[0:37] Good afternoon, apologies for the delay. I'm calling to order the September zoning meeting, September 21st, and I'd appreciate it if all of you would sign in, please.

[1:31] Thank you, all members present. I'd like to turn the pledge of allegiance over to Mr. Fox.

[2:00] Thank you. I'd like to now turn the meeting over to Director Moyers for swearing in. All right. If you're here to speak to this body,

[2:08] on any item on the agenda either for or against the item, please stand and raise your hand.

[2:14] If you plan to speak to this body on any item, please stand and raise your right hand.

[2:21] Everybody?

[2:22] All right.

[2:22] Do you sell them to swear or firm testimony about to give the truth?

[2:25] The whole truth and nothing of the truth, so you got to be seated.

[2:31] Thank you very much.

[2:32] Moving on to amendments to the agenda.

[2:35] We have zero ads. We have number nine deferred to October. We have zero withdrawals.

[2:46] So could I ask for a motion please to approve the minutes? Motion by Duretz. Second by Russell.

[3:07] Tally please.

[3:18] Thank you. Motion passes. We do have a couple of members signed up for public form.

[3:25] We typically for zoning wait and call public for members at the time the zoning is heard so

[3:31] please don't forget that we have forgotten about you.

[3:37] I'm looking for approval please at the minutes from the previous meeting.

[3:43] Motion by Rawls, second by Holt.

[3:47] We are open for voting.

[3:55] Anyone wish to change their vote?

[4:01] Assess 11-0.

[4:03] Thank you so much.

[4:16] Item 1, please, Madam.

[4:17] item. Item number one is RZ-26-901. It's a resolution, approval, and authorizing a moratorium

[4:28] on data centers in Knox County.

[4:34] Thank you. Commissioner Durrett.

[4:37] Thank you, Madam Chair. Due to my current employment and to avoid any potential conflict

[4:43] of entrance perception, I would like to abstain from this.

[4:47] But thank you, abstention noted.

[4:50] We have a first on this by how could be second by Thompson, discussion, Commissioner Fox.

[4:56] Thank you Madam Chair.

[4:57] I have a question for Mr. Moeers.

[5:03] If we do any, if the commission does anything, if the commission order do anything other than

[5:10] approve this, assuming that the commission does not deny it, for instance change any that

[5:17] provisions in what was proposed by the Planning Commission? Does that mean it has to return

[5:25] back to the Planning Commission? That is an interesting question. It depends on how

[5:30] extensive the changes were.

[5:34] There's no bright line distinction, but what the courts say

[5:38] is that the Planning Commission must advise before you act on any zoning change. The reason

[5:44] This has come back to us the second time, is because the courts consider a moratorium

[5:51] like this to be a zoning chain.

[5:54] So we initially passed this moratorium using our police powers.

[5:59] If we do it tonight, it'll also be under the zoning rules and regs.

[6:04] So I think it would withstand any kind of scrutiny.

[6:09] But if you make significant changes to what the Planning Commission has approved, it might

[6:14] have to be sent back for their reconsideration. So, but if we were to lower the peak

[6:27] electric

[6:28] demand from 10 megawatts to 5 megawatts, would that be a substantial change?

[6:32] I would think so. It would certainly give somebody an argument if they wanted that our

[6:37] moratorium was not valid. Okay. I would recommend you leave things the way they are, but I'm

[6:46] I'm not a commission, so yeah.

[6:47] Thank you.

[6:49] Thank you.

[6:50] Any other comments, questions?

[6:52] We have a motion in a second on the floor.

[6:55] Voting is open.

[7:02] Does anyone wish to change their vote?

[7:05] Tally, please.

[7:08] Motion passes, 10 with one abstention.

[7:12] Next item, please.

[7:15] Item number two is seven-L-26-RZ.

[7:18] It's a request of Michael Gerard, for rezoning from CA General Business to PR plan residential

[7:25] up to 12 dwelling units in Acre.

[7:27] The property is located at Zero Bionton Beaver Ridge Road, parcel ID, 090 DA, 040401 in the

[7:36] 6th Commission District.

[7:39] Thank you.

[7:40] Is the applicant present?

[7:45] Mr. Gerand,

[7:49] I don't see him.

[7:50] We will call this again at the end of the meeting.

[7:53] Next item please. Item number 3 is 8-B-26-RZ. It's a request of Randall Buckner for

[8:04] rezoning from a agricultural to R.I. low-density residential, the

[8:08] property is located at 531-75501-5507 East Emory Road, zero quarry road,

[8:15] parcel of the 029, 020302, 020309, 098106, and the 7th Commission District.

[8:26] Thank you.

[8:27] Is the applicant present?

[8:28] Come forward, please.

[8:30] If you'd state your name and address for the record.

[8:37] Good evening.

[8:38] My name is Stephen Ward, PO Box 30654, Hospital Tennessee.

[8:45] I'm the surveyor for this project.

[8:46] The owner could not be here this evening.

[8:48] Thank you, Mr. Ward. Is there any opposition present to this item?

[8:55] Seeing none, Director Brooks, if you'd read the recommendation, please.

[8:59] Planning commission recommends that county commission approve the RA load and

[9:02] see residential sound because it's consistent with the Knox County Comprehensive Plan and surrounding development.

[9:07] Thank you. Mr. Ward, would you like to speak to this project?

[9:10] Not unless you all have any questions.

[9:13] I do look to my fellow commissioners, commissioner Fox.

[9:17] Thank you Madam Chair. I do have a question. What, Mr. Ward? Does the owner, and this is here representing the owners, that is correct, sir.

[9:27] What does the owner want to do with this property?

[9:31] There's a small house on the 30, he wants to break off, he wants to retain the, there's a pond and some acreage that goes back behind KUP substation there on the east side, he wants to retain, and he had to be able to get a zoning that allowed him to go less than 1 acre per lot.

[9:46] to do that. That's the general reason for doing it. The land in the back, he decided

[9:52] while we were at it to go ahead, and that's all his mother's land that he just inherited.

[9:57] He wouldn't take care of it all in one fell swoop.

[10:00] He wants to join it all into one, he may at one time. He wants to do it as one big rezoning.

[10:06] He does not want to join all the parcels together. He's going to cut off the house that's closest to

[10:11] uh, the KB substation, okay, retained the property behind with one of the other tracks

[10:16] and then I, he was going to do something with the rear, but I don't remember what his

[10:19] plans were, but I know he did want to re-zone all of it simultaneously.

[10:22] Is he, is he planning on building something?

[10:26] Possibly, he didn't share, he just wanted to get R.A. while we were doing it.

[10:30] I told him he could probably do all the pieces at once, um, you know, it's one application

[10:35] and you can do multiple parcels, so I told him, best bang for his buck was to do it all at

[10:39] at once if he has had intentions of doing that in the future.

[10:44] Okay, thank you.

[10:46] Are there any other questions, comments?

[10:51] Commissioner Bealer, your district,

[10:53] I turned it over to you.

[10:56] Thank you, Madam Chair.

[10:58] I just had a question for Director Snowden, please.

[11:01] I drove that property and it's north of Brown Cap.

[11:04] Are there any site distance issues

[11:06] to your knowledge Director Snowden?

[11:08] I don't believe so with this location,

[11:10] We've kind of looked at it preliminarily and didn't see any major challenges with access, so I think we'd be okay with that.

[11:18] Thank you, sir.

[11:23] Do you wish to make a motion?

[11:25] Yes, ma'am.

[11:26] I'd like to make a motion to approve this Zoning Request up to two units per acre, please, at this location.

[11:33] All right.

[11:33] We have a motion for two per acre.

[11:39] And this, instead of approving the low-density residential, you're specifying to per acre.

[11:49] Correct.

[11:51] Point of order, is this P, we're approving for going from RA to PR?

[11:57] That's what I'm trying to clarify here.

[12:02] If I made the request was, I think, from AgriPulse Rule 2, RA, he has no desire to go to PR.

[12:08] because PR puts setbacks on there that would probably put the existing structures in violation quite honestly because PR, you get a 35 foot peripheral around the development, which would put all of these properties rather than the rear piece already have structures on them, all the pieces on the road frontage.

[12:29] It's only the piece in the rear that I believe backs up the ball field and a separate access off another road that's undeveloped. The others are all currently developed.

[12:36] All right. Thank you. Just for clarification, Commissioner Bealer, your motion was for

[12:44] PR at 2 per acre?

[12:56] I'm okay. I mean, I understand planning commissions.

[13:05] I want to make the motion to adopt per

[13:10] planning commission up to 2 units per acre.

[13:16] Madam Chair, a point of order. I believe that's going to have to go back through planning

[13:20] commission, I'd like a director of lawyers to opine.

[13:23] I agree.

[13:26] The RA zone is a zone that allows how many units per acre in the RA zone can you, it's

[13:33] 10,000 square feet and 4.

[13:35] Roughly four.

[13:36] So roughly four without infrastructure.

[13:40] So that's by right.

[13:42] If we go to PR, which the Planning Commission has not considered, then it would have to be

[13:47] referred back to the Planning Commission for their recommendations.

[13:58] I'd like to withdraw that motion and open it up for more discussions on it.

[14:02] I'm so.

[14:03] All right.

[14:05] Commissioner Fox.

[14:06] Thank you, Madam Chair.

[14:09] That's why I was trying, Mr. Ward, to identify what the owner wants to do with this.

[14:19] Because if he came and said, I want to do for units breaker, that might be something that

[14:22] would be objectionable to at least some of us.

[14:25] and so we need to know in your under oath now and so we're saying what does he

[14:29] want to do because if he just wants to you know build another if it's an owner

[14:33] that wants to build another home with you know on this track then generally

[14:39] the commission will will go along with that but you know if if this is something

[14:46] that the owner he wants to build what so we got we got a pawn so we got basically

[14:52] six acres, so 24 homes, I don't think that people would be likely to vote for that.

[15:00] We need to know, because we might just say no, you know, we make new plans. Understand, matter of saying he's has no intention of doing that. Like I said, there are existing structures on there. This was his mother's property who recently passed. I believe he currently resides on one of the tracks. Believe his son lives in one of the others. The only place we have any intent of doing any development would be in the rear and that's future. He has not told me he just wanted to go ahead and rezone it while we're at it because it was easy enough to add to the request.

[15:29] he doesn't have any current plans or sold anybody or anything like that

[15:35] the more area. It was just a it was an add on I told him to do what he wanted to

[15:39] do with keeping that property in the rear that had to be rezoned to make it

[15:42] work that he did not have enough acreage there to cut off the existing house

[15:45] keep the pond in the land in the back to with that rezoning and probably my

[15:50] mistake but I I suggested that he had the other track down while he was at it just

[15:54] to for future housekeeping but now he doesn't have any plans that I'm aware of to

[15:57] develop back there in the new future. Okay. And so I'll even

[16:03] go as far as say if I don't know if you all can do this, if you

[16:06] wanted to just rezone the fronts and leave the back parcel out of

[16:09] it, if that can be done without going to planning back to

[16:13] planning commission, I would be okay with that. Because that was

[16:15] not his immediate concern, was that rear parcel? And this is 5317

[16:20] right and trending. Okay, there it is. Yeah. So it's tracked

[16:25] in rear that runs behind the others. I don't have the parcel

[16:27] number at my fingertips, but I can get it. Mr. Buckner.

[16:40] Commissioner Fox, while you're

[16:41] looking, would you jacked to someone else speaking? No, I'd be glad to yield. Thank you.

[16:48] Commissioner Durea. Thank you Madam Chair. I just wanted to point out and looking at the packet

[16:56] for this item, that it's not necessarily rare, but this is an occasion where county staff,

[17:03] The Planning Commission both agree on exactly what to do.

[17:08] There is no condition, there is no anything else.

[17:12] So it does, and I've pulled up the future land use map as it references.

[17:19] It's just, there's no, from what I can tell, there was no issue regarding our educationally

[17:26] trained staff members and also those that were appointed on the board.

[17:30] that it's not a good word. No conditions. No nothing. So and it was on consent. So that that tells me that it's it's fairly.

[17:41] That it might be okay to just me forward with it, but just want to point that out because again when staff and in

[17:49] planning commission agree it's usually because it's a good thing.

[17:56] Commissioner Thompson.

[18:00] Thank you, I'm here. Director Brooks, I know I remembered two years ago when I had my

[18:08] first item. I'm going through this process. When we're looking at RA versus PR, PR does

[18:15] not have a minimum lot size, correct?

[18:20] That's, it looks like correct, yes, yeah.

[18:23] But RA does have a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Correct. And so while you technically

[18:31] could somewhat cluster the houses, there's still a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet.

[18:39] So it's not going to, it's not like you're going to be able to compress all of the density

[18:44] into one area.

[18:45] So it would have to be spread out somewhat and also accommodate for any potential infrastructures.

[18:50] So you're not going to get the true for dwelling units per acre once, if this were to be built

[18:57] out to get the full four units per acre because you have to have the setbacks and you have to have

[19:03] the road width and all the other things that go along with it. So typically RA is more desirable

[19:11] than PR because it does have the middle of a lot size. So just a thought of reference.

[19:17] Thank you. Commissioner Huckabee.

[19:20] My question for you, sir, is understanding the lot itself. So the back parcel that you

[19:25] recommended your client to add on, how do they access that property? Is there an easement?

[19:32] I believe it has an easement off of Quarry Road. It's got a Quarry Road address and I believe

[19:36] that's where it's access is from. I don't believe it's actually shown on the access is shown

[19:40] on KGIS. I'm looking at it right now. I'll phone, but I believe it does have an easement to

[19:44] go over to Quarry Road. And that's the other thing. If he was going to develop that, he would

[19:49] honestly have to bring it through, probably through one of these other tracks to make it

[19:54] It was just an afterthought, and another point to make on that rear piece.

[19:58] There is a, from this pond, there is a creek running through there as well, that I know

[20:05] well that the county engineering would make us put a buffer along that as well.

[20:09] So the density that some might be thinking out here isn't even if we were to develop this

[20:13] in the future, we're not talking a 50 lot subdivision, it just doesn't lend itself to it.

[20:19] I'm sorry, that's what I do, but this is not one I would tell somebody to try to stick 50 lots on because I don't wait

[20:25] there's a way to get it to fit.

[20:30] Commissioner Beeler.

[20:32] Thank you, Mr. Ward, for that clarification.

[20:34] I think my concern was planning commission had the zoning up to 20-29 units and or 24 duplexes.

[20:43] But I appreciate you coming to represent your client.

[20:45] I'm going to make a motion that we approve this zoning per planning, per planning.

[20:52] approval. Thank you. Motion to approve as recommended by Planning Commission. Is there a second?

[21:02] I'm sorry. That is your motion. We have a motion by Bill or second by Thompson. Is there any more

[21:11] discussion on this?

[21:15] Commissioner Fox? Oh but voting is open.

[21:25] Does anyone wish to change their vote?

[21:28] Boatings closed.

[21:32] Passes unanimously, 11-0.

[21:34] Good luck with your project, sir.

[21:36] Thank you all.

[21:36] I have good evening.

[21:37] Next item.

[21:40] Item number four is 8-c-26-rz.

[21:44] It's a request of Christie Gettelman,

[21:47] for rezoning from a agricultural

[21:48] to R.A. Logensity Residential.

[21:51] The property is located at 64-27.

[21:53] McFall Road, parcel ID 039, 067 in the 7th Commission District.

[22:00] Thank you. Is the applicant present? Come forward, please.

[22:07] If you tell us your name and address for the record.

[22:16] Hi, my name is Michelle Klein. I'm the daughter of the owners of the property.

[22:22] And we're trying to get it ready.

[22:23] Okay. And your address is 6427 McFall.

[22:28] All right. Hold on.

[22:30] Is there any opposition to this project present?

[22:35] Seeing none, Director Brooks, if you'd read the recommendation.

[22:39] Planning commission recommends that County Commission approve the RA load-in city zone because

[22:43] it's consistent with the next kind of comprehensive plan and will bring the property to compliance

[22:46] with the zoning code.

[22:47] All right.

[22:48] Now, would you like to tell us about the project?

[22:52] My parents are aging and my dad is a vet and he's on dialysis now.

[22:57] And it's just a lot to take care of my property and their property and their property is family property.

[23:05] So we are going to sell our house. Well, we have sold our house.

[23:10] And we just want to move in a single live trailer so we can help them as they're aging.

[23:16] And you know, take care of the property that my grandfather left my mom.

[23:20] home. And it's just my dad doing dialysis three days a week. He just he can't

[23:26] move that property. He can't clean off the growth that's going to overtake it.

[23:31] And, you know, they just need help. I can appreciate that. Does any, do any

[23:38] commissioners have any questions? Seeing none, Commissioner Wheeler?

[23:44] Well, I'm sure I just had one comment. Oh, I'm sorry. That's okay. Yeah. Well, I was

[23:48] going to note that this is the classic example of some individual coming and wanting to take

[23:55] it from agricultural to low-density residential, just one individual, not because they wanted

[24:00] to build a subdivision, but just because for some reason, low residential, better suites,

[24:07] whatever they're trying to do with the property, so I was just noting that for the new commissioners.

[24:12] Thank you, and I actually agree with what you're saying, Commissioner Fox, although I will point out just having had it happen in my own district that sometimes we make approvals for certain

[24:31] for certain densities or certain land types like RA and then the property ends up being

[24:40] sold and even though it's RA and there was no intention of building and I'm not insinuating

[24:48] this with you at all at all ma'am but it gets sold and next thing you know you got 40 houses

[24:54] is coming in. So at any rate, just a caution that we all may have experienced at one

[24:59] time or another. Commissioner Bealer.

[25:05] Thank you, ma'am. I think it's noble that you're taking care of your parents. I'm going

[25:08] to make a motion that we approved this zoning request for planning commission's unanimous

[25:13] decision.

[25:14] All right. If you press your motion, we have a motion on the floor by Bealer. Second by

[25:21] My hold, is there any more discussion on this item?

[25:25] Seeing none, voting is open.

[25:37] Thank you, anyone wish to change?

[25:40] Voting is closed.

[25:43] Motion passes 11-0.

[25:45] Next item, please.

[25:46] Thank you.

[25:47] Good luck with your project.

[25:49] The next item is number five.

[25:52] It's 8-B-26-PA.

[25:55] Request of David?

[26:01] in HPE Hill's High Protection, to BP Business Park and HPE Hill's High Protection.

[26:07] Properly located at zero East Raccoon Valley Drive, Partial ID 026, 076 Partial in the 7th Commission District.

[26:16] Thank you. It's the applicant present.

[26:24] Could we have your name and address, sir?

[26:26] David Hirsch, 1627, Greenwell Graph.

[26:30] Thank you, Mr. Hirsch. Is there any opposition present?

[26:32] Senate?

[26:36] Seeing none, Director Brooks, would you read the recommendation?

[26:39] Planning commission recommends that county commission approve the BP business part

[26:42] place type because it's consistent with the established development and changing

[26:45] conditions. Thank you. Mr. Hearst, would you like to speak to this project?

[26:50] No unless you've got any questions. I intend to build a shop to house Hearst

[26:54] excavating company that I'm currently the CEO.

[27:00] Thank you.

[27:02] Commissioners, any questions?

[27:06] Seeing no lights?

[27:09] Commissioner Bailer, you're on again.

[27:14] Welcome to zoning, huh?

[27:15] Yes.

[27:16] The owner over here.

[27:18] Director Snowden, I just had a quick question on this one.

[27:21] Can you, for this rookie commissioner here on the hillside protection?

[27:25] That will be all addressed during the design phase and things.

[27:31] Yes, sir. We'd work through that in design plan review.

[27:34] Okay. Sounds good. Thank you for that. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll go ahead and make a motion that we approve this zoning request because it's right there at the interstate with easy access to interstate per planning's approval.

[27:48] Thank you. And motion is made. Second by Commissioner Russell. Is there any more discussion on this item?

[27:58] Commissioner Russell?

[28:01] Oh, I'm sorry.

[28:02] No. I see no more lights. Thank you. Voting is open.

[28:14] Does anyone wish to change their vote? Voting

[28:17] is closed. That passes 11-0. Good luck with your project. Yes, sir. Thank you all.

[28:25] Item number six is also a request of William David Hearst. It's item number 8-E-26-RZ.

[28:34] Sorry.

[28:34] It's for rezoning from CA General Business to the LI Line Industrial, and the property

[28:39] description is the same as the previous item.

[28:43] Thank you, and I do need your name again for that.

[28:45] David Hurst, 1627, Greenwell Drive.

[28:48] Thank you.

[28:49] Thank you, sir.

[28:52] Is any opposition present, seeing none, Commissioner Director Brooks, if you'd read, please?

[28:59] Planning Commission recommends that County Commission approve that LI light industrial zone because it's compatible with the surrounding development and changing conditions.

[29:08] Thank you. Commissioners, are there any questions?

[29:11] You've already spoken to your project, Commissioner Bealer.

[29:17] I make a motion that we approve per planning's unanimous consent on this project.

[29:23] Thank you.

[29:24] First by Bealer.

[29:25] Second by Russell, is there any more discussion?

[29:28] Seeing non-voting is open.

[29:36] Does anyone wish to change their vote? Voting is closed. Passes unanimously.

[29:43] Next item, please. Good luck, sir. Item number 7 is 7-0-26-RZ. It's a request of

[29:52] Ronda Vineyard for rezoning from A.I.C.R. Holtroll to P.R.P.R.

[29:55] residential after three dwelling units per acre, the property is located at 462.

[30:00] Lay, Crippin Road, parcel ID 039, 024, part of, partial, I'm sorry, and it's in the 7th Commission District. Thank you. The applicant present.

[30:14] Your name and address, please, ma'am.

[30:18] My name is Rhonda Vineyard. My address is 7609, Charmwood Way, in Knoxville. 37938, is my zip code. Thank you. Is there any opposition present to speak against the

[30:32] item?

[30:35] Seeing none. Director Brooks, please.

[30:38] Planning Commission recommends that County Commission approve the PR plan

[30:41] residential zone up to three dwellings per acre subject to the condition that

[30:45] developer provide the Knox County Department of Engineering Public Works. A

[30:48] certification from a license surveyor that there's adequate site distance on

[30:52] Krippen Road before County Commission approval.

[30:55] Thank you. Would you like to speak to your project?

[30:59] If there's any questions, I would be glad to answer any.

[31:02] All right. Thank you. Commissioner Fox.

[31:07] Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, I would like to know what your project is.

[31:10] It looks like this, how big is your track to land? It looks fairly large. I didn't get the acreage.

[31:14] There's 30 acres, but only 18 will be able to be developed.

[31:19] Okay. So, 54 houses.

[31:24] Yeah, there's three per acre's all they're asking.

[31:26] Okay.

[31:30] Do you already have, do you already envision what kinds of homes

[31:33] homes you seek to build there?

[31:36] It's not so, but I think the idea will be three single family homes.

[31:42] Single family homes.

[31:43] So 54, what, are you, when you say that 18 acres or you're not planning on developing

[31:53] on them, is that because those 18 acres are not conducive to placing a home on them, or

[32:02] or you wanted to spread them out, could you explain?

[32:06] The adjoining property belongs to the owner.

[32:08] They all live there, there's three homes,

[32:11] and they want to sell it, but of course,

[32:14] they want to keep the density down

[32:15] because they're going to be right next door to it.

[32:23] It looks like, oh, there's a right-of-way,

[32:26] an electric wire right-of-way

[32:29] that goes through the property, is that right?

[32:33] Nothing, I'm aware of.

[32:35] This is 4628, Crippin Road.

[32:43] 4628, correct.

[33:03] And 4628, Crippin Road, it says it's actually 69 acres is what I'm looking at, I misspelled

[33:09] it.

[33:10] Well there's actually that, we're taking half of that and trying to develop, it's 30 acres

[33:17] total.

[33:20] So the 18 acres, I'm not aware of any kind of easement line or anything like that.

[33:26] Madam

[33:29] Chair.

[33:32] I might ask another question in a minute.

[33:34] I'll yield for now.

[33:36] Thank you.

[33:37] If I may, Commissioner Dirt is next.

[33:42] Thank you, Madam Chair.

[33:44] I see that in planning commissions approval it was dependent upon adequate site distance on

[33:53] has that taken place either Director Snowden or Director?

[34:01] Yeah, sorry.

[34:03] It has.

[34:03] We went back and forth with the surveyor and there is probably only one location that has

[34:10] adequate line of sight, but he has confirmed that to our satisfaction.

[34:14] Okay.

[34:15] Okay.

[34:16] Good.

[34:17] I have family that lives in the condominium complex that's directly across the street.

[34:22] So that and and I'm in and out of there quite a bit and so I understand the need for that but if director Snowden is happy then I'm happy. Thank you. Thank you.

[34:33] Commissioner Russell.

[34:37] Thank you Madam Chair. I just wanted to make sure that the District Commissioner was aware that staff had originally suggested that this be denied.

[34:51] and also that there was opposition at the planning commission.

[35:01] Commissioner Huckby.

[35:02] Thank you, Madam Chair.

[35:04] I just want to clarify for Commissioner Fox, in those rezoning packet, because I had the

[35:09] same question you did, they do crop out the section, because I noticed that discrepancy.

[35:15] I'm going to say it's the left side of the map.

[35:17] Right.

[35:20] Any other discussion? Commissioner Bealer. Well, do you have an objection? Commissioner

[35:29] Fox speaks again. Commissioner Fox. Thank you, Madam Chair. So this question may be directed

[35:38] to director Brooks or director Snowden, but okay,

[35:47] well, actually, I think I can answer

[35:48] So they're just wanting to, you can rezone just a portion of a tract, in other words.

[35:56] Yes, that's correct, to me, sir.

[35:57] Okay.

[35:58] Commissioner Fox, I wanted to also know there is this parcel stops before it gets to there,

[36:04] but there is what appears to be either a, either a TVA or KUB easement on the property, but

[36:10] they don't go that far to the south, so they stop some distance before that.

[36:13] But there is an easement on the parcel, but not on the area that's being resumed.

[36:17] Yeah.

[36:17] Thank you Commissioner Russell. Thank you Madam Chair. I do have a question for the applicant.

[36:25] Do you plan on asking for the remaining property to be resellented at any point in the future?

[36:31] No ma'am that's the hillside rich top. I don't think the slopes too big. I don't think we can do

[36:37] anything with that.

[36:43] Any other comments? Commissioner Wheeler.

[36:46] I just had a couple of questions. There were six comments to the planning commission not

[36:54] opposing this but had some questions about the zoning request. A lot of side I think

[37:00] Director Snowden has addressed that. The increased traffic they estimated 572 trips would

[37:06] be an estimate on increasing on that road. Encrypting road doesn't have a shoulder.

[37:14] It's not need to disrepair and then some concerns about drainage and things, but did you

[37:24] have a chance to talk to any of the property owners adjacent to this property?

[37:30] There was one gentleman that came in opposition and he was concerned with drainage but he was

[37:35] on the other side of the road and there was not going to be, it really wasn't going

[37:41] effect him at all. There was one person that day and so I believe that was resolved.

[37:50] And the other question I had there was a concern about the number of units and one of

[37:58] the persons that commented to planning was concerned about the 54 units and was curious with

[38:05] The two units per acre won't, it didn't pose as a question because they thought 54 units

[38:12] was potentially too much for this area, would your customer consider anything less than

[38:18] three per acre?

[38:19] Absolutely not.

[38:20] It would have to be three or more.

[38:21] Okay.

[38:22] Or three.

[38:24] Okay.

[38:24] Thank you for that.

[38:25] Director Snowden, I just had a quick question on the line of sight.

[38:29] But I think we got the letter from the surveyor and then to make sure we have, we're meeting

[38:37] the uniform traffic code, we'll, once they design it, we'll make sure we get the coordinates

[38:42] together.

[38:42] I think we had, you know, I talked about the KGIS had too much tolerance for you.

[38:46] You wanted to make sure that we got it more specifically, is that correct?

[38:50] That's correct, Mr. Baylor.

[38:52] On the back end, before we will sign a plot of creating the lots, we would require them

[38:58] to have an additional certification that has those real specific measurements and we would

[39:03] verify that as well. So there's a there's a failsafe there to make sure that that before

[39:08] any audit is created above what they have today that they would certify that.

[39:12] Okay, thank you, sir.

[39:19] Director Stunders, one more question here. As Crippin Road, is it on

[39:25] the NUX County project for improvement capital improvements or is it, where does it stand

[39:33] on. I know you have a scale and it's objective scale for new asphalt and

[39:37] striping. Where is it on that scale if we recollect? We do not have

[39:42] creeping road on any per se capital plan for roadway improvements. I think we

[39:48] have we have done some operational improvements on you know the location.

[39:51] There's a part nearby that there I think that there have been some folks have

[39:57] some concern about so I know we have done some restriping and some

[40:00] operational improvements in the past, but unfortunately, we do not have any plans to

[40:05] make large scale or really significant improvements to this location.

[40:11] Thank you, sir.

[40:17] I guess this is a question for Director Brooks, please.

[40:22] With the increase in traffic on Emory Road, Crippin to Brown Gap has become like, I think

[40:28] planning calls it a minor connector road?

[40:31] For it to become a major connector road,

[40:34] does that have to do with volume of trips

[40:36] or does that have to do with where people are going,

[40:40] if you understand my question?

[40:43] Well, all the roads are classified in the major road plan.

[40:47] So in order to reclassify it,

[40:49] have to go through a total of an analysis

[40:53] to look at how the road functions, how many cars it's carrying, but currently it is classified as a minor collector.

[41:06] And then, Director

[41:10] Snowden, just for you again, sorry, I'm just trying to get all this squirt away here.

[41:13] There were 12 traffic accidents, no fatalities, thank goodness, between 2016 and 2024.

[41:20] 4. Now in terms of a rate,

[41:27] can you help me out on that rate 12 per 8 years? Is that below

[41:32] the average, or I don't mean to put you on the spot, like that, but no. And sadly, I can't

[41:39] answer that just right now. I would need to, there's some analysis that would have to go

[41:43] into that. I mean, to put in perspective, kind of perspective, we, there is a traffic

[41:48] it can't, that's closer towards manable highway of 4,200 vehicles a day. That was,

[41:56] what was that take? In 2025, so the roads essentially carrying about 4,200 cars a day out

[42:05] there. It's kind of hard to say, I could calculate that rate, but because you're right, that rate

[42:10] is really what we're mostly worried about because crashes, there are random occurrences by nature

[42:16] of themselves. So we want to look at that volume versus that. That number of crashes. I can do that.

[42:21] I just I don't have it readily available right now. Yeah. That's okay. I appreciate that. I

[42:25] the other question I have with the estimated increase in trips to 572.

[42:31] Your criteria to have a transportation set would be 750 or higher and or if there was an

[42:38] ordinary amount of crashes and fatalities, right? That could trigger a traffic state as well. Is that

[42:43] correct? Yes, or Amy and I, if we feel like that there's a need for a study

[42:47] regardless of the number of created trips we can certainly ask for one.

[42:52] And this may not be a fair question, but the estimated five or seven two trips

[42:57] as opposed to how many you said per day, how much impact is that going to have? I mean,

[43:03] Crippin Road is a, doesn't have a shoulder? It's an older county road. I mean,

[43:09] is there any way for you to make a judgment on that? That's true.

[43:12] I mean, you know, and it's, you know, if we were to look at a study at this location,

[43:17] the two things we'd be probably, well, three things we'd be probably focused on is

[43:21] warn you're right that just a width of the road versus the volume, that's always a concern

[43:25] because, you know, that creates issues, the line of sight, which they've kind of addressed

[43:31] and then really the percentage, the large percentage of traffic is going to turn left out of here

[43:35] to go to the main highway.

[43:36] I mean, that's going to be the bulk of the traffic and, you know, what does that do to

[43:42] The signalized intersection does the turn lanes down there have enough length to you know to contain that queuing a traffic

[43:49] So those would be that probably the three things that we would look at what kind of operational improvements

[43:54] We would they would need to do to mitigate their traffic as well as what might be to add a delay at the intersection of brown gap

[44:02] Not brown gap. I'm sorry. Thank you. I appreciate that and

[44:12] then

[44:13] more real quick here on drainage. There was some slopeage on the back side of that.

[44:17] Miss Fender, maybe you could help me with that. Is hillside protection or is there

[44:22] some sloping on the back side of the property?

[44:25] Yeah, I guess the difference between 18 and 30, that's what's on that hillside.

[44:30] And so we can't do anything that that's part of the slope on the back side of the

[44:35] property, correct? Okay. All right. Thank you for that.

[44:46] Commissioner Boehler. Commissioner Fox has his light on one more time. Would you object to his?

[44:53] No, ma'am. No, ma'am. Thank you. Commissioner Fox.

[44:56] Thank you, ma'am. I'm sure. I do have a question. Are you currently, are you planning on-

[45:00] On personally developing this, or do you have an agreement with a developer you've already spoken with about getting this developed at three units breaker? Well, you're so ago, the family asked me to sell it. So at that time, I did engage with two or three developers, and they've all made offers, but we've not accepted anything. I will not have anything personal. I will not be doing anything with this development. Right, I understand. I'm just trying to find out if there's already somebody waiting in the wings for this approval to get started.

[45:27] and, you know, who potentially that developer was.

[45:31] Um, am I at liberty to, I don't think I should say now.

[45:36] You don't have to.

[45:37] Sorry, but I don't know if they would want their name out there.

[45:41] I think, uh, Mr. Moore's, I think she's required to answer the question.

[45:51] What was the question?

[45:52] I'm just asking if there have been discussions with the, uh,

[45:55] there's a developer waiting the wings for this rezoning to begin developing the project.

[45:59] But

[46:04] the question is asking for the specific person in the contractual agree that it's confidential right now, correct.

[46:11] I don't know if...

[46:12] Well, I don't believe that you can compel her to answer a question like that.

[46:19] You could vote against her if she fails to.

[46:21] But I don't think this body has the power to require somebody to answer a question.

[46:27] Okay. Thank you. That's all I have, Madam Chair. Thank you.

[46:31] Thank you.

[46:38] I make a motion that we approve it per planning's recommendation to 13-0.

[46:47] No, there's three, three dwelling units per acre.

[46:56] Madam Chair, I think he was just reading the vote.

[47:00] I think he was just reading the vote 13-0 from Plain and Commissioner.

[47:06] Thank you.

[47:06] We have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Baylor, second by hold.

[47:11] Is there any further discussion?

[47:12] Yes, I have a commission to make a substitute motion.

[47:22] My substitute motion is to approve this at Duke University Breaker, Plain Residential.

[47:27] Is there a second on Commissioner Fox's second?

[47:36] All right, we have a substitute motion on the floor at two per acre instead of the three,

[47:43] made by Commissioner Fox, second by Russell, is there any discussion on that? Commissioner

[47:50] Holt? Madam Chair, Commissioner Fox, could you clarify the reason for the substitute

[47:57] of motion? Certainly. I think that they ought to be transparent

[48:00] about coming to us and asking for a rezoning. If they're going to conceal things then they

[48:05] can be entitled to units breaker. That's my reasoning.

[48:08] Are

[48:13] there any other comments or questions? May I ask Mr. Snowden a question? I mean,

[48:21] if they're going to approve two, how can I oppose that?

[48:29] I don't know if I can answer that question. I think that may be more legal. You could withdraw

[48:35] the request. I mean, I would necessarily want to provide you advice in that matter, but

[48:40] Mr. Morgers may be able to provide more legal advice to that.

[48:44] Well, I'm not going to provide legal advice.

[48:47] I would just tell you that if you're not satisfied with the body, you can bring into

[48:53] Claretory Judgment Action in a court of general jurisdiction in Knox County challenging

[48:59] the vote of the commission that you're out of appeal.

[49:04] Thank you.

[49:05] I'd like to state that, you know, we are always talking about listening to the recommendations

[49:12] of the commissioner in the zone here and Commissioner Bealer has made the recommendation to follow planning.

[49:27] I'm not sure that it's, I'm not sure that it's wise just because the person presenting is not willing to disclose who might or might not want to develop it,

[49:38] which may or may not even happen with that person anyway

[49:41] is really a fair question.

[49:44] But again, that's my opinion.

[49:48] Commissioner Huckabee, did you have a comment?

[49:50] Yes, Madam Chair, thank you.

[49:52] Ms. Minnard, just to clarify,

[49:53] you're not the property owner, right?

[49:54] You're the realtor representing you.

[49:56] No, they're the remit family.

[49:57] It's the property.

[49:58] I'm just the realtor.

[49:59] And is it under contract with the buyer?

[50:01] There's not a signed contract, no.

[50:04] Okay, so it's listed on the public market.

[50:06] No, it's not.

[50:06] Thank you.

[50:07] It's not listed.

[50:09] No, it's not.

[50:09] Okay.

[50:18] Questions or comments?

[50:21] All right.

[50:22] Seeing none, the substitute motion on the floor is for two units per acre.

[50:28] Voting is open.

[50:41] Does anyone wish to change their vote?

[50:46] Voting is closed.

[50:50] The motion fails.

[50:52] The substitute motion fails.

[50:53] So we're back to the original motion, which is to accept as planning proposed at three units per acre.

[51:03] voting is open.

[51:18] Do you see one wish to change their vote?

[51:24] Mr. Beeler, you made this motion and you're voting against your motions,

[51:29] is that correct? I'm just asking. I have some concerns about some of those

[51:35] stains. All right. Do you see one wish to change their vote?

[51:39] But voting is closed,

[51:44] it passes 6-5, good luck on your project.

[51:49] Thank you.

[51:53] Next item, please.

[51:55] Item number 8 is 8-F-26-RZ.

[52:00] It's a request of Reliance Development for Resonting from PR Plan Residential, up to 5

[52:06] Dwellyn units per acre, to PR Plan Residential, up to 5.25 Dwellyn units per acre.

[52:12] The property is located at 68.06 and 68.12 East Emory Road, parcel of the 020 117 119 in the 8th commission district.

[52:24] Thank you. You are the applicant.

[52:26] I'm Garrett Tucker with the proper Campbell Associates 7523 Taggart Lane, where the engineering firm on this project.

[52:34] Mr. Tucker?

[52:36] I'm sorry.

[52:36] Did you say Mr. Tucker?

[52:38] Yeah, Garrett.

[52:39] Yes.

[52:40] Is there any opposition present for this rezoning?

[52:46] Seeing none, Director Brooks, your recommendation.

[52:49] Planning commission recommends that County Commissioner

[52:51] approve the PR plan resentials on after 5.25 values per acre

[52:55] because it's compatible with Australian development

[52:57] and consistent with previously approved plans.

[53:00] Thank you.

[53:02] Do you wish to speak to your project, Mr. Tucker?

[53:04] No, but I'd be glad to try to answer any questions.

[53:07] All right.

[53:08] commissioners.

[53:12] I'm wondering is this a project that's already built and you've got a little room left.

[53:16] Yes, this was done a few years ago. We got concept plan approval. We got design plan approval and everything was approved.

[53:28] And then what's happened is the surveyed acreage. The original zoning was based on the deed or the KGASA

[53:37] area of 10.79 acres, and when we surveyed it came out to be 10.14 acres, and in order

[53:46] to be able to maintain the 53 units that was approved by the Planning Commission, we

[53:53] needed to increase the density to 5.25 dwelling units per acre.

[53:59] So that's kind of the reason for this request.

[54:03] Yes.

[54:04] Thank you.

[54:06] Any other comments, questions?

[54:10] Commissioner Thompson.

[54:12] Thank you, Madam Chair.

[54:14] Director Brooks, what was the total number of units that were approved in the current

[54:17] concept plan?

[54:19] I believe that was 50 units.

[54:21] 50 units?

[54:22] Correct.

[54:23] Okay.

[54:26] I was sorry, 53.

[54:28] Okay.

[54:29] Yeah.

[54:29] Sorry.

[54:30] Yeah.

[54:30] So they would, so under the current acreage it was approved under, yes, so this would give them a three additional units.

[54:41] Okay, so the concept plan was approved with 53 units with the incorrect survey but with the correct survey, the five-odil units and acre limits it to 50 units.

[54:50] So I would like to make a motion to, since this is more of a clerical area and sort of cleaning it up,

[54:58] I'd like to make a motion to approve the 5.25 billion units an acre with the condition

[55:04] that the total units not exceed 53 units.

[55:12] All right, thank you.

[55:15] If you don't mind Commissioner, how could we make the motion and Commissioner go for seconded?

[55:22] I will say mine was an accident, so I will let you make your motion, and I have moved my

[55:27] bet.

[55:28] Okay.

[55:28] Thank you.

[55:28] Thank you. All right. Motion made by Thompson. I have a second. By Russell, is there any further discussion?

[55:39] Seeing none, voting is open.

[55:53] Does anyone wish to change their vote? Voting is closed.

[56:00] Motion passes 9-2. Good luck with your project, sir. Thank you.

[56:03] Next

[56:08] item number nine is deferred to October. However, I do believe our Catherine are the

[56:15] ad can still here. They had requested to speak there where that has been postponed, but

[56:23] just as a courtesy since they come down here, I'd be happy to give you.

[56:28] Catherine, to add to you.

[56:29] A few minutes.

[56:30] Go ahead.

[56:31] 84-16 Strawberry Plains 5.

[56:33] All right.

[56:36] This is agriculture's own land.

[56:39] It borders the properties are all agriculture.

[56:42] And they're single family homes, and they're mostly third and fourth generation families

[56:46] that's been there 50-60 years.

[56:49] The comprehensive land use plan did not arbitrarily draw a red line around this property.

[56:54] as MPC Commissioner Gil said at the planning meeting.

[56:58] Those planners knew exactly what they were doing.

[57:01] They saw all the restraints that are on the property.

[57:04] They saw that it was right in the middle of an old established rule neighborhood and

[57:09] that the rezoning would forever change the very character of the area.

[57:14] This is exactly what the planners wanted to protect in the vision that they had for the

[57:19] comprehensive land use plan.

[57:21] He has put this off by two meetings, and he has used these delays to keep our neighborhood

[57:27] in perpetual limbo while working citizens take off work and arrange childcare to show

[57:33] up month after month.

[57:35] Please do not be deceived by the compromise presented by the developer's new hired attorney.

[57:42] Dropping the request to 2.5 homes per acre is a tactical calculation to silence our widespread

[57:51] community opposition to this.

[57:54] An attorney cannot litigate away the dangerous physical realities of this 13 acre track.

[58:01] Because this property is designated as rural conservation, it contains two creeks, is legally

[58:07] hillside in wetland protected, your planning rules mandate that 50% of this land must

[58:14] remain entirely undisturbed if it's allowed to be resolved.

[58:19] The reality is because of all the resetbacks and restrictions that setbacks is unbelievable.

[58:27] 50%, that's what we believe because of all the restrictions.

[58:31] The developer cannot spread these homes out safely.

[58:33] He is cramming high-density foundations into the remaining 6.8-buildable acres, which

[58:40] are tightly bordered by two officially mapped closed depressions that indicate sing-hosts

[58:48] at the front and sides of the property.

[58:51] Two matte blue line streams and a huge 150-foot TVA high-tension line that has 150-foot wide

[59:00] that runs the entire length of the property.

[59:04] Most critically, this is an immediate public health emergency

[59:08] that would happen if it's developed.

[59:10] Our surrounding neighborhood relies on 23 private ground water

[59:14] whales for our drinking water.

[59:16] In a carous landscape feature in these protected wetlands

[59:20] and closed depressions indicates these sink co-service pollution

[59:25] does not filter out slowly.

[59:26] It flows directly and instantly into the ground water table.

[59:32] If you allow heavy grading, blasting and high density runoff on this unstable footprint,

[59:39] you are risking the chemical and bacterial contamination of 23 family-striking water.

[59:46] A developer's profit margin is not worth a public health crisis.

[59:51] Ms. Hackens, could you wrap this up since we're not hearing it tonight?

[59:55] We are asking members of the commission to look at the facts of this land and we have prepared that

[1:00:00] Important information in the folder for you explaining the many reasons that you should not want this to happen to this old, established rule neighborhood. Just because a new property owner can buy a piece of land does not give him the automatic right to think that he can rezone it to completely change the character of the surrounding area. He knew exactly what he was buying. He knew about all the problems and constraints on this property and he also knew it was completely surrounded. Thank you. Thank you miss. I can thank you.

[1:00:28] You're certainly the character of the name back.

[1:00:30] Next, thank you.

[1:00:31] Thank you, ma'am.

[1:00:33] Next item, please.

[1:00:37] The next item is number 10, 8-A-26-PA.

[1:00:42] It's a request of our Paul Wallace

[1:00:44] for Comprehensive Plan Amendment

[1:00:46] from SR Suburban Residential and HP Heels High Protection

[1:00:50] to RCC for the Crossroads Commercial and HP Heels High Protection.

[1:00:55] The property is located at 7729 Strawberry Plains Fight,

[1:00:59] 8-Portal ID, 07-3-014-03 in the 8th Commission District.

[1:01:06] Thank you.

[1:01:06] The applicant is present.

[1:01:08] I am Ben Mellon's Faculty West Main Street here for the applicant.

[1:01:11] Thank you.

[1:01:12] Is there any opposition present to speak to this item?

[1:01:17] Seeing none, Director Brooks.

[1:01:20] Planning Commission recommends that County Commission approve the RCC roll crossroads commercial

[1:01:24] place type because of changing conditions in the area.

[1:01:27] And it supports the policy's action goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.

[1:01:32] Thank you.

[1:01:34] Mr. Mullins, would you like to speak to this project?

[1:01:37] Yeah, you're briefly.

[1:01:38] I'll speak to this.

[1:01:39] Do I need to put the timer on?

[1:01:41] I hope not.

[1:01:42] I might just ask for it if I could please.

[1:01:46] Oh, sorry.

[1:01:50] Five minutes.

[1:01:51] We'll give them five.

[1:01:52] All right.

[1:01:53] And I'll try to cover both the zoning and the place type, because it's hard to divorce

[1:01:59] the two.

[1:02:00] This is a 6.42 acre piece of property.

[1:02:03] It is a zoned agriculture that currently has a commercial use established on it through

[1:02:08] a use unreviewed and that's the big orange pickleball court.

[1:02:13] The owner who's here in the back along with the applicant, Mr. Wallace.

[1:02:16] us. The owner is having, just be frank, it's having difficulty staying in business and is likely

[1:02:26] will fail unless he found an investor. And so the applicant has come in and wants to rezone the

[1:02:33] property to this rural crossroads commercial playstop and then a rural commercial zoning to allow him to

[1:02:40] establish self-storage units on the back portion of the property and that will

[1:02:47] then go into business together and I'll help keep up the business the

[1:02:52] pickleball court especially until some of the more residences that are already

[1:02:55] planned there's an apartment complex being constructed in the city just to the

[1:03:00] east of this business and you know we think that those additional roofs will

[1:03:05] help support both businesses and make for a successful operation there.

[1:03:12] The Rural Crossroads Commercial is appropriate.

[1:03:14] There is Rural Crossroads Commercial Placetype about 300 feet to the east that this body

[1:03:19] just voted on and approved last month from Mr. Figgins, the pool place, within the Rural

[1:03:25] Commercial Zoning.

[1:03:27] We selected the Rural Commercial Zoning because it was the most appropriate, you know, that

[1:03:32] you've heard in your training.

[1:03:33] I'm sure when you are considering a rezoning, you not only need to consider what the applicant

[1:03:38] intends to do, but in the example that Commissioner Hill did, other potential uses that could

[1:03:43] go there in case something does change.

[1:03:46] And we acknowledge that's a reality that you need to consider, which is why the world commercial

[1:03:50] zone is the most appropriate because it allows limited retail and service uses in a manner

[1:03:56] convenient to outline rural areas.

[1:03:58] and it goes on to say, and I'm reading from section 5.37 of the zoning ordinance,

[1:04:03] development performance standards are included to maximize capability or compatibility,

[1:04:07] excuse me, between commercial uses and surrounding rural areas and to maintain the

[1:04:12] rural character of these areas. So the uses that could go in even if our plan doesn't move

[1:04:18] forward would still be and is intended to be compatible with the rural areas. I see

[1:04:24] This is a win-win proposition for the current property owner.

[1:04:28] He's able to utilize more of his property with a business partner to help keep his business afloat

[1:04:32] and also provide services that are very convenient to this area when you're talking about self-storage.

[1:04:39] I mean, there's about as innocuous as a graveyard as far as the impact.

[1:04:43] There's very little traffic impact whatsoever to that, but there is a need especially in this area

[1:04:50] which is transitioning.

[1:04:52] I'm happy to answer any questions.

[1:04:54] I could provide a letter outlining all of my rationales.

[1:04:58] Happy to go through that.

[1:05:00] But we think this is an appropriate use.

[1:05:03] And we think with the rural commercial zoning,

[1:05:06] it would provide adequate protection to that area as well.

[1:05:09] So I'd ask that you approve per planning commission's recommendation.

[1:05:13] Happy to answer any questions.

[1:05:15] Thank you.

[1:05:16] Commissioners, are there any questions about this particular project?

[1:05:25] Seeing none, I turn this over to Commissioner Thompson.

[1:05:29] Thank you, Madam Chair. Director Brooks, when we're looking at the rural commercial zone, what are the setbacks from the surrounding property?

[1:05:42] because I'm just looking at everything around it is is ag rule residential. So what are the if it's if it's self storage, I'm assuming there'll be lighting requirements and extra things like that. So I'm just trying to what are the setbacks?

[1:06:00] I'm sure I'm pulling it up right now.

[1:06:14] I apologize for the wait here.

[1:06:17] So the front yard setbacks and landscaping requirements, there are no less than 35 feet

[1:06:27] from the front and side yard setbacks that they're adjacent to residential or agricultural

[1:06:31] zones must be set back no less than 25 feet and the side yard is not less than 10 feet.

[1:06:40] Are

[1:06:43] there any requirements for vegetative buffers or anything like that?

[1:06:48] There are the side yard must be landscaped with a minimum of 1 evergreen tree per every

[1:06:57] 25 feet proportion thereof of the side yard.

[1:07:01] So there are some landscaping requirements, yes.

[1:07:05] Okay.

[1:07:07] I've gone back and forth with this one because obviously the staff are committed to Nile and Mr. Mullins and I have gone back and forth and you've not really known where I was going to land on this one and but my concern is initially this particular business that's being proposed or being asked to change the comprehensive plan and the zone based on a commercial concept that isn't necessarily clearly defined.

[1:07:35] and it's not binding, and so I'm trying to figure out what changing conditions has there been.

[1:07:44] Yes, Mr. Figgins property last month, we re-zoned, but that was actually an extension of a zone that he already had on his property.

[1:07:55] And once we re-zoned it stays, whether this business is a success or a failure moves on, you know.

[1:08:02] But if that's if that's the buffer and and the setback, I'm not I don't I'm sympathetic to the the owner's situation.

[1:08:15] I think it was an ambitious goal and pickleball, you know, it certainly came came in like a lion and hopefully the the new residents that are moving in will love to play pickleball.

[1:08:30] I'm sure they'll need storage.

[1:08:33] So yes, I've been conflicted on this one, but I will make a motion to approve per

[1:08:41] planning commission's recommendation.

[1:08:46] We have a motion to approve on the floor, a second by Fox.

[1:08:51] Is there any further discussion on this?

[1:08:54] Seeing none, voting is open.

[1:09:01] Does anyone wish to change their vote?

[1:09:03] voting is closed. Passes unanimously. Next item, please.

[1:09:10] Item number 11, 8-A-26-RZ is also a request of R-Paw Wallace. It's for rezoning from A-A

[1:09:18] agricultural to CR Rural Commercial and the property description is the same as the previous

[1:09:23] item.

[1:09:24] Thank you. Your name is please.

[1:09:27] Ben Mellon's 550 West Main Street here for the applicant.

[1:09:29] I'm assuming there's still no opposition.

[1:09:33] Would you like to continue with more time?

[1:09:36] Just as there's any additional questions, I'd be happy to answer them.

[1:09:40] Thank you.

[1:09:41] Is there any discussion?

[1:09:44] Seeing none, it looks like we already have a motion to accept as presented by Commissioner

[1:09:50] Thompson, second by Commissioner Huckby.

[1:09:53] Oh, good.

[1:09:54] Goodness, did I ask you to read your recommendation?

[1:09:57] Please do.

[1:09:58] I apologize.

[1:09:59] Planning Commission recommends that County Commission approve the CR World Commercial Zone because of changing conditions in the area and it is consistent with the plan designation as amended.

[1:10:09] Thank you. Thank you.

[1:10:11] We have a motion on the floor by Thompson second by Huckabee. Is there any further discussion?

[1:10:16] Seeing none, voting is open.

[1:10:23] Does anyone wish to change their vote?

[1:10:26] voting is closed, passes unanimously. Good luck with your project.

[1:10:31] Thank you all very much.

[1:10:33] Next item please.

[1:10:36] Yes.

[1:10:39] We're going back to item number two, which is 7-L-26-RZ, a request of Michael Gerard.

[1:10:48] Mr. Gerard here.

[1:10:53] Right. Without objection, we will move this forward to the October planning zoning meeting.

[1:11:03] next item please.

[1:11:07] I'll make a motion on that.

[1:11:12] Motion by Hill, second by Thompson, any objection?

[1:11:16] All those in favor? Voting is open.

[1:11:24] Anyone wish to change their vote? Voting is closed,

[1:11:27] passes unanimously. Thank you.

[1:11:34] I'm ready. The next item is item 12. Ordinance 0-26-8-101.

[1:11:43] It's an ordinance amended to not spend any code of index A zoning, Article 6, Section 6.306.40 and 6.90, pertaining to the public notice requirements,

[1:11:55] and it's invested rights.

[1:11:56] This amends ordinance.

[1:11:58] O-9-9-130 adopted September 10th,

[1:12:02] 9-C-9-E.

[1:12:03] This is on secondary.

[1:12:06] Thank you.

[1:12:08] Commissioner or Director Brooks,

[1:12:11] would you like to speak to this?

[1:12:14] I'm happy to answer any questions.

[1:12:20] Any questions?

[1:12:22] Commissioner Fox.

[1:12:24] Thank you Madam Chair.

[1:12:26] I just want to clarify.

[1:12:27] So this basically is just to bring us in line with state law that was passed recently.

[1:12:32] Yes, can I show them that's correct.

[1:12:34] What's the, I did see 15 to 21 days, is there a reason why we're extending that notice?

[1:12:40] I mean, I think it's a good thing, I'm just trying to get the information out there.

[1:12:44] Again, that's state law, it was the state law that extended to 21 days.

[1:12:48] Okay, thank you.

[1:12:50] Thank you.

[1:12:52] Mr. Cofer.

[1:12:54] Thank you, Madam Chair.

[1:12:58] Could someone, the law director, maybe explain to me which portions of these amendments

[1:13:03] are required by changes in Tennessee law in which ones are actual policy choices for

[1:13:11] Knox County?

[1:13:12] Because as I was reading it, it seemed to be a little bit over there and it's hard to determine

[1:13:18] what we're obligated to do if you could simplify that a little bit.

[1:13:22] The best thing part of it is required by state law that Amy, was the notice required

[1:13:29] by that change in law, too?

[1:13:31] Yes, that's correct.

[1:13:32] Okay.

[1:13:33] But the biggest change that I noticed was the best thing.

[1:13:37] And that's none by the state, and we're really nothing we can do about it.

[1:13:40] So we're just putting it in our code.

[1:13:47] Are there any other questions?

[1:13:49] Seeing none, we have a motion on the floor by direct, second by Huckabee.

[1:13:54] Voting is open.

[1:14:02] Does anyone wish to change their vote? Voting is closed. Passes unanimously.

[1:14:08] Thank you. Public form, we have no one out there. My only other business I just would

[1:14:18] like to ask if in an effort to get the workshop proposed that Commissioner Huckabee is looking

[1:14:28] for is there any day of the week, a single day that is out for anyone on this commission.

[1:14:42] Seeing no one speaking to that, then we'll do our best to get the date set and get it lined up as quickly as possible.

[1:14:51] Anyone else got anything they'd like to add?

[1:14:55] Excuse me, Commissioner Duret.

[1:14:57] Thank you Madam Chair.

[1:15:00] This doesn't necessarily pertain to zoning, but I did get this email this afternoon. Knox County is a member of the National Association of counties or NACO, and we have started a new caucus called the mid-sized county caucus. Well, we're still working on the name, but it is just now starting its second year, and I sit on the executive committee for it. I were first, like, caucus-wide meeting.

[1:15:30] will be on Wednesday, September 30th at 12.30 pm, so I'm happy to, in its virtual, so I'm happy to

[1:15:36] forward that information. I'll send it to Drew to send out, but it's interesting to sit on

[1:15:42] there with, we get to hear from various counties across the nation that are around our size, so this

[1:15:49] is from anywhere 300 to 500,000 plus in population. So it's really cool to hear what's happening and to

[1:15:58] I know that we're not alone in all of our issues.

[1:16:01] So, of our ills, thank you.

[1:16:03] Thank you for that, Commissioner Thompson.

[1:16:07] Thank you, Madam Chair.

[1:16:08] I didn't want to end without thank Ms. Adkins for putting these together.

[1:16:14] Thank you all for putting this in.

[1:16:16] I know I wanted to, I guess, recognize how much time and effort you all have been putting

[1:16:20] into this.

[1:16:21] It's been a bit of a community effort.

[1:16:23] I know it's been a long process, and I appreciate your patience and the information you all have put together. Thank you.

[1:16:33] All right. Thank you. Anything else? Do I have a motion to adjourn?

[1:16:40] adjourned first by Russell second by direct everybody says yes and we are adjourned

Untitled meeting

Transcript