MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF THE PIPERTON PLANNING COMMISSION August 22, 2017, 6:00 P.M.

Transcription

1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF THE PIPERTON PLANNING COMMISSION August 22, 2017, 6:00 P.M. The Piperton Planning Commission met on August 22, 2017 at 6:00 p.m., at City Hall, with Board members: Chairman John Henszey, Mayor Henry Coats, Vice-Mayor Mike Binkley, Commissioner Denise Browder and Commissioner Gwen Brown present. City Planner Brett Morgan, City Engineer Harvey Matheny, Fire Chief Reed Bullock and City Recorder Beverly Holloway were also present along with Tim Turner, Curtis & Denise Poole, Greg Smith, Andrea Joseph, John McCarty, Preston Trotter and Mike Medling. Agenda item 1. Call to order, establish quorum Action taken: Chairman John Henszey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and established that a quorum was present. Agenda item 2. Prayer and Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag Action taken: Chairman Henszey led in the opening Prayer and Vice-Mayor Mike Binkley led in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. Agenda item 3. Any changes to Agenda; Motion to adopt Agenda Action taken: There was a change to the Agenda with the deferment of item #6 until the September meeting and Commissioner Denise Browder moved to adopt the revised Agenda, seconded by Commissioner Gwen Brown. The Motion received all affirmative votes. Agenda item 4. Any changes to the Minutes of the Regular Session of July 11, 2017: Motion to approve Minutes of July 11, Action taken: There were no changes to the Minutes of the Regular Session of July 11, 2017 and Mayor Henry Coats moved to accept the Regular Session Minutes of July 11, 2017 as presented, seconded by Commissioner Browder. The Motion received all affirmative votes. Agenda item 5. LaGrange Pointe Plat Revision Bret Morgan, City Planner, stated John McCarty is here to represent LaGrange Pointe, they had formerly submitted a Master Development Plan that had shown the different phases and the applicant is requesting to split Phase 1 into Phase 1A and 1B and has been assured there are no changes to lots, infrastructure etc, it is a fairly simple request and staff has no problems with the request. John McCarty stated the partners of this development requested the split, there are multiple reasons; 1) 66 is a lot of lots in a phase of a subdivision and the split will help the marketing and the push as well as the urgency where people feeling like it is closing in, 2) it would only require the partners to pay property taxes on the first 33 lots in 2017 since the partners have been sitting on this almost completely constructed subdivision for a long time and Phase 1 will not be a financial success one way or the other but they are committed to moving forward and doing it as high quality as possible at the same time with the financial factor in the background so they want to plat half now and keep the momentum going, and keep the builders crunched up in the front so it looks really good and then come back and plat the second half. Mayor Coats inquired on the time frame. 1

2 Mr. McCarty stated hoping to plat in the next 45 to 60 days, the sewer plant is completed with the drip fields under construction now and most of the infrastructure is in place and after TDEC and the City inspects will be ready to plat. Mr. Morgan stated the applicant has submitted what the new phasing will look like and the second entrance is in Phase 1B and staff has no issues. Harvey Matheny, City Engineer stated what has been approved is the 66 lots in the original Phase 1 and the one entrance (the western entrance), the development is in the City and the second entrance to the east is at the crest of that hill and would be considered Fayette County due to the corporate boundary and the County was not agreeable to lowering the hill and connect that road at this time and per the approved plans from the previous City Engineer, he had deferred that second entrance for the original 66 lots development. Mr. McCarty stated we will come back with Phase 2 once we file 1A and 1B and construct Phase 2 obviously between the Police, the Fire and the planning engineering then it will become a requirement issue to solve with the County and as you can see we have constructed everything up to it for the 2 nd entrance. Chairman Henszey stated the road grading is still in play when it comes to section B. Mr. McCarty replied yes sir. Action taken: Mayor Coats moved to accept LaGrange Pointe Development divided into 1A and 1B in equal lots of 33 lots each, seconded by Vice-Mayor Binkley. The Motion received all affirmative votes. Agenda item 6. Glenn Farms PD-O Rezoning Request Action taken: Item was deferred until the September meeting at the beginning of the meeting. Agenda item 7. Piperton Hills Commercial PD-O Rezoning Request Mr. Morgan stated Piperton Hills Commercial is currently zoned RC but proposed land use for that entire Hwy 72 corridor is for commercial development, the applicant is requesting rezoning and the applicant s justification is as follows: 1) the property s current zoning is not aligned with the City s Land Use Plan, 2) the area has changed significantly-noted by the expansion of Hwy 72 and approval of Piperton Hills Parkway, 3) there is a public need for commercial uses along the Hwy 72 corridor and Mr. Morgan stated the applicant meets the requirements for giving justification for rezoning of this magnitude, the site is acres and within that you must also change the base zoning and staff is requesting the base zoning be changed to B2 with a PD-O or a Planned Development Overlay on the property in which staff can use the PD-O instrument to restrict or to allow uses that are not conventional to just a straight zoning district, so the B2 offers a lot to this and the applicant is using the bulk requirements of the B2 zoning to control this, originally the applicant had shown on the concept plan 16 different lots but that has been reduced to 15 lots and they have provided a Master Development Plan with a list of conditions to the Master Development Plan, Piperton Hills Parkway has been previously approved as a rural road and this PD-O needs to condition how Piperton Hills Parkway is build and that it become an urban cross-section that provides for curb and gutters, sidewalks and street-scapes through the commercial district, has also considered 4 lanes, 2 lanes in each direction, may not ultimately be enough if a major north-south and somewhat east-west thoroughfare for the City that intersects to Hwy 72 with 55 acres of commercial so that section may need to be a 6 lane section with a median in it as well so as you go through the conditions that are placed upon approval of this development, consideration of this being a 6 lane urban section as opposed to a 4 lane rural section is considered. Mr. Matheny stated there are a lot of things staff doesn t know and that is why the condition was added to consider a 6 lane section and staff does not know if a traffic study was done to show with Piperton Hills PD and with the commercial of 55 acres to know what kind of traffic to expect on this roadway and it is very common in some communities to approve a lot of Master Plans without 2

3 giving a lot of thought to the trip generation that it is going to create and by the time you approve the development plan on a certain right of way and then you find out later there will be a lot of traffic it is too late, so you need to have some idea early on with a trip generation studies to know what is expected and if it justifies that the 4 lane divided section is sufficient then staff is willing to look at that but we don t know that and that is why staff included it. Mr. Morgan stated the conditions as they have been written allow for it to be less if less can be justified which is what Mr. Matheny stated but if the traffic generation increases to such a point as it is needed then staff wants to make sure that we have taken care of the residents of the City and give them adequate thoroughfare. Chairman Henszey inquired if Greg Smith was up on this. Greg Smith with Mr. Adair, stated he is aware of it and does have comments about it. Mr. Morgan stated the other major north-south thoroughfare is Hwy 196, which is to the north and is a two lane road through there now and staff feels the right-of-way needs to be a full 84 foot right-of-way and staff is requesting that the applicant dedicate 42 feet to the City as development occurs in that area. Mr. Matheny stated the precedent for that is Ridgewood Grove, the frontage along Hwy 196 was dedicated 42 feet from the centerline which would accommodated the full 84 foot right-of-way at some point in the future. Mr. Morgan stated with anticipating that staff is saying that may not carry as much traffic as Piperton Hills Parkway so staff may give consideration to if Hwy 72 continues to develop as retail along that northside whether or not that should have flexibility built into it or at least through the commercial area to be a bigger section so these are conditions staff is offering up now before it goes the Board of Mayor and Commissioners for the Planning Commission to consider to either say yes or no to. Mr. Matheny stated regarding the access on page 3, currently the plan for shows a connection to Hwy 72 with is Piperton Hills Parkway which will line up with future Casey Road so that is one access point and there are two other access points over to Hwy 196 internal to the development, any and all connections to State Highways have to be approved by TDOT so to the extent of this connection of Piperton Hills Parkway, it has already been approved and staff has that documentation in our office and the two other connections that are shown over to Hwy 196 to staff s knowledge doesn t have TDOT s approval at this point in time, so the condition is just that TDOT has to approve any connection to State Highways and relative to other connections to local roads that would need the approval of the City Engineer. Mr. Smith stated they are meeting all the three criteria s that the City requires to approve the rezoning due to the advance changes going on in the neighborhood and the public needs for new businesses coming in and to address the right-of-way situation concerning Piperton Hills Parkway we do agree to dedicate more right-of-way and had spoken with Mr. Matheny via regarding the advance section of Piperton Hills Parkway being through the commercial area only and we don t feel like we need a six-lane road all the way through the entire development but what we are asking since there is only one person interested in the property now and there will be future prospects but we do not see this developing out in a hurry is that we dedicate the right-of-way and leave the road as it is so we have room to improve it at the time it needs to be improved rather than building all that right for just one lot and that is what we are asking on that. Mr. Morgan stated staff is good with that. Mr. Smith stated as far as the access, I have two access points on Hwy 196 and have spoken with TDOT and got their recommended distance away from 196 and have changed our plans so that we are 350 feet away and does have permits that he is processing and will be submitting for that and as far as storm water we do plan to put underground urban drainage system throughout the whole thing in the commercial and along the northside of the commercial there is a low area with a ditch going through there and we plan to have detention ponds adequate to keep this to post of 3

4 predevelopment runoff through the whole system, there will be ponds along the ditch and in a couple other spots. Mr. Morgan stated the concept plan that showed two lakes on, are those your detention areas. Mr. Smith stated those are the proposed detention areas right now and they will be used for retention/detention wet ponds and on that plan it didn t show the south entrance on that concept plan but there will be a south tie in there. Mr. Morgan inquired if we know how much off-site water maybe coming on to us and where it is coming from. Mr. Smith stated the biggest part of the water comes from the south end and they have taken the hill down considerably and basically leveled the whole site and there is a substantial amount of water that comes down through here and we have 48 inch pipe planned to carry that which this will remain an open channel and there is about a 100 acres of water shed that comes along the northern line and far as water within the subdivision it basically hits the top of the hill and runs all directions. Mr. Morgan inquired which way the water is moving, is it moving north. Mr. Smith stated it is moving south to north behind the business that we are planning now and those other three lots back there, there will be storm water retention back there. Mr. Matheny stated the current water line ends just passed the MCR facility so the plan is to connect to the water line all along the down the highway and cross under the highway and would have to have permits to do that and come and serve the development. Mayor Coats inquired on a 12 inch water line. Mr. Matheny at this stage doesn t want the size determined because when we get ready for design we will ask for more information such as what are your anticipated flows, what pressure flow do we have here, can you provide the pressure flow that you need for a full build out because it is conditioned it to say at each stage and final site plan approval staff will need to know what your flows are incrementally so that at some point I presume that the line would be extended up Hwy 196 to connect to our existing system at Russell Road so that we have a loop system. Mayor Coats inquired if there was a 12 inch line on Russell. Mr. Matheny stated it s a 6 inch and doesn t know at this point if this one single feed basically a dead end feed into the commercial would be enough for the full build out but presumes it would be enough for Phase 1 but the condition was written this way so that staff would have the ability to analysis with each final site plan to know if we need more. Mayor Coats stated we are connecting a 12 inch line to an 8 inch line in Collierville. Mr. Matheny stated we know there are supply issues at this part of town so that is why staff wanted to cover that base and for this rezoning purpose just to be on the record that staff will look at with each phase. Mr. Smith stated he had a flow test done and will send that data in the morning. Mr. Matheny stated sewer is a little more complicated, there is no sewer nearby and recently the Public Works Director, Terry Parker and I visited with the Marshall County representative to see if they would allow us to modify our agreement to service this property along the northside of the highway into Marshall County, Marshall County is open to that and they have met with their Board and their Board is open to it and their engineer has going to send some questions to us and ask for more detail such as how much flow are we anticipating along the highway and how much are we wanting to send to them but staff has not received those questions yet but as soon as staff receives them, we will answer those question and hopes at that point they can move forward with modifying our service area, and if they modify our service area we would like for this commercial property to flow into Marshall County which would be a much simpler solution than what Mr. Smith proposed, Mr. Smith proposed a lift station to be located near the northwest corner and a gravity sewer system within the development to route ultimately through other phases of Piperton Hills and ultimately flows all the way to the north, the plan doesn t show the culmination of that but it shows how it would tie into Piperton Hills north but needs more detail where ultimately sewer would flow to and how it would 4

5 get into our existing system if the Marshall County plan falls through, our condition is Marshall County is plan A and some other direction is plan B but we need more information. Mr. Morgan inquired of Mr. Smith, if we don t get a quick answer from Marshall County and you have a Phase 1 that wants to come on and move forward are you ready to move forward with this concept for that one phase. Mr. Smith replied yes sir, it serves a dual purpose with the sewer line proposed, and it will also serve Mr. Adair s home and one other that is being planned in there that will probably happen before the development happened and it is being planned along the proposed direct routes that were planned a long time ago assuming everything gets approved but are willing to take that gamble, they would be in a position when the roads and the infrastructures come in it would be right where it needs to be, so we are not looking at it as wasted sewer but we will get use of it in the future. Mr. Morgan inquired on the time frame for submitting Phase 1 site plans. Mr. Smith stated on the site plans for the convenience store, their drawings are done but civil plans are not ready but can be worked up in a short time and they are ready to go with their project. Mr. Smith stated they went to 60 foot right-of-ways with three lane sections. Mr. Morgan stated staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the rezoning to B-2 Minor Planned Commercial with PD-O Planned Development Overlay subject to the 11 conditions and Mr. Morgan went over the conditions. Chairman Henszey inquired to Mr. Smith if agreeable. Mr. Smith stated they are agreeable with all conditions. Action taken: Mayor Coats moved to accept the acre rezoning to B2 with PD-O based on staff s recommendations as included in items 1 through 11, seconded by Commissioner Browder. The Motion received all affirmative votes. Agenda item 8. Tommy Joseph Accessory Building Mr. Morgan stated the applicant has requested approval of the site plan and design of the accessory structure, this is in the RC (Rural Conservation) Zone which requires a minimum lot size of 5 acres or more and this lot is 20 plus acres so staff does not anticipate this ever being out of the RC zoning district in the City, and so in a typical subdivision the size of an accessory structure is tied to a maximum percentage of the principal structure except in areas where there is 5 acres or more in land and that put it in the hands of the Planning Commission as well as the Board of Mayor and Commissioners to approve, all of the restrictions for accessory structures are excluded on a lot of this size it becomes strictly a site plan and design review for the Planning Commission and the Board, and the applicant has proposed a structure that is 42 x 80 which 3,360 square feet, the required front yard setback for this lot is 35 feet and the applicant is showing 340 feet plus on the front yard, the required side yard setback is 50 feet and the applicant is showing 63 feet for this structure and staff also requires any accessory structure not be build out in front of the front wall of the primary structure as it faces the street and so this structure according to Mr. Turner s plans is 13 feet back from the front wall of the principle building and the accessory structure is fitting within the bulk requirements. Chairman Henszey stated there is a pool pavilion on the property also. Mr. Morgan stated he had requested of Mr. Tim Turner, Eagle Construction, to submit samples of the materials to be used, typically within any other subdivision the City doesn t allow metal or vinyl siding for an accessory structure but because of the size of the lot that is an exclusion and the Planning Commission is allow to allow that and so Mr. Morgan showed the samples brought in. Mrs. Joseph stated half of the structure will be a wood working shop and the other equipment storage. Mr. Morgan stated the height of the structure should be reduced to 25 in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, this building is 26 feet 6 inches and the accessory structure cannot be habitable 5

6 and comply with all necessary permitting requirements of the City and or the State so that being said with the stipulation of the 25 feet staff recommends approval. Action taken: Vice-Mayor Binkley moved to recommend approval to the Board of Mayor and Commissioners of the site plan design of the accessory structure with the 3 conditions, seconded by Mayor Coats. The Motion received all affirmative votes. Agenda item 9. Any other old/new business, questions or matters from the audience There was none. Agenda item 10. Adjournment Action taken: Commissioner Browder moved for adjournment, seconded by Commissioner Brown. The Motion received all affirmative votes, and the meeting was adjourned at 7:01 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beverly Holloway, City Recorder Approved: date: 6