Hendersonville Planning Commission

MINUTES HENDERSONVILLE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2021 6:30 P.M. – MAIN MEETING ROOM Chairman David Jenkins called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the City Hall Meeting Room, 101 Maple Drive North, Hendersonville, TN. OPENING PRAYER: Chairman David Jenkins led the opening prayer. ROLL CALL: Present: Tim Altizer, Jeff Coker, Charles Hasty, David Jenkins, Beth Longmire, Lee Peterson. Absent: Barry Hardwick, Owen Hardcastle, Vanessa Silkwood, Darlene Stringfellow. Also Present: Keith Free, Planning Director; Timothy Whitten, Assistant Planning Director; Sarah Lock, Public Works Director; Shane Nolan, Fire Inspector; and Lauren Beery, Planning Assistant. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE: None. ADDITIONS TO AGENDA: None. MINUTES: MOTION BY Altizer, seconded by Peterson, to approve the Hendersonville Regional Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 7, 2021. Altizer, Coker, Hasty, Jenkins, Longmire, and Peterson voted aye. Nay: None. Abstained: None. Absent: Hardwick, Hardcastle, Silkwood, and Stringfellow. Motion carried. (6-0-0) CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: None. FINAL PLATS: None.  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLANS: None. SITE PLANS: 21-044-002 & 21-063-002: CHEERVILLE & HALF BATCH BREWERY, MATERIAL CHANGE REQUEST – SITE PLAN AMENDMENTS: MOTION BY Hasty, seconded by Altizer, to approve the Cheerville, Material Change Request – Site Plan Amendment, with the southern wall to be brick and the interior wall (between buildings) to be wrapped with brick (approximately 10-20 feet), and with all staff comments as listed below. Altizer, Coker, Hasty, Jenkins, Longmire, and Peterson voted aye. Nay: None. Abstained: None. Absent: Hardwick, Hardcastle, Silkwood, and Stringfellow. Motion carried. (6-0-0) MOTION BY Coker, seconded by Peterson, to approve the Half Batch Brewery, Material Change Request – Site Plan Amendment, with the interior wall (between buildings) to be wrapped with brick (approximately 10-20 feet) to match the Cheerville Site Plan, and with all staff comments as listed below. Altizer, Coker, Hasty, Jenkins, Longmire, and Peterson voted aye. Nay: None. Abstained: None. Absent: Hardwick, Hardcastle, Silkwood, and Stringfellow. Motion carried. (6-0-0) STAFF REPORT The Cheerville and Half Batch Brewery site plans were both approved by the Planning Commission at its September meeting (9/7). Both applicants presented exterior building elevations showing brick on all four sides of each building. Their initial submittals both proposed using painted CMU block on the sides and rears of the buildings, but staff encouraged the use of brick in order to comply with the City’s building design standards and to avoid having to request waivers. They complied, showing brick on all sides on their resubmittal.  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 3 Now, both Applicants are requesting waivers to allow the use of painted CMU block on the rears and sides of their proposed buildings. The existing shopping center has painted CMU block on the rear and on the east side facing Bonita Parkway. In the graphic below, the blue line indicates where CMU block is present on the existing shopping center. The shopping center was built in the 1970’s, well before the City had building design standards. The red lines indicate where Half Batch and Cheerville would like to change from brick to painted CMU block to match the shopping center. The fronts of the buildings facing Bonita Parkway, and the front of Half Batch facing the north parking lot, would remain brick as approved. CMU block is not one of the recommended exterior materials listed in the City’s building design standards. Both Half Batch and Cheerville are requesting waivers to allow CMU block as shown.  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 4 East end of existing shopping center has CMU block East end of existing shopping center has CMU block  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 5 Rear of existing shopping center has CMU block View looking south towards homes on Vintage Circle  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 6 Proposed north facade of Half Batch (facing north parking lot). Edge of existing shopping center to the right. Proposed east facade of Half Batch (facing Bonita Pkwy) Proposed east façade (facing Bonita Pkwy) and south facade (facing residential subdivision) of Cheerville  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 7 Proposed west rear facade of Cheerville Proposed east facade of Cheerville and Half Batch (facing Bonita Pkwy) STAFF COMMENTS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. No comments. Submitted by Timothy Whitten, RLA, AICP, Assistant Planning Director (September 30, 2021) PUBLIC WORKS 1. No comments. Submitted by Sarah Lock, PE, Public Works Director (September 30, 2021) FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. No comments. Submitted by Shane Nolan, Fire Inspector (September 29, 2021)  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 8 21-085-001: CROWN CASTLE CELL TOWER (FIRE STATION #4) – SITE PLAN: MOTION BY Altizer, seconded by Peterson, to approve the Crown Castle Cell Tower (Fire Station #4) – Site Plan, with all requestested waivers and with all staff comments as listed below. Altizer, Coker, Hasty, Jenkins, Longmire, and Peterson voted aye. Nay: None. Abstained: None. Absent: Hardwick, Hardcastle, Silkwood, and Stringfellow. Motion carried. (6-0-0) STAFF REPORT Indian Lake Elementary School has decided to not renew the lease for the cell tower on its site. The tower will be removed by August 21, 2022. The City of Hendersonville determined that the loss of this tower will create a substantial gap in cell communications coverage in the area and issued a Request for Proposals as Cell Tower Land Lease at Fire Hall #4 at 511 Indian Lake Road. (See pages 23-28 of the application showing resultant gap in coverage with loss of Indian Lake Elementary tower). BOMA accepted Global Signals Acquisitions II’s (GSA II) proposal on August 10, 2021, subject to receiving a Conditional Use Permit from the BZA and Site Plan approval from the HRPC. Fire Hall #4 is located at the corner of Bonita Parkway and Indian Lake Road.  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 9 The lot is zoned Suburban Residential, Low Density (SR-1). The entire area shown in the image above is also zoned SR-1. The cell tower ordinance allows a Tower in a residential zoning district only if it is on a publicly owned lot or a lot whose primary use is a church, and only if it obtains a Conditional Use Permit. A Conditional Use Permit was granted for a cell tower on this site at the most recent Board of Zoning Appeals (9/13). The cell tower will be of a monopole design as required by the Ordinance. See pages 36-41 of the application for photo simulations of the proposed tower. While the Planning Commission should familiarize themselves with the full application, the following highlights some of the critical sections of the Ordinance: 15.5.4 - This paragraph requires the Applicant to demonstrate why a tower is necessary rather than using small-cell technology, which requires much smaller installation and equipment. See page 21 of the application. This page explains that macro cell (i.e. a Tower) is necessary because the area will have insufficient capacity and throughput that cannot be supplied by small cell, and that the coverage provided by small cell technology is insufficient to cover as large an area. 15.5.5, 15.5.6 - These paragraphs require the Applicant to make diligent efforts to utilize existing Tower facilities or Antenna Support Structures (such as a church steeple or a water tower) within a one mile radius of the proposed site, rather than build a new Tower. The Applicant demonstrates on pages 4 and 15 that there are no other available towers or support structures within the designated area. 15.5.8 – This paragraph requires technical evidence that the Tower will meet all required structural requirements. The Applicant has provided site plans stamped by a civil engineer, and agrees to provide further structural drawings and specifications once the site plan is approved and prior to a building permit being issued (see page 32 of the application). REQUESTED MODIFICATION #1: Section 15.6.5 requires a Tower to be setback from residentially zoned properties a minimum of 200 feet. Because of the small size of the lot, and because it is surrounded by residential zoning, it is not physically possible to meet all the required setbacks. The lots across Indian Lake Road to the south are owned by the Indian Lake Forest Swim & Tennis Club. The lot to the west is Indian Lake Elementary. The lot to the north-east is common open space for The Meadows of Indian Lake subdivision. The lots to the east are the only adjacent lots that have residences on them and are part of The Meadows of Indian Lake subdivision. Crown Castle is requesting a modification of the setback requirement to allow the following:  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 10 a) A setback of 58 feet from the eastern property line b) A setback of 189 feet from the western property line c) A setback of 178 feet from the southern property line d) A setback of 60 feet from the norther property line In order to request a modification of the setbacks, Section 15.17 requires the Applicant to demonstrate the following: 1. In addition to the requirements for a Tower, Application for modification shall include the following: a. A description of how the plan addresses any adverse impact that might occur as a result of approving the modification b. A description of off-site or on-site factors that mitigate any adverse impacts that might occur as a result of the modification. c. A technical study that documents and supports the criteria submitted by the Applicant upon which the request for modification is based. The technical study shall be certified by an Engineer and shall document the existence of the facts related to the proposed modifications and its relationship to surrounding rights-of-way and properties. 2. In addition to the requirements of subparagraph 15.17.1 of this Chapter, in the following cases, the Applicant must also demonstrate, with written evidence, the following: 1. In the case of a requested modification to the setback requirement established in Chapter 15.6 (Setbacks), that the setback requirement cannon be met on the parcel of land upon which the Tower is proposed to be located and the alternative for the person is to locate the Tower at another site which is closer in proximity to a residentially zoned land. The Applicant makes the following response to these requirements:  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 11 REQUESTED MODIFICATION #2: Section 15.19.6 requires: All electronic and other related equipment and appurtenances necessary for operation of any Personal Wireless Services Antenna shall, whenever possible be located within a lawfully pre-existing building or structure or be located entirely below grade. When a new structure is required to house such equipment any portion of such structure above grade shall have brick exterior and a shingled, pitched roof. In response to this requirement, the applicant states: (REPORT CONTINUES BELOW)  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 12 There is a substantial existing evergreen screen at between the fire hall lot and the adjacent Meadows of Indian Lake residences (circled in red at right and below). In addition, the Applicant will be planting evergreens around the cell tower enclosure, and the enclosure itself is vinyl- coated chain link with privacy slats inserted. Any equipment inside the enclosure will be well-screened from view.  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 13 Section 15.17 gives specific criteria that the Planning Commission must consider when determining whether or not to grant the modification (or variance). 2. The Planning Commission shall consider the Application for modification based on the following criteria: a. That the Tower as modified will be compatible with and not adversely impact the character and integrity of surrounding properties. b. Off-site or on-site conditions exist which mitigate the adverse impacts, if any, created by the modification. c. In addition, the Planning Commission may include conditions on the site where the Tower is to be located if such conditions are necessary to preserve the character and integrity of the neighborhoods affected by the proposed Tower and mitigate any adverse impacts which arise in connection with the approval of the modification. (These criteria (15.17.2) should be mentioned when making a motion regarding the modification.) STAFF COMMENTS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. Structural requirements letter (Attachment #4) must be stamped and sealed by a qualified professional. 2. Prior to obtaining a building permit or otherwise beginning any component of construction, provide a tower design meeting section 15.7 of the Hendersonville Zoning Ordinance. The design must be stamped by a licensed engineer. 3. Provide taller growing evergreens around fence, such as Thuja ‘Green Giant’. Planting height shall be 8’. Spacing should be 12’ – 14’ o.c. Submitted by Timothy Whitten, RLA, AICP, Assistant Planning Director (September 30, 2021) PUBLIC WORKS 1. Storm Water Calcs: Provide more detail and add statement regarding pre vs post. Submitted by Sarah Lock, PE, Public Works Director (September 30, 2021) FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. No comments. Submitted by Shane Nolan, Fire Inspector (September 29, 2021)  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 14 PRELIMINARY PLATS: None. REZONING REQUEST: None. RELATED PROJECTS: None. STAFF-REVIEWED PROJECTS, APPROVED: The Hendersonville Regional Planning Commission acknowledged staff’s approval of the following projects. No other action was taken: 21-072-001: DURHAM, PHASE 3, SECTION 28A – FINAL PLAT AMENDMENT 21-082-001: MARANATHA ASSEMBLIES OF GOD SHELTER – SITE PLAN 21-064-001: SAVANNAH, PHASE 6 – FINAL PLAT 21-073-001: TODDSCARTEAM.COM DRIVE APRON ADDITION – SITE PLAN STAFF-REVIEWED PROJECTS, PENDING: 21-074-001: DURHAM, PHASE 1, SECTION 16, LOT 1200 PARKING PAD (LENNAR MODEL HOUSE) – SITE PLAN 21-065-001: DURHAM PHASE 3, SECTION 28 (TOWNHOMES) – SITE PLAN AMENDMENT 21-062-001: HAZEL PATH COMMONS, PERGOLA ADDITION – SITE PLAN 21-084-001: INDIAN LAKE VILLAGE, PHASE 7, RESUB. LOT 31 – FINAL PLAT 21-071-001: JOLLIE OLLIE’S, DECK ADDITION – SITE PLAN 21-080-001: JOLLIE OLLIE’S, SPRINKLER RISER ROOM – SITE PLAN 21-076-001: MARTIN’S BBQ, ADDITION & PARKING LOT REVISION – SITE PLAN 21-079-001: 105 RICE ROAD SUBDIVISION – FINAL PLAT 21-081-001: WALMART #1376 CURBSIDE PICKUP RENOVATION – SITE PLAN  H.R.P.C. MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 2021 PAGE 15 21-075-001: WALMART #1376 PARKING LOT ATM ADDITION – SITE PLAN OTHER: None. PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMENTS: Director Keith Free stated that development continues, and the Planning Department has been very busy. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY Longmire, seconded by Altizer, to adjourn the Hendersonville Regional Planning Commission Meeting at 7:03 p.m. Altizer, Coker, Hasty, Jenkins, Longmire, and Peterson voted aye. Nay: None. Abstained: None. Absent: Hardwick, Hardcastle, Silkwood, and Stringfellow. Motion carried. (6-0-0) ___________________________________ ___________________________________ DARLENE STRINGFELLOW, Secretary DAVID JENKINS, Chairman ___________________________________ KEITH L. FREE, MPA, AICP, Planning Director