Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

meeting that's happening a lot. The 26 and 26 uh meeting to order and we will go ahead and get started. And so the first item up is item B which is the adoption of the agenda which was sent out earlier and commissioners you should have gotten that. Is there a motion to adopt the agenda? So move. Motion and a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say I.

Opposed? No. Eyes have it and the agenda is adopted. Next, commissioners is item C, which is the approval of the March 12th, 2026 minutes, and those were also sent out prior to the meeting. Is there a motion to adopt the minutes? There's a motion and a second. Any discussion on the minutes? Seeing none, all in favor say I. Oppos? No. Eyes have it. And the minutes are adopted. Next is our sort of new uh D item, which is the public comment period. And Lisa, just remind the us about that. And I noticed that there was nobody sign up, but if you'll just our new state law.

Sure. That um a few years back the state legislature passed a law requiring that for all meetings of boards and commissions that there be a time at the beginning or that there be time for uh anyone to speak on any items that are on the agenda. That's normally not a problem for us because our rules and procedures require public hearing for most items. However, there are a few unique items that don't have their own sort of rule specified public hearing. And so for those, we set aside this time at the beginning of the agenda. Um, and it's only for items where there is a closed public hearing or where they don't otherwise have a required public hearing.

Thank you, Lisa. And so, commissioners, we didn't have anybody sign up for that. So, uh, seeing no signatures, we'll go on to item E, which is the recognition of the council members. I just saw some former council members, but no no current council members. I want to make sure we get everybody. Okay. If any come in, we'll recognize Oh, there's a couple couple of former council members. They're everywhere. All right. Next uh is the items item F commissioners, which is items for deferral withdrawal. Our items for deferral or withdrawal tonight are starting on page four of your agenda item number four 2026s 034001 pullium subdivision staff recommendation is to defer to the April 9th meeting. Item number five 2026s 037001 Cali subdivision phase 2 staff recommendation is to defer to the April 9th meeting. Item number six, 2025Z104 PR 001. Staff recommendation is to defer to the May 14th meeting. On page five of your agenda, item number seven, 2025Z109 PR00001 staff recommendation is to defer indefinitely. Item number 8, 2025 CP012001, Cane Ridge, Antioch Small Area Study. Staff recommendation is to defer to the April 9th meeting. On page six of your agenda, item number 14, 2025, SP046001, Kersy Property SP, staff recommendation is to defer to the April 9th meeting. Item number 15, 2026 SP 008001,

Dragon Ball and Boba SP. Staff recommendation is to defer to the April 9th meeting. And on page seven of your agenda, item number 18, 2026 Z012 PR001, staff recommendation is to defer to the April 9th meeting. And that concludes the items for deferral or withdrawal. Thank you, Matt. And so, commissioners and Matt, make sure I get these straight. So, the items for deferral or withdrawal are items number four, five, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, and 18. Is that correct?

That is correct. Okay. Commissioners, you've heard the items for deferral withdrawal. Is there a motion? There's a motion. Is there a second? Second. Any other discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say I. Oppos? No. Eyes have it. And those items are deferred or withdrawn. Next, Matt is the consent agenda. Item G. Go ahead.

Items noted on tenative on consent will be read aloud at the beginning of the meeting to determine if there is opposition present. If there is opposition present, please raise your hand and the item will be taken off the tenative consent agenda and placed on the agenda to be heard in the order in which they are listed on the agenda. If no opposition is present, the item will be placed on the consent agenda. As notice to the public, items on the consent agenda will be voted on at a single time. No individual public hearing will be held, nor will the commission debate these items unless a member of the audience or the commission request that the item be removed from the consent agenda. Hold on.

All right. Starting on page three of your agenda, item number one, 2026 Z003TX 0001, bar or nightclub use and shopping centers. Um staff recommendation is to disapprove. Is there anyone here in opposition to this item? This item will be on the consent agenda. On page four of your agenda, item number two, 2026 Z005TX 0001, DATUS and non-conforming lots. Is there anyone here in opposition to this item? This item will be on the consent agenda. Item number three, 2025 SP0450015 515 Anderson Lane. Is there anyone here in opposition to this item?

This item will be on the agenda to be heard. On page five of your agenda, item number nine, 2026 CP0000001, a community character manual update. Is there anyone here in opposition to this item? This item will be on the consent agenda. On page six of your agenda, item number 13, 2019 SP016003 Altera 8th Avenue South amendment. Is there anyone here in opposition to this item? This item will be on the consent agenda. Item number 16, 2026, SP000090015683, Cane Ridge Town Homes. Is there anyone here in opposition to this item?

This item will be on the agenda to be heard. On page seven of your agenda, item number 17, 2020 S145004, Eaton's Reserve Phase 1. Is there anyone here in opposition to this item? This item will be on the consent agenda. Item number 19, 2026 Z018 PR00001. Is there anyone here in opposition to this item? This item will be on the consent agenda. Item number 20, 2026 Z021 PR 001. Is there anyone here in opposition to this item? This item will be on the consent agenda. Item number 21, 2026 Z022 PR00001. Is there anyone here in opposition to this item? This item will be on the consent agenda. Item number 22, 2026 Z023 PR00001. Is there anyone here in opposition to this item? This item will be on the consent agenda. I will now go through and read uh the consent agenda items with their full caption as legal notice, as information for our audience. If you are not satisfied with the decision made by the planning commission today, you may appeal the decision by petitioning for a rid of cert with the Davidson County Chancery or Circuit Court, your appeal must be filed within 60 days of the date of the entry of the planning commission's

decision. To ensure that your appeal is filed in a timely manner and that all procedural requirements have been met, please be advised that you should contact independent legal counsel. Starting on page three of your agenda, item number one, 2026 Z003 TX001, bar or nightclub use and shopping centers. This is a request to amend title 17 of the Metropolitan Code of Laws to remove the bar or nightclub use from being permitted within the shopping center zoning districts. Staff recommendation is to disapprove. On page four of your agenda, item number two, 2026 Z005TX001 datus and non-conforming lots. This is a request to amend chapters 17.16 and 17.40 of the Metropolitan Code of Laws to permit detached accessory dwelling units on legally created residential lots with non-conforming lot area. Staff recommendation is to approve. On page five of your agenda, item number nine, 2026 CP 0000001 community character manual update. This is a request to amend Nashville next volume 3 to incorporate updates related to housing types and zoning districts and the community character manual. Staff recommendation is to approve. On page six of your agenda, item number 13, 2019 SP016003 Altera 8th Avenue South amendment. This is a request to amend a specific plan for properties located at 8th Avenue South and Bass Street to permit 365

multifamily residential units. Staff recommendation is to approve with conditions and disapprove without all conditions, including the conditions in the memo at your desk. On page seven of your agenda, item number 17, 2020 S145004 Eaton's Reserve Phase 1. This is a request for final plat approval to create 29 lots on a portion of property located at 1501 East Stewart's Lane, zoned RS10. Staff recommendation is to approve with conditions. Item number 19, 2026 Z018 PR 001. This is a request to reszone from RS5 to R6A for property located at 129 Elmhurst Avenue. Staff recommendation is to approve. Item number 20, 2026 Z021 PR00001. This is a request to reszone from RS5 to R6A zoning for property located at 311 Joiner Avenue. Staff recommendation is to approve. Item number 21, 2026 Z022 PR001. This is a request to reszone from RS5 to R6A zoning for properties located at 1233 and 1235 John L. Copeland Boulevard. Staff recommendation is to approve item number 22, 2026 Z023 PR00001. This is a request to reszone from RS15 to R15 zoning for property located at 3524 Earheart Road. Staff recommendation is to approve. And on page eight of your agenda, other under I other business, item number 23,

contract renewal for Savannah Garland. And item number 27, accept the director's report and approve administrative items. And that concludes the consent agenda.

Thank you, Matt. And so, commissioners and Matt, make sure we get these correct. Uh, what is a little bit different about the passing of this consent agenda is item one is a disapproval. So when we're voting yes, you're voting to disapprove item one. And we discussed that in great detail at the last meeting. All right, just to be clear, the rest are are adoptions. So items one, 2, 9, 13, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 27. Is that correct, Mint? That is correct.

All right, commissioners, you've heard the items to adopt on the consent agenda. All in favor say I. Oppos? No. Eyes have it. All right. So, we are on to items to be considered, but I did see council lady Hancock come in the room. Council lady, do you want to speak now or during the item? Okay. I just want to make sure.

Welcome. All right. And so, we are on to items to be considered. Before we get started, just a reminder, please uh silent your phones and then also um there may be several folks that have never been here before. And so how it goes um on the public hearing part is that we do the presentation. We'll open the public hearing. The applicant has eight minutes and then they can save two of the eight minutes for rebuttal. Then once the applicant is finished, then everyone wishing to speak will come up to the podium. They have two minutes. So, we have a timer over here and then um the applicant will have a rebuttal and then the council member and then we'll close the public hearing and we'll have um the deliberation for the commissioners. One last thing I do want to mention is it's still March. Uh this is probably out of order commissioners, but it's March Madness. My bracket is on life support. I hope yours are better. All right. So that leads us to uh one, two, five items being considered. And so there's three text amendments. And so uh we'll go ahead and get started with item number three.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Jeremiah. Presenting item number three on the agenda tonight. This is a request to permit 57 multif family residential units and staff recommendation is to approve with conditions and disapprove without all conditions. The subject the subject site consists of three parcels located on the north side of Anderson Lane. The parcels have frontage on Anderson Lane which is classified as a collector avenue in the major and collector street plan.

Okay. The subject the subject site consists of three parcels located on the north side of Anderson Lane. The parcels have frontage on Anderson Lane which is classified as a collector avenue in the major and collector street plan. The properties are currently zoned RS 7.5. Nearby properties are zoned RS 7.5 and SP. Surrounding land uses include single family residential and civic land uses with elementary school located to the west. There is a stream located at the northwestern corner of the subject site. The proposed plan is shown on the screen. The plan proposes 57 multif family residential units. Anderson Lane is shown on the bottom of the screen with nine units along the frontage. Units one through nine are oriented towards Anderson Lane and the remaining units are located interior to the site oriented to a courtyard or open space. The proposed unit share access drive share access through a private drive from Anderson Lane. The units along Anderson Lane are permitted to have two stories in 35 ft with the requirement for a pitched roof form. The interior units are proposed with a maximum height of three stories in 32 ft. The plan proposes to abandon the temporary turnaround at the terminals of Ellie Drive and create a permanent terminus with a hammerhead extension. Ellie Drive is at the top left corner on the screen. The hammerhead transitions into a private drive that includes a crash gate

for emergency access. The plan shows a 6' wide planting strip and a six foot wide sidewalk with a long Anderson lane consistent with MCSP requirements. As shown on the site plan, a 10-ft type B landscape buffer is proposed along the easting and rear property lines with a 20ft type B buffer along the resting property line. A six-foot opaque fence is proposed within all perimeter landscape buffers except along the northwestern property boundary. An open space is proposed at the northwestern corner of the site at the terminals of Ellie Drive where the stream buffer is located. The subject site is located within an urban neighborhood evolving policy area. Policy guidance notes that T4 areas will have higher densities with a broader range and integrated mixture of housing types providing housing choice more than some surrounding urban neighborhoods. staff reviewed the proposed SP against the T4 any policy goals for consistency and finds that the proposed SP is consistent with the goals of the policy. The proposed SP would permit 57 multif family residential units at a density of about 14 units an acre which is within the range of density supported by the T4 NE policy. The proposed height of all units at two and three stories is consistent with the policy guidance of one to three story buildings. The site has access to existing mass transit with three regit stops located

along Anderson Lane and mid drive to the east and proposed sidewalks consistent with the MCSP which will enhance the pedestrian environment and provide alternative modes of transportation. The orientation of the internal units to an open space or courtyard is in line with the T4 any policy goals of orienting buildings to the street or an open space. staff finds that the proposed SP is consistent with the goals of the T40 policy and we commence approval with conditions and disapproval without all conditions including the conditions in the memo before you. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. And so we'll go ahead and open this item for public hearing. And is the applicant in the room? Come on up. You've got eight minutes. Welcome. And you can save two of the eight minutes for a rebuttal. State your name. Yes, ma'am. You can't. Well, we're trying to speak into the the mics and I think it's Let Let me see if we can turn it up a little bit more. Okay. So, everybody speak into your mic. Thank you. Yes. Check. One, two.

You're good. Thank you, chair, and and commissioners. Appreciate you having me. It's been a long time been in front of you here. Um we've been working on this SP uh for several months now. Um actually almost a year. Um Michael Gary mentioned recently uh after planning's initial planning staff's recommendation um of going the SP route. We initially had proposed a base zoning change but pivoted to the SP. Uh we've worked over these many months with staff INDOT uh council member Hancock and other stakeholders uh to refine this unique site. It is a nearly 4 acre infill site that does have an environmental feature as was mentioned, a stream coming through one side. Um, as you heard, this is a neighborhood evolving land use in an area that already has a wide variety of housing stock, which includes Cedarwood condos just to the north, which is 104 existing condos. Uh, 1017 Pierce, that's an approved SP that has 20 units per acre density. Uh there's also another SP at Matt and Anderson in the 20 units per acre range. Uh an 84 unit project and our proposal here is a more modest 15 units per acre or in the uh RM15 density range um in an SP of course. Um this project is a missing middle opportunity um primarily being town homes uh with some single family sprinkled in. Uh it's definitely a product that's missing in this immediate area in Madison. Um there's some larger info lots on this part of Anderson. Uh it's close to transit and it's a connector street between Gallatin and Matt. Uh sidewalk infrastructures there connecting to the existing Amqui Elementary. Uh as far as working with the neighborhood, uh we've been in communication and supported uh we earned the support of Council Member Hancock as we move uh throughout the process. Um the council member went through her

typical zoning process uh via a large email list in addition of course all the notices that went out. Uh and we were a part of her regular monthly meeting at Yazu Brewing uh just held a few weeks back. Um we had several neighbors attend and had some great questions and feedback during that meeting. Uh and from that we actually made several changes to the SP circulated that back with those neighbors that attended uh Council Member Hancock as well. And then we submitted as we were submitting back to planning. Um you should have a support letter in your inbox. I know the council member just arrived actually. Having said all that, I I asked the commission please support this SP uh that planning staff has recommended approval of um and we will continue to listen to any concerns of neighbors. Uh we would like to continue to address those concerns uh and move forward to council with your recommendation today if at all possible. Thank you. Uh thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the commission. My name is Michael Garrian. I'm an engineer with Dell and Associates. Uh we did the design work for this preliminary SP. Um as Anthony said, we probably started working on this last right around this time last year. Uh initially filed with staff last June. Um so you can see we've been in no hurry uh to get to this point. uh very thankful to the staff and Jeremiah uh for their patience because we've gone back and forth six or seven times now both through staff reviewing the different agencies as well as revisions uh based upon community input. Uh I would say the biggest unique piece of this property is that stream. Not that a stream is necessarily unique, but this stream was not mapped by Metro uh nor the state. We we self-discovered it and we self-reported it. Uh it's it's evident that it's springfed and no one

really knew about it because of it being springfed because the subdivision immediately to the north has built right up to it and it was done 2017 somewhere around in there. So it it would have had a buffer had had it been known. That being said, that springs pop up all the time. It could have popped up at any time between now and then. Um, so once we discovered that, we also knew that Amqui Place, uh, the neighborhood just to the north of us, uh, Ellie Drive would not want Ellie Drive extended and connected to Anderson. It it makes an obvious cut through from Anderson to Pierce Road. Um, so typically INDOT requires if you're not going to extend the road, you put the culdesac on your property. If you know what the culde-sacs look like, they're 118 feet in diameter. They are massive. That would have put it right on top of that stream. Um, so we are very thankful to INDOT as as well as the planning staff working hard with us to come to this solution that eliminates a dead end under emergency conditions. We have a crash gate, so there is emergency connectivity between the two, but we're able to preserve the stream. We're able to keep that as a natural habitat and not have a cut through on a day-to-day basis situation there. Um, and provide pedestrian connectivity between the two developments because we do, as you can see, have the the um kind of uh miniature greenway around the stream, the little sidewalk trails through there. Um, density has been a a big talking point um because uh this is viewed as kind of unique to the to the area, but in reality, as Anthony said, there's 104 condos a couple hundred feet to the north, two SPS across the street from that that are higher density than we are, and then the extensive Matt and

Anderson SP to the east, which engulfs both of both sides of each of those collector roads. Um so so the density is in place. Um this is planning for the future, not necessarily breaking ground tomorrow. Um we have done everything we can do to minimize the feel and the scale of it. The interior town homes are 32 feet maximum. That's a standard two-story home. That's to uh shrink their mass, eliminate any possibility of light or shade on a uh effects on a neighboring property. We've increased the perimeter buffers. We've agreed to uh six foot screen fence, opaque fence around the entire property. Lost units along the frontage um as well as some of the interior to create more green space and along the frontage so that we could make those footprints larger and reduce the height. So take them from up to out. So um we've agreed to just about everything we've been asked to to this point and um we've worked very hard over the past year and we ask for your support. Thank you.

Thank you. And you have a minute and 10 seconds for rebuttal if you need rebuttal. All right. Is anyone wishing to speak? Come on up. Welcome.

First, well, ma ma'am, hold on. You have to go to the microphone because it's recorded.

Uh, I only have one ear u ear drum. So, it's a little bit hard for me. I haven't really heard everything. Okay. I had a uh uh speech ready to give you, but I'm going to just tell you my story. I live at 523 Anderson Lane. There are three properties to the east. We The road goes up the the Anderson Lane was cut cut through a mountain. The roaded across from me is is just ground cut and in their yard. Mine goes down about this kind of angle. So I forfeited that much lawn already. And now they're wanting to take a set back further and I will have practically no yard left as as to my driveway. My driveway is street level and the sidewalk curb sidewalk and then it slopes out of necessity of the land. I have a built-in garage, so it comes down and I can level out and go. Okay. If you take any of my front yard, if at all. I have a 2019 Grand Caravan. That is a big car. It goes in my drive. It goes in my garage. But if you take if you make the down longer, it'll drag my back. If you give me less room, I can't park flat to

my to my driveway. And I mean my garage, the foundation of my house. I have a very small about this size on the side of my house that you can actually go to the my the only way to go to my uh back. I have in my backyard existing a sewage um that starts about a twothird about a third going to the east ma'am goes across. So you've run out of time. The two minutes is up.

Well, I did send in things and since I've heard a lot and since I've read a lot, I will tell you the main thing. They have not cut the brush on that property. The two two lots that are named unknown. They've been that way for over 25 years since I've been there. Thank you, ma'am. Appreciate you coming down. and we requested a a survey and we you can't you cannot adjust the height on these buildings that you're talking about until you do you cut that and find the four corner and the the

Yes, ma'am. Thank you. what your the level of your property. And ma'am ma'am, grab your you need to grab your somebody. Thank you. Anyone else? Come on up. Thanks for coming. And just state your name for the record. We appreciate you coming down.

Hi, my name is uh Jeremiah Greg. Uh, nice name, right? Uh, I live at 529 Sarver, which is directly behind this uh, new project that's planned. My wife also owns 528 Sarver. And the biggest thing that has not been acknowledged here and has not been acknowledged in the email that you guys received from uh our council person that poorly represents us at 79 p.m. last night that we've been asking about the traffic study before anything gets to SP preliminary from Mr. Davis and uh Mr. Michael over here. But we're getting baited and switched. This email that consists that you received last night says that we've made huge changes. This is from uh Councilwoman uh Hancock. Uh we've made huge changes. Uh I know that uh sorry, I'm trying to find the right spot. the that the the big changes were that the height of the building that the uh community wanted to see more room on the property or something like that. We honestly we talked to these guys after the after the meeting last time and uh we just want to be heard about the traffic. The traffic is so absolutely dog aful terrible over there. This is going to cause more problems. Yes, there are 110 condos that are north of us that were built in the 70s with a lot of elderly people that don't leave, that don't travel as much, but the people in this community right here are traveling a lot and we're not seeing any of those traffic studies before. What they want is it to be approved and then, hey, we'll do a traffic study. What does that do for us? That doesn't solve the

problem of how maybe we can fix what we're going to do with this property, which I want them to build. I want them to be able to build whatever they can build. We just need help as a community. That's what we're asking for you. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Anyone else? Come on up. Just state your name for the record. Appreciate you coming down.

Thanks. Sorry I was a little bit late. I got stuck in traffic. My name is Paul Abear and I live just two houses over from this uh monro that's going to be built. Kind of mimicking Jar of the traffic is a major issue. I face Anderson Lane and I cannot get out of my park out of my driveway two or three hours a day. You know, rush hour coming in, rush hour coming out, I cannot leave my house. Um, if they're putting up what, 60 units, 120 vehicles. Take that over eight hours, that's 15 vehicles an hour. Like, that's three or four cars every minute on top of the traffic we already have. And it's in a traffic calming zone that you guys just put up the speed bumps. So, why are we doing something that's going to bring all this traffic? Just down the street at Anderson and Gallatin, there's been a lot that's been empty forever. Put it down there. Like, it's right off a Gallatin Road. It's not going to affect anything. Why are you putting this in the middle of singlestory houses? That makes zero sense. Like, threetory condos and in the middle of, you know, single family homes, it's going to totally change the entire dynamic of the neighborhood. So, I'm 100% against it. I know there's a few others that couldn't make it. Um, we feel like we have not been given notice for anything. They had the meeting right in the middle of the ice storm, got postponed to the next week. Nobody knew about it. I was sick. I couldn't make it. Like, nobody, our council person's not telling anybody anything. She doesn't use Facebook to tell people about this, but she'll use it to tell people about other things. So, I feel like we're just kind of being shoved to the side. Um, and that that's not right. Um, I own that house. I I don't plan on leaving. If this gets put up, I'm out. My next door neighbor's out. The one on the other side's out. Like, we're not going to live with this. It It'll be impossible. Like, you can't you if you do put this in, put a damn stoplight or a stop sign at that entrance. Like, so at least it'll give us a chance to maybe get out of our driveway because it'll slow the traffic down.

So, that's it. I got five seconds. So, I appreciate you guys time. Um, hopefully this doesn't go through. If it does, reszone the entire street so I can sell mine and make more money. Thank you. Appreciate it. Anyone else? I know there's We'll make sure we get everybody. Anyone else? All right. Seeing none rebuttal. It's a minute and 10 10 seconds. Actually,

I'll be brief. Chair, um the only quick comment we wanted to make was yes, we did commit to a traffic study. We were not required to do that, but we wanted to make absolutely sure we're putting it on the record today that we are committing to it. Um I'll have the council member put it uh in the SP um that we will be required to do the traffic study and we want to make sure that we we do that just to help the area in general if if we can. That came up in our community meeting and we'd like to we we have committed to that. So um we wanted to use utilize the SP to to do that. And again, just remind you, you know, again, it's it's um neighborhood evolving policy. Um and of course with council member and planning um support, we we just love to have your approval today. Thank you.

Thank you. And see and then council member.

All right. Is that on? Super nice to see everyone. It's super exciting to see a couple of new faces here like Hannah and Roland that I know and um get to work with in other aspects. Can I speak louder? How's that? Or get lower. I wish this was taller. I'm wearing a little bit of a heel, so maybe that's the problem. Okay. So, I greatly appreciate your time and thank you very much for having us first on the agenda so I can get to the Megs versus Isaac Whitten soccer game at Ted Rhodess. I understand and hear the concerns that are still existing from the community. And I think what is not always understood with a zoning change plan, especially in SP where it is so very specific to what they're building, is that the traffic study will be done before everything is built. So if this is approved, then the traffic study has to happen before the, you know, final site plan could be approved and this could be built. And I do think that's something that's a huge consideration on Anderson Lane, especially with MQ Elementary and the heavy traffic, not only during rush hour in general, but rush hour in the morning at the same time that school starts and then school exiting in the afternoon and then an hour later rush hour again. So, I I see that I drive through it sometimes. And I also encourage any of you that are concerned with the traffic on this street to drive through at school opening and closing times anywhere in the city. You know, we're in an era where a lot of people don't want their kids to walk to school. They don't want to um put them on the bus. So, a lot of people are driving their kids to school and that helps increase the traffic. I think one thing we've done on this street is we have added a sidewalk across from Enquy Elementary that took maybe four years to accomplish, but we

finally got it in. And that's allowing children on the other side of Anderson that were previously not walking to school because of the dangers of crossing the street to walk down the sidewalk to the crosswalk and crossing there. However, I understand traffic is still an issue and that traffic study will be a requirement in the plan. And um yes, I did wait until 2009 yesterday to send my email. I was wanting to wait and hear any additional feedback. We had a large number of people at the community meeting at Yazo Brew Yazu Brewery and I appreciate Anthony giving a shout out to that brewery um located in district 9. But the changes that they have adjusted based on the community feedback in that meeting is reducing the number of units on the front which were previously you know sandwiched closer together and we've reduced the number of units on the front to allow the visual impact not to be as strong kind of mirroring the tall and skinny homes across from Amqui Elementary. They've also reduced the height on the two end units because the folks that came to the meeting that lived directly beside were concerned that, you know, folks would be towering over them and that it would be a huge adjustment. And they were really happy with the reduction of a floor and then adding a fence around the new neighborhood, although I guess we'll have to discuss how that pedestrian connectivity that I heard about earlier would work. And then the traffic study, as I mentioned before, my my one remaining concern is the hammerhead. the hammerhead that um INDOT has recommended was to abandon the current traffic circle at the end of Ellie Drive, extend a little bit further into the subdivision and build the hammerhead partially on top of a stream, which I think that you know interfering with the stream is a risk of of flooding for both the new properties as well as the properties beside. And we have not yet

had this stream evaluated for the everpresent but state endangered streamside salamander that loves Madison. So I do have an appointment with the state zoologologist to come to that stream on um April the 4th and we can check it out and and see if there's a presence. Besides that, it's a stream, so there's going to be some sort of wildlife there. And I'm concerned about both the flooding and the wildlife. We've reached out to INDOT but haven't gotten an answer yet on their flexibility of this proposal. So, that's something that I would like to modify moving forward, but I think I could modify that at council. And I commit to continuing to have my twice a month community meetings where I can hear any additional concerns people bring up so that we can address them and make amendments as we go. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Lady. And seeing no one else wish to speak, I declare the public hearing closed. Commissioner Henley, you want to start us off?

Mr. Chair, thank you for that. I I I want to acknowledge obviously the the the residents that came to speak and and even reviewing the letters that we received in public comment. I think the the one word that jumps out at me is frustration. I think there's a lot of frustration. Um extremely familiar with the traffic that that Anderson Lane sees. I think the um you know my my soap box that I use um here a lot is probably coming out because I think it's it's unfortunate because you know we even had someone come and speak and and while some people don't necessarily care for the density on the site and and the placement of the project it it seems as though the main call is for an understanding and a solution for the traffic that's already there today. Um, it's an unfortunate and recurring thing that we hear at the planning commission that, you know, there's there's a perceived um and and really felt lack of of infrastructure in in the communities that meets the needs that they have. Um, with that in particular, I think, you know, we we've heard on the record that there'll be a commitment to a traffic study. I think it'll it sounds like there's quite a few other things that are going to be stewarded by the council member that will take place long before this project starts to get going. I think some of the concerns that I heard were also just related to some of the the kind of the geology and and other topography of the area which I know for certain that water services will be all over. Um and and you know wish luck to the developer once that process starts because they they do their job and they do it well. I I would I would be inclined to support it. I think it is a it's it's a great amount of density for a major corridor. I think with with with that comes the responsibility of figuring out how you manage that additional traffic entering that street. I think the way that it's laid out, you know, you will you will have a lot of traffic internal to the project, I

think, but that's part of the design approach that you want to have. Um, and I think again, we've heard from other residents that live directly next to this that it is a challenge to get out of of that. And I think there's probably maybe perhaps even a more unique solution um than just traffic calming to to help support that. I know it's always tough when you have um residences that immediately abut a a very active corridor um and and that is their only point and means of of ingress and egress. So, I would I would just, you know, and kind of obviously the council member being the person has to, you know, shepherd this, but I think it would be worth looking at something particularly for that area um that that allows that whether it's, you know, not that everyone will abide by them, but the, you know, do not block this entry type of markings that are placed um at intersections. There may be some opportunity to look at those specifically for for some of the the households that that line the street. But but all that said, based on what's been presented and and staff's recommendation and the and the several conditions, I'm I'm inclined to agree with staff recommendation.

Thank you, Commissioner. Any other discussion? Commissioner Dundon.

Um I agree with those comments and I also um am inclined to agree with staff's recommendation, but I do just have two questions. One of the speakers mentioned um wanting a stoplight at a particular location and my question to staff I guess is once the traffic study is completed if there is a recommendation for whatever the recommendation is a traffic light or stop signs um does the city pay for that or does the developer have to pay for that or if the traffic study is based on this development then it would be tied to this development. that this developer would have to typically pay for the the improvements associated with this case.

Okay. And does that go into a a requirement before the final plan is approved? Yeah, it would be it would be part of the final site plan review process for the traffic study to be completed and whatever come whatever recommendations come out of that traffic study that I end agrees with would be um made part of the the final site plan approval recommendation. Okay. Thank you. And then my my other question is there seemed to there I and maybe I misheard but I thought there was a slight disconnect between um the applicant was speaking about preserving the stream and then the council member mentioned that there was a possibility for a road hammerhead that might impact the stream. So maybe I misheard but if you could clarify.

I mean the the plan does show a hammerhead um at the northwest side at Ellie Drive. So that's um where we're talking about that the the design of that there's a gated access there on this I can't point to it but I don't know if you can find is the blue the stream on this picture

the blue is the stream and then next to that is the hammerhead drive that would allow for Ellie Drive to have a turnaround but south on the south part of that hammerhead is a gate that would prevent through traffic unless it's for emergency vehicles. So is that if the road the the road for emergency vehicles is that going to be paved into the stream or across the stream or will it block the stream? So go ahead.

It will partly it will partly go into the stream buffer. However, the traditional way that you have to end a road would be a culde-sac which would be much more impactful to that area. And so this is the sort of least impactful way to still allow for the appropriate emergency turnaround. Okay. Um I mean I guess I I have I share the same concerns about flooding and um is there is that something that Metro Stormwater would address in their you know subsequent review or could be I mean I think

as part of the final site plan approval full construction plans and storm water management plans will be submitted with that plan and it will have to meet metro storm water regulations in order to get a final site plan approval. Okay. All right. Thank you. Any other discussion? Any other discussion? Seeing none, need a motion. Commissioner Henley, you want to make a motion? Yes, chair. U make a motion that we accept the staff recommendation to approve with conditions and disapprove without all conditions.

And I I would urge that we we would urge a traffic study. And the council member already said that she's going to put that in there. And I she's always been honest to her word. But thank you, council lady, for doing that. But we'll put that in the record. That's okay. Second. Any other discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say I.

Oppos? No. Eyes have it. And it's adopted. All right. So, that leads us to the next item, which is item 10. And so, commissioners, items 10, 11, and 12. Uh, the motion will these are text amendments, and this is the first time we're having the public hearing on them. And so the motion that we make will be uh to defer to the next meeting to the so item 10. All right. This is item number 10 on the agenda tonight. The proposed text amendment updates daycare standards in the code. The code contains daycare center and daycare home land uses and they're defined as the provision of care for individuals who are not related to the primary caregiver for less than 24 hours per day. The daycare use depends uh the daycare use category depends on the number of individuals being cared for and whether operates out of a center or a home. Uh as you can see here on the screen a daycare center um in the land use table it's shown as two uses under 75 and over 75. And then also daycare home is split into two uses. Daycare home small and daycare home large with small being for 5 to seven individuals and large being 8 to 12 individuals. Kind of just a brief overview of how we um categorize different types of land uses. Um the land use table identifies land uses as permitted uh permitted with conditions, special exception or accessory. When a use is permitted, there are no conditions for that use in the zoning district. Um, if designated PC or permitted with conditions, that means a certain provisions need to be met for the use to be permitted. If designated special exception, approval from the board of zoning appeals is required for the use to be permitted. And then finally, an accessory is only permitted with the primary use on the property. And these are the acronyms that'll be used with throughout the rest of the presentation.

Um, so summary of some of the key changes in this amendment. Um, it proposes many things including consolidating daycare center classifications, permitting with conditions daycare centers in multif family zoning districts, modifying daycare home large from SE to PC use in various zoning districts that are listed on the slide, the residential ones there. Um, modifying daycare homes small and large to be accessory uses in R and RS districts. and then re or sorry reducing parking requirements and reducing spacing requirements for daycare centers and daycare home large uses. The proposed bill reduces restrictions for daycare uses to operate through the simplification of the definitions of daycare centers reducing permitting requirements by making daycare uses either PC or accessory uses by allowing more daycare uses uh to be permitted with conditions. This removes the requirement for daycare centers and daycare homes to go through the BZA to get um to be granted a special exception in some residentially zoned districts. This would reduce a step in the process and potential barrier, thus increasing the opportunities for adding daycarees throughout the county. This legislation also uh reduces minimum spacing requirements between daycare uses and reduces parking requirements. Staff is generally supportive of these changes. The reduction of spacing between daycare uses could open up new sites for them to operate. all changes still ensure that the requirements of the state are met. Um, and so that was kind of a summary of what this legislation proposes and now we'll have the public hearing and staff recommends a deferral to April 23rd, the planning commission meeting in accordance with NPC rules. Thank you.

Thank you very much. And so, commissioners, we'll go ahead and open this item for public hearing. And um, Councilman Horton, I I know you're the council member on this. Do you want to start us off? uh during the public hearing. That way we No, you can you can stay seated. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No,

thank you. Um so what this legislation does is attempt to increase accessibility um and reduce costs um for uh child care services in Nashville by cutting some of the unnecessary red tape um which has made it uh very difficult to build and operate a daycare in Davidson County. I think um Davidson County has a daycare deficit. I study showed that we lack nearly 3,000 needed child care spots. Um even if a family can find child care, there's no guarantee they can afford it. Um child care costs for in Davidson County annually, uh 14,000 a year per child, which is more than the cost of college tuition in Tennessee. Um and so we have a crisis. Um and this legislation helps to make it um easier to open and access a daycare, reduce weight times, which can often stretch for over a year. Um and through increased supply, um help lower costs and increase competition among daycarees to help bring down those costs for families. Um it's been a collaborative effort between um myself, the mayor's office, uh the planning department, and the codes department. Um so excited um for us to um start to tackle this very important issue for for our city and for families.

Thank you, Councilman. Anyone wishing to speak on this on item 10? Come on up. State your name. And

hey, just want to check wasn't planning on speaking on this, but we often find that there are unintended consequences. So, I just want to speak up and make sure some things are considered for this. What we keep experiencing, uh, number one, I agree there's a lack of daycare, but what we keep experiencing is that when this kind of thing is considered, it isn't considered in the context of how it can apply to the outlying areas. Uh we have lots of daycarees that are coming in with churches and on uh we have lots of things happening on agricultural properties that kind of skirt by a lot of the rules. Um and just down the street from me on the south side there's going to be a thousand member church. There's one across the street that has seven day a week uh events involving kids and there's one that's going to be to the north. Um, so I would just ask that when considering it, you keep in mind all the ways that it might apply. It sounds like it's for smaller issues, smaller places, but they can often go bigger and it has consequences that weren't really considered. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, council member, we'll save comments for uh when we open when we close the public hearing. Is that okay? Okay, perfect. All right. And so, uh, seeing no one here wishing to speak, I declare the public hearing closed. And so, Councilman, you want to go ahead and either close us out and we'll see if there's any other discussion?

Um, well, I think I gave my main pitch um during the the public comment period. Um, but um, yeah, again, this has been a collaborative effort um on behalf of the um um among the council, the mayor's office, planning and codes. Um, I don't think it's a um necessarily a a finished um um product yet. I think uh there are some things that we left out um in order to allow them to be considered um individually as amendments at the council. Um you know, currently the legislation reduces but doesn't eliminate parking. Um we reduce the special or the previously special minimum lot areas for child care but don't eliminate minimum lot areas. Um so um excited to move forward with this legislation and and we have to defer it today but when we reconsider it I think um want to make sure that we provide sufficient latitude um to the council to consider potential amendments um um when it's in front of them.

Thank you Councilman Commissioner Deng. Thank you. Um, I agree that there is a a a need for more child care in Davidson County and I'm really excited to to read this particular case. I did have one question for staff. Um, in within the analysis, there was a concern about permitting accessory uses where the principal activity itself might not be permitted to the code. Um, could you maybe speak a little bit more to that maybe and provide an example for understanding? Are you talking about um like the definitions or what were you talking about specifically

within the analysis of the staff analysis in the third paragraph at the at the end is it speaks to um requirement that non non-coring law areas must be a minimum of 75% of the law area and then goes on to say there is concerns about permitting this accessory use where the principal activity might not be permitted by the code. Could could we

Yeah. As part as part of this ordinance, it would allow for some daycarees to be permitted on legally non-conforming or non-conforming lots. I guess that's something we're still reviewing. I mean, the language that's in the code. I mean, it it probably should say legally non-conforming lots and not just non-conforming parcels. And so I think we need to define that a little bit better. But typically uses are required to meet the the minimum lot size requirements. This this provides a little more flexibility in that you if a lot is substandard, it could at 75 meeting at least 75% of the requirement. It could still have a daycare. That's something we're still reviewing to determine if if uh we would recommend that or not. So, right now, I guess we're just wanting to hear feedback from the commission on that item to see if it's something that um should be modified or left in the way it is.

Anything else, Commissioner Deng? We can always come back.

Oh, no. Go ahead. Go ahead. Um, I my one other question I might have would be the reduction of the spacing from I think 1,00 to 1,000 ft to 600 ft. And a similar question um I believe when we were looking at the CCO overlay which is do you know what comparable city standards are for a use of this sort like in terms of the distance? I mean, we we did research this and there is a wide variety of requirements for daycarees. I I looked at this about a year ago when this first came up and there are there are cities that do have different separation requirements and I I think there are some that have close to a thousand feet, there's some that have less than a,000 feet. And so I think with with this ordinance with the the intent of this ordinance was providing more flexibility. We felt it was appropriate to go on the lower end of and reducing that that separation requirement as part of this um proposed ordinance. So that's what um I think was put in there in this in this current draft.

I think one thing to add I mean there are some cities that don't have a separation requirement at all. And so I mean anytime that we're doing research on sort of what peer cities do, it can really run the gamut. People just different cities choose different ways to to regulate land uses. Yeah. So it's a range. Anything else, Commissioner Day? Not on. Okay. Any other discussion? Yes. Commissioner Leslie. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh I appreciate the uh what's been done here, but let's see. In simplicity, would it be just if I had a house, uh, could I put a daycare in it?

Yes. It depends on um how many individuals you'd be taking care of, but there's like it would be permitted with conditions or it would be if it's up to four, it would you would be allowed to have that as a permitted use. And so there would be no other restrictions other than whether it was over that number. if it was over like if it was over four individuals, right?

There would be there would be um let me find my ly's table really quick. Um so this legislation is proposing that um if it were to be a daycare home, so that would be either five to seven individuals or 8 to 12 I think was the number. Um it would be either an accessory use to what's already happening, so your principal use of having a residence or it would be a permitted with conditions use. So, it' have to meet what's in the code for the conditions to to operate as a daycare home. So, but I wouldn't have to worry about whether or not it had enough parking spaces or anything like that.

There are still um parking space requirements. They are being they're proposed to be reduced a little bit with this legislation. Um but there's still there's still parking requirements that are that are proposed with it. So this type a daycare could go in a residential neighborhood and but then you're requiring the the residential neighborhood uh the resident the house to have parking.

Yeah, maybe it Let me pull up the parking exhibit so you can see. T typically though in a residential neighborhood the driveway can serve as the parking where in commercial uses there may be a uh prohibition about having tandem parking that would not apply. So you so a driveway where if you could fit three or four cars is likely going to meet the parking requirements. So it wouldn't have to be a parking lot necessarily.

Yeah. Yeah. And I was just going to say if you look on the screens now, you can kind of see if it was the small one, you'd be required to have one space um for where the daycare is an accessory use and then one for the principal use. So for the house itself. Um so that'd be two spaces. And then if it was a large one, it would be two spaces plus two for the principal use. Would the street allowed? Will street parking be allowed? Would that Yeah, street parking unless it's signed for no parking, then street parking is allowed typically on on public streets. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Any other discussion? Any other We want to get it out while we can here. The first hearing. All right. Commissioner Deng and then Commissioner Henley. Well, let's do Commissioner Henley and then we'll come back to Commissioner Deng. He hadn't spoke yet.

Well, yeah. The only point I mean, and these are comments. They're not necessarily questions, so you don't have to flip through pages, but I I just want to express my support for this. I think it's it it's clearly a need and and and my bias to it is not having, you know, young ones that I'm trying to place in daycare, but it's from having engagements with the community where one of the most asked for amenities in any neighborhood, no matter what direction you go, it's the need for additional child care facilities. Um, and I and the thing I appreciate about this is it's it's it's creating a level of diversity and offerings because I think that's what we need as a city. I mean, we we hear it here every couple weeks that, you know, not every neighborhood, not every community or part of town is the same. Um, but one thing that everybody needs is is is support uh for their for their children, right? It takes a village. So, I like I like the the efforts that are here. I think the concerns that were mentioned are important. you know, we want to make sure that we're thinking about some of the ripple effects and and I think that's why we um handle the process the way we do now as we open it to to the public. We look for for further ways to improve what's in front of us. But as as it is today, I think it it's definitely something I'm I'm proud of. Appreciate the work because it's a proactive approach. It's the kind of thing that communities ask us to do all the time. Um and so I'm glad to be able to, you know, go out into the community and say we are actually doing something about it. It's not ready yet. Um but but we are doing something about it. So just wanted to commend all the efforts and and express my my stance on it.

Commissioner D. You're good. Okay. Any other discussion? I personally want to just say thank you to the councilman for um doing this. Uh I feel like um we we do need this. It's very important. I think diversity of of daycarees is is a really important thing. And um I'm sure if we get a lot of complaints, we'll be back to, you know, they'll there might be complaints. You never know. But this is I really appreciate his thoughtfulness on this. So, thank you, Councilman, for bringing this to us. All right. Seeing I I just want to make clear per the rules, it needs to be deferred to April 23rd.

Yep. And so, uh, Commissioner Deng, you want to make a motion to defer? Um, you might need to help me out help here, but um, so make a motion to defer item 10, daycare uses to the the April 23rd meeting. That's a proper motion. Councilman seconds it. Any other discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say I. Oppos? No. Eyes have it. It's deferred. Next is item 11.

Okay, this is item 11 on the agenda. The proposed text amendment would add a notice requirement to council members when conditions adopted as part of a preliminary specific plan are determined to be uninforceable. The proposed amendment would add a requirement to the administration and procedures portion of the code to require council member notification within two business days of staff determination that a condition adopted as part of an SP reszoning or preliminary SP um is uninforceable by any reviewing agency. Once the determination is made by Metro Planning or the Metro Department of Law uh that a condition is uninforceable, email notification to the council member where the SP is located would be required. The legislation addresses the planning department and the department of law. Um the department of law provided a statement that they check on any legal concerns regarding a piece of zoning legislation or its enforcability prior to the third reading at council. The proposed amendment addresses the review of the development plan, uh, also referred to as a final site plan, which is typically an administrative process. Preliminary SPS often have conditions of approval, which will usually include restrictions on the permitted uses, infrastructure, architecture, or landscaping. Um, at times, council members may add conditions at the council level after planning commission consideration and recommendation. When this occurs, uh, these conditions are not reviewed by planning staff for feasibility. And as a note, uh the review period for final site plans or final SPS um may take additional time uh because they often include detailed construction drawings and a determination of uninforcibility may not be discovered until days or weeks after the application is filed and under review. There are also multiple agencies involved in the review process for a final SP. And if an agency were to determine a condition is uninforceable per the proposed legislation, the agency would notify planning and then planning would notify the council member. Review of the of preliminary specific plans is led by the land development team team of the planning department and

includes other development service agencies. Uh recommendations of approval include conditions from some or all agencies and agencies do not knowingly add uninforceable conditions. Uninforceable conditions generally are rare. At times, the planning commission will add conditions during their consideration and planning staff will advise as to issues that may arise related to enforcement if any are known to avoid inclusion of uninforceable conditions. There are some conditions that have been included in the past past such as hours of operation that can be difficult to enforce. On occasion, conditions are added by district council member at the council level after the planning commission has reviewed and made a recommendation. um legislation is only referred back to the planning commission in limited circumstances. So si so staff may not review these added conditions. So that's kind of a summary of what this proposed text amendment um changes and now we'll have the public hearing. Um staff's recommendation is to defer to the April 23rd meeting in accordance with MPC rules.

Thank you. And commissioners, we'll open this item for public hearing. The council member Cortez is the applicant, but he's not here. I don't see him. And so,

oh, he sent a letter. Oh, thank you, C. Thank you, Councilman. He sent a letter. So, that will be the the opening part. I got that. It's like the baseball signs. I like it. All right. So, anyone wishing to speak on item number 11? Anyone wishing to speak? Come on up. Tuanichek Canidge. I understand I think some of the drive behind this and I know that um the state mandates a lot of what we do and I get that and I understand things not being um you don't want things in that are not enforceable, but it makes it ever more important for the conversations to happen early. Um, if this happens, then what I think I understand coming out of it is that we are going to lose our voice a little more. Um, we've already, you know, we've been cut back from having more time back to two minutes to try to convey community concerns. We've found a way to put some things in writing that the developers agreed to that weren't necessarily enforcable. I I understand I think where that's coming from. But what keeps happening is there there's this whittling away of our ability to have any influence over our own communities. And so if things are getting tighter like this, everybody's overworked. Every metro department is overworked. Can we please also find a way to improve the community's ability to have a voice to have in-person meetings to work things out ahead of time because everybody's moving at such a fast pace that we're really losing that ability and the communities are suffering for it. Thank

you. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none, uh, seeing no one else switch and speak, I declare the public hearing closed. Commissioner Marshall, you want to go first? All right. Thank you. I think I understand the amendment. Um, I as I reviewed it and listened to the presentation. I am interpreting it that it's just kind of streamlining the process a little bit and making it a little bit better from an operational standpoint. So, if I'm reading it correctly or hearing it correctly, I would tend to support that particular amendment.

Thank you, Commissioner D. You want to go next?

Sure. Um, I did have one one question about this. We're speaking about uninforcable conditions, which I, you know, hope that we're most of the time, you know, not recommending with legal and thank you. Um but in the analysis that staff notes that final site plans might take months and yet this specific code change would essentially ask for a notification within days like how could that that itself seems then uninforceable if we wouldn't know for the amount of time. Could you speak a little bit how that process might work? I mean, the the requirement is that when it's determined that something is uninforceable, and so we could be weeks or months into the review of a a plan before it's determined that something is if it's a requirement. I think the example I gave earlier on the phone with you was the um if someone proposed a roundabout and it turns out there's not a way to engineer that roundabout or the there's not enough right of way for that roundabout. If there's a condition that requires it, then then there may have to be some other alternative other than what was in the condition of approval because it's not enforceable to build the roundabout. So, um, that is just one example of what could happen. But, I mean, I think it it's there's various ways that a a condition can be determined to be uninforceable. It could be illegal in ter terms of fair housing. It could be uninforceable because it can't be met from an engineering standpoint. And we just don't know. Um, and so at at the point that we determine that it's uninforceable is when we would notify the council member per this this bill.

Let me just add also that I think that the situ I think that occurrences of this are pretty rare. Um, I would say that, um, you know, to Bob's point of of say a roundabout, if if there's an engineering way to have an alternative that is determined to be equal to, um, in regards to how it functions, then that might even not be considered an uninforcable. It just might be that you have an alternative that serves in the same way. It can gener, it can serve the same amount of traffic. And so in that case or with an hour of operation like Bob said that might necessarily not be uninforceable. It just might be difficult to enforce. And so totally uninforceable from a legal standpoint is probably going to be relatively rare.

Thank you. And and just so continuing to use the example from from my understanding with this the implementation of this new code the council notification would it still would it then change any of the current process of the finalization of the plans? No. Okay. I was say no it won't. Um but yeah we would notify the council member within two days of making that determination that something might be uninforceable. Any other discussion? Seeing none, we'll need a motion to defer. Commissioner Marshall, you'll make a motion. Sure. I'll make a motion that we approve staff recommendation deferral to April 23rd. That's a proper motion. Is there a second?

Second. Any other discussion? Seeing none, all in favor of the deferral, say I. Oppos? No. Eyes have it. It's deferred. We are on item 12. All right. This is item 12 on the agenda tonight. The purpose of this amendment is to update the home occupation section of title 17 per direction of the metroleal. Um, home occupation in the code is defined as the occupation, service, profession, or enterprise carried on by resident member of a family within a dwelling unit. Generally speaking, the home occupation provisions are intended to permit small-cale non-residential land uses to operate on residentially zoned properties as long as they are an accessory use to the principal use. This ordinance proposes to delete and replace section 17.16.250.D D of the Metropolitan Code which regulates home occupation throughout Nashville and Davidson County. Um there are five main points that I will summarize here that have been changed. Um the floor limitations have been removed. Hour restrictions for customers have been removed and has been limited to 12 customers per day. It adds another use for non-powered equipment and vehicles. It adds new regulations for when a permit can be revoked and the permit dur duration has been extended from 1 to three years. The proposed changes to title 17 primarily address issues identified by recent court of appeals ruling in fixing the gaps in the existing code. They also introduce one new allowable home occupation. Overall, the purpose remains the same to allow small-scale business activities in homes while pre preserving their residential character

and staff does recommend to deferral per the MPC rules. Thank you. Thank you. And so, commissioners will open this item for public hearing. Uh the councilman, did he send a letter? No. No letter. Thank you, council. Um, and so since he's not here, anyone wishing, is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak? Make sure. Seeing none. All right. Seeing no one wishing to speak, I declare the public hearing closed. And we went this way. So, Commissioner Deng, you haven't started. Okay. You want to start? Go ahead. Sure. I I

sure I can I can start. Um, in general, I understand this is is an update to to a code to allow you know home home occupation um with some fewer restrictions. I think I did just have one question about the addition of I believe it was um bicycles and what can be allowed out outdoors while in your home occupation. Could you speak a little bit more to that permission and why that changed from the previous version? Um yes. So the one more permitted use was to repair of non-powered equipment and vehicles which would be bicycles um whether indoors or outdoors. Um I'm not I mean it's under the section that outlines the permitted uses. Um but I think the council member might have added this one on specifically. Um,

yeah, I can't really specifically speak to the reason that was added, but it was added, I think, by the council member. Um, this the council member did work with Metroleal um to draft this this ordinance, but um I can't speak specifically why that one use was added. And Commissioner Dang, I think it would be helpful. This stems from a lawsuit and I think Counselor wants to update us. I think it'll be helpful. Yeah.

Yes. So, um so one change uh stems from a lawsuit and then there are other I would say more policy based changes. Um the portion that stems from the lawsuit is um D3 the customer visit section or at least formerly the customer visits I believe now customer appointments. Um there was a a case um Shaw versus the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County where the Tennessee Court of Appeals um found that those um that that two individuals who had um uh sued Metro over um this home occupation as applied to them. uh uh these these uses I guess were um determined to be uh not not used as uh sorry uh they they were uh held to be uh similar to other uses that are regulated in title 17 uh and metro did not have a rational basis for the difference in treatment. So, so this bill is meant to better align uh these home occupation uses with current existing uses like daycare and short-term rental.

Thank you. That's helpful. Any other discussion, Commissioner Leslie? Does this allow uh can I fix my car in my driveway? Um I'm going to say no. Well, what the section that she was just talking about to repair nonpowered uh vehicles wouldn't a car that is de be disabled and I'm trying to repair it. Wouldn't that fit into

you can you can probably fix your car within limits of uh in your driveway because you're it's not you're not running a business when you fix your own car. Um, there may be some codes issues that you can't violate while fixing your car in the driveway, but um, but you can't fix someone else's car. You can't fix other people's cars as a business.

This is about businesses. So, if you were running an auto mechanic shop out of your home and had people bringing their vehicles to you to fix, that would not be permitted as a home occupation. If you're changing your own oil in your driveway, then that's likely permitted because that's your own vehicle and it's not a business operation. The use that's being added is non-motorized as in bicycles, not auto vehicles. Oh, I thought it said bicycles and vehicles.

Non-powered vehicles. I do not believe that is including automobiles but we are certainly happy to clarify that but it would not permit um auto repair is specifically prohibited. Right. So so cars are motor vehicles. So uh vehicles in this sense are are those without a motor. So a bicycle, a scooter, something like that that doesn't have a motor. But why was there there two distinctions that there's a bicycle and you have in there a non-powered vehicle? It is um non-powered equipment and vehicles including bicycles. So bicycles is just meant to illustrate a a non-powered equipment or vehicle.

So you're saying they're they're the same thing that that bicycle fits within a non-powered equipment and vehicle. But that but would you agree that's not how it's stated though? It could be confusing because it appears to me that it look I don't there you have an indication in there for a bicycle and it went one step for further and said a nonpowered vehicle. Those are two different thing. I don't know what a non-powered vehicle is but it's not a bicycle. Maybe a go-kart. Yes. Scooter. Well, what I would I would like a little bit more clarification on what a non-powered vehicle is and

remind the commission this is the first meeting and and those are issues that we'll we'll look into for the second meeting when this comes back if we need to clarify something like that. So that's a good comment for us to look into a little bit further. Very good commissioner. We'll for sure that's a good question because it is a little confusing. More Thank you, Commissioner. Any other discussion, Councilman?

Uh, yeah, I just um grateful for Council Member Parker for bringing this legislation to remedy the uh deficiencies under the state constitution for this. And I think it makes sense to expand the permitted home occupancies to include things like uh bike repairs. I think this can be a useful home business and one which doesn't impose significant externalities on uh on neighbors. So, I think um not only are we fixing a constitutional deficiency, we're making it a little bit better than it was before. So, grateful to the council member for bringing this and look forward to picking this back up after we defer it. Any other discussion? Seeing none, Commissioner Deng, you want to make a motion to defer?

Sure. Um, I'd like to make a motion to defer item 12, home occupation revisions to the April April 23rd meeting. Thank you. That's a proper motion. Is there a second? Second. Any other discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say I.

Oppos? No. Eyes have it. And the item is deferred. We are now on to item 16. and commissioners. Everybody's okay. We're going to keep on trucking. Is that okay? Going to keep keep going. I want to make sure everybody's okay. All right. Item 16.

All right. This is item number 16 on the agenda. The request is to permit a multif family development. Staff's recommendation is to approve with conditions and disapprove without all conditions. The site consists of one 6.6 acre parcel located on the west side of Canebridgeidge Road. The site has been zoned AR2A agricultural residential since 1974 and is currently developed with a single family use. The site is currently accessed by Canidge Road which is classified as an arterial boulevard in the major and collector major and collector street plan. Um adjacent zoning includes AR2A to the north. Um and then single family residential RS10 and RS20 to the south, west, and east. There are a couple policies on the site. Um T3 suburban neighborhood evolving is intended to create and enhance suburban residential neighborhoods with more housing choices, improve pedestrian and bicycle and vehicular connectivity and moderate uh density developments, development patterns with moderate setbacks in spacing between buildings. Conservation is intended to preserve environmentally sensitive land features through protection, remediation. The conservation policy on this site um at that northwest corner um likely reflects a uh small portion of the stream buffer um which does not substantially impact the buildable area on the property. So this is the proposed plan and just to orient um Canidge Road is on the top right of the screen. Uh the proposed SP would permit a multi a residential development of 68 multif family residential units. There are three unit types. Attached front-loaded town home units um and attached or two types of attached rear town rear loaded town home units. The front-loaded ones are shown in orange and the rear loaded uh units are shown in red and blue along the alleys. Um the units are either oriented toward Canidge Road open space or the private road internal to the site. Access is from an entrance along Cane

Ridge Road and units will be accessed by a private alley and road network internal to the site. The plan calls for the streetscape improvements according to the MCSP with new sidewalks along Cane Ridge Road connecting to the site's internal sidewalk network. Uh the units that are in orange and red are proposed to be two stories and 30 ft and then the units in blue are proposed to be three stories and 35 ft. In the area closest to uh Canidge Road, there are two small open spaces which are intended to provide a larger setback between the development and Canidge Road. And there's also a central open space internal to the site as well. And then finally, the landscape buffers that are around the western, northern, and southern property lines are standard B2 B2 landscape buffer. Um and then along Can Road, additional plantings are also provided to screen parking and the sides of units from Canidge Road to the entry drive. The proposed SP would permit 68 units at a density of approximately 10 units an acre. Uh the SP meets the goal of the T3 policy to provide more housing choices as it provides a mix of town home unit types um and introduces a new unit type town homes to the western side of Canidge Road. The plan limits all the heights to the of the units to be three stories and 35 ft um which is in line with the policy guidance of one to three stories. Um the major and collector street plan MCSP requirements are also proposed to be met along Cane Ridge Road. Um and the internal sidewalks uh connecting to the sidewalks proposed on Canidge Road contribute to the overall evolving sidewalk network in the area. The landscape buffers um provided on the southern, western, and northern property boundaries align with policy guidance as it um acts as a formal buffering between existing development and then screens the new proposed development. And then finally, the open spaces that are shown on the site um serve different functions. We have the two that are closest to Canridge Road, lining the entrance and of the private drive and offsetting the units from Canidge Road, helping to reflect the deeper setbacks

along the Canidge Road to the south. And then the open space central to the site um development central to the development breaks up the units on the site and provides an active open space internal to the site. Overall, um the site meets the goals of the T3NE policy by providing a moderately dense residential development through introducing a unit type to the area and contributing to pedestrian connectivity in the area. So staff's recommendation is to approve with conditions and disapprove without all conditions. Thank you.

Thank you. And so commissioners, we will open the item for public hearing. And is the applicant in the room? Come on up and state your name. You have eight minutes and you can save two of the eight minutes for rebuttal. Welcome.

Thank you. My name is Casey Kaiser. I'm with Meritage Homes. Appreciate your time and consideration this evening. Appreciate the presentation. I think it was very comprehensive on what we've proposed. As noted, the site meets the goals of the T3 policy by providing a moderately dense residential development through introducing a new unit type to the area and contributing to pedestrian connectivity in the area. That's always our goal. From the time we start looking at a parcel or project, we immediately look at Nashville next, the community policy, and work on putting together a site plan that that meets the intent of that. That's the vision that Nashville has cast and we want to fall in line with that. So, we've worked diligently with uh planning staff and NDOT and other departments to meet that whether emails, phone calls, inerson meetings to provide a high quality site plan that that meets that community character policy intent. Uh we're in alignment with all the conditions of approval. uh we've met all the policy requirements in terms of buffering, parking, open space requirements, and so we think we've put together a uh a high quality site plan that we're looking forward to uh getting approval on. So, I uh respectfully ask for your approval this evening. I'll be happy to answer any questions and I'll save uh my extra couple minutes for any uh rebuttals that that may come up.

Thank you so much for your time. And we'll save two minutes for rebuttal. And so, anyone wishing to speak, come on up. But if you'll line up behind the microphone, that'd be great. Thank you.

Hey, Tuanic. Um, we have not had sufficient community engagement on this. The our residents in our area, as you know, often want to sit down, always want to sit down at the table and discuss. Uh, we've had good development outcomes from this down the street. 5788, you may remember, we did an amazing turnaround on that. Can farms north and south right beside this. and another one that's going in just down the street. We've only had one meeting on this and it's been uh on WebEx, which is not conducive to actually having discussions. Um some of our biggest concerns that we want to discuss are buffers. They're not being required to do the same quality of buffers that we've had in nearby ones. Uh we need to talk about the intersection nearby and especially because now we have Tennessee not a choice lanes coming into the I24 corridor. That is going to cause traffic to get even worse. We're a uh a bypass for I24 when anything is happening out there. We don't have any undisturbed uh areas on this property. Uh and it's not fair and it's not a good precedent to not hold this property to the same standards as all the rest. I'm requesting that we have a deferral for the purpose of in-person conversations in person, not WebEx, and specifically especially that we talk about the intersection of Blairfield at Cane Ridge Road. Uh it is getting worse every day. And we again have that 10,000 member church to the north, 10,000 member church to the south, and these other developments coming in. Some of them are not on y'all's agenda yet because it's they're just in discussion phases. um the density is not appropriate for that side of the road. This kind of density has only been approved on the other side up at 5788 and this has kind of been a line along the the history so we would like to stick to that. Um so yeah, again

deferral please. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Come on up. Please state your name. Welcome.

Good evening. I'm Dr. Emily Burgess and our um property is adjacent, let's see, is directly adjacent to the subject property and we anticipate being significantly impacted by the proposed development. Um I actually have not even met the developers. I know the neighbor pretty well, but we um you know, we just haven't had any communication really from anyone. And I tried to attempt to at one of the Zoom meetings, but it didn't work. Um so I just would like to delay the uh amendment adding it to the amendment so we can have further discussion and properly plan since our land is adjacent right to this and make sure that the buffer zones are proper. Also with that curve where the entrance of this condos would begin. We actually call that dead men's curve because it's such a blind site. Um there's a new single home development that's already been made across on the um looking from my side right now on the right side. And then you've got homes opposite of this development. So right now it's a two-lane Canidge road as you know and it's congested the density and volume the traffic that we get overflowed from 24. It's you know like leaving at my house at 7 in the morning. It takes like 15 minutes to get from my house at 5667 to get to the mount um the stop four-way stoplight uh Mount View Road takes like 15 minutes because traffic is already like a standstill. So, we just want some further discussion and planning because we know that Cambridge is a hot new neighborhood that's getting a lot of attention and we love the growth, but we also love that a lot of people love to come to Cambridge because we've always been looked upon as like a rural like family oriented community and Antioch is huge and a lot of people don't realize that Cambridge is a part of Antioch, but we'd like to also still continue to keep that, you know, family oriented and we love diversity. We're very diverse, but

we want to make sure that the planning is also considering the community and the residents of Cambridge Farm as well.

Thank you. And just a reminder, if everybody could silent their phones, so that would be helpful. So, just out of respect for all the speakers. All right, come on up. First of all, I want to say I'm a retired Metro school teacher and I'm still subbing, but I I'm worried about the schools in that area. When I go, they're over overcrowded, you know, and I feel sorry for the kids. And here we are trying to make some more developments. There's like seven of them right now in Cane Ridge trying to start this developments. And my house has been there. We moved there in 19 in 1984. Built a house with five acres and Larry is my neighbor, the one that's trying to build all these condos and stuff. It it runs over my land. If they want to make that road that was behind us, building behind it, it's going to be running over my land. And that's not right. It's not right at all. So if you wear my place, you know where I'm coming from. So, I'm a respectful Nashvilleian. I was not born here. I was born in Texas. My children were born and raised here. My husband was from Kentucky. He's deceased. So, I'm a widow, you know, and I'm fighting for this because I think we all should have a a say so in this. And Larry just went ahead and did all this without even telling me that was not right. And I see that this should not be passed. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Welcome.

Hi, I'm Lori Chaffer and I'm in the Canidge area. These mics are not very loud. Um, and I just would love to propose a deferral as well. I feel like the Cana there's so much stuff being built and uh so little infrastructure and very little meetings with those of us in the community. um with the builders. I just feel like if we could just slow everything down a little bit, um it would really help us help the developments work for our area. There's a certain charm to our area. The way they've done Nolan'sville, for example, and made it very charming and kind of work together on the buildings that are happening there, I feel like is not happening in Cambridge. And so I think that's happening in this case. I think there's just not stuff is popping up before we can even have meetings with a lot of these developers. So, I'm just requesting that you guys um just defer this and also um allow for more buffers and um mine. I turned it off. So, sorry. Anyway, more buffers as well because we they're building like we're not a rural area, but we are largely rural at this point and so the speed with which the buildings are happening is just um it's just too fast. So, thanks.

Sorry about my phone. Thank you. No, no problem. Come on up. Welcome. You might hear dings and stuff.

Hi, my name is Sharon. I'm going to be reading from um the email that I sent. Um I'm here to I agree with everything else that my neighbors have stated. Um I'm wanting to express my concerns regarding the proposal of this new development. Um I really do like what Cambridge has done with the neighborhood right across. It's 779 feet across on um Spring Lane. I think that's very nice. And also what they've done around All Ridge and even the um apartments on the other side, they're very nice. Um, but as of now, I feel like with this new development of the town homes um near my house are I think Kidge is um known for its peaceful atmosphere, scenic back roads and natural surroundings including greenery from um greenery and farm animals, occasional sometimes horseback riding or people um going around in their golf carts um from neighborhood to neighborhood. I do know that there's a lot of people in Cambridge Farms that do walk over to the little trail behind um Spring Lane and then they also go around Tanganger outlets to walk and I know there's no sidewalks there so they should probably not be doing that. Also, there's constant um crashes exactly at that existing curb which I think is a terrible idea for that entrance in that development period. I think if they were planning on doing anything else, maybe a single home would probably be better to best align with the characteristics of Cambridge um community and also I don't think there's been enough um meetings in regards to this and I'm also concerned about the you know the public safety there. Um the area already faces a lot

of challenges on Cambridge Road. It does take me sometimes even 20 minutes to get to the traffic light. Thanks for listening. Thank you ma'am. Anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing that two-minute rebuttal.

Thank you very much for the uh public comment and interaction there. Um I would like to clarify we've had two public uh meetings with the constituents. Uh those were coordinated by Councilwoman Lee and Roseanne Shackleton Shakut Hayes, pardon me. Um, one was back in October was the first meeting and the second meeting was in January. Um, in terms of our buffering, it's the standard policy B2 buffer with shrubs, understory trees, and canopy trees to provide a comprehensive buffer around three sides. Um, and working with staff, we've added some additional trees and landscaping to the the front open space to provide some additional buffering there. Uh, in regards to traffic, we're bringing up Cane Ridge Road on our side to MSP standards with uh, rideway dedication, sidewalks, grass strip, turn lane into our subdivision. We've already had preliminary conversations with NDOT in terms of lighting, signage, efficiency, safety improvements in front of our site and up the intersection at Old Franklin. One of the conditions of approval is to continue coordinating with NDOT on those improvements or proposed improvements and have that finalized prior to the approval of the final SP. So, we're eager to continue those conversations, come to a final resolution as this plan uh moves forward. Um, again, appreciate your consideration and hope to get your approval this afternoon.

Thank you. And I don't see the council member here. So, seeing no one else wishing to speak, I declare the public hearing close. And Commissioner Leslie, you want to go first? It's your turn.

I didn't have very much to say this time. So, thank you, Mr. Chair. I I do want to uh I I I thank everyone for coming out and expressing, you know, what they needed to express, but it looks like it it is in um within the policy for that area. And I understand that. Um, again, I always talk about change. Change is difficult. I'm a native Nashvilleian and I'm familiar with that area. It's a very beautiful area. Uh, but things are changing in Nashville. Uh, it it complies with the policy. Uh, I understand the conversation about more meetings and things of that nature. That's something we can't require that. That may be something that the um the applicant may talk with the people out here, but if we were to defer this uh as requested, it seems like most of that's what it is. I don't know what we would defer it for. And so I'll listen to my colleagues and um and see what they have to say.

Thank you, Commissioner. Any other discussion? Commissioner Henley. Oh, Commissioner Dunn and then Henley. How about that? We'll do that. Sorry. Yeah, I think this is it's just I guess it it bears mention that this is a um it's to me these are the hard slightly harder ones just from an impact perspective because you've got an agricultural residential policy area directly across from an RS10. So you've the and then and this lot is really bounded on on two sides at least by that more more heavily developed area. Um and so I understand the you know the community comments that we heard tonight and um sympathize which with what you're seeing in these large lots with you know currently one one single family house on two acres essentially um with with this more dense development. But I agree it does meet the policy. Um this is an evolving area policy. It's um designed to enhance residential neighborhoods with more housing choices. And um I I think they've also done a good job here at preserving the the conservation um area. I think probably some of that open space is clearly marked for storm water management. Um and it looks like that is the area of the stream. Um so I think this is a you know one of those that really does meet the policy and I um I would support staff's recommendation. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Henley.

Thank you, Chair. And and a couple of my notes or some of the things I was going to mention have been addressed. I think I want to first say, you know, I think it's it's a absolutely a thing that I'm I believe in and support. I mean, I hear it adamantly where the community wants to have have more input. I think there'll hopefully be more times where that's happened in the in a form that is in the community in person like was like was expressed. But obviously there's there's also the council meeting after this. Um I had a couple notes about the buffer and then and some of the things about the the right of way that I I think have already been addressed. But one thing I wanted to bring up is I reviewing some of our emails for this case. It was at least in one or two emails there was a mention of a cemetery at the property.

Yes. I did not see that in any of the Yeah, we reached out to Metro Historic about that. Um and they said that they were unable to verify cemetery at this location. Um they had gone out to the property I think a couple of times maybe. Um but they weren't able to verify. Okay. Thank you. But I'll also note per state law if a cemetery is discovered um at a later date, they do have to meet state law and and um to to meet the requirements of state law to either relocate or have a a distance around the cemetery.

Understood. I think it it it just caught my attention because I think it was in more than one email. So I it seemed like it might have been something that was maybe known or accepted. The the other point that I had cuz I've we heard it here on this case and we've heard it other cases and don't want to step on toes but I am curious. I mean when we talk about this being a neighborhood evolving area. I think what falls into our purview is important to communicate publicly and I know we've heard a lot about um schools this evening and I know looking at at at the staff report you know there's a meaningful increase in in what are the anticipated student counts from a development like this going from um AR2A to this density I know that analysis is put forward like we receive the chart and and we do that but is I mean is there some type of companion exercise or something that's done on on with schools that is representative of something that I think would be I won't necessarily say positive but at least something that I think would be good to communicate to to the public.

Sure. So the way that we have sort of thought about and and and dealt with um school issues has changed over time. at one point for really large developments um planning would require a set aside of a school site um and then Metroleal came back and said you can't do that right I mean that would be for really large properties but schools are have become more complex when we think about capacity given sort of the fluid nature of students now so while a school in this district may be at capacity because of choice schools. Um it's really hard to sort of assume where a student may attend because they're not necessarily always going to attend their zoned school. And so I think that even the way that because there are a lot of schools across the county that are under capacity. We do have some that are over capacity. Some that are over capacity are over capacity because of choice where you're having sort of movement of students. And so that doesn't really answer your question except to say that I know that Metro Nashville Public Schools is thinking about it, but it is really sort of hard to to make good recommendations on it just because of that fluid nature of students attendance these days.

Yeah. And Lisa, I appreciate that. I just think I think the dialogue is important to hear and I know it's been expressed as a concern multiple times. I mean, obviously, we're talking about densifying communities. We're talking about infrastructure. I think, you know, I was part of the quote unquote campaign to talk about housing as infrastructure because it's needed, but schools infrastructure, daycarees, infrastructure as well. And so, I think it's just important that we we make sure we embrace those conversations even if it's again not part of our purview. Um, so I compliment you. I I think the report was well given and the analysis was well done. I'm I feel really relieved because I was hoping we didn't miss something um with the cemetery because I saw it in a couple emails. But my other comments, like I said, or were addressed either in the rebuttal or or by my other commissioners. Um so I don't have anything else.

Thank you, Commissioner. Any other discussion? How is uh Lisa, I do have a question on um how's it tracking at council uh or Bob? Yeah, there is not a council bill at this time.

Okay. any other discussion? My one um comment is um you know I I think the commission and just so everybody out there listening I we've always really tried to have more meetings than less and so I I personally want to we're we're almost on the verge of of and the councilman probably knows this of um not requiring meetings but it we've discussed that before the council has discussed that and so I always encourage the developer unless you want required mandatory meetings and I know you've had two but it would be great if you could before this gets to council I encourage another community meeting because we're getting we're we're on the verge of uh we get a lot of uh complaints that the developers aren't meeting with neighborhood and I think that that's a really important thing and so I'm I'm always on record for doing more meetings not less and I This commission has been on record a million times for that. And so if you could find the time, I would encourage you to today to meet with the neighbors uh in the hallway and figure out a time to set up a meeting. Any other discussion? So we'll need a motion. Commission Hanley,

take it. Chair, uh I'll make a motion to approve the staff recommendation um which is to approve with conditions and disapprove without all conditions. That's a proper motion. Is there a second? Second. Any other discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say I.

Oppos? No. Eyes have it. And we appreciate everyone coming down. Thank you very much. So, commissioners, that leads us to other business. And so, historic Mr. Smith's not here. Commissioner Smith's not here. Uh, hold on one second. Ma'am, if you could Yeah, if we could just We're still in the meeting. If we could

parks, thank you, Chair. I I I appreciate it. I I will take the time as a matter of privilege. I I enjoyed one of probably my

best experiences since being on the parks board uh between our last meeting and this meeting. um had the opportunity to be at the ribbon cutting of the Old Hickory Community Center. Um it it felt it was it felt like something out of a movie. It was very picturesque. I think it was very telling of a community that received a facility um that was long overdue um but is is lined up to be well-loved. to want to make sure that I compleiment the the work of previous council member um Larry Hager because I I was part of plan to play um which is almost a decade ago now. Um, and I know I get certain looks when I say dating myself in at my age, but but to have been a part of a master plan that's almost a decade old and then to see a community center just now coming to life. Um, it is one of those moments where you continue to have to communicate to to our citizens that it it just takes a long time uh for some things to happen. It doesn't mean that they're less deserving by any means. Um, but to see that facility, to see the people outside of it, to see the droves of people in that community walking to it, um, it was great. Kids outside playing, it was fantastic to see the facility on the inside. It was very well done. Compliments to the to the, um, the design team and the contractors that were there. Um, also the current council member, uh, uh, council member, he he obviously had to steward it across the finish line, but just wanted to share that it's really important. It's an area of town that, you know, is a little bit further out of the way um for me, but I promise you it was probably one of the most rewarding tries I've had in a while. So, I just wanted to share that.

Thank you, Commissioner. And personally appreciated the pottery stuff in the Anyway, it was beautiful thing. So, thank you. I thank you for going. Commissioner Hanley is a a great representative on the parks board and brings a lot of passion to to that board. So, we appreciate you representing us on there. All right. So, uh, executive committee report. I don't have any report. We're doing great on attendance. Let's keep it up, commissioners. This is great. Uh, we haven't had I haven't got a call from the mayor's office. So, this you guys are doing great. So, I really appreciate everybody doing that. Uh, that's my executive committee report. Uh, director, you have a some few comments.

Yes. Um so some of you may have seen uh uh work that the department is putting forward. We're just getting started. So we'll be bringing it to you um around a uh design and development strategy sort of in the core of the city. This is something that we committed um to council that we would do during the discussions around historic, but also committed to you that we would do as a follow-up to some of the downtown code work that we completed about a year and a half ago. And so it's looking at a range of issues. The these are some of the most quickly developing um parts of our city that have a lot of um development pressure, but also different zoning tools from the downtown code to, you know, the other zoning districts that we use, but um we're seeing some similarities in the development drivers there. and um and so it's a complex project and we're looking at um transfer of development rights uh for example and have an economic study we're working on. So we're going to bring that to you in a work session. We're just getting started um and look forward to that. On a really important note, go hogs tonight. Um this is a matter for the importance for the commission, but thank you all for your public service. I appreciate you. Um,

I don't think those words have ever come out of my mouth, but I appreciate that from Arkansas. Uh, let's see. That threw me off totally. All right, Councilman. Legislative update. No updates from the council. All right. Well, seeing no business, no other business before us, is there a motion to adjurnn? We're adjourned. I want to put on the record that I was here last week at a quarter to 4 waiting and nobody showed up. That's good. But I came extra

and I came back. This has been a service of the Metro