everybody's has since 2020. Do you have this I have the the loads that you have in Madison? Is it as far as property? Is it the size of this one or is it larger? I I'm not familiar with that one. I I I I only get involved when there's an issue. So, there's not an issue there. Yes. We have 1,700 stores, so I can't I can't get them all. Coming up with a solution here, CJ, do I know? Go ahead.

Your your storage on the left side of the building. Um on the plan, it shows a upper left photo with an arrow going to it. There's a storage. Is that just single level? can we do as as he suggested go vertical have your racks I know that's more expensive but if you're truly you're not loading from that you're just stocking inventory there to reload to to move it back out and replenish your supply out front in the approved areas why can't you go with vertical storage there and vertical storage in the back as additional inventory space

um the the biggest thing right now is financially it it's much more expensive because we would have to make that all concrete that asphalt back and we'd have to put structural foundation in for those racks. So, it would it would I would have to go back to our estimating department and say, "Hey, what's it going to cost to do vertical racks here?"

Well, I think that request needs to be made because the request that you're making of us to increase your exterior warehousing storage from 11,000 ft to 29 is also financial. I mean, that's that's to financial benefit. And I understand what you're saying is that you need that supply. You don't want to run out of supply. You can't sell out of an empty wagon. But for some financial cost, you could overcome your limited inventory storage area and satisfy your supply and your, you know, satisfying the demand of your customers and it's a whole lot cheaper as far as the financial cost. It's a lot cheaper than building more building. Absolutely. So, I would like to request the opportunity to come back and present with what I can do uh on the next one.

That would be great. motion to accept his request for deferral. All right. So, we have a motion for deferral from the from the applicant. Second by Albert. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed. Deferred. Thank you all for your time. Thank you. Okay. Item number 16, Ashley's Place parking lot edition final match development plan. Charlie.

Good evening, commissioners. Charlie Perry, staff planner. The owner and applicant requests approval of a preliminary off on your a final master development plan for Ashley's Place uh parking lot addition located south. Okay, I am agenda it seems to be off. I'll read from here. Located south of West Smith Street. The wording is off on there, but it's uh south of West Smith Street.

Oh, yeah.

And is zoned as R six um high density or not zoned as R six. Zoned as um that's MRO, multiple residential and office. Uh the applicant is proposing an additional um 12 parking spaces to go along the western side of that um structure just to accommodate for some extra parking. Uh staff did have the comment in there to add the landscaping around the perimeter as required by the zoning ordinance. Uh the plan department recommends approval of resolution 2025-103 with uh four conditions. Thank you, Charlie. Okay. Uh, we have a member from the applicant present.

I'm representing the applicant, Brian Rashnneider, um, City of Gallatin Engineering Department. This is City of Gallatin property. Okay. But the tenant is, uh, Ashley's Place, which is a child advoc advocacy group. Uh, we're in agreement with all conditions and I'm here for any questions you may have. Okay.

I I mean this we're just expanding the parking lot, correct? That's correct. Is it It's all in the Well, is it flood plane or flood way or both? Little bit of each. Okay. Some of it's actually shaded X as well. So, um yeah, over to the right. Um can someone refresh my memory on who our flood plane development manager is? Right. That's what I thought. Uh, are you okay with this? They'll have to get a floodplane development permit in order to proceed.

Okay. It's possible. Um, so yes, and they've already submitted an application for that. Okay, cool. I mean, as long as they're following proper procedures, I mean, I don't This seems very straightforward. What do you mean? I mean, do they have to create additional capacity in flood plan for what they're taking away from it? They have to just prove that um any uh development within the flood plane will not cause an increase to the levels of the base flood elevation um more than one foot. So I I don't believe that this will do that but we just need to see that data.

Okay. Oh, I mean I this seems pretty straightforward. It is. I mean to me it is. It's and there's not even many conditions, right? Far conditions. Where did I miss that? They're trying to continue to just improve their facility and their access for the work that they do. And this is a city-owned property. You guys did the plan, right? Yeah. Uh Steve Bridges did the surveying and then they had some trouble finding an engineer to help them out. So, we volunteered to offer our services to help uh move that plan forward to you all. I bet that one's cheap. [laughter] I'll make a motion to approve of status for conditions. Go ahead. I'll second.

Okay. So, we have a motion and a second. Um, any other discussion? All right. All those in favor, please say I. I. All those opposed? Passes. Thank you. 17.

The owner and applicant requests approval of a final master development plan for Monday Anthony Street Development to construct three single family detached residences on a 0.21 acre lot zoned as R six Highdensity Residential located south of Deas Street and west of Anony's Street. start with the uh architecture for um this project. Uh it does have a uh brick water table that is on the front of the um renderings shown. There is a note that this will be added to the other remaining facades. Um staff is comfortable with accepting that as being part of the um meeting the architecture requirement. Um there were some concerns about the um storm water um infrastructure on the property and being able to fit the u sidewalk along demonstralet engineering speak a little bit on that. Then the planning department recommends approval of resolution 2025-117 with 13 conditions. Okay. Uh is there a representative from the applicant present? Go to Beasley Greenwood Design. Uh we're in agreement with all staff conditions. I'm happy to answer any questions anyone might have. And these uh there's been several others along this street do the same thing. Correct.

Okay. Was there any I mean I wasn't at work session. Was there any crazy comments questions during that time? Just the questions were around the grass strip and the 5 ft of sidewalk. We've got that worked in and uh we still think we can accomplish what engineering is asking for in these conditions.

I'll make a motion to approve with the 13 conditions. Second. Okay. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any other discussion? Okay, seeing none, all those in favor, please say I. I. I. All those opposed. Passes. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Now, we move on to item number 18, other business.

Don't really have much to report on other business other than uh we did get our final draft back from our consultants to TPUC for the zoning ordinance. Uh Jillian and I will be doing a really quick run through to check and make sure that everything looks good uh before we put it out for the planning commission to start reviewing that. Uh we do expect to deliver that to you next month sometime but just stay tuned and um we'll probably once we deliver it give you a little bit of time and then start maybe the f you know in December to start to talk about it. So

will we get a digital copy? Uh that we might be able to do that. It's a very very big file. So, um we can work with you on whatever needs you have, but um however I guess if you guys want to give us some, you know, indication of what you'd prefer, that might be helpful, too. So, um you know, send me an email and just let me know if you have a preference one way or the other. Okay, that's it for other business. Any announcements? I entertain a motion for adjournment.