Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Welcome to the April 16, 2026 meeting of the Mount Julip Municipal uh and Regional Planning Commission meeting. Um thank everybody for being here tonight. Got a semi- full house and uh pretty big agenda tonight. Um for those um that might have seen, Commissioner Giles was with us momentarily ago. He wanted me to extend his apologies. He is a personal matter that requires his immediate attention and so uh he had asked for me to extend his apologies that he will be absent for the remainder of tonight's meeting. Uh with that being said, I do like to start our meeting by reading our quorum uh requirements for the planning commission. It states that the presence of five members of the commission shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Chairperson may at his or her discretion wait up to 30 minutes after the scheduled meeting time for a quorum to be present. In the event that a member is required to leave a meeting prior to adjournment and the departure causes a loss of quorum, no further official action may be taken until a quorum is restored other than an adjournment. A majority vote of those commissioners present and in no case less than four affirmative votes shall be required to decide any item of business requiring action from the commission. Our uh next item up is to set our agenda. I am not aware of any changes, amendments. Seeing none, we will set the agenda as stated. Our next item up on the agenda will be our staff reports. Begin with our city planner, Mr. John.

I don't have anything today. Nothing nothing unusual. Nothing Nothing interesting. It's easy like Sunday morning. Yeah. Yes, sir. Very well. Shane, public works.

Old Lebon Dirt Road widening is under contract. The resolution passed this week at the BOC and uh we're pleased to announce that construction is scheduled to start in June. So, I know a lot of people have been seeing the heartburn and the utility relocations going on on Webman Dirt Road, but the widening is coming. And uh I just want to give a lot of credit to form director Barlo, you know, all public work directors have passed, now director White of getting this thing to the finish line and our residents will finally see improved roadway and multi-use path going in. So, I think they're looking at about two years of construction. So, um give our residents that heads up. Go have some cones in the road.

Very well. And uh our EQ basin uh people notice as you're on your way out of town uh there's a big concrete structure uh on the north side of 11 and dirt road. Uh we're progressing steadily with that and we hope to be done with that in October. So that won't have any impact or any conflicts at the road winding project but we're just hitting these capital projects and some big things are coming to the city. So that was my report. Well, what are the boundaries of the widening for all L and Dirt Road? Chandler Road to Moren Farms.

Very well, nice, nice, nice. Wonderful. Todd, anything for us from the roads over there? Very well. Our next item up our agenda falls underneath our citizen comments. At this time, we will take citizen comments. Public is welcome and encouraged to make public comment about any item on our agenda. There will be two opportunities for comments. You may speak now or you may speak when the item is presented to the planning commission. We do ask that you limit your comments to three minutes or less. And anyone that wishes to address the planning commission at this time is welcome and encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, we'll move forward with our first item up on the agenda, which uh is item 5A. It is to review the minutes from the March 19th, 2026 planning commission meeting.

Please, please, please. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And you can speak now or when the item is presented to the planning. So, you want to go ahead and talk now? Anybody just had a general comment? Sounds good. Name and address for the record.

My name is Paul Garrettson. I live at 100 Katalpa Drive is the uh Long White Ranch House. house that's on the corner. It's a corner lot on Kalpa and Old Pleasant Grove Road. Um I'm here tonight because I just had general We just moved to the community on February 28th. My wife and I bought the house. We're here now. Love being part of Mount Juliet community. It's been great so far. I was at the city commission meeting the other night. It was great. People care. They talk. And I really appreciated that. for this uh committee group that's meeting, I know that down the road y'all have plans in place now to put in a sidewalk that's going to eat up a massive portion of my front yard. Um, and as I was thinking about that, I just wanted to come and say that as we get closer through that planning and over the course of obtaining the easements, I just wanted you to think about the people that are actually impacted by that. Um, such as for instance, my daughter here who's not going to have a front yard anymore. Um, also just the general look of things when you're doing city planning. The sidewalk that's supposed to be supposed to be in place now is going to be 10 foot wide, eat up a massive portion of my yard. Um, the rest the Lowe's near my house, the Walmart near my house, the Dodge dealership near my house, the Heritage Medical Associates near my house, the Culver's near my house. They don't have 10ft sidewalks. The Glass Creek apartments that are already there don't have a 10-ft sidewalk. The apartments that are going up are going to be having are apparently, I guess, part of why we're now going to need to build this potentially. Um, and it just doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense to me because uh you're going to go from the five or six foot into a 10- foot. And I just thought that was interesting. When I was looking at sidewalks, I also thought it was interesting. I didn't know if anybody knows this, but apparently it's against city ordinance. You can't spit on a public sidewalk. I thought that was fascinating. But if you're a property owner that is connected to a sidewalk, you are responsible for keeping it clean. Um, you're also responsing for responsible for shoveling snow, which I thought was also interesting. So, I can shovel the snow once you get the 10-ft sidewalk built, but I can't spit on it. And I thought that was funny. Um, anyway, when you get it built, um, because I know how government works. Um, I know you'll

obtain the easement. I know that I'll lose ultimately in the end. Um, I just want you to maybe consider those things. Consider alternatives. It is possible to put amendment language in ordinances that require 10-ft things like that. It wouldn't be imp it would be maybe also topographically impractical to do so. You could also look at fiscal reasons to not do so. I'd much rather not. And I would I'll tell you one thing. I talked to Mr. Bobby Franklin the other day. I would glad I would not even bother showing up if it was just a five or six foot sidewalk. I won't even be a pain in anybody's side if it was just that. The 10 foot is really the only reason I'm here. Six foot would look reasonable. I think I'm probably right at my time. But anyway, all to say I do appreciate all of you. I will be back at all of these meetings on the third Sunday or third Thursdays. So long as I'm not traveling for work, only here tonight because of this and my little one, my wife would be here, but she had to travel out of the country this morning for an international work trip. So thankfully my firm let me fly back in last night from Detroit to be here so I could be with you all. But appreciate y'all. Looking forward to meeting with you. If you're interested in learning more about Pleasant Grove Road in my area and why this is a bad idea, come over. I'll make you some awesome sweet tea. Mine's really good. Not biased. Um and have barbecue. We'll have a good old time. Appreciate you all. You're great.

Thank you. Any additional citizen comments? See no additional citizen comments at this time. We'll move forward with our next item up on the agenda, which would be item 5A. Review the minutes from the March 19th, 26 Planning Commission meeting. Any comments, changes, adjustments, typos. Seeing none, looking for a motion in regards item on our agenda. It's a motion. Second.

A second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. Two. Very well. Next item up on the agenda falls underneath our consent agenda. We'll begin with item 6A, which is sewer letter of credit number SLC0000006446 for Capstone at Mount Juliet in the amount of $101,640 can be released. Item 6B, review the site plan modification for the pavilion on the RTA property located 2163 North Mount Juliet Road. Item 6 C, review the final plat for Winry Pines, phase 9, located off Winry Club Drive. In item 6D, review the final plat for Walton's Grove phase 8 located at 10749 Central Pike. Begin with uh city planner, Mr. John.

Sure thing. Um approval with all the conditions as stated. I will comment on Mr. Cersei's comment last time about the fence on Winry. So this plat we will not sign this plat until that fence is in. That's how we'll that'll be there. That'll be the easy way to to uh hold them to that constructing that fence. And we have the correspondence with the uh developer. We've seen the fence detail. Um shouldn't be an issue, but we can always just put the plat in a quarter and sit on it until they install the fence. So, that'll that's how we'll hold them to that. That

is great news. I'm sure Commissioner Cersi will be very pleased with that. Yes. Perfect. Shane, anything from public works? Steph recommends approval with our comments is listed. Well, questions, comments from the commission. Commissioner Rash, just a question. I I don't have any problem with I'm certainly for it. Anything the Rotary does, I'm behind it. But the pavilion in in that park area, is that part of a bigger plan or is it just putting the pavilion in? Not at the moment. Okay. Got a got a donation. Going to put it in the park and Okay.

Hopefully it'll could spur something else. I hope it has something to do there. It' be nice to have something in there. Yeah. Okay.

Questions? Any further questions, comments? This time, let's call for citizen comments in regards to any of the items on our consent agenda. Anyone wishing to make comments, welcome, encourage to do so. Turn the microphone, name, and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, we do need to close our uh planning commission meeting in order to open a public hearing. Public hearing is in regards to items 6 C and 6 D. Item 6 C is to review the final plat for Winry Pines phase 9 located off Winry Club Drive. Item 6 D is to review the final plat for Walton's Grove phase 8 located at 10749 Central Pike. Anyone wishing to make comment about either of those items during the public hearing is welcome and encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record.

Seeing no citizen comments at this time, we'll close our public hearing, reopen our planning commission meeting, and at which time I am looking for a motion in regards to the items on our consent agenda.

Motion to approve with conditions. It's a motion. A second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against extensions. So approved. Next item up on our uh agenda is item 7A. It is to review the mass grading plan for Providence Central West located at 7110 Central Pike Chain Public Works. Uh this is the next uh component of the Providence Central PUD. Uh they're working on the west side of Central Pike. uh they brought this mass grading plan into uh like I said to get underway with their next component of construction and development on this side. Uh we've also conditioned that the grading be compliant with the T dot interchange that's coming in and I'm going to let Todd discuss more of that.

Very well Todd. Uh so when this putt originally came through, there was plans for T DOT to realign John Hager Road into their extension of Province uh Parkway. Uh that connection has since been shifted. So John John Hager is going to tie directly into Central Pike just further south than where it does now. Um however, because their party shows access to John Hager, they are required to provide access to John Hager. Um that was a change that we had to work through with them. You know, T dot kind of changed the game on on on both us and Providence Central a little bit. So, we are currently working through that road alignment. They have a great 2D alignment already provided to us, but it will impact some of the grading particularly um you know there's kind of three areas of steep grading on call it lot one if you've seen the plat that middle section of steep grading that is currently in the alignment of the roadway and that's going to have to move a little bit. Um they're just going to shift out where that grade line is though to so their cuttail will still work before it's approved by uh public public works and engineering. It's just we got a small amount of work to do once this plan comes through planning.

Very well. And you guys have spoken with the applicant and the applicant is on the same page. Yes. Very well. questions, comments from the commission. Commissioner Franklin, please. Yeah. Um, just one question about the the gas easement that's on the southern side of that track. Is do you know whether or not um there's anything that they're going to force upon the development with respect to improving those gas lines for density? I would have to defer to the the representative of the development team on that.

Um, you know, when Providence came in, they had to do a major gas line project to increase the walls of the gas line because of the number of people whenever they run this gas line. It was very rural. And so, they didn't use, I guess, the thickest wall. And there's three of them. They're three foot in diameter. And in 2004, they cost 500 a foot a piece to do. And I was just for just if you don't know, you don't know, but you might want to mention it because there's something in their their easement that says if there's enough people within a certain amount of distance from them, that upgrade has to happen.

We have representation here. Would you like to speak to that or maybe answer that question? Name and address for the record. Good evening, Joe Hadex Heritage Civil 25 2055 North Mount Juliet Road. Um, great question, Mr. Franklin. We can help with the gas company talk. I know they upgraded a couple years ago, they were down there and they upgraded at least one of the lines down on that end to Central Pike. Seem to recall as we were developing some of the Providence Parkway, the previous Providence Parkway extension. Um, happy to check on the rest. We have this this side of Providence Central in particular doesn't have any residential planned on that end. Um it's all just commercial space down on that south end on the west side of Central Pike. But happy to work with the city. Shane and Matt White and myself worked with them to get Province Parkway widened crossing them uh which was a big hangup for years. So we finally got that approved to widen the full full five lane section you see now. So

nice. Thank you. Thank you. Any further questions, comments from the commissioner? Seeing none at this time, like to ask for citizen comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Anyone wishing to make comments, welcome, encourage you to do so. Please come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. See no citizen comments at this time. I'm looking for a motion in regards item on our agenda.

Motion to approve. Second. It's a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against extensions. So approved. Next item up on our agenda is item 7B is to review the preliminary plat for Providence Central West located at 7110 Central Pike. Mr. John,

sure thing. Thank you. Uh this is the prelim preliminary plat associated with the uh mass grading we were just talking about. Um, in the conditions, you'll see I got number two, one of the two conditions. Obviously, there's not a not a whole lot to be said about this on on my end other than the two conditions. And number two, we got to remove because that question has been uh solved. Uh there was some ambiguity on to where the zoning lines lie out there and um we have uh determined that that is not an issue anymore. So go back to COVID era approvals and we find uh find the one where they change the zoning on those parcels. So everything should be should be uh should be good there with that. So just recommend approval with uh one condition.

Very well chain public works any anything on this? Our only condition is that lot one will need an additional plat to dedicate the rightway for Pulk roadway that we just talked about connecting Province Parkway and John Hager. Thank you. Questions or comments from the commission? See no questions or comments from the commission this time. Let's call for citizen comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Anyone wishing to make comments, welcome and encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone. State your name and address for the record. See no citizen comments at this time. Like to ask for a motion in regards item on our agenda. Make a motion to approve the staff strike number two. It's a motion

second and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against extensions. So approved. Next item up on our agenda uh falls underneath the site plan. We'll begin with item 8A. That is to review the site plan condition reconsideration for Texas Roadhouse located at 105 Bear Crossing. Mr. Shane,

the developer team has requested to remove a multi-use path that would be installed along the rideway of front of this site and ultimately connect to a receiving ramp to a receiving ADA ramp at the on-ramp onto I40. Uh since it goes against code, uh we do not support this waiver request. And with that, I'll turn it over to you to you ladies and gentlemen to discuss and provide a resolution to this. Thank you. Very well. Thank you. Question's comments from the commission. We'll begin there.

Shane, is is this trail expected to connect to something else in the future as part of a bigger plan? Todd? Yeah. So obviously north of the interstate we've seen every site plan that comes in been requiring 10 foot trail. Um this particular one connects us to the bridge to get over the interstate. There is a section of trail uh south of the interstate along the erage

um with the goal being to connect that when the other properties on Summit Boulevard develop. Uh and a a goal would be for the city to add a bicycle and pedestrian facility on the bridge. Uh understanding that that is a capital project that we take on. Right now there's a 10 to 12 foot shoulder uh which is an allowable bike ped facility. Uh certainly not our preferred one, but

further on down Beck as well as that's expanded and improved upon. Yes. Um the long-term plans for Beck south of the the interchange are somewhat in flux u as development plans change down there. Um, you know, we've had conversations with with people who are looking down there. Um, but we do there we do plan to widen Beck south of the the interstate and that will include 10 foot paths.

You have other connecting in south that one yet. Are they in front of the um the car wash and the Chipotle? They're there. That's that already exists. I've been there. I just noticed it.

Yes. Uh in front of the Waterburger, the the new bank, the the car wash, there is there's a path. There is not currently one between this site and those sites. Uh because that stretch between Rutland and Legacy Boulevard hasn't developed yet. As that comes in, we'll fill in that gap. Um, and honestly, pretty shortly we should have a full 10- foot path from the interstate all the way to division. Shane, can you get some input on that?

That parcel he's talking about, I've the representatives of that parcel have reached out to me and they're working to start develop going through the development process soon. So, that twice daily owns that currently. So, that is coming imminently. Very well. President. Yeah,

I think just a general concern is that we're encouraging pedestrians to walk across interstate entrance ramp. Like that's the part that I'm just like I'm confused about. Like understand it's code and at the end of the day planning and engineering and public works we you have to rely on code. Code is what you operate on. But I'm sitting here and I'm looking and I'm like we're encouraging pedestrians to walk across an entrance ramp to an interstate. So, I mean, that's my concern and that's that's why I would be in favor of the waiver because I don't feel comfortable saying that I approved encouraging somebody to walk across an interstate ramp. Yeah. Well, do owns that rideway and I can't imagine them going through this. Yeah. At all.

I mean, it's it's their rightway. The the question I've got is who's responsible for signing and marking this and providing a continuation if if there isn't currently continuation over the bridge? Is this just cordoned off where people are not allowed to go there or is is there going to be something in capital project that puts that signing and you know to make it a safe place or safer place for people to be? We do not currently have a project funded or or designed um to provide a a path on the bridge. Um however, we have provided the uh ADA crossing um that currently as existing uh puts you on the the far shoulder of the bridge and this connects into that. It's definitely the safest way to get from one side of Golden Bear south to the bridge. If you try to do it on the east side, you're crossing two lane, two oncoming lanes, people coming off the interstate. So, it's the shortest path to get to the bridge

currently. And this this might be for the city attorney. I'm just trying to think this through. If if something were to happen there and an accident happens, does the liability fall upon the city or does the liability fall upon the developer in this instance? And with it being on T dot rightway, does it fall on the state? Yeah. Sorry, I I helped buy that right. And they, you know, T Dot's gotten a whole lot better with sidewalks. Back in ' 05, they didn't want sidewalks on any of the state highways. They didn't. They fought us tooth and toenail, but now, you know, they're pretty reasonable about it. But

see, well, and I mean, an entrance ramp too. I mean, granted, it's at the start of it, but the point of an entrance ramp is an acceleration ramp at the end of the day. You were to try to go fast to match the speed so you can merge on. So, the fact that we would have a spot there where people would be yielding to pedestrians or bikes just it seems like trouble to me. But, Did you say that the bridge right now can currently accommodate a path across it? Right. I I did not um No, I I'm saying is that is that possible?

There would need to be a structural evaluation to determine whether the dead load of a raised path um impacts the bridge. I think most realistically if we were to put a path across the bridge, it might just be a vertical separation, a jersey barrier or or something. Probably more aesthetically pleasing. Um because we can get down to 8 foot. We currently have 10 to 12 in that shoulder. Again, we don't we do not have a plan at this moment to do that. It is not on our books. It's not funded. It's it is a long-term vision. Um

well then that would stand the point we've used the term before it's kind of a sidewalk to nowhere then because if it can't go across the bridge um how long did it take us to get the one Mount Juliet road back you know redone a long time so

commissioner Todd can we offer something I mean yeah we do the sidewalks to nowhere where quite often and we get accused of that, but I mean it it's better to have them build it while they're developing it than us to come back and pay for it 5 10 years from now. How about a compromise? Have them build the trail up to their southern property line and just terminate it there. And when we have more of a plan for taking it across the bridge, that's just a little bit more trail for us to do. Does that make more sense? Yeah. I mean, if if the concern is getting them like what where do they go once they're across the ramp? Yeah.

Uh, absolutely. I I do want to push back a little bit on the the design as shown. This is the standard crosswalk across interstate ramp entrances. It's what we've got on North Mount Juliet Road. Um there are inherent risks involved as a pedestrian when you're crossing these facilities. Um you know we we've we've all done it. Um I assume uh it's it's no riskier than what we do in any other interstate though. Um and we're going to have them at Central Pike. We're gonna have them at North Juliet Road. I do agree. Eventually, we're gonna have them here.

I I do agree with you, but there's no place for them to go currently. I mean, in in those other instances, there's place for them to go here. There's no place for them. I I do think uh if we want to hold off until there's connectivity to the the south, cutting it off um a few feet shy of the ramp itself. Uh I will caution that that is not going to stop a able-bodied pedestrian if they're choosing to do so. if they want to cross the bridge. Technically, the fact that there's not a path here wouldn't stop someone who was really determined to walk anyway. Yeah, I'd rather do that than encourage it. Sure.

Let's go ahead and call for uh represent uh representation to the project uh please and name an address for the record.

Uh Mark Linbearing and I'm the developer for Texas Roadhouse. So, I think you all had covered a lot of my concerns. The real concern was getting out to where it crosses the crosswalk. You know, I don't want to encourage kids especially going down that walk walkway and ending up in the middle of the interstate, which is what's going to happen. Um, I like the compromise of we stop it at our property line. I can't complain about that. That I think that alleviates the the liability issue because that's really what I'm concerned about. That's why I've got a cameraman here because we end up in court. I want it noted that I objected to this. I'm talking about court with a civil lawyer because I think this is a lawyer's dream to get a case from this. So, um I can't complain if we, you know, if we were to stop it before it makes that turn and goes out toward the ramp.

I'm sorry. Did I answer the question? No, no, no. just wanted to kind of share your side and your vision or or even potential solutions. Sure. Well, you're the site developer. So,

I I don't know that there's a good solution to this. There's going to be some some risk however the the things finally put in. But, um one thing that I've noted is that if you're standing down there at that crosswalk, it's about 400 feet, 350 to 400 feet back up to Rutland Road. If your car is traveling from Costco coming back toward the interstate, you can't see that crosswalk until you cross till you pass Rutland Road. So, you've got 350 ft to to react, slam your brakes on, and stop if there's somebody in the crosswalk. Takes a truck from 45 mph, 250 ft to stop. So, I think there's some other things that may have looked good on paper that may need to be reconsidered about this when the ramp is finally, you know, when everything's finally done, when the city gets around to doing all that. But right now, like it is, encouraging somebody to get out in that in that median or on the bridge is a terrible idea.

Thank you. I made some videos out there, but I'll spare you all. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You know, maybe even a uh signage right there at that terminus point if that's the terminus point of it says uh put a fence barricade or something. Yeah. Kind of uh this is where the trail ends. Yeah. You know, please turn around and go visit Texas Road. Yeah. Exactly. We saw the big balloon mascot. We put that right. Have to get a sign permit. Further questions, comments from the commission. Thank you guys so much. Thank you.

This time, let's go ahead and call for citizen comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Any citizens wish to make comment are welcome and encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. See no citizen comments at this time. No further discussion. Let's uh open it up. Looking for a motion in regards to this item on urgent. Since I offered it up, I'll make a motion to approve with the change or the condition that they terminate at the southern property line and install proper signing to be worked out with the city.

It's a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I

against extensions. So approved. Next item up on the agenda uh is item 8B is to review the site plan for New Tribe Church located at 260 Clemens Road. Mr. John, we got uh 260 Clemens across the street from Caddy Corner, across the street from uh public works building, planning building, building department. Um what they propose here, you've seen this before. I think they had a mass grading permit a while ago. Um maybe 2024. Um it's 750 seat, 29,795 square foot church facility. Um the biggest issues with this align with these uh waiverss and variances here. I guess that's that's Most of the comments of appro conditions of approval are fairly typical. Um they are asking for a waiver as you can see in the staff report. It's primarily metal sighting. Um they've got a little bit of masonry on the front on the front of the the west facade which will be the front of the building, but it's primarily metal. uh in preliminary meetings with these this applicant, we you know, we've encouraged them to uh take a look at that a little bit closer. Um I will say in this particular instance is that they are way off the road and they've got a to the east you have industrially zoned empty land. To the north you've got some industrial uses. You've got some county

zone uh residential land around it, but it is off the road quite a bit. Um it's on the back of the lot because they got wetlands and you know physical constraints. Um so that's that's that's up to that's that's what they're asking for there. Um the waiver number two on the landscape buffers, we do not support it. And that's what that exhibit I handed out around there was that uh basically shows you where it's up against residential or industrial zoning. However, this is not a pud. So, they don't have the authority to ask for that waiver. So, that one is a no doesn't doesn't can't moot point at this point. Um, I have a condition in here regarding something about sidewalk or or pedestrian accommodations from the rightway up to the building. They've got quite a distance from the from the road to the building and a fairly large parking lot in front of the building and they have provided striping from the rightway to that parking lot. Um I'm not so sure that I can I feel it's that necessary to stripe additionally up to the building given the conditions out there. Um I'd be all right with that condition going away. Of course, if you guys agree, you guys can drill the grade. Um, but other than that, I think the uh comments are pretty straightforward. The big stuff here is they're going to have to do the landscape buffers and their waiver request is subject to you all you all's opinions and what you want to say there. Um, let me think if there's anything else here on this particular one.

Oh, conditional use permit. It's in RS40 zoning and that that's a condition. They've got the conditional use permit for 750 seats. So, that part of it is covered. Um, yeah. If you have any questions, be happy to answer. Sure. I do. Will the landscape buffer um force them to either move or eliminate any of those boundary parking spaces that might then put them under the perhaps, but I think they have enough room there. They could probably recoup them. They'd have to recoup them.

I think they're slightly over parked right now. Um so they might be able to uh finesse that a little bit. Let's go ahead and move over to public work. Shane, anything on this one? Uh there's a force man that runs along the front of this property. So that's how they'll be obtaining sewer. So the uh we'll coordinate with the grinder pump purchase with the applicant through utilities. We revised our uh sewer bill letter to reflect that uh change since the development to the north installed that force name. Outside of that, I'll hand over to if he's got any additional comments, but we do recommend approval.

Very well. Thank you. Just going to open up uh a place.

Sorry. Um just a couple things I wanted to point out. Uh these guys did provide me with a traffic study uh on a Sunday. when all the analysis was done, uh, turn lanes on Clemens Road are not warranted, and that's mostly just because the volumes on Clemens are are pretty low on a Sunday. Um, and then, as John mentioned, they are providing a painted pedestrian access route to the building. They're required to provide a pedestrian access route. Our code does not specify what that needs to look like. So, that is compliant. Um, now there's grading requirements involved in that that they are hitting. Uh, but you know, they're they're good as far as pedestrian connectivity goes. And that's that's all I had.

John, you have something else you want to add?

I just want to add that now that I've heard Todd speak on it as well. It would be condition planning zoning condition number three that needs to be omitted or struck. Very well. Questions, comments from the commission off real quick. I agree with staff on the um you know, no to the metal siding. We need to get closer to the city standards of brick and masonry, maybe even 7030. Um, the Amazon building looked beautiful with metal siding when it was built and it looks terrible right now. And upkeep on building of this scale is not going to be insignificant if it's uh any kind of similar type of a product.

Let's go ahead uh let's go ahead and ask for representation to the project. name and address reserve.

Jessica Gore, Parad Design 145 Bear Crossing. Um I'm going to let the the um church rep talk about the metal siding in a moment. Um but I do want to point out there there was a map I believe that John passed out to you that had the red and yellow on it. um because I felt like that more accurately depicted what's going on out there on Clemens Road more clearly than just the site plan or the overall site plan um for the church. As John indicated, this site has some considerable environmental restraints with some wetland um that we had to dodge and a stream crossing that pretty much bisects the entire property um that we had to push the building pretty far back which creates a beautiful setting. Um they've masqueraded. Um it's really nice to look at um when you're back there. It's very peaceful. um because there's trees all along the back um on the adjacent properties. Um but however, if you look to the north, there's a concrete plant that um has an industrial zoning um that is to the side of the church that would have the metal building. Um they have recently cut down a lot of the trees back there. um even some of the trees that were along the access easement that the church owns um without permission from what I understand. Um, so the fact that there's no relief on the landscape buffering is a little bit concerning considering one of the residential sides that we're being asked to buffer is the Mount Juliet public works facility

which has metal buildings which all of you know I love the public works department you guys. I'm very partial to them and what they do. So, um it's not a dig on public works because there's a place for them and they need to have their um equipment and the church bought that property knowing they're there. They're happy they're there, but to require that buffer, which John's just following the code, and I understand that. It just seems like who's protecting whom from whom. Um and then, um we've got industrial all around us. There's a county residential piece that's landlocked in the middle that isn't likely to be developed residentially unless it comes in with a mixeduse plan and a reszone. Um, and then right against public I mean I'm sorry right against Clemens Road is the residential piece which again looking across the street there's self storage there's Husky Lumber um the church is really not the offender um but again I understand there are codes so if there's any um any way that we can work around that it would be great. Um, it does affect the site plan. I mean, the the debuffer is 20 ft wide at at a minimum and it does require uh fencing and we do not have uh 20 ft in between the property line and the parking that is proposed currently. So, we were under the understanding up until five minutes ago that a waiver could

possibly be granted. So, um do you want to talk about the elevations of the building at all?

Cole, New Tribe Church at 1279 North Mount Juliet Road. I um Jessica covered a lot of it. You guys have heard um kind of what we're surrounded by. Even I've got documentation of a a salt shed going up which is going to be a metal building, right? That's going to be within eyesight of of where we're building. Um and so what we feel like we're asking is not unreasonable. The front will be beautiful. Um but we are 750 linear feet off of Clemens Road. Um and we're buted up against a TVA easement in the back and on the side. Um and so again it feels a little bit like we understand what the ordinance is or the code is um as letter of the law but the intent is to protect the visual from around but there's nobody around except for other metal buildings and the TVA and so that's why we're asking for the variance on that the front will be gorgeous and we'll make sure it's um any any metal used on front be architectural it's going to be uh mostly what what uh what you guys have asked for and we can we definitely discuss more on that. Um, but really would would appreciate a variance. We're even next month we're we're gathering our people and putting in over a thousand hours of of service right here in our local community with our people. And so, as a local church, uh, we feel like we have a lot to offer. Uh, we love being here, we love our neighbors, and we're going to be good neighbors. Um so but we do ask you just to consider um the cost savings could be half a million dollars for us on some of these variances which could be put to better use for our cause. So thank you so much.

Thank you. Questions comments from the commission question. Can we vary it? Is it an ordinance? Same please. The planning commission just simply doesn't have the authority to grant the variance for the buffer. the board of zoning appeals does and the zoning administrator has the authority to give up to a 15% change to the plantings required. So the board of zoning appeals could but PC cannot grant that. Correct. Very well PC can grant the other variance request though. Yes.

Very well. Good question. John, please. I would just like to clarify that the buffer that you'll be required in this instance is a B buffer, not a D, and it's only along the residential boundaries. Thank you, John. Yeah, ask I got a couple that jumped out to me a little bit outside. One is on uh make sure I'm on the right sheet. your landscape plan sheet LP-1 is what is being shown on this landscape plan what you are proposing and does that meet without the variance or is that with the variance granted

that is that is with a variance that does not include buffering

that does not include buffering so this is just what your general plantings. The other thing I I guess out there I was trying to I agree you're you are surrounded by a lot of metal right there. But as with everything um everything starts a starting point and uh and a trigger for something. in this case being 750 ft off the road um and being a church which I always try to be a little bit more conscious of um you know makes me look at it a little bit or or I guess the willingness to grant it but then one of the things that jumped out at me which is rare because you're right the front 750 ft off the road however the back is on what is going to be a pretty major thorough prayer for this city um in many many many years to come. Uh not that Clemens won't, but again, you're 750 ft off Clemens. You got some distance behind you as well before you get to Golden Bear. But my concern with the metal across the back in this case is probably greater than the metal across the front, oddly enough, because in if I'm reading your topo right, you are at the high point. And that means if somebody does mass grade brings a proposal before this body particularly because you do have a TVA easement which is cleared um you open up a nice metal building right at the back of the property whereas the other me metal buildings are contained into that area in question and then on top of that we show zero landscaping across the rear of the building. So nothing at all as as I believe was just mentioned a minute ago as well. Uh tree clearing and whatnot has has begun adjacent uh maybe behind as well. But my concern with all the metal is it's going to be

pretty visual from a pretty major corridor with zero landscaping or nothing to you know it's going to be beautiful with the with your proposed landscaping for the front. Not going to argue that the way it's laid out. But the back of it is in this case as much of a concern five years, 10 years, 30, 40 years down the road for me as the front because it's going to be a monolithic metal building that everybody looks at. So just like we're having to buffer on the residential.

I mean this is and if you've mass cleared then you have nothing to preserve.

So you've cleared tomorrow. No, he's saying there's still but there's grading to the property. I know. Yeah, you've got to grade that area. So, you're going to most likely take them out. Um

especially with just looking at it and trying to think of how you would get in there and be able to preserve the remainder of whatever is left there. I'm uncertain of how you do that to be able to accomplish this FFE and the grading plan as you noted here. What I would say is currently it's industrial. We don't know how long it's going to be like that. There've been no hurry, but we all know that Golden Bear is coming on strong. So,

um I think we'd like to request a a deferral to work with architect about that. Do you want any additional feedback or any concerns from the commission at this point? If there's more feedback, we'll take it.

So, let me pull the planning commission here, especially because of the church and and not trying to deter your or anything else, but um I think legitimate concerns and then we need to obviously our city of attorneys noted that we don't even have the ability to grant a landscape buffer. Um, I think that we would have the ability to increase landscaping if it were to go forward across the rear of it. Would we have the ability to do that if if were to be asked for just out of cur? Not to enforce it, but I suppose if the applicant was willing to do it.

Fair. So, let me uh anyone else any additional comments, feedback for the new tribe church to after the deferral? Any other concerns that you might not have been shared? I think they're trying to construct and at first I was concerned about the metal and then I'm hearing all of the other structures around our metal and I'm not sure if I call you on what the back part of it is to be facing if that's Golden Bear.

Yeah. Well, you're going to be facing Golden Bear. So if it happens to be just houses that go there, their backyard will be looking at a monolithic metal building. But if they have a buffer, there is not going to be a buffer when they grade it. that grade or well if a mixed use I will say in in that argument with houses most likely if it's a mixeduse development that comes in with a reszone and a pud there are a lot of provisions that go in with that as we all know for home building there's

um if it's I know there's not multif family right now but if it was multif namely there would be fencing, there would be buffering. Um, you can't build within the TVA easement, which is very wide. Um, yeah, and that's that's honestly probably one of my biggest is because it shoots right down the back and it's a forever clearing right at the back of the building. So, whoever develops that's going to have to get created.

Yeah. Oh, yeah. Um, so I guess the um 400 feet wide, a third of which is covered by the TVA easement. Um, doesn't seem to be as concerning to me. Um, if the public works buildings that are being constructed aren't of concern, um, the concrete company that's on the property to the north isn't a concern. Um, and you're I'm going to guess 2500 feet off of Golden Bear or more. Um, so I um

also remember a time that Husky came in to build their additional lumber shed out there and we required them to go three side brick on something that's not going to do anything but have sticks underneath it. That's right. different mayor, different time, but what a lot of waivers since then

just because it was a visual it was a visual point and and this is it being a high elevation is it going to be a visual point someday just because of its elevation and like I said I'm more worried I mean crazy enough I'm more worried about the back than I am the front landscaping push it up a little bit frontage a third of the frontage Yeah. And that easement just continues on. Um, so I mean I I guess I would like to know if if everybody has that concern over the the rear before we do defer or request deferral. Mr. George.

No, I I want to see a masonary aspect on all sides personally. doesn't have to be fully brick, but I'd like an aspect because if you do look at Husky Lumber, even the bottom third of theirs has brick on that side. If you look at Tri-State moving, theirs is all brick. So, I I think each side needs to have a component of masonry. I what we've seen in the past is we've seen a 6040 or a 7030, but we've never seen I don't even know what these percentages are. I mean, it's basically all metal with you got 20% on the front end. So, um yeah, I think masonry needs to be in an aspect as a whole. I don't mind looking at waiverss and variances if it's a a middle ground point, but this is so far to the opposite way for me.

Good feedback. Any additional feedback, please. Commissioner Franklin. Well, one thing, and I don't know, the county does this all the time. a trip to the board of zoning appeals sometimes clears up a lot of questions, you know, and so I don't know that it wouldn't help this to go there first even if if that's available in the city. I'm not sure it is. used to be. But if you can do that, you know, kind of a condition, right? That's going to be necessary to figure out if they will not allow the buffer because if they force you to have the buffer, that's going to completely change your parking and potentially your building setbacks. Yeah.

Well, I I think we could make it work with the building, but we definitely would have to work on our parking. Um, for for me, the only the only member that is on the board of zoning fields isn't here today. Yeah. So, I I can't speak for them. I have any idea. Oh, you're on there. I'm sorry. I didn't know that. Well, congratulations. Um, but but I mean to me, for me, if it was my project, I that would be more kind of more important than than our approval even tonight. I mean, because you still wouldn't know, you know, we we can only we can only do so much here.

We we did go before BZA before the conditional use. Um at that time, the plans weren't far enough along to know that we should ask for the landscape um waiver. And I'll say I personally don't have a problem with the variance that you've requested on that. But

so um and and I do we we talked significantly with with our client and the design team about the elevations and how in in the latest years there had been some changes in in materials that were allowed. Um, so we we've talked extensively about it. I just want to make note real quick. Anybody that's about to leave, please be careful. Our Nixel just went off with a severe thunderstorm warning and we are about to get rocked. So, anybody that would happen to leave here in the next few minutes, please be mindful and please be careful. It's kind of ugly. Sorry.

It's okay. It is. It's your meeting. Yeah. Yeah. Dangerous one right now. Um, please. Commissioner R. Not make it mandatory. Not to make it mandatory, but there is no walkway or a central walkway in the parking lot to get to the church. If there was a way you could squeeze that in, I'd like it much more. just consider it. Just a request, right? I think there there's a there's a lot of uh a lot of land between that furthermost parking spot and a sidewalk or a safe place for people to walk. And I get it. It's, you know, Walmart doesn't have a sidewalk central either. But I get it. I hear you, David.

Thank you. Our youth group may go up and play at Ethan Page Park. Well, it's a cool park right across the street. I said the youth group could walk over to Ethan Page Park to have an event or play or it's a great little accessibility to the park right there. And then you got the hopefully some of the people over in Lynwood Station would join the congregation and

the hope for the church. The hope for the church also was, you know, the environmental impacts with the wetland and the stream and all that is to eventually have a very much a park-like setting for them. Um, as everybody may not understand, they have chosen to do this project in steps because of the expense of it and um fundraising for the church. And so they've gotten the masquerading and we're trying to get their construction, you know, get through site plan approval and get construction plans. Um, and and they may still have to do, you know, parking, utilities up to a pad site and wait on their building. Like, so that's why I just want you all to know like they're respectful of the codes and and I am respectful of the codes. I'm used to being on consent. I just want that to be noted. I like to be on consent with our project. Um, however, for them, I understand why they're asking for sure

waiverss of the magnitude that they're asking. Um, you know, again, they're they're just trying to get their project off the ground. They've been in Valley Center for a very long time. They've gone from one small section in Valley Center to multiple sections in Valley Center. They've been flooded several times. Um, so, um, you know, just they've been they've been really good to work with. Um, I don't attend church there. Uh, I go elsewhere, but, um, they're a great group of people and really wanting to be good community partners. So, um, you know, if anybody else feels like they could, um, support the the metal sighting, you know, I I would love to hear it. would love to hear it because it would be a blessing to them. It would be a blessing.

I think I would have to encourage Commissioner Franklin too to maybe uh what Commissioner Franklin shared and see what Bose has to say about being able to grant that landscape buffer because it does change a little bit of the dynamic of whatever we approve up here, which if it vastly changes it, you'd probably have to come back here either which way. Um, and then that way we all know what we're approving, what we're granting on the front end and let's see where where it could be taken. It reminds me a lot of I don't know if you're familiar with it, but the layout of Connect Church, which is out off of Central Pike and 109. U, it's got kind of the same. It's out there.

Yeah. It's kind of got the same kind of campus feel this project does and u to to what they have out there at Connect. And I know churches are way more conscious of the maintaining the outside aesthetics uh to it. So um so yeah, I mean let's see what Bozo might say about that right there. I like the idea of a deferral to I was going to say I would like to request a deferral so that we can take your feedback. We can meet with the team and see what they have to say about that. I think a trip to Boza is very likely. Yeah. Um, so we'd like to request a deferral. Very well. Thank you. Thank you guys.

Thank you. Yes, sir.

Please, if y'all leave, please be safe. Okay. It looks like if you stay here about 20 more minutes and enjoy this conversation and meeting, you may avoid at least the blunt of what's coming. I know Miss Gore would like to stay. The uh that is a uh uh item 8B has been deferred per the request of the uh applicant. Uh that was to review the site plan for New Tribe uh Church located at 260 Clemens Road. U the next item up on our agenda will be item 8 C which is review the site plan for a commercial strip center located at 30007 North Mount Juliet Road. Miss J.

Um this as you stated is at 30 7 North Mount Juliet Road. It's a retail center site plan. Um it is just south of the Opal subdivision and it will sit directly adjacent to Camp Bow and Grace Church um right in the middle as a lot of people know it's the crest of that hill coming up North Mount Juliet Road that um has been up for sale for quite some time. It is currently zoned CTC which is appropriate for the proposed use of a retail center. Um they are looking at putting in nine suites um with a mix of retail, restaurant and professional services, both medical and non-medical to be included. Um all of their their setbacks have been correctly rendered. They are under 50% of the max building coverage. Their impervious and height are all within the limits as prescribed under the code. Um there's 88 parking spaces required. They're providing 92 that also include five ADA spaces. Um they are providing a 7 foot sidewalk along the frontage of the building. Um and they are also going to be widening the North Mountain Juliet Road sidewalk portion from 5 foot to six foot. Um their parking spaces and drive aisles are all adequate in size. The commercial design guidelines um they did not provide an elevation with percentages. However, as part of our conditions, we are requiring the 100% broker stone because no waiverss or variances were requested. We're also requiring the HVAC be fully screened with the parapit wall as standard practice. Um they have provided the phototric. Everything is in accordance with that. There is no fencing being proposed. Um staff does recommend approval of the site plan as noted with the conditions included. I did want to add for the record and I also pass it along to staff. The fire marshall has included some conditions that were not included on your staff report. So I just want to read those into the record if you don't mind. Um, it says, "A site plan currently indicates fire apparatus access extending only to the rear of the

building. It is preferred that the fire department access provides a continuous 360 degree drive around the entire building to allow for adequate emergency vehicle access to all sides of the structure. As the parking lot currently does not extend to a 360 degree, it cuts off at the rear of the building and does not extend around to the front on the southern portion of the building. Um, the fire department connection shall be located no less than 100 ft from the nearest fire hydrant in accordance with all applicable fire codes. And he's also reiterating a comment we have of the combustible material shall not be stored or located within 3 ft of the building.

Sorry, trying to capture that. And I do have those for record. I give to staff the the written. Very well. John, you have something you want to add to that, please?

Yeah, they didn't call out the materials on the building. This is straight, so they have to sh There are restaurants being proposed within this use. So each restaurant will have to have its own individual grease trap. And of note on the utility and site design side, they will have to cross into the church's property to connect to sewer. Uh to my knowledge, I do not believe that the easements have been obtained yet. So, one of my one of staff's conditions is that all uh easements that are necessary for the site shall be submitted to public works prior to the issuance of land disturbance permit. Uh we'd like to see those uh along with the review of the sewer plans for the public sewer extension. Uh outside of that, we've got general comments and I'll let Todd talk about traffic and roadway. place tough. Yeah. Uh based on the expected trip generation, this development does warrant a right turn lane uh into the site. Uh we uh don't provide a lot of those on North Mount Juliet Road. Uh so if if y'all feel strongly about not including that, there's some precedent, but it it is warranted. Um big thing that's going to be a problem for them is obtaining their T dot permit. Uh if you look at page C203,

and it's hard to make out with the with the uh figure as provided, the hill on North Mount Juliet Road blocks their site distance. Uh now the development team is claiming that that is due to a lack of survey on their part and they turned to a publicly available elevation uh to provide the uh site distance figure as requested. They will go get additional survey and it's in their opinion that that will resolve that problem that it's it's a survey error. um until that figure is provided, they will not get a T dot permit and that driveway will not go in that location. If they get the survey and it comes back and they still don't meet sight distance, that driveway will have to be moved to the crest of the hill. Uh which would move it to the north. Um and that's going to dramatically impact their loading to the point where I think they would need pretty significant um site plan changes. Um so I would re recommend approving with the condition that they are able to produce that that site distance figure. That's not good news. Let's go ahead and call for representation this project. Uh please uh h no representation for this project tonight. Is that correct?

Wow. This uh project has concerns with me. May I defer this on behalf of the applicant? the board could vote or do we want to continue to press forward with action or would we like to take a vote to defer this item? I personally

seems like it's halfbaked. I was my first comment was going to be why we're seeing something with so many planning and public works comments. First of all, it seemed like this for a small and scale project seemed like they had a lot of comments on this project. So, that's exactly where I had planned to start this evening. I don't know whether or not it's most prudent to take action upon it. based upon what I feel right now or whether or not the best course of action would be to uh request a deferral and the request for deferral is out of kindness. Yeah. Do we normally defer people's site plans? Don't they have a 30-day clock? If you don't take action, I know we can turn it down, but

might be approving this thing without knowing it. Yeah. I do not want that to happen.

Can we just table this one and I'll find the answer. That would be a blessing.

We are going to move uh for the record, we're moving item 8 C, which is read the site plan for commercial strip center located 307 North Mount Juliet Road to the back of our agenda. That will be heard immediately after item 11 C. Moving on, next uh uh item up on our agenda falls underneath item 9A. Uh this is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners is to review the preliminary master development plan put including a reszone from RS40 to RS20 PUD for the PE subdivision located at 115 Oakmont Drive. M

thank you. You all have seen this project before a couple of times actually. The last being in January when it was deferred. Um this is a um subdivision with PMDP for um 115 Oakmont Drive. Approximately 10.32 acres, 15 lots with two open spaces. Um the density is 1.56 units per acre. Um the land use there is no land use amendment required as the land use currently supports this subdivision. It is uh infield type subdivision um which is good to see. So we do not have as much sprawl throughout the community as we've been seeing as of late. Um there are no waiverss uh previously as noted requested on any of the design guidelines. No elevations were provided. Um but if they are they will have to be requested at FMDP. Uh the amenities was a big holdup at the last meeting. That was one of the things that the commission encouraged the developer to go back to the drawing board and see what they could do. They now have provided two open and green spaces at 7.1% of the total project with 7% being required. They now have included a playground and gazebo along with the required mail kiosk through the post office. They are also going to be providing a lowmaintenance decorative fence around the cemetery that shall be maintained by the HOA. Um, we have required that it is not to be placed in open space and not on or to be placed in open space, excuse me, and not on the lots. Um, the waiverss and variances that have been requested um do reference back to a cold and sub street. So, I will defer to public works to allow them to speak to those. Staff does recommend forwarding a positive recommendation on the reszone and PMDP to the board of commissioners with all of the conditions that we had previously included.

Okay. Public works. As I've mentioned before on this PMDP um did make a slight tweak in the sewer availability that um as this is a recommendation item uh by the second reading or before prior to the second ring of the to the BC if it makes it that far that they formally request your availability based on uh a chosen routing. Um I've been pretty uh consistent to have this development served by gravity sewer. That is the preferred route of the staff. Um if topograph topography does restrict the site, uh we could consider grinders in play at that point. But uh I I do want to push this development of B certified gravity just due to uh due to the fact that grinders we have m lifetime maintenance on at the city and if we can mitigate those costs anywhere we can uh we want to push for that type of routing. So with this body and then as it goes to the BOC as a recommendation from those boards uh comes about that will formulate the our response to uh the sewer availability. I've also got a note in here to uh cover the development uh as flood plane does exist in the area which is note number 10. So, um they're out of it right now, but if any lot revisions do occur, uh then they will have to uh abide by the flood plane ordinance.

That's it for grading and utilities. I'll toss it over to Todd for roadways.

Please, Todd. Yeah, as we've covered before, they're asking for some pretty standard variances. uh culde-sac length and number of units on a culde-sac um as well as stubbing a access street at their property line and a var variance to allow a permanent dead end street within 150 ft of the property line. Um, one thing I would love to mention is, uh, as I was, you know, I've been in communication with their engineer as he was trying to get this, uh, and address all comments and we weren't super sure where the board stood on the um, temporary deadend street. It seems like there was some discussion that didn't get completely resolved. Um, and I believe that they were immutable one way or another, whether that was a stub road or not, but they were looking for some clarity there from us. Yes. Interesting. Okay. What were we what were we needing to clarify there? Honestly, just does do y'all want that to be a a stub road or not? whether you support that variance essentially. Okay, it it came up a few times, but we never took action. I will make mention again real quick. So, sorry to be up here and be a meteorologist. I'm not a planning commission chairperson, but uh was just reading the NIXLE that came through said we're replying to down trees, utility lines, and debris and roadways related to the storm. Use caution when traveling. Do not approach any down power lines or utilities. You see a

hazard block in the roadway, please call and report it through our non-emergency line at 615-7542550 should anyone encounter that. So, I do know crazy enough a lot of people watch this at home. So, please be mindful of uh of that and uh as well if you leave early from the meeting. Sorry. Questions, comments from the commission. So, is it a temporary is that a temporary cul end of the road or are we talking about just a culdeac? That's where it ends.

Yeah, we're talking about the the road that kind of veers south heads towards Kurt Road. Um, now that could be reconfigured as a permanent culde-sac. Um, it would then fall under variance request D to allow within 150 ft of the the property line. Um, or it would be a temporary culde-sac with a potential connection to Kurd should that one parcel redevelop. Please, Commissioner Franklin.

Yeah, I mean, we want connectivity. I get it. and it's in the code and every every chance we get we should do it. But the likelihood of it happening is probably low. There's one lot that I mean it's pretty big. How big? Two acres. No, that RS20 there if you look at it on this map. That's a big lot. Probably about a 57 at least. There's a building right there where they'd have to tear down a pretty large structure. Doesn't look like it. I'm see

maybe I'm looking at it wrong.

If it was going to be right here, you got RS20. You think that's right? Five acres at least. My guess with one with one house on it. Yeah, that's what I mean. Yeah, the probability of connectivity all of a sudden opens up with grandeur. I personally wouldn't like to see that be a cut through. I I mean I'd rather it be a permanent culde-sac than a connection to Kurd road right there, especially with we've got commitments and I believe means in the the ball rolling to get a stoplight at Curve Road. Correct.

Yes. And so I don't want to provide an outlet to bypass a stoplight that we're funding. I think we've had some other avenues of funding towards. I'd rather keep that traffic on Kurd road and get them to a stoplight than I would to create a a bypass around something like that. I guess my point was the cost of building a road from this culde-sac to Kurd road. Even through that amount of property after you dem demolish a house, you're going to be on the property line. Yeah, you you might get a couple lots out of it. I'm just I'm from a monetary standpoint, I just can't see how anybody's going to make a profit doing it. Not much of one by the time you build roads at our expense. And plus you would the sidewalks and so forth. But anyway, and then that would also create a cut through. So

yeah, please just provide some clarity about why uh staff did request that that be a temporary culde-sac. It's entirely um to provide a resolution to the variance requests. So if you're comfortable with the variance requests uh with the culde-sac exceeding length and unit count and we do provide that a lot then um it does not need to be a a through connection. Um we were just looking to for a way to in the future no longer be um against regulation.

You're doing your job. Yep. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But it is I'm I just want to make it that is not a mission critical connection for for anyone. It's definitely a better pro. Uh third time we've seen it, I think. Definitely a better third time may be the charm. I don't know. Do we have a representation for this project here tonight? Name and address for the record. I'm Hayden Deberry with Ellis Smith and Associates out of Paris, Tennessee. How y'all doing now? Be careful. We're going back to Paris. All righty. Yeah. Yeah. I'm your local meteorologist.

Yeah. I picked a good time. Yes, sir. Yeah. Long drive. Uh questions, comments for us? I mean, you've done a lot of work. Been here three different meetings coming up from Paris. Definitely appreciate and recognize that. And it looks like you've heard comments so far. as far as what this body has given you in the past there. I mean, any feedback or or thoughts from you guys on this?

Yeah. Um, yeah, like like Todd was saying, the the road really that's just kind of whatever you guys see fit here. I mean, we did it at the recommendation and uh really if we brought that culde-sac back, it would allow some of our our two lots to kind of wrap around that as well. Um, but I also have had a couple uh residents there on Oakmont uh come uh talk to me after these meetings and and they have said that they're you know one concern they had was just the getting on to uh to the main road uh coming out. So that might allow if that were to be connected. Of course that no telling when that could be but um you know that's another option for the connectivity. But like I say ultimately you know it's we're fine either way with it. I mean truly, like I say, it would give those two lots to to be larger and and and those big expensive roads be a little shorter. And so

So what do you think if if we were to grant you the variance for maximum length of the culde-sac? We said we wanted it to be a a permanent culde-sac. Where are you going to move the uh the culde-sac, the circular portion of your culde-sac to? We would just keep it there and just shorten it along the same the the road would have the same bearing. It would just be shortened and so that it would keep that right away from connecting all the way to the property line. We'd bring that back and allow the lots to wrap around that. Okay. Essentially keeping the same dimensions of everything, just shortening that roadway. Just bring it off of the property line itself.

Yes, sir. probably make lot 202 and 203 a little bit more attractive at that point too. Yes, sir. My only other comment that I have outside of that is uh um I just want to make sure that the comment is included. I know that that tree line uh to your eastern boundary of Oakall there is very very important. um sir

would like to see I know it's only a 10ft buffer doesn't look like you need to be in that at all um I'd like to encourage 10 foot or or greater as a tree preservation back there one it will probably help you to sell the house two you don't none of your masquerading or anything even takes you near it uh but three to make sure the erosion control measures don't go into any of the buffers uh as noted here um and that further helps you to protect it when your contractors or developers get out there because the first thing is going to be your erosion control measures and it kind of sets a fence to tell them to keep out of it.

That's right. You'd like to see that about 15 foot or so. Is that what you're saying? You know, any tree that you can preserve um especially in a backyard of something like this that's going to butt probably smaller houses than what you're going to build here. um that provides that buffer. I from a aesthetic standpoint, it it really benefits both benefits your potential developer and and seller

and it uh certainly benefits those that are established uh directly to the east of this over there and m maintain that there because every night they are looking at uh nice little trees and if you clear to the tree line or just 10 feet pretty much removing it if you go to 10 feet. So, um, just kind of giving you a feel on Mount Jul's a lot like Paris in in that they they like their trees. Oh, yeah. Yep. So, Chris Rash,

just one last comment, and it's just a comment. It's nothing you need to do. But lot 210, that that was one of the lots that we had previously talked about it just being incredibly small. I'll probably be a tall and skinny on that lot, but you know, it it's your development. So, God bless you to get a a home built on it, but that that's a tiny lot. Yes, sir. I mean, just the bu the building pad itself is there there's not much room for home there.

So, further questions, comments from the commission. Thank you. Let's go ahead and ask for citizen comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Any citizens wish to make comment are welcome, encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record.

Douglas Robert Weise. I live at 118 Oakmont Drive. And um I'd like to propose that this development be renamed from uh Kill subdivision to Oak Swamp Estates because that's what we've got back there right now. I understand that most of the lots are out of the flood plane proper, but all it takes is a rain like this. And most of those most of those yards, they're not going to be underwater except maybe way once every hundred years literally, but every year there's going to be a mud pile back there. Um, I would like to see, you know, fewer lots so that you get more of the house out of the mud. Um, other than that, um, the main problem with this development goes back to the land use plan. Once upon a time, somebody just drew a line down Mount Julie Road and said, "Every house to the left, all development to the west is going to be low density and all the development to the east is going to be medium density." Except that we are basically u RS40. when the when the property sold as RS40, I thought, "Okay, fine. We're going to have new neighbors that match our subdivision." Um, other than that, I would like to add I think it was about two meetings ago, Commissioner Ras asked Mr. Shen here a very direct question pertaining to sewer. And I'm not sure that he got a real direct answer, but if I'm if I'm if I remember correctly, you asked him, "Are you going to hold this development to Gravity Sewer?" And Mr. Zane this evening kind of confirmed that the city was determined to do that. Uh if this is recommended to the board of commissioners, I'd like to have that as condition put in there

if you please because uh this will burden this will you know this take a big load off the city and if um if that can be done I think it would be much to everybody's benefit. And the other thing is just, you know, could the city put a no left turn sign at the end of Oakmont? Because it's almost impossible at certain times of the day to turn left turn anyway. Uh now you're going to add, you know, 16 more houses or so, 32 more cars. Um but of course I guess our no traffic study traffic study said there's no traffic uh impact but you know uh at RS40 would solve so many problems. You wouldn't have nearly I mean the traffic wouldn't be exacerbated unnecessarily. You'd be abiding by the existing culde-sac rules or guidelines and it'd be compatible with what's already there. Uh, it would be a win-win, especially if we can welcome the new neighbors to what we have. That's all I'm asking that and the sewer particularly if you don't mind. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Samantha Jackson. I'm at 106 Oakmont. Um, this the flood plane is a really big deal. Um, we see, my husband has videos of just a raging river, something like this. It's going to be for three days. It's just going to be there. It's going to sit there. It is a really big deal. And I would hate for someone to buy a house and realize they can't use their backyard more times than not. So, that is something to consider. Um, I am really concerned about the traffic going on to 11 or Mount Juliet Road. Um, adding those extra cars. I mean, today it took me seven minutes to turn left on the Mount Juliet Road to get here. If we're adding cars backed up, I'm just really afraid people are going to use that middle lane more than they do and there's going to be more traffic or more accidents. It just I agree. Fewer fewer houses, fewer cars. You know, I bought this property. I love it. I bought it because of the large lots and having lots come in at the end that are teeny tiny and a tall and skinny. Like that's that's not what I bought and it just kind of bums me out a little bit. And so I think keeping with our street which is the direct connector not this not o call not behind it just it would be really nice if that was a consideration to kind of keep the current tenants like a similar vibe basically. So thank you.

Thank you. My name is Rhonda Pritchette and I live at 113 Oakmont. Um, my property is right next door to the property they are wanting to develop. Um, one of my concerns is the traffic. Um if they do not have a direct culde-sac and Kurd road comes through there that will allow more traffic on the road and it's going to make it harder for us to even get out of our driveways and to the main road. Um also the the rain water is a big issue. Water is in the back of my yard and stays there for a while even when it's been dry. you can go back there and there's still water. So, I just want to keep that present that to you guys so that you know, excuse me, how much water does come through there and flows downhill. You know, the veterary clinic, everything back down there, it goes downhill. So, water naturally is going to go there. So, just wanted to get let you know.

Thank you. Any additional citizen comments at this time? See no additional citizen comments. I'm looking for a recommendation in regards to this item on our agenda. Got a lot of conditions. I'm working on one. I think I'm ready. Please hear the floor.

Motion motion for a positive recommendation uh with uh I guess it's condition or waiver allowing a permanent culde-sac. Um also condition to provide for gravity sewer. I guess what would would it be for the next Service by gravity only.

Service by gravity only. Um prior to FMDP. Um and I think that's it. It's a motion. Got a motion for a positive recommendation with those conditions that lie within.

It's a motion and a second. Yeah.

7,500 square feet and they've got over 11,000 on that lot. So, uh, another thing is if you notice that access to the cemetery, they got that easement and it's shown drawn on top of that lot. I have a condition in there that they remove that easement off, get it off those lots and put it in open space. So, that lot is going to actually get smaller with when they address that. Um, it may not end up being buildable, but um it is 11,000 square feet right now. We got lots a lot smaller than that in the city. Yeah.

Okay. Motion a second for positive recommendation. Uh all those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. That was four. Five. That is a positive recommendation. Next item up on our uh agenda is also a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. It is to review the land use plan amendment from Thoroughfare commercial to light industrial for lock box self storage off Lebanon Road directly east of 12337 Lebanon Road. Mr. John, I'll keep it to just the land use since we're on that. Um, lockbox storage north uh north side of town uh to the east of Needam's nursery. Uh there's an existing lockbox facility up there. Uh this request is for a land use amendment directly to the east on the parcel to the east of the existing facility up there. The uh land use plan calls for thorough commercial. This request is lockbox storage is self ser self self storage. Self storage is permitted in industriallyzoned districts only. So they have to request this land use from thoroughare commercial to business development impact which is our industrial land use for this use to be permitted on this piece of property. Um, just for information sakes, if you remember a couple years ago, we had a U-Haul down the road west down uh Lebanon Road who desired to do the same thing at the land use amendment to industrial on their on their adjacent vacant property and build

a uh another storage facility. Um, that one was denied. Um and this request is essentially very similar. Same road, same request, same use. There is no industrial lands land use in this vicinity. There is no industrially zoned land in this facility. The existing facility existed before these changes to the code were made. Um, so that's the that's the reason for the request for a expansion of the self self storage use at this location. The existing facility has been there for a long time. The current conditions on the lot that they are seeking this land use amendment includes it's uh it's it's back up off the road, but right now they've got vehicles and RVs and and stuff parked outside. It's a storage situation occurring in open air out there. Now, this request will allow them to if they if approved would allow them to construct structures so that all the storage will be within buildings. Um this this request is only for the portion of the uh property the northern portion of the property where they proposed development. The land use along Lebanon Road is thoroughare commercial and that's going to stay the same. They're going to keep the front part of the lot commercial and then they're requesting for the land use for the back I don't know half it's whatever it may be. Um basically there's a tree line that runs through the property. If you drive out there now and look at it, this development that they propose is going to be behind that that that tree line that's existing out there. the front

part of it they're leaving uh undeveloped and it will remain commercial. So I bring up the U-Haul because there is precedent on this on decisions sim very similar to this and I just would like you aware of it. Um staff cannot recommend approval because the land use plan does not support it the request as uh as presented here and I leave anything out. I don't think so. There's your little summary on that and my recommendation. Thank you. Since this is land use plan only, any public works comments? Yes, sir. Questions, comments from the commission,

please. I will say it it is a little bit different than U-Haul in that they're not wanting to change along frontage of Lebanon Road. I would potentially foresee that coming in as a subsequent request in the future probably. Um I think it would have have the same result as U-Haul did. Um being off Lebanon Road, it doesn't quite mix doesn't quite match anything around it. But it is different a little bit from what I think it's different from what we did what what you all requested

the zoning and the land use request is identical and they use requested is identical. So well from a functional point I think on top of that too what U-Haul was trying to do was a empty lot that wasn't used and this is currently used for storage. So I think to commissioner R's point is it is a different a little bit. I mean I think the request on paper might be the same but it's a different situation when you look at road frontage but the current uses versus U-Haul was an empty lot on Mount Juliet Road or on Lebanon Road, excuse me. And this is kind of backed off. U-Haul parked their trucks on that lot as well just yeah

it wasn't empty all the time. Just just trying to put my arms around how different it is. Further questions, comments. Let's go ahead and call for assistant comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Anyone wishing to make comments is welcome, encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone name and address for the record.

My name is Darren Reigns. I'm the owner of Lockbox Storage at 1233711 Road. I think my understanding with the U-Haul places is they bought that property later. We developed the site 19 96 97 we opened. We've always used it for that. We've always had self storage on the east side of the property. We've always even before the codes change and they change it to industrial, we were doing storage there before that open RV storage. Um, we've always had the inclination that we build buildings there at some point in time, but we've never really changed use of it. It's a different type of storage, but it's still under the umbrella of self storage. And the tree line that's there buffers quite a bit in the property that we're going to we'll never develop self storage out front and I'd be willing to put a carve out for that because that's I just would never do that. I'm not sure I would ever build anything there just because I don't want to look like one and maybe some of the neighborhood there gets cleaned up. I would consider commercial but definitely wouldn't mind putting something there saying self storage would never be placed there. Back in the back it's the buildings be two or 300 foot back and a thick tree buffer and you know the the self storage buildings although we you know one of the commissioners came up a year or so ago and I said just drive up here and take a look at I'll tell the manager let you in and found our site very nice very neat and orderly without knowing they were coming. So, we keep our site nice. But with that being said, I can't help but think buildings would look even better. And we've got privacy fence around it. We've got you can't virtually even see it from the road. U but to us, we're not changing use. We're just putting buildings up, which is a a

different type of storage. Everything else is existing is there. You know, the office's there, the driveway's there, the been there for a long, long time. RV storage. I'm not sure which building that may be. Needs building seven. Oh, uh, the one toward the front. Yes. Let me see here. No, that will be a climate control building. Oh, yeah. There won't be any. Yeah. Yeah.

Climate control. And the buildings I don't think you'd even be able to see them from the road. Um the tree there's line there's pretty thick. We left that on purpose buffer. Commissioner George. Yeah. Question for staff. So we're just talking about the reszone

for the 4.1 acres. That front part is not changing zoning. So that would stay intact. So in the future, let's hypothetically say they wanted to put self storage, they would have to come back and do another land use. I'd be willing to put something in there. Now, we have no intentions about putting self storage out there. If I if I would highest and best use would self storage on that kind of commercial property, but it would have to be something that was fairly nice. It wouldn't make us look like we're on an alley back at the back. Only comment I got is I was able to speak with Commissioner Giles with this lies within his district and uh I asked his thoughts on any projects that we would have on our agenda going forward. Commissioner Giles did indicate that he did not support this project.

He said he would not. That is correct. I'm not spoken. I don't know

that. It's It looks neater and may look neater. It's also an industrial zoning that if the tornado wipes that area out like it has before, they have industrial zoning right there. We'd be willing to put a carve out that it could never be used for. And you're asking for three stories instead of making it one story, which is even harmonious, which what you got and that's right in our face. We have two stories now. So, we can keep going with those right there. Well, if if if you think twotory would be better, we could look at that. One story would be harmonious with the property adjacent to it.

No, we have two stories there. It's all one property, but we we have two stories on the west side of the property now. We're not asking to change use. So the use changed on us. We made storage there before they changed the zoning. Commissioner, I just wanted to note the current property that he's speaking to is on commercial general and vehicular storage and parking is allowed in the commercial. That's why it's allowed there currently.

It's not listed as storage per se. Mr. P, he you keep saying it's the same property, but on the maps that I get, it's a separate four is is it's a separate property.

So, it's not in a continuation of a non-conforming use. Well, the they when they when we put building up there by the office down in the front, we had said there are two pieces of property, but we have storage on the side. They said, "No, we see it as one business and one type of business and and one property because it's contiguous and it's used for the same thing." And when they approved that building right down there at the front, they actually signed it on the right hand side for the whole property. And they made us bring the right hand side up to codes at that time. So they saw it at that point in time as one contiguous property, one continuous business and even brought made us put in trees and landscaping everything. So come back now and say it's not to me is inconsistent. It was actually signed on the right hand side when they approved it for the lefthand side. I would be more apt to approve it if you um went to a twostory structure that was lower than that tree line. Right. If you're saying now currently we can't see the cars there and I drive by it all the time and I probably never knew that there were cars parked back there

and two stories. This was a preliminary thing. two stories if you find me that looking at the cost of a three story now is really significantly different than a two than a three story.

So in regards to the land use plan any additional questions, comments? See none. Thank you. Any additional citizen comments at this time? Seeing no additional citizen comments at this time, looking for a recommendation in regards this item on our agenda. I'm going to make a motion for a recommendation to approve with the um change being from three stories to two. It would only be this is only land use plan. Land use plan.

So it' be either a positive or negative recommendation to the land use plan. positive recommendation for that.

It's a motion for a positive recommendation. It's a motion in a second. May I make a suggestion or amendment to that? Um that the I believe I can do this. um that should the land use plan or should the preliminary master development plan that follows fail that the land use amendment goes back to what it currently is. We may do that correct

very well. Would that be acceptable amendment to your recommendation on your second? It's a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. That is a positive recommendation.

The next item up on the agenda. Um, it is also a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners is to review the preliminary master development plan PUD with the res from CG to our pud for lockbox self storage located off Lebanon Road directly east of 12337 Lebanon Road. Okay. seven new buildings here they propose um like you said there's one of them uh three stories that was that's the one further south front of the front of the property um they did a I got to say they did a pretty good job with the appearance of these um they they are asking for waiverss on some of the uh you know some of our design design standards and actually staff can support for for the user. I think they look pretty good. Um they really they really worked hard on making that uh trying to address that that part of the code as well as possible. Um, the other waiver, another waiver that they're asking for is since this is industrial and they've got residential zoning to the north, you're supposed to have a 100 ft of buffer in between the industrial use and the uh the residential. They've got about 20 feet there with drive aisles in it. Um, it's undeveloped up up there. I think it might be a house, maybe one house up there right now, but it's it's a large mostly undeveloped piece of parcel up there. I have a I have in here uh you know, given that this is a storage unit, it's not exactly the most intense industrial

use. I have that we would support a 20 foot buffer. They'd have to remove their drive aisles out of there to achieve that. So, they're going to have to wiggle some stuff around there and make that work. and with a privacy fence. I mean, we're talking headlights here probably at the worst. Um, so elevation waiverss as as shown on the plans. The rear buffer, which is supposed to be 100 ft in this instance. Um, third waiver, this use actually requires 20 20 parking spaces. Um, Jill, do you remember if they how many they showed on there? Did they show any on there? I don't even know if they even showed any. Um, so 20 seems a little excessive. However, we we got to have some parking shown on this plan. Um, so I would I could support that if they showed us some alternative, you know, showed us what they are going to provide. It is a storage unit type development. I think people are going to pull in front of the unit most of the time and the traffic or the activity in there probably isn't going to be that heavy to require a ton of parking spaces. Um, but again, that's a waiver. That's up to the board to decide. Um, most of our conditions here are just standard conditions on a site plan or on a PMDP at this point. Um, again, they'll have to submit a site plan. If this all gets approved and any of these waiverss that they're asking for that aren't aren't granted, they'll be held to provide that at site plan. Um, we have a couple things in here. Uh, see if there's anything else

notable. Really isn't that much. It's just those waiverss, I guess, are the biggest points to talk about here as far as planning goes. Um, I really didn't think it was the land, so I'm sorry I'm a little little uh blinds out of here talking about this facility itself, but um, if you got any questions, let me know. Thank you. Thank you, Shane public works. We'll let Todd talk about this reserve.

Very well, Todd, please. Honestly, I don't got much to say. Um, self storage is just about the least intensive land use from a traffic perspective you can get. Um, the the my honestly my big concern is just looking ahead. Um, if they ever develop that out parcel, it does not get access from Lebanon Road.

They've already they've already shown the sidewalk on their their P. They re revised that between uh tech review and and resubmitt. So they they're agreeable. Okay.

Yeah. If it's not an issue, it's not an issue.

Our understanding is that the county name address for the record real quick. So, uh, Darren Reigns Lock Sell Stories 12337 Lebanon Road. It's our understanding that they're working on putting a sidewalk through there, uh, through some type of funding. And the area that's up there on top right now, when the county came through and widened that road, they took a lot of our property in front there. And that that piece on the top, I've mowed it many times in the past, and it's probably couldn't be much more than three foot, maybe four. So, that was a concern. We don't mind necessarily putting a sidewalk there, but just want to make sure we didn't get twisted sideways with what else was going on.

Shane,

please I can answer that question. Um, there is a project that I believe is commencing this summer through public works to extend sidewalks from Nonville to North Green Hill. So depending on the timing of the project, by the time they start, sidewalk could very well be out in the front. But as we talked about with uh Texas Roadhouse per code uh that request if they want it waved, we cannot support. So staff staff wants the sidewalks to be built. Is that correct?

Yes, sir.

Further questions, comments from the commission. So, is that child business and public works later on in the future, projected future, is that going to line up with whatever may be required of this particular situation if he builds sidewalks? Yeah, we just revised the design and tie in the U capital project to connect through here. Save us a little bit of money.

I'm just saying you build you build we require a sidewalk and then they come in and do something else to build another section in a different manner or a different way. I don't know. It's a It's a relatively steep grade there as well. If somebody would go off with a bicycle or something, the way the county finished that off there, probably maybe 20 foot, you know,

I mean, I'm okay with the requirement as long as we look in the future and, you know, we were not tearing stuff down that we required somebody to build. Yeah, we it's realistically it's going to match the curbs along the the rest of Lebanon Road. It's going to be right up against the curb. Um and when the city project comes through, uh essentially this section would just already be built and we tie into it.

We approve this. Would you be amendable to making that bigger building a a 20 foot twotory structure versus a 30 foot threetory structure? Condition on that. Yeah. Twotory. Yeah. Yeah. I don't have a problem. I This these were preliminary trying to give you guys something to look at because they kind of want to get an idea where we're trying to go with, you know. Understood. We just have to be careful because if we allow a 30 foot, you can build a 30 foot. No, no. I I don't mind, like I said, putting something in there to that degree doesn't bother me at all. But we got to looking at the cost of a three story versus two story. It's a lot lot of difference.

I don't see I guess this would be back for John. Uh doesn't look like this requires a photometric plan. So, is there lighting internal lighting or how how is lighting within the site accomplished? Um, at the PMDP we don't require it, but at site plan they'll they'll have to show it then. Um, I'm not sure what they proposed at this point. Um, do we need to include no wall packs?

Could include that. And now that we've opened it up, I would uh I would also like to add the condition if you are not able to that the only you since you remember how we were talking about it's industrial zoning in perpetuity. Um, I don't know if that's a good idea, but maybe just cap the use at Can you do that at self storage there? Can we do that same?

I got another one I'd like to add, too, because if you go out there now, there's probably a U-Haul truck sitting on the front edge of that property. Um, the other day when I was putting or Pensky truck or something, the other day when we were putting signs out there, there was one out there. Um, I'd like to add a condition that they not be allowed to park any uh vehicles along the drive towards Lebanon Road. It functionally acts like advertisement. That's what U-Haul was doing as well. And it's it's a it's a sign essentially. And uh so I'd like to add a condition that that prohibit prohibited it. Since this this is a PMDP, it's be the time to do it. actually spoke with my manager about that tonight when I came in because you hadn't mentioned it before. So I it wasn't supposed to be and one more here. You want to make sure I understand this. The plans indicated a 20ft rear setback with drive aisles within staff supports this. So, is that just the drive aisle within the setback or the building itself?

No, I I think if I if you remove if they could pull the drive aisle out of there and put a real landscape buffer in there, um that would be the way I'd support landscape buffer with a privacy fence. So, like a 20 foot wide section with a privacy fence. That would be my compromise. Um you got the fence, you got the landscaping. I and the requirement in this instance for the buffer the 100 foot buffer I tal I spoke about it's a it's not that buffer I guess buffer is a improper term it's a free and clear space it just has to be nothing it's it's written to be nothing in that 100 foot section it's it's a separation require requirement since you know industrial could have noises smells things like that it's just it doesn't require necessarily require plants it's just you got to have a 100 ft separation. So yeah.

So does that or does that cover us in your recommendation? Should we recommend your staff comments or is that specity within there?

I believe it's specifically spelled out in there. Let me read it. Uh uh plans indicate standard 20 foot rear setback which is their industrial rear setback with drive aisles within which is permissible. Um, but because they're not doing the 100 foot free and clear space, I would say staff supports this request to omit the 100 foot free and clear space. If the drive aisles are removed from that 20 foot area back there and they plan it with buffer and put in a fence and I'm really it sounds like a lot, but I don't know. I don't I don't think a self- storage use is like as intense as what that 100 foot free and clear space is intended for.

Yeah. Yeah. We have a privacy fence there now. And the back the back part of the property or the north side I guess is pretty much just a cliff. Yeah. And what I'm asking is that you so you have a fence there. We'd ask for an opaque lowmaintenance fence and then 20 feet of 20 foot width of vegetation. We got buffer sections our code. It's not a It's very common you and I fit it in that 20 foot. You'd have to move the drive aisle out of it to do that. Um but I guess that's that's the extreme compromise I I think I could stand behind in this instance. So if I'm not mistaken to accomplish that, building one will go away perhaps.

Well, that's got to be something there with those properties on the east side down there. Those are commercial. Those are Yeah. Yeah. Talking about the undeveloped property to the north. Yeah. You only require you only needed that buffer on the north side. Okay. Because the other zoning east side. Yeah. Yeah. The east side's commercial use, but the north side runs all the potential to be residential use and currently zoned residential. Yeah. And there's Yeah. Trees on the other side now. Yeah. Yeah. No trees on yours. Okay. So, nothing that you can maintain. So, it would need an updated fence and new plantings.

Yeah, it it steps up right there, right at the edge of the property significantly. So, I we couldn't put a fence on their property. I don't know how we do that. Maybe try to put some trees or something in there if it's all rock, but I don't know. We'll figure something out. Alternative. Yeah. Yeah. And I mean, that still wouldn't solve the visibility part of it. So, but yeah, we'll work with you. Further questions, comments.

Thank you. This time, let's call for citizen comments. Anyone wish to make comment, welcome, encourage to do so. Please come to the microphone, name and address for the record. See no citizen comments at this time. Looking for a recommendation regards this item on our agenda. There's a lot there. There's a ton there.

I'll take a stab at it with assistance. Um motion for a project recommendation. Um I think we're still looking at capping the use at self storage. Um the vehicles along the drive or on Lebanon Road. Um the 20 foot buffer that the drive drives clear from the 20 foot buffer. It's a buffer and a fence. Um privacy fence as mentioned. Um, the only one I'm I'm having trouble putting together is the parking spaces. We're basically saying less and the 20 is excessive, but

appropriate. I guess at site plan, we'll figure that out. Yes, this is this is PMDP. at site plan. We're going to have to cross that bridge and it'll be it'll come before the commission and you guys have the authority to say yay or nay on how much parking. Okay. Um yeah, this one's it's kind of an unusual use when it comes to parking, but we'll we'll we'll we got another pass at it with site plan. That's when they're going to have to show the parking and how many they got and we'll see see how it lays out and see how it works. Okay. And I guess was it building seven is limited to two stories only. I'll leave it there and open for amendment. No wallpack lighting.

Anything else I missed? Sidewalks to be built. Sidewalks built on Living Road. And you got them all. So amended. Motion made.

It's a motion. I'll second that. It's a motion and second for positive recommendation subject staff comments subject to the additional comments uh stated by Commissioner Rast. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions is a positive recommendation. Next item up on our agenda is also recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. review the out of city sewer request for 445 447 449 Liberty Chapel Roads about 49 acres on property off of Liberty Chapel Road which is off of Bender Ferry. The sewer wastewater flows would be directed through the Yorkshshire Estates development which ultimately drains to the Paradise Pump Station down to Winry Pines and down Donable ultimately into the Stoner Creek interceptor. So capacity is available for this site. only 447 Liberty Chapel Road is contiguous with the city limits. And if this body and the governing body, the BOC choose to provide a positive recommendation andor approval, we uh wish to uh be conditioned with such in our my report. Um if y'all got any questions, I believe the developer is here. Just to note that the property owner that's organizing this development also I believe he either owns or he's involved with Yorkshshire Estates. So the main condition is that he is part of the ownership group or the development group

that is constructing the sewer infrastructure in Yorkshire which this development would pass through. questions, comments from the commission,

please. Commissioner Franklin, generally speaking, you know, a few years ago, the city is restricted from annexing by ordinance. You can only annex by permission. Somebody's got to ask to be in the city now, right? And it would seem to me that this is the the last way the city can expand. And I don't know if the city, you know, wants to expand if that's a a goal of the city. Is is that I mean I I I just just kind of don't know. And I also don't know is is Yorkshire Estates in the city.

Yes, sir. It is. is because if you if if we we serve all of these uh developments outside the city once they develop in the county, you know, probably never want to be annexed. Just a question. Is the policy of the city to grow or to stay the same or shrink? Great question. Great question. Further questions, comments from the commission. Let's go and call for representation to the project. Microphone name and address for the record. Jake Porter, Heritage Civil, 2055 North Mount Juliet Road. Um, so just uh to add as much as an answer as I can provide to that. In the past, it's seemed like, and I do not want to by any any means necessary put uh any words in the mayor's mouth, but typically we've been seeing um unless there's a real reason to annex something that it's been kind of we think the the preference to not annex it. So, it doesn't cost the city anymore. Um but again, this is that's totally my opinion of what's kind of happening being in develop in development in the city. So, um just the overview, uh Mr. Van Clive here is uh the owner of the property of Yorkshire Estates, which is the southwest of this uh this little development. They uh are doing I have to give the dollar amount, but the amount of sewer they're putting in for Yorkshire Estates also required a pump station for Yorkshire Estates, which pumps across the creek there, goes into the Paradise pump station, which are also um providing upgraded pumps in that and upgraded system to that to increase the flow over

there. So there's a little bit extra flow with doing that and doing the the uh design and and the new pumps and infrastructure upgrades. So the leftover Mr. Vanclively currently lives on this property and him and his neighbor just trying to see if it's possible to subdivide theirs into and I'll put air quotes on development. Development is an overarching word here. Um they're they're they will be it's two it says two plus acre lots on the application but it's a 54 acre track combined track. Um the total that we're asking for is 18 lots. So there'll be three acres but there'll be some I mean just depending on how it lays out it'll be two here four there five one you know whatever it winds up being. Um I believe Shane we talked about it needs to be it'll be a public sewer that would tag into uh a public force main that would tag into the uh Yorkshshire state's plan. Um yeah the the goal is u to not not doing small you know dense development. It's it's attempted to be a threeacre plus development. Um more of a rural feel more of a spacious feel. not necessarily getting into the weeds of weeds in lots of tight spaces. So, um there's no intention at this point, I'll look back here to say this, but there's no intention to connect to York Shshire, Yorkshire Estates. Um it's not what we're not wanting to go that direction. It'll be a Liberty Chapel um potentially Bender Ferry connection if there's enough room over there, but probably Liberty Chapel and go down towards Benders. Um again, just add on to the the the annexation versus not. Um the closest I think city portion of this via public rightway is about eight 8 ten of a mile away. The closest sewer is over a mile away. So going back through Yorkshire is the only way to get this. We've tried to go through um we have again Mr. Ride living there has I think

his house and his neighbor's house have the two only um decent enough septic areas for their houses and I think they scrape by with that. So, uh, we we've kind of exhausted that route, potentially doing septic for each one. Um, again, he's here. You have any questions pertaining to the land itself, but as an engineer, if you have any questions that way, just let me know. What do they Jill or or John with out of sewer uh taps or out of city sewer taps out there? They pay an additional monthly or Shane, they pay an additional monthly fee

due to that forever, right? From my report, the the developer property owner will pay all regular charges in a search charge of 100% for additional additional for all city fees meeting ordinance 2019-36 since the property is not within the city ordinance. And further, the owner understands agreed to pay the tap and pass fees required for connection to the city system 100% up charge on all of it, including the bill. So you get the money without the burden or without the annexation plan of services. Further questions, comments. Thank you. Let's go and call for citizen comments. Any citizens remaining here around welcome to make comment. See no citizen comments. I'm looking for a recommendation in regards item on our agenda. Make

motion for a positive recommendation. There a motion second and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I

against extensions. There's a positive recommendation. Excuse me. Next item up on uh the agenda is item 10B is to review the Adam City sewer request for 3150 nonable road. Okay. We've had it out of sewer city requests on this property before. So this report will be the same at this time. Uh the owner property developer would like to request four single family residences connection to the city sewer system. Um there's a forest man that runs along the furnace of this property. High pressure. So, we would not I would uh staff would recommend that there's not a direct tap serving homes off the high-pressure force main that a smaller force main run as a tributary that then serves the four houses. We would request that that smaller diameter force main line serving those homes would be private, but the individual grinders would be private at the expense of the property owner and maintained by the property owner in perpetuity. So with our recommendations, if you do choose to provide a pro positive recommendation, I would just ask that uh the final plat for this lot, these lots show that a 20 foot easement is with that the smaller tributary line force man is within a 20 foot of sewer. reason. I know it's 5 acre lot. probably we wouldn't we wouldn't see the uh the

plat generally because of the lot size but uh hopefully deferring to my planning friends maybe we could see that as part of uh the connections as they come in for sewer service and the same things would apply of uh the s the search charges for being out of city sewer questions comments from the commission See no uh questions, comments at this time. Call for citizen comments. See no assistant comments at this time. I'm looking for recommendation in regards to this item on our agenda.

Make a positive recommendation with staff comments. It's a motion and a and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I raising your hand. I against extensions is a positive recommendation with any objection to go ahead and hearing 8 C prior to these final items. Any objection by the commission? Let's go ahead and table item 8 C. Item 8 C is to review the site plan for commercial strip center located 307 North Mount Der. Sam, I think we are looking for an opinion from you at this point.

Yes, to answer your question, um, sometimes we can defer it is 30 days from today. Unfortunately, there's five weeks till the next meeting. So, that puts us at automatic approval. Well, you can deny it if you'd like. Yeah, but if we if we were to defer, it would constitute an automatic approval. I'm just saying don't you can't defer it. You have to make a decision. just a couple months ago. Yep.

No. Good, good, great, great point. That being said, I know that we've heard staff comments regards this project. Any further questions, comments from the commission? This time, we'll call for assistant comments regards this project on our agenda. Seeing no citizens remaining in the room. Citizen. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

This time, see no citizen comments, I'd like to u ask for a motion regards this item on our agenda. It's a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand.

I against extensions denied. All right. Fun time of the year. Our next item up on the agenda is item 11 A. Uh this is the election of a chairperson. At this point in time, I would like to open the floor for nominations for a chairperson for the Mad Planning Commission. Seems like we just did this a month ago. I'd like to nominate Luke for another term as chairperson.

Any additional nominations at this point in time? We'll close nominations and uh that being said uh all those in favor of Luke Winchester as planning commission chairperson uh please raise your hand and say I I

against extensions. Normally I do vote for myself but I had to be thank you guys. You already uh know my grateful and appreciation for it. Um, I will make a comment to say here that as I move forward throughout the next calendar year that I would like it at least to be my final year as chairperson of this committee or this commission. Uh, possibly final year of on the commission as a whole for me, but we'll see. I'm kind of going to make some some personal decisions that uh that I have uh going forward. So, um it's been an honor and it's been a pleasure. Um been here since that gentleman trained me to be here. So, that'll be a long time ago. Uh how you become the old one in the bunch, it uh always fascinates me. But thank you guys. Thank you all for your trust, for your confidence. Grateful. Appreciate staff and all y'all do. Y'all are awesome and amazing and it's uh been a been a very good pleasure. That being said, uh next item up on our agenda is item 11B, election of the vice chairman for the Mount Juling Commission, at which time I would like to open the floor for nominations of such.

It's a motion and a second. Any further nominations at this point? See no additional nomine uh nominations. will close nominations at which time uh I am uh or all those in favor sign I and raising your hand I against abstensions congratulations surprising outcome I I I liking your acceptance speech to I I gamble a lot in the casinos and there's always that guy sits at the table says one more hand one more time One more hand and I'm done. Y

So yeah, I I appreciate you and your guidance and uh your leadership here. Sure. I certainly hate to lose you next year, but thank you. Understand your choices. Yes, sir. Thank you guys. Thank you all. That being said, our next item up on agenda is item 11 C is appoint Jennifer Dunar as a planning commission secretary. Any comments towards that? Speech. speech. Speech for public record. You You want the position? You You've been You've been campaigning for a long time.

Yes. Thank you guys for having me here. Uh my name is Jennifer Dunar. Um just to introduce myself slightly. I'm um originally from Charleston, South Carolina, uh where I was born uh raised. Um, I moved here in 2010 and I've spent most of my career as a police officer. Uh, most recently in Gallatin, Tennessee. Uh, I spent six years in Gallatin on patrol and I did five years in the planning department where I was a permit technician and zoning enforcement. Um, I took a brief leave absence uh for about a year and I've returned and Mount Juliet has been very welcoming and uh the last five months that I've been here has been very enjoyable. I've learned a lot. Thank you for having me.

That's awesome. Thank you. That is awesome. Thank you for your service. That's awesome. Yeah. My speech wasn't as nice as that. Yeah. Yeah. Feel bad now. Uh that being said, we'll open up to citizen comments. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, I'm looking for a motion in regards to this item on our agenda. Motion to approve. Second. Motion in a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. Congratulations. That being said, looking for a motion to adjurnn. Motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against extensions. We are journ