Planning Commission

Cookeville Planning Commission Minutes December 12th, 2022 The Cookeville Planning Commission met on Monday, December 12th, 2022, at 5:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 45 E. Broad Street, Cookeville, Tennessee. Members Present: Ali Bagci, Jim Cobb, Bob Faulhaber, Lauren Metts, Jim Stafne, Kay Starkweather & Jim Woodford. Members Absent: Judy Jennings. Staff Members Present: Jon Ward, Christopher Phillips, Ken Young & Haley Dickson. Staff Members Absent: James Mills. Others Present: Barbara Thomas, Evon Hicks, Roger Thomas, Donnita Hill, Jerry Cantrell, Dianne Gill, Robert Breeding, Jack Gill, Teresa Dunn, Lanny Dunn, Whitney Crawford, Monika Bowman, Ann Breeding, Bill Harris, Al Enochs, Pat & Sid Gilbreath, Jed & Jill Delk, Amanda Carlen, Clarissa Williams, Herbert Williams, Cameron Williams, Kay Detwiler, Ingeborg Williams, Marilyn Flatt, Lauren Shibakov, Mindy Lloyd, Donnie Suits, Jake & Karyln Reel, Melinda Poston, Thom Robinson, Skyler Tarr, Joe Tarr, Justin Cumby, Phillip Moore, Hill & Beverly Carlen, Patsy House, Karen Tarr, Donna Long, Mario Cervantes, Scott Woods, Paula Harris & Elsa Gamaunt Establishment of Quorum: Chairman Woodford announced that a quorum was present for the meeting. Consider for Approval the Agenda as Submitted. Kay Starkweather made the motion to approve the agenda as amended. Kay Jim Stafne seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously. Approved. Consider for Approval the Minutes of November 28th, 2022. Jim Cobb made the motion to approve the minutes of November 28th, 2022. Kay Starkweather seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously. Approved. Consider for action a six (6) month extension of the preliminary plat of Highbury Subdivision, 147 lots located on Neal Street & East Veterans Drive. Request submitted by Chad Gilbert of Putnam Contracting Services. Mr. Jon Ward stated that Mr. Chad Gilbert, on behalf of Putnam Contracting Services, has submitted for approval a six (6) month extension of the preliminary plat of Highbury Subdivision, a 147-lot single-family attached development located on Neal Street and East Veterans Drive. This proposal was originally granted preliminary plat approval at the December 13, 2021, Planning Commission meeting. Analysis: As provided in Article II, Section D, Subsection 9 of the Subdivision Regulations, two (2) six (6) month extensions can be applied for by the developer and granted by the Planning Commission provided a $50.00 fee is submitted with each request. The developer has submitted the fee along with a written request for an extension. Grading work has begun on the subject property. Recommendation: Approval of the request for a six (6) month extension of the preliminary plat subject to all conditions established by the Planning Commission on December 13, 2021. Jim Stafne made the motion to approve the request recommended by staff. Jim Cobb seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously. Approved. Cookeville Planning Commission 2 December 12th, 2022 Consider for action the preliminary plat and PRD (Planned Residential Development) for Ellington Subdivision, 53 lots located at 1327 East Tenth Street (Tax Map 041P, Group B, Parcel 007.00). Request submitted by Capital Communities, LLC. Mr. Jon Ward stated that Mr. Donnie Suits, on behalf of Capital Communities, LLC, has submitted a preliminary PRD Plan and request to rezone from RS-10 “Single-Family Residential” to PRD “Planned Residential Development” for Ellington Subdivision, a 53-lot single-family residential development located at 1327 East Spring Street. This request was taken for study at the November 28, 2022, Planning Commission meeting. Analysis: The subject property is identified as Parcel 007.00 on Tax Map 041P, Group B, and contains approximately 6.04 acres. The property is currently zoned RS-10, “Single-Family Residential” as are the adjacent properties to the east, south, and west. The property is bordered by RS-15, “Single-Family Residential” to the north. The Cookeville 2030 Plan depicts the subject property as best suited for Lower-Density Residential. PRD zoning is considered appropriate for any area identified in the plan as being suitable for residential development, provided the specific conditions can be met. The PRD District is intended to encourage flexibility and innovation in land use in residential developments. Through careful planning, such districts can provide for the best use of a site consistent with the goals of protecting and embracing the natural environment. Establishing a PRD District requires that special procedures and provisions be followed that are unique from most other zoning districts. To establish a PRD District, a site must contain a minimum of five (5) acres. A density of up to 21 units per acre (approximately 2,075 square feet per dwelling unit) may be permitted in the district; however, one quarter of the site must be maintained and preserved as common open space. Significant perimeter setback and screening requirements are mandatory while interior yard setbacks can be greatly reduced. The process for the approval of a PRD involves several steps. First, the developer is required to meet with the Planning Director to determine whether PRD Zoning is appropriate for the proposed property. If it is determined that the property is appropriate for PRD zoning, then the developer must submit a Preliminary PRD Plan which must include a Schematic Map Plan and a Written Statement. The Planning Commission, after reviewing the request and required submittals must submit a recommendation to the City Council for approval, modification, or denial of the request. Upon receipt of the Planning Commission recommendation, the City Council then considers enactment of the PRD District. Once the PRD Zone is enacted, a Final PRD Plan and preliminary subdivision plat, if necessary, must be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission. The Final PRD Plan must be submitted and approved within 18 months after the effective date of the enactment of the PRD district by the City Council or the rezoning action shall be repealed. Approval of the Final PRD Plan and preliminary plat is required before construction can begin. The Final PRD Plan must substantially conform to the Preliminary PRD Plan. It must contain detailed information on the proposed development including circulation diagrams for vehicles and pedestrians, areas to be preserved as open space, each building site including height and bulk of all building, floor plans of all structures to be built, all utilities including storm water facilities, and final drafts of all covenants. Additionally, a development schedule must be submitted indicating when each phase of the development is to begin and be completed. Cookeville Planning Commission 3 December 12th, 2022 The petitioner has submitted the required materials to consider a PRD rezoning. The proposed development consists of six (6) single-family detached dwelling units and 46 single-family attached (townhome) dwelling units. This represents an overall density of approximately 5,060 square feet per dwelling unit or approximately eight (8) dwelling units per acre. Under the current RS-10 zoning, which allows a density of 10,000 square feet per dwelling unit, approximately 27 single- family detached dwelling units could be constructed on the property. The Water Quality Control Department has approved the submitted Sewer System Availability Request indicating that there is adequate sewer system capacity to serve the proposed development. The Preliminary PRD Plan depicts 46 single-family attached townhomes sited within the interior of the property with a private street proposed as Ellington Square to provide access from Wall Avenue. Of the 46 units, 38 are depicted as townhome flats, some with second stories, and eight (8) two-story townhome units located along the eastern boundary. The flats have most of the square footage on the first floor and are a mixture of two (2) and three (3) bedroom units ranging from 1,033 square feet to 1,446 square feet, all with a one (1) car garage. The proposed two-story townhomes contain 1,490 square feet. The written statement indicates the structures will be mostly brick and Hardie board exterior with off-white painted brick and bronze accents. The plan also depicts a pool house and swimming pool. The Preliminary PRD Plan depicts six (6) lots for single-family detached homes located along the southern boundary of the property, fronting Inglewood Drive. Lot sizes for these single-family detached homes range from 8,982 square feet to 11,657 square feet. The lot widths range from approximately 67 linear feet to 87 linear feet along Inglewood Drive. Setbacks for the single-family lots are 30 feet from Inglewood Drive and Wall Avenue right-of-way and 25 feet for the eastern side yard boundary. PRD zoning requires that a minimum of 25 percent of the land area be preserved as open space. The engineer for the project confirmed that approximately 30 percent of the site containing the townhome development remains as open space. Within PRD districts perimeter front yard setbacks are required to be 75 feet unless a Type 2 Screen is provided, in which case the setbacks may be reduced to 50 feet and perimeter side and rear yard setbacks are required to be 50 feet unless a Type 3 Screen is provided, in which case the setbacks may be reduced to a minimum of 30 feet. The submitted plan indicates that a Type 2 Screen, and the required 50-foot front setback would be established along East 10th Street and Wall Avenue. Type 3 Screening is depicted on the submitted plan, along the eastern boundary and the required 30-foot rear/side yard setback will be met according to the PRD requirements. The single-family detached homes along Inglewood Drive meet the required building setbacks. Two (2) points of access are proposed for the townhome development, both from Wall Avenue, and the single-family detached developments will have individual driveway access along Inglewood Drive. Both Wall Avenue and Inglewood Drive are classified as Local Streets. East 10th Street is classified as a Major Arterial Street. Traffic counts on East 10th Street west of the proposed development indicate an average annual daily traffic count of 17,159 in May of 2021 and 16,460 in September 2020. East 10th Street has been identified in the Cookeville Major Street Plan as needing improvements. The Old Kentucky Commons Development initiated the East 10th Street widening project. Phase One of this project included widening East 10th Street from three (3) to five (5) lanes from Chocolate Drive to Wilson Avenue. Phase One of the project is complete. Phase Two of the project will continue these street improvements from the terminus of Phase One to Fisk Road. The Cookeville Planning Commission 4 December 12th, 2022 project to widen East 10th Street will include new sidewalks on both sides of the street. Phase Two of the project is currently in the ROW acquisition Phase, with plans to start construction in late spring/early summer 2023. The ROW exhibit for the subject property depicts right-of-way acquisition of approximately 7,197 square feet, consisting of approximate 15.82 feet by 435.18 feet with additional area at the intersection of East 10th Street and Wall Avenue. The right-of-way acquisition will reduce the site area to 5.88 acres. New sidewalks are proposed along Wall Avenue and within the interior of the development. Sidewalks will be required along Inglewood Drive. As noted previously, PRD zoning is appropriate to be considered wherever residential development is projected to occur provided that the specific standards of the district can be met. Advantages of PRD zoning include flexibility in design with assurance that a property will be developed as proposed. PRD zoning also allows the opportunity to negotiate higher standards of design to help mitigate potential impacts on nearby properties. Recommendation: Approval of the request to rezone to PRD and approval of the Preliminary PRD Plan Jim Stafne asked the audience about the Cookeville 2030 plan and stated that the subject property is shown as suited for lower density. RS-10 would allow 27 units and the proposed PRD zoning goes from 27 units allowed to 53 units allowed. States that 53 units does not sound like low density residential. Stafne did state that the 2030 Plan looks to the future which is unknown. Stafne also notes that there has been a lot of success with PRD zoning and that PRDs have produced good products. Councilman Bagci stated he is concerned with the increase in density and traffic and wants to know what will incentivize traffic to use East 10th Street rather than side streets. Jon Ward stated that improvements to East 10th Street should alleviate the congestion and traffic should navigate towards the arterial street. The East 10th Street widening project was started to address the failing level of service. Chairman Woodford stated that 53 units will bring over 100 cars if you consider two (2) cars per unit. States that not all vehicles will be leaving at the same time of day and an addition of 100 cars would not make the traffic situation any worse. He stated that we can’t control whether a driver uses East 10th Street or a side street. Kay Starkweather stated that she lives on Pickard Avenue and has seen over the years how traffic has picked up over the years. States she is concerned that once construction is begun, the congestion will be worse. She states that there are no sidewalks, and the streets are narrow around the proposed property. States she would like to see East 10th Street widened before construction begins. Chairman Woodford asked if the East 10th Street construction was slated to begin in the Spring of 2023 and if there was an estimation on the completion date. Jon Ward stated that the project has not been sent for bid as of yet but predicts the project will take around 18 to 24 months to complete. States that the Developer plans on going vertical in January of 2024. Mr. Ward stated that the Planning Division received several letters of concern and also received a petition right before the start of the meeting that has not been reviewed but it has been entered into the record. Donna long stated that she is concerned about the feeder streets and that if 100 more cars begin traveling on the side streets, that is not a good thing for this neighborhood. Cookeville Planning Commission 5 December 12th, 2022 Jeff Jones of 1151 Winterhill Drive states that he believes the property is best suited for lower- density residential. States that the proposed development is out of character of the current neighborhood. PRD zoning is often used as a buffer from one density to another. States that he is concerned about the increase in traffic flow and states that he can clearly notice the traffic increase in the morning with the high school being so close. States that people already use the feeder streets to avoid East 10th Street to get to school. States that traffic has been a problem in the past and he has requested that speeding be reviewed by the police. States he is not sure that widening will alleviate this issue. Mr. Jones stated that several children play in the neighborhood and adding traffic will add danger for these children. Amanda Carlen of 1490 East 10th Street states that she just lived through the East 10th Street Widening Project and that traffic is just as bad as before, if not worse. She bought her house because she liked the area and wanted to live where she had a yard and had room to run around. She stated that the reality of what Cookeville needs is houses for people to downsize to, not 1,400 to 1,500 sq ft sized houses. She states that Mr. Suits builds beautiful homes, but she would like to see lower density. She states she is concerned about the longevity of the complex. She states that she knows there will be a lot of houses build, but 50 something houses is too many. She states that we do not need this development, we need houses for people to downsize. Jerry Cantrell of East 10th Street and Bilbrey Avenue states he would like to approach this from a different perspective. He states that ordinary people will be happy that they aren’t put into a position to suffer what he considers an atrocity. States that the US Constitution permits Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. He begs the Commission to reconsider this nonsense of putting 53 units on this property. States that 100 cars will make at least four (4) trips per day on the roads. States that in 2019, there were 123 accidents on East 10th Street. States people use East 10th Street as a speedway, and this will open up to more accidents and could cost the lives of people within the room. He states that a study was conducted in Europe that found over a period of five (5) years and one million subjects showed an increase in noise pollution contributed to a decrease in life expectancy. States traffic noise is not getting better and wonders if the City would want to spend millions and millions of dollars on a soundproof wall. States that he lives in his forever home in Cookeville, and he is not very proud of some of the things that are on the table in Cookeville right now. Asks that anyone associated with planning or that has a vote in this matter recuse themselves if they have direct ties to construction companies and wonders if there is any under the table stuff happening with this development. Jack Gill of 1382 Ivy Lane thanks the Planning Commission and those in local government. He opposes this development primarily because the 2030 Plan does not fit with the existing neighborhood. States that this development will stick out like a sore thumb. There are a lot of pedestrians and walkers in the area, and possibly more if this rezoning is approved. States there are no sidewalks within the community and that safety should be a concern. States he is concerned about the infrastructure, and he is unsure about the sewer capacity. He states that Food City was supposed to control the water runoff, but residents of Bilbrey Park say otherwise. States the bigger concern is developments popping up all over town. States this is his second rodeo with this type of situation and there are at least three (3) large plots that will probably go through this exercise again. States that the zoning is RS-15 across East 10th Street. States that developers have an unfair advantage in this process and that citizens are not included in the process except for the public hearing. Asks what the vision of Cookeville is, and states that input of all citizens should be obtained. States that he has learned that a petition is the best approach to show opposition to these Cookeville Planning Commission 6 December 12th, 2022 developments and states that over 10,000 signatures will be gathered for the City Council if this is approved. Kay Detwiler of 1570 Country Club Place states that she moved to Cookeville in 1976 off of 10th street. Started work in the city planning department. Went around advising communities in this region. When moved here in 1976, Putnam house and apartments were already built. Darwin park was developed in the 60s and the city annexed the area with sewer service eventually being added. States that just because there are apartments around Fisk Road, doesn’t mean you have to do this to this property. States the lots are too crowded. Asks where the visitor parking will be. States making guests walk all the way to house from the far end is not good planning. States there are no extra spaces. States the development needs more parking, the houses are too stacked together, and having a dumpster at one end is not helpful to residents having to carry trash all the way to the end of the development. States she is not necessarily against PRD zoning, just against the number of units. Regular zoning would allow 27 units which is a more reasonable number. This property could be really nice like Downton. States there are no sidewalks on Wall Avenue, and when houses across the street were being built, could barely get through with construction trucks on road. During construction of Food City, people cut through neighborhoods and more have been taking side streets lately. States she can’t imagine this density. There are places in town for this but not there. States the units against 10th barely have backyards. Sid Gilbreath of 1370 Inglewood Drive states that his property is one (1) lot away from the proposed rezoning. States he wrote a letter and sent to members of the council, furthering negative opinion of the PRD. States he has a problem with the PRD zone in the first place. Implores the Commission to deny rezoning. Mindy Lloyd, on behalf of her grandbabies, states she just bought a new house on Wall Avenue. States that Beth and Donnie are excellent friends, but that she does not like this idea. States that 100+ cars coming straight through their house and yard is very concerning and hopes the Commission considers not approving this. States the developer should consider building beautiful homes. States that walking with stroller on Wall Avenue is extremely dangerous. Bill Harris of 1071 Wall Avenue stated he has lived in his home for 50 years. He feels that this area of town is very special. This idea concerns him. He thanks the commission for hearing their concerns. States he doesn’t know if developer is here, but he appreciates the developer’s construction. Hopes that Donnie will look into this on a personal basis. States what he sees is greed. He doesn’t think Mr. Suits is that kind of person. Thinks that this is the wrong thing to do in this area. Could have an appropriate number of homes that will fill the integrity of the neighborhood. States that this will destroy that area. Hopes commission listens to concerns stated tonight. States East 10th Street cannot handle more traffic. Major concern is primarily streets. Two entrances to this development, both on Wall. Cannot go left on 10th from Wall. Storm drainage that comes from this lot already is outrageous. Already floods homes next to lot. Schools, character and integrity of neighborhood are concerns with this development. States we are putting the cart before the horse. Reconsider after 10th street is completed. Ann Murphy White Breeding of East 10th Street states that her property has been owned by the Murphy family for 102 years. Knows very well the traffic concerns, lived traffic problems now. States we need to consider the impact on the current property owners. This property is unique, located between Northeast School and Cookeville Highschool. At 8am and 3pm you can’t go anywhere. Sometimes goes on until late evening. States this area is a major conduit for tech students. Cookeville Planning Commission 7 December 12th, 2022 People already cut through side streets to get around 10th Street. Her area to canvas was Jamestown Road for the petition, spent hours at 4 different sessions asked very influential people to come to meeting. Most people signed petition. Only had four (4) people not to sign. Voters do not want this development. States she had a lot of her front yard taken by the city for the road widening. States we don’t need more houses. Please listen to citizens. Inga Williams of 1265 Inglewood Drive states that there is a huge water problem on Inglewood and that her front yard is flooded when it rains. States that there is no drainage on the road. States water runs like a fast creek on either side. Bilbrey, Wall & Pickard are side streets to get to 10th Street. States that the roads are so narrow that you can’t pull onto side street if someone is at stop sign and cannot make a left-hand turn. States this area is not safe. Asks the Commission to look at the plan. Skylar Tarr of 930 Wall Avenue states that he moved here and closed on the house across the street before he knew about this development. States he feels deceived by this development and that he wouldn’t have purchased his home if he knew this development was going in. States he loves his home and loves Donnie’s product. States his home office window faces Wall Avenue and he sees cars fly by all the time. States the road is unsafe. Tom Robinson of 1335 Inglewood Drive believes they found a great neighborhood. States this neighborhood has walkers and riders and knows many of the properties are very well managed. What is not so good is the number of vehicles using side streets as cut throughs and exceeding speed limit. Has concerns with the project including what it will look like. States Mr. Suits has done a good job on the houses being built on Wall Avenue. States concerns with traffic. States this project does not meet the intent of the designation. Delay any action until the developer presents an authorized traffic study to give a better idea of what to expect. Improvements to Wall and Inglewood need to be addressed immediately, and that the developer has to install improvements to adjoining streets before any construction can begin. States this is a good neighborhood, doesn’t want to lose the feel. Whitney Crawford of 1362 Ivy Lane states that his property backs up to the proposed development. States that whatever is decided, he hopes that Ivy Lane is not opened up. Else Gammo, of 816 Wall Avenue states that she has lived in this area for 20 years. States her concern is existing infrastructure. States only 20 new homes would need a signal at Wall. States storm runoff isn’t in control at all. Water is rushing down East 10th Street during a storm. Floods her carport. Backyard floods. Standing water on her property. Once or twice a year has called to get pothole filled on Wall Avenue and Inglewood, filled every year and ends up larger than before. Wonders if the pothole is caused by either a spring or sanitary sewer. Need help now in neighborhood. No sidewalks, no gutters, no storm drains. Skinny streets, no room for traffic. Jed Delk of 1351 East 10th Street states that he loves the neighborhood and town and has young children. Read through section 218 of the Zoning Code and understands that a PRD is a district used for truly special property. Supposed to protect and blend with existing neighborhood. Minimalize negative impacts on community. This project does not follow those standards. Nothing special about property. Attached single-family is everywhere. Asks the Commission to look at this proposal, cut two (2) new roads, lots of concrete and removal of foliage in area and what is left of grass is enough to offset greenspaces. Not environmentally sound and issues caused approving this zoning change will probably lead to more liability by the city. Whoever says utilities and sewer and infrastructure is not an issue is fooling themselves. Argue that development is not fitting, many people have family and has land in family for many years. Neighborhood of friendly people, who walk their dogs and Cookeville Planning Commission 8 December 12th, 2022 know one another. If you move this type of product in this area, reality is that most of these properties will be sold to rental agencies and a small amount will be bought from individuals. Rentals in area will increase turnover of the community and wouldn’t pick attached homes as forever homes. Greatest thing about commission is to protect these neighborhoods and the people. Jill Delk of 1351 East 10th Street states she lives right next to proposed rezoning. States she lives in Bilbrey Park. States she is not here to talk for herself. Ms. Delk read a letter of the person who owned the property before them. States she believes this property was purchased unethically. States the property was left in will to parents and kept home as second house. Stated the owner was willing to sell property to someone to keep home intact or build like surrounding neighborhood. Suits assured the previous owner he would build 16 to 20 homes and that PRD rezoning would not happen with the property. Stands with neighbors and asks to decline the request. Clarissa Williams of 1372 Ivy Lane states that she spoke in the previous rezoning on East 10th Street public hearing. States she is not a big fan of Food City but that she still shops there all the time. States the road in front of Food City is beautiful but still carries a considerable amount of traffic. States that Donnie builds beautiful homes. States that she loves Cookeville and tells others while traveling that we have a hallmark town and neighborhood. States that it currently looks like there isn’t access through ivy. Jon Ward states that currently there is no access to Ivy Lane, but the property owner has the rights to open Ivy Lane if he so chooses. Clarissa Williams states that with the East 10th Street construction, she notes that we all have issues. Stated she spoke with Mr. Ward and that he sent her the 2030 Plan. She is not in favor of cut through of Ivy Lane but if it takes the cut through to stop the high density then she thinks the cut through would make sense. States that the neighborhood will be transformed with this development. Herbert Williams of 1372 Ivy Lane states that this is a low-density neighborhood. States that Donnie does great houses. States he would rather see those big, beautiful homes than this development. Would prefer to keep integrity of neighborhood with houses instead. Cameron Williams of 1372 Ivy Lane thinks that traffic does more harm to communities rather than bring others to the community. Thinks this needs to be reconsidered because of harm. Melinda Poston states she is here for moral support for her friends. States we should have empathy for others try and experience what they’re going through. Asks Commissioners to put themselves in their position when they vote. Jim Cobb asked Mr. Suits if he has considered any other mixed with the property before considering PRD. Donnie Suits stated that he looked into RS-10 with connecting to Ivy Lane and having houses front East 10th Street. States that more houses on East 10th Street would make traffic more difficult with more driveways connecting to the street. States he also wants to use the existing trees for screening between the current properties. Jim Stafne states that density seems to be the issue across the board, along with traffic. States he is impressed with petition of over 600 people. Proposes to other commissioners that the options are approve, deny, conditional approval, table and postpone. States that a Majority of a quorum voting is required to table. Asks to table this item and have the developer look at this and come up with something more comparable to neighborhood. Cookeville Planning Commission 9 December 12th, 2022 Chairman Woodford thanks audience for their comments and states he is privileged to serve on the Planning Commission for 12 years, but to infer that any member of the commission would take money under the table is offensive. They are not beholden to individuals or developers but are tasked with considering if something is good for Cookeville. Lauren Metts states that Cookeville is growing at an alarming rate, East 10th Street is getting busier and busier, and that is will soon be widened to 5 lanes. States that with development comes density. States that the 2030 Plan shows that East 10th Street is suitable for low density but that will change. Chairman Woodford states that he lives on Robin Lane, and five (5) or six (6) years ago another developer purchased land and wanted to change the zoning to do upscale houses. The neighborhood did not want that and kept what is currently zoned. 29 units were built, and he did notice an increase in traffic and notes that 10th Street has been a problem for decades. States that he wants 10th Street completed and wants the Planning Division to reach out to Public Works about the street conditions. States that stormwater runoff is controlled with building codes. States that this neighborhood has been around for 65 years and thinks it can be traumatic for a change like this. States he is also a fan of Mr. Suits and his buildings. States right now we need a time out to reassess the infrastructure. Councilman Bagci thanked the audience and stated this will help them make an informed decision. Mr. Harris apologized to the commission about unfavorable remarks done by someone. Donnie Suits states that there is a demand from realtors for one-story houses with attached garages. Kay Detwiler states that Country Club Place was the first PRD. Jim Stafne made a motion to table the request and Kay Starkweather seconded the motion. Jon Ward stated that if tabled, the item will remain on the table indefinitely. Asks what the Planning Commission is trying to accomplish with tabling this item. Jim Stafne states that tabling would possibly reduce the density and add more common space. Jim Cobb states that he understands where Commission Stafne is coming from, but he feels like with all of the community input, that the residents deserve an answer tonight. The motion to Table the request was denied unanimously. Jim Cobb made the motion to deny the Planning Division’s request to approve the rezoning and to leave the property as RS-10 due to density, traffic, and infrastructure. Councilman Bagci seconded the motion, and the votes were as follows: Woodford – Aye; Starkweather – Aye, Stafne – Aye; Bagci – Aye; Cobb – Aye; Faulhaber – Nay; Metts – Nay. Denied. Consider for action allowing Campgrounds and RV Parks as a permitted use within the CL (Local Commercial) District. Request submitted by Josh Stites. Mr. Jon Ward stated that Mr. Josh Stites has submitted a request to amend the Cookeville Zoning Code to allow campgrounds and RV parks as permitted uses within the CL, “Local Commercial” Zoning District. This item was taken for study at the November 28, 2022, Planning Commission meeting. Analysis: The Planning Department has prepared for consideration amendments to the Zoning Code pertaining to Campground and RV Parks being permitted within the CL, “Local Commercial” districts. The Planning Department received a request to allow Campgrounds and RV Parks within the CL District. Currently, Campgrounds and RV Parks are only permitted within the CG, “General Commercial” District. Cookeville Planning Commission 10 December 12th, 2022 The CG, “General Commercial” District is intended for moderate and larger sized offices, personal and business services, and general retail businesses. The maximum square footage of individual developments is restricted to 120,000 square feet. It is the intent of this district to promote the clustering and development of commercial facilities that are directly dependent on transient patronage or draw users from an area beyond the immediate environs of the city. All uses are to be developed within the district so as to offer convenient ingress and egress to streets of at least Major Collector classification. The CL, “Local Commercial” District is intended for small and moderate sized offices, personal and business services, and general retail businesses serving the general population of the city. The maximum square footage of individual developments is restricted and determined by street classification. Large-scale commercial or service activities designed or intended to draw users from an area beyond the immediate environs of the city are prohibited. Planning Division staff analyzed zoning codes from cities throughout Tennessee to observe how they managed campgrounds and RV parks within their zoning districts. Lebanon, TN and Mount Juliet, TN both allow campgrounds and RV parks within the CG District. Murfreesboro, TN allows campgrounds and RV parks within the CH, “Highway Commercial” District with the issuance of a special permit. Spring Hill, TN limits campgrounds and RV parks to the PR, “Public Recreation” District. Currently, bed and breakfast homes, motels, and short-term rentals are allowed within the CL District as uses permitted by right. Tennessee Code Annotated 67-4-1401 defines recreational vehicle campsites and campgrounds along with motels, short-term rentals, inns, and tourist camps as subject to Hotel Occupancy taxes. The proposed amendments would remove Campgrounds and RV Parks as a use permitted within the CG District and would permit Campgrounds and RV Parks as a use permitted by Special Exception by the Board of Zoning Appeals within the CL District adding 221.4F to the current Zoning Code. The amendment would also establish standards to provide protections to adjacent properties. Campgrounds and RV Parks would not be permitted on lots adjacent to RS-20, RS-15, RS-10, RS- 7.5, and RS-5 Zoning. SECTION 221.4 USES PERMITTED ON APPEAL (SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS) 221.4F Campgrounds and RV Parks meeting the conditions of Section 206.27 of this Zoning Code Planning Staff has also prepared amendments to update the standards for Residential Mobile Home Parks. The amendment would update Section 217 Residential Mobile Home Park (RMHP) with the following: SECTION 217.4 USES PERMITTED ON APPEAL (SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS) 217.4DRecreational Vehicles/Travel Trailers SECTION 217.15 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 217.15G Recreational Vehicle Park 1. A portion of any Residential Mobile Home Park greater than two (2) acres may designate an area not to exceed 20 percent of the total approved number of units, or not more than 20 percent of the total land area be set aside for the purpose of short-term to long-term personal recreational vehicle use. 2. Standards: All recreational vehicle park areas shall meet all standards established in Section 217.14 Cookeville Planning Commission 11 December 12th, 2022 3. Overnight or long-term idling or use of generators shall be prohibited. 4. Length of Stay: No recreational vehicle or travel trailer may occupy a single pad for greater than 180 days. An amendment adding standards for Campground and RV Parks is also proposed by the Planning Staff. The proposed amendment would establish standards for Campground and RV Parks within Section 206 Additional Standards with the following: Section 206.27 CAMPGROUNDS AND RV PARKS The following additional standards shall apply to all campgrounds and RV parks: 206.27A No Campground and RV Parks shall be permitted on lots adjacent to RS-20, RS-15, RS-10, RS-7.5, and RS-5 Zoning. 206.27B A minimum of five (5) acres is required for all campgrounds and RV parks within the CL District. 206.27C A minimum of two (2) camping loops and a maximum of 20 campsites per acre. 206.27D Each RV parking pad shall be a minimum of 12 feet wide by 40 feet long. 206.27E Roadways within a campground and RV park shall be constructed to City of Cookeville Standards. 206.27F Campsites shall be a minimum of 25 ft. wide and 75 ft. long. 206.27G A minimum of two (2) bathroom/shower structures and two (2) toilet structures shall be provided on-site for up to 20 camping sites, and a minimum of four (4) bathroom/shower structures and four (4) toilet structures shall be provided on-site for any park with more than 20 camping sites. 206.27H Tent camping should be separated from other camp sites. 206.27I Recreation amenities shall be located outside of any camp loop and near day use area. 206.27J Trash containers shall be provided. 206.27K One (1) off-street parking space per recreational vehicle pad shall be provided. 206.27L All pads shall be surfaced. Recommendation: Postpone until the January 2023 Planning Commission meeting. Jim Cobb made the motion to approve the request recommended by staff. Kay Starkweather seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously. Approved. Adjournment: 7:45 P.M. Submitted for Approval Submitted for Recording ____________________________ _________________________________ Haley Dickson Jim Woodford, Chairman Planning Assistant Cookeville Planning Commission