[0:04] Good evening. I'd like to call to order this evening's meeting, please.

[0:08] Before we begin our meeting, I do have just a few brief housekeeping items,

[0:13] just a few brief housekeeping items, please.

[0:14] We do have public comment.

[0:15] There was a sign-in sheet at the back of the room that's put out every meeting at

[0:21] 5:15, so those of you that have signed up to speak on a particular item,

[0:25] We have the list, and I will be calling on each of you as I get to those agenda

[0:31] items. There is also an additional public comment period at the end of the meeting

[0:36] for those of you who have— who would like to comment on a non-agenda item.

[0:41] So, just wanted to cover that before we begin our meeting.

[0:44] I want to point out the 2 exits because—

[0:48] Oh, okay. Also, we have 2 exits from the room this evening,

[0:52] here and then the double doors in the back, just so— we have a full house

[0:56] back, just so— we have a full house tonight,

[0:57] so just wanted to point that out as well.

[1:00] So, with that said, we will move on to this evening's agenda.

[1:04] The first item on our agenda this evening is the approval of our agenda.

[1:08] So moved.

[1:11] I have a motion. Do I have a second?

[1:13] Second.

[1:14] Okay, thank you. All in favor?

[1:16] Aye.

[1:17] Those opposed? Okay, motion carries.

[1:20] Item 3 on our agenda is the approval of the July 27th meeting minutes.

[1:26] 2026 meetings— meeting minutes.

[1:29] Do I have a motion for— or are there any additions? Okay. Do I have a second?

[1:35] All in favor?

[1:36] Aye.

[1:37] Those opposed? Okay. Motion carries. Thank you.

[1:41] Under old business, item 4 on our agenda this evening is the recommendation for a

[1:47] Planned Development District map amendment, Snow Creek Ranch.

[1:51] I do want to add that this application was deferred by the Planning Commission at

[1:57] our July meeting. Is the applicant present, please? Good evening.

[2:02] If you would just state your name and then just tell us a little bit about— again,

[2:08] I know you were here last month,

[2:10] but if you could just tell us about what you're proposing for the property, please.

[2:17] Good evening. Nathan McVey with T-Score Engineering.

[2:20] Good to see y'all again this week. Um, so yeah, last meeting we were deferred.

[2:24] This is, um, Snow Creek Ranch, which is, uh, off Snow Creek Road.

[2:28] Uh, it's a ministry retreat that's seasonal, um,

[2:30] kind of centered on equestrian outdoors, allowing people to kind of come in, drive,

[2:35] park, and then stay for a set amount of days, um,

[2:38] there to kind of open up the word and, um,

[2:40] kind of retreat from everyday life that we always experience.

[2:44] Last month there were 2 outstanding comments that we had.

[2:47] One was kind of the emergency access plan.

[2:49] Since then, we've met with a couple individuals.

[2:52] In your packet, you'll see there's a letter of who we've met with,

[2:56] what's been kind of corresponded to,

[2:58] and then there's also an emergency action plan packet that's in there.

[3:02] So both of those things have been provided to you.

[3:05] The meeting that we had in August with the Murray County Fire Department, Mr.

[3:09] Robinson. He met us out on site.

[3:11] We kind of walked the site, talked about kind of the programming of everything.

[3:15] He's been provided all the files, all the plans that we have up to this point,

[3:20] and he didn't really have any major comments.

[3:22] Murray County or Murray Regional Health is going to be meeting with us out there in

[3:27] September. So probably some comments from them,

[3:30] but we'll make sure we address them all accordingly.

[3:33] The second comment from last month was On the dwelling units.

[3:36] And we talked with staff on that one as well,

[3:39] and we agree that they're probably not accessory dwellings,

[3:42] being with what they are as far as, you know, 4 bedrooms and a shared kitchenette.

[3:47] However, we don't think it changes the PUD plan at this point in time.

[3:50] That's more of a code item.

[3:52] And Robert and I discussed that when these come through for building permits,

[3:56] that the building permits will be addressed at that point with construction

[4:01] addressed at that point with construction types,

[4:01] fire protection, etc. With that, I can answer any other questions you may have.

[4:05] Thank you. Questions,

[4:08] comments from the commission, please?

[4:12] Go ahead, please. You have the floor.

[4:15] Do any of the proposed facilities include stormwater

[4:20] or storm shelters for guests? Not at this time. None?

[4:27] What's the—

[4:27] what's the plan if there is severe weather or tornadoes?

[4:30] Was that discussed, Rebecca? We're building some basements.

[4:33] Some of them will have basements. Do you know which structures will have basements?

[4:37] Um, the Lake House and Lodge.

[4:40] Lake House and Lodge will have basements now.

[4:42] Okay.

[4:45] That's it. I don't— I mean—

[4:48] Okay. Thank you. Go ahead, please.

[4:51] Jonathan Dow.

[4:51] Hi.

[4:52] Um, so yeah, I have a question about the concern about the accessory dwelling unit.

[4:56] I know it's been addressed by staff,

[4:58] but I'm still I'm confused as to why it keeps getting defined as an accessory

[5:02] dwelling unit, seeing as how it definitely,

[5:04] obviously does not meet that definition of an accessory dwelling unit.

[5:08] Could you give me some understanding on that? They're not.

[5:11] We're going to go ahead and— right, Robert,

[5:13] we talked about making them primary dwelling units.

[5:16] Well, on your application and in your submittal,

[5:19] it still defines it as an accessory dwelling unit. Correct.

[5:22] The resubmittal happened,

[5:23] and we've had discussions with staff since the resubmittal.

[5:26] So we connected last week with Robert and staff and defined that a little further,

[5:30] dug into the code and refined what that was.

[5:33] So are you good with changing that definition or classification on your

[5:36] definition or classification on your submittal?

[5:37] Correct. Moving forward,

[5:38] I don't know if we can change the submittal prior to County Commission,

[5:42] but we can make that known at County Commission as well that we agree with

[5:46] Commission as well that we agree with that.

[5:46] Okay.

[5:49] I'll entertain that, John.

[5:51] And likewise, A condition of approval that those are representative of

[5:56] an R occupancy would be in order as well.

[5:59] All right.

[6:02] If the Planning Commission so deems it. Thank you.

[6:06] And the second concern is the— it's still the water supply,

[6:10] the fire flow requirement and the water demand.

[6:13] It's less than 500 gallons per minute out there,

[6:17] and using pond water for a fire protection life safety system is not a reliable

[6:22] source. You have biological contaminants that could affect the system.

[6:27] So I think a better engineered solution would be required for this.

[6:32] And that could be an elevated tank or some type of more reliable source.

[6:37] But using pond water for fire protection for lodging facilities,

[6:42] I don't see as A very reliable source.

[6:45] So I don't know how we need to address that, but that's a big concern.

[6:50] And it could affect your going forward with the development. Sure.

[6:54] Can we make that condition of approval?

[6:57] And I know you all will see this once again at site plan stage.

[7:02] When we come back at site plan,

[7:04] we can have a more defined engineering solution for what that looks like if we do

[7:10] solution for what that looks like if we do go

[7:10] above ground with the tank or have reports on the pond.

[7:14] We'll provide that solution for you then. Okay. Okay. All right. I'm good.

[7:19] Thank you.

[7:20] All right. Thank you. Debbie. Thank you. Hi. Thanks for coming back.

[7:25] In one of your— one of the documents,

[7:27] it says that guests will not come and go throughout the course of their stay and

[7:33] that they're transported by vans to the property. Yet you've got 141 parking

[7:38] property. Yet you've got 141 parking spaces.

[7:39] Are those only going to be utilized when there are special events?

[7:43] So that's only for special events?

[7:48] Okay, thank you.

[7:53] I, I don't, I don't believe we have anyone signed up.

[7:56] Is anyone here signed up to speak on this item on the agenda, please?

[8:00] Okay, no, we don't.

[8:01] I think, if I might—

[8:03] Yes, you have the floor, Mr. Delk.

[8:04] I think this site depicts the ongoing discussion There's a lot of debate within

[8:10] discussion There's a lot of debate within this

[8:10] county of what we do with our land.

[8:13] There is some who feel like we ought to try to put a lot of houses on a small

[8:19] try to put a lot of houses on a small amount

[8:20] of land so we leave more open land.

[8:22] There's others that feel like we ought to have large lots and houses on them.

[8:28] And now— and we also have a preservation plan which requires 15 acres.

[8:34] And this doesn't fit any of those modes,

[8:37] but it does demonstrate a useful property that is a fairly low impact compared to

[8:43] what it could do if it were developed as a subdivision.

[8:48] Yeah.

[8:50] It— the questions that have been raised are good questions.

[8:54] The— you are doing a fire system, I believe,

[8:57] that includes sprinklers off your ponds, which reduces somewhat your demand.

[9:03] Your spacing of your buildings is such that you're not apt to have a complete

[9:09] conflagration of a whole site.

[9:11] If I were a neighbor, I think I would rather have that than a lot of houses.

[9:16] The one point that I—

[9:18] additional points have been made that I have a problem with is on the weekends or

[9:24] whenever it is that people come in.

[9:27] If we get travel trailers and that type stuff coming in, if they don't turn—

[9:32] can't turn in immediately, we could block the whole road, Snow Peak Road.

[9:38] And I just feel very strongly we ought to add a turning lane that would hold 2 or 3

[9:44] travel trailers where they can get out of the way and let people through while we're

[9:50] trying to get them on site.

[9:52] So with that, with the conditions that have been set forth here and the

[9:57] have been set forth here and the conditions

[9:58] that have been addressed here this evening, I'm going to move approval with

[10:04] evening, I'm going to move approval with those—

[10:04] with staff comments and the approvals and the comments that have been made today and

[10:10] recommend approval to the— a recommendation for approval to the County

[10:15] recommendation for approval to the County Commission.

[10:16] And I'll second the motion.

[10:18] Okay. We have a first and a second— or a motion and a second.

[10:23] Any other comments or questions from the commission?

[10:26] I, I had a couple of questions, um, that, that we,

[10:30] we actually went over these at our last meeting.

[10:33] Um, one of them was about your special events. We talked about that.

[10:38] I believe you all are, are stating you want to hold, I think,

[10:43] one fundraiser a year with approximately I don't remember if it was 50 to 100

[10:48] guests, but that would be like an annual fundraising event.

[10:52] That's the first part of my question.

[10:55] But you all are not planning on doing renting out the venue as a special event

[11:01] venue. That's— is that correct?

[11:03] No weddings, things of that sort. Okay.

[11:05] But, but you are— you will do— is it one or two?

[11:08] I believe— just wanted to—

[11:09] it was a couple of fundraising events to raise money for your, for your foundation.

[11:13] One more question, please.

[11:15] Will people be bringing horse trailers to and from the property, or will you all—

[11:19] because you think you're offering horse horseback riding,

[11:22] will the horses remain or will you have people coming and going with their horses?

[11:26] Correct me if I'm wrong, but they'll remain on the property.

[11:29] Is going to be able to bring their horses on site.

[11:32] Ma'am, can you, can you get up for the record? Can you get up and state your

[11:37] record? Can you get up and state your name?

[11:37] Hi,

[11:38] Rebecca Wind.

[11:43] Thank you.

[11:47] Yeah.

[11:48] Yeah, nobody right now.

[11:50] The way we have our rules written is that we're only using Snow Creek

[11:54] Ranch-owned horses for any of our horseback riding. Okay.

[11:58] Okay.

[11:59] Thank you. That's all the questions I have.

[12:04] Any other questions from the commission? Comments? We're ready to vote.

[12:11] I have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Those opposed?

[12:19] Motion carries. Thank you.

[12:22] Okay, the next item on our agenda under new business is item 5,

[12:29] the final site plan for Zion Christian Academy.

[12:34] It's a classroom addition. Is the applicant present, please?

[12:40] Good evening. If you could just tell us your name and your district and

[12:48] a little bit about what you're proposing, please.

[12:54] Good evening. My name is Sam Bohannon. I'm with Ingram Civil Engineering.

[12:58] I'd like to thank the commissioners for your time together here tonight and thank

[13:02] staff for helping us through the process as we go through it.

[13:05] A little bit about the project.

[13:07] This is an addition to the Zion Christian Academy, the existing school.

[13:11] And in general, what we've got is on the east side,

[13:14] the right-hand side of the plans, we've got a classroom addition,

[13:17] and the left-hand side is a 2-story dining kind of multipurpose type building.

[13:21] And in general, we are— it'll be adding approximately 80 students as a part of

[13:25] approximately 80 students as a part of this,

[13:26] and it'll be done in 2 phases.

[13:27] We've got the classroom addition will come first, and then at some point later,

[13:32] as a part of the master plan, the multipurpose building.

[13:35] Thank you.

[13:35] purpose building will be completed. And, um, happy to answer any questions about

[13:40] um, happy to answer any questions about it.

[13:40] Thank you. Uh, we'll,

[13:42] we'll see if we have any questions or comments.

[13:47] Thank you, sir. Any comments or questions from the

[13:52] commission, please? Go ahead, please. You have the floor.

[13:57] Is there any going to be any traffic, like,

[14:00] for overflow traffic coming into the main road?

[14:04] Off of this, is that all the parent pickup the children type thing,

[14:08] is that going to be on the premises or is that going to be backed up on the main

[14:14] road? It'll be the same as what it is currently as far as the route that's

[14:19] happening. I'm not sure if it's going to— Well, you've passed—

[14:23] and I'm not familiar with Zion, like,

[14:26] going by it when people are picking up or dropping off, but like a lot of schools,

[14:31] their traffic gets up on the main roads because people are waiting to get in. Yes.

[14:37] Uh, I know there is some queuing space on the site before you get up to the

[14:42] building. It, it, I couldn't tell you how many linear feet I'd have to measure,

[14:47] but it does kind of snake up to it, up to the front.

[14:51] Uh, I'm actually not familiar with if they've got any issues currently or not.

[14:56] Very top side of the page.

[14:58] Yep, you can pull in, take an immediate right,

[15:01] and it kind of loops back around 180 degrees up the front of the building.

[15:06] Oh, wait. Is that who's talking?

[15:11] Yes. Okay. Okay.

[15:22] Any other questions or comments?

[15:26] Debbie, you have— making a motion? Okay. All right.

[15:33] Thank you. Thank you.

[15:36] Okay, we have a motion and a second.

[15:41] All in favor say aye.

[15:44] Aye.

[15:46] Those opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, sir. Okay.

[15:51] The next item on our agenda, item 6,

[15:55] is a final site plan for the Boondocks project, which is in District 8,

[16:02] located at 3543 U.S. Highway 431 in Columbia.

[16:06] Is the applicant present, please? Good evening.

[16:11] If you could both just state your name, please,

[16:16] and just tell us a little bit about what you're proposing. Thank you.

[16:23] Yeah, I'm Alex Malika. I'm with TTO. We're the civil engineers on the project.

[16:29] I'm Trey Barlow. Anyway, we're proposing a gas station with 2 tenant spaces.

[16:35] Um, yeah, one, one thing I'll point out, we were— this one has been on the agenda,

[16:41] I think, prior. We got pulled off due to a mix-up with the capacity letter.

[16:47] Um, recently had a request to rejoin the planning cycle.

[16:51] Um, nothing has really changed since the last time we were here.

[16:56] It's just getting back into the cycle due to missing one of the meeting dates.

[17:02] But, yeah.

[17:02] Okay. All right. Thank you.

[17:05] Questions, comments, please, from the Commission.

[17:10] Jonathan, you have the floor.

[17:13] The zoning requirements require a 25-foot setback for

[17:20] the gas pumps, and you're only showing 15 for your—

[17:27] on your plans. 25-foot setback for the gas pumps.

[17:33] Is that from starting at the right-of-way?

[17:39] Is that what you're saying?

[17:42] What are you showing there, 29, 30?

[17:47] Yes.

[17:48] Okay. I must have misread the plans. Okay. My other comment is— Your fire hydrant.

[17:55] You're 3,500 feet from your nearest hydrant.

[17:59] The zoning requirement requires you to abide by the subdivision regulations,

[18:06] which is 500 feet within— from your nearest hydrant.

[18:10] Do you plan on installing a hydrant on site? Yeah, that could be something we

[18:17] site? Yeah, that could be something we show.

[18:18] I know there was a situation with Whether it was sprinkled or— Well,

[18:24] it kind of comes back to that water service availability letter that we were

[18:31] service availability letter that we were trying

[18:31] to get and moving from 7,500 to 500 GPM.

[18:35] But I'm sure that we will propose that if it's a requirement.

[18:40] Yeah, I would like to see that on the— as a condition of approval.

[18:55] Thank you, Jonathan. Mr. Dale, the floor is yours.

[18:57] Hearing on this, I suggested you darken up your existing contours,

[19:05] and I see that you've done that, and I appreciate that.

[19:11] Down in the— where the road on sheet C-401,

[19:16] if you put that on the board.

[19:19] C-401.

[19:42] It's for grading and drainage. I think that's it.

[19:46] I can't see it from here, but— ah, there you go.

[19:49] Over on where the offset—

[19:51] the easement there is to serve this house that sits back here on this lot.

[19:57] Is that the purpose of the easement?

[20:00] From what I understand, there's 2 easements,

[20:03] and we had talks with I've spoken to TDOT about that as well.

[20:08] TDOT doesn't own the easement, do they? I'm sorry, sir?

[20:12] TDOT doesn't own the easement, do they? No, sir.

[20:16] I was just talking about the— from what I understand,

[20:20] it's an easement of access for that house.

[20:23] One of them is for the resident that's there south of the development.

[20:29] And then there's a There's a second one,

[20:32] but essentially we are utilizing that so that they can maintain—

[20:37] whoever the owner is can maintain access to that property as well as the owners of

[20:43] this development can access.

[20:45] Are both those easements contained within this one area here, or one of them—

[20:51] where are the 2 easements? I didn't know there was 2.

[20:55] They should be contained in that one area.

[20:59] Have you obtained a copy of those easements? I believe so.

[21:03] I don't have them with— obviously not with us,

[21:07] but if that's something we need to research a little further, I think—

[21:12] research a little further, I think— Fellas,

[21:13] it's about— we've had this now for about 3 or 4 months.

[21:17] It's about time to complete our research.

[21:20] I don't know what to do with those easements if we don't know where they are

[21:26] easements if we don't know where they are and who

[21:26] they serve. Now, y'all have indicated you can't ban the landscaping.

[21:32] strip because it's an easement.

[21:34] I don't know whether that's right or not until we know where the easements are and

[21:40] what the easements are like.

[21:43] What I'm saying is I don't have the deed with me currently, but that's something—

[21:49] what we're showing there, the surveyed easement,

[21:53] I believe that's reflected accurately.

[21:56] If it's not showing here, we could clarify that. Further. Yeah, there should be 2.

[22:02] Sorry, down here and within the easement.

[22:05] Now starting at the offset right there,

[22:08] there's a V-shaped line that comes through it that is not explained what it is.

[22:14] It starts right in the corner and runs over in the site,

[22:18] comes back down to the property line again.

[22:22] Can you— and there's a similar I have an item over on the other side of the

[22:28] property, I believe, only it's much deeper.

[22:31] It looks like a ditch symbol, but I don't know what it is.

[22:35] Can you enlighten me on that? I'm going to bring that out here.

[22:40] Is this the— you talking about the V-shaped contour? Is that what you're

[22:46] V-shaped contour? Is that what you're saying?

[22:46] Oh, it's not— I hope it's not a contour. Maybe it is a contour.

[22:51] It doesn't have any numbers on it. Let's see. It's not shown as a contour.

[22:57] It's a solid light line, which looks like an arrow almost.

[23:02] I think that's another one of the lines denoting one of those 2 easements.

[23:07] It's what?

[23:08] I think it's another one of those lines denoting one of the 2 easements.

[23:14] It might show up better on the existing— on the existing condition sheet, sir.

[23:20] Well, where's the sheet set? Let's look at it.

[23:24] I think it looks like it's an attempt at a contour,

[23:28] but the contour denies that it's a contour.

[23:32] 5-foot easement, and then there's a line connecting the two.

[23:37] If that's the line you're referring to.

[23:40] Fellas, I don't have a problem with your site. I don't have a problem with your

[23:46] site. I don't have a problem with your use.

[23:47] But I'm afraid we're coming here unprepared as far as some of this

[23:52] unprepared as far as some of this information.

[23:53] And I don't find out on anything else. Are you referring to this line?

[23:59] Sorry, I'm not able to catch it here.

[24:02] You're talking about the line coming Sir, excuse me,

[24:05] you can walk up to the— to the— if you'd like to point.

[24:09] Thank you.

[24:10] No, come up. See that big line, that curved line,

[24:13] the arc coming right up north of your— north of your property line? Oh, I see.

[24:18] And it comes to a point out yonder somewhere and then comes back.

[24:22] That's a— that's a leader from a— that's a callout right there.

[24:26] That's what?

[24:27] That's a dimension callout right there. That's Coming off the screen.

[24:32] If you were— you scroll to the right a little bit.

[24:35] If you scroll to the right a little bit, you'll see that's,

[24:40] that's the noting that that easement— we have the 2 leaders.

[24:44] I'm sorry, I wasn't sure what we were— Tell me again what it is.

[24:48] It's another leader for that callout right there, the 25-foot. So it's an arrow.

[24:54] I believe it's just showing up a little— Well,

[24:57] what about the one over on the right-hand side? That one right there?

[25:02] Yeah, we're I think it's— we're just denoting that line right there on both

[25:08] denoting that line right there on both sides,

[25:08] just calling it out along the property line there.

[25:12] I think what you're seeing there— I'm sorry, I was misunderstanding,

[25:16] but I believe that's— you're seeing that arrow kind of cross through there,

[25:22] and it might be a little murky, but that's what we're showing right there.

[25:27] It's just showing along the line.

[25:29] The plan that's before me shows The grading line of 698 over on the adjacent

[25:35] property rather than within your property line.

[25:38] It doesn't show where it hooks up to an existing 498 before it gets on property

[25:44] line. I know the encroachment is not but a couple of feet,

[25:48] but an encroachment is an encroachment.

[25:51] And I think you need to get that out of there. Sure.

[25:54] Okay, I see, I see what you're saying.

[25:57] Yeah, that's something we absolutely— I mean, there's— it's a quite flat site.

[26:03] It's not going to be flat when you get through,

[26:06] when you've got the 2 easements about 4 feet apart down here at one point.

[26:11] Your 98 and your 90— I mean, 89 and 90 easement are really close together.

[26:16] I think it's about 5 feet, so that's 2 to 1.

[26:20] And once again, I think it's just details.

[26:23] Sure.

[26:24] But the problem with that is when you give this to a contractor,

[26:27] he's going to grade it like this.

[26:28] Sure.

[26:29] He's going out there and set his rod down and say, this is the elevation.

[26:34] And I don't think you're ready right there in the corner. It's your property.

[26:39] Or y'all's— your client's property. I have no problem whatsoever with the site.

[26:45] I'm all in favor of approving it, but you got a problem with your contours.

[26:50] I'll speak to that. Um, you know, coming here a little behind the game on this, I,

[26:56] I definitely think we could go through and clean up a lot of this,

[27:00] a lot of details on the plans. Um, that's part of the reason why I'm here.

[27:05] If, if there's any issues like that, uh, I appreciate you pointing them out,

[27:11] and we'll try to clean that up, especially some of the callouts here.

[27:15] The symbols that you use are— I understand the reason why you use symbols,

[27:21] but when you blow them down to this size over here,

[27:24] it's kind of hard to make sure which one's which.

[27:28] The big area out here in the center, right, Right here, that is a concrete

[27:33] right, Right here, that is a concrete area,

[27:33] is that right?

[27:34] Yes, sir.

[27:36] That carries a heavy load? It should be called out as heavy-duty asphalt.

[27:44] It looks like it's a— Building overlaid with asphalt pavement.

[27:50] That's asphalt pavement? So it's not heavy duty?

[27:55] I'm sorry, I'm having a hard time.

[27:58] The big crosshatch part right there around the K sound.

[28:04] Yes, so that right there is— we're denoting overlay right there.

[28:11] The heavy-duty asphalt proposed section is right there in the dark shaded

[28:18] area. The crosshatched area then, what is it? That is asphalt. Yes, sir.

[28:26] It is asphalt, heavy duty?

[28:28] Yes, sir.

[28:30] It calls out, looks like required overlay asphalt pavement.

[28:33] It looks like when I look at your details, is that correct?

[28:36] I see what you're saying. Yes, sir.

[28:38] I believe that hatch is a little different, but it's not very clear.

[28:42] And I definitely understand where you're coming from.

[28:45] And the reason I bring this up is you You have heavy-duty pavement over here on this

[28:50] side, and it ends right here.

[28:52] If this is not heavy-duty pavement,

[28:54] I don't know how you're going to get a truck on this. Sure. Absolutely.

[28:58] And so either you need to expand the heavy-duty pavement or show in detail what

[29:03] makes this heavy-duty pavement. I don't believe it's there.

[29:06] Absolutely.

[29:07] Yeah, and may I ask, for the sake of clarifying some of these things,

[29:13] I know Switching systems here to kind of clean up these plans.

[29:17] Do you guys prefer to see keynotes and a little bit—

[29:21] instead of having so many callouts on one sheet?

[29:25] I know you mentioned it was hard for visibility on some of those viewports.

[29:30] Is keynotes something you'd prefer instead of the legend system like that?

[29:36] You know what I'm saying? Calling out the details.

[29:40] Yeah.

[29:41] That's all I got. I got you.

[29:43] Thank you, Mr. Delk.

[29:45] Additional questions from the commission?

[29:49] Tracy, you have the floor.

[29:52] Oh, going back to that easement, that's plat book 7, page 187.

[29:56] So that easement's been around for a long time.

[30:00] Is it— is it accessing the frame house down on the backside?

[30:04] Who's actually— who's using that 25-foot easement? Which property is using it?

[30:10] It'd be for the property that's just south of ours.

[30:14] And then there's a second one for the house that's in the back, I believe. Okay.

[30:20] So there's 2 of them. Y'all are not the one that goes in the back.

[30:25] So you've got this house on the south here accessing from that one.

[30:30] So that's crossing the other easement to access Their property or their dwelling.

[30:36] Yes.

[30:42] So I guess the question to staff, is that allowable to cross an easement,

[30:48] to come off an easement, cross another easement?

[30:51] It feels like we're building a road here. You want me to answer or you got it?

[30:57] Yeah, that's— to answer your question,

[31:00] that's an existing condition as it sits currently.

[31:04] That property has always been used as commercial,

[31:08] and those easements have been around since— as you, as you noted,

[31:13] the plat book dates quite a ways back too.

[31:16] So, um, so the other thing is I'm trying to find how much lights it's going to

[31:22] create.

[31:22] Light? Yeah, lights.

[31:25] So you're going to light up a gas station there. They're pretty bright. Correct.

[31:31] Yeah, that's something we can get some details put together for.

[31:36] If a photometric plan needs to be provided, we can look into that.

[31:41] I have no comment on exactly how much light,

[31:44] but if that's something we can show on the plans coming from the contractor,

[31:50] that's something we can provide.

[31:52] Aren't we in our zones to To have the light plan for, like, light,

[31:57] how bright the light is, all that stuff. Ain't that in our zoning?

[32:02] Pretty sure it is.

[32:03] It's in there.

[32:04] That is in our current zoning text.

[32:06] I'm not certain that this one didn't have application prior to that current zoning

[32:11] text, but the lighting, the cast of the lighting,

[32:15] should be under the Planning Commission's purview.

[32:18] As well as landscaping and buffering from those nuisances.

[32:22] So we probably need to see a lighting plan.

[32:24] Sure.

[32:28] That's all I had.

[32:30] Thanks, Tracy.

[32:31] Thank you.

[32:32] Giles, you've got the floor.

[32:34] On Sheet C-501. About, I guess, east of the—

[32:38] on the back of the side of the building,

[32:41] there's a comment there that says tie outlet line from building to grease trap

[32:48] outlet line from building to grease trap and

[32:48] from grease trap to existing septic field lines.

[32:53] Are you going to run a grease trap to the septic field lines directly?

[32:59] That's the intent. Yes, sir.

[33:01] But I can get back with a more detailed—

[33:05] I don't think that's a recommended practice.

[33:09] That's going to— that's going to kill the field lines as soon as that happens,

[33:15] within months. I think most of the time you pump out a grease trap, I would think.

[33:23] But I don't think pumping to the field—

[33:26] the field lines directly is going to solve anything other than create problems for

[33:33] everybody around there. I see.

[33:36] If that's something— I'm assuming we'll see— Well, it says you have an existing—

[33:43] you're grandfathered in on the septic system from TDEC.

[33:48] But does that allow a grease trap going to your fill line,

[33:53] directly to your fill lines? So far, that's something we've had shown.

[33:59] in our TDEC submittals, but we can, uh, if,

[34:03] if there's any kind of follow-up from them,

[34:07] that's something we'll look into and keep note of that as a comment.

[34:13] Okay, no further questions.

[34:15] Thank you. Jonathan?

[34:20] Clarify— clarifying comment, the, uh,

[34:22] 15-foot setback is actually on your title page, uh,

[34:25] that is shown as a measurement on your title page,

[34:28] so just make that correction when you resubmit.

[34:34] Yeah.

[34:34] Thank you.

[34:38] I know you'll be working with TDOT for approval.

[34:41] This is on a really, really busy 2-lane highway.

[34:44] Is part of that approval going to be a left turn lane from the north?

[34:48] Currently, that's not part of their conditional approval.

[34:53] They did require that we show a right turn out only for that northernmost Exit.

[34:59] And then on the south, what I have shown is what TDOT wanted us to show.

[35:05] But currently, they did not require that we propose a turning lane.

[35:10] That's right. Because you get a car coming or one or two cars traveling from the

[35:15] north to the south to stop there to turn into your gas station,

[35:19] it's going to back up for a long way. So that might just be a consideration.

[35:24] Thank you. Kristi, I have a question, please,

[35:26] regarding that particular item that Debbie just mentioned.

[35:30] It's my understanding that once we, we move forward from this point,

[35:34] then TDOT would take a look at this and they would advise what would need to be

[35:39] they would advise what would need to be done

[35:39] as far as turn lanes and traffic studies and so forth.

[35:42] Could you comment on that, please? That's my understanding. Okay. What you said.

[35:47] Okay. All right. Thank you.

[35:49] And if you don't mind me speaking on that, so We did, like you were saying,

[35:54] I'm just confirming that TDOT did have conceptual approval of the plans,

[35:58] but they were awaiting comments from our county for the official approval.

[36:03] So I know that was the comment we came in here with. Thank you for clarifying that.

[36:09] It is a concern. I live near there, and gas tankers pulling in,

[36:12] it's a very heavily traveled road during morning and evening commutes,

[36:17] so that is a concern about you know, safe ingress and egress from,

[36:21] from that property.

[36:22] Understood.

[36:23] Thank you.

[36:28] Other questions,

[36:34] comments, please?

[36:42] I'm looking for a

[36:49] motion.

[36:52] Are we able to include all of our comments

[36:58] tonight as part of the recommendation?

[37:03] Is that permissible? Maybe that's a question.

[37:10] Robert, I'd recommend listing those out for

[37:16] clarity. Conditions of approval, if you have any,

[37:23] I recommend listing them out as part of that

[37:29] motion. Robert, Robert.

[37:36] Was not— his mic was not on.

[37:38] He's recommending that we list anything that has come up in our discussion,

[37:42] that those items be listed as part of a motion or any decision reached this

[37:46] motion or any decision reached this evening.

[37:46] Let's put them together.

[37:49] Huh?

[37:49] Light plant.

[37:51] Grease trap.

[37:54] Hydrant. Power hydrant. Y'all hear me?

[38:03] Go ahead. So we said fire

[38:06] hydrant, grease trap,

[38:09] lighting plan.

[38:11] Clarification on annotations.

[38:16] Easement purpose and

[38:20] description.

[38:22] I don't know.

[38:25] I'm going to ask him.

[38:25] Anything else?

[38:28] All right, I'm going to move approval with following conditions.

[38:31] After you.

[38:34] A light plan be submitted to acceptable staff, uh,

[38:38] that the grease trap be put on a separate overflow field unless specifically

[38:44] approved otherwise by TDI, by state.

[38:47] Fire hydrants, appropriate fire hydrants be added to within the limitations

[38:53] established by our regulations,

[38:56] that you look at regrading near the property line properly,

[39:01] and that you provide the location and easement purpose of the easements that are

[39:07] there and the book and page in which they are found.

[39:12] And with those conditions, I move approval,

[39:15] and the conditions that the staff has already placed on it in their review.

[39:21] I would move approval. Okay.

[39:24] Thank you. We've made note of those. So Debbie has a second? Okay. All right.

[39:31] We're ready to vote. All in favor say aye. Those opposed? Motion carries.

[39:38] Thank you, gentlemen. Okay.

[39:40] The next item on our agenda, item 7,

[39:43] is a preliminary plat reapproval with revision.

[39:48] This is Forest Trails, 82 lots located in District 8.

[39:53] Is the applicant present? Good evening.

[39:56] If you could just state your name and tell us a little bit about what you're

[40:03] proposing, please. Thank you.

[40:06] Thank you. Appreciate it. Joe Epps with Anderson, Delk, Epps and Associates.

[40:12] Uh, like the staff report says, uh, we're trying to get reapproval of Forest Trails.

[40:20] There's 82 lots. Uh, the last time it was approved was, uh, back on September 25th,

[40:27] 2023.

[40:27] Thank you, sir. Questions or comments? Mr., Mr. Delk?

[40:32] Okay. I've said this before, but our staff,

[40:36] our commission is almost 100% turned over since the last time we had this.

[40:41] This is presented to you from the firm of Anderson, Delk, and Hatt and Associates.

[40:48] That is a firm that Mike Anderson and I established in 1977.

[40:52] Joe Epps came on board '84, I think, somewhere along in there.

[40:58] And—

[40:59] but I— when I retired in 2000, I've had no further contact with the firm,

[41:05] have no association with them whatsoever,

[41:08] and I will not be declaring a conflict of interest on this. All right.

[41:15] Thank you, Mr. Delk. Other comments or questions?

[41:21] Debbie, you have the floor.

[41:24] So the main entrance to this is going to be on Ollie

[41:31] Chun Road, the 2 access roads?

[41:34] Well, we've got the one that's going to come off Ollie Chun Road,

[41:39] and then there's accesses that will be developed later on as other properties

[41:44] developed later on as other properties around

[41:44] it develop. Okay.

[41:46] And is it— it's 80— let's see, I had a note here. It's 82 single-family homes?

[41:53] Yes, ma'am. All right.

[41:55] One of the documents said it was 97, so that was a little concerning.

[42:01] But that's— so that's about like over 500 car trips a day.

[42:06] And so their access would be mainly to get out to 431 would be Kidron

[42:12] Road or Will Brown?

[42:13] After they got off Ali Chan.

[42:16] After they got off Ali Chan.

[42:17] So they're going to either have to do Kidron or Yes, ma'am.

[42:21] Okay.

[42:24] All right. That's, again, a lot of traffic going onto a very,

[42:28] very busy 2-lane road out on 431.

[42:30] So I don't know if there are any improvements in the work for Kidron Road,

[42:35] but that's not part of your project.

[42:38] So, all right.

[42:38] Thank you. That is a concern of mine with the traffic on 431 and on Kidron Road.

[42:43] That's a lot of houses.

[42:44] And there's— you said there's more plans for additional Probably adjacent

[42:49] for additional Probably adjacent properties

[42:49] will develop over time.

[42:51] Yes, ma'am.

[42:51] Right. All right.

[42:52] Thank you. Thank you.

[42:53] Any other comments or

[42:57] questions from the commission?

[43:02] Giles.

[43:03] What was the— what was the reason that the total site area was reduced from 153 to

[43:09] the 84? The site that the Stalin Coker is still on,

[43:13] it was on the original concept plan as Phase 5.

[43:16] It was never part of the preliminary that was approved.

[43:20] The preliminary was approved just for Phases 1 through 4.

[43:24] So that's what we're trying to reapprove, just Phases 1 through 4. Okay. Thank you.

[43:30] Thank you.

[43:31] Any others?

[43:38] Harold, no comments of changes at

[43:46] No changes need to be made,

[43:53] is that correct, on staff?

[43:59] That's not correct, or—

[44:05] That is correct. We are not

[44:11] recommending any changes.

[44:17] Thank you. Okay, we have a motion and a

[44:24] second. All in favor say aye.

[44:29] Those opposed? Motion carries.

[44:35] Thank you, sir.

[44:38] Appreciate it.

[44:44] Okay. The next item on our agenda this evening is item 8,

[44:49] which is a concept plan for Ridgeline Reserve subdivision.

[44:55] in District 9. Is the applicant present? Good evening, sir.

[45:00] If you could just tell us your name and tell us a little bit about

[45:07] what you're proposing, please.

[45:10] Good evening, Commissioners.

[45:11] My name is Cole Newton, TKC Architecture and Engineering.

[45:15] We prepared the concept plan before you tonight.

[45:18] Um, 13 lots, all greater than 5 acres. Majority of them have road frontage.

[45:23] 4 lots are pass-through lots, easement Easement pass-through lots,

[45:27] extension of a water line is included as part of the proposal.

[45:31] Happy to answer any questions you've got.

[45:33] Thank you, sir. I do want to take some—

[45:37] any questions or comments.

[45:40] We have a number of people here this evening who have requested

[45:47] to speak on this item,

[45:49] but I do want to come to the commission first for any questions

[45:56] or You know, comments. Thank you. Tracy?

[46:01] Other than the water line, what's the requirements for this to be—

[46:05] is it specifically the water line asking to have a water line extended to the

[46:11] site? Is that the only reason why we're seeing concept plan on this type of

[46:16] subdivision?

[46:17] There are multiple reasons, and you all received the memo.

[46:26] That was one of them.

[46:28] I understand that, but I'm looking at the one now,

[46:31] so not the previous correspondence.

[46:34] So like here, right here, this subdivision, is there— other than the

[46:39] subdivision, is there— other than the water line,

[46:40] I don't see— what is the— and I'm not asking this as a light question.

[46:45] It's a subdivision plat like any other that you would see,

[46:49] and so you We would review it just like whether you have a 50-lot or a

[46:53] 13-lot subdivision.

[46:54] So my question is, what is the difference between this one and one that gets

[46:58] recorded out? Is it just the water line?

[47:00] Because they're asking for water line.

[47:02] Well, this won't be recorded because it's a concept plan.

[47:05] And so it will come back with a preliminary plat.

[47:08] And then if you all approve a preliminary and then a final plat, ultimately,

[47:12] whatever the final plat looks like that you all approve,

[47:14] that's what would be recorded.

[47:16] That's what would legally create the lots that could then be sold.

[47:20] Okay.

[47:20] So what is different that gets recorded, a couple of steps away from that.

[47:26] So the concept plan is more general.

[47:28] So you all can comment,

[47:30] share your thoughts on that before it comes in for preliminary plat,

[47:35] which would be the vesting document, if that makes sense.

[47:39] So that I got questions.

[47:41] Lot number 3 and then lot number 5,

[47:44] you're showing soils area that crosses the property line.

[47:49] Those are preliminary soil areas that we did for the concept plan.

[47:54] I mean, they'll be split.

[47:56] That's just a huge area of soils,

[47:59] but there's enough soils on each of those lots to account for— Yeah,

[48:04] it should offset the 10-foot on each lot line,

[48:08] then have the calculation because you're adding in unusable area to the soils.

[48:15] And that would apply to any of the other ones that's touching the property line.

[48:21] And what's the difference between the 25-foot utility easements and the 25-foot

[48:28] ingress/egress utility easements?

[48:30] The ingress/egress easements along with the utility easements allow access all the

[48:37] way back. To the 4 lots that are off the road.

[48:41] Some of them will have, you know, they'll have water lines.

[48:46] They'll have— the water service will run in the ingress/egress utility easement

[48:52] in the ingress/egress utility easement from

[48:53] the right-of-way all the way back. Is that what you're asking?

[48:58] You're running 2 easements. Let's just use Lot 7, for instance.

[49:03] You've got an easement on the north line.

[49:06] The north line and the south line, are they both going back to Lot 8?

[49:12] I think there's got— it's got to do with the power as well.

[49:17] You know, you're going to split power and water in the driveway, and that's just a—

[49:23] Can we label that as power? Yeah, I'll label it as power.

[49:28] That would make more sense. That's all I got.

[49:32] Okay, thanks, Tracy. Jonathan?

[49:34] I want to make sure I'm understanding this

[49:40] correctly. The way I'm seeing it is 9 of the 13

[49:46] lots don't have direct road frontage.

[49:51] Is that correct? 4 of the lots don't have direct

[49:57] road frontage. Lots 5, 8, 9, and 11.

[50:02] You pass through 1 to get to 1.

[50:06] Thank

[50:13] you.

[50:20] Yeah, I guess I'm trying to get more clarification from staff as well.

[50:26] Does the— does this have to comply with the subdivision regulations where you can

[50:34] only have one driveway per lot, if I'm understanding that correctly? Okay.

[50:40] Within the subdivision regulations,

[50:43] you are allowed an easement to pass through one to get to one. Only.

[50:49] So, and there's actually Lot 3 is one of those that's granting access as well,

[50:56] or has access granted to it as well.

[51:00] So just wanted to point that out for clarification. Yeah, there's 5

[51:06] clarification. Yeah, there's 5 pass-throughs.

[51:07] Yeah. Okay. Sorry.

[51:14] This is a new plan to me.

[51:16] I'm trying to get my head around it.

[51:20] So you're saying that it does comply with the subdivision

[51:26] regulations the way it's submitted? That's up to you.

[51:32] Yeah, yeah, I'm not going there.

[51:36] Based on the way I read it, it is.

[51:39] But again, I'd take comments y'all have. That's all I have.

[51:46] Okay, thanks, Jonathan. Debbie, you have the floor.

[51:50] So why would there not be a single road, interior road,

[51:55] that these driveways could access instead of having 9 driveways on a very narrow,

[52:02] very hilly road that has a lot of blind curves on it? It's a safety issue.

[52:08] So is there a thought to maybe making one driveway for these folks that they can

[52:15] access?

[52:15] There's— as you know and you've seen, there's several different ways we could do

[52:21] there's several different ways we could do it.

[52:22] You know, this is the way we've got it laid out here today.

[52:26] I mean, we're not— we are adding 13 residential lots, proposing to,

[52:31] and so we'll create the traffic from that and That's one way that could be done.

[52:37] We're proposing to come off the main road with this proposal.

[52:41] I— yeah, I would rather much see one,

[52:44] one driveway access that led to a feeder road that they could all use rather than

[52:50] all of those driveways coming out on that little windy road.

[52:54] Just not only for their safety but for the safety of the other people traveling on

[53:00] the road. That's a lot of cars, a lot of traffic on there. So that's it.

[53:06] Okay, thank you, Debbie.

[53:07] I know there are other questions and comments from the commission,

[53:12] but I would like to turn to our audience.

[53:15] There are several, several of you that have signed up this evening,

[53:20] so I'm going to begin calling names.

[53:23] When you come up, if you could just state your name, district number,

[53:28] make sure you speak into the microphone, and we will give each person 3 minutes,

[53:34] please. So I'm going to start with Tate Foster. Good evening.

[53:38] Good evening. I'm Tate Foster in District 9 at 2740 East Sheepneck.

[53:43] And actually, what I'm going to talk about is the access points and the driveways.

[53:48] We are right across the road from this development.

[53:51] So I'm speaking tonight on behalf of the residents of East Sheepneck in opposition

[53:56] to this Ridgeline Reserve concept, and it's about access points.

[54:00] I run on that road in the morning.

[54:03] My 5-year-old son and I run on that road 3 or 4 days a week.

[54:06] As someone already commented,

[54:08] it's very windy and you can't see what's on the other side of the curve or on the

[54:13] hill, and we wouldn't be doing that anymore, I don't think,

[54:17] if there were 9 more driveways.

[54:19] Thank you.

[54:20] 13 houses right there,

[54:21] because every driveway creates a place where something could happen.

[54:26] A vehicle slows down to turn, maybe they use their blinker, but it's a country

[54:31] use their blinker, but it's a country road,

[54:31] so maybe they don't. A vehicle stops while waiting to turn.

[54:35] Amazon trucks, garbage trucks—

[54:37] these are all conflict opportunities that need to be addressed and need to be looked

[54:42] at. These are 13 opportunities for, for things that are not currently there.

[54:47] Um, to, to be there and to happen.

[54:49] So what happens when we put all of these driveways together on the road?

[54:54] Uh, where will each driveway exactly be located?

[54:57] Uh, these 9 that are on the, the frontage, how far apart will they be?

[55:02] How close will they be to the curve? These are all—

[55:05] Off—

[55:06] Just concerns that I have. As I've already said, I've got a 5-year-old.

[55:11] My, my wife and son, we look out our window and we see these driveways right

[55:16] window and we see these driveways right now.

[55:17] And it's not a pretty sight. It used to be.

[55:20] But now we go down and there's these access points and driveways and culverts

[55:25] access points and driveways and culverts and

[55:25] everything. And so just here to ask and make sure we do our due diligence on

[55:31] everything. Federal Highway Administration access management guidance recognizes the

[55:36] driveway frequency, spacing,

[55:38] and sight distance as legitimate Roadway safety considerations.

[55:43] I think these are all legitimate roadway safety considerations to take into

[55:48] safety considerations to take into account.

[55:48] So, once these driveways are constructed,

[55:51] these access points will be there for a long time.

[55:55] That's why the time to evaluate their impact is right now,

[55:59] not after the houses and development is built.

[56:02] It's before the access points are approved. So, thank you.

[56:06] Thank you, Mr. Foster. We did get some feedback.

[56:10] There are some people watching us online.

[56:14] You can watch our meetings on the internet, and the sound quality is low,

[56:20] so I'm just going to ask everyone to speak up.

[56:24] All the— you know, if you come forward to speak,

[56:29] just please make sure you're speaking into the microphone so everyone can hear you,

[56:36] please. The next person signed up to speak is Bart Watley. If I got that correct.

[56:43] Good evening, sir. Just state your name and district, please. Thank you.

[56:50] I'm Bart Watley. I live at 2626 East Sheepneck Circle, District 9 in Cullioca.

[56:55] I've lived there since Yes.

[56:57] I've lived here since '87, almost 40 years,

[57:00] and I watched it grow and things improve.

[57:03] And y'all blacktopped the road about 20 years ago, which was a big improvement.

[57:08] It was so dusty, just a one-lane road, really. It's a very crooked road.

[57:13] It's got some deep drop-offs, no curbs,

[57:16] and the said driveways we've been talking about,

[57:19] they Come off of a hill and a little gravel and right into the road,

[57:24] and there's really not enough room to make a good turn.

[57:27] So something's got to be done if it goes through with the road.

[57:32] Water lines, I don't know about that,

[57:34] but I think they're right down the middle of the road,

[57:38] and I think that's got to be improved. Should have a fire hydrant down there.

[57:43] A lot of things going to be done to make it compatible, I would think.

[57:48] But one driveway would be the most important thing, like most subdivisions.

[57:53] And that way you're dealing with one driveway.

[57:56] You can have— you can have turn lanes and so forth, and that would improve it.

[58:01] The big thing, though, I've lived there 40 years, like I said,

[58:06] and people go there and they spend hundreds of thousands of dollars just to

[58:11] hundreds of thousands of dollars just to get in a

[58:11] rural area so they don't have to deal with the traffic and a lot of neighbors and

[58:17] things. And, and so this is kind of going—

[58:20] disrupting what we expect out of Sheep Neck Road.

[58:23] And I put a business in there myself, Watley and Sons Trust Company,

[58:28] about 30 years ago and had it there 25 years.

[58:31] And I had to jump through hoops for over a year to make it compatible with the area

[58:36] and the neighbors and work with them and work with County,

[58:40] and there was plenty of attention drawn to it.

[58:43] And we had a trust company there, and people that lived up Sheepneck Road,

[58:48] some of them didn't ever know we had one there, I think,

[58:52] because it was out of sight.

[58:54] You couldn't hear it hardly, trees, you couldn't see it. We respected the

[58:59] couldn't see it. We respected the neighbors.

[59:00] And then when we shut it down, it was back to the private citizens.

[59:04] There's a couple with 3 kids have it now.

[59:07] There's good people on Sheepneck Road and they are tolerant,

[59:11] but this right here is just pushing the envelope.

[59:14] And it's— more houses would go in there than I've seen in 40 years, I think,

[59:20] would go back in there.

[59:21] And I just think that these things need to be really thought through.

[59:26] Thank you a lot.

[59:27] Thank you, Mr. Watley.

[59:30] I appreciate the commission.

[59:31] I wouldn't want to be in your position with all the growth today.

[59:35] Robert's position, for one. But we're growing fast.

[59:37] And one thing I didn't mention, you can get the water line in,

[59:40] but we don't have the water. We don't have the water for new subdivisions.

[59:44] Thank you.

[59:45] Thank you, Mr. Watley. Don Barnett.

[59:49] Don Barnett. I live at 2632 Double Branch Road.

[59:54] I will be talking about development on Double Branch because the

[1:00:00] Double Branch developer is the same one that's on the Ridgeline

[1:00:07] project. Is that okay?

[1:00:12] No? Okay. No, no.

[1:00:13] Because I'm talking about the developer.

[1:00:16] No, sir. So the way our comments,

[1:00:18] per what I mentioned at the beginning of our meeting,

[1:00:21] we have public comment on items. So you signed up.

[1:00:26] Can I speak then at the very end of the meeting?

[1:00:28] We have open comment, public.

[1:00:30] You can speak on any item at the end of the meeting that is an open public

[1:00:34] the meeting that is an open public comment.

[1:00:35] I do think it's very relevant to your decision process around Ridgeline.

[1:00:39] Yeah, we're just talking about this particular development now, sir.

[1:00:42] I understand.

[1:00:42] Thank you.

[1:00:43] The next person, I have Jordan. Sorry, Jordan, I can't read your last name.

[1:00:48] You write like my husband, so. What is your— if you just state your name.

[1:00:54] Jordan Rauden, District 9.

[1:00:55] I do not live on East Sheepneck,

[1:00:57] but I've had the pleasure of getting to know some of the folks that do live on

[1:01:01] know some of the folks that do live on East

[1:01:01] Sheepneck, and which means I've had an opportunity to drive out there a couple

[1:01:06] times. And, uh, yeah, you know, um, I think if I did the math right,

[1:01:09] there's currently, if you exclude the extra parcels that are coming up,

[1:01:13] 35 parcels on East Sheepneck.

[1:01:15] So that's a 37% increase in, in density out there on that small road.

[1:01:19] And that road itself, we've already acknowledged tonight,

[1:01:22] is substandard for what you're trying to accomplish out there,

[1:01:25] or what the developer is trying to accomplish. That's not okay.

[1:01:29] It's not okay to let this go forward without having real issues—

[1:01:32] these things resolved and accounted for in, in what's being brought forward.

[1:01:36] That's 12. That's, that's, you know, we've got this small road,

[1:01:40] we've got no shoulder, we've got These driveways that can— can a fire truck—

[1:01:44] how does a fire truck even work in those driveways?

[1:01:47] Can it get 7 acres down to get to those back lots and take care of folks on the

[1:01:51] back lots and take care of folks on the back

[1:01:51] lots? And once it's down there, how's it getting back?

[1:01:54] Is it backing up 7 acres to get back onto Sheep Neck?

[1:01:57] There's a lot— it's a lot of stuff here doesn't make sense.

[1:02:00] I appreciated the recommendation for a singular entrance point.

[1:02:04] But on that note, has anybody considered the amount of traffic that this is going

[1:02:08] the amount of traffic that this is going to

[1:02:08] do? We've talked about it tonight. Y'all have mentioned it tonight.

[1:02:12] But has anybody done a quantitative,

[1:02:14] numerical look at what this will do traffic-wise. It's farm community.

[1:02:18] You've got tractors, you've got ATVs, you've got four-wheelers,

[1:02:21] you've got people running and walking. That's already been mentioned.

[1:02:25] So this is not a cool approach. You've got to take care of this.

[1:02:29] This has to be addressed. The line of sight is a real concern.

[1:02:32] We've heard already about the curves and the hills, the S-curves.

[1:02:36] You've got new driveways that are going to run up against that.

[1:02:39] It's going to add dangerous situations.

[1:02:41] Tonight we've had a question asked about these,

[1:02:44] these driveways and whether or not we can have multiple lots with one driveway.

[1:02:48] And honestly, I was not comfortable with the decision from that.

[1:02:52] This body should have an answer to whether or not that's acceptable and say

[1:02:56] objectively this works or this doesn't work. And we need to hear that.

[1:03:00] And then ultimately construction itself is going to massively disrupt this You've

[1:03:04] got this smaller road, less substantial road,

[1:03:06] and you're going to have the dump trucks and the diggers and the front loaders,

[1:03:11] all the things my 6-year-old loves to see,

[1:03:13] is going to be on there disrupting traffic and tearing up the road.

[1:03:17] So I think there's a lot more work that needs to be done before this can be moved

[1:03:21] forward.

[1:03:22] That's it. Thank you, sir. Mathew Fuhrman.

[1:03:38] My name is Matt Fuhrman, 3134 Sheep Neck Road, District 9.

[1:03:41] My family and I are absolutely opposed to this development.

[1:03:45] As you've heard, the proposed subdivision would add 13 new driveway conflict points

[1:03:50] and potentially 70 to 120 additional vehicle movements every day on a narrow

[1:03:54] vehicle movements every day on a narrow rural

[1:03:55] agricultural road with a dangerous S-curve.

[1:03:57] I said, in addition to this, I'm going to keep this short.

[1:04:00] I wanted to make it longer,

[1:04:02] but I don't think that the county and representatives of the taxpayers should

[1:04:07] representatives of the taxpayers should reward

[1:04:07] folks who have apparently—

[1:04:09] who have and apparently continue to attempt to skirt the law for personal

[1:04:13] attempt to skirt the law for personal gain.

[1:04:13] These developers.

[1:04:14] Thank you, sir. Catherine Corden.

[1:04:17] My name is Katherine Cordon, and I live in District 7.

[1:04:20] And the reason I'm here is because all of this growth is really disturbing to what's

[1:04:26] happening to these developers that are coming up and tearing up our farmland and

[1:04:32] putting in 13 homes here, 82 homes here.

[1:04:35] And I just wonder if there is a 5-year plan for this county that will address the

[1:04:41] water The schools, the police, the fire departments.

[1:04:45] I mean, these are true concerns for all of your constituents that are saying no to

[1:04:50] any more development till we look at a 5-year plan. What does that look like?

[1:04:56] We can't just keep approving more subdivisions.

[1:04:59] It's just ruining the whole landscape of this beautiful county.

[1:05:04] And I just ask you to please listen to the people whose hearts are bleeding as their

[1:05:10] farmlands and the homes that they live in,

[1:05:13] the places that they raise their families are just being destroyed by greed.

[1:05:18] And these developers come in here under a shell company,

[1:05:22] and then they turn the land into something that it wasn't proposed to you to be.

[1:05:28] So I just ask you to take a really hard look at these developers who's come in and

[1:05:34] what their plan is, and really understand the full impact for the next 5 years on

[1:05:40] Murray County, because we live here and we love this place.

[1:05:44] So I just ask you to please listen to the people who are here this evening.

[1:05:49] Thank you. God bless you. Thank you. Dustin Kittle.

[1:05:53] Dustin Kittle, District 6, and I'm also going to be speaking on behalf of Brian,

[1:05:59] going to be speaking on behalf of Brian, uh,

[1:05:59] Easterly And Taylor Easterly, who are in District 9.

[1:06:03] And there's kind of a threshold issue that somehow— I mean,

[1:06:07] you would think on this one that this,

[1:06:09] this particular subdivision will go down in Murray County history as being a

[1:06:15] in Murray County history as being a turning

[1:06:15] point, because it's the one that we figured out that we've been

[1:06:20] figured out that we've been misinterpreting what

[1:06:21] the subdivision rules require for who knows how long.

[1:06:25] And I would bet if I drove around this county,

[1:06:28] there have been a lot of subdivisions that did not go before this body.

[1:06:33] And that's not the Planning Commission's fault. It's the county's fault.

[1:06:38] And I think at this point we're interpreting right—

[1:06:41] interpreting it right to where even if it's over 5 acres,

[1:06:45] if it is a subdivision and it meets the qualifications for it under Tennessee law,

[1:06:51] it has to go before this body. And that makes perfect sense.

[1:06:55] So I had confidence that maybe we were going to start interpreting things right

[1:07:01] until I realized that we did not even get right the fact they don't even own all

[1:07:07] this land. I'm speaking on behalf of Brian Easterly, and I have his deed right here.

[1:07:12] Brian Easterly owns Lot 6 because they've already sold it to him.

[1:07:17] And so it's a violation of Tennessee law for this to have even been presented to

[1:07:23] this Planning Commission tonight. It requires unified ownership.

[1:07:27] And we did a public records request and we got information,

[1:07:31] and that question was asked to them specifically. I believe it was by Mr.

[1:07:36] Muhammad, asked them, do you own Lot 6?

[1:07:39] And I don't see any reference back as far as them indicating, no, we don't own that.

[1:07:45] And it's very clear in Tennessee law that the only way they could bring this before

[1:07:51] this body would be with Mr.

[1:07:53] Easterly's approval,

[1:07:54] particularly given the fact that also what they're requiring or what they're asking

[1:08:00] this body to do is to void a prior plat that has been filed.

[1:08:04] And this is just an example of how a simple mistake could create chaos for

[1:08:09] simple mistake could create chaos for people in

[1:08:10] the county. Mr. Easterly has financing.

[1:08:13] He has a deed that is tied to a prior plat that's been filed.

[1:08:17] One of the things that's interesting is they filed 2 plats.

[1:08:21] They only reference to this body that there's only— that there's one plat.

[1:08:26] Tennessee law requires if you're going to void a plat,

[1:08:30] you've got to have all owners' approval.

[1:08:33] So if they would have got this planning commission to have approved this tonight

[1:08:38] commission to have approved this tonight and

[1:08:39] voided that prior plat, it could have actually voided Mr.

[1:08:43] Easterly's deed and his financing. And he was never told about this.

[1:08:47] And as, as you all know,

[1:08:49] you had authorization to go on all of this property to look at it. Well, they did.

[1:08:55] They gave that authorization. They don't even own it.

[1:08:59] And there's even another defect that's almost just inconceivable in the fact that

[1:09:04] they listed the owner as being a Mr. Blackmon when he's not even the owner.

[1:09:10] It's Cedar Grove Partners. So they don't own all this land.

[1:09:14] It'd be a violation of Tennessee law for this to even be considered.

[1:09:18] And my recommendation would be for this application to be rejected.

[1:09:23] May I have an additional 15 seconds?

[1:09:26] Yes. Finish your thought, please, Destin.

[1:09:27] It, it would be a violation for this to go forward.

[1:09:30] My recommendation, and I would ask Ms.

[1:09:33] Ransom to have this application withdrawn, require it to be refiled.

[1:09:37] And part of the reason that I think it was filed early is new subdivision

[1:09:42] regulations went into— went into place on July the 20th.

[1:09:45] This was filed earlier that same month.

[1:09:48] If they get vesting rights,

[1:09:49] then all of a sudden they don't have to do these soil studies and the more

[1:09:54] scrutinized water studies. I think they presented this for one reason.

[1:09:58] That was to avoid that.

[1:10:00] I would reject the application, make them refile it,

[1:10:03] but there's no way this body could,

[1:10:05] could consider it tonight in anything other than a denial. Thank you.

[1:10:10] Thank you. Yeah, go ahead, Kristi, you have the floor.

[1:10:14] So, I mean, Dustin's right— I'm sorry, Mr. Kittle is right.

[1:10:18] Um, the zoning ordinance, even not talking about state law,

[1:10:23] the zoning ordinance says that there are only certain people who can present

[1:10:28] applications. So if the property owners haven't all consented to considering this,

[1:10:34] then it's not properly before And you can't take action on it at this point.

[1:10:40] So I need to take a look at our procedures, but if they—

[1:10:44] and I assume they've closed on it, Dustin. It's like straight up theirs.

[1:10:50] They own it. It's closed.

[1:10:52] Can I have a copy of the deed?

[1:10:53] No, that's okay. I trust you. I knew there was a contract on it.

[1:10:56] I wasn't sure whether it had closed.

[1:10:58] It did close about—

[1:11:00] A while ago? Okay. Okay. Okay.

[1:11:03] So yeah, you can't apply for an action on a property that you don't own without the

[1:11:09] consent of the property owner.

[1:11:11] So, I mean, you might want to take the rest of the public comment.

[1:11:17] You know, I'm not suggesting that you shut everything down, but—

[1:11:22] and I need a minute I'm going to look at the procedures.

[1:11:26] So, I mean, it would probably be helpful to the developer should they bring

[1:11:32] something back without this Lot 6 to get the rest of the concerns and comments.

[1:11:38] Because as I said, a concept plan, it's really— it's not a vesting document.

[1:11:44] That's a preliminary plat.

[1:11:46] But it is for you all to share your comments and concerns so that they can

[1:11:52] comments and concerns so that they can take that

[1:11:52] back.

[1:11:53] Yes.

[1:11:54] in deciding how to move forward with any kind of proposal.

[1:11:58] So I'll let y'all proceed while I look at the procedures.

[1:12:02] And Dustin, I appreciate you bringing that to our attention.

[1:12:07] Next time, call me the afternoon so I can prepare,

[1:12:11] but I appreciate you bringing that to our attention. Thank you. Thank you, Kristi.

[1:12:24] Theresa Sparks.

[1:12:29] Theresa Sparks, District 9. I also live on Sheep Neck.

[1:12:33] I've been speaking about this project for over a year, and we have raised legal,

[1:12:39] which you just heard, ethical,

[1:12:41] and public safety concerns about surrounding this subdivision.

[1:12:46] Tonight I want to focus on primarily the ethical concerns,

[1:12:50] and you're going to hear more about the safety concerns.

[1:12:54] These concerns started with a simple question:

[1:12:57] how could approximately 82 acres be divided into as many as 16 5-acre lots

[1:13:03] divided into as many as 16 5-acre lots with no

[1:13:03] oversight from the Regional Planning Commission at all?

[1:13:07] It simply didn't add up, so we began researching state law,

[1:13:12] ultimately questioning whether this development should be classified as a

[1:13:17] subdivision, primarily due to the infrastructure triggers.

[1:13:21] That's state law, regardless of the lot size.

[1:13:24] On February 26th, Humble Law submitted a legal memo to the Regional Planning

[1:13:30] Commission concluding that this project should be, in fact,

[1:13:34] classified as a subdivision.

[1:13:36] And then, Kristi, thank you for— I mean, this is a detailed,

[1:13:41] detailed document also agreeing with that Kristi wrote agreeing with Humble Law that

[1:13:47] the development is subject to the subdivision regulations.

[1:13:51] Yet the concept plan before you this evening, as you heard earlier,

[1:13:56] does not comply with the subdivision regulations.

[1:13:59] And the concern does not end with East Sheepneck Road.

[1:14:03] We have examined another development involving the same developer on Double

[1:14:09] involving the same developer on Double Branch.

[1:14:09] And this is important because We know that in a records request,

[1:14:14] even though we were told Double Branch is not— does not meet the same criteria,

[1:14:20] it does. And those record requests are available. We have them.

[1:14:24] And so here's the point that ties it into East Sheepneck.

[1:14:28] Double Branch is a public safety concern. Several residents still lack water.

[1:14:34] Yes.

[1:14:34] And they've had— at least one has had to dig a new well.

[1:14:38] Let's not repeat those same mistakes on East Sheepneck.

[1:14:41] That's why it ties in, because if this happened on Double Branch,

[1:14:46] it can happen on East Sheepneck.

[1:14:48] It's the same developer and they're pulling the same shenanigans over and

[1:14:52] pulling the same shenanigans over and over.

[1:14:53] You can't build a subdivision and say, oh, the water's coming, wink wink,

[1:14:57] the water's coming, and then say that people are going to dig wells.

[1:15:02] Do you think Mr. Easterly Hill here wants 13 wells?

[1:15:05] Yes.

[1:15:06] dug around his, that's going to compromise his water source.

[1:15:11] So I'm asking you tonight to—

[1:15:13] respectfully asking you to apply those regulations fully and deny this concept

[1:15:20] plan and this and the entire subdivision and not let it go forward.

[1:15:26] So we, we can see what's happened on Double Branch will be repeated on East

[1:15:32] Sheepneck.

[1:15:33] Thank you.

[1:15:34] Thank you. Bree Foster.

[1:15:35] Hi, my name is Bree Foster and I live at 2740 East Sheepneck in Collioca.

[1:15:40] Chairman and commissioners, my concern tonight is very specific— the site

[1:15:45] tonight is very specific— the site distance.

[1:15:46] You've heard it already tonight multiple times.

[1:15:49] Our road contains an S-curve, and my family and I live directly behind it.

[1:15:54] Just last week, I was coming home from the grocery store with my 5-year-old in the

[1:15:59] back seat, buckled into his car seat,

[1:16:02] when a Mack truck was within feet of smashing us head-on.

[1:16:05] The driver was speeding to a concerning degree,

[1:16:08] and had I not been driving defensively and cautiously,

[1:16:12] You might not be seeing my face right here tonight because I might be on the news.

[1:16:17] A potentially fatal accident almost happened within feet of my own property.

[1:16:22] Curves matter because they limit how far a driver can see ahead of them.

[1:16:27] Imagine traveling through our curve and encountering a vehicle that slowed or

[1:16:32] stopped to turn into one of these brand new driveways that are proposed.

[1:16:37] A UPS truck delivering mail, a school bus, or a tractor pulling farm equipment.

[1:16:42] Now consider the opposite perspective.

[1:16:45] A resident pulling out of one of these 13 driveways needs to be able to see that

[1:16:50] they have roadway clearance on either side before continuing safely into the

[1:16:55] roadway. This isn't something we should be guessing about. It can be measured.

[1:17:00] Maury County's roadway and drainage technical standards contain minimal sight

[1:17:05] distance values that are based on the current roadway classifications.

[1:17:10] According to those standards,

[1:17:12] the minimum The required distance referenced in the county materials for a

[1:17:17] referenced in the county materials for a minor

[1:17:17] local road are 150 feet, 250 feet for a local road, and 450—

[1:17:21] 400 feet for a collector road.

[1:17:23] So I have several very simple and basic questions for you.

[1:17:27] What's the official classification of my road?

[1:17:30] What is the required site distance for that classification?

[1:17:34] And most importantly,

[1:17:35] what is the actual measured site distance at each of these 13 proposed driveway

[1:17:40] locations? I'm not asking for a guesstimate.

[1:17:43] I'm asking for an exact measurement,

[1:17:46] and if a qualified professional has actually evaluated the sight distance

[1:17:50] actually evaluated the sight distance through

[1:17:51] and around that S-curve. These are objective questions that have objective

[1:17:56] objective questions that have objective answers.

[1:17:56] If the driveway meets the appropriate standard, then demonstrate it.

[1:18:01] But if we don't know if they do,

[1:18:03] then we shouldn't permanently create 13 new access points first and then ask

[1:18:08] questions later. Measure the conditions.

[1:18:10] Thank you.

[1:18:11] Apply the standards. The lives of us living on East Sheep Neck might depend

[1:18:17] living on East Sheep Neck might depend upon it.

[1:18:17] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

[1:18:20] And I have, um, if anybody'd like to see it,

[1:18:23] I have photos of all these access points. And just if anybody'd like to see it.

[1:18:29] John Sparks.

[1:18:38] You get to hear from another Sparks other than Theresa Sparks, so you're welcome.

[1:18:45] Sir, if you— if when you come to the podium,

[1:18:47] if you could just state your name and district, please. Thank you.

[1:18:51] John Sparks, District 9.

[1:18:54] I have 2 letters to submit that are in opposition to

[1:19:02] this development, and I'll be short.

[1:19:07] Can I give this to someone?

[1:19:11] I'm kind of the patriarch of the family,

[1:19:17] and the safety of all my grandkids, 5,

[1:19:23] and all my kids were privileged to live on the same

[1:19:30] road. Not a lot of families have that opportunity,

[1:19:37] but We have it. And can you imagine having this kind

[1:19:45] of mess ruining what you've invested a lot of time

[1:19:52] and energy and money? I love my family.

[1:19:58] This is a safety issue.

[1:20:01] I wish you would consider the safety part of this and

[1:20:09] deny this development. Thank you.

[1:20:14] Thank you, sir. Chris Gramling.

[1:20:25] Hi everyone, Chris Gramling, District 9.

[1:20:28] Um, I prepared, uh, uh, uh, comments,

[1:20:30] but I'm going to have to go off script because I don't want to be shut down, uh,

[1:20:35] for talking about other things. So I'm just going to speak from the heart.

[1:20:40] Um, this is vile and disgusting what's happening.

[1:20:43] Every person here in this room needs to go out to East Sheep Neck and see what's

[1:20:48] been done. We've talked about safety.

[1:20:50] They've already had a trailer fall off the road in one of their new driveways.

[1:20:55] They just went ahead, thought they'd skip by you.

[1:20:58] They had an attorney,

[1:20:59] and they just thought that apparently that part of the law didn't apply to them.

[1:21:04] I find that hard to believe, that you've got an attorney and a team,

[1:21:08] they're doing this all over the county,

[1:21:11] and they don't realize what the triggers for subdivision are. What disrespect.

[1:21:16] To you. And this— some of the people on this side of the room,

[1:21:19] I'm deeply upset with you. I'm deeply disappointed.

[1:21:23] Why do I need to hire an attorney, spend a year of my life, 40 hours plus a week,

[1:21:28] trying to protect what I've spent my entire life trying to build,

[1:21:32] to get you guys to recognize the law and do the right thing? It's, it's gross.

[1:21:36] It's morally reprehensible what's happening. We're a farming community.

[1:21:41] This thing is developed with those lots for a specific reason.

[1:21:45] The, the engineer comes up and says, oh, well, this is our first plan.

[1:21:49] That's obviously developed for financial gain.

[1:21:52] And they do it rinse and repeat, not only throughout Maury County,

[1:21:56] it's all over southern middle Tennessee.

[1:21:59] This same exact developer.

[1:22:01] There's controversy everywhere they go. Upset buyers, upset neighbors.

[1:22:05] You've got ethics complaints about public officials.

[1:22:09] This is bigger than the myopia of what we're looking at.

[1:22:13] There's a bigger picture, and Don Barnett should have been heard in part about it.

[1:22:18] I invite everyone, please come,

[1:22:20] come down to East Sheepneck and find out who is really behind this and what is

[1:22:25] really going on before we take that word agriculture, tear it off,

[1:22:30] and say Troy Blackman or development. Please, enough is enough.

[1:22:34] Drake Sparks.

[1:22:41] Hello, my name is Drake Sparks. I'm a District 9 resident.

[1:22:46] I live at 3090 East Sheepneck Road.

[1:22:49] And I just want to talk about this development from a farmer's perspective.

[1:22:56] I'm vocationally a farmer at this point in my life.

[1:23:00] And the traffic, even the existing traffic, creates a lot of safety

[1:23:06] traffic, creates a lot of safety challenges.

[1:23:07] So the way I do business, I bring my kids with me everywhere.

[1:23:12] So if you look in the cab of You look on my tractor or you look on my UTV,

[1:23:19] there's 1 to 2 small humans with me doing everything.

[1:23:23] And that means we're stretching water hoses across the road, watering cattle.

[1:23:30] That means we're pulling hay down the road in a truck.

[1:23:35] That means we're taking hogs or cattle to the butcher, et cetera, et cetera,

[1:23:41] et cetera. You know,

[1:23:43] the transportation and all that stuff that comes with agriculture.

[1:23:49] So I believe that Sheebneck, even unto its early days of being paved and everything,

[1:23:56] was conceived as an agricultural road to serve the farmer.

[1:24:01] And I don't know how it's going to serve the farmer anymore when it's going to have

[1:24:08] a subdivision I've had people trying to run me off the road when I'm pulling hay

[1:24:15] down the road. So it's already pretty sketchy and totally against it, you know,

[1:24:22] for the sake of agriculture, which should be a priority of this body and all of us,

[1:24:30] is preserving that. So thank you for your service and what y'all do.

[1:24:35] I really appreciate it genuinely. Have a great night.

[1:24:40] Thank you. Lauren Sparks.

[1:24:42] Hello, I'm Lauren Sparks and I'm at 3090 East Sheepneck in District 9.

[1:24:46] I'm a little nervous, so I wrote it all down,

[1:24:49] so I'm just going to read it for y'all.

[1:24:52] But thank you so much for your guys' service, first of all.

[1:24:56] First off, um, I'm speaking tonight on behalf of the residents of East Sheepneck

[1:25:01] Road in opposition to the proposed 13th lot.

[1:25:04] Ridgeline Reserve concept plan—

[1:25:06] this plan represents a direct threat to public safety,

[1:25:10] as we've heard many times tonight.

[1:25:12] I want to focus on the 13 additional homes,

[1:25:15] what they actually mean for our small rural road.

[1:25:19] When you hear 13 homes, that number can sound relatively insignificant,

[1:25:23] but the fact is that Murray County households have approximately 2 vehicles

[1:25:28] available per household.

[1:25:30] Applied to 13 new residences,

[1:25:32] That suggests roughly 26 additional resident vehicles regularly using this

[1:25:37] resident vehicles regularly using this road.

[1:25:37] And those vehicles don't just make a trip, like one single trip a day.

[1:25:42] They leave for work, they take kids to school, they go to the grocery store,

[1:25:47] appointments and activities, then they come home.

[1:25:50] And that's before we count for Amazon, UPS deliveries, visitors, contractors,

[1:25:55] school transportation, the emergency vehicles, et cetera, et cetera.

[1:26:00] This is a major road.

[1:26:01] The different transportation methodologies estimate that this—

[1:26:06] or this activity differently. It's not just 26, you know, cars going back and

[1:26:11] just 26, you know, cars going back and forth.

[1:26:11] Actually, it would be more like 73 additional vehicle trips per weekday,

[1:26:16] all the way up to as many as 120 trips per weekday vehicle movements.

[1:26:21] I'm not suggesting that there's 120 new cars. That's not what I'm saying.

[1:26:25] I'm saying that, um,

[1:26:27] 13 homes can generate dozens of additional vehicle movements every single day.

[1:26:32] Those movements occur on, as we know, a narrow, like, single road or single lane,

[1:26:37] um, for at least half if not more of the road.

[1:26:41] Um, yeah, just a narrow with, you know, S-curves. It's just dangerous.

[1:26:45] Um, I'm one of at least 4 other moms that regularly walk on this road.

[1:26:50] I know there's probably 7 of us with Young kids,

[1:26:53] but I know 4 actively walk on that road with small kids.

[1:26:57] We obviously are very concerned about this, as you've heard.

[1:27:01] We also— you also heard we're farmers,

[1:27:03] so we move cows across the road at 2 different access points as well.

[1:27:08] And we, you know, usually have to keep cars waiting as we're moving our herd

[1:27:13] cars waiting as we're moving our herd across

[1:27:14] the street back and forth. And we do that weekly. So there's a lot going on.

[1:27:19] Thank you.

[1:27:19] Over there. The development should be designed around the limitations of the

[1:27:24] designed around the limitations of the public

[1:27:25] infrastructure it depends upon rather than expecting the public infrastructure to

[1:27:30] somehow accommodate whatever development occurs,

[1:27:33] because that's not fair for us or really anybody, the people that buy the property,

[1:27:38] all of that. Before these 13 homes permanently change the traffic pattern of

[1:27:43] permanently change the traffic pattern of this

[1:27:43] road, I'm really asking you guys to demonstrate that the road—

[1:27:47] or not necessarily you guys, but the county—

[1:27:50] to demonstrate demonstrate that the road can safely handle the additional activity.

[1:27:55] Thank you, guys. Thank you. Chandra Cecil.

[1:27:58] And I am a resident of East Sheep Neck Road as well and District 9.

[1:28:02] And thank you for listening today to our comments.

[1:28:05] I've lived here since I was Since, well, 12 years old.

[1:28:09] And we moved onto East Jeep Neck Road. My parents built a house out there.

[1:28:13] And I remember the roads being dirt roads.

[1:28:16] And Mark does too, I know, and many of my other neighbors.

[1:28:20] But so we've seen, you know, just like she just said, I mean,

[1:28:23] just imagine all the extra traffic and, yeah, all the other— I mean,

[1:28:28] we already have a lot of traffic.

[1:28:30] And without You know,

[1:28:31] 13 extra houses and all the extra vehicles and things coming onto the road.

[1:28:36] So, and a lot of people do like to walk on that road.

[1:28:39] Um, years ago, I used— my family, we used to bike on the road,

[1:28:43] but we had to be very careful because it is a very narrow road and no shoulder.

[1:28:48] There's not a, you know, not shoulders. There's ditches and it's curvy.

[1:28:53] And like everybody— everyone pretty much has said,

[1:28:56] you get in certain areas of that road and if someone—

[1:28:59] if you're met with a big truck that is Like right in your lane and you have

[1:29:04] Like right in your lane and you have nowhere

[1:29:04] else to go. You could be in the ditch. And that's happened before to some of us.

[1:29:10] And my parents couldn't be here tonight,

[1:29:12] but they are definitely against this as well.

[1:29:15] They live near— next door to us, actually.

[1:29:18] Our daughter was raised in our residence and we built our house back in 2002 or had

[1:29:23] it built in 2002. And yeah, we just— I'm just— I don't— I'm frustrated.

[1:29:27] I don't understand how all these driveways got put out there.

[1:29:31] Without approval, that this guy was able to just come in and just start, oh,

[1:29:36] I'm going to build here, and without approval from the county commission,

[1:29:41] from y'all. And like Chris said, how disrespectful.

[1:29:44] I don't understand how people think they can just bulldoze into Middle Tennessee

[1:29:49] can just bulldoze into Middle Tennessee and

[1:29:49] do this. I, you know, it's just, again, it's a mess.

[1:29:52] So please, please don't approve. Please do not allow this to happen.

[1:29:57] Thank you.

[1:29:58] And like Dustin said, they've already done illegal things.

[1:30:00] Why, why is it that— or unethical, whatever you want to call it.

[1:30:03] Um, what's going to keep them from doing that anymore?

[1:30:06] And the other places around the county where they're doing this kind of stuff.

[1:30:09] Um, this is not okay.

[1:30:10] And we— I just plead with you to please listen to everyone that's talked tonight

[1:30:14] that said they do not want this application approved.

[1:30:16] Thank you so much for your time. God bless you.

[1:30:18] And again, I wouldn't want to be in your position.

[1:30:20] Oh, another thing I wanted to say too. I have 55 seconds.

[1:30:23] Thank you.

[1:30:25] I love farmland. I love being in the country.

[1:30:27] That's the reason why I grew up in the country. I love being in the country.

[1:30:31] My husband and I love being in the country. My parents love being in the

[1:30:34] country. My parents love being in the country.

[1:30:34] We love having neighbors,

[1:30:36] but we like having that distance as well and not having tons of traffic on our

[1:30:39] and not having tons of traffic on our road.

[1:30:39] But the animals and the farmland and all that is— that's going to be taken over,

[1:30:43] that natural habitat that's going to be disrupted.

[1:30:45] And again, we don't have enough water in our county. We're running out of water.

[1:30:49] Where are we going to get the water to to give these people water in their houses.

[1:30:53] We've already got the issue going on on Double Branch Road as well.

[1:30:56] And anyway, that's another thing I take on that.

[1:30:59] So thank you.

[1:30:59] And again, we have all these families that we want to make sure that they can

[1:31:02] provide for their family for the future.

[1:31:04] The people that currently live here, please, please listen to us.

[1:31:07] We'd appreciate it so much. God bless y'all. Thank you again.

[1:31:09] Thank you. Glenn Alexander.

[1:31:16] Okay. Gabe Howard.

[1:31:20] Thank you, Madam Chair, uh,

[1:31:23] members of the Regional Planning Commission.

[1:31:28] I'm asking you tonight to not—

[1:31:32] Gabe, I'm sorry, can you just state your name and district number for the record?

[1:31:35] Sorry to interrupt. Gabe Howard, uh, District 8.

[1:31:38] Uh, tonight I'm here representing my friends on East Sheepneck Road.

[1:31:42] I'm asking you tonight to vote no on the Ridgeline Reserve concept plan.

[1:31:46] I know that y'all were just presented that maybe this should be withdrawn.

[1:31:51] I would ask y'all tonight to go ahead and actually deny it.

[1:31:54] They submitted an application, uh,

[1:31:56] but that basically they didn't even have the right to submit.

[1:31:59] So send that message loud and clear and deny it.

[1:32:02] This is bigger than one subdivision.

[1:32:04] It's about whether our rules actually mean something and whether Everyone in Murray

[1:32:09] County is expected to play by the same rules.

[1:32:12] This plan proposes 13 residential lots, more than 3,300 feet of new water line,

[1:32:16] an individual septic system.

[1:32:18] The plan also states that its purpose is—

[1:32:20] includes voiding and vacating the previously recorded plat.

[1:32:23] This is a residential development, plain and simple.

[1:32:26] But before we get into planning policy,

[1:32:29] this commission should vote no based on public safety alone. East Sheepneck Road.

[1:32:33] How many of y'all have actually driven down East Sheepneck Road?

[1:32:37] East Sheepneck Road is already dangerous and rural road.

[1:32:40] The plans say the pavement is 24 feet wide. I would question that. I know that

[1:32:45] wide. I would question that. I know that road.

[1:32:45] I've been driving that road for 15 years.

[1:32:47] And whether that road is actually 24 feet and whether it's been represented

[1:32:52] correctly, I don't believe that it has.

[1:32:54] Before we approve more homes and more traffic,

[1:32:56] that should be independently verified.

[1:32:59] The applicant's own plans identify steep slopes, large trees, culverts,

[1:33:03] and rock outcroppings.

[1:33:04] In some places, even the proposed water line has to be placed only 2 or 3 feet

[1:33:08] line has to be placed only 2 or 3 feet from

[1:33:09] the edge of the pavement because of the conditions. That should tell us something.

[1:33:13] Then look at how these lots are configured.

[1:33:16] The concept plan relies on multiple 25-foot easements throughout the property.

[1:33:20] That should be alarming in itself.

[1:33:22] When we start using easements and administrative mechanisms to squeeze

[1:33:26] administrative mechanisms to squeeze additional

[1:33:27] residential lots out of rural farmland,

[1:33:29] we have to ask whether we are honoring the intent of our subdivision regulations or

[1:33:34] simply finding another way around them.

[1:33:36] It should not be harder for a farmer to preserve and protect their own farmland

[1:33:41] preserve and protect their own farmland than

[1:33:41] it is for a developer to administratively carve that farmland into residential

[1:33:45] tracts. That's completely backwards.

[1:33:47] I believe strongly in property rights,

[1:33:50] but the rules should apply equally to everybody.

[1:33:52] At some point, we have to say enough is enough.

[1:33:55] Enough loopholes, enough workarounds,

[1:33:57] enough development greed being placed ahead of public safety,

[1:34:01] Good planning and the protection of rural Murray County.

[1:34:04] Protect our roads, protect our farmland, respect the rules.

[1:34:07] Make a motion to deny this tonight. Thank you all so much.

[1:34:12] Thank you. Okay, that's everybody.

[1:34:14] That's everybody that I had signed up to prior to the meeting to speak on this

[1:34:19] particular agenda item. Kristi, you have the floor.

[1:34:23] Sorry, I don't ever wait for the light like I should.

[1:34:26] I looked through your procedures,

[1:34:29] and I think at this point I understand the sentiment asking you all to take some

[1:34:34] action, but I don't believe you have the authority to do so.

[1:34:38] So at this point, I'm going to ask the applicant to withdraw the item from the

[1:34:44] agenda because you can't take action on it even if you wanted to because you don't

[1:34:49] have the authority to. without that property owner's consent.

[1:34:53] So I don't have a whole lot of other choice at this point.

[1:34:57] Just ask, ask for it to be withdrawn.

[1:35:02] Yeah, yeah.

[1:35:04] I mean, that the item be withdrawn.

[1:35:06] Okay, we're gonna, we're gonna withdraw it.

[1:35:09] Why don't y'all just take an action to accept the withdrawal just so that it's

[1:35:15] clean? Um, no, it's withdrawn as of right now,

[1:35:18] and And y'all just move to accept the withdrawal so we have it on the record.

[1:35:24] And it's— this is a weird situation.

[1:35:26] Oddly enough, I had it happen in another county just last month.

[1:35:31] I don't know what's going on. I haven't seen this in 15 or 20 years.

[1:35:36] Yeah, let's just take a motion to accept the withdrawal and take an action on that,

[1:35:41] and then we'll, we'll move along. Debbie. Okay. Thank you.

[1:35:46] Debbie, Debbie was first and Quentin was second. I'm sorry. Yes, Mr.

[1:35:50] Delk, you have the floor.

[1:35:52] I want to ask you one question. Lot 6 already sold.

[1:35:57] Can't be part of the plat, right?

[1:36:00] Unless they consent.

[1:36:02] Like, I mean, unless they join in with the—

[1:36:05] yeah, yeah. I mean, because you can see, you can void, vacate,

[1:36:08] and supersede with But if they don't consent,

[1:36:11] then all the easements and everything on there cannot be in place either?

[1:36:15] I don't know. We'd have to look and see what was part of what their deed is.

[1:36:20] I mean, there may be easements contained within their deed when they took title to

[1:36:24] the property, and that's not something I would really know anything about.

[1:36:29] But that's also something that the developer and their consultant would need

[1:36:33] developer and their consultant would need to

[1:36:33] clarify. So it may be that it has to show up on the plat to affect the easement.

[1:36:38] I mean, it's— This is kind of a tangled web here we'd have to figure out.

[1:36:42] Okay. I don't need no— all right.

[1:36:45] No other questions from the commission?

[1:36:48] We have a motion and a second to accept the applicant's withdrawal.

[1:36:52] All those in favor say aye.

[1:36:54] Aye.

[1:36:55] Those opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.

[1:36:58] Take a couple minutes, let everybody back in.

[1:37:04] Um, this has been a long meeting.

[1:37:06] Let's just take like a Let's take a 5-minute break so people can get something

[1:37:09] 5-minute break so people can get something to

[1:37:09] drink and go to the restroom. Thank you.

[1:37:11] Yes,

[1:38:23] right.

[1:40:11] That's the thing. I was looking at the

[1:40:17] timer. I'm like, okay. No, but I still—

[1:40:24] What's that? Oh, oh, yeah, you're right.

[1:40:28] I was gonna

[1:40:34] say,

[1:40:37] I remember it

[1:40:45] being there

[1:40:52] last year.

[1:40:58] I'd like to

[1:41:05] get started

[1:41:12] again, please.

[1:41:21] Thank you.

[1:41:27] All right,

[1:41:34] I'm going to

[1:41:41] call the

[1:41:46] meeting back

[1:41:54] to order.

[1:41:59] Thank you,

[1:42:06] everyone.

[1:42:11] We're going to

[1:42:20] move to item 9

[1:42:29] on our agenda,

[1:42:38] which is a

[1:42:44] recommendation

[1:42:53] for a rezoning

[1:43:02] from RG to an

[1:43:10] AP district,

[1:43:17] property being

[1:43:26] located at 26

[1:43:34] 2626 Double

[1:43:41] Branch Road,

[1:43:49] Columbia,

[1:43:54] District 5.

[1:44:01] Is the

[1:44:05] applicant

[1:44:11] present,

[1:44:16] please?

[1:44:20] Could you come

[1:44:29] forward, sir?

[1:44:37] If you would

[1:44:45] just state

[1:44:51] your name and

[1:44:59] district and

[1:45:07] just tell us

[1:45:14] what you're

[1:45:21] proposing,

[1:45:28] please.

[1:45:32] Darryl Manzolini, District 9, 2626 Double Branch Road.

[1:45:37] Can you— do you have any information you want to give?

[1:45:41] No, we just would like to try to move forward with this and try to go along with

[1:45:46] forward with this and try to go along with the

[1:45:46] settlements here going on,

[1:45:47] I'm part of the complaint that's attached to that previous menagerie.

[1:45:51] They started on our road and we're getting overrun.

[1:45:54] And so we just want to try—

[1:45:55] there's a couple of us are getting together with this to try to protect from

[1:45:59] together with this to try to protect from being

[1:46:00] encroached on. You know,

[1:46:01] we moved out there to try to enjoy the peace of the countryside and it's being

[1:46:05] closed in on us. And this is just one step that we're trying to make to make sure

[1:46:10] that we buildings and people, you know,

[1:46:12] they hear a rooster crow or don't like the smell of a pig in their yard,

[1:46:16] they start crying and complaining. This gives us a little protection against that.

[1:46:20] Okay. All right. Thank you, sir.

[1:46:22] You bet.

[1:46:23] Any questions or comments from the Planning Commission?

[1:46:27] All right. We have a motion and a second.

[1:46:30] All in favor say aye.

[1:46:31] Aye.

[1:46:32] Those opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.

[1:46:36] Okay, moving along to item number 10.

[1:46:39] This is also a recommendation that will be sent to the County Commission for

[1:46:46] a rezoning from RG to AP district at location 3090 East Sheepneck Road,

[1:46:52] Columbia— excuse me, Culeoaka, District 9. Is the applicant present, please?

[1:46:59] Yes.

[1:47:05] Good evening. If you all could just state your names and your district number,

[1:47:10] please. Yes, ma'am.

[1:47:12] Drake Sparks, Lauren Sparks, Teresa Sparks, John Sparks, District 9.

[1:47:15] Okay. Is there anything you all would like to say to the commission?

[1:47:19] Um, obviously from our previous statements, uh, on other matters,

[1:47:24] we're passionate about preserving farmland and The farm is used,

[1:47:29] or the land is used to farm.

[1:47:32] Okay.

[1:47:32] So, all right.

[1:47:34] Any questions from the commission? We have a motion and a second.

[1:47:39] All in favor say aye. Those opposed? Motion carries. Thank you all.

[1:47:45] Moving along, item number 11 is also a recommendation for a rezoning from RG to

[1:47:51] recommendation for a rezoning from RG to AP

[1:47:51] district at 3083 East Sheepneck Road in Culeoaka, District 9.

[1:47:56] Is the applicant present, please?

[1:47:59] Sam, I know you're responsible for a lot of this AP district,

[1:48:04] and you're going to hear tomorrow we're going to try to push to make it more

[1:48:10] going to try to push to make it more easily—

[1:48:11] to make it happen more easily, because— and I think I have a plan for that,

[1:48:17] because I don't think anybody else will go through the 14 steps. It's a lot.

[1:48:23] It's a lot to get through it.

[1:48:26] And I have a plan, so I'm going to present that tomorrow at the comprehensive plan,

[1:48:33] land use plan. But yeah, this is also— the next 2 are our property.

[1:48:38] For the record, would you all just state your name again, please? That's okay.

[1:48:45] Theresa Sparks. John Sparks, District 9. All right. We have a motion and a second.

[1:48:51] All in favor say aye.

[1:48:53] Aye.

[1:48:54] Those opposed? Motion carries. All right, next item. You can, you can stay.

[1:49:01] The next item is also a rezoning from RG to AP district located at 3192 East

[1:49:08] Sheepneck Road in Culeoaka, District 9. Okay, second. We have a motion and a

[1:49:14] Okay, second. We have a motion and a second.

[1:49:15] All in favor say aye. Those opposed? Motion carries. Thank you all. All right.

[1:49:22] Item number 13, also a recommendation for rezoning from RG to AP district located at

[1:49:30] 2691 East Sheepneck Road, Culeoaka, District 9. Is the applicant present,

[1:49:36] District 9. Is the applicant present, please?

[1:49:37] Good. Okay. Good evening.

[1:49:39] Could you all just state your name and district number for the record, please?

[1:49:47] Mike Foster and Patty Foster, 2691 East Sheepneck Road, District 9.

[1:49:53] Okay.

[1:49:54] Okay.

[1:49:56] We have a motion and a second on the table. All in favor say aye.

[1:49:59] Aye.

[1:50:00] Those opposed? Motion carries. Thank you all. We have one final— yes.

[1:50:07] Who was my second on that, please?

[1:50:10] Yeah, uh, we also— item number 14 is also a recommendation for a rezoning

[1:50:18] from RG to AP district located at 1001 East Sheepneck Road in Culebra,

[1:50:25] District 9. Is the applicant present?

[1:50:29] If you would just state your name and district for the record, please,

[1:50:36] sir.

[1:50:36] Chris Grambling, District 9.

[1:50:37] All right, thank you. Who was my— Mike's my motion, Jonathan's my second.

[1:50:43] Okay, we have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Those opposed?

[1:50:48] Motion carries. Thank you, sir.

[1:50:50] Thank you very much.

[1:50:55] Okay, item number 15 on our agenda is letters of credit.

[1:50:59] We have a request for a reduction of letter of credit for LaBella Springs.

[1:51:05] They're requesting approval of a 30% reduction in the letter of credit, 33

[1:51:11] reduction in the letter of credit, 33 lots,

[1:51:12] reducing the performance amount from $2,598,000 to $1,818,600,

[1:51:17] which is proportional to the work completed to date. Is the applicant here?

[1:51:23] Do we have anybody here for LaBella?

[1:51:26] No.

[1:51:26] Okay. All right. Any questions from the commission?

[1:51:37] Comments? The reduction in amount is 30%, is that right?

[1:51:41] That's correct, Mr. Delk. Yeah, that's what it says.

[1:51:44] That's correct. Based on y'all's

[1:51:47] recommendation, I move approval.

[1:51:51] Second.

[1:51:52] Okay, we have a motion from Mr. Delk, second from Mike. Bless you.

[1:51:58] All in favor, all in favor say aye. Those opposed? Motion carried.

[1:52:04] Okay, do we have reports of officers, committees, or staff?

[1:52:09] Okay, floor is yours, Robert.

[1:52:12] There is a published advisory committee meeting tomorrow evening

[1:52:18] in this room at 5:30.

[1:52:20] That's to continue work on updating the comprehensive land use

[1:52:26] Plan. Just an announcement. Okay, thank you.

[1:52:31] I'm going to get to you.

[1:52:32] I do, um, uh, any other— before I move forward,

[1:52:35] any other items of business from Reports of Officers, Committee of Staff?

[1:52:40] Okay.

[1:52:42] Under other business, um, Mike Diaz,

[1:52:44] who has served this Planning Commission for 10 years,

[1:52:48] let us know this evening that this will be his last Planning Commission meeting.

[1:52:53] So, Mike, I've gotten— most of us have gotten to know you over the many years.

[1:52:58] I sat next to you for many years.

[1:53:01] So we thank you for your dedication and your years of service to this commission.

[1:53:06] You will be missed, and, and we thank you.

[1:53:09] So just, just wanted to say, just to mention that at the end of our meeting.

[1:53:14] So thank you, Mike.

[1:53:16] Thank you.

[1:53:19] Okay, moving on to other business. Anybody have any topics they would like to cover?

[1:53:26] Any questions, comments?

[1:53:27] Okay, finally, we have—

[1:53:29] this is the portion of our meeting where we have public comment.

[1:53:34] If you would like to make a comment regarding something that was not on our

[1:53:39] regarding something that was not on our agenda,

[1:53:40] this is the time to do it. So, sir, I will If you— I'm— okay.

[1:53:45] When you come to the podium,

[1:53:47] just please state your name and district number again for the record,

[1:53:52] and we will provide 3 minutes. Thank you.

[1:53:55] For the record, Jordan Rauden, District 9.

[1:53:57] So there was a moratorium on data center stuff approved by the County Commission

[1:54:02] last month. In it, it mentioned, hey,

[1:54:04] there's going to be time now for a study of the impact of data centers on Murray

[1:54:09] County. And the scope seemed quite extensive,

[1:54:11] but no formal word on what the heck is going on with that now that we are almost

[1:54:16] going on with that now that we are almost 2

[1:54:16] months in from when this body proposed sending it to the Commission.

[1:54:20] There were 6 infrastructure systems mentioned in that: electrical, water,

[1:54:24] wastewater, stormwater, transportation, other public stuff.

[1:54:28] 6 separate domains which require technical expertise.

[1:54:31] It also has in it mentioned 12 environmental and operational categories:

[1:54:35] environmental and operational categories: noise,

[1:54:35] sound, heat, Odors, hazardous waste disposal, fire safety setbacks, buffers,

[1:54:40] disposal, fire safety setbacks, buffers, blah,

[1:54:40] blah, blah. Okay. That's also stuff that requires a lot of expertise to dig into,

[1:54:45] plus all the zoning and regulatory work, appropriate districts,

[1:54:48] all of that kind of stuff.

[1:54:50] Compounding all of that is that the moratorium itself defined data centers

[1:54:54] moratorium itself defined data centers very

[1:54:54] broadly into like 9 separate bullets in it, which means, guess what?

[1:54:58] And me as a resident,

[1:54:59] and me and most of these folks would be expecting that any study that comes out of

[1:55:04] this addresses all of those environmental factors,

[1:55:07] all of those infrastructure factors within the context of each of those bulleted

[1:55:12] definitions of data center.

[1:55:13] Because each one has a different kind of impact to Murray County.

[1:55:17] And so my question is, where is it?

[1:55:19] How far along are we in creating a framework on doing this?

[1:55:22] I emailed this body last week.

[1:55:24] Robert responded that so far there's nothing determined on how that's going to

[1:55:29] nothing determined on how that's going to take—

[1:55:29] how it's going to happen. Has that changed? Is it documented?

[1:55:33] Does it itemize all the infrastructure systems, all the 12 environmental impacts,

[1:55:37] all of the other stuff? Who's participating?

[1:55:40] Or as they say, who's going to be at the table?

[1:55:43] We need technical folks, but the moratorium also mentions citizens,

[1:55:46] moratorium also mentions citizens, residents,

[1:55:47] and business owners as core participants. How is that going to play a role?

[1:55:51] Have you assembled a team yet?

[1:55:54] What is the—

[1:55:54] when does the framework lock in? How do we know that?

[1:55:57] Who's going to get to see When's the study going to begin?

[1:56:00] Like, there is a metric ton of work for this that y'all have set yourselves up for

[1:56:04] that we as residents are expecting to see.

[1:56:06] So I'm not sure if y'all thought about it yet,

[1:56:08] but it's imperative that somebody move forward with this and get it going.

[1:56:12] How is this all going to be shared with residents? How do we get to participate?

[1:56:16] How do we get to hear how it's going?

[1:56:18] Does the framework— is it going to reference everything in the moratorium,

[1:56:22] which Which I would expect. I'm concerned we're already behind.

[1:56:25] Like, this should already have been planned.

[1:56:27] When y'all crafted the moratorium recommendation to go to the commission,

[1:56:31] you already should have been formatting a plan and a framework for this.

[1:56:34] So if we haven't— don't have a framework, we're behind.

[1:56:37] And if you haven't started, I'd say we're behind,

[1:56:40] because there's a lot of work to get this done.

[1:56:42] So honestly, what I'd love from y'all is like, we'd love to hear like,

[1:56:45] what are the dates? When are things happening?

[1:56:48] When are we going to see a framework, a strategy, a plan for this study?

[1:56:51] Who's going to be involved? We need to know that. And so that's my request from

[1:56:55] know that. And so that's my request from you.

[1:56:56] Thank you, sir.

[1:56:59] Thank you. My name is Don Barnett. I live on— at 2632 Double Branch.

[1:57:05] I'm speaking about development in Double Branch because the The Double Branch

[1:57:11] developer is the same developer working on the Ridgeline project.

[1:57:17] I realize the Ridgeline project is kind of off track now,

[1:57:21] but I still think our experience is relevant,

[1:57:25] as I am sure the Ridgeline project will be back.

[1:57:29] So I'm just— just a little bit, be less than 3—

[1:57:33] much less than 3 minutes on our experience on Double Branch.

[1:57:38] This developer put 16 new driveways On a half-mile stretch of a steep hill on

[1:57:45] half-mile stretch of a steep hill on Double

[1:57:45] Branch Road, a narrow tar and chip road. That's part of a 23-home project.

[1:57:52] About less than half are underway now as far as builds go.

[1:57:56] But 16 new driveways, which I have a picture of here,

[1:58:01] which I have one for everybody. You can get it later.

[1:58:05] I realize it's not as relevant as it was before.

[1:58:09] One of the driveways has to be seen to be believed.

[1:58:14] It is not 10 feet from the top of a ridge,

[1:58:17] affording no view of what is coming over the hill.

[1:58:21] I stood there and watched a 13-foot 18-wheeler come by, and yes, I could,

[1:58:28] I could see the roof of the 18-wheeler and A little bit before I saw the 18-wheeler

[1:58:34] itself. But that's the kind of driveway, like I said, 10 feet from a blind ridge.

[1:58:41] It's possible they don't plan on using it. I don't know.

[1:58:46] But off of that driveway are 2 home sites, which brings up another issue.

[1:58:52] The developer, when originally came into this area, showed plans for large lots,

[1:58:59] 5 acres and higher.

[1:59:00] Yes.

[1:59:02] According to neighbors,

[1:59:03] verbal promises were made to potential buyers about estate lots, mini farms—

[1:59:08] meaning miniature farms, not, not, not many—

[1:59:11] mini farms with deed restrictions to guarantee this outcome.

[1:59:15] This has not turned out to be the case.

[1:59:17] Among the new lots, again, on our—

[1:59:20] I'm talking about like just a half mile where there are 16 new driveways.

[1:59:24] Uh, there are 4 drive— 4 lots that are less than 5 acres,

[1:59:28] 2 lots that are less than 3.

[1:59:30] And do we— are we sure there won't be further subdivision of these larger lots,

[1:59:35] yet more cars on this very narrow road?

[1:59:38] I realize the developer may have gotten case-by-case Planning Commission waivers

[1:59:43] case-by-case Planning Commission waivers for

[1:59:43] the smaller lots, but the development was never considered as a subdivision,

[1:59:48] which could have triggered a more comprehensive study of overall impact.

[1:59:53] After all, in state documents, it is named Blackberry Meadows Subdivision.

[1:59:57] That's what they call it.

[1:59:59] And they even have an East Subdivision and a West Subdivision.

[2:00:03] Verbal promises, again, made about what's— what's— what the size.

[2:00:07] Okay, verbal promises about water availability when there was no water

[2:00:12] availability when there was no water there.

[2:00:12] Some had to move in without water. Their water was hooked up later.

[2:00:16] Um, I believe if it had been considered as a subdivision,

[2:00:20] water would have been proactively confirmed rather than reactively reacting

[2:00:25] confirmed rather than reactively reacting to facts

[2:00:26] on the ground. At any rate, I'm looking at this as a resident and a layman.

[2:00:30] I'm not pretending to be an expert in everything,

[2:00:34] and I do understand there's an incredible amount of expertise that goes into what

[2:00:39] you do. But I do think this is a— this is one developer who needs guidance.

[2:00:44] Thank you.

[2:00:44] especially if we want to protect future home purchasers from fraudsters. Thank

[2:00:49] home purchasers from fraudsters. Thank you.

[2:00:49] Thank you, sir. Scott.

[2:00:55] Scott Sumner, District 5.

[2:00:57] I wasn't planning on speaking this evening, but I feel like I need to.

[2:01:03] I feel, I feel like every development, residential, commercial,

[2:01:09] should go through the Planning Commission. Every one of them.

[2:01:14] I believe there's a state law. It's not a loophole, right?

[2:01:19] It's state law that allows certain,

[2:01:22] certain developments to not have to go through the Planning Commission.

[2:01:28] So I feel like everything should go through the Planning Commission.

[2:01:34] And I hope that you guys,

[2:01:36] and I want you guys and the county commission to try to work on something to

[2:01:43] commission to try to work on something to send to

[2:01:43] our state legislatures to try to get them to see what we've been through here.

[2:01:50] Like District 5, District 9, no, 8, 9?

[2:01:54] 9.

[2:01:54] 9. Those are, I mean, I've had a lot of calls about Double Branch Road.

[2:01:59] My constituents out there, they're going through it,

[2:02:03] and it's unbelievable what they've gone through.

[2:02:06] The folks that have lived there,

[2:02:08] the folks that have moved into their new homes without water or not being able to

[2:02:14] move into their homes without being able to get water.

[2:02:17] We finally got them water on a temporary water line, not the new water line.

[2:02:23] But I would like to see you guys Work with the county commission on trying to fix

[2:02:28] that state law that would allow everything to go through the planning commission.

[2:02:34] That way, that way everything is scrutinized by someone— or not someone,

[2:02:39] but somebody, a body, a planning commission, a county commission.

[2:02:43] So I would hope maybe Robert can get something going with that,

[2:02:47] with what the state law is.

[2:02:49] I don't know what the TCA code is,

[2:02:51] but But there is TCA code out there that does allow this to happen.

[2:02:56] And I would hope that you guys would potentially send us something that we

[2:03:01] potentially send us something that we could

[2:03:01] send to our state reps and they could try to get something going and get that

[2:03:07] amended.

[2:03:07] Thank you. Thank you,

[2:03:11] Scott. Anyone else?

[2:03:15] Please.

[2:03:22] Everyone, Chris Gramling, um, from District 9.

[2:03:25] Another thing that you should be aware of regarding this developer,

[2:03:30] they also own a real— a realty. It's called Wild Olive Realty.

[2:03:33] Most of their transactions we've seen go through that when they buy land.

[2:03:38] Well, uh, their broker in charge has been warned by the Real Estate Commission,

[2:03:43] and you can look this up on the, on the, the commerce site,

[2:03:47] warned over their affiliates' advertising claims.

[2:03:50] Black— Sam Blackmon, Troy Blackmon's son himself, has been—

[2:03:54] I don't know what the word— I think he has a fine or he's got a strike.

[2:03:59] You can see it on there.

[2:04:00] And then at the fire station thing out in Santa Fe that I think many of you know,

[2:04:05] they uncharacteristically used a different real estate agent as their buyer.

[2:04:10] And to me, it felt like they were trying to do this as if they were a straw buyer.

[2:04:15] I know the seller's agent,

[2:04:17] and the seller's agent does not approve of breaking up farms.

[2:04:21] When they bought it,

[2:04:22] they used a company called FM Provisions and another one called Provisions Living

[2:04:27] Trust, which would seem innocuous. They're not Wild Olive Realty.

[2:04:32] They're not Blackman. They're none of Double Branch Partners Seagrove.

[2:04:36] They're none of that.

[2:04:37] Well, that guy just had his license suspended on July 29th,

[2:04:41] and I have proof of that.

[2:04:43] So that's what we're dealing with,

[2:04:45] and that's why I say please look behind the curtain. The Wizard of Oz is

[2:04:50] the curtain. The Wizard of Oz is operating.

[2:04:50] We got to pull the curtain back.

[2:04:52] Thank you. Thank you, sir.

[2:04:55] We have anybody else that would like to speak during our open comment

[2:05:02] period? Okay. Mr. Delk, you've got the floor.

[2:05:06] I found some reports on where we are on a comprehensive plan on each item,

[2:05:11] and I appreciate it.

[2:05:12] Okay.

[2:05:20] He don't mind.

[2:05:30] Anybody else have it? Debbie, you have the floor.

[2:05:32] Move to adjourn. Second.

[2:05:33] All right. Everyone in— all in favor say aye.

[2:05:36] Aye.

[2:05:36] Those opposed? Motion carries. Motion— meeting is adjourned.

Regular Meeting

Transcript