Hendersonville Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right. Thank you very much. First thing we're going to do is the opening prayer. Uh, I'll do it since I didn't ask anybody in advance. Everybody, please bow your head. Dear Lord, thank you so very much for the Christmas season. Thank you for everything you've blessed us with, for sending Jesus here to die for our sins. Lord, thank you so very much for this new year. Let it be a very good year for us personally, for the city of Hendersonville, and for all the people in this audience. Lord, thank you very much for everything that you've blessed us with. Lord, guide us tonight. Let us make the right decisions for the city and for the people of this city. All this we pray in Jesus name. Amen. Amen. Good prayer. Thank you.

So, okay. Next, we have a roll call. Zack, will you take that? Yes, sir. Aliser here. Evans here. Hardwick here. Hasty here. Kerr here. Wessel here. Martin here. Silkwood here. Slatterie here. That makes nine present.

Okay. Next we have public comment agenda items only. And it looks like we have one person on the agenda. Did anybody else want to sign up for this that forgot to or didn't? Okay. The person that we have is Burket Nelson. Will you step up to this microphone over here? Say your name and your address. Right there at the podium. To your right. To [snorts] your right. There you go.

Thank you. I am Burket Nelson. I live at 155 Robera Drive. Um I'm the life surviving developer of what was called Music Village. Charles, good to see you. You were around back then those days. Uh we had 169 acres that we were developing in the 1980s. 22 and a half of them are being considered tonight for the U Trinity Cottages. Um u 17 acres of that 169 including the theater and four showcases and nine acres of Twitty Cities with his stage under the tent of Twitty City uh were zoned for entertainment. Um and uh the that that's what we asked for and that's what we promised we would do is create city and county taxable performance income uh for the city which we did for quite a few years. Um, the Music Village Theater when we sold it was renamed the Music City Theater, which was close, uh, but very confusing because sometimes that sounds like it was Twitty Theater, Twitty City Theater, but it was Music City Theater. Most recently known as the Huckabe Theater. Um, Conway actually never had anything to do with that theater. He was not an investor in it, nor did he ever perform there. So, um, you know, we really don't need to be calling it Twittish Theater. Um, in the 90s, uh, when we when when Music Village sold our property and Twitty sold his nine acres to Trinity, that was in the 90s. It was reszoned to office. At the time, I think we called it plan unit development. I maybe that's called office- PD now. I'm not sure exactly how

that what's happened since then. But the theater was grandfathered uh in that office zoning as that was not a normal use in an office uh public plan unit development. And um so uh what I'm hoping is even though the theater has been excluded out of where the colleges are going, it's it's got its own plot now with a parking. Um the uh we're hoping that it will still be available to the public for more taxable income. I don't know whether it's turned totally religious where it comes under a religious cause where they don't pay taxes at all, but I'm hoping that that theater can be used for the benefit of the city under because that was the zoning under which we got it approved. I am for I like and am for the cottage plan. I think that is I looked it over quite a bit. Thank you, staff. Um and um and I would just say I support that. That's all my comments questions of any kind. [cough and clears throat]

Thank you, Buret. All right. Next on our agenda is acceptance of the agenda. And I believe tonight we're going to change a few things. So yes, Mr. Mr Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to move the election of officers to uh between items five and six. All right. Uh second. Do I have a second? We have a second. Do we'll do this one uh by voice? Everybody in favor say I. I. Anybody opposed?

All right, that will be moved. Thank you. Now, we got one more thing that we need to deal with. We have had a request from one of our city folks to move his item up. Okay. and that's Heritage Park which is under the site plans. He would like to move it up to right after the consent agenda is dealt with. So between 6 and 7, we'll insert him. I'll make that motion. That's uh let's see that is again Heritage Park and we'll be moving that one up on the agenda. Do I have a second? So I have a second. We'll do this with my voice too. All in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? All right. Thank you very much. So, next is the minutes. So, with that, has everybody had time to read their minutes? See it? Do I have a motion? Do I have a second? All right, we'll do this one by roll call or I'm sorry, by the electronics. Yes, the middle one.

Motion to approve. Pass with eight yeses and one absent. That's staying. Sorry. Thank you very much. All right. Next is the consent agenda. I'm sorry, the election of officers. Sorry about that, but I need a motion, please. Um, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that we um continue the slate of officers as they currently sit with Tim Altiser as our chair, Wendy Slatterie, that's me, as our vice chair, Vanessa Silkwood as our secretary, and Charles Hasty as the vice secretary. Do we have a second?

Okay, we have a second. So, we will do this one electronically also. Motion to approve election of officers passed with nine yeses. Thank you very much. Now we'll move to the consent agenda. And on the consent agenda, we only have one item, so we don't need anything for grouping them. Uh with that being said, does anybody need any description about this? Any conversation about it? It looks like everything on there has been agreed to. It must meet everybody's expectations. Anybody got questions about it on the board? All right, then I'll accept a motion.

We have a motion. Do we have a second? We'll vote for this one electronically. I voted. I hit it. It lit up and then it went off. Sorry about that. Motion to approve the consent agenda. Pass with nine yeses.

Thank you. Okay, next we have the change that we made where we have moved Heritage Park up off the previous or the uh I'm sorry off number eight and moved it up behind the consent agenda. So this one is Heritage Park site plan owner city of Hendersonville location is 119 East Drive parcel 164F 001.00 00 uh leading planning staff is Timothy. There is a waiver request on this. So Timothy, if you'll fill us in, please.

Um the uh the planning commission approved the concept a concept plan for Heritage Park last year. Uh now they're coming forward with the site plan for this is a passive park that will include walking trails, multi-purpose facility, playground, pavilions, and 40 parking spaces. Um and then the uh the existing barn that's out there will be renovated. Uh they are part requesting a waiver from the requirement to provide landscape islands within the proposed parking lot. Uh our or ordinance requires landscape islands to be provided every 10 parking spaces and at the ends of all parking runs. So on page three, there's an image there that shows the um the two islands that they're asking a waiver from. If granted if granted the waiver, those that would just be a paved uh and striped area. Okay, that concludes my report. Any questions you guys for Timothy? Any comments from anyone? All right, I don't see anybody lit up. So, do I have a motion?

I got a question. Okay, go right ahead. No, Charles, go ahead. I see you on there. The uh the area they're asking the waiverss for are the are the green spots up there? Yes. I mean uh why

you come right on up.

Mr. Hy, that would be a maintenance nightmare to be honest with us having maintenance staff to have to go out there just to weed eat and take care of two parking islands. We do not have any islands like that in Drags Creek, Veterans Park, Sanders Ferry Park, the Rugby parking lot. Uh the only other park that we have islands that have grass and trees in like that would be Volunteer Park. And uh that's our request is to not have to have people go out there on a one-off with weed eaters and and maintain something that quite honestly would be a waste of our time. We may have some other commercial developers come in and say be a waste of their time. Also, I really think you've got an excellent project out here for this park and and I think it'll be great for the community, but I I don't know about the waiver.

Okay. Any other comments, questions? Go ahead, Miss Latter. Just one question. So, if if you're proposing to eliminate the the little landscape bubbles, are you proposing to stripe that space for additional parking or it's just going to be No, ma'am. It would be striped for no parking. Okay. Um that way it would leave room for people to drive around to navigate the parking lot. Um that it would just be striped just like we have it. We just we just redid a parking lot at Drags Creek Park. repaved it last last last year that had multiple areas like this where we just striped for no parking areas. Okay.

I would anticipate when we uh repave uh Veterans Park coming up in the next year, we're also going to repave at Malard Point in the next year that we will do areas like this as well. Okay. I also have a concern about just the precedence of the city being given a waiver and developers coming into the city and claiming that just as Mr. Hasty said that it's an inconvenience to have to maintain it. What do we say to a developer if we've told the city? That would be my concern with the way we understood. Thank you. Commissioner Kerr, I saw you next.

Yeah. Thank you. Uh just a quick question. Are those areas going to be curbed? The areas around the parking lot will not be curbed [clears throat] because we will have multiple times throughout the year when there will be a need for parking that will overflow this parking lot. And putting curbs there would not allow people to use the grass area to the right and above that area for parking. So, you could expect that that's going to be parking at some point. People are going to park on that if you don't curve it. No, it's it's striped. Oh, I see. You're just going to stripe it. Period. That's correct. [clears throat] Are you So, you're not going to curb around where it's striped? That is not the plan. Okay.

Other than the stripes, what keeps somebody from parking there? I see people parking everywhere at ball games and different places. Hendersonville Police Department. Okay. So, it would be the police that have to Okay. Yes, sir. Gotcha. Okay. And people just using common sense. Good luck on that one. Okay. Yes, sir. Thank you, Commissioner Silkwood.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I understand the thought behind the idea of, you know, setting a precedent and whatnot. Um, I think one thing we need to keep in mind though, this is not a commercial development. It's not a for-profit development. This is run by taxpayer dollars. And I have to say, you know, Director Gilly and his staff do a really good job keeping up our the maintenance of our facilities and the parks department um with a relatively small staff. So, I'm very much inclined to support it just because of that. Thank you,

Commissioner Hardwick. So, as Commi Commissioner Hasty said, that was the first thought that I had is that all the other developers are going to come in here and show up and want the same thing. In my mind, the way I justify it, it's a park, not a office building or a retail center. And we typically on those developments, you're looking for more grass. And in this case, there's a whole lot of grass once you get off the parking lot. That's how I justify it in my head. Director Frey, I see you're wanting to make comments.

Yeah, I I might explain one thing uh because uh you brought up a good point about uh asking about the curb. And so just for the planning commissioners, typically uh a parking like the parking lot like this in a commercial area, we would be requiring curb. So you would you'd be seeing curb since this is in a park. Uh we did several years ago, we did change in our zoning ordinance uh to allow even gravel parking uh in parks uh if it was approved by the uh uh the city engineers office. So that's that's one of the reasons that the that the um curb isn't required here. Uh so that it's kind of being treated a little bit different. Uh but that's supported by the zoning ordinance. And then um but it is this is a little it is a little bit different. So you know when we're dealing with parking in the park the public parks uh there is a different uh level of review on what we require. But this is something that does require a waiver uh that just doesn't get. But I kind of wanted to explain that cuz I'm sure a lot of you were thinking, I wonder why there's not a curb uh around there. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Commissioner Slatterie. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Director Free, your comment brings to mind the thought that the next time we're looking at at zoning ordinances and and requirements that there's an opportunity potentially to look at park specific requirements to distinguish. We're all saying we're concerned about some of us are saying we're concerned about precedence and making the distinction of this being park versus a a commercial development of some kind. I wonder if there's an opportunity in the future to look at some of those ordinances specifically for parks to remove the the president's concern. Yes.

Yes. I think that's possible to do that and um you know it really wouldn't be a significant change in this in the sense that it could be supported um you know changing something in the future on the zoning ordinance uh dealing with uh parking lots for for parks because that is something that benefits the totality of the community not just a specific business or even if it was a church it's not just a specific church uh it's uh it's for the whole community when we have parks. And as we all know, you know, one of the reasons that was done and why maybe we need to look at it next time uh we're looking at changes to the zoning ordinance uh is that uh parking is a premium at our city parks and everywhere we can maximize it. It does make sense uh especially if you've ever been the last person that there wasn't a parking spot for. Uh so uh in the parks, I've I've had that happen uh before and I'm sure everybody everybody has. So we want to try to maximize but then still balance that with the same expectations we have about attractiveness and and all of those different things. And the balance I guess one thing to keep in mind is ah you know what are we going to wave this and you know comparing that to commercial and everything. Uh but in this specific instance and in most of our park situations, the balance of outside of the parking lot, you know, is pretty substantial open space and grass and trees and more extensive than it would be in a commercial development or in most cases even like if it was a church or religious type of development, it would it would be more extensive.

So, thank you,

Commissioner Evans. Yeah, I'm I'm going to support this, but uh wanted to make a couple of comments. I've had occasion with a couple of daughters to be down in the parks and the softball fields and that area. And uh it it seems that that parking is not always done very well there that you're talking about using common sense. If it weren't for the mud holes down in certain area, you you would have people all over the grass everywhere and parking is at a premium. But I've also noticed uh being uh 73 years old that at night in the park, unless those white lines are done very well, the islands and the curbs are about the only thing that define the parking lot. And that's my only concern. If we if we draw stripes on the on the ground and if it's raining or if it's dark and the lighting is not very very good, uh that center parking section there is not going to be very well defined. So, just a concern if

if I may. Go ahead.

One thing I would I would say to address that is that um I fought since 2016 to have our park parking lots repaved and all of them but one in Drakes Creek Park have now been repaved and we're about to repave the last one and we're also working really hard to get some more light in that area. I think this is also an opportunity to use some newer technology maybe for some solar light type stuff that will help light the parking lot. But the repaving and constant resealing and striping of the parking lots is something that I fought for as a alderman and as a parks director to have happen in our cityowned parking lots because it can become a fiasco. As you have probably noticed some of y'all who are up here who are parents, if it's not striped properly when it is, people seem to respect it. When it's not, we've got people everywhere. So, I understand that and hopefully that's something we can keep a watch on in all parks, not just this one.

It It gets to be coaches and grandparents and everybody in between. Yes, sir. Okay. Any other commissioners have comments, questions? If not, I'll entertain a motion if anyone has one to offer. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. We have a second. So, we'll do this electronically. Motion to approve. Pass with ad yeses and one no. Thank you, Zach.

Thank you all very much. Appreciate you moving us up also. Thank you. Okay, next we have development plans. And again, this one I'm sorry.

Okay, development plans. Now we are uh to the TBN Millennia Cottages final development plan. Owner is Trilogy Asset Investments Incorporated. Location 645 East Main Street, parcel 158A 008. Lead planning staff is Timothy Whitten Zachary Coleman. And uh this just so everyone knows is a deferral from the November 4th and the December 2nd meeting. Uh this was deferred twice. So we're hearing it tonight. Timothy, you have anything to offer on this?

Um I don't have a whole lot. I I can go back over the highlights of the changes uh of this plan from the approved preliminary development plan if if we'd like like me to. Well, I remember it. Uh the only problem I have with it is we deferred it twice. So, I don't know everybody remembers it. So, if you'd like to just get a real quick highlight,

I can do that. Uh so those changes include uh they've eliminated the assisted living facility which comprised of 80 units. They've expanded the independent living cottages from 90 to 110 units. They've replaced the barn with a new storage facility. Have reduced the two office out parcels to one out parcel at the corner of Codell and Maine. They've removed the proposed chapel and added a small cafe at the pickle ball courts. Uh they have increased the length of the sidewalk along a firmed drive to provide pedestrian access for the neighborhood to the church. Um and then um since the deferral, they're no longer requesting the parking waiver. They've agreed to meet the full quantity and dimensional requirements of the of the zoning ordinance for parking spaces. Um then also just as a reminder per agreement with the developer at the last meeting um a note will be added to the FTP to the effect that if the owner desires at any point in the future to implement the assisted living use nursing home use uh an amended FTP will first be required to be submitted to the planning commission and the and Bulma at at that finished.

Yes, sir. Thank you very much, Timothy. So, with that being said, I see we have uh one person in the queue that needs to ask questions. So, go ahead, Todd. Okay. Uh somebody here to to speak to the development. Yes, sir. Just step up to the podium, say your name and your address, please. Frank Media and uh I'm the CBA and also with Trinity Broadcasting here at Hendersonville. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Just a [clears throat] couple maybe follow-up questions from the last meeting, maybe the last two meetings actually. Yes.

Uh and I know that the the definition of this development has moved from an assisted living to um independent living. It's got a 55 and above criteria. Um, and I think the right move was to to remove the assisted living. It it creates a lot of complexities uh beyond just the the structure part of it. Um, I do I still have some concerns that were calling it independent living. Um, and I was in in the industry for many years. So uh you know in independent living it is is that it's it's made for 55 and above that have uh can live independently but have ready access to medical care uh and those things. So are you planning to uh through this contract or make available or be a conduit to any kind of medical care at these cottages?

Yes sir. Um, and thank you by the way for your overview. If I might just take a moment to thank all of you for your kind consideration on my behalf. Uh, the reason I couldn't get here in November was uh I was suddenly hospitalized and that sort of caught me by surprise and then I was prepared to come in December and we had a snowstorm. We couldn't go anywhere. We were locked in for three days. But I really thank you for that and I apologize for any discomfort that has caused anybody. Um yes and and uh our approach on the independent living is to be able to provide a lot of amenities and a lot of assistance and help. And uh probably the right person to speak to that on the specifics of that is is Chris from Vitality Living. They have the they have the one facility right down the street. They're local and they're our partner nationwide in multiple areas. So, if I could ask Chris to come to that, I know your answer, but that's not my profession.

Sure. Thank you. If you would, please. Thank you, sir.

Good evening, everybody. Um, our company's Vitality Living based in Brentwood, Tennessee. We actually own and operate Vitality Hendersonville, right down the road. Uh, specifically to your question, age restricting housing has really kind of uh morphed several definitions. There's active adult, 55 plus, independent living, assisted living, memory care. When it comes to health care support, only truly in assisted living and memory care are you licensed to do healthcare support. This will be more of an active adult project. Um the patio home style, what's what's happened in some of like the Clarendale building that's right down the road here where you have independent assisted all-in-one roof. Sometimes there can be a blend. Sometimes there's a a home care service that that travels over to those apartments. This being patio home style, we may now residents may have home care. They may need homeare and may use a home care company here locally to come in and deliver that service, but we will not coordinate that for them. The to Frank's point, the amenities here are more lifestyle amenities. Truly, what we find, and we've done several of these patio home type projects across the southeast, the type of person who wants to move there is looking for a lifestyle, uh, wants to make sure they're living with folks that are their same age cohort. They're not looking to live next to a family or next to young kids or teenagers. And so they like the uh connection to people their own age and also then the lifestyle like pickle ball courts uh obviously was mentioned earlier about the theater having the theater on site. We're going to use that to do a bunch of different entertainment venues just access and then socialization with people their own age. What's good about us operating both is we do have assisted living memory care right down the road. So when people age and they may need those services will hopefully help bridge that for them. um which we think is a positive uh for both Hendersonville and for obviously uh the folks who are going to live in the community.

Um just to follow up to that uh you mentioned an active care. Why wouldn't you call this an active care facility versus or or development versus an independent living?

That that's the interesting. So it's all independent living and so it's like the other name that's used with these sometimes is 55 plus. I'm 54. I wouldn't move into a patio home development next year. Right. So, um, independent living is probably the right term and that's more of an industry issue where the terms have been switched around and truly independent versus active adult. Um, people resonate, our customers resonate better with independent living versus active. Sometimes [clears throat] active kind of we find the average age of our residents who live in these types of communities still is usually 75 plus. And so when you say active adult, their mind goes to 55 plus and they're thinking, okay, that's not really not for us. So independent living usually covers um the customer base we're looking for.

I I mean I hear you, but I think it's a little bit of a stretch. Yeah. To call it independent living. Um and my other concern, you weren't here at the last meeting, is how do we control um those under 55 wanting to join the community?

Yeah, great question. So the difference between a traditional, you know, all you've probably all signed a apartment lease, um it covers kind of what you're responsible for, payment, what you can do with the physical space. Our leases for any of our active or independent projects, have age restriction, have um [clears throat] uh how many people can live in the property, where you park your vehicles. It's all outlined in the contracts. So we are we do not allow so our residents can have guests if they have grandchildren or kids that want to come stay with them. There's usually a guest period they're allowed to stay a week at most. If they have something that's longer than that they have to give a special request to the on-site manager to allow that. But we do not allow anyone under the age of 55 to live in that property uh full-time. It is age restricted.

So the one week is the cut off. I it's usually a week is we have sometimes a college you know grandkid is coming in 10 days but they have to request that beyond anything beyond the standard guest policy has to be a request and nothing long term. So the uh one week is articulated in your contract. Yeah. Yeah. We outline the guest um expectations in the contract. So everything is signed when they sign their resident agreement. All of that is outlined um in the contract and that's what we hold them accountable to. And if they violate that, we go through the same process if we have to evict them for uh not filing the contract. So, I mean, to me, I I I I'm concerned that you you get the the creep where you get start getting one family that's got three or four members,

you get another one. I've seen developments in in Hendersonville and in Summer County like that. Uh that's a prominent location. A lot of history there. And I'm I'm concerned that we we don't preserve some of that history and and uh nostalgia of what happened in that area. Um and so that's been my concern all along. The [clears throat] assistant versus independent, I actually think you would be better served not calling it independent, but that's just me. Um but I am concerned about uh losing some of the nostalgia of that area

and how you control that. So, if you had a if you had a family that was a repeat offender um having guests under 55 for more than a week, what is your remedy? What what would you do? That's a violation of the contract and they get evicted. We have a patio home development in Athens, Georgia, very similar uh 120 patio homes. We have never had this issue there because we're very clear and we've had guests come in. We've the issues we've had is someone tried to bring an extra car and we'll we'll address that just like if they had someone else living in the property. So part of moving into the community and why people are attracted to it because they like the rules and they understand it. So if you violate them, that's a violation of the contract and that's something that we um start the eviction process on.

So let let me change gears just a second. Sure. Um because you're in the in the business to do this. I if we've got I don't know is it 100 100 total units? Yeah. um what [clears throat] what is your your guess in terms of those families that will have say two vehicles uh in this age category? Um so I where I'm going is the traffic component of that where it leads on the main street. Um and so I have concern that that creates a problem. So walk me through that if if you've got the data.

Yeah. So, traditionally we see people um we get a lot of couples in these type of designs. Most of them are one car. Uh very few um and again this is just experiential developing these all across the southeast. Uh very few we've got traditional IIL apartments and we have uh patio home developments across the southeast. We've got one in Brentwood. We've got um one uh south in Smyrna. It's traditionally one car. Very rarely do families have more than one car at this point. It just is not a necessity. There's so much there. The other piece, we provide transportation to events. That's part of one of the amenities. And so, um, one of the draws is obviously, um, older adults want to save money. And so, multiple cars is an expense. So, we find they downsize one car. Very rarely do we have someone that has more than one car.

And this may be a planning question. Are we concerned at all about the traffic where this traffic will feed into Main Street? Did we decide that we have multiple lanes that have turn lanes, those things that would create that would give some relief on the traffic jams there? I think I'll let our assistant uh public works director answer that question.

So, that really hasn't been uh hashed out at this phase at this kind of development plan type phase. That's something we would address with the site plan where they submit to us a uh a traffic impact scoping form where they estimate the trips generated based on the square footage of of living space being proposed and then from there we determine what what scope of study if if necessary at at what stage would that be uh I guess evaluated would it with the site plan with the site plan. Yes, sir. Commissioner, if I may,

Mark Boyd with Kimley Horn. We're the civil engineer for the project. We already have performed a traffic study for the project. We did that with the preliminary development plan. So, that already has been approved um and and accounted for all of the traffic within the property. Actually had a a higher density because we've actually decreased the density overall with this revised plan. So, the traffic has been accounted for and there was no off-site improvements required. So, are you're not going to add any turn lanes or anything like that to to relieve any pressure on the traffic? No, sir. There was nothing that was required based on the volume of traffic generated by this development.

Well, my concern um is that you can't get from one end of this town to the to the to the next quickly anymore. So, that's a lot of traffic even though it's one vehicle that that that feeds onto Main Street. And and and I'm having a problem approving this from from my perspective because of the the pressure on traffic in general. Um, and so just walk me help me get comfortable with it. I guess if I may speak to that, please.

Yeah, thank you for that. And we had the same concern. Uh, typically we were originally we were at 170 units. We've decreased that by almost 40%. And that traffic was approved and it met code. um according to an IIL and and and mixed use spaces. Obviously, if you're talking assisted living, you're not going to have as much traffic, but visitors you do have almost daily. That's eliminated completely. The configuration of the site right now that we have um what was uh Music City, I was very interested to hear what the gentleman shared with because I understood that history. Um I want to speak to that a moment too. If you if you saw um we were influential with our our our friendly neighbors, our great neighbors, the First Baptist to get a a red light that that's it's it's an exit now. So now if you're going to exit uh on the existing area, you'll find all the traffic's being diverted over to the red light and it even is enough to handle uh the church when it lets out on a Sunday with 2,000 people leaving and they use part of our parking lot. Uh I think we've mitigated that a lot. Um, I think that not only did we mitigate it a lot, um, part of our concern was the density. So, we took the density down to 4.94 per acre. Um, I think Chris and and Chuck, the chairman of Vitality, will tell you that's not heard of because developers can't typically afford to get down to less than seven, eight, 10 units per acre and make it work. We own the property and and our motivation wasn't density. Our motivation wasn't how could we stretch the price per unit. Our motivation was what's going to be a wonderful place to live in with all the amenities we can give and preserve the auditorium which um you know Mike Huckabe bless his heart he's serving our country he's a great

man we lost Mike uh we gained him in one end we lost him on the other end but now you have the Gaither family that comes there and they've been doing an excellent job and recently in the last three four months there's been events that have been used for certain areas in the community in that So part of the plan with that is to integrate that into this community, integrate it also for the use of the assisted and memory care so they can come for special events and then also to to be able to be available for the community to have events now. Whereas in the past is just the Huckabe theater, it really wasn't viable and practical. So in in in one way I think our sovereign lord sort of settled that whole thing by taking Mike and sticking him in Israel and giving us that place and giving us the incentive to to diminish it and uh especially after the tornado. You know as we spent a lot of time on that site it set us back a year as you well know. We owned the Holiday Inn for 9 days before the tornado decimated it. We got it back and running in six and a half months, which by the way got an award from Holiday Inn for Excellence and Expedience, but it also caused us to take really hard looks at the site again, the infrastructure of the site, um how it's laying out, how it's working. And then of course uh as our relationship with Vitality increased because they are our manager in Orlando with a very large site um we realized that we already had something that was really good in the community. How can we join hands and make it better? Were we really doing a service to the community by adding more density with more memory care, more assisted living? Are we doing better by joining our hands and giving people a way to to age up and go to places? Um we ran a studies we're not just being arbitrary and the studies proved to us that you know our market is 75 plus here as he mentioned and uh on

the uh the parking um it yes the code required too. So we apologize we didn't do that in the first place. It wasn't arbitrary where we were trying to figure out how to jam cars because a typical car is one car. Um what Chris didn't mention to you the lease is restrictive. You cannot use the garage for storage. It must be a garage that holds a car. And there's a purpose for that too because our thresholds are zero so that people taking their groceries into their kitchen and that they don't have to stumble over something. And independent can use a walker, right? So everything's made for that purpose as well. And also there's there's no living ability in there. You can't store stuff in there for living ability. So the fact that we've added the second literally it's a second drive now. Um my opposition to that was I don't like concrete jungles. I don't asphalt jungles. Um I come from a long life back in the day of the HUD HUD experience. I was a HUD director [snorts] and uh those things we were trying to solve when we had huge density. So our approach to that is is we wanted to be permeable areas that have [clears throat] some grass along with the concrete that have some cobblestone. And I thought that the uh the team Timothy and Keith and the team their their comments were exactly the ones I'm making and I would make about the exteriors. We don't want just horizontal siding. Yeah.

You know, we want a combination of our vertical Dutch lap, our stone, and uh and to be able to give some different faces to it as it goes. So, we're we're aligned with you perfectly. We're we're our heart hearts are beating exactly the same. And I would hope to prove that, you know, we took the the concern and and jumped right on it with the mansion and those of you were able to come and tour it with us. Thank you for that. Um, I I I believe we brought it back better than it was and uh we're proud of that and that's going to be part of our facility as we're using it there. So, I hope that helps to answer that question. It does. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Commissioner Hasty, you're in the queue.

Uh, I may get out on a limb by myself again. This this project has been obviously a very [clears throat] involved, revolving project. when [clears throat] it was first submitted, [cough] you know, we had our public hearings and whatnot. Assisted living was always a component of this development. You got a negative recommendation from the planning commission. uh don't even remember how I voted but you went on to the board of mayor and alderman and you got a positive recommendation from the board of mayor and alderman. The plan that the board of mayor and alderman approved had 80 assisted living units as a part of the project and that's what the plan uh the board of mayon alderman approved and that's what I was expecting to come back to the planning commission had we received a plan that met the plan that the board If Mayor and Alderman approved and you met all of our regulations, I'd have been the first to say yes. I would have voted for that project. But it's constantly evolving. Tonight is the first time that I had heard that Vitality was a partner in this project.

Let me correct that. There are management companies. So when I say partner, a manage Okay.

Yeah. They don't have a a financial interest other than a contract. financial interest would be you competing with the f vitality project that they have from a management standpoint. They don't want you competing with them. Maybe if you've got your own assisted living out of respect to the border bar and alderman and the project that they approved, I think it should go back to them. They want assisted living, they can vote that way. They want to take out the assisted living and prove this plan. Bring it back and I'll vote for it. But I think out of respect to the board of mayor and autumn, it should go back because we're doing something against what they approved. So we'll see how it goes.

Thank you, sir. Overview here just real quick.

Director Fre. Yeah, let me give just a quick overview and I think almost everybody understands this about this this process but maybe so the so the uh folks in the audience understand as well. Uh this uh uh several years ago went through our process as a uh preliminary development plan and so that's we call it a PDP preliminary development plan. It's basically a uh reszoning of the property and so going through that reszoning as uh chairman hasty I mean as uh commissioner hasty had stated I think previously when it came through the the preliminary development plan uh to the planning commission. The planning commission is a in this particular instance is a recommendation body and made the recommendation to Bulma uh and it was a negative recommendation but at Bulma uh um they they actually ended up approving it and so by approving that they reszoned the property and then gave it uh you know uh whatever rights that it had to that particular plan. Now the the what we have before us this evening is a final development plan and FDP it's kind of the conclusion of the PDP. So the PDP is the entitlement that sets this is what you can do. Uh and then the FDP is then focusing in more and having more specifics you know on what's um uh on what to do. So, so the planning commission will uh make a recommendation on this proposed final development plan and then that will go to Bulma and then they will ultimately have you know the final determination on that. uh and then if it's approved at Bulma then uh I think the issue that came up while ago about the the traffic study and everything which was already done at the preliminary development plan and I know I'm saying a whole lot but uh then when

that site plan is done to actually submit for everything that's going to get built during that process which will come back to this body uh then that's when the city engineers office will review to see hey do we need we need to update the traffic plan or, you know, uh, do the traffic study, uh, to see if that time if anything's changed that might require off-site improvements. And so that's that's kind of the dynamic of what this whole thing is going. And just for the planning commissioners, you you're not seeing a lot of the FDPs. You're typically because we changed it a few years ago, you're seeing the CDPs, which are the combined development plan, which is taking the preliminary and the final, and doing it all at one time. In this particular instance, it's separated. So, that's why it's a little bit it's a little bit different. So, I just kind of wanted to explain that, Mr. Chairman, for uh for the folks in the audience. I appreciate it.

Thank you. Commissioner Evans, you're in the queue.

Yeah, I'm kind of confused here. Uh I voted against the reszone when this property was reszoneed to begin with. Uh then we came back and uh the project that was originally uh laid out in front of us was was far more extensive than this. It uh appeared to combine several different approaches to uh residential property. It did do a traffic study and traffic's always going to be a problem here. Anything we look at has a traffic problem in Hendersonville. There will never be anybody that won't complain about traffic regardless of what we are considering. So, uh that's not an issue to me. What is an issue to me is we pulled out everything in this initial project and now I see a duplex development. Call them patio homes if you want to, but they're duplexes and I'm just I I'm not I'm not impressed. Uh this has nothing to do with Trinity Broadcasting except you own the property. Uh, and we still have a group of duplexes, which I believe we probably got uh uh misdirected in trying to save the the 20y house and uh said, "Well, okay, save the 20y house and uh we'll let you build these duplexes." So, I I guess maybe that's my confusion, but but I'm I can't vote for this.

Commissioner Slatterie.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a a question. And I think it's more directed to planning staff and to director free so that I understand when we say independent living is that the same as 55 plus when it comes to Tennessee regulations that 20% of the units can allow people under the age of 55 in total. I understand that as I understand it, Tennessee regulations for 55 plus say that 80% of the units have to have at least one resident in the home that's 55 or older, but 20% of the units don't have to apply that age restriction.

That would that would be something that might be what the state and maybe the developer can can address it, but that would be something that the state law might say. But for us, we just define independent living facility. So, it's a little bit of a broader [cough] thing. The the nuts and bolts of how that might work. Um maybe the basement of it is what the state laws are in regards to that depending on the type of facility uh that it is. Uh but then uh that doesn't necessarily mean that's what the minimum has to be. um uh hearing the developer representative talking uh it sound like theirs is a little bit different and they have the leeway to do that

with HOA covenants. Yeah. With restrictions and all those different things, you know, they they probably have that, but that's something if the developer wants to address that. But for us, we don't get into that with just the broad. we just get into the broad independent living facility, not all of those different, you know, different specific things. And those things, honestly, every year we see it, uh, something changes in the state law. So, there's always something changing that might change what those percentages, you know, would be. If I may, uh, Miss Lattery,

your question is well put. Um we we are not subject to a state law that would require us to adjust our plan to a 20%. And we won't. Um we're going to be very strict as we said as it is. It's quite typical. 100% of your leases are 55 plus. They have to qualify and they have the restrictions of how ter how long somebody can stay, how many cars they can have. Uh this isn't a uh and by the way the the cottages you see now are the same cottages you saw before. They were always presented at that as as as as a a twounit cottage because we don't want congregate living. We don't want row type spaces where people are walking upstairs. We're not looking for density up to seven or eight per acre. We want it to be a nice living facility for somebody who's in some ways, you know, they may be going down and what they want to do. They don't want to have as much to take care of. They want someone to do it for them. They want something that looks like a home, feels like a home, and is their home. Um, adding units to each other doesn't do anything for the project. In my in in my perview, it takes away from it. Uh, you have less landscaping. you know, when you're only at 4.9 units per acre, you have a lot of room for landscaping. And uh and again, I don't like the idea of concrete or asphalt um looking for because that's what you look like. You then begin to look like a multifamily unit. That's not what we are and we can't be and never will be. I might also add to you that, you know, because of who we are, our financing structure, which some of you can can relate to, is taxexempt bond financing. Uh that's very strict. Those are 40 years, 30, 40 years. And so the plan that we present to them is the plan that we have. We we don't have the the independent ability nor the desire to go in and change the plan. That is the

plan. And um and so what ends up being permitted by this city is more than just an exhibit. That's our plan uh along with the way that we're going to manage it and everything else. And that's what we're accountable to do. So, so very meticulously we considered the market and and to Mr. Hastings point, yes, when we first came in in in early 24, we were considering what would be a mixeduse facility with the assisted and with your memory care. So, it was 80 units of assisted and memory care and then the the vast amount of it were the independent living cottages just like they are. Um, but as we did some more studies, uh, we determined that that probably wasn't in the best interest not only of of our site, but of the community because you have some facilities now. And I don't know that us competing with assisted and memory care is going to do the community any good. But where we do bring a bright star is with this this lifestyle center that we're bringing that is not mediocre by no means. It it it's if if you'll allow me, it's a high-end product that's brought at affordable price. And we're able to do that because we own the land. If we didn't own the land, we wouldn't be able to do that. We couldn't bring it forth at numbers that made sense and worked. And uh and so the way I look at it, and I could appreciate, you know, the the metamorphosis of it all, um is and forgive me, but you know, I am a pastor. I'm a man of faith. So everything to me has to line up on that basis. I just see the good Lord's hand in this that he's brought it back to a place that is good for the community, good for everybody. [snorts] And and you are right. One of the positions that was brought was to deal with the uh the uh mansion and uh not only did we concede that, we were happy to do that. It's a wonderful facility and it's going to be

a centerpiece along with the auditorium to this community and it does make it special. It does make us different and we'll continue to be music city. We're not going to give that up. I hope that answers that question. Thank you. I'll go back to you have another question.

Yes. For for um Director Free. So nothing in the any of the DPS the CDP the FDP the all DPS nothing has has actually articulated that it is 100% 55 plus. So if the project is approved and the world changes every day, but six years from now things aren't moving along as they had intended in their business plan, could they back off of that 55 plus without having to come back for any kind of approval?

No activity. Okay. Thank you. The answer is is no. Okay. Um the the def the definition this is being developed as independent living facility. They have to be our definition which is on the screen which means that in each unit one of those one of those people has to be 55 or older. Um it has to meet our definition and it that's part of the plan. That is in the plan. Okay. Thank you. Any other commissioners have questions, comments?

I'll make it real quick because I know this is going on. Go ahead. We have a couple in our small group who is 75 and they just recently purchased a home in the vineyards uh which is on the back side of 12stones and and I have if I'm understanding what they're saying those are going to be very those are very similar to kind of what these will be other than those are home ownership where this is is rentals but other than that distinction I think they're going to be pretty close to the same they they paid over $600 $100,000 to be in there. So, I think this is a product that's needed and um I think it'll they'll fill it up in a hurry. Any other commissioners questions, comments?

Anybody have a motion that they would like to offer? Sure, I'll do it. I make a motion uh that we accept. Sorry, pl's been presented. With all staff comments with all staff comments. Do I have a second? Second. We have a second. Okay, we'll do this electronically.

Sorry about that. Motion to approve. passed with six yeses and three nos. Okay. And commissioner I mean sorry director free would like to let everybody know the next steps for this. Yes.

Okay. Uh so uh where it goes from here is next Tuesday at the Bulma general committee. It's kind of a small meeting uh of uh of some of the uh uh the Bulma me board of mayor and alderman members. Uh then they'll review it and then it'll pass through that commu committee. Uh and then two weeks after that it'll be at full Bulma uh and uh for the uh first and final reading. Uh so that'll be the final determination of this particular project in about 3 weeks. So thank you.

Okay. Next we move to the site plans. First one is 120 at Saunders Ferry site plan. Owner Steven Paneer. Location 120 Sanders Ferry Road. Parcel 160MC017.00 uh lead planning staff Timothy, you want to tell us about this? And this is a waiver request. Thank you. This is a vacant 4.7 acre site that's located at 120 Sanders Ferry Road. It is zoned general commercial. Um the um the it there was a old site plan that was approved a few years ago which was a mixeduse development had 54 residential units over over commercial. Um so this new plan is for three buildings uh and the associated parking. Um on the image there I know it's kind of hard to read. Uh building one is the top right hand building. Building two is bottom bottom right hand and building three is the large building to the rear. Um so buildings one and two which are located closest to Sanders Ferry those will be singlestory commercial retail totaling about 21,500 square ft. The third building at the rear will be a headquarters for Panera Roofing which is a commercial roofing company. Uh there will be two uh accesses off of Senior's Ferry, one full ingress, egress and then a right in right out. Um and then there'll be there will be cross access to the lot to the north. Um they are providing uh 176 parking spaces out of 175 required. They are requesting three waivers. So, the first waiver um our zoning ordinance allows for the use of high quality architectural metals to be used on a case-by- case basis and

those are proposed in limited quantities on the two retail buildings on Sandish Ferry and greater quantities on the front of building three. The primary materials should be brick or stone and buildings two and three meet that requirement. On building three, high quality architectural metal is is the predominant material on the front. Although there is a good amount of brick on that side as well. On the north and south sides of building 3, the brick wraps around the sides of uh of the building. Um but the predominant material on the sides and the rear is is your standard metal siding, which is what you would associate with a typical sort of warehouse kind of kind of building. Um and the uh the image that's been provided, everything in yellow uh is the the standard um uh metal sighting that they are requesting the waving the waiver for uh on on building three. Uh the parts that are highlighted in red, that's that's the brick. And then on the front where you see that signage uh that's that's more of the high quality uh uh metal metal sighting. So they're requesting for the waiver for that uh building three for the metal sighting. Um then moving on to number two. Waiver request number two. Um, our zoning ordinance requires that at least 75% of the replacement trees uh be canopy type trees. So, canopies that will develop a a broad canopy uh rather than smaller ornamental type trees. Uh the purpose of that requirement is to maintain and increase the city's uh city's uh canopy tree canopy. Um 100% of the replacement trees for

this project are proposed to be the ornamental type rather than the canopy. Um so that's a total of 30 trees. They're requesting for a waiver. Um and then the last waiver number three, the zoning ordinance requires a minimum of 20% of the overall lot area to be pious surface. So something other than asphalt, concrete or rooftop. Um, and the applicant is is proposing to provide 17.5% pvious area. That concludes my report. Thank you, Timothy, commissioners. Okay, Commissioner Martin.

Thank you. Um, this project has generated, excuse [clears throat] me, this project has generated a lot of interest on social media. So, I wanted to see if we could talk a little bit more about this for the people at home. Um procedurally, uh you mentioned it was u residential. We did the Westlake plan. It moved to general commercial. Um so that would make this a buy application. Is that correct? That's correct.

Okay. Um the other concern uh on social media is um obviously the traffic impact. Um but there's a note on from public works. Um I wanted to see if you could articulate is [clears throat] anybody from public works there?

T can you talk a little bit about the concerns for um the Sanders Fairy Road improvement and then also the storm water detention because that ties into the permeability of the waiver west. So, um, the city this past year had, uh, had widened the road, the Saunders Ferry Road from about six six or 700 feet south of the of the intersection with Main Street. Um, so this project that will be required to extend that two-way left turn lane. um you know the the width of its frontage and then that that 200 foot or so taper uh to that two-way left turn lane width would have to be shifted uh south of their property frontage. So the the intent is at some point to have a three-lane section um the the large majority of of Sauners Ferry Road. um regarding the stormwater detention, their their proximity to Old Hickory Lake, um that they have requested not to require detention. And and our response to that is, well, okay, prove to us that, you know, the receiving infrastructure has capacity for the 25-year storm, which is per our ordinance, and also that there won't be any kind of um negative impact to the roadway. So, we're we're really concerned at this point with runoff bypassing uh the proposed inlets and inundating the roadway. So, there there's methods they can use in their storm water analysis to prove to us that the spread and the depth around those inlets um does not cause bypass and and and does not inundate the roadway.

All right. Thanks. Yes, sir. Um, so when I look at this project, these are my own personal thoughts, but when I look at this project with all the parking spaces, yeah, you're meeting the parking space requirements, but the the site is just it's just the permeability is an issue. Um, the square the square I think there's too much building on [snorts] this site is my opinion. um because it's driving the parking count up and they're not able to provide what we're asking for as far as uh the shade trees and the permeability. Um I don't have a problem with the first waiver um but the others I do. So those are just my thoughts. Thanks.

Any other commissioners? Commissioner Hasty,

I agree. I believe if the staff would work with the developer on waiver one, I think we could come up with a product that would be okay. Waiver number two, I think we need to [snorts] get as many of those trees there as we absolutely possibly can. But is uh this a scenario where uh contributions to the tree bank would suffice on a portion of the the trees. U

need to get all the trees we can I can I can speak to that. So this this isn't really a issue of the quantity of trees they're providing the quantity. It's the type of tree. Um, but if there's an issue with replacing of trees on his site, if the if there was such a massive amount of existing trees that he couldn't meet that 75% requirement, we could at least get them off site if we can in a tree bank. So, but I think he should get it get them on site.

Yeah, they are providing they are providing all the replacement trees. They're just not the canopy type tree that we require. Well, they should be the canopy trees. And I also agree with on waiver number three. I mean, you got a site that's over seven over four and 3/4 acres and what are we talking about? 5,000 square feet. Believe so roughly. Do what? So, I believe so roughly. Can I speak to waiver two and three? Go right ahead.

Okay. Thank you. So [clears throat] to speak to waiver two regarding the trees, as Timothy mentioned, we're we're replacing all the trees that are required. Now, the the big reason for not wanting to necessarily have shade trees everywhere is because when you have a commercial development like this, visibility is very big for a thriving commercial development. uh if you put shade trees everywhere, once they get to full maturity, you're not going to be able to see this development from the street. And so we're the also the existing site is pretty much open like the only trees that are on the site are at the back end of the property. The whole site's been cut with for hay and has been maintained uh for the last several years. And uh from from a canopy standpoint, I we're not necessarily removing that much canopy in my opinion. Now, as Timothy said, we're replacing all the trees. They're just ornamental trees that fit a commercial development more so than a residential development. Um to speak to waiver number three, we were really close to meeting this. Um, and then as we were working through the design process with with the fire department, the fire department came back and I've I'm not putting him on the spot. I've have gotten his permission to actually state this in the meeting. So, um, as we were working through it, he wanted us to have wider drives throughout the site, which we accommodated. And when we accommodated that, it made it a little bit challenging to meet the impervious surface requirement. Um, I would also like to add to speak more to the to the detention um, it's not necessarily a waiver, but the uh, I guess it is a waiver to speak to the detention waiver. It is very common for sites this close to the lake to request this this waiver. If you detain water and hold back water from entering into the lake, you end up causing more problems in later storm

events. And so it is common practice to alleviate and uh remove the storm water runoff off the site sooner than later. And so that's one of the main reasons why we're asking for that waiver. Uh we've we've sat down with Trey and his department multiple times to to discuss this and we are actively working back and forth with them to make sure that we meet their requirements. [clears throat] Commissioner Hasty, you're still in the queue. Yeah. Yes. Yes, I your storm water requirement is I mean I think that's a perfectly good answer, but you have to answer to the to the city. You're going to get it across the street and get it to the lake. Yes, sir. If you're not going to detain it. Yes, sir. You may have to upgrade capacity,

correct, of some structures to get it there. Correct. But I agree detention is not necessarily required if you're going to get it to the lake. And to speak to speak, I guess to to more so the the impervious uh surface, we are proposing water quality units being installed subsurface on site to treat the water before it exits the site. So it's not like we're we're asking for a complete storm water waiver on this project. We are utilizing water quality units to treat the water. We are upsizing the uh the covert the there's an existing covert that goes under Saunders Ferry right now. We are upsizing that to provide more capacity. Also, I think your argument of visibility on trees. Yes, sir. Pretty weak argument in my opinion.

Okay. And uh coming up with 5,000 square ft or so impervious area and blame it on the fire department. Still a little bit of a weak argument. Okay. It's a little bit overkilled or maybe a little over development, overbuild if you can't meet that 20%. Any other commissioners questions, comments? I see none in the queue. So, anyone have a motion that they'd like to offer?

I'm sorry. Well, you can do it any way you want to do it. You can the waivers. You can do the waivers. You can do the waivers individually. You can do them as a group. You can do it however you see fit.

Okay. So, your first motion is a waiver is waiver number one request to agree to the waiver. Is that what your motion is? Yes. A motion to approve waiver number one. Okay. Do we have a second? We have a second. Uh, now we'll go the electronically for the vote. State what that waiver is. Okay. I'll make the statement. Are you want to talk? I was going to move to approve the whole thing. That's not what we're doing. All right. The motion before us is a waiver request use of metal siding in GC general commercial zoning building number three. Okay. Do I need to read the details further than that?

Okay. We have a motion to accept it as the this waiver as is. And we have a second. Now we're going to vote electronically on that waiver. Motion to approve waiver number one pass with nine yeses. Okay. And then now motion to approve waiver number two.

Okay. Okay. And this motion to approve waiver number two is a waiver request for the replacement of the tree 50% canopy requirement. And just to make sure everybody knows, uh Timothy did state that they have hit the right number of trees. They are just not the same type of trees, canopy trees that uh our restrictions require. Okay. Now, do I have a second? Is it 75% or 50%? It's actually I asked a question before. Yeah. Yeah, I see. But go ahead. Go ahead, Charles.

Uh, yeah, I see it. Yeah. I I think there's room for a compromise here somewhere. Maybe if you could just come up with more canopy trees in lie of such of the decorative trees versus me sitting here saying you got to make Abraham one of them canopy. You know I think we can do that. You know, but [clears throat] you better do some quick negotiating if you're going to get my vote on it. Okay. [laughter] I can say there is there is room along the south property line, not in front of the development, but on the [clears throat] the bottom side of it to to add 15. Yeah. To hit the 50% mark.

Okay. And I'm I I could even see us putting some in the internal islands in between the buildings, but along the frontage of Saunders Ferry, I think that's So, I mean, yeah, I think you could you could hit 50% without putting any additional along Sers Ferry. Okay. Would you allow for 50%. Can Yes. So you're increasing it, you know, to 50% of them that are going to be canopies that you norm now have as ornamental ornamentals. It'd probably save us money because the ornamental trees are not cheap. [laughter] Well, you buy the right caliber and size and quality of the right can canopy trees, you know. Yes.

They ain't not gonna be cheap either. But I'm sure the guy new guy up here off Saundersville Road be glad to sell you a bunch of them. I think I might know that person, [laughter] right? You could sell you a bunch of them. Maybe even a little bigger caliber than what uh you know you had in mind. So would you be okay? Okay. Now I question to the staff. Is that something you think you could work out to the satisfaction of the staff? Yes. If he's willing to negotiate on the canopy tree? Yes. So do we need to If yes, I'll vote yes. Do we need to do the motion as a determined percentage or do we need to do the motion that he has to work with staff? I say staff. Thank you. So, you cool with making the motion? You want to reward your motion?

Um, subject to working with the staff. Very good. Do we have a second? We have a second. We'll vote electronically. Motion to approve waiver number two pass with nine yeses. Okay. Then finally we are to our third waiver. And the third waiver motion to approve waiver number three

as is. You're fine with it just the way it's written. Um, I'll defer to Charles Hasty on that. [laughter] Good decision. So, if you're looking at your site plan at the back of the building in that parking lot, you've got some wide areas there that are going to just be asphalt. You can put some green space there. at the end of those parking spots there. You could put some green space in there, you know. Yes, sir. So, cut down a to provide

couple feet on that one. Minimize the parking. You can get 5,000 square ft 20%. I think

if I can provide some context to to how we got to this point in in our site plan. So, as mentioned in Timothy's uh presentation, building 3 is is intended to be the the headquarters for Panera Roofing. So, the back of house back behind the building is can be a really important and critical component to their business. Um the the other thing is is that right now what we're [clears throat] assuming in this site plan is that 5,000 square feet of these commercial buildings up front are going to be restaurant. And so with a restaurant component to a commercial development, restaurants require much more parking than a normal retail development. Now, obviously, [clears throat] we'll have to monitor the the the tenants that go in here and in the final uses. Uh but what's driving that parking number way up is the restaurant component to the development. If we were if we were to just do retail use, um the the parking requirement would be much less and we could likely very easily hit the the u pvious requirement. But what we were trying to do with this development was not only provide a home for Paneer roofing, but also provide a much needed restaurant space, retail space for this peninsula in this I I'll say it up and coming area which drastically needs redevelopment in my opinion.

Well, I think you've got a great development here and I think it's good for the area. And I think it I think it's all around good. But we have a zoning ordinance with regulations and requirements. Understood. There for a reason. Since you have it a roofing company back here in the back, that's parking for them. Correct. And a restaurant up front. Well, the odds are the use of the restaurant is not going to be the same time the use for the roofing company. Correct. You know, balance parking. I'd be more apt to give you a minor variance on the parking requirements, you know, okay, to get to the green space requirement.

You know, you need to get with the staff and work these things out on my opinion before you ever get here. And I'm sure the staff is more than willing to work and there's some negotiated areas on stuff like that. I've spoken with Tim here and a little give here. Yes, sir. Now, would if we're negotiating, which we have on the other one, uh would you be open to us utilizing pvious pavers in parking spaces? What? Utilizing pvious pavers in parking spaces to help meet that requirement. Are you good as a combination? I'm looking staff. I would I would be fine if staff agrees.

I think we're okay. Are you okay with this? And and I'm not I'm not saying all 5,000 square feet or whatever that number ends up being. The two and a half% is going to be met with the pvious pavers, but we can find more pvious area and also utilize pavers in conjunction to meet that full 20%. I think square foot for square foot of impervious per pa, you're going to have to do a whole lot more pavers to get the same effect of impervious of a grass space. Actually, you can get more water back into the ground with pvious pavers than you can do a pvious not on a slope parking lot. I don't think the the the vast majority of this parking lot is well under 5%.

Which pvious pavers like require you have to be less than 5% to function. Yeah. And the majority of the parking spaces are at 2%. Yeah. I I think a whole lot of calculations. I think staff would be okay with it as long as the engineering worked out on it. And uh I would I would look for using those pvious pavers in a very creative manner uh for attractiveness. Yes. In key areas uh where that it could be uh the visual attractiveness of it could be could be utilized. That that could be that could be interesting. Imagine previous pavers looking like cobblestones in front of those buildings. Yeah, that would look very nice.

Maybe. Okay. If you can convince the staff that you're getting equal amount of purvishness. Yes. With that as you can for the green space and foot square foot per square foot. Yes, sir. I'll go along with it. Putting a monkey on you, buddy. All right. Thanks, Michael. No pressure. Our motion is a waiver request and they're going to hit their minimum 20% pvious area requirement by using pvious pavers creatively according to what our staff will agree to. That's the motion that's been offered. Do we have a second?

All right, we'll vote electronically. Motion to approve pass with nine yeses. So now that we have all of those addressed individually, I'm going to offer the final motion. And the final motion is to approve the entire site plan as it's written with all of the uh all the waiverss that we just agreed to per staff comments. And that's it. Correct. Do I have a second? Can I make one last comment? You go right ahead, but don't do anything that's going to jeopardize. No, I know. I know. Because your boss may be pissed.

I know. I know. I know. Um, the only thing I'll add, and I I meant to mention this in my in my opening statement, uh, the widening of Saunders Road was brought up with this site plan, we're already showing showing a widening of 12 feet. So, what we did is we did a symmetrical widening where we offset six feet for a six foot uh, middle section. and then a full 12 foot lane. So, the only other area we need to make up is six feet. And I I don't know if we can do that in existing rideway uh on the opposite side of the road, but we'll we will work with Trey and his department to make sure that gets obtained. But we're already showing a widening with this plan. I just wanted y'all to be aware of that. You feel good about that, Trey? I do. Okay, cool.

So, we have a motion. We have a second. And everybody's itchingly wanting to push these buttons. Thank you. So, go right ahead. Motion to approve. Pass with nine yeses. Thank y'all.

Thank you. You did good. All right. Moving right along on site plans. We've skipped over Heritage Park. We've already done that. Next is Nashville Tempered Glass Warehouse Site Plan. Owner Grants Fireworks Property Management Location 100 Jessica Lauren Court Parcel 146100- Z00. Again, this is Caitlyn. Sorry, not Timothy. And this again is a waiver request.

Thank you, Chairman. The applicant grants Firework Property Management is requesting approval for the construction of a new warehouse facility. The proposed site for the development is currently a vacant parcel located at 100 Jessica Lauren Court. This property is situated at the corner of Leverne Circle and Jessica Lauren Court. The property is zoned heavy commercial under the current zoning ordinance. The property to the north, east, and west is also heavy commercial with the vacant property to the south as industrial. The new building totals 12,950 ft² which 1,500 square ft of that is office space and the remainder being warehouse. 16 parking spaces are required. They are providing 17 spaces. And the applicant is requesting two waivers for the project. The first waiver is for 60% glazing requirement. The commercial walls facing the street require 60% glazing. The proposal does not meet the standard as the wall facing Jessica Lauren Court provides 26 glaz% and the wall facing Lever provides only 14.5 glazing. The second waiver is the overhead door facing the public street. The developers addressed the zoning ordinance requirement for additional landscaping screening incorporated um for into the site plan. The re the sorry the elevations uh surrounding the structure features multiple ever overhead doors positioned uh to face the door or the street, excuse me.

Um, also back in 2019, the site plan at 103 and 104 Jessica Lauren Court was granted similar approval. Um, which is northeast of this property. Um, the Let's see here. Keep going. Can you go one more? Thank you. Well, um, let's see. Those waiverss also had the overhead doors and the glazing and then also that's all I have.

Thank you very much, Kayn. All right. Anybody on the commission have questions or comments? Commissioner Silkwood, you're next. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a question for Miss Shen. Um, Kaitlin, could so for the glazing the waiverss for the neighboring properties that were were granted, those percentages were similar to what is being requested tonight or dissimilar? Sim very similar. Okay. Thank you.

Well, and the other thing too, just as a comment from my perspective, I mean, you're in a heavy commercial or industrial area. I mean, I think this is what we should expect is buildings that are made for function over pretty. So, I have no problems with what they've presented so far. Any other questions from the rest of you guys? I move. Okay, we have a motion. We have a second. Everybody ready to vote? Motion to approve. Pass with nine yeses.

Thank you, Zachary. Okay, the next thing on our planning agenda is Manscar Farms phase 18 section one setback deviation final plat. These people are having a problem uh being available from my understanding. So they had asked for a deferral here. So I'm sorry about that.

So uh with that being said, I'll read the rest of it and then we'll go from there. Masker Farms phase 18 section one setback deviation final plat owner Wilson Bank and Trust location 124 Manor Way Barcel 1144 I N020.0 uh again lead planning staff is Caitlyn and uh this is a deferral from a previous meeting too. So correct go ahead. Um, I'll just run through the just give us the highlights and if anything's changed from the last meeting.

Actually, we have I'll go through the the request and then I'll touch on the HOA.

Okay. Thank you. Let's see. Let's see. So the there are six waiverss that were being request or deviations that were being requested. The first one is the front setback to allow the building wall to encroach 1.8 ft over the required front setback uh to establish a new building setback of 28.2 two instead of the 30. Um the right side setback would allow the building wall to encroach 23 feet over the required right side setback which would make the building set back 4.77 ft. The rear setback would be allowed to encroach um 1.9 ft over the previously amended rear setback of 7.9 by the board of zoning appeals. So, the new rear setback would be six feet. The next waiver was for the HVAC unit to allow the HVAC unit to encroach 1.4 ft into the allowed 70% encroachment, which would be the um 1 foot from the property line. The next one was a retaining wall, a deviation to allow the retaining wall over five feet in height to be placed along the property line and driveway instead of requiring a 5-ft separation distance from the property line. I'm sorry, there was five, not six. The in in front of you, the HOA did provide documentation within the last few days. Um there is a um the red lines the ones that's not

stamped it has the second page has red on it but then the HOA has approved all but the HVAC being moved or h they're requiring the HVAC to be moved and the concrete on the side of the house behind the garage to be removed but they are willing to move forward with the other items. That's all I have. So, Kaitellyn, LA, one thing, the HOA, [clears throat] what they did not want, they wanted the air the HVAC setback, correct? Changed. Correct.

Yes. They wanted it honored. So the the front setback, the right side setback and the rear setback and the retaining wall they were fine with. It was the HVAC unit that they did not want to allow or are not allowing based on their approval [clears throat] process, right? And to remove the second driveway. I know that was a lot said quick for the commission and Commissioner Kerr, I see you're already up. Go right ahead.

Right. Uh this is a followup from the last meeting. Um and I think the commission in general had wanted to hear from the bank in terms of their commitment, financing, budget, those things. So would you be uh opposed about coming up giving us some thoughts? [clears throat] Hello, Taylor Walker, Wilson Bank and Trust. I'm the chief credit officer. Uh also have Wes Taylor here. Uh me and him lead lending. And I will tell you as we get started, I know there's some questions. Um but Commissioner Hasty, we probably like to put you on loan committee. You asked some pretty good questions, so we know think you could help us out. Um, no, but but but please, this is a a property that we've taken back recently. Obviously, we have challenges with it, and tonight we're simply here to ask for a deferral to give us a little more time uh till next meeting, February, to work through some of these challenges with the staff to make sure we get it buttoned up properly. But happy to answer any questions.

Sure. Thank you. uh what what the question was at the last meeting was scoping out a a budget for this and I think the contractor I had asked the contractor last week uh is there appropriate funding to address all of the deviations that we have here. That's question one. Question two is what are you going to do with this property? Are you planning to sell it? Are you planning to I don't know what are you planning to do with it? And and and thirdly, you know, I I guess I heard a lot of concerns uh during the meeting and after the meeting uh about just the structure in general, the neighbors, the the people that live in that neighborhood and and what they've endured over the last three or four years. So, I think I want to hear that we have some closure that's coming and that you're planning to meet these deviations that u our staff has outlined to you plus your HOA to meet the HOA requirements. And [clears throat] and I guess more of a of an ask than anything is uh when you get all of the uh items worked out if it's in February, would you be amanable to come back to this commission, say every 90 days or every four months or some some increment to give us an update on how things are progressing. What I don't want to do is is be here a year from now and we're still on on the pad and hadn't launched yet. So, uh, and you you both seem very committed and and and motivated to do this and or you wouldn't be here and I I appreciate you being here, but those are just some of my concerns that I've got about the project.

Understood. So, ju just a couple comments in general and lots of questions. And so please I want to make sure I answer everything. But I I would say that, you know, uh we're we're a bank, we're in the lending business, and we're not in the real estate business, right? We don't we don't like taking this back. This this happens in worstc case scenarios. Uh we do a lot of construction projects throughout Middle Tennessee and East Tennessee. And this is the first one of this nature uh that I've been involved in that we've had to take back that have had such issues. And so I think we all want the same thing, right? We we've had to take this back in ARO. We want this off our books. We want it done right. We're also a community bank, right? And so we want to make sure that we do the right thing for the neighbors, the neighborhood. And so that that is one thing that one reason we are asking for a little more time is to make sure that we can uh I think as Commissioner Hasty earlier said, hey, work with the staff, make sure that we check all the boxes, that we're doing the right thing. And ultimately at the end of the day, of course, we have a responsibility to the bank and the shareholders. We also have a responsibility to the community. So, I think our goal is to try to strike that balance with the two. So, I know that's general, but that that is our goal with this. Can I tell you exactly what we're going to do here today? For sure. I cannot. But what I will tell you is that we want to take time and try to get it right. So, and and this isn't something Arya, we we we typically try to move these off our books fairly quickly. We don't want to hang it around, but we're also not going to do something, you know, ne knee-jerk. We've got to find the right balance to all that as well. I mean, we, you know, I I'm from Sumar County. I live right, you know, right between Gallatton and Hendersonville. You know, this is my community, too, right? And so, we're very familiar friends of Manser Farms. So, we do want to make sure that we do the right thing there, too. Okay.

So, so I guess I'm hearing that you would be amanable to come back at some increment and update the commission in terms of the progress. Um, again, I mean, we we'll rely on staff, too, but I think it's important for at least me to to have facetime with you to see is it going the direction it needs. Are there any hiccups that we need to be aware of? And I just don't want this to be a long drawn out process for the neighborhood. That's the bottom line. So,

understand. Well, what what I would what I would say is, you know, I understand your question. Can we come back every 90 days, 60 days and give this body updates? I I would ask to let us kind of get through the process to figure out what we're going to do before I make any commitments. Um, and that's once again kind of why we're here tonight is to try to think through this process and make sure that we have a a plan and and our our goal is to have exit strategy uh on this that meets the needs of the city of course as well as the needs of the bank. I'm not sure I got the commitment that I was looking for. Uh, are you amanable to come back to this body at some point and give us an update on the progress of the project?

I would think as we get through this and we we work with the people that we've hired to help us with this and we work with the city staff, uh, I will come back at that meeting and we can have a further discussion. Okay. How does that sound? That sounds good. Thanks. Uh, Commissioner Silkwood, you were next.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I think frankly I think you all are doing a good job of trying to make the best of a bad situation here. Um, and I would like uh, Director Free if you would to speak to some of the mechanisms we already have in place to avoid a situation like this from just lingering out there with no forward progress. So, I think he's going to give everybody an update on that. Yeah, I think uh I think if this uh drug on let's just say let's just say the bank just says okay forget about it and just somebody else gets control over it or nobody else gets control over it uh uh and it just sits there then this would have to go through a process um um as it deteriorated but until it deteriorated you know then it's not through our property maintenance code enforcement you know it's not necessarily a dangerous you know, home. Uh so it would probably take a little bit of time for it to get to the point where the city uh you know, would be able to forcibly take action. Uh but just uh in regards to what it is now, uh you know, there's not an easy mechanism to move forward to say, okay, if these things aren't fixed, we're just going to level the house. I mean, there's substantial cost uh to the city if they did that. even if we filed leans, I mean that's a it'd be a substantial amount to to demolish that. Uh as well as uh it would uh you know from the legalities of it to have a clear path to do to do such a thing. Uh so I think it is it is optimistic that the bank is even caring to look to try to resolve this. Uh so I'm happy that there is a you know a responsible party that's looking to try to uh try to get a resolution on it. But if if there is not a resolution reached at some point then the future of this for the for the poor

people out there that's got to look at it. I mean it this could go on just sitting there for a long time which just I don't think anybody wants to you know wants to see uh wants to see that. Uh, so if that that kind of is that kind of what you were

Yeah. So that's just that's just what that what that is. So not not thinking like well if the city doesn't like that and it doesn't meet the code then we can just tear it down. There's possibly a path to that. It's quite expensive and it's not a clear direct uh a direct path. You know even even in cases I mean I'll just explain this. Even in cases where we have a house that's clearly it needs to come down and it should have came came you know we don't really have a lot of these but that surely could have should have come down years ago. Uh you know even when we fully engage in that uh it it takes a long time to get to that you know that point and there is a substantial cost associated with that especially a site like this and leveling you know that uh that site. So, I I hope we can get this, you know, resolved in some some manner. The the planning staff is concerned about, you know, not just not just the violations that exist, but we're we're deeply concerned about how we going to get this resolved, you know, or this thing isn't an issue out in this neighborhood for the next 8 to 15 years. Uh, and so, uh, we we definitely want to want to see something happen. So,

uh, yes, sir. I was going to say to the commission, um, I'm Wes Taylor. I oversee special assets for the bank. Um, and to Taylor's point, you know, we don't want to be drawn out either. Um, you know, that's why, you know, working with these guys, you know, we've come up with a plan for the driveway and to fix these issues and we want to get that path where we don't want it sitting around forever. Um, asking for more time. We'd appreciate your consideration on that. Hey, I'll own that. That's on me. you know, my house burned down last month. I head up special assets of the bank. Um, I wasn't around to coordinate it the past few weeks, quite frankly. So, I'll I'll take that on. And that's just asking for a little grace and time for next month's meeting so we can be a little bit better prepared. So,

totally understand. Sorry to hear. It's okay. Thank you. Yeah, Commissioner Martin, I see you're in the queue. Also, we Here's a new house. [laughter] Okay. Um, in ready? Yeah, you move in ready. [laughter] Not yet. We'll be when the guy in the blue does it. Yeah. Um, I just want to say I appreciate the position you guys are in. I'm glad that y'all are motivated um to to take care of it. Um, tonight if we had to vote, uh, I would approve everything that the HOA approved of, and I would not approve what the HOA did not approve. Um, so I when you talk with the city and look at stuff, I would probably focus on on just those remaining issues. Commissioner,

thank you, Commissioner Slatterie. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Condolences on on the loss of your home. That's devastating.

Um, and I appreciate what you're trying to do. I know banks don't want to be in the real estate business. And I saw when Commissioner or when uh director Free said casually, we don't want to have to tear the building down. I think I saw both of you shiver just a little bit. So, we appreciate what you're you're dealing with. I'm just curious the time that you need for the deferral and and I have no problem with it. I'm just curious, is that because you still don't feel confident that you can do more than you're asking for? Do you need to sprinkle more holy water on this project and and try again? Do you think there's still some room for you to come closer to what was originally approved? Well, I I will tell you this. Um, luckily at the bank, we don't have too many of these situations, right? And so, this is not a common practice for us.

And even at the, you know, the variance process and working with these wonderful gentlemen, you know, we didn't realize the bank was even expected here last time or we would have been here, right? And so, obviously with Wes and that situation, we just simply want a little more time to work through it. And I think, you know, and one reason, um, Commissioner Kerr, we don't know, it's the future, right? So, I can't tell you that we're going to take on this construction project and I give you check-ins every 30 days because I don't know exactly what's going to happen. And so, that there in lies the request. We would just like a little more time to make sure that, you know, as time goes on, it will become more clear. Our goal is not to drag this thing out forever and ever, but it is to come up with a a solution that's hopefully acceptable to this body as well as the bank as well. So, um, you know, I think as we as we continue to engage these gentlemen as well as some others possibly, it will become more clear.

Well, with all that being stated, no other commissioners are in the queue. I will offer a motion to give you a deferral until the next meeting which is in February. We have a second. Uh will everybody take the time to vote by electronics. Thanks you all. Thank you. See you next month. Thank you. Thank you. Approve. Motion to approve. Pass with nine yeses. Okay. Next on our agenda is director free. He wants to develop uh give us a little conversation about uh impact fees. All right.

All right. Okay. Uh you have before you this evening uh uh you've got everybody's been given the impact fee study uh that the city uh city had uh completed uh here over the last year. Uh currently where this is in the process. I want to update uh the planning commission on kind of where we are in this process as well as in speaking with Mayor Clary. Uh he he wanted to to put this uh for me to bring this before you all. not necessarily to give uh clear direction on what option uh to move forward, but getting a general sense [snorts] from the planning commission in regards to moving forward uh with development impact fees and and kind of give an opportunity uh you know in this in this uh planning commission setting uh to address that. So we we have the study that's completed and uh then looking at the study then we do have uh two uh two ordinances that are proposed that'll be on Bulma's um um agenda next Tuesday uh that are that are different ones uh different ways to kind of approach it. I didn't put any of that in there, you know, because really we're just looking at uh just looking at kind of getting your comments from the overall plan, not necessarily a specific option. Bulma's going to be working out uh that uh that detail. Uh and this isn't something that typically that the planning commission from a uh from a uh from a requirement standpoint is required to be a party to uh on development impact fees. But it I mean uh it does make sense for it to kind of run past you guys. Uh you're all aware of it. Uh but uh to give you an option uh to address anything that you feel about impact fees. Uh ask me or Zachary any questions in regards to our

knowledge of the uh the proposed impact fees. And then if if possible, if you wish to even do a motion in support of impact fees moving forward or of impact fees not moving forward, you know, whichever direction uh that would be. Uh so, Mr. Chairman, I'll just kind of Everybody has the staff report, but I'll just open up to any questions anybody might have about impact fees, uh or anything that you'd want to u to share about your overall thoughts about impact fees. Commissioner Martin, you were first.

Yeah. I just wanted to invite the conversation on uh whether or not we would want to include retail. Uh I'd love to hear everybody's um opinions on that. Doesn't it say that? Commissioner Slatterie, you were next. Well, uh first I'd go back to Commissioner Martin's question. So, residential fees only and one for residential and commercial fees. So, where does retail retail doesn't fall into commercial fees be under the commercial? Okay. Oh, okay. All right. Um, it was 74 pages. Mike, don't ask questions that be a test.

Man, I looked for the cliff notes. They're not available on Amazon. Um, I just have a question about the fiscal impact and I think I recall us having discussions about this when we have had oneoff discussions on projects. the revenue generated by impact fees is only eligible for use on capital expenditures that mitigate impacts of new developments. So, is that truly saying that if a project's going to be built on Sanders Ferry Road and traffic is a problem that that that impact fees would be allocated specifically to mitigating traffic issues or mitigating um school overload? I mean they really would be tied to very carefully mitigating that particular project's impact.

Not necessarily. Not actually. Okay.

Uh so like if we had a project um uh let 120 Sanders Ferry that we just you know we just uh uh discussed and uh and approved uh that for example if it was required to pay impact fees which would be you know commercial or retail or office uh you know uh fees. if it had to pay impact fees, that money would go into an account for either it wouldn't be parks, it would just be depending on what we did. If it was just uh we had transportation fund, then it would go into the transportation fund and then it would have to fund the projects, capital projects that were identified in the c in the uh transportation fund. That would not necessarily mean it would be anything on Saundersville or Saunders Saunders Ferry. Saunders ferry mayor Sand Sanders Fairy Saunders Ferry. So it wouldn't necessarily mean that it would have that it would just go to benefit uh the overall transportation system. Well, I and I asked that thank you, Keith. And I asked that the question because I think sometimes the the community angst around development

could in part be mitigated if they see that those impact fees and let's pick let's stay with Sanders Ferry. If if there's a project on Sanders Ferry and everybody has discussed the impact it's going to have and the impact fees that would be generated by a project, but then Sanders Ferry isn't on the list for another four or five years, then how does that address the community concerns that are valid and are articulated? I I just wonder if there's an opportunity for impact fees to be demonstrated to the community as truly being a fee to mitigate the impact of that project. Can I try that? Only the mayor wants

Hello, mayor. Go ahead about this subject.

So, yes. So, we did have we did have a similar conversation during our workshop. Um, we have our 10-year master transportation plan. Um, we have ranked all those projects and part of the ranking uh has to do with impact. it's impact that that project will have. So if a if we have a new development residential uh or commercial uh and we're going to be creating a bigger problem, a bigger demand on infrastructure and this project will now have a greater impact in solving a problem. So it's going to move up the list. So instead of it being instead of uh you know pick pick any project at number 14 15 or 16 and then if we have a project that is going to be close if we have a development that's going to be close to where that project is that project is probably get moved up because part of the criteria is what kind of impact it does it have for the for the surrounding area. So we would never say since this since this development is happening on Sanders Fairy Road we're going to put money towards a Sanders Fairy project. However, what we do is we go back and re-evaluate and rescore those and likely anything that comes close to that that development is going to move up on the list.

Okay. Thank you, mayor. I would continue to advocate from a messaging standpoint that if impact fees do move forward and become part of the city structure, there is an [clears throat] opportunity to message this well to the community so that they understand those things that um it's not just seen as great. We had we've put a project on Sanders Ferry and we're beating the daylights out of Sanders Ferry right now, but we've put a project in an area of the city and the people that live right around that and feel the impact personally in their day-to-day lives don't see that the work on Sanders Ferry just moved up in the priority list. So, I I would advocate strongly for a messaging effort around how impact fees would be used. I I could address something that you know one of the things that we're doing as well is you know if we adopt impact fees regardless of whatever version that we adopt uh we're also going to adopt u credit system of how you know you could have a credit so if you had a development uh and which we would prefer people to use credit so if you had a development and it was going they were going to have to do off-site improvements I'll use Sanders Ferry in since we've talked about it. Uh but they're going to do that whole, you know, add that whole lane down through there, you know, uh on that on that portion of that development. That is something they had to do regardless and they have to pay for it. Uh but you know if and it's and it's specifically the majority of that is specifically for their development. But on some other developments, you know, unless it's just a lefthand turn lane or really a widening that just impacts that particular development that's triggering the need for it. Uh if it's bigger improvements, then they could do those improvements in that area, you know,

near that area and spend their their development impact fees and do it toward credits so that we wouldn't end up with any impact fee, but we'd end up with a whole bunch more specific targeted transportation improvements that, you know, like what the mayor was talking about, our capital improvement transportation plan. one of those projects. You know, a large uh commercial development might not be able to build a whole project, but it could pick a small piece of it and in addition to doing what it's triggered to have to do, it's going to do extra.

Uh because it would rather go ahead and do all of that than pay the impact fee, which really that's a part of the impact fee is the credit system. the credit system will allow us to then get more things done where we're not just sitting there holding the money waiting to get enough money, you know, to help help offset a project. So, in that sense, you could impact things around the direct impact area uh for a development if that if any of that makes sense.

Sure. And I I again I think it would be nice if if we move forward with the impact fee system and credits. I think it's a real opportunity for the citizens to see the benefits, not just a Chick-fil-A that's closer to them, but the benefits of that the community in totality is getting and how it benefits their particular part of our community by moving up in the priority list or getting the developer to do a little bit more than they had to. I think we lose sight of that in our internal workings and [clears throat] it doesn't always translate out to the community. Good question, Commissioner Kerr.

Yeah, just a just a couple of just observations. I mean, I I'm certainly for impact fees. I I think there is a need for that. Um it's a long overdue need uh in Hendersonville in my opinion. Um, uh, so just from a a metric perspective and and and revenue into our city and would you anticipate, Keith, that this would speed up development, slow down development, or would it not have an impact on development? It depend, you know, and this is something, you know, that that Bulma is looking at on how to how to calculate it and and how how they may do it. Uh but it's just finding that right balance. It's it's hard. It's hard to say. Uh you know, uh could there be projects that you know might not happen because of them? It's it's possible that that's the case. probably less so probably less so on the residential side of things than maybe [clears throat]

I would say the commercial and the residential as two totally separate lanes. Yeah. Um one, you know, you're looking at the infrastructure and schools, the the impact to actually adding units and homes. The other is a business that's going to bring jobs and and more tax revenue. Uh so I mean I I certainly you wouldn't put them in the same bucket. They're they're two separate buckets for sure.

And it and it depends on the it depends on the calculation and what the basis is that we're doing the calculation, you know, because the study you can see what the study is saying. It's a big number. That wouldn't be the number we'd use. We'd use some percentage of that. And it just depends on different projects. If that's, you know, if it's if it's manageable for a lot of projects, it wouldn't keep if it it just depends on what the mix was. It wouldn't necessarily keep somebody from doing something. But if the figure was pretty high, then of course, you know, all of that comes into, you know, comes into play, right?

Mayor T. So Mike and I sort of look to each other because I think the answer is it depends who the 13 people are on the board and whether that speeds it up or slow it slows it down. And I'll tell you my perspective is that these impact fees are going to help us get to closer to that day far far off in the future where somebody says our infrastructure isn't a problem. we're caught up. I'm like, y'all, I don't know that day will ever come, but we will get closer to it. Um, and I tell people all the time, I'm not anti-growth. I'm pro infrastructure. And so, I really have a hard time growing our residential population before infrastructure is is caught up. And so, in a sense, this will help us get caught up. And if it helps us get caught up, then it will help us grow more. Right?

It's my perspective. It'd certainly be in a catch-up mode at this point. I mean, you know, so what my my fear would be if I [clears throat] were one of those 13 voting on this would be does this, you know, put more powder in the keg in terms of development and adding units uh to the infrastructure that we don't have up to date yet that we need some more infrastructure in terms of managing traffic and and everything that we deal with every meeting. Yes. I just would not want to see it kick into another gear. Yeah. Yeah, when we're already in a catch-up mode, you know what I mean? I don't think you can price your way out of that in a short-term basis

because, you know, at some point people stop building and stop coming to open businesses here if you make it too expensive. So, there is that balance to your point. There's there's a balance there.

Commissioner Evans. Yeah, I've been around here long enough to remember when commercial development was really frowned upon in Hendersonville and the pendulum then kind of swung the other way and now we're talking about overdevelopment and residential because we've got traffic problems everywhere. Uh before I was involved in the planning commission, I've stood out there and made several uh speeches about impact fees versus negotiated impact fees because uh the latter is not specifically allocable to any particular project. And I didn't really like that because I didn't think that that was the appropriate thing to do. it it seemed to be incentivizing uh decisions that might not be made otherwise. So that really wasn't a good way to go. Uh I did see that u our uh infrastructure that we have I made the argument that those of us who have lived here for a long time have paid for all that infrastructure and the folks that are coming in uh in new houses and and new subdivisions probably should invest in the infrastructure that we've already got here. So uh I've been for impact fees for a long time. I think we should have done it five to 10 years ago in in lots and lots of different ways. And also I got a communication today from someone who uh emphasized the importance of having somewhere for our local residents to work in Hendersonville rather than uh having to travel down I65 every day. And in that situation, you want to emphasize what you want more. So the discussion of whether to apply to commercial or residential or both uh would would seem to be answered by by

what we probably would prefer out of those two segments of development. Uh but nonetheless uh I'm I'm I like the impact fee idea and I think we should proceed with it as soon as possible. Commissioner Hardwick, the fees that we saw on the report, is that what's being proposed or is that just a number the consultant came up with that has no relevancy at all? Uh, let me let Zachary uh address that.

So, yeah, that is the basis for which Bulma is basing their numbers off of. So that is the maximum that's allowed based on um you know the numbers that the consultant pulled. So all of that is the basis for which the numbers that Bulma is deriving um comes from. So it it's able we're able to point back to the study and say it could have been this like this is the maximum allowable but as a city and you know um the mayor and alderman are discussing it they're they're trying to like Keith said trying to find that strike that balance between Okay, what's a fee that's manageable? What's a fee that works for the city? What's a fee that still works for development in a certain sense? Um, and how do you craft that? So, those are the the numbers are the basis for [snorts] that basically. Um, and it's required for us to be able to point back to too. Um and I think as part of um the the two kind of not competing but the two uh that are on the table um they do talk about revisiting the studies every five years to kind of go back and determine what the market is is kind of dictating and adjusting those numbers. So,

so a lot of comments and and I the it mentioned in the report that Franklin, Samrna, Leverne, the White House all have impact fees. How do those fees compare to what those cities charge? Some are similar, some are different. Um, I don't necessarily know what the basis for for, you know, White House or or anybody else. I haven't seen their the the studies that they've done, but I know that ours is rooted in data. Um, and it does align with I think it it closely aligns with Franklin. It's closer to Franklin.

I don't remember. Yeah, we have we have that that information.

I think they all they all do most of all of them do a percentage. I don't know that they all go 100% of what of what of what the study says. And part of that is is looking for that right balance, but part of it is all of this is wrapped in a big potential latigious bowl, too. You know that we've got to be careful and make sure we're doing something that's very defensible and very very justified. And that's why one of the reasons a lot of communities don't go all the way up to exactly what the study study had. uh that's just what the max is. Uh and um and so that that kind of comes into play too of why you wouldn't go all the way [snorts] because then then the study, you know, the study could be questioned anyway. Uh but if you're going all the way to the full tilt, 100% of what the study said, uh then, you know, uh the study will come under attack, you know, quite a bit. uh versus if you're backing off of that and give it

if [clears throat] I were Bulma, I would be real curious what the market rate is when you're looking at those other cities because you're competing with them for the development. Um it would also be curious to know that I believe Costco's 100,000 square foot building and based on the number that was in the report, their impact fee would have been well over a million dollars.

And would that have killed that deal? I think that's something the board the the board Bulma has to look at. Um the again the study suggested a fee of over $12,000 for every residential lot. That is going to add directly to the payment of that homeowner. We're already saying that young families can't live in Hendersonville because it's over it's already overpriced. And you put another $12,000 on that lot, then that's another hundred dollar a month payment financed over 30 years. So, I think impact fees are good until they're not. Um, I think definitely we need to have cost to help with infrastructure. You know, they say there's there's two best times to plant a tree. One was 10 years ago and the other is today. We've we've missed a huge 10-year run in development that I'm not sure the next 10 year is going to be near what this past 10 years have been. I think we're kind of at the end of the development cycle. Um but at the same time, it it's something that clearly we need to look at. I just don't want to get it to where it's killing all development and that people are going well I think I'll go to Califan or I think I'll go to the county because while we all complain about the traffic, we all complain about infrastructure that needs to be there. Uh we don't want to live in a city that's dying and we we have been we extremely fortunate to live in a city that is vibrant and that people want to be here. there was a reason we chose to move here. Uh, and I and I don't want to change that. I want to find the balance to where that new development is paying for itself, but that we're not running

it all off either. Um, and so, yes, I think it's a good thing, but I don't want to see us take a sledgehammer to something that doesn't need to be there. Commissioner Martin, sorry. So, Commissioner Silkwood.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, a lot of good comments tonight, and I'll just echo um what some folks have said. You know, one of my concerns, at least on the commercial side of of development fees, would just be sort of what Commissioner Hardwick said. You know, I would hate to lose a corporate campus. I would hate to lose a Costco when they could just as easily open in Rivergate, just as easily open in Gallatin or, you know, somewhere nearby that doesn't charge an impact fee. So, in speaking to the me bulma members who are here tonight, that would be one of my top concerns as I'm sure you've heard. Commissioner Slatter.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, Director Freed, how recently or how long has White House had impact fees? Do you have any idea?

Uh, I think they've actually had it for a for a long time. Okay. Uh it's uh it's I think it's they've had it for quite some time. I can't remember if it's parks that they had and then they recently did something different updated it or something a couple of years ago, but they've had some form of an impact fee for a long time. I don't think it was a large a large fee and I don't think it was the figure probably wasn't updated for years, you know, on exactly what that was. Okay. Thank you. Okay. No other comments by anyone.

Well, I know that you had made mention of offering a motion or anything like that. We've had a lot of discussion to, you know, is anybody impelled to offer a motion to move forward with anything? Just to give a thumbs up, thumbs down to Bulma. What I mean, we'll entertain anything you have. Let me make one comment. I I think we should offer a motion because I I I feel strongly enough that that is the right direction for uh the city. Um just to give, you know, force support for what Bulma is going to consider. So I'll offer the motion that um at least the planning commission is in favor of moving forward on uh impl impact fees. Now sorting it out which is whether it's commercial or residential I think would be we need to hear from Bulma what what the numbers are what their tolerance level is but the whole process of moving forward with impact fees I would certainly make the motion that we do that.

Okay. And Commissioner Hasty I see you are lit up. All right, I will second his motion. But, uh, yeah, the kind of the caveat and somebody mentioned it, we don't want a commercial, uh, or residential or a retail impact fee so high that a Costco would move right across the county line somewhere. We need Costco. If you're a Costco member and go there, gosh, they got to bring in a whole lot of dollars. Yeah.

And it take them a long time to pay that impact fee that that study is recommended. You know, I will second the motion to give the thumbs up to the board of mayor and alderman. And I think with the staff guidance, the comments that have been mentioned tonight about making sure that that fee is such that it doesn't kill that major development. But yeah, and I think a lot of the major residential developers like and people like that, they pay them everywhere else. They expect to pay for it. you know, I wouldn't worry about them as much as I would the Costco or something like that. But I think it is something though that I worked for the development community for years and of course they years ago they were adamantly no no and they got their way for a long time. But uh it's something that Hendersonville needs and probably has been needed for the last 10 or 12 years. We miss the boat on some So let's someone said we can at least plant the tree now. So we need to plan it but it needs to be carefully managed in a fee structure that we can get development kind of headed in the direction that would be the most advantageous to the city tax wise and infrastructure-wise. So, and and I think the staff will will do that. But that was an interesting reading on that study as to how they get it. You know, the old, you know, you throw enough numbers at the wall, something will hit. And boy, there was a bunch of numbers there. You know, every little this that, and the other, even down to the point, if you know, if you

leave town tomorrow, it's going to change. Or if he adds to his he has a baby, it's going to change again. Going to go up. I mean, it was very very very very detailed, but I I think it's something we need to support and I think uh the staff involved will make the [clears throat] right decision. Commissioner Kerr, I see you. Yeah. No, no change to my motion. I just wanted to comment uh what Commissioner Hardick said. Um you you use 12,000 as a as a number. Um that's assuming that the developer wouldn't pick up part of that fee.

They won't. Well, that yeah, that's something we need to cons the Bulma should should consider. Is there a way to to to force that uh where the builder would pick up part of that and it's not just a complete dump on the on the homeowner. So, but that's just something to throw out there. Commissioner Evans, I see you're back in there. [laughter]

Second bite at the apple. Uh that strikes me as interesting. The time to plant that tree is 10 years ago. And uh I agree with that. Every piece of property that that that I have in Somar County has doubled in price in the last five years. And that's not uh because of anything but market forces. And uh that's may be changing. It may be, but an impact fee through that period of time would not have changed anybody's mind about moving to Hendersonville. Not with not with what what we've seen in development. Will it in the future? Who knows? We're we're uh almost built out. Almost built out. We need to find a place for the people in Hendersonville to work instead of finding more people for the city of Hendersonville. Commissioner Hardwick,

I just want to say I am going to vote no. Not that I'm opposed to the impact fee, but I don't want Bulma to misread that I'm for what was in this report. So with voting yes on that.

Okay. Well, we have a motion and a second before us and I'll just try to reiterate the motion. motion is to give the BOMO a thumbs up as it relates to an impact fee. And just to reiterate everything that the people here have said, we don't want to see growth squashed. We want to make sure that it's right, it's adequate, it's good for the city, it's good for the people that live here, and we don't want to price ourselves out of the whole marketplace. So, with that, I would say we'll do this by voice vote. All in favor say I. I. Anybody opposed? Yes, we got one opposed. So, there we go. Zachary, have you recorded it?

And that was uh I think it was uh 1999 when when White House initially had their first impact fee. Thanks to our city attorney sharing that with me.

All right. Thank you. Next on our agenda are the staff level projects approved. Um, you can see that Rock Castle Wealth Management Offices, three-page plat amendment, 119 MU, uh, Maple Road Boulevards approved. We also have several staff level projects pending. I won't read through all these. Anybody got specific questions they want to ask or bring up. You got staff available. You're welcome to do it right now. If not, we'll skip across all that. And then finally, we have director comments.

All right. I am not going to belabor this uh Mr. Chairman. Uh but actually I'll just uh I'll take my comments and I'll go ahead and do the year-end report. Everybody's had a copy of the the year-end report just looking at some of the touch points of the uh uh the things that we touched with preliminary plats, final plats, all the different development plans, PDP, all those DPS uh and site plans and resoning. So we had a lot of a lot of things last year. here. We had a lot of uh included on this the uh minor home occupation of 300. That really is something. We have a lot of folks that are working out of their home. So, they have to get a home occupation permit uh to do that. And just this year, we issued 300. So, just about every year we this was more than we did last year, but typically every year it's around 300. So, we have we have a very diverse population of people working out of their households uh here in our community. Uh and then also when you see use and occupancy where you see that that's 220 uh what that is is like uh a new building that got built and they had to do a use and occupancy but also it includes an ice cream shop that went out and something else went in into it or an off a doctor's office that that changed ownership uh and had a different doctor in there. Uh so it's all those different kinds of things. So there's a lot of uh a lot of activity uh that we're that we're seeing. You know, looking at it from a numbers standpoint, uh a lot of our different numbers, you know, were higher than they were last year. Overall, it's probably about average what it's, you know, what it's been. Uh but as we progress in um in these remaining years uh to come the over the next you know 5 to 8 years uh there is going to be a lot of different things that are going to change in our community especially from the growth standpoint and and hopefully here over the next couple of months I'm going to

I'm going to give you a very detailed data driven overview of where we are and where we're going in the future with our population and our buildout. and we're close enough to that that I think we're going to be able to uh to kind of uh light on exactly where we are and where we're headed uh here in the next uh next several uh several years. But as we look at um um you know there might be less different things that we're touching. Everything that we're touching now is more complicated and more difficult because a most of all of the properties that were the simple easy properties, all of that was done long ago. The things that we do have remaining in this last 5 to 7% of undeveloped property that doesn't already have a plan associated with it. uh some it's some of our most challenging topographic uh properties uh properties that have drainage issues and different things. So there's a lot of different challenging things uh with all of these things that the staff touch uh on uh on their uh their reviews, but the staff is doing a great job. And I mean I've uh here I'm entering now my 10th year here with the city. Uh and I I can say this you know in even in including the planning department but even outside of the planning department with our fellow fellow professionals that we deal with at the fire department and in the public works. We've never had a better group of professionals that are more thorough in looking out and advocating for the community as they're reviewing development. And I think you guys can see that on a pretty consistent basis as you're seeing the things that are being reviewed. So, we have a really good group uh here that is guarding and safeguarding uh the development as it as it moves forward in our in our community. Uh we continue uh during this

last year, we continue to leverage everything for our community. So, every time we're interacting with a development, a proposed development or development that's underway, we're leveraging everything we can uh to make sure that we're getting the best of everything from that uh from that uh developer or from that uh from that builder. And what we have found, you know, consistently is that these engineers and architects and different folks that will sit up here at this thing and uh, you know, and be asking for different things. At the heart of the things that they do, they really care about their profession and what they do. And be honest with you, uh, they like the opportunity to be challenged uh, for a higher bar, for a higher expectation of a deliverable. And it's what they in their heart want. Uh but a lot of times because of money or different things with the folks that are hiring them uh you know economies of scale come into play and you you've got to kind of pair back things. But as they're pairing back things we're challenging and saying hey we want we want a little bit we want a little bit more than what you're you're talking about giving. So through this last year you know I really I really appreciate all of those interactions. And one thing I'll mention too is and I don't know that I've really shared it here uh but one of the things that we've done real consistently uh over the last six years is that uh a couple of times a year uh we go out and we actually do an audit site plan audit of uh all a lot of all of our commercial areas and we look at hey you know are there trees missing are there's b bushes missing you know what's going on is the site all messed up are there big potholes and things like that and through our site plan process. Uh we uh we send letters and uh we tell people they got to fix it or they're going to be not giving in compliance with their site plan uh if they don't have those trees. And what's I'm telling you this amazes me, but it says a lot about our

community and it says a lot about the people that have property uh commercial property and an office property in our community. Once they are aware, and I'm talking hundreds and hundreds of different letters and and different episodes that we send stuff out at uh uh 100% compliance every some things take a little bit longer uh to take care of uh but we we get 100% compliance. One thing that we're doing and this is going to be the fifth year we've done this. our zoning enforcement officer later this month. He's going to be working some nights and so he we go out and so when you and your family are, you know, are going out at night to a restaurant or to to shop in our beautiful community and it's a little dark or, you know, a lights's out or something, uh, we're looking at those things and we're letting the businesses know that they need to fix those. And once they're aware of it, uh, they're fixing that. And you'll probably notice also throughout the community, uh, there's been a conversion, a lot of LED lights in commercial parking lots. That's something that we're also encouraging, uh, our commercial, uh, businesses to do. And I think that's making it safer. It's making it feel safer uh, for folks to uh, to shop in the evenings. And, uh, I think that's good. You know, that's something that's good for our for our community. So, um, that's everything I kind of had to share about that, but I can answer any questions, uh, that anybody, uh, may have. Mr. Chairman,

Commissioner Kerr, I see you are lit up. Yeah, mine is more Keith, I just wanted to commend you and your leadership. What you do is tremendous work. Your whole staff does tremendous work. And, uh, I've lived in different cities and I know it's not this way everywhere everywhere. So hats off to your leadership, but we wouldn't be here talking about some of the accomplishments without your leadership. So thank you.

Well, thank you. I really I really I really do appreciate that. And you know, and I I think you pro you guys probably have it with your friends or spouses when you're you know, when you're driving through our great community, especially a lot of times at night, you know, and you're driving through and and oftentimes me and my wife will say it to each other. Oh my gosh, isn't it great that we live in such a beautiful, beautiful place? And so it's really, it's really great to live in Henderson and work in work in Hendersonville, too. But it's great to uh be a resident and live here and get to enjoy the physical and the built environment. And the built environment is a big part of what this commission is has oversight for and things that you've held firm and made happen. and the people that set before you 10, 15 years ago, you know, had that same determination that they wanted quality development so that we can all drive through our community and have great great pride in it. So, I'm very excited about the uh about the upcoming year and I'm very excited uh about where we are as a as a community. One of the things I might also mention is, you know, I've shared with you uh a lot of times, you know, we'll have pre-development meetings um with uh potential developments. Um usually over the last few years, we've we've had as many as three of a week. Uh it has slowed down a little bit where we're having probably on an average maybe two. Uh and so those are continuing. So there's a whole lot of things on the horizon. Now what we are finding out is is that um of those pre-development meetings that we do have you know where before the percentage uh was probably you know 75% of them will probably end up working out. Uh now with those that we meet it's usually about half you know

and some of that is just challenges with you know the value of commercial property and finding commercial property you know that is uh that is available. Uh but um we're um we're still an extremely soughtafter soughtafter community and I think it's just really amazing that we're ble we're blessed as a community to be at the stage of development that we're in and that you know over the next 10 15 20 years. You know this isn't our heyday. Our heyday is actually still ahead of us but a big part of our growth is really behind us. And uh a lot of communities, you know, maybe they're only really great while they're growing. Uh you know, uh but our community, we've done the growth pretty well where that when that starts slowing down, uh you know, through buildout, uh then it just it changes into something different. But I think I'm very I'm very excited about what that is going to change into and and and what our future is going to be going to be here. So, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Any other comments with anyone? All right, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. So move. Okay. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Thanks everybody for being here tonight.