[0:10] So these agendas didn't get reprinted then?

[0:13] Correct.

[0:13] Okay, that's fine. We need to save money on paper. All right, are we good?

[0:19] All right. All right, good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

[0:23] I want to welcome everybody to the September meeting of the Comprehensive

[0:28] September meeting of the Comprehensive Land Use

[0:29] Advisory Committee. Let the record show that we do have a quorum.

[0:34] It was in our rules that we had 7, and with Mr.

[0:37] Vrailas showing up, we now have 8, so that issue is well taken care of.

[0:43] The next order of business is the prayer and pledge,

[0:46] and I've asked the Honorable Greg Combs I'd like to ask our new county

[0:52] I'd like to ask our new county commissioner

[0:53] if he would lead us in a prayer.

[0:55] So if you'd come on up and do that, we'll, we'll do that.

[0:59] And you don't have to stand if you don't want to.

[1:03] Pray in whatever position is comfortable for you to pray.

[1:07] It's up, you know, you do as you wish. Please uncover.

[1:11] Heavenly Father, Lord, we love who you are and we love what you stand for,

[1:17] and we're so grateful that we live in a nation that you've given us freedom

[1:22] nation that you've given us freedom Freedom

[1:23] not to just do what we want, but freedom to respect others,

[1:27] to follow your holy word, to be respectful, to give grace.

[1:32] Father, we just operate by the order that you've given our footsteps.

[1:37] Lord, we thank you for this time tonight where we're able to gather and discuss

[1:43] these topics that are important to us.

[1:46] Thank you for all the folks that made it here tonight safely,

[1:50] and we ask that you As well get us home safely again.

[1:54] We ask a special blessing over our troops in foreign lands,

[1:58] all branches of the military.

[2:01] Father, we ask that you bless our police and fire and all those first responders

[2:07] that take care of us when we need them most. Lord, we thank you and we're

[2:12] most. Lord, we thank you and we're grateful.

[2:13] Amen.

[2:13] For your love, your provision, we pray your favor and protection around all of

[2:18] your favor and protection around all of us.

[2:18] In Jesus' name we pray, amen. Amen.

[2:20] All right, now I'll lead us in a pledge to the flag. Please join me.

[2:24] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the

[2:29] United States of America and to the Republic

[2:29] for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible,

[2:33] with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, everyone. Please be seated.

[2:37] All right, next item on the agenda is our public comment period,

[2:41] but before we do that, I'm going to make a couple of comments.

[2:45] Um, last month's meeting, we were in the weeds.

[2:48] We were in the weeds a lot, and so this month with comment period,

[2:52] we allowed people to speak during the meeting, um, that were not on the

[2:56] meeting, um, that were not on the committee,

[2:57] and we're not going to do that this month.

[2:59] We have a public comment period per our bylaws at the beginning of the meeting,

[3:04] bylaws at the beginning of the meeting, uh,

[3:04] 3 minutes apiece, up to 30 minutes, and at the end of the meeting,

[3:08] 3 minutes up to 30 minutes, you know, for, uh, whoever wants to speak.

[3:13] Uh, there's a sign-up sheet in the back,

[3:15] and I hope that anyone wants to speak has done that.

[3:18] Um, I also want to just remind everybody, committee members as well as the public,

[3:23] that we are an advisory committee. We are not making decisions.

[3:27] Okay.

[3:28] We are looking at what's done here.

[3:31] We have a We have a planner here that's helping us to put that together,

[3:36] a consultant, and they're going to put that package together,

[3:40] and then that goes to the Planning Commission.

[3:43] The Planning Commission is the deciding body on that.

[3:47] So I just want to make sure that, you know, we're going to—

[3:51] we're not going to get into the weeds too much tonight.

[3:55] We're going to stay focused, and we are not a deciding body.

[3:59] So with that said, our public comment period is open. Does somebody have the

[4:05] period is open. Does somebody have the sheet?

[4:05] If they'd bring that up here to me, I would appreciate it. Thank you.

[4:10] And while he's doing that,

[4:12] I want to recognize our county commissioners and Mayor Butter here.

[4:17] We're glad to see y'all this evening,

[4:19] so thanks to you guys that were able to attend.

[4:23] Um, I'm waiting on the list to get up here. Let me go get it. Thanks, sir.

[4:28] Appreciate that. All right, so this— I'm, I'm counting this the first sheet.

[4:33] So this is the second sheet for everybody who wants to sign up and speak at the end.

[4:39] So we'll leave that back there. All right, I've got 11 people signed up.

[4:44] We have 6 people signed up to speak at 3 minutes apiece.

[4:48] That's going to run us to the limit, so we'll get going here.

[4:53] The first person signed up to speak is Pater Jensen.

[4:56] Please come to the mic, tell us your name and your district,

[5:01] and you'll have 3 minutes, sir. My name is Pater Jensen.

[5:05] I reside here in District 6 in Murray County.

[5:08] Good evening, and first of all,

[5:10] I want to sincerely thank every member of this committee for volunteering your time

[5:16] and taking on a very difficult responsibility.

[5:19] I want to thank our planner that is working on this as well,

[5:24] and I'm proud to see such a diverse group of people representing different parts of

[5:29] Murray County on this committee, bringing different perspectives to this process.

[5:35] I believe that diversity is exactly what we need for this plan for the future.

[5:41] And it's your job ultimately to design and drive a plan for the next 20 to 30 years.

[5:47] It cannot be retroactive. It cannot be looking backwards.

[5:51] It needs to be looking forwards.

[5:53] Please make sure you keep that in mind as you're on this committee.

[5:58] My biggest concern is that we don't lose sight of what the purpose of a

[6:03] comprehensive plan should be.

[6:05] To me, there should be a 20 to 30 year vision for how Murray County can grow

[6:10] responsibly, not simply a plan for putting more restrictions on our property owners

[6:16] today. And before we make major changes,

[6:19] we must accurately show what Murray County looks like today.

[6:23] I would like to see a GIS-based plan that is extremely detailed. It is now 2026.

[6:29] All of these tools are at our hands.

[6:32] I want to be able to zoom in all the way down to the street level to see the homes,

[6:37] the businesses, the subdivisions, agricultural areas, existing

[6:42] agricultural areas, existing infrastructure,

[6:43] and communities that are already here.

[6:46] If a neighborhood was approved and built years ago,

[6:49] that needs to be reflected on this plan.

[6:52] If a subdivision has been approved to come in the future,

[6:56] that needs to be reflected on this plan.

[6:59] If a business has been operating and serving this community for decades,

[7:04] that needs to be reflected.

[7:06] Our future plan should not inadvertently change what already exists.

[7:11] And if someone owns a parcel that's, say, less than 5 acres today,

[7:16] I don't believe that property owner should suddenly be penalized because we decide

[7:21] to change the rules for future development.

[7:24] We need to be extremely specific in how we program these changes.

[7:29] I also believe that we need to think creatively about our small rural

[7:34] creatively about our small rural communities

[7:35] and think about how they were many years ago.

[7:38] See places like Theta, Santa Fe, Culebra, the village of Hampshire and Williamsport,

[7:44] and Bethel. Let's allow these communities to have appropriate village-style living.

[7:50] Let's encourage the small businesses that make these places unique.

[7:55] Businesses like the Santa Fe Diner, Carter's Creek Antiques.

[7:59] They're not just businesses,

[8:01] they're locally owned livelihoods and part of what makes these communities work.

[8:07] In fact, the first map I saw last month didn't even include— I got to cut you off,

[8:12] Peter. That was your 3 minutes. Thank you, brother.

[8:16] Because I got, I got some— if it was just a couple people, I'd do it,

[8:21] but we got that many. We got a bunch.

[8:24] We got 3 more minutes at the end, so pick up where you left off, sign in.

[8:29] All right, next one up is going to be Jim Baker.

[8:32] Come on up and state your name and your district where you live at here in Murray

[8:38] County, and you'll have 3 minutes, sir. I'm Baker.

[8:41] I live at, uh, 7016 Old Zion Road, and I don't really know what district I'm in.

[8:47] All right, well, go ahead. You got 3 minutes, sir.

[8:51] Okay, uh, I want to talk from an agricultural Point of view.

[8:55] I was in the John Deere business here for over 40 years,

[8:59] and I knew a lot of farmers, almost all of them in the county.

[9:03] And farmers worked hard, they paid for their land,

[9:07] and when they got to retirement age, most of them, all they had was a farm.

[9:12] Didn't have any CDs or—

[9:14] Okay.

[9:15] Didn't have any CDs or certificates of deposit, but they had their land.

[9:23] If we impose this, this 5-acre limitation,

[9:27] you're taking away some of their livelihood.

[9:32] They use their land as their 401.

[9:35] With this rule, a lot of that land,

[9:39] you're going to devalue it probably anywhere from 50 to maybe 35, 40%.

[9:46] I agree.

[9:48] You're taking money out of their 401. Most of you probably have a 401.

[9:52] If somebody came in and said, well, we're going to change the rules,

[9:56] 30% of your 401 disappeared, I think you'd be upset.

[9:59] So I'm looking at this from their point of view and what they—

[10:03] what they were going to do with it. I think it's a good idea.

[10:07] Not everybody, or not all the farmers in this community are going to sell their

[10:12] this community are going to sell their land

[10:12] or develop their land, but a lot of it will be. We can look at Williamson County.

[10:17] I used to have customers all over that county.

[10:20] Today all of those farms are covered up in houses.

[10:23] So at some point, 20, 30 years down the road,

[10:25] there will be a lot of land in this county that right now you say, well,

[10:30] that will never be developed. But it probably will be if growth continues.

[10:34] So that's the perspective that I had on this. Appreciate your time and attention.

[10:39] I appreciate your work on this project. Thank you, sir.

[10:42] We appreciate that very much. You still had a minute left. Good job. Okay.

[10:47] Let's see here. Reset. Clear. And the next person I've got up is Seth Howell.

[10:52] Come on up. Please state your name, the district you live in.

[10:55] And sir, you will have 3 minutes as well. Seth Howell. I live in District 9.

[11:00] I'm a resident of Columbia. I've lived in Middle Tennessee my whole life.

[11:04] My wife— I grew up in Murfreesboro.

[11:06] My wife is from Columbia, and we chose to raise our 4 kids here in Maury County.

[11:11] Professionally, I'm a local homebuilder.

[11:14] My company builds around 10 homes per year in Maury County.

[11:17] As a local resident and a local builder,

[11:20] I have no desire to see more national production homebuilder neighborhoods such

[11:24] production homebuilder neighborhoods such as

[11:24] Drumright off the side of Highway 31.

[11:27] But those are in city limits and they're not within the jurisdiction of the county.

[11:32] That must be solved in the city limits jurisdictions.

[11:35] This proposed land use change does nothing to stop those national homebuilders

[11:40] because they don't have any interest in building in the county on 1-acre lots.

[11:44] But it does hurt local builders such as myself and the families that we work for

[11:49] myself and the families that we work for who

[11:49] are looking for an alternative to these production homebuilder neighborhoods.

[11:54] I want to clearly distinguish there's a big difference between the local builders

[11:59] and the national guys. I live here, I work here, and I build here.

[12:03] I reinvest in this community.

[12:05] In addition to homebuilding,

[12:06] I've recently restored a 139-year-old building in downtown Columbia.

[12:10] I coach and sponsor sports teams. I'm involved in our local church.

[12:15] donate to local charities.

[12:16] I'm invested in this community where the big guys are not.

[12:20] My company specifically works on 1-acre lot subdivisions so that we can provide a

[12:25] better alternative to what the national guys are offering.

[12:28] Our main development is the Estates at Prince Farms, located off Mooresville

[12:33] Prince Farms, located off Mooresville Pike,

[12:33] uh, by— just past the bowling alley.

[12:35] If you have not driven through a 1-acre subdivision recently,

[12:39] I encourage you to do so and see what a 1-acre subdivision looks like,

[12:43] because we build a beautiful product and, uh,

[12:46] I'd love for you to have a chance to see it.

[12:48] I've sold 21 homes to 21 families in this development in the last 2 and a half

[12:53] years. The first home I built in there was for a widow who lived on 100 acres in

[12:58] Murray County. Her husband unfortunately passed away and she was not able to take

[13:03] care of that farm anymore.

[13:04] She did not want to be forced into a quarter-acre lot from a national

[13:09] quarter-acre lot from a national homebuilder.

[13:09] She did not want the upkeep of a 5-acre lot.

[13:12] So she chose to build with us on a 1-acre lot.

[13:15] We have various other families who are young professionals,

[13:18] young families with children. I've got empty nesters.

[13:22] I've got several other widows in addition to her.

[13:24] Their story is that they wanted a space to not be on top of their neighbors.

[13:29] They, most of them actually looked at 5-acre lots and decided it was too much

[13:34] 5-acre lots and decided it was too much upkeep

[13:34] for them. They decided that they would rather spend their nights and weekends at

[13:39] baseball, soccer games with their kids and grandkids, at recitals, at concerts,

[13:44] at church and other fun events, spend time traveling,

[13:47] making memories with their families. And when they saw what a 5-acre—

[13:51] What?

[13:52] parcel did. They did not want the maintenance that that required.

[13:56] 5 acres can be great,

[13:57] but I've got 21 families that I've worked with directly who decided that 5 acres was

[14:03] not for them. They wanted a 1-acre lot. That was what was for them.

[14:07] If people want larger lots, that's great. They have that right and that choice.

[14:12] I just ask that we don't take away the choice from the 21 families that I've

[14:17] choice from the 21 families that I've worked

[14:18] with to live on a 1-acre lot. On the money. All right, good job. Good job.

[14:23] Okay guys, uh, next one up is going to be Dave Townsend. Come on up.

[14:27] You're the next contestant, sir.

[14:29] Tell us your name and your district and we'll give you 3 minutes.

[14:33] Hi, I'm Dave Townsend. I'm in District 6, 2354 Harlan Road, Columbia.

[14:38] I was here last time and there were some things I wanted to readdress because I

[14:43] think they're really important.

[14:45] First off, I lived for 17 years in Oaklake Estates, which is a 1-acre Subdivision.

[14:51] Everybody has those in that neighborhood.

[14:53] It's— few lots are a little bit larger than others.

[14:57] We were on a little cul-de-sac, and at one point while we were living there,

[15:02] there were 13 children who played together on that little cul-de-sac of about 4 or 5

[15:07] homes. That's what you get with a 1-acre development. You get families.

[15:12] You get people in that neighborhood who care about each other,

[15:16] who hang out with each other. That is what Murray County needs for culture.

[15:21] We need people who care about the other person who's next to you.

[15:25] 5-acre lots are great too. I'm now on 7 acres, so I've seen both perspectives.

[15:30] We don't see our neighbors hardly at all at this point.

[15:34] Sometimes that's a good thing.

[15:36] Maybe you don't like your neighbors,

[15:38] but other times maybe you do want to hang out with them a little bit more,

[15:43] get to know them better. 1-acre lots are about perfect for that.

[15:47] I'm also a real estate agent,

[15:49] and I have taken people out to properties They'll look at a 5-acre lot and say,

[15:54] this is just too much.

[15:55] Sometimes they'll look at a 1-acre lot and say, you know,

[15:59] I need a little bit more than that. You've got to have some sort of flexibility.

[16:04] The 1-acre option is really the maximum flexibility that you can have.

[16:09] I spoke a lot last time about the terrain, the soil conditions.

[16:13] Those are really, really important to consider because if we don't look at

[16:18] consider because if we don't look at those,

[16:18] you're going to make limitations that you didn't intend.

[16:22] There'll be unintended consequences of making 5-acre lot minimums.

[16:26] The economics are another thing that I'm really concerned about.

[16:31] Right now, home affordability is hard for first-time buyers. Okay?

[16:35] A first-time buyer home right now is probably in the $400,000 range,

[16:39] which is crazy to me.

[16:41] If you go to a 5-acre lot minimum,

[16:43] You are pushing your home prices on those lots to being upwards of $1 million,

[16:48] probably more like $1.5 million.

[16:50] And those are not going to be local Murray County people buying those in most cases.

[16:56] They're going to be people from out of state, California,

[16:59] other areas who have the money because they've sold really high-end properties

[17:04] they've sold really high-end properties and

[17:05] moved over this direction.

[17:06] So what you would do with a 5-acre lot would limit Murray County people from that

[17:12] step-up level of home where they're coming from the starter home,

[17:16] moving up into the middle area where maybe they want a little bit more space to

[17:21] garden, have a pool, whatever it might be.

[17:24] So I really, really want to put some emphasis on that,

[17:27] that a 1-acre lot is much better for the people of Murray County than a 5-acre

[17:32] space. What you get with 5 acres is a lot of sprawl. You'll have people spread out.

[17:38] And you'll— you won't end up with agriculture on those 5-acre lots.

[17:42] You'll end up with a person who builds 3 different buildings,

[17:46] a garage for 6 different cars, lots of things like that. So here's my time.

[17:51] Thank you, sir. All right, let's see here. No.

[17:54] All right, next person up is Damian Prince. All right, thank you for that,

[17:59] Prince. All right, thank you for that, sir.

[17:59] We appreciate you. Next person up is, um, Court Pugh. C-O-U-R-T.

[18:03] Is that— did I say that right? Come on up, sir.

[18:07] Tell us your name, your district, and we'll give you 3 minutes. Thank you.

[18:11] I'm Court Pugh, 8035 Dry Creek Road, District 10.

[18:15] I want to thank y'all for spending y'all's time in this endeavor to help mold the

[18:20] vision for Marion County.

[18:22] I come to you tonight as a landowner, a business owner,

[18:25] and a father of young men that hopefully soon one of these days will move out of my

[18:31] house and not live in my basement for the rest of my life.

[18:34] And I hope they move and live locally.

[18:37] I purchased some land in southern Marion County where I live,

[18:41] and with anticipations that maybe I could split off some property in the future to

[18:46] be able to give my kids a place to to build or live.

[18:50] But in anticipation that this may be considered a 5-acre minimum in the future,

[18:55] you limit my availability,

[18:56] my rights as a property owner to be able to split my property off and provide for

[19:02] to split my property off and provide for my

[19:02] kids maybe, or to split it off and just sell it for money myself if I wanted to.

[19:07] And it shouldn't be the landowner's responsibility or the—

[19:11] for the blanket county just to be Forced into that 5-acre rule.

[19:15] The, the landowner should be able to keep what he has when he purchased it, and,

[19:20] and if he wants to put it in a more restrictive regulation, he could do so.

[19:25] But I shouldn't be forced to put my property into a more restrictive, uh,

[19:30] than what I— when I purchased it. Um, and I hear a lot about urban sprawl.

[19:35] I'm a land surveyor. Uh, I talk to people daily. Thank you.

[19:39] And I see it, and I see a lot of people talk about it, but a lot, you know,

[19:44] I look at the tax maps daily, multiple times a day,

[19:47] and I see the majority of it in the maps that y'all have created.

[19:51] You'll see there are very large parcels along the highways.

[19:55] There's, you know, 1 to 5 acre lots up and down them.

[19:59] But for the most part, outside that, you're very large farms,

[20:03] very large timberlands.

[20:04] But the density that everybody keeps pointing at seems to be on the outskirts

[20:09] pointing at seems to be on the outskirts of the

[20:09] city limits. of these large home builders.

[20:12] But one thing I will point out about the dense populated home builder developments

[20:18] that are in the city, if it's not for those, the demands here,

[20:22] people are going to move to the city or county either way.

[20:25] If it wasn't for those dense populated areas,

[20:28] those same people are going to disperse into the county and it would spread out

[20:34] into the county and it would spread out even

[20:34] more than what we've got now.

[20:36] So Uh, and as a small, uh, business owner, like I said, land surveyor,

[20:40] I talked to grandfathers, mothers, uh,

[20:43] fathers that want to split off a piece of property for their kids,

[20:47] and you have to tell them about the regulations,

[20:50] and they already feel burdened by the things that are going on now.

[20:55] And if we throw them into this 5-acre rule, uh, you're gonna see a lot of land—

[21:00] landowners and taxpayers that are gonna be burdened a great deal more than to be

[21:05] asked to rezone. And I'm not even sure they'd be able to rezone it if,

[21:10] if that's available in the future.

[21:12] But, uh, I'm all for small, small amounts of regulation to prevent—

[21:16] to protect the welfare of our communities. But I'm even more for freedom.

[21:21] And I may not always like what someone does on their land,

[21:25] but I'll fight every day for them because we still got freedom in this country,

[21:30] and freedom should stand for something. Thank you, sir. We appreciate you very

[21:35] Thank you, sir. We appreciate you very much.

[21:35] Well, All right, next person up, Mr. Randall Shaw. Good evening, sir.

[21:40] Tell us your name and your district, and you'll have 3 minutes as well.

[21:45] Randall Shaw, 113 Nashville Highway. I think that's District 1.

[21:49] I believe you're right. I've been a local developer-builder here for over 30 years.

[21:54] We employ approximately 100 people.

[21:56] And we have done that successfully, like I said, for about 30 years.

[22:01] We operate exclusively in 1 acre or less. Right now everything we do is 1 acre.

[22:06] There is not a market out there, given what we do, for 5-acre tracts.

[22:11] We can't make that work.

[22:12] The cost of that and the desire of people coming in here To buy.

[22:16] And these are not people coming in here that—

[22:19] these people coming in have a lot of disposable income.

[22:23] And those, if you're going to add to this county,

[22:26] you have to have that mix of people too that want to spend money at your local

[22:31] businesses and keep them in force also.

[22:34] But if we go to 5-acre tracts and we do away with the 1-acre tracts,

[22:38] you're effectively putting us out of business.

[22:41] You know, there's a—

[22:42] there's 100 people right there that are not going to have jobs that are local,

[22:48] that are local, spend money locally every day.

[22:51] The problems that we're having in this county right now,

[22:54] the perceived problems that we have, come from the city.

[22:58] They don't come from the county.

[23:00] In the county last year, there were about 200 permits pulled.

[23:04] 32 of those came out of county subdivisions. 21 of them were us.

[23:08] So those other permits were either individuals pulling their own permit to

[23:13] individuals pulling their own permit to build

[23:13] their house or a contractor pulling a permit for an individual to build a house.

[23:19] Now, the majority of those are not on 5 acres.

[23:22] Yeah.

[23:24] People coming in here do not want 5 acres. An acre.

[23:27] If you show them what 5 acres look like, they go into conniption.

[23:31] You know, they— and when they look,

[23:34] you know how many people we have look at an acre of ground and say, how big is

[23:39] an acre of ground and say, how big is this?

[23:39] You know, those same 1-acre buyers came looking for 5, but they couldn't afford

[23:44] looking for 5, but they couldn't afford it,

[23:44] first of all. Then they had to start looking at what they could actually

[23:49] looking at what they could actually maintain.

[23:49] So the problem is, is not in the county.

[23:52] You have enough legislation already to control growth in the county.

[23:56] And I know the overwhelming sentiment is they don't want Culeoaka to look like

[24:01] Neapolis. That's not going to happen.

[24:04] These big box boys operate where there's infrastructure.

[24:07] There's not infrastructure out there,

[24:10] and there's never going to be infrastructure out there.

[24:13] You've also taken that issue away when you took away half-acre lots.

[24:18] Just for kicks, how many people live on more than 5 acres?

[24:22] Okay, I think that's pretty representative of what the public is saying also.

[24:27] Thank you, sir. Appreciate you. And next person, I apologize with the name here.

[24:32] Is it Branda? Brenda? Okay, okay, come on up. You're next. You good?

[24:36] I know my handwriting is terrible. That's all right, friend.

[24:40] All right, give us your name and you'll have 3 minutes, sir. Uh, Brandon Frierson.

[24:45] Uh, I live on 1036 Peyton Place here in Columbia, um, District 9.

[24:50] Um, I will share that sentiment from the Prince family and from Seth.

[24:54] Uh, I come from a family— I've lived here 41 years.

[24:57] I come from my first house me and the wife built was Old South.

[25:01] It was a tract build. You had a quarter-acre lot.

[25:05] Me and the wife wanted something bigger.

[25:07] We needed something a little bit better, but we didn't want 5 acres.

[25:12] And so, Seth, I've talked to Sam and talked with his wife about what they

[25:16] talked with his wife about what they built,

[25:17] but Seth offered a product, 1 acre. It's perfect for us.

[25:20] I'm not trying to be a farmer.

[25:22] If it was on a 5-acre tract, we probably wouldn't be able to build that house.

[25:27] But what Seth has done in Prince Farms has been wonderful for us.

[25:31] We've been able to We've been able to bring in my mother, you know, whose

[25:36] bring in my mother, you know, whose ailment—

[25:37] she has dementia and diabetes. We take care of her.

[25:40] We've been able to put in a pool.

[25:42] We've been able to raise our— raise the rest of our family.

[25:46] My oldest daughter is 22 years old. She's graduated college at MTSU.

[25:50] Our youngest daughter is 14, 15, goes to Columbia Academy.

[25:54] So we've been able to build what we call our retirement home.

[25:58] That would not have been possible without the ability to buy a 1-acre lot,

[26:03] because coming from somebody— I used to pay somebody to cut my grass.

[26:07] Right.

[26:08] But now I want to go out. I actually enjoy cutting my own grass.

[26:12] I got a zero-turn lawnmower and done all the things that, you know,

[26:16] that a dad would like to do with their yard.

[26:19] But at the end of the day, that's, you know, if it was 5 acres, we,

[26:23] we would have never looked at it because it's not something that would have been

[26:28] manageable for us and what I do for a living as far as taking care of my family

[26:33] living as far as taking care of my family in

[26:33] the long term. And Seth and the Prince family, you know,

[26:37] being able to sell that land to Seth and Seth being able to develop it and provide

[26:42] Seth being able to develop it and provide a

[26:42] product that It's close enough to the city, but it's right outside.

[26:46] You know, we got enough space where I can wave at my neighbor,

[26:50] but I don't actually want to talk to my neighbor.

[26:53] But I come from a— I come from Spring Hill.

[26:56] You know, we built the house back in 2014, uh, up there, and it was like that.

[27:01] Like, you could sneeze and your neighbor will hear it.

[27:04] But now I can go take out my trash, and it's close enough where we,

[27:08] where we can get together,

[27:10] but it's far enough away where I can still have my own privacy.

[27:14] So I urge you guys to really think about that and think think about the people who

[27:19] have been here, you know,

[27:21] for 41-plus years like myself and really enjoy a 1-acre lot. Now, 1 acre is

[27:26] enjoy a 1-acre lot. Now, 1 acre is perfect.

[27:26] Now that I got 1 acre, maybe I could do 2.

[27:29] But at the end of the day,

[27:30] I think 5 will be too much for families that are trying to expand and get a

[27:35] retirement home or get a little bit more land for their,

[27:39] for their family and for themselves. I appreciate you guys. Thank you guys.

[27:43] Thank you, sir. Appreciate you very much. Get this reset. Next person up is Mr.

[27:48] Bart Watley. Come on up, friend.

[27:50] Tell us your name, your district, and you will have 3 minutes, sir.

[27:55] I gotta admit, before he starts, I'm pleased at the attendance tonight.

[27:59] It's good to see a full room tonight, so I'm glad y'all are here. Mr. Watley.

[28:04] My name is Bart Watley. I'm in District 9, Cuyahoga. I'm a builder also.

[28:09] I heard some of the builders speak and I can identify with them.

[28:13] And when I first moved to Sheepneck Road,

[28:15] I purchased 85 acres and I was able to sell 1 acre by the rules.

[28:19] And then— so what I did is— no, I sold 6 acres and that person—

[28:23] and divided up an acre off of that.

[28:25] So I was able to build 2 homes Right by my house.

[28:29] So I can identify with those builders,

[28:31] especially when you need a job coming to Tennessee and nobody knowing me.

[28:36] The problem I have with 5-acre lots is that you're going to see these driveways

[28:41] every 100 to 300 feet.

[28:42] I don't know if you do flag lots or not, but now you did— used to.

[28:46] And I hate to see that in a rural area taking up all the road frontage,

[28:51] which happens to be Most of the time seem like some of the best farmland.

[28:55] I just don't like to see that.

[28:57] Now, some— I love for somebody that wants to buy a 5-acre lot, that's great.

[29:02] But just don't make them.

[29:03] Now, on the other hand, if it's a subdivision,

[29:06] I want it to be in an area that has the infrastructure and the planning to support

[29:12] it. And above all, the consensus of the community.

[29:15] Thank you.

[29:16] That's what I would like.

[29:18] So I want to think real long and hard about the 5-acre thing because when you

[29:24] about the 5-acre thing because when you take

[29:24] a— you're wasting land like one gentleman just got through talking here.

[29:29] You're wasting land.

[29:31] Somebody don't want 5 acres, but they got to get 5 acres,

[29:35] and then they let the rest do whatever,

[29:38] and it can be some of the best farmland in Murray County.

[29:43] I think that's a good point. That's why I oppose that.

[29:47] But I'm all for somebody that wants 5 acres. That's great.

[29:51] But I just don't like to see 5 acres, flag lot, 100 feet, another 300 feet,

[29:57] and then maybe 100 feet, and just tear up a whole 1,000 feet deep or whatever farm,

[30:03] some of the best farmland in the country.

[30:06] I'd like to see it remain pastoral and And I'd like the subdivisions to be planned

[30:12] with one entrance, if that's legal, one entrance, and have real good access.

[30:18] And above all, I'd like to see that it has a consensus of the community.

[30:24] And I understand when somebody buys a place,

[30:27] they need to read the rules in the zoning. So— because I'm all for—

[30:32] Yes.

[30:33] freedom for the people to buy land.

[30:35] If they planned on putting— dividing their land up,

[30:38] then it bothers me that you got to tell them now you can't divide it up.

[30:42] So you've got your job ahead of you, try to make everybody happy.

[30:46] But I hope we preserve the pastoral effect of the rural Caleoche. Thank you.

[30:50] Thank you, Mr. Watley. All right, I'm going to reset it again.

[30:54] Uh, the next person up is Jordan Rowden. Come on up.

[30:57] And tell us your name and district, please. And you'll have 3 minutes, sir.

[31:02] Well, it's for the record. You're doing it for the record here.

[31:05] Jordan Rudden, 3900 Cambridge Court, District 9, Caleoca.

[31:09] First of all, I want to start by bringing forward that I actually—

[31:13] I think this project is a potentially amazing project that can be really

[31:17] amazing project that can be really beneficial

[31:17] for the county if it's properly run,

[31:20] if we have really good quality deliverables and objects and artifacts

[31:24] deliverables and objects and artifacts that we get.

[31:24] And of course, those things end up getting, you know,

[31:28] approved and implemented and people follow it.

[31:30] There's a really great recipe here for it to be fantastic for the county.

[31:35] To that end, I would say we're a wee bit behind the curve when it comes from a

[31:39] project management standpoint.

[31:41] I think this was originally planned to be about a 9-month project.

[31:45] I think we're past that now or right up at it.

[31:48] And we're not even past Phase 2, I don't believe.

[31:51] And we're now up against a building moratorium that is kind That is basically

[31:55] moratorium that is kind That is basically ending

[31:56] in October. So I'm not pointing fingers.

[31:58] I'm just curious what can this group do with the help of the consulting firm to

[32:03] with the help of the consulting firm to help

[32:03] make sure this gets back on track and finished over the edge in a timely way

[32:07] finished over the edge in a timely way with

[32:08] quality? Second, I'd be curious what controls can be put in place between y'all

[32:12] controls can be put in place between y'all and

[32:12] the consulting firm to make sure that the deliverables that are contracted for with

[32:17] the consulting firm are of high quality?

[32:20] There are some quality concerns in the Phase 1 summary, all right,

[32:24] that do beg the question, first of all, did anybody actually read it,

[32:28] or did it just get tossed up on the website?

[32:30] But really, like, what do you all do to vet,

[32:33] or what does somebody do to vet what comes and gets delivered contractually to make

[32:38] sure it meets the requirements, it's of high quality and usefulness?

[32:42] If you want more information on that, I can share it later.

[32:46] And then, like, I'm on a 1-acre lot, a little bit more.

[32:49] I live in an old established subdivision down in Culebra.

[32:52] We have the double cul-de-sacs and kids running. It's great.

[32:56] We were looking for 4 and 5 acres when we were first looking and ended up running

[33:01] into the subdivision and falling in love with the neighborhood.

[33:04] And the neighbors are phenomenal. It's quiet.

[33:07] There's like 4 LEOs in the neighborhood. It's safe.

[33:10] I probably wouldn't change it for the world. And yes, 1 acre is a lot.

[33:14] There is— there are folks I think that have—

[33:17] there's a lot of folks tonight that are like, hey, no 5-acre lots, minimums that

[33:22] like, hey, no 5-acre lots, minimums that is.

[33:22] Uh, there are also folks that probably are like,

[33:25] we would be really great if that could happen.

[33:27] There's probably some great mechanism in between there somewhere.

[33:31] Thinking outside the box,

[33:33] there might be an opportunity for dynamic zoning sizes of the, of the lots.

[33:37] The further away you get from, for example, the urban growth plan zones, uh,

[33:42] the urban growth zone things,

[33:43] that might be an approach where just the further away you get,

[33:47] the larger lot minimums get. Just think outside the box a bit.

[33:51] And again, to our, our chairman over here, no, you don't make the final decision,

[33:56] but you are deciding what gets brought before the group that gets the final

[34:00] decision. So take that seriously. I know you are, but please consider that. Thanks.

[34:05] All right, thank you, sir. We appreciate that.

[34:08] Uh, the next person up— let me get reset here— and Chris Grambling,

[34:12] you have 3 minutes. Come on up and tell us who you are, where you live, uh,

[34:16] district, and we'll give you Thank you. Chris Gramling, District 9 in Sheep Neck.

[34:21] I prepared some comments I'm going to read in a, in a second,

[34:25] but I wanted to address some things that were said before.

[34:28] First, I think that Pater is spot on,

[34:30] and I think we all know last time we were here we've got a problem with data.

[34:35] We need to get those maps, the overlays.

[34:37] I suggested that we get the We need to get the greenbelt stuff figured out somehow

[34:42] to overlay that. I agree with Peter that we need to drill in.

[34:46] And I think additionally,

[34:47] we do need to talk to the neighbors and get some feedback from the communities.

[34:52] From day one, I have said that I am not for any sort of homogenization of Maury

[34:56] County through a 5-acre minimum, a 1-acre minimum, a 100-acre minimum.

[35:01] None of that makes sense.

[35:02] I agree with you.

[35:03] As you drive around the county, each area has its own character,

[35:07] and I think we need to stick with that as a guiding principle.

[35:12] Also, I don't know Mr.

[35:14] Howell, but I've driven through his—

[35:16] through this site that he's talking about on the advice of Dave Townsend after I met

[35:22] with Dave, and I agree with them. That is a good use of that space.

[35:27] It's It's in— it's just from a location perspective, it makes sense.

[35:32] However, I would disagree with some of the other statements.

[35:37] For instance, this idea that the utilities will never get out.

[35:41] I'm in the most remote southeast part of the county in Kalioka.

[35:46] If we didn't fight tooth and nail, that developer,

[35:50] in the course of illegally subdividing land, which I can say publicly—

[35:55] Mm-hmm.

[35:56] Now, he was on his way to bring water out.

[35:58] You know, we look at— I'm not sure if Double Branch is in the county,

[36:02] but Double Branch, as of today, right now,

[36:05] they still don't have that 12-inch pipe running.

[36:08] And they hammered with a 60-some-odd thousand-pound excavator through all of

[36:13] thousand-pound excavator through all of that

[36:13] rock. So they will go to lengths to get that stuff out. Anyway, enough.

[36:18] Let me try and get through these prepared notes.

[36:21] I keep hearing agricultural preservation portrayed as an attack on property rights.

[36:26] But property rights are reciprocal.

[36:28] When I bought my farm,

[36:29] I didn't choose it based only on what was inside my fence line.

[36:33] I deliberately chose an agricultural area.

[36:36] I invested my money and my life there in reliance on the established character of

[36:41] the surrounding community. My neighbor absolutely has property rights, but so do

[36:46] absolutely has property rights, but so do I.

[36:46] If I own land upstream from you,

[36:48] my property rights don't give me an unlimited right to alter the water flowing

[36:53] unlimited right to alter the water flowing onto

[36:53] your property. and then dismiss your concerns by saying it's my land.

[36:57] We recognize that one person's use of property can profoundly affect another

[37:02] person's property. The same principle applies to land use.

[37:06] I'm going to run out of time here, so I'll pick up the rest later.

[37:10] Thank you very much. Yep. All right. Thank you. We have 2 more people signed up.

[37:15] Let me get this reset. All right. Lee, is it Borkoff? Mark Borkoff?

[37:19] I'll pass.

[37:20] You pass? All right, next person up then is Ryan Dugger.

[37:23] Ryan, come on up, give us your name, your district, and you'll have 3 minutes, sir.

[37:28] Ryan Dugger, I'm from District 6.

[37:30] I want to start off with saying that this is deeply personal to me.

[37:33] My family has been in Murray County since before Murray County was a county,

[37:38] when it was still part of Williamson County.

[37:40] I saw actually on Facebook yesterday where my 4th great-grandfather traded some I'm

[37:45] a 4th generation rancher.

[37:46] My father bought some prime agricultural land in Santa Fe for a Shetland pony.

[37:51] So my family's been here since they were making stupid land deals back then.

[37:55] Part of the statute in dealing with this requires you all to reflect the county's

[38:00] duty to manage natural resources and to manage and control urban growth,

[38:04] taking into account the impact to agricultural lands, forests, recreational

[38:08] agricultural lands, forests, recreational areas,

[38:09] and wildlife management areas.

[38:10] So I don't think it's important just purely to focus on random, you know,

[38:15] 5-acre lots or 1-acre lots.

[38:16] I think you also just need to factor in the wilderness or agricultural land that

[38:21] the wilderness or agricultural land that we

[38:21] have. I don't have a lot to say on the 5-acre minimum or 1-acre minimum,

[38:25] to be quite frank. I didn't know that was a part of this till today.

[38:29] I only learned of this meeting today.

[38:31] But I would say if you adopt a 5-acre minimum, I'm certainly on board with that.

[38:35] I'm sure there's some mechanism that could be placed where we've heard most of the,

[38:40] um, we've heard from some developers,

[38:42] but we've also heard from other property owners that they would,

[38:46] if they wanted to give property to their kids,

[38:49] they wouldn't want to be stuck or locked into a 5-acre minimum.

[38:52] But I'm sure there could be some process that allows them to divest property.

[38:57] If you're divesting to someone in your family to potentially help with that.

[39:01] Um, the main thing I want to talk about is In relation to the urban growth of Santa

[39:06] Fe and this Highway 7 corridor, I think we—

[39:08] there was a post on Facebook today asking the community's thoughts on that.

[39:12] There were over 200 responses. Every single one was, no, we don't support this.

[39:17] There was not one single yes in the entire over 200 responses.

[39:20] So I think that's telling in itself.

[39:23] Historically, every time boards at the county get together,

[39:26] Throughout my entire life, there's conversations about developing Santa Fe,

[39:30] bigger subdivisions, anything like that, businesses.

[39:33] Overwhelmingly, Santa Fe unites and says absolutely not.

[39:36] So I would just ask for you to consider that, um, in making that decision as well.

[39:41] Further in supporting that, we don't have the infrastructure in Santa Fe,

[39:45] and part of it is planned infrastructure change.

[39:48] But if at this point in 2026, we can have high-speed internet through grants,

[39:52] however, um, We still don't have city water where I live in Santa Fe,

[39:56] then I don't think we need to consider that an urban growth area.

[40:00] Um, I think if there's any issues with 1-acre lots or any other issues of

[40:04] subdivisions, they have the Board of Zoning Appeals,

[40:07] which has always been an option for people who want exceptions and variances.

[40:12] They have that option to still come propose that just like before.

[40:15] I think that's a good body.

[40:17] I think that addresses most of the issues that we've heard here today.

[40:21] So I think those are, uh— All right, very good.

[40:24] All right, that was all that we had for the public comment period for before the

[40:28] meeting, so we will have another public comment period at the end of the meeting.

[40:33] I do have 3 people signed up if you want to speak up to that.

[40:36] The list was brought up to me. We'll make sure that you get added to that.

[40:40] All right, next item on the agenda is item 4.

[40:43] It's the approval of the September 24th meeting agenda.

[40:46] I need a motion to approve it.

[40:48] Before we do that, we're going to make— uh, having a Motion here to—

[40:52] we're going to remove item 5, and that was an alternate proposal by Dustin Kittle,

[40:56] and basically what has happened with that is that Mr.

[40:59] Kittle— excuse me, guys, I'm sorry— is that Mr.

[41:02] Kittle— pardon me, excuse me, sorry about that, forgive me—

[41:06] had asked to be on the agenda to make an alternate proposal,

[41:09] and after that was put on the agenda, some other persons had reached out and said,

[41:14] hey, well, why can't we do that also?

[41:16] So, we made the decision— I made the decision to pull both of them, all of

[41:20] decision to pull both of them, all of them,

[41:20] and so we're going to do that next month,

[41:23] so the agenda that you'll be approving will be minus—

[41:26] what's on your list you have in front of you will be minus Item 5,

[41:29] the proposals from Dustin Kittle. We will hear any alternate proposals next month.

[41:34] That said, I need a motion to approve. I have it from Ms. Notley.

[41:38] Do I have a second?

[41:39] Second.

[41:39] I have a second from Sam over here. Any discussion on the agenda?

[41:43] Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

[41:46] Aye.

[41:46] Any opposed? All right, that passes. Thank you for that.

[41:50] Next item on the agenda is the product update discussion,

[41:54] so we will turn the floor over to our consultants.

[41:57] Also, I want to introduce Robert here in case anybody's not met this Robert.

[42:02] Uh, Robert number 1 left, and you're Robert number 2, right?

[42:06] So you are— you got to hit the button.

[42:08] Uh, tell us, tell us 5 seconds who you are and what you're doing with the county

[42:14] right now. Hello, my name is Matthew Pfeiffer. Matthew, I said Robert.

[42:18] Robert number 2. Robert number 2.

[42:20] I am acting interim now that Robert has left,

[42:23] and I'm working to facilitate continued work at the Planning and Zoning

[42:28] work at the Planning and Zoning Department.

[42:29] Well, we're glad to have you here,

[42:31] and we're glad that you're working with Murray County, so thank you for doing

[42:36] Murray County, so thank you for doing that.

[42:36] And you're helping out with the mics as well, so we appreciate that.

[42:41] All right, uh, to our consultant. Good to see you again.

[42:44] Yeah, thanks, and glad to be back.

[42:47] Yes, ma'am. Floor is yours.

[42:49] All right. Um, hello, everybody.

[42:51] So, um, I thought it would be helpful to kind of start with just sort of a status

[42:58] update of where we're at kind of with the overall project scope.

[43:03] Um, and so this is in your packet, but I figured I'd go over it real quick.

[43:09] So, Phase 1, these were the scoped kind of tasks and deliverables.

[43:14] All of these have been finished.

[43:16] We're happy to, you know,

[43:18] look again at the engagement summary and make any edits to that.

[43:23] So, happy to do that too. For Phase 2, this is where we're currently at.

[43:29] We have These first 3 bullets are all in progress.

[43:33] So the vision statement and goals and policies,

[43:37] we're going to touch on that tonight along with the future land use map.

[43:42] And then the fiscal analysis is in process.

[43:46] Tishler Weiss is our firm that's doing that fiscal analysis,

[43:51] and the plan is for that they would be able to come to the next meeting and do

[43:57] able to come to the next meeting and do kind

[43:57] of their update.

[43:58] Okay.

[43:59] of their findings at the next meeting. So all of that is in process.

[44:04] From an engagement standpoint and meeting standpoint, we have done everything from,

[44:10] you know, a scoped meeting standpoint for this phase.

[44:14] Advisory Committee meeting 4 is tonight.

[44:17] So, you know, after this meeting, that will be completed.

[44:21] So we've kind of— we've done all the public engagement that we said we would

[44:26] public engagement that we said we would for

[44:26] Phase 2. Okay. But we do still need to wrap up those few big deliverables.

[44:32] Phase 3 will be essentially bringing it all together, drafting the plan,

[44:37] putting it all together, putting that out for public review, having, you know,

[44:43] you all review the draft plan, the public,

[44:46] and then taking it through the adoption process.

[44:49] So from a meeting standpoint, engagement standpoint,

[44:53] with Phase We have 2 more scoped advisory committee meetings.

[44:57] Currently thinking those would probably line up in mid-October,

[45:02] and then the next one, it's going to kind of depend on the order of things,

[45:07] but probably one in October, one in November.

[45:10] And then we will have one more big public engagement event.

[45:15] I'm thinking, you know, based on Yes.

[45:17] Your all's feedback, kind of when we want to have that,

[45:21] what we want that meeting to focus on,

[45:24] that can still be decided and discussed tonight.

[45:27] But this kind of rough schedule is what I was initially thinking is we would have

[45:33] kind of our next advisory committee meeting in mid-October,

[45:38] hopefully followed by that public engagement event in early November,

[45:43] with then hopefully another advisory committee meeting in November,

[45:47] but with The holidays coming on, that just complicates things.

[45:52] And so depending on how all that shakes out, we could have—

[45:56] we could be ready to have a plan adopted in December.

[46:00] But again, it just really depends on meetings.

[46:03] So if we decide that not all of this is necessary, we can speed things up.

[46:09] If we want to condense things, we can do that too.

[46:12] But I want to make sure that we had time in there for all of those.

[46:17] So from a kind of project standpoint,

[46:20] is there any questions on that or anything else that you guys have?

[46:24] All right. Hit your lights if y'all want to say something.

[46:28] Commissioner Strand, you're up. Thank you, Chair.

[46:31] It looks like we're already going— we're planning to work beyond the moratorium.

[46:36] That's a given then, huh?

[46:38] Yeah. Based on the last meeting—

[46:41] That's not an easy yeah.

[46:42] That's pretty major stuff, especially some folks in the audience, I think.

[46:46] And I mean, and again, we can move as fast as you want,

[46:50] but based on last month's decision, you know, and conversation,

[46:56] we don't have a set direction for the future land use map.

[47:00] And so then drafting a plan at this point, I can, I can put all the pieces together,

[47:07] But without you all and the community saying how you want to kind of address

[47:14] saying how you want to kind of address this

[47:14] future land use framework, we can't finish.

[47:18] I don't think there's any question that we're not going to get done before October

[47:23] 1st, regardless of how many meetings we have.

[47:26] But I'm concerned about pushing out the moratorium.

[47:29] Is it the plan to end the moratorium in October,

[47:32] or is it the plan to push the moratorium out?

[47:36] That's outside of my scope.

[47:37] That's up to the county commission. Don't sit there like you're so naive.

[47:43] Are we looking at pushing the moratorium out? She can't answer that.

[47:48] She doesn't live here.

[47:50] I can answer that. The moratorium expires of its own terms.

[47:54] So if the county commission wishes to extend it, you can, but you have to—

[47:58] You can't extend it before October 1st because it's a zoning.

[48:01] You have to follow the procedure that you do, like a zoning text amendment.

[48:06] So it would have to go to the Planning Commission for recommendation and then to

[48:10] Commission for recommendation and then to the

[48:11] County Commission with a public hearing.

[48:13] So we could get it to the Planning Commission in October, right?

[48:17] At the earliest, unless there's a special—

[48:19] Which is past the moratorium time.

[48:21] Yes, exactly.

[48:22] My point. Thank you. Is that all you have?

[48:29] Okay.

[48:29] All right. Anybody else? All right. Seeing no other lights, continue, please.

[48:32] Do you want me to just move on? So that's the project update discussion, item 6.

[48:38] So moving on to item 7. Am I good to just keep going? Go ahead, yeah. Okay.

[48:43] So item 7 on the agenda is kind of an update on the vision statement, goals,

[48:49] and policies. So these have been presented to you.

[48:52] Now, you know, we reviewed them and discussed them at a previous committee

[48:58] discussed them at a previous committee meeting.

[48:58] They went out— they were part of the second public engagement event.

[49:03] So these have been kind of presented, revised based on that public feedback.

[49:09] I wasn't aware that the revised ones that we made based on that public feedback

[49:14] hadn't been Sent around to you all.

[49:17] So we wanted to make sure that these got in front of you and you guys have time to

[49:23] review those, digest them, provide me any comments.

[49:26] So in your packets is, and on the website,

[49:29] is kind of our current draft of the vision statement and the goals and policies.

[49:35] If anybody has any comments, I'm happy to take, you know, take them.

[49:40] But I think this is the first time that you guys are seeing kind of the the most

[49:46] final version of them. Again, these are not final, final.

[49:50] Nothing's final until the plan is adopted.

[49:53] So if there are, you know, things that we want to add, change, you know,

[49:58] that is all still possible.

[50:00] This was emailed to the entire committee? The—

[50:04] all the divisions, yeah. It was part of—

[50:05] Because we got 5 of them not here tonight, so.

[50:07] Yeah, it was part of the agenda packet, and it's on the website.

[50:11] I thought I saw it, but I will make sure it comes.

[50:13] Yeah. So those, again, that's nothing new at this point,

[50:17] but I wanted to make sure that you all had the most recent copies of

[50:22] all of that.

[50:23] All right. Any questions on that, guys?

[50:27] All right.

[50:27] Seeing none, go ahead. Okay.

[50:31] So then the big, you know, our big next step and the big thing, you know,

[50:37] that we need to talk about as a group is this future land use framework.

[50:42] And so we've gone through this kind of evolution with the last public meeting and

[50:48] our last advisory committee meeting.

[50:51] And there's a lot of different directions that we can go with this,

[50:56] but I think it's probably good to just sort of start with a reminder of, you

[51:02] sort of start with a reminder of, you know,

[51:02] that your future land use map and future land use framework is a guide.

[51:07] It is a policy, you know, a guideline for the community to follow.

[51:12] Any recommendation, anything that's displayed in a future land use map does

[51:18] displayed in a future land use map does not

[51:18] change zoning. It does not change, you know, anything like that.

[51:23] But it is used then as kind of the foundation for future zoning requests and

[51:29] changes. So we want to make sure that the vision is accurately reflected.

[51:34] On this, that, you know, what the county wants to see.

[51:38] And, you know, we're—

[51:40] we've heard a lot of mixed feedback based on the public meetings and then in the

[51:46] meetings tonight of, you know, this 5-acre or 1-acre, you know.

[51:50] And this is, I think,

[51:52] really where we're going to be stuck until we can kind of figure out how you all

[51:58] want to move forward. Um, And kind of talk through that.

[52:02] So I, at the last meeting, there was requests for maps with more details,

[52:08] and we were kind of initially thinking of having kind of meetings based to talk

[52:14] about different areas.

[52:15] But with that changing, we created countywide maps,

[52:19] which then kind of reduced the amount of information we put on.

[52:24] Each map to make them visible and readable.

[52:27] And so those were all sent to you and also on the website.

[52:31] So we have maps that— let's see— floodplain, topography, the future land

[52:37] floodplain, topography, the future land use,

[52:37] the draft that we have right now, roadways, the prime farmland,

[52:42] which is based on soils, and then the existing urban growth boundaries.

[52:47] So That is the information that we have from a mapping standpoint.

[52:52] If there's any information that we want to layer on any certain property,

[52:57] I'm happy to do that.

[52:59] But we can't put all of that information on one map or else it would be unreadable

[53:05] at the county level.

[53:07] But if we go down to like parcel level, obviously then we can get more detailed,

[53:13] but we can't do that for the whole county.

[53:16] Well, I want to piggyback a little bit on what Mr. Jensen was saying earlier.

[53:20] You know, we need that GIS mapping,

[53:23] and I can say something now that I couldn't say last month.

[53:26] I'm no longer on the County Commission,

[53:29] so I'd like to encourage the County Commission, you know,

[53:32] y'all need to have the discussion about GIS mapping and the cost in doing that.

[53:37] You know, we've got it, we've got the capability, I think,

[53:41] but we have to get licensing for more layers.

[53:43] I'm not fully versed on what we actually have,

[53:46] but I think that we need to do that because We need that information, those

[53:51] because We need that information, those layers,

[53:51] and there's a complete layer here that was completely forgotten,

[53:55] and I was just reminded about it, and that's the industrial development areas,

[54:00] the I-65 corridors. What pieces of that area is going to be where we attract the

[54:05] industry to come? The 412, the Bear Creek Pike, those areas,

[54:08] and they need to be tagged, and then that's what's going to be, you know, for

[54:13] that's what's going to be, you know, for the—

[54:13] you know, I've been talking about Convention centers or commerce, you know,

[54:18] or tourism, agri-centers, things like that.

[54:21] So we need to— that needs to be a layer of that map as well.

[54:24] But we need to get that layering now.

[54:27] And I don't know what the pricing on that would be, but I would like to see the—

[54:32] Commissioner Strand, since you're on this committee,

[54:35] if you could get maybe the budget committee or some of the budget office to

[54:39] committee or some of the budget office to look

[54:40] into that and see about doing that, because we need that data.

[54:43] And, you know, and it's invaluable,

[54:46] the layers that are there that can tell you anything you want to know.

[54:50] And you don't have to have it on a piece of paper.

[54:53] You do it digitally and you peel back. It's like an onion.

[54:56] You just peel back the layers and look at what you want or stack it.

[55:01] But we definitely need to have marked those industrial areas, commerce, retail,

[55:05] what's going to go in. You know, we have no effect on the city whatsoever.

[55:10] And that's a lot of the problem that we've got is the shell shock of everybody

[55:15] looking at what happened on 31 in Neapolis and all that. And we're like, oh, wow.

[55:20] But that's the city of Columbia and we have no say whatsoever.

[55:24] Anything that happens with the county has no jurisdiction whatsoever with the city,

[55:29] but we've got areas in the county, you know, most of it is not in the city.

[55:33] And so those industrial areas along the interstate corridor, 412, you know,

[55:38] Highway 50, we need to, we need to know what they're going to be and what, what,

[55:43] what they're going to be going for the future,

[55:46] because industry is what's going to employ, you know,

[55:49] the next generations that come along. So what are we bringing in here?

[55:53] And, and maybe Travis can help with that, getting that, you know,

[55:57] find out about some GIS layers that, that information that they might have as well.

[56:02] But that's my 2 cents worth. Anybody else? Uh, let's see. Uh, James, go ahead.

[56:07] So I've had this conversation recently with, with folks about this, uh, um,

[56:12] growth boundary map, and I do agree that it needs to be refined a little tighter.

[56:17] I'm going to piggyback off what Mr. Duggar said about the Santa Fe area.

[56:21] You can see on this map that's available online,

[56:24] it's like this draft was done September 15th.

[56:27] There's a whole corridor of growth all the way up through Santa Fe that honestly

[56:32] that community, it doesn't want there.

[56:34] So we need to be mindful of the main arteries in Murray County,

[56:38] but we also need to make sure we're finding that balance of what people want.

[56:43] And, you know, I keep hearing the same keywords: agriculture, natural resources,

[56:47] the scenic, I guess, rural environment of rural Murray County.

[56:51] That's something special that cannot be ignored,

[56:54] and I hope it's not ignored through this process.

[56:57] The other thing I want to talk about a little bit,

[57:00] since we've heard a lot about it tonight, is the—

[57:03] and I guess this is the appropriate time to bring it up—

[57:07] but the whole 1-acre versus 5-acre discussion.

[57:10] That's a difficult pill to swallow, whichever side of the coin you're on.

[57:14] And I'm still a little bit struggling with the idea of the 1 versus 5 myself,

[57:19] and I want to elaborate.

[57:20] And Christy, I may call on you to elaborate on some of what Williamson

[57:25] elaborate on some of what Williamson County has

[57:25] done in the past, if you could.

[57:27] But one conversation I had this week was if we make 5-acre lots,

[57:31] we're going to have just a lot of really big yards out in Murray County that

[57:36] big yards out in Murray County that people,

[57:36] some don't take care of.

[57:38] I agree that many don't want a large acreage to take care of,

[57:41] and 5 acres is not a huge parcel of land,

[57:44] but it is a substantial amount of area to maintain.

[57:47] But on the other side of that coin, I was given the example,

[57:51] say we've got a 500-acre farm somewhere in Murray County that could potentially be

[57:56] developed down the road.

[57:57] Okay, and we've got a 1-acre— we've got the 1-acre rule in place.

[58:01] That's, that's 500 houses in theory. That's, that's 500 homes.

[58:05] That's 500 more people driving.

[58:07] Plus, you know, if it's a family unit, it's going to be more than that.

[58:11] So it's adding that much more infrastructure stress to our community

[58:15] infrastructure stress to our community that those

[58:16] extra 500 homes could provide our community versus If it was a 5-acre rule,

[58:21] you know, we're looking at 100 homes.

[58:23] So there's an economic impact on the overall abuse on our land.

[58:27] And Christy, Williamson County does have the 5-acre rule for their—

[58:31] can you elaborate on that, why they went that way?

[58:34] Was it a fiscal reason for, you know,

[58:36] growing their school systems and roads and all that?

[58:39] Well, not Not wishing to speak for the entire county of Williamson County,

[58:45] but I was there for the the the process.

[58:48] And when the county Williamson County updated its comprehensive land use plan,

[58:54] it was focusing on infrastructure. It was focusing on the projected growth.

[59:00] And one of the things that Williamson considered was the infrastructure.

[59:05] For density, at least in Williamson County's plan,

[59:09] it should be in and around the cities where that infrastructure is,

[59:14] hoping to reduce the reliance upon the onsite wastewater systems out in the

[59:20] onsite wastewater systems out in the county

[59:20] because the county in Williamson County doesn't serve municipal sewer.

[59:26] Right.

[59:26] So if you develop out in the county in Williamson County,

[59:29] you're either on individual septic systems or the onsite wastewater system.

[59:33] The step systems.

[59:33] The step systems. And so some of the language in the comprehensive plan in

[59:39] Williamson County was that density should be in and around the municipalities.

[59:46] It also has some areas of growth in what they call villages or hamlets,

[59:51] what are the traditional small-scale community crossroads for some small-scale

[59:58] commercial. But the thought process was That you could have that density closer to

[1:00:04] where the infrastructure is.

[1:00:07] And the fiscal analysis that was done in with that plan showed that it would save

[1:00:13] the county money in terms of the cost of road building and maintenance and the cost

[1:00:20] of schools, because schools would be closer together instead of spread out

[1:00:26] closer together instead of spread out where all

[1:00:27] the. density is. Williamson also focused on maintaining a rural viewpoint,

[1:00:33] like a viewshed, with conservation subdivisions so you can have smaller lots

[1:00:39] subdivisions so you can have smaller lots but

[1:00:39] maintain the 5-acre density gross on the property and fairly deep setbacks from

[1:00:45] existing county roads from a viewscape standpoint.

[1:00:49] So, yeah, I mean, you know,

[1:00:52] I'm oversimplifying what's a fairly detailed comprehensive land use plan,

[1:00:58] which is on the website if anyone wants to read it. But that was the study.

[1:01:04] And so part of it was the fiscal analysis.

[1:01:07] The other thing to remember is about half of Williamson County had already been

[1:01:13] 5-acre lots since 1988.

[1:01:15] Yes.

[1:01:16] And so it was essentially taking the other half on the other side of 65,

[1:01:21] and a lot of that matching what had already been 5 acres for many, many years.

[1:01:26] So Williamson County was also able to kind of look at, well,

[1:01:30] here's how it's worked for so long.

[1:01:32] And so had an idea of how it might work on the other side.

[1:01:36] So hopefully that is somewhat helpful. And let me just be clear.

[1:01:40] I've worked for Williamson County for a long time and it's a privilege to also

[1:01:45] long time and it's a privilege to also help

[1:01:45] here as best I can. I'm not trying to make one like the other, right?

[1:01:49] But because of my experience,

[1:01:51] sometimes I'm asked about how things have gone in Williamson.

[1:01:55] So I just want to make it clear to everyone on TV, that's in the audience,

[1:02:00] I'm not trying to make y'all Williamson.

[1:02:02] But if someone asks me about my experience, I'm happy to share.

[1:02:06] And I'm here to kind of help you facilitate,

[1:02:09] get to your vision for Murray County for the next 20 years.

[1:02:13] So let me just make that clear for social media.

[1:02:18] Thank you.

[1:02:18] Hopefully that was helpful.

[1:02:19] Well, thank you for that. That's kind of what I needed to hear.

[1:02:24] And this, this is just open conversation, really,

[1:02:28] but would a hybrid model And again, I'm not advocating for this.

[1:02:33] I'm just talking out loud.

[1:02:35] What a hybrid model of maybe within a certain extension of the city limits

[1:02:40] certain extension of the city limits outside

[1:02:41] in the county, maybe a 1-acre lot minimum up to a certain boundary outside to 5-acre

[1:02:47] lots out in the county,

[1:02:49] would that be an absolute nightmare to enforce or for the County Commission to

[1:02:55] enforce or for the County Commission to try

[1:02:55] to implement? Is that off the table as an idea? Get Kristin in here.

[1:03:01] If you're asking me, I don't think any ideas are off the table.

[1:03:04] I mean, you have your identified urban growth boundaries where you—

[1:03:09] the cities intend to grow over time.

[1:03:11] If you wanted to establish a certain policy for the urban growth boundaries,

[1:03:16] it would be for what those growth boundaries are, even if they change in the

[1:03:20] boundaries are, even if they change in the future.

[1:03:21] You know, if you all say you think there should be a certain The look or density in

[1:03:26] and around the cities.

[1:03:27] And maybe you have a different—

[1:03:29] maybe it's a gradation instead of just one or the other like someone had suggested.

[1:03:35] So that's all the conversation that you all would have and what that looks like.

[1:03:40] But the plan is a vision.

[1:03:41] And so when the County Commission is then asked to make rezoning decisions after

[1:03:46] that, they would look to that as kind of a guidepost.

[1:03:49] Okay. Can we put our current map on the— up on the screen?

[1:03:55] Yeah.

[1:03:56] What else you got, James? You know, this is a— I've thought about this.

[1:04:01] I've thought about this process all day long, trying to find the common ground.

[1:04:06] Because, you know, as some of our longtime builders in the crowd have alluded

[1:04:11] tonight, you know, they've invested in the community and they bring jobs to the

[1:04:16] community and they They bring worth to Murray County as well,

[1:04:20] and I don't want to disrespect that.

[1:04:22] But I also, you know,

[1:04:23] I'm up here to help advocate for agriculture and farmers out there.

[1:04:28] And, you know, they're sometimes the last at the table to get a say-so.

[1:04:32] And I know I'm up here just advocating for those, for that demographic,

[1:04:37] and trying to find some common ground here with this process.

[1:04:41] Thank you.

[1:04:42] Is that all you got? All right, Sam, you're up.

[1:04:46] Um, I guess just speaking to some of that, um, you know,

[1:04:50] when they redid the zoning guidelines, and Christy, you can speak to this, you know,

[1:04:57] make sure I'm— but some of the things in that Williamson County did,

[1:05:02] our county commission has already made it very clear that They don't want those

[1:05:08] items in conservation neighborhoods, being that, you know, and you'll have to—

[1:05:14] is it net density versus gross density from 1-acre minimums versus—

[1:05:19] so I think that the, you know, I guess that would be my first thought would be,

[1:05:26] well, the governing body of this has already said, well, we don't want those.

[1:05:32] So—

[1:05:32] I think that's a good point.

[1:05:34] Um, you know, those aren't currently in our zoning, um, you know, framework, uh,

[1:05:41] which— so I guess that would be a hurdle to cross.

[1:05:45] Um, and then, you know, as far as Williamson versus, um, Murray, you know,

[1:05:51] Williamson versus, um, Murray, you know, the,

[1:05:52] the guidelines for road construction are completely different as well when it

[1:05:58] comes to—

[1:05:59] Yes.

[1:06:00] Uh, we're required to do, uh, and I wish Ken McKee was here tonight to,

[1:06:05] to speak to that, but, you know, above and beyond what,

[1:06:09] what Williamson County requires for roads, um, in that, uh, you know, some,

[1:06:15] some neighborhoods can be without curb and gutter and et cetera and et cetera.

[1:06:21] Um, there's some different options that they're allowed to do that we're currently

[1:06:27] as development developers are not allowed to do.

[1:06:30] Um, You know, and then, you know, the opting in and opting out, just to me, of—

[1:06:36] and I heard somebody mention that today— seems to—

[1:06:40] could create lots of issues versus, you know,

[1:06:43] you could have somebody who's allowed to do 5 acres,

[1:06:47] somebody's allowed to do 1 acre, somebody else allowed to do 5 acres, somebody's—

[1:06:53] Right.

[1:06:53] You know, lots of what they consider spot zoning instead of, um, you know,

[1:06:58] what I would consider what we've had for years, just 1 acre of blanket zoning.

[1:07:04] You know, I know that's changed over the years with lot dimensions and this and

[1:07:09] that. Flag lots, like Mr.

[1:07:11] Watley was saying earlier, now they're, they're not, or they are.

[1:07:15] You know, I, I don't know that personally, but, um, So I don't know that, you know,

[1:07:21] how that fits in our community either, you know.

[1:07:24] I mean, because everywhere in Santa Fe, half of them could say we, we want,

[1:07:29] we want to keep 1 acre,

[1:07:31] and then half of them could say we want 5 acres if we gave them a choice, you know.

[1:07:36] I'm not saying we have the opportunity to give them a choice or anybody a choice.

[1:07:42] I don't, I, you know, I just want to, uh, You know,

[1:07:45] do what's right for the community.

[1:07:48] But I guess what I'm saying is, you know, I guess there's pros and cons to each way,

[1:07:53] I guess is what I'm saying.

[1:07:55] You know, I don't— you know, you go down Highway 7 and then, you know, every—

[1:08:00] you know, these 5 people can do 1 acre, these 5 people can do 1 versus 5, you

[1:08:06] these 5 people can do 1 versus 5, you know.

[1:08:06] So without the conservation opportunity, who is— which has already been removed,

[1:08:11] my understanding, You know, that, that already removes some of those standards

[1:08:17] already removes some of those standards that,

[1:08:17] you know, the neighbors to the north have already done. So, yeah, absolutely.

[1:08:22] You say something.

[1:08:23] So on your— yes, the idea of conservation subdivisions was presented a couple of

[1:08:28] years ago when we were updating the zoning ordinance.

[1:08:31] And at that time it was determined the county commission didn't want to go that

[1:08:36] route. But in this process, If,

[1:08:38] if you all as advisory committee and ultimately the Planning Commission from—

[1:08:42] if that looks like a good planning tool, maybe that's a good planning tool in,

[1:08:47] in a zone that's 5 acres but not in a 1 acre or whatever.

[1:08:50] That's something that you would recommend.

[1:08:52] That would be something that you all would describe and recommend in your plan.

[1:08:57] And because I assume once the plan is done,

[1:08:59] there will probably need to be zoning changes, whether it's zoning map changes.

[1:09:04] You know, you're hearing people say you don't want driveways so close together.

[1:09:08] Well, even if it's a 5-acre lot or parcel that's not even subject to a plat,

[1:09:13] you can still in your zoning say how far apart you want driveways on your public

[1:09:18] roads. So, you know, same with the road standards.

[1:09:20] If you're saying in 5-acre lot subdivisions you're fine with, you know,

[1:09:25] you don't necessarily need curb and gutter or whatever, then—

[1:09:28] I think that's a good point.

[1:09:30] That would be a recommendation in your plan because you're okay with how that

[1:09:34] plan because you're okay with how that looks,

[1:09:34] which would then be translated into amendments to your subregs, if that makes

[1:09:39] amendments to your subregs, if that makes sense.

[1:09:39] Yeah.

[1:09:40] So as part of the vision and the planning discussion,

[1:09:43] then if that's a vision or a look that is ultimately in the plan,

[1:09:47] then the County Commission could work to revise the documents to match that vision.

[1:09:53] That's helpful. I don't want you to feel like everything's off the table because

[1:09:58] it's already off the table. Sure.

[1:10:00] That's something that's an option that you would like to describe at this level and

[1:10:05] then at the planning level.

[1:10:07] So that I got.

[1:10:10] Yes, sir.

[1:10:10] Well, just one more thing.

[1:10:13] And so in going over and beyond 5-acre minimums, you know,

[1:10:18] that's state-regulated.

[1:10:20] We can't regulate anything further than what state mandates,

[1:10:26] is that correct?

[1:10:27] Well, so that, that's another— it's another topic that's been floating around.

[1:10:32] Generally, if it's a 5-acre or greater parcel on a public road and there's not

[1:10:37] parcel on a public road and there's not new

[1:10:37] roads or new infrastructure,

[1:10:39] then that's an exempt lot and they can go out and be created by deed.

[1:10:43] All the little nuances of that comes from case law.

[1:10:47] Right.

[1:10:47] So some might be subject to platting at the Planning Commission and some might

[1:10:52] the Planning Commission and some might not.

[1:10:52] It's a very fact-based analysis.

[1:10:54] Generally, if it's a 5-acre or greater parcel and it's already on a public road

[1:10:58] parcel and it's already on a public road and

[1:10:59] doesn't require a road, it's probably not going to require a plat.

[1:11:02] But sometimes because of infrastructure that has to serve it,

[1:11:06] it would kick it into a plat that has to go to the Planning Commission.

[1:11:12] Gotcha. But there wouldn't be an opportunity for, as an advisory committee,

[1:11:19] to say, well, we want to do that, you know,

[1:11:22] everybody here has to be a 15-acre plot.

[1:11:26] If the county chose to create a zone of 15-acre lots and the county saw that it

[1:11:32] 15-acre lots and the county saw that it was—

[1:11:32] there was a good reason to do so and support Supported that decision, yes,

[1:11:38] the county could do—

[1:11:40] the county could do 50-acre lots if it's supportable for reasons,

[1:11:45] if that makes sense.

[1:11:47] Because you have to— if you're going to change that,

[1:11:51] that nuance to people's property rights, it's got to be supportable, right,

[1:11:57] by reasons that rise to the level of constitutional support.

[1:12:01] Yeah. And so I guess like part of that,

[1:12:05] and I guess my Some of my point is, is that scattered throughout,

[1:12:10] you know, if you zoom in on these maps, which I know you can,

[1:12:15] throughout the county is even in some of the areas that are deemed as 5

[1:12:21] acres and, you know, there's still 1 acre, lots of them.

[1:12:26] And I should confirm this map that's on the screen right now is the current urban

[1:12:30] growth boundary.

[1:12:31] Yeah, gotcha.

[1:12:31] That's approved, that the county has previously approved.

[1:12:35] So everything that's in the tan color is within the approved growth management

[1:12:40] within the approved growth management plan,

[1:12:41] but some of the areas— and I know it's going to be hard to see—

[1:12:45] but some of the areas that are polka-dotted are the planned growth

[1:12:49] polka-dotted are the planned growth boundaries.

[1:12:51] So none of, none of that is proposed or part of the land use Well,

[1:12:56] I just think what I mean is like, you look at that,

[1:13:01] and I can see like most of those are probably in that bottom left.

[1:13:06] I don't know what road that is.

[1:13:09] But, you know, there's lots of what look like very small parcels already.

[1:13:14] Yep, like, like running down 31,

[1:13:17] running down outside of the urban growth boundaries currently.

[1:13:22] Oh, yeah.

[1:13:24] So I just don't know how you deviate one from the other.

[1:13:28] You know, you know, for 100 years we've said, hey, we can do this.

[1:13:33] Now your neighbors can't.

[1:13:34] You know, I just, I have a hard time getting over the fact that one,

[1:13:39] one property owner has had these rights for so many years,

[1:13:43] and many people with large farms have had the opportunity to subdivide their lands

[1:13:49] to to 1-acre minimums, whatever.

[1:13:51] And so we're gonna— we are inevitably going to, if we do have a 5-acre zoning,

[1:13:56] we're going to dictate, you know, these zoning rights of many, many people who

[1:14:02] zoning rights of many, many people who have,

[1:14:02] who have had that for many years.

[1:14:05] And I guess that's at the end of the day, that's my whole point.

[1:14:09] And I mean, I can look at the map outside of the urban growth boundaries,

[1:14:14] outside of the things that you've before last week that had a lot of 5-acre

[1:14:19] minimums. You know, I would say to me, outside of the city centers, um, you know,

[1:14:25] most was a 5-acre minimum.

[1:14:27] And I have a hard time, you know, telling one man you can do this or one you can't.

[1:14:32] Um, and with the infrastructure, you know,

[1:14:35] the Planning Commission has to tell these developers, you know,

[1:14:40] if they have the infrastructure They can provide it.

[1:14:43] If they don't have the infrastructure, the developer has to pay for that,

[1:14:48] and it's giving them their option to upgrade that water line, or you know,

[1:14:53] you know they need a turning lane on the road,

[1:14:57] or whatever they deem as the Planning Commission and Kim McKee and Todd as the

[1:15:02] Murray County Water. You know, whatever that comes up with.

[1:15:06] You know, that's on the decision of the developers to make those decisions.

[1:15:11] So that's, I guess, my point. Is that all you got? All right.

[1:15:15] I do got a couple lights over here. Let's go with Ms. Notley first.

[1:15:20] Thank you.

[1:15:22] Has it been your experience that if someone has, like Sam was just saying,

[1:15:27] a farm that they've had for years and forever,

[1:15:30] and now all of a sudden they can't do this,

[1:15:34] Is there such a thing as grandfathering it in?

[1:15:37] This would only apply to new,

[1:15:39] new projects and keep the farms that have been viable and sustainable forever?

[1:15:45] I'll answer that. So the, the only thing that's generally grandfathered is the use.

[1:15:50] So if you're using the land, for instance,

[1:15:53] as a gas station and the county rezones it to only a residential,

[1:15:57] you don't have to tear down your gas station and build a house.

[1:16:01] You can continue using your gas station.

[1:16:04] You're not generally grandfathered for a density unless you're already using it for

[1:16:09] that. So if you have a 1-acre subdivision and you have all these 1-acre lots already

[1:16:15] created, legally created, owned by people, and the county rezones that to 5 acres,

[1:16:20] that's not going to—

[1:16:21] all this—

[1:16:22] they're legally nonconforming as to their lot size.

[1:16:24] Okay.

[1:16:25] But if you have a 150-acre farm and it's zoned 1 acre now and the county determines

[1:16:32] it's better to zone it for 50 acres, 1 unit per 50 acres—

[1:16:36] I'm exaggerating on purpose— you don't retain the grandfathering of that density.

[1:16:43] You're just retaining the use that you have on it, if that makes sense. Okay.

[1:16:50] Is that all you have? Commissioner Strain, you're up. Thank you, Chair.

[1:16:57] It's interesting that you asked that question because we didn't even talk about

[1:17:04] it, but that was pretty much my question as well. Well, I'll let her go first.

[1:17:12] Yeah, because she's cuter than I am and younger.

[1:17:16] Uh, clarify this for a very simple person, okay?

[1:17:21] I've owned a farm for generations, 100 acres,

[1:17:25] and the county decides that they want to make that area 5-acre lots.

[1:17:31] Then the value of my property has decreased significantly because I could

[1:17:38] decreased significantly because I could sell

[1:17:39] that if I decided to sell that.

[1:17:41] Right.

[1:17:42] So that with 1-acre lots,

[1:17:44] I could put either 100 houses on that 100 acres or 20 houses on that 100 acres,

[1:17:50] depending upon what I, I or this committee or somebody else decided.

[1:17:56] There's no way that we can say that the guy with the 100-acre lots, the,

[1:18:01] the current owner, could decide,

[1:18:04] make a decision at this point that he would rather have Have a 1-acre commitment

[1:18:10] would rather have Have a 1-acre commitment or

[1:18:10] a 5-acre commitment?

[1:18:12] Well, the way to do that would be to not rezone the property.

[1:18:16] So what you're grandfathered in is how you're using the property.

[1:18:20] Like if you have a structure or if you already created this lot or you had an

[1:18:25] already created this lot or you had an event

[1:18:26] venue and all of a sudden they weren't legal in that zoning district,

[1:18:30] you can keep using that event venue.

[1:18:32] But if you just have 100 acres and you're farming it,

[1:18:36] no one's going to tell you you can— you have to do 5-acre lots.

[1:18:40] No one's going to tell you you have to stop farming it.

[1:18:44] But if that zone only allows 5-acre lots,

[1:18:46] you can't then all of a sudden propose a 1-acre lot subdivision.

[1:18:51] Now, whether it reduces—

[1:18:52] So the value of the property is going to decrease significantly.

[1:18:55] Whether it reduces in value or not, I will leave to the real estate officials.

[1:19:00] And because I will say it's different in every community.

[1:19:03] There are a lot of areas on a piece of property that you're not going to get to

[1:19:09] develop whether you have 1 house or 500 houses because of floodplain or slopes or

[1:19:14] whatever, you know, the soils that you need for the septic.

[1:19:18] So there's a lot of variables to it,

[1:19:20] and I'm not qualified to say it's automatically reduced in value.

[1:19:24] Although I will say that's the general consensus.

[1:19:28] But I will also say that that was— that's been studied before,

[1:19:32] and it depends on the community.

[1:19:34] So I would have to defer to the real estate professionals about that.

[1:19:38] So are you saying then that we can't say that we can give that property owner,

[1:19:44] whether he bought it as an investment or he's owned it forever, we can't— we can't,

[1:19:49] as we make these rules, regulations or suggestions, whatever we call them,

[1:19:55] we can't say that the current property owner has an option to say an acre or 5

[1:20:00] acres?

[1:20:00] It's— zoning is not personal to the property owner.

[1:20:04] Zoning is the policy and the law that you apply to that land.

[1:20:08] And so if that's the case, then you just don't rezone it.

[1:20:11] You know, otherwise it would be some sort of springing zoning a future owner,

[1:20:17] and I'm not— I don't know how that would even work.

[1:20:20] Okay.

[1:20:20] Yeah, because generally you can't apply regulations to a specific owner,

[1:20:25] because a lot of times— and again, I'm not an expert on Tennessee law—

[1:20:30] but if somebody sells a property, generally that's not, you know,

[1:20:34] they're not notifying every county office on that sale.

[1:20:37] You know, if I sell my property to my My mom or to somebody, you know,

[1:20:42] that goes through the deed process and goes through those, you know, legal

[1:20:47] goes through those, you know, legal things,

[1:20:47] but it may not, you know, it's not going to go to the planning department.

[1:20:52] And so a lot of times when people talk about putting regulations, you know,

[1:20:57] this is only applied to this property owner, the tracking of that,

[1:21:01] the maintenance of that is really impossible.

[1:21:04] Because who's going to be the one that's Like kind of ensuring that that property

[1:21:09] hasn't sold, you know, is every time a building permit comes in, you know,

[1:21:14] it's just, it's kind of—

[1:21:16] I understand you can give it to your son or something. I understand that.

[1:21:20] But I also have a sense that if I invested in 100 acres with the idea that I was

[1:21:25] going to split that property into 1-acre lots, the value would be extremely higher.

[1:21:30] And the reason I bought it was because I was going to split it into 100-acre lots

[1:21:34] and some Jerry Strahan from the county commissioner decides, no,

[1:21:38] you're going to make that a 5-acre lot, I would be a little upset with him.

[1:21:42] But that's me.

[1:21:43] Thank you.

[1:21:45] Thank you, Chair. All right. I don't have any other lights. Proceed.

[1:21:50] I guess I want to ask a question.

[1:21:52] When I have meetings, you know, we have an agenda, we have an item,

[1:21:56] we make a motion, we We move forward, we vote on the item.

[1:22:00] What action are you looking out of this committee tonight? What are you looking

[1:22:05] committee tonight? What are you looking for?

[1:22:05] What do you want out of us?

[1:22:07] At this point, we've gotten a lot of mixed feedback, you know,

[1:22:11] from different groups throughout this whole process on kind of this 1-acre

[1:22:17] whole process on kind of this 1-acre versus

[1:22:17] 5-acre lot. You know, this is not— I'm not making that decision for you all.

[1:22:23] I'm a, you know, I'm here to help facilitate the process.

[1:22:29] Yes.

[1:22:29] But in order for us to sort of create the documents and create the policies and,

[1:22:36] you know, create this final product, you know,

[1:22:39] I need that direction from the county on, you know, where do we think or, you know,

[1:22:46] are you all ready to make kind of a determination on kind of a general idea of

[1:22:52] determination on kind of a general idea of where

[1:22:52] you want to go with this future land use map and future land use policy or,

[1:22:58] you know, Do you need more information?

[1:23:01] Do you need— do you want to wait until we have the fiscal piece to make that

[1:23:07] decision? I mean, I think we just need to have that kind of conversation of,

[1:23:13] you know, where we're at so I can know where I can go.

[1:23:17] All right. So, that said, you know, I asked the question.

[1:23:20] So, what is— what does this committee understand what she's asking and where

[1:23:25] understand what she's asking and where we're

[1:23:25] going to go. Sam, your light's on. You're up, sir.

[1:23:28] So how much of the fiscal piece, you know, are you, you going to present to us,

[1:23:32] I guess, is my— would be my question.

[1:23:34] Are you going to present, hey, if we go to 5-acre minimums, you're going to—

[1:23:39] the perpetuity property tax is going to go down this much,

[1:23:42] or it's going to go up this much, or you're going to, you know—

[1:23:46] The consulting firm Tischler Beis is the one that's doing the financial analysis,

[1:23:51] and So I— they're working on that now.

[1:23:53] I don't have their results, so I don't, I don't know exactly what they're going to—

[1:23:59] what they're producing.

[1:24:00] Sure.

[1:24:01] But we'll have that.

[1:24:02] Yes.

[1:24:03] Yes.

[1:24:03] I know they've done a lot of work with y'all before.

[1:24:05] So I guess that's— those are the things that are going to be on the table that

[1:24:09] that are going to be on the table that say,

[1:24:09] hey.

[1:24:09] Yeah. And essentially what they're doing is kind of an analysis of sort of the

[1:24:14] status quo Yes. So, you know, the status quo of, you know,

[1:24:18] your current regulations allow for 1-acre lots pretty much, you know, countywide.

[1:24:23] What would that look like versus if it was increased to 5 acres?

[1:24:27] Again, the specifics of every data point that goes in that, I'm not sure,

[1:24:32] but if there's specific things that you want to make sure is included in that,

[1:24:37] you know, if there are certain things that you want to see that I can pass on to

[1:24:42] them and make sure that they address or check to make sure that they can do that,

[1:24:47] I can do that as well.

[1:24:49] Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, in, in a fiscal analysis, I mean,

[1:24:54] I would want to see, hey, if you go to a 5-acre minimum, you know,

[1:24:59] what strain does that put on, or lack of strain put on the, you know,

[1:25:05] the added infrastructure that's recently been added?

[1:25:09] And, you know, was the infrastructure that was added recently in preparation for X

[1:25:15] growth? And, you know, if we essentially, you know,

[1:25:19] I don't want to say halt that growth, but, you know,

[1:25:23] slow that growth in those areas that they've spent a billion or what, you know,

[1:25:30] I don't have numbers, you know,

[1:25:32] what does that look like to the other departments that are funded by the, by

[1:25:38] departments that are funded by the, by the,

[1:25:38] by the county? You know, what is the, uh, you know,

[1:25:42] what does the road superintendent think about, you know?

[1:25:47] Mm-hmm.

[1:25:48] You know, the, the, the increase in property value over these last 5 years of

[1:25:53] property value over these last 5 years of growth

[1:25:54] that we've had, uh, has that helped, um, in, in gaining on any infrastructure?

[1:26:00] Um, are we gonna slow in some of that infrastructure growth?

[1:26:04] You know, I, I mean, our property taxes in perpetuity have grown enormously,

[1:26:10] and sales tax and this and that.

[1:26:12] You know, their use of it as a county commission is, you know, that's on, you

[1:26:18] commission is, you know, that's on, you know,

[1:26:18] the budget committee.

[1:26:20] But, um, you know, what does that look like in making these types of changes?

[1:26:25] I guess that's what I would I would ask. Okay.

[1:26:29] All right.

[1:26:30] Anybody else? Because I still have to ask, you know, I asked her the question,

[1:26:35] what does she want out of us? Are we prepared to give her an answer to that?

[1:26:40] Because, you know, we've been here an hour and a half, you know?

[1:26:43] And so I want to know where we're going forward with this meeting.

[1:26:47] James, you're up, brother. Go. I'm sorry. Wait, let me, let me let Travis go first.

[1:26:52] Cause he hadn't, he hadn't talked tonight. Travis, go ahead.

[1:26:56] So I guess for the financial analysis,

[1:26:58] I'd be interested to see what the projected impact on the median home value

[1:27:02] projected impact on the median home value is

[1:27:02] likely to be, and then also what the projected impact is on the amount of

[1:27:07] projected impact is on the amount of productive

[1:27:07] agricultural property.

[1:27:09] Okay. Home value and projected impact on—

[1:27:16] Productive—

[1:27:18] Productive agriculture. Okay. I just want to make sure I got that read down right.

[1:27:21] That all you got? Yes, sir. All right, James, you're up. Mr.

[1:27:25] Chairman, this is kind of moving ahead just a little bit, but indulge me.

[1:27:30] Do we have an idea about our next public engagement event,

[1:27:33] when we're going to try to do that?

[1:27:35] Well, that's discussed later in the agenda, but— Well, I've got a point to

[1:27:40] agenda, but— Well, I've got a point to that.

[1:27:40] Okay, go ahead. You know, I want to— I want some feedback from people.

[1:27:45] I know I've got some partially,

[1:27:47] but I want more feedback on some thoughts on this whole 5 versus 1-acre Rule.

[1:27:52] I know I have property that could be subdivided if I sold it and, you know,

[1:27:56] live comfortably, but I'm not going to.

[1:27:59] I don't care if there's a 5-acre rule in place, but I'm just one landowner.

[1:28:03] So, but I want, I want more input from the community. Okay. All right. Anybody else?

[1:28:09] All right. Proceed. Not just for the— yeah, just go ahead.

[1:28:12] Okay. Yeah. Based on that, The— my, you know,

[1:28:16] kind of the current idea in my head was that we would have a meeting to discuss

[1:28:21] that we would have a meeting to discuss the

[1:28:21] fiscal analysis, and then we would go to the public for a public, you know,

[1:28:27] engagement event and get more feedback.

[1:28:30] It is completely up to you all if we want to go to the public first before we have

[1:28:36] that fiscal analysis,

[1:28:37] or do you feel like you all want to kind of hear that fiscal analysis before we go

[1:28:43] to the public? So I think, again, in terms of order,

[1:28:47] It doesn't matter to me how it all lines up.

[1:28:50] What does matter is kind of what information are we looking to get from the

[1:28:56] information are we looking to get from the public.

[1:28:56] And I think if really the question is,

[1:28:59] are we trying to get more public impact or public input on, you know,

[1:29:04] the 1 acre versus 5 acres, then that's kind of what we should go to the public

[1:29:10] kind of what we should go to the public with.

[1:29:10] Okay.

[1:29:12] I would think that the fiscal— I would think that that could—

[1:29:17] the fiscal impact of some of this could determine some people's vision of

[1:29:23] 1 versus 5.

[1:29:24] It definitely could.

[1:29:25] I mean, if they don't get their road topped for 5 years versus 2,

[1:29:30] or they're not going to get a shoulder on their road because we didn't have any

[1:29:36] growth, you know, that could Determine— I would think you would have, uh, you know,

[1:29:43] approached this at a fiscal, uh, first.

[1:29:46] Mm-hmm.

[1:29:46] And then, you know, get it out there and people could look at it for a couple weeks

[1:29:51] and, you know, explain it to us and explain it to the public and then have a

[1:29:55] explain it to the public and then have a public

[1:29:55] engagement after that. That would be my thought. I don't know.

[1:29:59] I'm still— for me, I still want more map data.

[1:30:01] You know, like, I want to— I, you know,

[1:30:03] like we talked last month about the Superfund areas,

[1:30:06] that they ought to be tagged on these maps,

[1:30:08] and that the area up in the county where it was real rocky, you know,

[1:30:12] kind of tag that so we know that nothing's going to happen there.

[1:30:16] I'd like to see the industrial corridors tagged so that, you know, we know that,

[1:30:20] okay, well, if there's going to be a business park here,

[1:30:23] That's going to have 400 jobs, where are those people going to live at?

[1:30:27] And so what kind of development might pop up next to those,

[1:30:30] and what might that need to be zoned to support that?

[1:30:33] And also, as far as shopping, you know, the Publix, the Walmart, the Kroger,

[1:30:37] and all that other stuff, we just need those. I think we still need those layers.

[1:30:41] And there again, I don't know if that's something that you can get, you know,

[1:30:46] or if it's something that, you know,

[1:30:48] can be bought online cookie cutter where that data is already there,

[1:30:51] or if it's It's not something where we've got to get the licensing and have each

[1:30:56] department sit there and pump in that data for a year,

[1:30:59] and then we come back with something. You know, all that takes work and time.

[1:31:03] Once it's built, it's magnificent, but you've got to build it, and we don't have

[1:31:07] you've got to build it, and we don't have it.

[1:31:07] And I just don't know if it's available on the open market other than real estate,

[1:31:12] you know, stuff is out there.

[1:31:13] And I know that the water company's got its lines,

[1:31:16] and the power company's got its lines, and that kind of stuff.

[1:31:19] Those layers are good. But I know we did talk about that last month.

[1:31:23] It's happening.

[1:31:23] Having that information.

[1:31:24] I don't see that here tonight, so I didn't know what happened with that.

[1:31:27] So we built the maps with the information that we do have and do have access to,

[1:31:33] and so those maps were in your packet, so that's— and these are on the website too.

[1:31:40] So we have— this is the draft that you guys saw last month.

[1:31:44] We haven't made any changes to this because, again,

[1:31:48] this is all still up for discussion. So ignore— you can ignore that one.

[1:31:54] Those are the existing urban growth boundaries.

[1:31:57] This is topography, and so we have it based on elevation.

[1:32:02] And again, to show it at a county level, we have to do it kind of in this version.

[1:32:08] We can zoom in. This is parcel-based.

[1:32:11] Oh, I know. I've got it right here on my laptop.

[1:32:13] I can zoom— I can drill down and it looks great,

[1:32:15] but it's It's not all the data that I want to see, though.

[1:32:18] But this is— so this is the data that we currently have.

[1:32:21] So we have the roads, we have floodplain, we have prime agricultural soils.

[1:32:25] There is certain open-source data that we can have access, but we would—

[1:32:29] I don't believe we have access to any, like, Superfund site.

[1:32:33] You know, like, I don't think that's public data that we can access on a GIS

[1:32:37] public data that we can access on a GIS layer

[1:32:37] that the county already has.

[1:32:39] So I think a lot of the So the really specific information that you guys are

[1:32:43] specific information that you guys are looking

[1:32:44] for is things that we don't have access to and that you all as a county don't have

[1:32:48] access to at the moment?

[1:32:49] Well, we know for a fact that there's a development project suitcase.

[1:32:54] I don't know what they call the place now, but it's up there on the east side of 65,

[1:32:59] north of— on the northeast quadrant up there.

[1:33:02] We don't—

[1:33:03] it's nowhere on the map,

[1:33:04] and we know that it's going to be warehouses and buildings and this, that,

[1:33:08] and the other, and jobs.

[1:33:10] So, you know, but that ought to be tagged on the map so that we can see that

[1:33:14] somehow. And also Cherry Glen and the other industrial parks in the county so

[1:33:19] other industrial parks in the county so that

[1:33:19] we know that if things come in there,

[1:33:21] there's going to be jobs and a possible need for, you know, infrastructure for

[1:33:26] need for, you know, infrastructure for them.

[1:33:26] Because we got— we've got to think ahead.

[1:33:29] This is—

[1:33:30] this is a multigenerational thing here.

[1:33:32] Oh, most definitely. And we have some of those industrial areas identified.

[1:33:37] But again, a lot of this is going to be based on your existing zoning.

[1:33:42] And so if things— the—

[1:33:43] We have the light purple currently as that kind of employment industrial areas,

[1:33:49] and then this kind of medium purple as like the corridor commercial,

[1:33:53] and then it's hard to see at this scale,

[1:33:56] but there are pockets of regional interchange,

[1:33:59] which is the other commercial corridor or commercial category. But if there—

[1:34:06] But the interstate is as commercial as it's going to get.

[1:34:10] I mean, you know, that's where you put the stuff. That's where you want your trucks.

[1:34:15] You don't want your 18-wheelers driving to Williamsport.

[1:34:19] You want your 18-wheelers off the interstate and getting off right there and

[1:34:24] interstate and getting off right there and doing

[1:34:24] their business and then moving back up the highway.

[1:34:27] So that's— What I was saying earlier is, you know,

[1:34:31] some of those really tight lines that you see are existing neighborhoods already.

[1:34:36] And so So, you know, when you look at the GIS mappings,

[1:34:39] some of those are already small parceled areas, I think is where I'm getting at.

[1:34:45] And, you know, maybe— I don't—

[1:34:46] maybe it has to be done in a quadrant basis more than a— you know,

[1:34:51] if we had 4 little maps that was, hey, you got a lot of neighborhoods here,

[1:34:56] you've got Monsanto here, you've got Old you know,

[1:34:59] plant sites in Mount Pleasant here, you know,

[1:35:02] maybe not things that the county pays for GIS mapping for, but, you know,

[1:35:06] we can see the neighborhoods, you can already see them.

[1:35:10] I mean, if we could label those like, hey, these are already 1 acre,

[1:35:14] this whole area is 1, you know what I mean?

[1:35:17] I think some of that might help as far as like what's already densely populated

[1:35:22] versus not. You know, there's—

[1:35:24] I know there's a lot of information that's not on there, you know, as far as—

[1:35:29] And we can continue to, you know, tweak the maps.

[1:35:33] You know, I'm not worried about that piece.

[1:35:37] I think the overall policy direction isn't set yet.

[1:35:41] And so, you know, that's kind of the hard We can make a million versions of a

[1:35:48] map, but I don't want to, you know,

[1:35:51] I don't want to waste your guys' time doing things if I don't know what the end

[1:35:58] goal is. And we don't have an end goal yet with this.

[1:36:03] Yeah, I just mean existing land use.

[1:36:08] Oh, existing, like existing land use?

[1:36:10] We don't even have an existing land use because that's not a—

[1:36:13] That's not a shapefile that we have.

[1:36:15] The existing land use map per se is like already developed neighborhoods, you know,

[1:36:20] neighborhoods and 1-acre tracts or whatever that have already been developed,

[1:36:25] you know.

[1:36:26] I mean, again, that's not a shapefile that the county has provided or has.

[1:36:32] So we can see it. Yeah.

[1:36:34] The parcel data, parcel-level data,

[1:36:37] you can see that there are smaller lots and presume some of those are at least

[1:36:43] residential. Oh, yeah.

[1:36:45] Yeah, if we just colored it even like, hey, all this is—

[1:36:48] and maybe that's very time-consuming and maybe that's what you're

[1:36:53] getting at.

[1:36:54] Well, we can— I mean, again,

[1:36:55] I'm just trying to figure out exactly what you guys are looking for.

[1:36:59] Well, I guess like in my head, my point is, is like around Coleoak, all right,

[1:37:04] I'm just saying around Coleoak. I'm just using Coleoaca.

[1:37:08] There are some— there's some 1-acre neighborhoods that are scattered

[1:37:13] neighborhoods that are scattered throughout

[1:37:14] there, you know, off 31, or, you know, in the Coleoaca, you know, downtown area.

[1:37:19] There's a lot of small parcels.

[1:37:21] So I guess, like, to everybody's point, when it comes to 1 versus 5, you know,

[1:37:26] when it comes to 1 versus 5, you know, it's—

[1:37:27] if that was the decision that everybody came to,

[1:37:30] then we would still need to If we were to make a line, where would that line be?

[1:37:35] You know, that line, if we go from the UGB out,

[1:37:39] that doesn't necessarily encompass all of the 1-acre neighborhoods that were

[1:37:44] previously approved throughout the years that are already on the ground,

[1:37:49] that are already platted. And I guess that's my point.

[1:37:52] And like some of these roads, I just can't tell what are, but, you know, I can,

[1:37:58] without having to zoom in,

[1:37:59] I can tell a lot of following 373 And then off 50 and then down 245.

[1:38:04] You know, there's a lot of little clusters of areas where, to me, in my view,

[1:38:09] is we've been doing this for 30 or 40 years.

[1:38:12] I don't think that, you know,

[1:38:14] downzoning those properties would be the right thing to do.

[1:38:18] And I don't know that, you know, saying 1 mile out or 2 miles out or whatever the,

[1:38:24] you know, the, the number is, is, is also the right thing to do.

[1:38:28] Okay.

[1:38:30] I guess that's sort of what I'm trying to explain, maybe.

[1:38:34] Yeah, and I get that.

[1:38:36] And I think from a land use map standpoint, if you currently, you know,

[1:38:42] have a 1-acre subdivision, and then the county makes a policy that, you know,

[1:38:48] kind of land outside of the UGB should be 5-acre minimums,

[1:38:53] If there's currently a 1-acre subdivision that's outside of that UGB,

[1:38:58] on a land use map showing that doesn't change, doesn't downzone it.

[1:39:04] It wouldn't make it—

[1:39:06] It just goes to a nonconforming.

[1:39:06] No, it doesn't even go to nonconforming because you're not

[1:39:10] changing the zoning.

[1:39:12] It's just because the future land use map—

[1:39:15] Like, I can think of a couple neighborhoods that have existing, you

[1:39:19] neighborhoods that have existing, you know,

[1:39:19] cul-de-sacs, temporary cul-de-sacs that have temporary developments that have

[1:39:24] have temporary developments that have been,

[1:39:25] you know, for lack of a better word, that are out of the UGB,

[1:39:29] that would then at that point be being downzoned.

[1:39:32] So I guess that's the type of— those are the types of properties that I'm—

[1:39:36] I think that in my mind, I'm like, well, what do you tell that landowner?

[1:39:41] And really, because again, we're— this is a plan for the future.

[1:39:47] And so anything that's currently platted, currently zoned,

[1:39:53] this won't affect that.

[1:39:55] I understand that.

[1:39:56] And so the idea is that, you know, kind of regardless of what has been approved,

[1:40:01] where does the county want to go in the future?

[1:40:04] And so if the idea is that outside the UGBs,

[1:40:07] we don't want any new small subdivisions, that's the policy that you all make.

[1:40:12] It doesn't change anybody's, you know, approvals of approved subdivisions.

[1:40:17] You know, all of those are good.

[1:40:20] But then is the county—

[1:40:21] does the county want to make that policy of like moving forward,

[1:40:25] this is what we want to do? Or does the county not want to say that?

[1:40:30] Does the county want to say, hey,

[1:40:32] we want to keep with what we have and the policies that we have,

[1:40:36] and let's just maintain that?

[1:40:38] I think that, you know, even if there was a decision made one way or the other,

[1:40:44] some of that's going to have to be spot-zoned, I guess, at the end of the

[1:40:50] spot-zoned, I guess, at the end of the day.

[1:40:50] And I know what you're saying, that it's a blanket deal across the— but yeah, so,

[1:40:56] but I understand what you're— I understand the concept.

[1:41:00] The—

[1:41:03] It seems like you could run into a lot of board

[1:41:07] of zoning appeals. Issues at the end of the day.

[1:41:13] And it— that all would come from how the county decides what to do with the zoning.

[1:41:19] So again, the land use plan informs future zoning decisions.

[1:41:24] And so if both working hand in hand, yes, they do work hand in hand,

[1:41:29] but nothing that we would put in a comprehensive land use plan would result

[1:41:35] comprehensive land use plan would result in a

[1:41:35] variance. You know, nothing— you can't get a variant, you know,

[1:41:40] from a recommendation or a guideline. You know, it has to be from a code standpoint.

[1:41:47] And so it's the whole point of this is coming up with a vision for the county for

[1:41:53] the future. So what is that vision?

[1:41:56] And, you know, is that we want to keep and allow our property owners to have The,

[1:42:02] you know, the development rights that they purchased and keep that is.

[1:42:08] And if that's the vision, then we keep the 1-acre, you know, recommendation.

[1:42:14] If the vision is we want to see bigger parcels and preserve that land and we want

[1:42:20] parcels and preserve that land and we want to

[1:42:20] see more 5-acre lots, then that's the vision.

[1:42:24] You know, so I think it's— We can go in whatever direction the county wants to go.

[1:42:30] Regardless of what decisions have been made in the past.

[1:42:35] But that's what we're trying to figure out is what is that vision?

[1:42:40] Is that all you got, Sam?

[1:42:43] Yeah.

[1:42:44] All right. Ms. Notley, you're up. Hi.

[1:42:48] It's kind of— I kind of feel like we're spinning our wheels here.

[1:42:51] Yeah.

[1:42:51] Because every meeting we've had, it's like you say, tell us what you want,

[1:42:55] and we say things, and then you come back and tell Tell us what you want.

[1:42:59] So I'm a little bit lost with that.

[1:43:02] But on the other aspect, what I would like to see,

[1:43:05] coming from an English major background,

[1:43:07] I would love to see whatever's published on the website be proofread.

[1:43:12] Okay.

[1:43:12] Because there are some, quite a few grammatical errors. And where is Tate

[1:43:17] grammatical errors. And where is Tate Township?

[1:43:17] Can I ask you that?

[1:43:18] Oh, that's a— it's a township in Ohio that is

[1:43:22] another client. We just used a format from that

[1:43:26] plan.

[1:43:26] So it was like a cut and paste mistake?

[1:43:29] From a graphical standpoint, but none of the information would be from them.

[1:43:33] But yeah, we'll fix that.

[1:43:34] Okay.

[1:43:34] 'Cause that's just, like, that's a graphical page. Okay.

[1:43:38] All right.

[1:43:39] Thank you.

[1:43:40] All right, so I asked you a question a minute ago, what you wanted from us.

[1:43:44] My next question to you is, are you getting what you want from us?

[1:43:48] And if you are not, spell it out what it is you want from us so that we can give it

[1:43:53] to you, so that we can move forward.

[1:43:56] Because I agree with her, we're spinning our wheels.

[1:43:59] I think what I'm hearing is that this commission is not comfortable giving

[1:44:06] me a policy direction until they hear the fiscal piece. Is that accurate?

[1:44:12] Ladies and gentlemen, is that accurate? Okay, my heads are shaking.

[1:44:16] I'm seeing no heads. Go ahead, James. We've talked about maps.

[1:44:20] We need better maps about what we're actually working with.

[1:44:23] That's been alluded to many, many times.

[1:44:25] I'm looking here at the proposed future land use map,

[1:44:28] and Commissioner or Chairman Previti alluded to it.

[1:44:31] We've got a lot of agriculture and conservation out near 65, and, you know,

[1:44:36] conservation out near 65, and, you know, that's,

[1:44:36] that's probably not realistic. Right. We need a better map. End of story.

[1:44:40] We need a better map of this.

[1:44:42] And, you know, I realize you're not from here and it's a lot of—

[1:44:46] there's a whole lot of roads, a whole lot of parcels. Call on us to help. I'm glad.

[1:44:50] I'll give you my card before we leave.

[1:44:53] I will help you as you see all these little purples and yellows and we can look

[1:44:57] little purples and yellows and we can look at

[1:44:57] individual parcels and I will help you navigate through that as best I can.

[1:45:02] I would love help.

[1:45:03] Yeah. All right. So So you asked a question and I saw several

[1:45:09] people shake their head no. So what is it you want from us?

[1:45:15] Okay. So if— do you all have recommendations on where we should go from

[1:45:20] recommendations on where we should go from a policy

[1:45:21] standpoint?

[1:45:22] Ball's in your court. Okay.

[1:45:27] Go ahead. I want some more financial information and I would like the median

[1:45:32] information and I would like the median Home

[1:45:32] value if we do 5, if we do 1. I'm a little torn between those 2 options. I own land.

[1:45:38] I don't want anybody to tell me how to sell that land.

[1:45:42] I understand all of this,

[1:45:43] but I also understand the next generation in my family can't afford a home in Murray

[1:45:49] County. I want to see the difference in a 5-acre and a 1-acre,

[1:45:53] and I don't know if this could come up in the fiscal study,

[1:45:57] but also With the jobs we hope to attract,

[1:46:00] are local people who want to stay in our community going to be able to afford these

[1:46:06] homes?

[1:46:06] And I think that's a—

[1:46:10] I would love to live on 5 acres in Murray County. I think that would be wonderful.

[1:46:15] It's not in my financial picture right now.

[1:46:17] Will we be able to produce folks,

[1:46:19] young people who want to stay here that could buy those 5-acre tracts?

[1:46:23] That's what I would like to hear, some of that information before I make a decision.

[1:46:28] Is that all you have, Dawn?

[1:46:32] Yes.

[1:46:33] Okay. Travis, you're up. Go ahead.

[1:46:36] Yeah, I think information on the projected impact on tax revenue,

[1:46:41] property tax revenue for the county,

[1:46:44] trying to make a decision on that policy without that information would be really

[1:46:51] difficult. Anybody else? All right. So did that help you get what you need?

[1:46:57] Are we any farther off than we were 5 minutes ago?

[1:47:01] We will bring the fiscal analysis to the next meeting, and I think that will help.

[1:47:09] I think from a mapping standpoint and information standpoint,

[1:47:14] I'd I would be happy to get feedback on things and more information and help from

[1:47:21] you all as a committee and staff.

[1:47:24] You know, because again, if I'm only ever getting feedback in these meetings,

[1:47:31] then that's— we're not going to get where we need to go.

[1:47:36] And so we can try and figure out—

[1:47:39] Google Maps is a big help too. There's a lot of stuff on Google Maps as well.

[1:47:43] And I know that, and we have that.

[1:47:44] Okay. All right. Anybody else have anything to say?

[1:47:49] All right, go ahead, proceed, ma'am. Yeah.

[1:47:54] Do you have anything else tonight then?

[1:47:58] Okay, so that said, the next item on the agenda are the next

[1:48:04] steps. So the next— wait a minute. I'm sorry, Ms.

[1:48:09] Notley, go ahead.

[1:48:11] No, just next.

[1:48:12] Okay, you're up for— okay, so the next item on the agenda are next steps.

[1:48:17] Item A is schedule advisory committee meeting number 5, so it looks like, it

[1:48:22] meeting number 5, so it looks like, it looks,

[1:48:23] you know, we had 5 people absent tonight, and they were important players.

[1:48:28] I mean, we had our water representative and also the school board people, Of

[1:48:33] and also the school board people, Of course,

[1:48:33] I understand they had problems that they had to deal with,

[1:48:37] but we need to try to come up with a scenario where, you know,

[1:48:41] we can get as many people here as possible.

[1:48:44] So the month of October, what does everybody feel like?

[1:48:48] The 15th.

[1:48:50] The 15th is a Thursday.

[1:48:52] All right, there again, I would suggest 6:30 to let everybody get a meal.

[1:48:57] So Thursday the 15th, how's everybody feel about that?

[1:49:01] I don't think it matters, but I'm out of town.

[1:49:03] I'm sorry?

[1:49:04] I'm out of town, but y'all don't schedule that.

[1:49:06] Okay. All right, so let's plan for the 15th at 6:30 then. You can't make it?

[1:49:13] No, no, I'm literally out of town. Oh, okay.

[1:49:16] I can't always be here, so y'all do—

[1:49:18] When can you be here?

[1:49:20] Yeah, when can you be here? The 14th? Wednesday the 14th?

[1:49:27] Well, we won't start till 6:30.

[1:49:31] Okay, I know Wednesday's a church— well,

[1:49:35] Wednesday's the church night for a lot of people,

[1:49:41] but how do y'all feel about that? Tuesday the 13th?

[1:49:47] Tuesday the 13th looks good. Well, I've got a meeting that night.

[1:49:55] Yeah, I got a class I have to take that night.

[1:50:00] Drop down to next week. The following week. 22nd? Thursday the 22nd?

[1:50:08] Nope, I got to— I got to take my wife to a concert that night.

[1:50:16] I don't know what y'all— Tuesday the 20th. The 20th.

[1:50:22] I got a class that night. I got a class. Yeah.

[1:50:27] Yeah, Tuesday nights I got, I got school.

[1:50:32] Well, um, how about Monday the 26th?

[1:50:36] Uh, no, that's— no, that's the 4th week.

[1:50:41] I mean, I've got— I mean, there's— I've got meetings that night,

[1:50:49] but this is important. So what about Tuesday the 27th?

[1:50:55] Tuesday the 27th? Tuesday the 27th. We got a winner. Yes.

[1:51:02] Okay.

[1:51:03] You can be here then? Yeah. All right.

[1:51:06] So next item on that is B, schedule public engagement event number 4. All right.

[1:51:13] So first of all, where are we going to do that at? Where do you want to do it at?

[1:51:21] You want a school? You want a memorial building or something like that?

[1:51:27] We can get about 300 people in the memorial building. I'm sorry. Go ahead.

[1:51:34] memorial building. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Who's—

[1:51:34] I mean, and I think we could, we could discuss location. Um, Kind of offline.

[1:51:40] I think probably if we thought about timing in terms of like a week or

[1:51:45] timing in terms of like a week or something

[1:51:46] like that, that might be helpful so we could at least start scheduling and then

[1:51:52] could at least start scheduling and then you

[1:51:52] guys could look out for room options and things like that.

[1:51:56] I mean, wherever you all think is, is the best place to gather.

[1:52:01] Well, I mean, you know, we've been to the satellite.

[1:52:05] You know, the communities with the schools.

[1:52:09] We did— I think the Memorial Building is a good choice because people can come in

[1:52:16] and out. You can't do it during the day because of the civic clubs that have their

[1:52:22] meetings in those, but possibly a Thursday night or a Tuesday night at the Memorial

[1:52:29] Building.

[1:52:30] Okay.

[1:52:30] And that's not hard to get.

[1:52:32] We just have to get—

[1:52:33] I got to check with the visitors bureau just to make sure that there's not

[1:52:36] just to make sure that there's not somebody

[1:52:37] that's got a meeting in there that night.

[1:52:39] Um, but we can run that through the mayor's office and the visitors bureau.

[1:52:42] So we'll, we'll come up with some dates for that, but I would— don't you agree,

[1:52:46] Mayor Butt? Don't you think the Memorial Building would probably be a good choice

[1:52:50] Building would probably be a good choice at

[1:52:50] this point?

[1:52:51] Would be a great choice.

[1:52:52] Yeah, I think just the Memorial Building, and we'll just find a date for it.

[1:52:55] And, um, So I think maybe either the week of the 9th or the 16th.

[1:52:58] Obviously, we don't want to get into Thanksgiving week.

[1:53:05] So—

[1:53:07] and with— if we have the advisory committee meeting on the 27th,

[1:53:12] we would want enough time for us to kind of revise things or prepare for that

[1:53:17] meeting. So I think—

[1:53:19] So there again, I would suggest Thursday the 15th, that evening.

[1:53:22] Which was our first meeting choice, but Christy couldn't be at that one.

[1:53:26] No, that was October.

[1:53:27] I'm sorry, that's what I meant, October.

[1:53:29] We need November.

[1:53:33] November? Why would you want to—

[1:53:36] you don't want to have the public input one before our next

[1:53:41] advisory meeting? I thought that if you all wanted the public—

[1:53:46] the fiscal impact analysis before we kind of go out to the

[1:53:51] public.

[1:53:52] Then Thursday the 12th, November 12th,

[1:53:56] based on the availability of the

[1:53:59] building.

[1:54:00] Yeah.

[1:54:01] All right, I'll get with the Visitors Bureau and verify that. Ms.

[1:54:06] Notley, you're up, ma'am. My question is on the public engagement meeting.

[1:54:12] Will there be a different format So far,

[1:54:15] nobody's been happy with the format of sticky dots, you know, kind of

[1:54:20] sticky dots, you know, kind of presentation.

[1:54:21] So how do we get around that?

[1:54:23] So we— I mean, we can do meetings in any number of format styles.

[1:54:28] I think probably we'll be looking for feedback from the public on kind of land

[1:54:34] feedback from the public on kind of land use

[1:54:34] scenarios of the 1 to 5.

[1:54:36] So I think it— we might need to think through that—

[1:54:40] —of kind of what would work the best, you know, because sometimes, you know,

[1:54:46] is it a presentation with information on things? Is it, you know, is it maps?

[1:54:52] I mean, I don't have an answer for that yet.

[1:54:55] Okay, what has worked well for you in other areas to get public engagement

[1:55:01] other areas to get public engagement going?

[1:55:02] It, you know, things that work in one community doesn't work in another

[1:55:07] community doesn't work in another community.

[1:55:08] Frankly, we do a lot of public, very successful public meetings with maps and

[1:55:14] successful public meetings with maps and dots.

[1:55:14] But again, that's not going to work in every location.

[1:55:18] And so we tailor every event to figure out what works best in a community.

[1:55:24] And so I can brainstorm with the county staff and You know,

[1:55:28] if we wanna kind of put some ideas out to the committee in an email or something

[1:55:35] like that, I'm happy to do that too.

[1:55:37] Okay, maybe we can think about that as a committee at the next meeting as to what a

[1:55:44] good format would be.

[1:55:45] We'll make that an agenda item on the next meeting. Sure, I can add that.

[1:55:50] Now also remember, remember on that next meeting,

[1:55:53] we're gonna have presentations from persons that want to say something.

[1:55:58] All right, yes, sir. Is it James? Yeah, James, go ahead.

[1:56:01] It would be my preference at the next public engagement meeting that we have

[1:56:06] public engagement meeting that we have some

[1:56:06] kind of presentation-style meeting where we're explaining, here's what we're doing,

[1:56:12] here's kind of the ideas, lay it out in bullet points if we have to,

[1:56:16] and just lay it all out on the table instead of people just wandering around.

[1:56:21] Because I just— It doesn't work for us. I echo that.

[1:56:24] That didn't work for Murray County. And we can have it a hybrid.

[1:56:28] We can have, all right, here's the presentation, Here's what we're doing,

[1:56:33] and then have a, uh, community talk afterwards,

[1:56:36] standing around eating cheese and crackers. I don't know.

[1:56:40] Well, and we'll have a public comment period because every—

[1:56:43] because the people were disappointed that they couldn't speak. Yeah, sure.

[1:56:48] I mean, we need that. We'll be at the Memorial Building.

[1:56:52] We'll get up on stage, have that presentation, bring the giant, you know,

[1:56:56] and show the maps, but also maybe in the back have her—

[1:57:00] the dots and the maps and that in the back, if optional,

[1:57:03] if that's what you want to do.

[1:57:05] But other than that, we have the chairs set up Yes, I agree.

[1:57:09] If the Memorial Building is not available,

[1:57:12] I'll check with my office at Yanalli Park for that.

[1:57:15] And we can probably also get a church, probably, you know, we'll make it work.

[1:57:20] probably, you know, we'll make it work. Yeah.

[1:57:20] Okay. All right. So, so we're looking at Thursday, November 12th,

[1:57:25] based on availability for that meeting.

[1:57:27] Our next meeting is going to be October 27th on a Tuesday.

[1:57:31] Um, our next item on the agenda is the public comment period.

[1:57:35] I have got 3 people signed up.

[1:57:37] I also have, uh, I have a public comment here that was emailed to me,

[1:57:41] and they told me that they had to get on an airplane,

[1:57:44] and they've asked me to read this.

[1:57:47] And so I'm going to do it, um, and then I'll let the other 3 speak.

[1:57:51] This is from a Jason Strain. Um, he says, city versus county.

[1:57:55] He said, there seems to be a widespread misconception among county citizens about

[1:58:00] the distinction between properties in the cities of Columbia, Spring Hill,

[1:58:05] Mount Pleasant, Versus properties outside the city limits in Murray County.

[1:58:09] I have seen a fair number of people on social media complaining and criticizing

[1:58:14] Murray County officials for the growth in the areas such as Neapolis along Columbia

[1:58:20] and Highway 31. That area is in the city limits of Columbia and has no access to

[1:58:25] sewer, which allows for higher density development.

[1:58:28] Murray County has 1-acre minimum lots required already in place.

[1:58:32] What's wrong with a 1-acre lot? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

[1:58:36] It allows for plenty of space between those houses.

[1:58:39] Most people don't want to maintain more than 1 acre. The county is not the

[1:58:44] than 1 acre. The county is not the problem.

[1:58:44] Be careful of what you wish for. Every action has a reaction.

[1:58:48] If a 5-acre minimum is placed in the vast majority of the county land,

[1:58:53] I foresee 3 things happening.

[1:58:55] More land will be annexed into the city limits for development.

[1:58:59] That means higher-density developments.

[1:59:01] That means more national tract builder homes that many people complain about in

[1:59:06] homes that many people complain about in some

[1:59:06] of social media. Number 2, more people will be pushed into Lawrence, Giles,

[1:59:11] Marshall, and Lewis Counties to buy or build a house on a 1-acre lot.

[1:59:16] What happens next is the traffic on Murray County roads will be even more congested

[1:59:21] with people from other counties driving through Murray County to Nashville,

[1:59:26] Cool Springs, and other job centers in Middle Tennessee each morning to get to

[1:59:31] Middle Tennessee each morning to get to work.

[1:59:31] Murray County will be getting zero tax dollars from these people but will be

[1:59:36] dollars from these people but will be getting

[1:59:36] all of the traffic. Next is, I have so much to say on this,

[1:59:40] but 3 minutes isn't much time, so I'll wrap up with this.

[1:59:44] People move out of the county because they don't want an HOA or a bunch of rules

[1:59:49] dictating how they can and can't do.

[1:59:51] Why is Murray County even entertaining a push to 5-acre minimum by people who don't

[1:59:56] want neighbors and want to impose their wishes and ideals onto people who actually

[2:00:02] paid hard-earned money for their land? One more thing, can we stop saying farmland?

[2:00:07] Yes, A lot of Murray County land is zoned as agricultural, but there aren't many—

[2:00:12] that many farmers in Murray County where food is actually produced.

[2:00:16] That is the definition of farm producing food.

[2:00:19] Save Our Farmland is just a fearmongering slogan.

[2:00:22] No one is pushing farmers off their land.

[2:00:25] That's just code speak for I don't want neighbors. So let's call it what it is.

[2:00:30] And God bless the actual farmers for the work that they do. And he says thank you.

[2:00:35] All right, so that said, uh, the next person—

[2:00:38] first person signed up to speak is Pater Jensen,

[2:00:41] and we know who you are at this point, so you'll have 3 minutes, sir.

[2:00:46] Let me reset this. Uh, no. Well, it got brought up here. I don't remember.

[2:00:50] Somebody brought it up here to me because I did leave it back there,

[2:00:55] but somebody brought it up here to me.

[2:00:57] I'm gonna go ahead and send it back real quick, and while Pater's talking,

[2:01:02] if somebody else wants to speak, sign up real quick. Ready, set, and go.

[2:01:06] All right, quickly, I think you all need to start over. We don't have accurate

[2:01:11] to start over. We don't have accurate data.

[2:01:12] You don't have the accurate data, do not start this process.

[2:01:16] Let's have our maps, Google Maps.

[2:01:18] I don't care how you get it, get the accurate data.

[2:01:21] If it costs money, tell us how much it costs. Start there.

[2:01:25] Why are we putting the cart before the horse?

[2:01:28] Stop trying to change something if you don't even know what's currently here.

[2:01:32] In Murray County. The first map I saw didn't even include Atheta.

[2:01:37] That tells me exactly how important it is to get the details right.

[2:01:41] When it comes to industry,

[2:01:43] I would like to think about how we can preserve more farmland while still

[2:01:47] preserve more farmland while still welcoming

[2:01:48] economic growth. I think Saturn gave us an incredible example 30 years ago.

[2:01:53] For years driving down Nashville Highway, you saw row crop agriculture.

[2:01:57] On GM land, not a giant industrial facility dominating the landscaping.

[2:02:02] The industry was there but was thoughtfully integrated into the

[2:02:06] thoughtfully integrated into the surroundings.

[2:02:06] I like that for Murray County.

[2:02:08] Today, our newer industrial development that was forced upon us by the state of

[2:02:13] Tennessee did not come through the Planning Commission because I sat right

[2:02:18] Planning Commission because I sat right there on

[2:02:19] this committee, didn't have landscaping buffers, didn't have anything.

[2:02:23] I had to fight tooth and nail to get trees planted to hide ugly buildings.

[2:02:28] Let's have stronger landscape agreements, screening standards.

[2:02:32] All of these things need to be part of Murray County the way it was 30 years ago.

[2:02:37] Why did we stop allowing farmland in front of GM?

[2:02:40] Finally, I don't believe preserving agricultural means putting 5-acre lots

[2:02:45] everywhere in this county.

[2:02:46] 1-acre, 5-acre, it still takes agricultural land out of production.

[2:02:51] It requires additional water for large lawns, irrigation,

[2:02:54] and turning working farmland into residential grass yards.

[2:02:58] Instead, let's look at conservation-style development.

[2:03:02] We talk about Williamson County a lot. They have it.

[2:03:05] You can do a 500-acre farm and put 50 houses on it and still farm 480 acres of

[2:03:10] houses on it and still farm 480 acres of it.

[2:03:10] There's ways to do this correctly with density.

[2:03:13] It's not a bad word if you do it correctly.

[2:03:16] Let's not take a map of Murray County and simply color it with one big crayon.

[2:03:21] That's what I feel like we saw last month.

[2:03:23] We don't need one green crayon for our entire county except for our urban growth

[2:03:29] boundaries. We have the technology. It's 2026.

[2:03:31] Let's get the data right and then start.

[2:03:34] Let's build a plan that is specific enough to recognize what already exists,

[2:03:39] flexible enough to respect property owners,

[2:03:42] and thoughtful enough to guide the growth that's here currently and continuing to

[2:03:47] come. I believe we can protect Murray County's rural character while still

[2:03:52] County's rural character while still welcoming

[2:03:52] businesses, industry, families, and responsible growth.

[2:03:56] Thank you again for your service and taking the time for the important

[2:04:00] taking the time for the important department of

[2:04:01] Murray County. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Oh, right on time too. Good deal.

[2:04:06] All right. And next person up is going to be Daniel Ajan. Did I say that? I'm sorry.

[2:04:11] Ajan. Very good, sir.

[2:04:13] Please come up, state your name and your district, and you'll have 3 minutes, sir.

[2:04:18] Thank you. My name is Daniel Ajan, District 5.

[2:04:21] I'm planning on listening tonight, but I thought, you know,

[2:04:25] I live on 4.7 acres just north of Oak Lake off of Clara Mathis.

[2:04:29] The entire neighborhood, if you go up Clara Mathis, is 5 acres, 2 acres, 1 acre.

[2:04:34] I'm on 4.7. I moved here. I came from 0.4 acres, moved to 4.7. I had 1 chainsaw.

[2:04:39] I now have 4. Nobody's talked about trees. We live in a jungle.

[2:04:43] Forcing every landowner to take care of 5 acres is an undue burden on the Murray

[2:04:48] County residents. I like running a chainsaw,

[2:04:51] but I'm not going to cut down every tree in the neighborhood.

[2:04:55] We had a mass— we have a problem with our ash trees.

[2:04:58] There's a huge ash tree going right next to where my kids play.

[2:05:02] I brought one of my boys here.

[2:05:04] Cost $2,000 for my neighbors who are retired on a limited budget to pay for

[2:05:09] retired on a limited budget to pay for that.

[2:05:09] By forcing people to manage the jungle, we get more rain than Seattle.

[2:05:13] And so I think we need to think about the unintended consequences of forcing

[2:05:18] everyone to maintain 5 acres. I choose it. I like it. Some people love it.

[2:05:23] I love 5 acres, but the restrictions drive me nuts.

[2:05:26] You know, I can't subdivide my land. I got deed restrictions. I can have horses.

[2:05:31] I can't have cows. All this stuff is just nuts. This country was founded on freedom.

[2:05:37] I got 6 kids and you're telling me I'm going to need at least 35 acres if I want

[2:05:42] going to need at least 35 acres if I want to

[2:05:42] keep my family together and everybody has to have their own house?

[2:05:46] You're going to force us outside.

[2:05:48] I live in Murray County because I can't afford Williamson County.

[2:05:52] But now we're going to—

[2:05:54] I'm going to have my kids living in Giles or Lewis because they can't afford to be

[2:05:59] close to me and I can't afford to be close to my in-laws who are in Williamson

[2:06:04] County. So my whole point is this country was founded on freedom. Let us be free.

[2:06:09] And if we want some sort of net solution, I think that I can understand that.

[2:06:14] I used to live on 0.4 acres and I loved it. That was perfect.

[2:06:18] I had 4 kids, 5 kids there. It was a great size. But we also had parks.

[2:06:23] We had better infrastructure. We had a road system.

[2:06:26] This was up in North Idaho before I moved down here. I'm a realtor.

[2:06:30] I just sold 0.75 acres to a starter home in Lewisburg to a couple that works in

[2:06:35] in Lewisburg to a couple that works in Cool

[2:06:35] Springs. They're having to commute all this way. They love 0.75.

[2:06:40] Why are we even saying an acre? Why not half an acre?

[2:06:43] I mean, but if we want to preserve something,

[2:06:46] I don't even think it has to be 1 versus 5. Some people want half an acre.

[2:06:51] So the entire county is on lockdown for an acre. How does that even make sense?

[2:06:56] If you've ever lived on half an acre, that's a good amount of land.

[2:07:00] The septic system is going to force us to have fairly big lots if we're on septic

[2:07:05] anyway. I know that.

[2:07:06] The reason why I have 5 acres is because they couldn't perk more than 3 bedrooms in

[2:07:12] the entire— on my entire lot because it's rocky.

[2:07:15] So one size fits all doesn't really make sense.

[2:07:18] You know, the lady across the street from me, she's on 1 acre. She's single.

[2:07:22] She has to pay to mow all of that. And again, we live in a jungle.

[2:07:27] So let's not force people, everyone to manage that. Thank you. Appreciate it.

[2:07:32] All right. Yes, sir. Thank you for that. Let me clear this.

[2:07:35] All right, Bobby Mitchell, you're up next.

[2:07:38] And while you're coming up,

[2:07:40] I want to kill these projectors because they're getting on my nerves.

[2:07:44] Bobby Mitchell, come on up. I think you're Bobby Mitchell.

[2:07:48] Bobby Mitchell, everybody. Shared office space next to Mr. Dogger.

[2:07:52] I'm actually Chris Scrambling, District 9.

[2:07:55] Um, I said something really stupid before I want to correct.

[2:07:59] Um, I'm really, really tired. Um, Double Branch is in the county. I knew that.

[2:08:04] I was just spacing out. Um, a couple quick, quick things.

[2:08:07] I wanted to finish what I was saying.

[2:08:10] Uh, owning agricultural land does not mean someone is automatically entitled

[2:08:14] Entitled to whatever subdivision density, infrastructure,

[2:08:18] or land use change would maximize its resale value.

[2:08:21] Agricultural preservation isn't contrary to property rights.

[2:08:25] It's recognition that the property rights of the people who are already here matter

[2:08:30] too. And I think that we need to— obviously, we got to get these maps.

[2:08:35] We have to get the data.

[2:08:36] I, I can't tell you how much I agree with Pater, you know, for Me,

[2:08:41] as a person who has campaigned as like the land preservation guy,

[2:08:45] being very aligned with the president of the Home Builders Association,

[2:08:49] I think that speaks volumes that we can come together.

[2:08:53] I went down to Bobby's office. They have maps there.

[2:08:56] I think that somebody needs to take the initiative.

[2:08:59] I've got— I'm sure somebody else here knows the mapper that's there.

[2:09:04] He was out the day I I wasn't there,

[2:09:06] but there are definitely limitations in what they have,

[2:09:09] and I think there will certainly be a price tag associated with some of that.

[2:09:14] But very importantly, to solve this problem of, oh, are we laying a blanket

[2:09:19] problem of, oh, are we laying a blanket down,

[2:09:20] I think that we have to figure out a way to add an additional dataset that we

[2:09:24] to add an additional dataset that we almost

[2:09:25] consider like the maps,

[2:09:26] and that is the public input about the people that are specifically there.

[2:09:31] Mount Pleasant is really none of my business.

[2:09:34] My business is in that— well, it's down, but it's in that southeast corner.

[2:09:39] And I spent a lot of time, a lot of money to get that place.

[2:09:42] I've put a hell of a lot into it.

[2:09:45] I specifically went out and I would—

[2:09:47] the analogy was I went out and I bought a Toyota. That's the car I wanted.

[2:09:52] And then all of a sudden overnight, it's like Cinderella,

[2:09:55] it's changed into a pumpkin.

[2:09:57] Right.

[2:09:58] That's not what people—

[2:10:00] people are not buying and moving in and putting all their energy into something

[2:10:05] putting all their energy into something just

[2:10:06] to have it change overnight.

[2:10:08] And I certainly respect the idea of people being able to peel something off here and

[2:10:14] there. My problem is also about intent.

[2:10:17] There's a huge difference between a guy like me and an investor who's coming in

[2:10:23] like me and an investor who's coming in with

[2:10:23] the intent of flipping the land, and they're being disingenuous.

[2:10:28] They're messing around with the rules, which we now— as you all know,

[2:10:33] we now have widespread examples of what they've done.

[2:10:37] And we have to find a way to acknowledge that.

[2:10:40] There's a difference between a guy like me,

[2:10:43] and I'd say a lot of the people in the room, the local builders,

[2:10:48] and these guys that are pulling the PE money in,

[2:10:52] and they care about nothing other than the numbers in their spreadsheet.

[2:10:57] We've got to find a way to accommodate that. Thank you. Perfect timing.

[2:11:02] All right, next one is Bart Watley. Bart, you'll have 3 minutes.

[2:11:07] Bart Watley, District 9. Pull that mic down so we can hear you. Pull the mic

[2:11:13] down so we can hear you. Pull the mic down.

[2:11:13] Yes.

[2:11:14] Bart Watley, District 9. And I think it was Chris said it, he said something

[2:11:19] was Chris said it, he said something stupid.

[2:11:20] Nah, we all do that. Don't worry about that.

[2:11:23] You know, I would like to see Murray County do something that they'd have on

[2:11:28] County do something that they'd have on the

[2:11:28] evening news, maybe make Fox News. I don't care.

[2:11:31] We need to be forefathers so our kids 50 years from now say, hey, in 2027,

[2:11:36] Murray County did something refreshing and neat, and it was fair,

[2:11:40] and most of the people, the big majority of the people, the consensus agreed to it.

[2:11:46] That's what I'd like to see you do.

[2:11:48] That probably could happen, but it's going to take a lot of work,

[2:11:53] maybe at the state level. I don't know. I think there needs to be more zones.

[2:11:58] I've got a little red zone.

[2:12:00] I can put hog farms if I want to,

[2:12:02] not far from a lot of these Sheepneck people have been talking.

[2:12:06] But I don't want hog farms.

[2:12:08] But the main thing, I don't want them coming down and burning my house down.

[2:12:13] And I'd feel like if I was them, I wouldn't do that.

[2:12:16] But we need to treat others like we want to be treated.

[2:12:20] And I'm not sure that this 1 acre or 5 acres, take it or leave it, is going to

[2:12:25] acres, take it or leave it, is going to work.

[2:12:25] And the others that talked before me, I could not Agree more with them.

[2:12:30] You've heard some good things tonight.

[2:12:33] I hope you heard it and will take it to heart and maybe have some people like have

[2:12:38] spoken tonight to be on some— in some of your workshops. Can y'all have workshops?

[2:12:44] I mean, can you get it done in this kind of meeting? I don't see it happening.

[2:12:49] You gotta almost have workshops as far as I'm concerned and have people like have

[2:12:54] spoken tonight. Not me. Oh man, I can't hardly think, go on pain pills.

[2:12:59] But people in here that's, that's invested in our county, to,

[2:13:03] to talk to y'all that's been around, got businesses,

[2:13:06] and get in deep with it and do something remarkable. I hope I've inspired you.

[2:13:12] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Watley. Next person up is Robert Crichton.

[2:13:16] Come on up, sir. This is your first time speaking tonight, I believe,

[2:13:21] so give us your name and your district before you start.

[2:13:25] And you will have 3 minutes, sir. All right.

[2:13:27] My name is Bob Creighton, and I live in District 8.

[2:13:31] I wasn't going to talk tonight, and I don't have a script,

[2:13:35] but I've sat here tonight and listened to a lot of words.

[2:13:39] And first of all, I, I want to be very kind to you.

[2:13:42] I'm going to say some things that don't sound very kind,

[2:13:46] but I want to be kind to you. You are all really good people.

[2:13:50] I like every one of you. George is a really good friend of mine from years ago.

[2:13:55] Eric's a good guy. He did a good job the other night.

[2:13:59] I mean, I could go across the board and mention everything. I like you.

[2:14:03] I'm not awake.

[2:14:06] But I have to say that Tate Township and a graphic with the same numbers from Tate

[2:14:11] Township on a graphic that was represented to us as our graphic is unacceptable.

[2:14:16] And I think you realize that. And I still want you here as a citizen to work.

[2:14:21] I think you can do good work.

[2:14:22] But you need to do something to resurrect your credibility a little bit. Okay?

[2:14:27] Fair enough? All right. Talk to the chair. Yeah. I know. I understand.

[2:14:32] Now, I heard a lot of things tonight, things like we don't even have,

[2:14:36] we don't even have, we don't even have.

[2:14:38] We don't have an end We don't have a final goal. We don't have a final map.

[2:14:43] This project— and I'm going to call it a project— needs a project manager.

[2:14:48] You said we feel like we're spinning our wheels. Jerry, you said that last meeting.

[2:14:53] So we've gone a whole month,

[2:14:55] and I had hoped that there would be some discussion in the background,

[2:14:59] somebody pulling stuff together saying,

[2:15:01] make sure what we're going to do in the next meeting so we make progress.

[2:15:06] And I don't feel like any of that's happening. It's happening.

[2:15:10] Eric, I'm not picking on you. You're doing a good job running the meeting.

[2:15:14] But there's no one here to pull the project together and to manage the

[2:15:19] project together and to manage the process.

[2:15:19] This poor lady's being looked at as the one that should do it. She's not.

[2:15:24] She's a resource. We've hired her to do a job for us, to do an analysis.

[2:15:28] She's not the one to manage the project, the process. And somebody needs to do

[2:15:33] the process. And somebody needs to do that.

[2:15:34] I'm, you know, I don't like this setting right here.

[2:15:37] But in the business world, I came in the business world,

[2:15:40] we'd be in a room with a blackboard and we'd be sitting around the table talking

[2:15:45] with pizza and we'd work all night. You don't want to do that, I know that.

[2:15:50] But I think you get my point.

[2:15:52] Now, there was a lot of mention about the 1-acre, 5-acre.

[2:15:55] I know there's some state programs that can enter into that discussion where they

[2:16:00] provide assistance. I don't know all the details of that.

[2:16:04] I'm just aware of a little bit of it,

[2:16:06] so I didn't want to make it sound like I'm an expert on that,

[2:16:10] but I just leave you with the point that think about a process.

[2:16:14] Again, I don't want to be critical, but we are wasting time here, and it's not,

[2:16:19] not your fault, but someone needs to step up and say, here's what we're going to do,

[2:16:24] let's make the process work. Okay, I'll leave you with that thought. Thank you.

[2:16:29] Thank you, sir. All right, next person up. Is, um, let me get this reset again.

[2:16:34] Ryan Dugger, come on up.

[2:16:36] And we've heard from you once, so sir, you'll have 3 minutes.

[2:16:39] First, want to address, as I mentioned earlier, the 1 and 5-acre debate.

[2:16:44] I'm not very well up on that, but I would just submit a proposal.

[2:16:48] I don't know if it has any legality or anything,

[2:16:51] and I guess you all might know But I think everyone's fear and why so many residents

[2:16:56] are for— it seems that most laypeople are very much in favor of 5 acres for one

[2:17:01] reason or another. Many developers and real estate agents are in favor of 1 acre

[2:17:06] real estate agents are in favor of 1 acre for

[2:17:06] one reason or another. That could be from a business perspective.

[2:17:10] That could be just because they have intimate knowledge of how it's kind of

[2:17:15] intimate knowledge of how it's kind of useless

[2:17:15] to say one way or another.

[2:17:17] But I think everyone's concern among the general public is that big developers are

[2:17:22] going to come in right across from your house, you're going to get 500 homes.

[2:17:27] And I think as long as there's a process to intensely scrutinize those,

[2:17:31] you may not even have to get to the 1-acre or 5-acre debate really as a part of this

[2:17:37] growth plan. I think you could simply put in there by restricting kind of what your

[2:17:42] growth plan is, it may be good enough for the Board of Zoning Appeals to not approve

[2:17:47] these massive subdivisions in certain rural parts of the county,

[2:17:51] which is what everyone's fear is.

[2:17:53] I would just like to reiterate,

[2:17:55] and I guess counter one of our other constituents' statement about farmland not

[2:18:00] being really used for farming or food producing. I think that's just flat out

[2:18:05] producing. I think that's just flat out wrong.

[2:18:05] I think that is someone who I think,

[2:18:07] and I say ignorant in just a not knowing the details kind of way.

[2:18:11] I don't think that individual's from here. I think he's looking at this.

[2:18:16] Much as like a massive cornfield in Illinois where he's from.

[2:18:20] Agriculture looks different here,

[2:18:22] just like it looks different out west in South Dakota,

[2:18:25] but agriculture is still much aware and alive in Murray County,

[2:18:29] and I think we need to help preserve it.

[2:18:32] For my last little over a minute, I would ask this group to consider one thing.

[2:18:37] I don't agree with the planned growth up and down Highway 7 in Santa Fe.

[2:18:41] However, I think if you are going to consider that What I would ask for would

[2:18:46] consider that What I would ask for would be if

[2:18:46] you would consider putting more of Santa Fe in there.

[2:18:49] If you're going to keep Santa Fe in a planned growth area,

[2:18:53] I would like more to be added in.

[2:18:55] The reason for that would be to consider annexation, or rather incorporation,

[2:19:00] of Santa Fe. I believe it's been about 189 years since we've had any new city

[2:19:05] incorporated in Murray County. We've had 4. We still have 3 of those.

[2:19:09] Williamsport's no longer incorporated. But I would ask—

[2:19:13] Thank you.

[2:19:13] That to incorporate enough of Santa Fe that is outside of 3 miles from Spring

[2:19:17] that is outside of 3 miles from Spring Hill

[2:19:17] or Columbia with at least 1,500 residents so that you give Santa Fe a voice.

[2:19:21] If you're going to put them in an urban growth area,

[2:19:24] give them an area big enough that at least 1,500 residents are there.

[2:19:27] So if they want to start the process of trying to incorporate, they can.

[2:19:31] They can't do that in areas that are outside of that urban growth area in their

[2:19:35] initial incorporation. So if you don't have enough—

[2:19:38] I'm sorry.

[2:19:39] they won't ever have that voice.

[2:19:40] But if you're going to put us in that bracket, at least let us have a voice.

[2:19:45] Thank you. All right, thank you, sir.

[2:19:47] And next person up is going to be Patrick— is it Tascori? Tascori.

[2:19:51] Okay, come on up, sir.

[2:19:52] You've not spoke tonight, so please tell us your name and your district,

[2:19:56] and you'll have 3 minutes, sir. Uh, I'm Patrick Tascori.

[2:19:59] I'm in District 1 in Riverside.

[2:20:01] I live on about It's 0.4 acres, which is about perfect for what it is,

[2:20:05] 'cause it is just a city block area.

[2:20:07] I grew up in Chicago area, which was about 0.16 acres,

[2:20:10] so I live on about 3 times the size of the property that I grew up on,

[2:20:14] but it's just kind of hard to come across lots that are just city blocks like that,

[2:20:19] so I don't really have room to talk about, you know, between the 1 and 5-acre lot,

[2:20:24] but I do know what it's like to live in a densely populated area.

[2:20:28] and infrastructure that comes along with it.

[2:20:30] But I only learned about this meeting today,

[2:20:33] so these are more questions and ideas than proposed answers.

[2:20:36] And based on what I've heard tonight,

[2:20:38] I think the comment about needing better maps is really important.

[2:20:42] I'm less concerned about whether the answer is 1 acre or 5 acres than I am

[2:20:46] answer is 1 acre or 5 acres than I am about

[2:20:47] what development actually looks and feels like on the land and what it causes around

[2:20:51] it. Could GIS become more than a colored future land use map?

[2:20:55] Could it become a one public platform where the commission, a developer,

[2:20:59] and a Murray County resident can look at essentially the same non-sensitive

[2:21:03] information without needing an ArcGIS license, a special login,

[2:21:07] or hunting through different agencies for shapefiles?

[2:21:10] Could I turn on the parcels, topography, prime farmland, waterways, floodplains,

[2:21:15] traffic, existing and future roads, schools, hospitals, water and sewer

[2:21:19] schools, hospitals, water and sewer capacity,

[2:21:19] power lines, fiber cell infrastructure, parks, employment, bike routes,

[2:21:23] and other layers? And see where the data came from and when it was updated?

[2:21:28] And then, could we use those layers for what-if scenarios?

[2:21:31] If 500 homes go on 500 acres, what happens to traffic, schools, water utilities,

[2:21:36] stores, parks, and employment?

[2:21:37] What changes if those 500 homes are spread over the entire property versus

[2:21:42] concentrated into a traditional neighborhood or a small hamlet that

[2:21:46] neighborhood or a small hamlet that preserves

[2:21:46] farmland, woods, ponds, and views around it? What happens if a hospital expands?

[2:21:51] If industry grows, if another transmission corridor, cell tower,

[2:21:54] or major utility is eventually needed,

[2:21:57] are we thinking about those secondary effects before we put homes next to them?

[2:22:01] And are we preserving transportation options before development takes them away

[2:22:06] options before development takes them away from

[2:22:06] us? Murray County still has the opportunity to identify future bypasses,

[2:22:10] collector roads, roundabouts, overpasses,

[2:22:12] and underpasses before every possible corridor is occupied.

[2:22:16] Carmel, Indiana's Keystone Parkway is one example.

[2:22:19] The city describes it as a 4-lane expressway with 6 grade-separated

[2:22:22] expressway with 6 grade-separated full-access

[2:22:23] roundabouts and interchanges that maintain through traffic while preserving

[2:22:27] cross-street access.

[2:22:29] How do we move traffic efficiently without creating an endless sequence of

[2:22:33] stoplights while also avoiding bypassing small communities in a way that isolates

[2:22:37] them? And when we plan neighborhoods,

[2:22:40] are we asking whether children can bike safely to a park or a friend's house,

[2:22:44] whether an older resident can walk to a small store instead of having to drive for

[2:22:49] every trip? So the public feedback already showed interest in both the traditional

[2:22:53] neighborhoods and trails and connections.

[2:22:56] So those ideas aren't necessarily inconsistent with preserving rural

[2:23:00] inconsistent with preserving rural character.

[2:23:00] Ultimately, I think the question is bigger than 1 acre versus 5 acres.

[2:23:04] Are we planning individual developments,

[2:23:07] or are we using GIS to understand how land use, transportation utilities, housing,

[2:23:11] commerce, recreation, and the landscape interacts as one system? Thank you, sir.

[2:23:16] Appreciate that. And our last speaker this evening will be Dave Townsend.

[2:23:20] Come on up, sir. You've already spoke once tonight, so you'll have 3 minutes, sir.

[2:23:25] So the subject of real estate has come up several times this evening about property

[2:23:30] values and stuff like that,

[2:23:31] so I just wanted to come up and provide a little additional info on some of that.

[2:23:36] First off, deed restrictions are something that anybody can do.

[2:23:40] Anyone can go in right now and say,

[2:23:42] I don't want my 20 acres to divided in more than 4 lots ever.

[2:23:45] They can put that on there. It permanently runs with the land.

[2:23:49] People have the freedom right now to make that choice.

[2:23:52] They have always had that freedom.

[2:23:54] They just have to go to the deeds office and have it applied.

[2:23:57] Secondly, there's preservation opportunities that they can put it in

[2:24:01] opportunities that they can put it in trusts and

[2:24:02] different things like that.

[2:24:03] So there are some ways that those who want to do it on a voluntary basis can protect

[2:24:08] their land, first off. Secondly, Mr.

[2:24:10] Strahan, some of your questions were about property value with 1 acre versus 5

[2:24:15] acres. So the way land tends to work is that your most usable,

[2:24:18] buildable piece of property on that land,

[2:24:21] that say maybe that 1-acre area where you're building your house and your main

[2:24:25] dwelling, that's going to be your most valuable portion of it.

[2:24:29] So hypothetically, we— well, not even hypothetically,

[2:24:32] 1-acre lots in Murray County right now are around $150,000.

[2:24:35] If you go to a 5-acre lot right now,

[2:24:37] you are looking toward the north end of the county somewhere around $300,000,

[2:24:42] give or take a little bit.

[2:24:43] Toward the south end of the county, you're much more into the sub-$200,000s,

[2:24:47] so maybe around $150,000 to that amount.

[2:24:50] It averages throughout the county to about $44,000 per acre right now.

[2:24:54] So you can see right there, if you have So if you've got 20,

[2:24:57] let's say you've got your 100-acre parcel that you were dividing up earlier,

[2:25:02] and you divided that up into 5 acres, so you've got 20 of those.

[2:25:05] And you've got 20 of those, let's say, at $300,000 apiece.

[2:25:09] That's a lot of money for a 5-acre piece of land in my mind,

[2:25:12] but right there you've got $6 million, right? Did I do that right? 20 times 3.

[2:25:17] right? Did I do that right? 20 times 3. Yeah.

[2:25:17] Okay. So when you then break that down to 150,

[2:25:20] you're going to be more at the $15 million range.

[2:25:22] So there's a big difference in what you can get out of 1-acre land versus what you

[2:25:27] can get out of 5-acre land if you are the original seller of that property.

[2:25:31] So if you're that farmer who's trying to make his 401 out of that property,

[2:25:36] you've got much more options when you do have that 1 acre.

[2:25:39] And that's what people will lose if they take that 5-acre thing and apply it as a

[2:25:44] broad stroke across across the county.

[2:25:46] I also think it's important to look at, like what Sam was saying,

[2:25:50] about the individual properties that already exist. What is around them?

[2:25:54] There's a certain expectation when you go into an area and you see a certain type of

[2:25:59] house, certain type of property,

[2:26:00] that the properties nearby are going to be similar to that.

[2:26:04] And you can see that all across the county,

[2:26:06] and that's just kind of the natural growth of how development tends to work.

[2:26:11] Thank you.

[2:26:12] Um, so my time's about up. I'll go ahead and stop there. All right, very good, sir.

[2:26:16] Thank you for that. And with that said,

[2:26:18] I'll ask if there's any comments out of the committee before we leave.

[2:26:22] If not, we will be adjourned. Going once, going twice. Y'all have a blessed evening.

[2:26:26] Thanks for being here tonight, and thank you for the crowd for your turnout

[2:26:30] you for the crowd for your turnout tonight.

[2:26:30] I know it thinned out some, but I was pleased at the turnout.

Comprehensive Land Use Plan Advisory Committee Meeting

Transcript