[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.