►
From YouTube: Council Agenda 5-01-2018
Description
Description here.
A
I
guess
there's
just
a
fiver
there
we
go
all
right,
I'm,
going
to
call
to
order
our
agenda
session
for
Tuesday
May
1st
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
minutes,
a
motion,
a
second
all,
those
in
favor,
say
aye,
those
whose
name
sorta.
Thank
you
very
much.
Welcome
everybody
all
right,
so
we'll
get
started
right
away.
We're
running
a
few
minutes
late,
madam
clerk.
Let's
go
ahead
and
jump
right
into
resolutions.
A
C
D
C
B
Authorizing
the
award
of
contract
number,
why
is
17
0
17
to
0
1,
to
J
th
Company
Inc
of
Chattanooga
Tennessee
replacement,
roofing
system
for
carver
yfd
center
building
in
the
amount
of
one
hundred?
Ninety
two
thousand
eight
hundred
and
forty
four
dollars
with
a
contingency
amount
of
$20,000
right
amount
not
to
exceed
two
hundred
and
twelve
thousand
eight
hundred
and
forty
four
dollars.
C
Byrd
you
all
right,
I,
don't
see
any
questions,
but
I
have
one
Justin
I
asked
this
of
chief
of
staff
earlier
we're
getting
to
put
roofs
better
than
just
patching
roofs,
and
things
like
that.
We're
beginning
to
put
roofs
on
different
buildings
and
jdh
is
getting
all
the
work
or
we
build
it
bidding
this
individually
or
is
this
a
requirements
contractor
these.
E
B
Authorizing
the
administrator
for
the
Department
of
Public
Works
to
enter
into
a
joint
funding
agreement
with
the
US
Geological
Survey
in
the
city
of
Chattanooga
to
operate
three
continuous,
real-time
stream
gauges
located
on
North
Sycamore,
Creek,
South,
Sycamore,
Creek
and
Chattanooga
Creek
for
the
period
beginning
April
1
2018
through
May
March
31st
2019
at
a
total
cost,
a
forty
four
thousand
two
hundred
dollars
with
a
contribution
of
ten
thousand
eight
hundred
and
seventy
five
dollars
from
the
USGS
and
thirty.
Three
thousand
three
hundred
twenty-five
dollars
from
the
city
of
Chattanooga.
D
Yes,
sir,
these
are
these
are
stream
gauges
that
are
installed
by
the
USGS
service.
We
we
worked
with
them
to
install
some
some
of
the
stream
gauges
particular
to
south
Chickamauga,
Creek,
Lookout,
Creek
and
Chattanooga
Clear
Creek
I,
believe,
are
all
included
and
an
early
and
advanced
warning
on
North,
Chickamauga,
Creek
I.
D
Think
all
these
stream
gauges,
except
for
one,
are
located
outside
the
city
limits,
but
the
early
warning
systems
that
give
us
an
indication
of
flooding
levels
in
Chattanooga,
they're,
currently
collecting
data
and
would
later
after
we
have
more
more
information
over
time,
be
able
to
provide
us
a
little
bit
more
predictability
about
stream
levels
and
where
they
would
end
up
after
heavy
rainfalls.
So
the
they
gauge
flows
over
time
and
are
able
to
provide
some
predictability
on
stream
elevations
in.
F
F
C
B
Resolution
authorizing
the
approval
of
change
order:
number
one:
CDM,
Smith,
Inc
relative
to
contract
number
at
W,
12,
0,
2,
4,
1,
0,
1
m
BW,
w
TP,
solid
process,
optimization
implementation
phase,
3,
centrifuge
and
digester
upgrades
a
constant
decree
project
for
an
increased
amount
of
three
hundred
thirty
four
thousand
five
hundred
dollars
for
the
revised
contract
amount
of
1
million
seven
hundred
and
eight
dollars.
Seven
hundred
eight
fifty
dollars.
B
Authorizing
the
award
of
contract
number
Y
17
zero
16
to
zero
one,
two
jdh
Company
Inc
of
Chattanooga
Tennessee
replacement,
roofing
system
for
East
ly,
FD
Center
building
in
the
amount
of
one
hundred
and
thirty
nine
thousand
two
hundred
and
twenty-five
dollars
with
a
contingency
amount
of
fourteen
thousand
dollars
for
an
amount
not
to
exceed
one
hundred.
Fifty
two
thousand
two
hundred
and
twenty-five
dollars.
C
B
Authorizing
the
mayor
to
execute
a
proposal
with
the
Tennessee
Department
of
Transportation
for
state
project
number
at
three:
three:
zero:
zero;
two,
two
one:
six,
nine
four
for
federal
project
number
and
hi2
for
three.
Ninety
pin
number
one
one:
two,
eight
three
three
point:
zero:
zero
interchanges
at
SR,
two
Broad
Street
and
s
are
58;
Market,
Street
and
Chattanooga
are
twenty
four.
B
B
Authorizing
the
Chattanooga
area,
Convention
and
Visitor's
Bureau
care
of
shelter
breeze
to
use
temporarily
the
right-of-way
along
the
northern
side
of
the
unit
block
of
Riverside
Drive
between
Chestnut
Street
and
Market
Street
bridge
for
the
purpose
of
installing
historic
TVA
signs.
As
shown
on
the
maps
attached
here
to
and
made
part
here
of
my
reference
to
subject
to
certain
conditions.
C
C
E
E
I,
wonder
wondering
if
you
could
answer
a
couple
of
questions
I
had
in
regards
to
how
we
purchased
our
recycle
cans
and
trash
cans,
as
I've
noticed
throughout
the
year,
lease
seems
seem
to
pay
a
lot
of
money
for
these
and
go
through
quite
a
few
and
I
just
I
had
a
few
questions
that
I
sent
by
email.
If
you
would
cover
those
please
yeah.
D
I
appreciate
your
questions.
I
have
roshanda
wood
I'll.
Ask
her
to
make
a
couple
of
a
couple
of
comments
about
the
process
and
I
can
brief
you
on
briefly
what
we've
done
in
the
past
and
how
our
operations
may
have
changed
over
time.
So
previously,
Public
Works
Department
only
managed
garbage
containers.
We
didn't
have
a
rollout
recycle
cart
program
until
2013.
D
Once
we
implemented
the
rollout
recycled
container
program,
we
increased
our
number
of
carts
by
about
30,000
a
little
over
30,000
carts
throughout
in
the
city,
so
our
inventory
throughout
the
city
is
about
five
and
a
half
million
dollars
in
garbage
containers
and
recycled
containers
that
that
volume
of
containers
has
to
be
maintained.
So
the
mechanical
trucks
are
difficult,
are
they're
pretty
hard
on
the
containers.
They
damage
the
containers.
Sometimes
people
damage
the
containers.
Sometimes
they
damage
the
containers.
Just
get
worn
out.
An
increase
in
curbside
services
using
the
carts
is
part
of
the
increase.
D
We've
been
purchasing
the
carts
through
NJ
PA,
which
is
a
a
cooperative
purchasing
contract.
We
we
purchased
carts
in
a
number
of
different
ways
over
time.
That's
it's
kind
of
where
we're
at
we've
typically
spent
about
$150,000
a
year
annually,
year-over-year,
since
probably
last
ten
years
estimated
after
the
recycled
carts
program
came
on
board,
we've
spent
a
significant
amount,
more
purchasing
carts,
so
we've
had
30,000
additional
carts.
E
H
So
there
are
several
ways:
residents
I
can
go
about
requesting
garbage
containers.
Mostly
it's
done
through
our
three
one.
One
call
centers
were
request
or
initiated
residents
can
request
containers
for
new
construction
or,
if
they're,
moving
into
a
new
home.
That
will
require
a
new
container.
Also,
if
their
container
is
busted,
lid
damage
will
damage.
Then
they'll
in
a
request
and
it'll
be
submitted
to
us
for
container
repair
or
replacement
a
lot
of
times
a
lot
of
repairs
that
we
have.
H
H
E
H
E
H
D
C
I
It's
a
good
it's
a
good
Segway.
Those
would
not
be
allowed
back,
what's
being
proposed,
oh
really
have
to
be
mobile.
This
I've
got
a
real
short
presentation
that
I
can
go
through
with
you
and
I
wanted.
To
give
a
little
bit
of
background
first
and
thanks
to
the
city
attorney
for
getting
this
process
started.
I
We
think
that
a
street
with
sidewalks
that
have
people
on
it
doing
all
kinds
of
different
things
is
both
safer
and
also
a
more
comfortable
place
to
be.
So.
We
think,
from
that
standpoint,
providing
the
opportunity
for
food
trucks
to
operate
on
the
city
streets
can
help
our
streets
feel
better
for
people.
I
We
also
acknowledge
and
identified
a
couple
of
things
that
apply
more
generally
to
how
food
trucks
operate,
that
that
I'll
share
with
you
fairly
broadly
and
I
also
believe
that
Nicole
shared
with
you.
A
draft
I
will
point
out
that
I
shared
that
via
Google
Docs,
which
doesn't
have
a
mechanism
yet
for
putting
a
big
draft
stamp
on
it.
I
So
that
being
said,
the
first
of
three
slides
just
gives
you
a
general
overview
of
the
code,
sections
that
we're
proposing
to
change
and
a
description
of
them.
There
is,
as
I
mentioned,
a
change
to
allow
food
trucks
to
operate
on
city
streets
I'll.
Go
into
that
in
more
detail
after
I
get
through
this
slide.
We
also
are
proposing
that
operationally
food
trucks
can
operate
more
than
just
in
the
downtown,
which
is
pretty
much
what
the
current
code
says.
I
I
You
still
get
your
food
truck
permit
through
the
city
treasurer,
and
it's
required
that
you
get
Health
Department
approvals
as
well
as
fire
department
approvals
before
we
had
a
coordinated
meeting
last
week
with
someone
from
Treasury
for
some
woman
from
fire,
someone
from
the
Health
Department,
the
City,
Attorney's,
Office
and
so
I
feel
like
we're
pretty
well
coordinated
on
how
this
is
gonna
work.
I'll
stress
again,
the
reason
CDOT
is
involved
is
to
assure
that
there's
a
good
mechanism,
a
simple
mechanism
for
food
trucks
to
operate
on
city
streets.
So
we've
created
a
one-page.
I
I
We've
talked
to
a
few
of
the
brick
brick
and
mortar
restaurant
owners,
and
they
think
the
ones
that
I've
spoken
with
think
that
this
is
a
reasonable
approach
and
captures
captures
what
what
could
be
perceived
as
fears
from
those
entities.
Although
I
will
say
some
of
the
brick-and-mortar
restaurants,
don't
seem
to
see
it
as
a
conflict,
but
I
think
that's
a
from
one
person
to
another,
whether
whether
it
is
or
it
isn't
so.
I
I
think
this
process
of
making
sure
that
people
in
the
vicinity
and
property
owners
in
the
vicinity
have
an
opportunity
to
weigh
weigh
in
covers
that
covers
us
in
that
regard.
Once
the
food
truck
zone
is
established,
then
we'll
share
it
with
the
parking
authority,
and
at
that
point
it
becomes
very
easy
for
a
food
truck
to
operate
on
a
city
controlled
on
street
parking
space.
It's
just
like
any
other
entity
that
wants
to
reserve
those
spaces.
I
So
that's
the
process
for
food
trucks
operating
on
city,
streets
and
I'm
sure
that
I've
forgotten
something.
But
the
last
slide
is
visual.
We've
talked
a
lot
about
potentially
Miller
Park
being
a
zone.
We
did
a
hypothetical
food
truck
zone,
and
so
you
could
see
what
we're
talking
about
in
terms
of
the
map
and
the
affected
area.
I
You
can
see
that
the
food
truck
zone
overlays
on
Miller
Park
it
would
include
on
street
parking
spaces
on
Market,
Street
and
Georgia
Avenue,
which,
if
this
were
in
a
proves
own
food
trucks,
could
then
go
to
the
parking
authority
and
request
to
reserve
one
of
those
meters
and
operate
their
food
truck
in
those
in
those
spaces.
The
affected
area
is,
in
this
case
by
default,
shown
to
be
one
block,
bigger
in
all
directions.
So
it
goes
to
8th
Street
to
the
North
Broad
Street
to
the
west.
I
C
F
I
Providing
an
opportunity,
so
we
wrestled
with
us
the
quick
answer
that
question
is:
this:
is
hypothetical
we're
providing
an
opportunity
for
anybody
to
apply
to
have
a
food
truck
zone
designated
and
the
process
for
doing
that
is
coming
to
seedot
and
giving
us
a
map
of
where
they're
proposing
the
food
truck
zone
would
go
and
then
establishing
the
affected
area
where
they
get
the
approval.
So
in
other
words,
this
is
citizen
driven
business
owner
driven
so.
F
I
F
Reason
I
say
that,
because
I
know
some
areas
but
they've
been
complaining
about
what
we
currently
have
nothing
to
say
on
mobile,
but
just
people
just
sitting
up
and
I
know
that
this
comes
up,
they're
gonna
say
well.
What
would
we
when
told
Bob,
oblong
and
I
can
tell
you
the
areas
when
we
get
through
went
wrong,
but
they
did
not
want
it.
The
other
question
is
Park
City
parks,
city
areas.
Are
we
going
to
allow
for
an
example?
We
had
a
function
down
aster
key
support,
which
was
nice.
F
I
Agree
and
I
think
the
Circa
farms
example
is
maybe
a
good
example.
I
think
that
was
permitted
as
a
special
event
and
food
trucks
can
operate
through
special
events,
so
that
would
be
one
way
to
accommodate
food
trucks
in
parks.
If,
if
we
want
to
provide
a
mechanism
for
food
trucks
to
operate
in
parks
on
a
regular
basis
on
a
day
to
day
basis,
that
would
apply
to
some
of
the
changes
we've
made
regarding
food
trucks
operating
on
private
property.
I
J
I
I
J
I
I
If
the
applicants
interested
in
this
they
should
they
should
do
the
legwork
to
make
sure
that
the
folks
in
the
vicinity
are
happy
with
it,
but
our
office
would
be
available
to
help
and
we
would
have
to
dictate
that
we've
got
final
authority,
which
is
what
our,
what
our
permit
says.
We've
got
the
C
doc
can.
If
there
were
a
restaurant,
say
in
the
top
left
corner
that
we
felt
like
needed
to
weigh
in
we,
we
could
say
you're
affecting
area.
It
needs
to
be
bigger
than
this.
E
K
J
I
And
I'm
glad
you
asked
that
question.
We
anticipate
that
neighborhood
organizations
or
groups
that
represent
areas
would
apply
to
have
food
trucks,
but
a
food
truck
operator
could
apply,
anybody
could
apply,
but
it's
not
just
for
the
applicant.
The
food
truck
zone
then
becomes
available
for
use
by
any
food.
J
J
I
said
wonder
what
the
draw
is
and
they
said.
Well,
you
can
come.
You
know
they
were
telling
me
and
they've
got
a
small
child.
You
can
come
get
something
great
to
eat
and
not
have
to
sit
in
a
restaurant
and
try
to
you
know
maintain
your
child
and
I
thought.
It
would
be.
You
know
great,
not
not
maintain
your
child
make
your
child
sit
in
the
seat,
I
mean
these
kids
were
kind
of
up
and
roaming
around.
There
was
a
lot
of
other
kids
there.
It
was
a
real
social
event.
J
Wasn't
anything
that
you
felt
like
you
had
to?
You
know.
Have
your
child
cry?
They
were,
you
know
not
running
around
I
thought
it
would
be
a
great
idea,
maybe
to
facilitate
this
was
more
facilitated
by
restaurants
that
was
located
in
a
building.
Something
similar
to
like
the
Walker
pavilion
is
where
they
just
you
could
go
in.
J
It
was
almost
like
a
food
court
in
a
mall,
but
it
was
more
of
an
open
area
type
deal
outside
event,
but
I
thought
it
would
be
if
something
worth
looking
at
that
we
could
facilitate
with
the
food
trucks
where
we
could
set
up
his
own
and
what
was
made
me
believe
it
was
all
part
of
the
city.
Is
it
was
right
next
to
the
city's
innovation
district,
they
had
an
innovation
zone
building
much
like
we
have
that
Edney
building
I
didn't
know.
J
If
that
was
something
that
we
could
sort
of
create
as
a
way
of
of
helping,
you
know
some
of
our
young
couples,
it
could
be
a
social
event
as
well
as
a
place
where
the
food
trucks
could
go
and
sell
their
product.
People
could
get
something
you
know
good
to
eat,
as
well
as
letting
their
kids
run
around.
They
didn't
have
to
worry
about
kind
of
constraining
them
like
they
might
in
a
in
a
restaurant.
J
I
I
think
this
I
think
this
creates
a
clearer
way
for
food
trucks
to
operate
and
I
think
it
would
create
a
mechanism
for
all
the
things
you're,
describing
the
note
that
I
made
earlier
about
talking
to
parks
and
open
spaces.
I
think
may
also
apply
to
this,
not
as
familiar
with
the
landscape
of
each
of
our
parks,
maybe
as
some
others,
but
I-
think
most
of
our
parks
have
parking
spaces.
I
So
we
could
easily
transfer
this
to
a
mechanism
where
food
trucks
could
operate
in
in
parking
lots
that
are
there
to
serve
parks
if
there
are
parks
that
have
like
some
parks
are
designed
with
pads
that
are
kind
of
for
the
purpose
of
food
trucks
mm-hm.
For
those
again,
it
could
be
a
special
event
or
through
that
conversation
that
I'll
have
with
parks.
It
could
be
that
there's
a
mechanism
for
a
day-to-day
operation
and
some
of
our
parks,
one.
J
L
I
Think
well,
council
councilman
Gilbert
raised
a
good
question
about
making
sure
that
there's
some
sort
of
council
at
least
notification,
which
I
think
would
help
with
what
you're
going
for.
We
also
have
in
in
the
existing
code
and
we're
proposing
to
change
it
to
expand
a
little
bit,
but
it
still
restricts
food
truck
zones
from
being
in
residential
zones.
So.
L
I
L
I
L
I
L
I
L
I
I
made
a
note
based
on
one
of
the
comments,
and
maybe
it
was
councilman
Anderson.
Some
of
our
some
of
our
parks
are
zoned,
some
of
our
parks,
obviously
in
residential
areas
and
therefore
they're
zone
residential.
Some
of
our
not
zoned
residential
I
I
think
that,
based
on
some
of
the
feedback,
I've
heard
already,
it
may
make
sense
to
say
non-residential
zones
or
parks
within
the
boundary
of
the
parks
or.
L
L
I
I
Some
parks
are
in
residentially
zoned
areas,
so
I
believe
I'll
propose,
subject
to
parks
and
the
attorney
and
others
being
involved
that
we
say
that
food
trucks
can
operate
in
non
residential
zones
or
parks
that
way
as
long
as
it's
confined
within
the
park
area,
you
could
have
what
councilman
Anderson
is
talking
about,
or
others
are
thinking
about
and
have
that
activity
occur
in
the
park
as
long
as
there's
not
I,
think
the
intent
of
the
residential
was
to
keep
food
trucks
from
being
a
nuisance
to
residential
areas.
That's.
L
I
And
purpose
of
the
food
truck
zone
is
to
establish
an
area
within
which,
on
street
parking
spaces
can
be
used.
So
if
it's,
if
the
desire
is
to
use
food
trucks
in
a
park
where
there's
not
parking
spaces,
there
would
need
to
be
something
that
was
added
to
what
I
haven't
currently
and
I'm
going
to
consider.
That
is
what
I'm
trying.
A
I
A
No,
no,
no,
stop
right.
There.
That's
the
I
was
gonna
say
you
had
me
at
no
and
then
I
knew
it's
not
allowed.
Is
there?
Is
there
anything
that
would
allow
I'm,
not
saying
we
would
want
to?
But
are
there
other
cities
that
are
allowing
beer
trucks
on
the
city
streets
or
anything
like
that?
I
haven't
seen?
Any
I
was
just
wondering
if
that
was
something
that
we've
looked
at.
A
F
F
F
I
B
I
K
J
J
So
so
I've
got
do
have
a
follow-up
question:
Oh
serious
under
20
149
a
and
it
talks
about.
You
know:
food
trucks,
food
trucks,
operating
approved
by
the
department,
transportation
and
compliance
with
rules
and
regulations
established
by
the
mayor,
or
so
it
are
there,
gonna
be
other
rules.
Besides,
what's
laid
out
in
the
ordinance
at
the
that
the
mayor
will
have
some.
I
From
just
from
my
standpoint
now
invite
mr.
Hinton
or
mr.
Reisman,
to
tell
me
I'm
longer,
add
to
it,
but
I
take
this
to
mean
that
seedot
has
the
authority
to
establish
a
mechanism
through
which
food
trucks
can
be
operated
on
city
streets
and
that's
the
that's
the
food
truck
zone
process
that
I
described
to
you.
So
beyond
what
I
talked
about
today,
I,
don't
anticipate
anything
else.
It's
the
process,
as
we
described
it
so.
C
C
Back
to
the
picture,
and
and
here
we
go
and
here
comes
a
food
truck
and
the
merchants
say
it's
okay
and
then
here
comes
another
food
truck
at
another
food
truck
in
another
food
truck
at
another
food
truck.
Until
we
don't
have
a
single
parking
space
in
this
block
on
Market,
Street
or
Georgia
Avenue.
Is
that
what
you're
envisioning
could
possibly
happen?
I
do.
I
Think
that
could
happen.
I
think
it's
unlikely,
then
one
thing
I
didn't
have
a
chance
to
address
is
that
with
the
parking
authority,
what
we've
talked
about
is
a
food
once
there's
a
zone
established.
Take
this
one,
for
example,
which
again
this
is
not
established.
This
is
just
hypothetical.
If
this
were
a
food
truck
zone,
a
food
truck
could
contact
the
parking
authority,
it
would
coordinate
with
us
and
make
sure
there
were
no
conflicts
and
then
would
bag
a
meter
on
a
predetermined
period
of
days.
I
I'm,
not
sure
I
can
anticipate
every
possible
issue,
but
I
will
say
that
I'm
very
sensitive
to
the
fact
that
our
on
three
parking
spaces
are
generally
four
before
the
public.
I
think
the
reason
that
we're
one
of
the
reasons
that
we
think
this
is
okay
is
that
these
food
trucks
will
be
for
the
general
public.
There
is
a
fee
by
the
way,
so
you
can't
reserve
you
can't
bag
a
meter
for
free.
I
K
I
We
can
set
up
some
sort
of
a
system
that
responds
to
that
demand,
but
if
there's
only
one
food
truck
there
and
it's
successful
and
there's
no
demand
for
another
one
and,
generally
speaking,
it
feels
like
the
general
public
has
the
access
that
they
need
and
then
theoretically,
a
food
truck
could
reserve
to
bag
those
meters
once
every
seven
days.
So
they
could
be
there
indefinitely,
but
they
have
to
come
back
and
re
reserve
them
every
seven
days.
So.
I
I
think,
theoretically,
but
I
think
that's
unlikely
and
I
think
we
would
again
that
these
are
intended
to
be
mobile
food
trucks
they're
not
intended
to
take
up
permanent
residence
on
a
city
parking
space.
If,
if
it,
if
it
makes
the
procedures
more
palatable,
I'm
happy
to
put
a
limit
on
it,
it
was
one
of
those
things
that
I
felt
like
as
long
as
as
long
as
we
can.
I
We
don't
have
to
say
yes
as
long
as
we
have
some
level
of
of
judgment
on
these,
that
that's
something
that
will
address
if
and
when.
If
we
have
that
bad
problem,
where
there's
lots
of
food
trucks
and
they're
doing
business
and
people
are
on
our
sidewalks
and
there's
not
enough
space,
then
I
think
we
can
address
it.
We
have
the
authority
within,
what's
being
shown
in
the
ordinance
to
address
that
okay.
K
G
I
G
G
C
A
E
E
M
M
F
M
Of
right
now,
I'm
not
sure
where
we're
at
with
those
cameras,
I
know
that
the
cameras
are
in
on
schedule
to
be
put
in
place
there.
As
for
placement
do
I
know,
there
were
some
questions
about
placement
of
cameras.
We
don't
have
anything
to
do
with
that.
That's
strictly
with
the
police
department.
You
did
what
you'd
have
to
take
out
with
them.
Well,.
F
I'm
sorry,
placement
I
think
that's
gonna
be
a
partnership
with
you.
You
found
development
and
police
because
of
they
know
they're
a
little
bit
better
I'm,
referring
to
errors.
That's
hitting
like
currently
on
brainer
in
the
backside
and
soon
you
can't
see
nothing
you
can
do
whatever
you
want.
I
have
concession
was
complaining
about
people,
cutting
the
fans
going
back
and
forth
through
the
fest.
So
that's
why
I'm
asking
you
have
a
timeline
that
get
them
cameras.
F
M
A
E
E
N
N
Let
you
know
communication
with
LDO
staff
and
we're
working
on
an
ordinance
amendment,
some
understanding
that
what
the
intent
would
be
if
you're
out
that's
to
get
boats
or
or
campers
that
we
have
some
kind
of
screening
provisions
for
that
and
a
c2
zone.
So
that's
kind
of
direction
we're
going
in
if
you
guys
have
any
questions
or
concerns
about
that.
Let
me
know
I
just
kind
of
give
you
a
heads-up,
that's
coming
down
the
pike
very.
N
C
K
N
That's
right
have
to
do
screening
make
sure
they
screen
it.
That's
the
things
they'd
have
to
so,
if
your,
so,
what
have
you
doing
now
and
I'm?
Looking
at
both
my
city
attorney
rep
and
my
LDO
team,
if
it's
legal
now,
the
new
standard
doesn't
change
that
now,
if
you're
doing
a
new
development,
this
would
apply
or
a
change
of
use.
This
would
apply
right.
Yes,.
C
C
E
N
N
It's
been
at
least
four
I
know
when
y'all
first
came
in
yeah
yeah
four
years,
I
mean
it's
typical
with
projects
of
this
scale
as
things
unfold,
the
program
changes,
and
so
we
have
a
bunch
of
conditions
that
are
designed
for
a
specific
program
concept
for
a
site
and
things
change.
Then
you
need
to
amend
conditions
to
address
a
new
concept
that
you're
trying
to
implement
on
the
project
site.
N
So
the
first
item
item
a
is:
basically,
there
was
a
request
to
amend
conditions
to
accommodate
basically
they're
shifting
from
an
office
development
concept
to
a
residential
development
concept.
You
see
here
the
area
outlined
and
r4
they're,
looking
at
doing
residential
for
that
site
and
so
to
be
able
to
do
that,
they
need
to
amend
the
conditions
to
allow
them
to
build
residential.
N
Here
again,
you
can
see
the
site
a
little
better.
This
is
153
on
the
bottom
part
of
the
screen.
You
can
see
the
site
in
the
middle
of
the
screen
boy
scout
Road
over
to
your
left.
Again,
that's
the
zoning
showing
it.
You
do
have
c2
to
the
west,
this
site,
basically
borders
a
subdivision
office
and
switch
Road
to
the
east.
N
The
plan
recommends
high
density
residential
for
this
location,
so
again
the
conditions
that
they
are
wanting
to
live.
Let
me
go
to
that
real,
quick
they're
wanting
to
amend
these
conditions.
You
see
here
for
the
r4,
which
are
really
geared
at
a
time
they're
written
for
office
use.
As
you
can
see.
It
says
the
total
gross
leasable
area,
which
applies
to
office
shall
not
exceed
two
and
fifty
thousand
square
feet
for
non-residential
uses.
You
see
the
ground
floor
of
any
structure
shall
not
exceed
forty
thousand
square
feet.
N
These
are
all
written
with
strictly
office
in
mind,
so
the
applicant
asks
for
several
items
to
be
changed,
including
some
lot
sizes
which
actually,
you
cannot
do
through
conditions
to
if
you're
trying
to
get
a
variance
in
a
lot
size
or
setback.
You
got
to
go
through
the
Board
of
Zoning
Appeals
to
handle
that
so
I
think
through
this
process
the
applicant
understood
that
and
realize
they
got
to
go
through
a
different
process
if
they're
trying
to
have
reduced
lot
sizes.
So
here's
the
concept
again
of
the
original
master
plan
concept.
N
So
what
staff
recommended,
in
light
of
again
still
getting
to
the
same
outcome,
but
trying
to
make
sure
we
do
what's
appropriate
for
conditions
and
what's
appropriate
for
variances?
Is
that
we're
recommending
to
now
some
of
the
applicants
requests
with
some
modifications.
I'll
show
you
here
that
the
we
would
approve
the
following
minute
conditions.
One
is
the
references
to
the
site
plan.
They
need
to
be
corrected.
You
see
in
red
there,
March
19
2018
is
the.
N
So
we
had
a
good
tie
into
the
site
plan
for
reference,
which
is
helpful
for
LDO,
when
they're
trying
to
enforce
a
building.
Permit
they've
got
a
correct
document
to
refer
to
you
see
they
were
adding
a
2.7.
It
says
specifically
residential
uses
per
the
typical.
Are
four
zones
shall
be
permitted,
so
it
clarifies
that
ambiguity
about
how
you
can
do
residential
on
that
site.
So
that
was
staffs
recommendation.
There
was
no
opposition.
N
Planning
Commission
reviewed
that
heard
from
the
applicant
and
staff
applicant
did
not
have
any
concerns
about
staffs
recommendation,
so
they
concurred
with
staff
to
deny
some
of
the
applicants
request,
but
to
approve
the
part
that
would
add
residential
as
a
permitted
use.
In
that
our
fourth
section
and
of
course
the
remaining
conditions
would
continue
to
carry
forward
for
that
property.
So
it
comes
with
you
with
a
staff
recommendation
and
Planning
Commission
recommendation
to
approve
a
modified
set
of
conditions.
I
hope
that
was
I
know
it's
complicated,
but
do
you
have
any
questions.
J
J
J
Let
me
tell
you
my
concerns
there.
The
only
comment
that
I've
heard
from
any
of
the
residents
about
this
change.
They
think
it's
great
they
want
to
be.
They
want
to
know
100%
sure
that
all
the
buffers
right,
the
hundred-foot
undisturbed
buffer
and
the
in
the
I-
think
it's
a
30-foot
to
the
North
there.
J
N
J
J
N
N
This
is
now
there
are
two
cases,
kind
of
give
them
a
go
to
area
plan.
So
you
see,
there's
see
these
two
parcels.
This
is
these
come
together.
These
next
two
items
where
they're
taking
with
a
remaining
really
spot,
are
one
it
who
ever
heard
of
that
right.
It's
our
one
area
is
two
remaining
are
ones
and
and
basically
rezoning
to
c2
for
our
parcel
development.
This
is
one
of
those
two.
N
So
again,
it's
up
to
my
notes,
requesting
to
resume
from
r1
to
c2
to
incorporate
the
parcel
into
the
master
plan
development
for
hillocks
farm.
It's
looking
at
60
48,
highway
153,
it's
currently
a
vacant
residential
building.
You
can
see
there
is
some
residential
to
the
north
and
south
across
the
street
or
true
I'll,
say
further
to
the
south.
You
have
the
C,
that's
the
Academy
Sports
Development.
N
So
again,
looking
at
this
based
on
the
particularly
the
zoning
pattern
of
the
area,
I'm
starting
to
go
forward,
most
of
the
area
is
zoned
c2.
So
we
see
this
as
staff
is
really
just
an
extension
of
c2.
There's
no
reason
for
this
to
stay
r1
at
this
time,
so
staff
recommended
approval,
subject
to
the
hillocks
farm
conditions
when
we
got
to
Planning
Commission
again,
there's
no
opposition
to
the
request,
given
that
these
are
really
out
parcels
that
are
part
of
the
hill.
The
the
however
1:53
development
I.
N
Don't
to
me
it's
a
little
bit
more
simplistic
that
you
just
zone
at
situ
and
not
try
to
add
all
those
conditions
to
those
conditions
were
specific
to
a
more
urban
village
concept.
These
really
are
more
affiliated
with
the
character
development,
see
up-and-down
153.
So
at
the
meeting,
Planning
Commission
just
recommend
approval
of
this
case
and
I
will
go
ahead
and
say
the
next
case.
Sorry
I'm,
jumping
ahead,
both
of
those
to
see
to
without
conditions.
So
I
don't
know
if
you
have
any
questions
or
concerns
about
that.
I'm.
E
E
N
J
N
Right
here
you
go.
This
is
again
as
part
of
the
redevelopment
concept
for
the
r4,
where
they're
doing
that
residential
single-family.
They
want
to
go
ahead
and
rezone.
This
slice
that
was
c2
to
r4,
to
be
consistent
with
the
residential
concept
that
they're
planning
for
this
part
of
the
site.
You
can
see
that
little
sliver
again
they're
going
from
c2
to
r4
to
accommodate
that
residential
development.
Again,
there's
a
site
plan
that
we're
talking
about
for
the
residential
development.
N
N
I
said
sure
that
should
not
be
meeting,
but
residential
I'm
sure
was
saying
that's
wrong.
It
should
be
higher
density
residential
as
I
recall
for
that
site.
As
far
as
the
Hickson
plan,
that's
its
I'd
say
my
staff.
We
had
like
30
something
cases,
so
they
were
burning
the
midnight
all
trying
to
get
all
this
together.
That
should
say
hard
to
see
residential.
N
So
again,
we
feel
like
the
it's
a
really.
The
request
is
compatible
with
the
recommendation
of
the
Hicks
North
River
plan
that
you
getting
you
incorporating
a
lot
in
the
overall
development
and
that
the
prior
conditions
that
apply
to
are
for
would
also
apply
to
this
site.
So
again,
we're
recommending
approval
that,
subject
to
the
conditions
for
the
hillocks
farm
area.
So
again,
there's
no
opposition.
N
Planning
Commission
found
the
use
of
the
compatible
adjacent
land
uses
and
they
concur
with
staffs
recommendation
to
approve,
subject
to
the
conditions
identified
through
the
on
for
the
hillock
farm
development.
You
know,
I
have
any
question
about
that.
Essentially,
it's
just
against
some
changing
of
the
development
program
on
the
site,
because
the
development
programs
changing
to
residential
from
office.
They
had
to
move
some
of
those
zoning
boundaries
around.
N
I
will
say:
there's
a
lot
of
slide
that
those
three
staff
time
figuring
how
to
do
unwind
that
one,
if
you
can
imagine
yeah,
okay,
the
next
request.
This
is
north
Chattanooga
and
Council
of
Mitchell's
district
I
believe
this
is
a
request
to
rezone
from
R
1
to
R
3
to
really
accommodate
an
existing
5
unit
apartment
building.
So
it's
already
there.
Now
it's
in
existence
they're
just
trying
to
align
the
zoning
with
the
current
use
of
the
property.
N
E
N
N
N
Here
you
see
the
site
plan
showing
the
five
parking
spaces
in
the
rear.
So
again,
they're
already
using
their
existing
parking
off
site
to
accommodate
the
development.
I
say
on
site.
I
should
say
the
north
strip
plan
recommends
urban,
medium
dense
to
high
density
residential,
and
that
includes
detached
single-family,
but
as
well
as
two
three
or
four
unit
residential
developments
and
multi-family
of
up
to
eight
units
or
less
as
long
as
it's
appropriate
indicate
on
a
case-by-case
basis
and
again
since
this
particular
property
is
right.
N
Adjacent
to
an
existing
commercial
node
staff
did
not
have
any
issues
we
recommended
to
approve,
subject
to
no
more
than
five
residential
dwelling
units
and
again
that's
just
to
make
sure
it
doesn't
become
more
than
what
it
already
is
appropriate
for
that
site.
There
was
no
opposition
at
Planning,
Commission,
Planning,
Commission
concurred
with
staffs
recommendation
to
approve
with
no
more
than
five
residential
dwelling
is.
E
C
N
K
C
N
Up
to
it's
a
thirty
five,
you
have
a
five
I'm
sure.
It's
a
lot
of
record.
It's
a
dau
scraped
if
I'm
wrong
here
five
feet
on
the
sides,
but
for
up
to
thirty
five
feet
every
foot
over
thirty
five,
you
got
increase
your
setback
by
another
foot
right,
so
one
other
option.
If
you
wanted
to
add
some
more
protections,
you
could
say,
subject
to
the
retention
of
the
existing
structure.
N
We've
done
that
sometimes
for
office,
so
that
could
be
another
can
and
that
we've
done
in
the
past,
if
you,
if
you're,
trying
to
make
sure
that
the
existing
residential
structures
does
not
get
demolished
without
cause.
If
you
could
subject
to
the
retention
of
the
existing
structure,
there's
another
condition
I'm
just.
C
N
N
N
Correct
gather,
yes,
they
are
the
two
very
similar
concepts
and
maybe,
as
far
as
briefing
just
a
similar
approach,
what
they're
trying
to
do
just
go
to
our
z1
to
allow
them
to
subdivide
the
partial
into
two
lot
since
I
can
find
well,
you
can
see
what
was
done
just
to
the
south.
Here
was
done
just
to
the
south
of
site,
where
they
rezone
to
RT
z1
and
then
basically
created
another
partial
to
the
rear,
with
a
small
flag
to
the
front
to
allow
for
a
sewer
to
access
the
rear
property.
N
N
However,
again
we're
always
careful
about
the
precedents
we
set
in
terms
of
zoning
and
the
concern
staff
has,
is
you're
really
substantially
increasing
the
density
on
the
street
going
to
RTC.
You
already
has
one
unit
for
a
lot
now.
You're
gonna
have
at
least
two
units
with
you
know
on
two
separate
small
lots
for
those
two,
and
so
what
the
question
becomes.
Where
do
you
stop?
The
staff
recommended
denial.
N
There
was
no
come
on
now.
There
we
go,
we
get
a
plank,
it
was
okay,
there
was
no
opposition
at
the
meeting,
Planning
Commission
decided
I
guess
the
use
was
compatible
to
double
form
the
area
recommended
to
approve.
So
you
got
two
different
recommendations
on
this
fast
recommending
to
deny
Planning
Commission
is
recommending
to
approve
council.
N
C
N
Very
good,
okay:
this
is
a
request
to
rezone
a
property
off
of
Knickerbocker
from
our
one
zone,
to
rtz
residential
zone,
to
accommodate
a
planned
residential,
develop
those
residents
and
townhomes.
Let
me
get
to
the
site
plan,
so
you
can
see
well,
actually
the
site
plan
was
a
little
challenging
for
us.
That's
over
history.
They,
let
me
show
you
this
was
what
we
originally
got
submitted,
which
is
staff.
We
saw
the
site
plan.
N
N
N
N
So
it's
definitely
had
some
history
over
time
and
at
Planning
Commission
had
a
similar
situation.
Applicant
requests
to
withdraw
the
Planning
Commission
decided
to
go
ahead
and
recommend
denial
of
the
request.
So
it
comes
with
you,
a
recommendation
from
staff
and
Planning
Commission.
Well,
the
staff
was
to
defer
Planning
Commission
to
deny
there
was
a
request
to
withdraw
at
Planning
Commission.
J
N
N
That's
cut
us
and
we're
down
50%
upstairs
in
terms
of
doing
our
area
plans,
so
we're
trying
to
wrap
up
area
12,
we're
still
working
on
rapid
and
we're
still
able
to
continue
with
area
3,
but
that's
impacted,
rolling
out
area
2
and
it's
also
affected
our
staff
capacity.
Just
start
the
hillside
study.
They
start
it.
So
we
are
hopeful
that
we're
going
to
get
to
those
positions
filled
in
the
next
three
weeks,
but
it
definitely
has
set
us
back
in
a
lurch.
N
J
Of
you
know
quite
a
knuckle
reaction,
but
I'm
very
concerned
about
what
I'm,
seeing
in
some
of
these
developments,
especially
on
our
steep
slopes,
particularly
north
Chattanooga,
where
developers
go
in
and
clear-cut
a
hillside
and
and
I'm
very
concerned
about
moving
forward
with
some
projects
until
we
understand-
and
we
have
some
kind
of
policy
that
can
guide
us
on
some
of
these
some
of
these
issues.
So
from
what
I'm
hearing
you
say,
it
could
be
out
a
little
yes
I'm.
N
We're
trying
to
I
mean
I
do
have
some
of
my
directors
looking
at
kind
of
our
scope
and
approach,
because
we
know
again
I
think
it's
important
and
I
said
just
to
share
with
you
before
I'll
say
it
again.
I
think
it
needs
to
be
two
parts,
because
I
think
one
is
about
sort
of
I
call
the
fact-finding,
the
research
side.
N
So
it's
not
a
short
deal.
We
just
have
a
full
this.
Actually,
this
probably
month,
is
a
good
example.
We're
we're
really
slammed
with
processing
zoning
cases
as
well
as
trying
to
execute
our
area
plans.
So
it
is
it's.
It's
certainly
a
priority
for
us
I'm
just
right
now,
I
got
to
get
at
least
two
more
positions
filled,
so
I
can
put
some
warm
bodies.
Okay,.
J
C
You
councilman
yeah
John
I'd,
like
to
add
to
that
when
somebody
comes
in
on
steep
slope
and
clearcuts
takes
all
the
forests
away
and
it
is
already
a
steep
slope.
I,
the
stormwater
runoff
that
increases
is
just
incredible
and
and
I
think
we've
had
some
developments
in
north
Chattanooga
that
are
are
it's.
Maybe
it's
the
city's
responsibility
on
this,
so
maybe
I'm
not
blaming
developers
necessarily
but
keep
up
with
our
infrastructure
being
adequate
to
handle
those
type
of
things
as
another,
very,
very
dangerous
situation
that
we're
facing
over
there.
C
But
what
I
wanted
to
say
on
my
time
here
is
I
would
like
mr.
Bailey
and
mr.
Rucker
to
take
a
look
at
this
picture
and
you
see
Knickerbocker
and
when
you
see
somebody
coming
to
you
for
one
building
permit
at
a
time,
don't
fall
for
this
anymore.
That's
not
what's
happening
over
here
and,
of
course,
there
we've
had
a
discussion
about
why
they're
doing
it
that
way
and
they're
doing
it.
C
N
This
is
a
man.
That's
right
here
we
go
request
to
rezone
a
property
located
on
25
7500.
Oh
nine
and
75
19
Ziegler
Road
from
R
1
to
R
T,
one
townhouse
zone
to
accommodate
a
proposed
12
townhouse
unit
development
with
an
Oakland
average
density
around
ten
point:
nine
two
volumes
per
acre:
this
is
in
the
East
Brainerd
community.
You
see
gum
Bell,
Road
off
to
your
left.
N
I
should
also
know
I'm,
sorry
that
you
can
see
that
it's
got
mostly
single-family
residential
around.
Although
you
see
some
smaller
lot,
single-family
to
the
immediate
east
of
the
site,
but
mostly
single-family
in
the
vicinity,
there
has
been
some
townhouse
zones.
You
can
see
our
townhouse
development
approved
to
the
north.
You
can
see
there
again.
You
can
see
the
rtz
zone
to
the
north
off
of
Joyner,
but
currently
there
is
not
any
RTZ
that
that
I'm
aware
of
on
this
section
of
Ziegler
Road,
it's
all
right,
Ziegler,
Road,
sorry.
C
N
So
again
the
history
case
history,
you
see
in
2016
we
had
an
approval
for
r12
arteezy,
with
a
density
up
of
up
to
five
units
per
acre.
You
can
see
Cannondale
loop.
That
was
an
r1
to
RTC
special
exceptions.
Current
residential
PUD,
both
of
those
in
the
1999,
a
similar
PUD,
was
approved,
but
that's
as
you
can
see,
that's
small
lot,
single-family
detached
residential
okay.
If
you
look
at
the
site
plan
and
indicates
12
proposed
townhouses
with
all
street
parking,
most
of
the
parking
is
in
the
interior
of
the
site.
N
You
do
have
some
parking
in
the
front,
but
the
houses
are
set
back
from
Ziegler
Road,
with
mostly
give
us
your
parking
interior
and
they're,
proposing
a
buffer
around
the
perimeter
of
the
property
they
a
Halton,
Kate
place.
Community
plan
recommends
low-density
single-family
residential
for
this
area,
which
is
basically
one
to
five
dwelling
units
per
acre
again,
as
I
mentioned
their
proposals
about
ten.
N
When
staff
looked
at
this,
going
back
to
the
zoning
map,
I
always
say
we're
proving
zoning,
not
projects
again,
if
I
think
did
you
think
about.
If
you
approve
this
request,
what
the
pattern
will
be
moving
forward,
I
will
say
one
thing
that
Ziegler
Road
is
a
collector
Street
right,
it's
a
through
Street,
so
something
to
think
about.
When
you
usually
ask
where
you
might
see
more
intense
development,
housing
development.
However,
the
current
policy
recommends
low-density
residential.
N
This
encourages
you
think
about
this
request.
It's
really
not
only
this
project,
but
thinking
about
okay.
What
does
that
mean
for
the
rest
of
this
block
of
Ziegler,
so
staff
recommended
denial
in
being
consistent
with
the
plan
Planning
Commission
there
was
some
opposition
most
of
the
opposition
had
to
do
with
concern
about
cave.
Is
this
gonna
be
rental
versus
a
homeowner
traffic
Ziegler?
It's
a
narrow
road.
There
were
a
couple
neighborhood
meetings
which
I
think
councilman
Ledford
can
speak
to
it.
I
think
you
attended
one
of
them.
N
N
E
I'll
jump
in
here
there
was
a
community
meeting
held
at
Harvest
Church
on
this.
It
was
actually
quite
a
few
neighbors
in
attendance,
I'm,
gonna,
say
probably
twenty
to
twenty-five
and
met
with
the
developer
met
with
the
Builder
and
went
over
the
plan
and
at
the
meeting
there
was
no
no
real
opposition.
There
were
a
lot
of
questions
and
discussion
about
setbacks,
building
materials.
E
It
was
noted
that
the
the
Builder
is
actually
building
his
own
home
right
around
the
corner,
and
the
resident
seemed
to
very
much
like
that
situation
as
he
will
be
on
top
of
it.
Living
nearby
you're
right
about
the
for
sale
and
for
rent
aspect.
I
did
get
a
feel
that
they
were
the
the
neighborhood
was
a
little
bit
more
in
cycle
with
before
sale
and
homeownership
in
rentals
and
I.
E
Think
that
what
the
developer
had
talked
about
at
that
point
was
was
a
renting
or
selling
to
the
nearby
medical
offices
that
are
coming
down
and
in
along
the
Gunbarrel
corridor,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
give
you
an
overview
of
what
I'm
recalling
from
the
from
the
meeting.
Yes,
there
was
opposition,
I,
think
came
and
had
some
concerns
still
and
I
think
that
if
I'm
correct
there
they're
still
reaching
out
to
that
individual
and.
N
Right
so
the
next
case,
all
right,
just
a
quick
footnote,
I'm
going
to
I,
got
appreciate.
I
know
one
of
the
John
Anderson
here
for
representing
one
of
the
parties
he's
just
got
some
information
he's
gonna
pass
out
after
my
meeting
close
because
he
knows
he's
I'm
presenting
nobody
else
is
presenting,
but
he's
my
I
there.
Some
information
I
think
he
said
he
wanted
to
pass
out
to
y'all
while
you're
here
is.
N
N
This
is
a
request
to
rezone
from
r1
to
r4
for
assisted
living
facility,
with
a
density
of
5.8,
doing
units
per
acre
for
the
entire
site
or
8.7
dwelling
units
for
the
are
four
special
zone
portion
again.
This
is
located
at
a
t12
Shalford
Road
just
past
as
the
gingka
Jenkins
Shalford
Road
intersection,
there's
a
church
across
the
street,
as
you
can
see
there,
the
building
with
some
parking
across
the
street
to
the
north.
But
it's
pretty
much
large
lot.
You
see
some
large
lot
or
vacant
lots
around
this
site.
Currently
the
property
zoned
r1.
N
N
Okay,
there
is
some
again
zoning
history.
With
this
site
in
2016,
it
was
requested
to
rezone
a
portion
of
the
site
to
our
for
special
zone.
For
the
same
use
of
an
assisted
living
facility
that
was
withdrawn
by
the
applicant
staff
had
recommended
denial
of
that
request
and
Planning
Commission
recommended
approval
with
conditions
the
East
brainer
I
should
note.
Also,
as
far
as
the
plan
for
this
location,
the
East
brand
community
plan
recommends
low-density
residential
uses
for
this
site.
So
again,
this
is
another
example
of
again
of
kind
of
what
you
zone.
N
For
you
know
it's
it's
the
zone
you're
going
to
be
approving
here,
but
the
proposed
used
is
assisted
living
facility.
If
you
look
at
the
site
plan,
it
does
show
one
curb
cut
on
the
Shalford
Road.
There
is
a
a
conservation
easement
on
this
property
again,
which
is
again
a
private
contractual
manner,
but
you
just
need
to
be
aware
of
that
there,
the
conservation
easement
as
you
can
see
it's
shown
in
some
that
green
area
to
the
to
the
west
and
north
that
we
on
the
top
of
your
screen
to
your
right
there's.
N
Basically,
what
they're
proposing
to
do
is
an
access
drive
to
the
property,
but
no
other
development
is
proposed
in
that
in
that
conservation
easement.
So
what
we're
acting
on
as
a
council
again
is
the
zone
and
what
they're
proposing
is
a
assisted
living
facility
at
Planning
Commission.
There
was
opposition
to
this
request
and
opposition
noted
that
there's
some
concerns
about
the
driveway
and
the
uses
proposed
was
not
in
the
concurrence
with
the
the
conservation
easement
there
is.
This
is
under
active
litigation.
Asunción
is
still
in
the
process
of
that
as
I.
Understand.
N
That
currently
being
litigated,
however,
were
again
we're
not
weighing
in
on
that.
We
were
reviewing
his
owning
case
at
Planning.
Commission
again
there
was
some
opposition
staff
had
recommended
denial
consistent
with
our
last
recommendation
at
but
Planning
Commission
after
hearing
from
the
staff
and
the
applicant
and
opposition
recommend
up
approval,
subject
to
the
following
conditions:
use
as
assisted
living
facility.
Only
the
building
shall
be
set
back
from
Shalford
Road,
no
less
than
200
feet,
building
height,
restricted
to
three
storeys
trash
pickup
between
8
a.m.
and
5
p.m.
N
F
E
E
What
you've
got
next
door
is
the
potential
and
I
know
that
it's
coming
soon,
because
developers
are
starting
to
make
the
conversation
for
the
potential
of
a
hundred
and
sixty
homes,
putting
300
plus
cars
a
day
onto
Shelford
Road
on
the
next
door,
property
uphill.
So
that
concerns
me
across
the
street
we're
now
into
district
7
County
that
is
also
being
discussed
and
developers
are
looking
at
those
parcels,
so
I'm
looking
at
a
tremendous
amount
of
traffic
with
the
next
door
piece
of
land.
N
E
You
get
a
zoning,
know
the
site
plan
when
I.
Look
at
this
I
see
a
facility
for
the
elderly,
I
see
very
little
traffic
impact.
Considering
what
I
think
is
coming
I
see
a
very
small
parking
lot.
I,
don't
think
the
people
that
are
living
there
coming
and
going
all
hours
of
the
night
and
day
and
I
think
that
that
is
a
something
that
needs
to
be
considered
is
the
amount
of
the
least
amount
of
impact
traffic,
wise
I,
also
AM
concerned,
or
the
way
that
the
r-1
is
left
there.
K
E
G
N
This
request
Arizona
tract
of
land
from
our
two
residential
to
m1
manufacturing
zone
for
a
wrecker
service.
This
is
located
in
the
East
Chattanooga
area
to
the
north.
You
can
see
comes
off
of
Lightfoot
Mill,
Road
again
and
they're
wanting
to
establish
a
busy
demolish
the
existing
residential
dwelling
to
be
able
to
locate
a
wrecker
service
at
this
location.
N
As
you
see
the
zoning,
there
is
a
mix
of
Zoning
this
site,
you
have
m1
to
the
east
and
one
to
the
west,
and
you
had
this
little
wedge
of
r2
in
between
and
staff
and
looking
at
this
request
really
didn't
have
an
issue
with
the
use
because
of
the
pattern
existing
pattern
of
land
uses
in
the
area.
The
bigger
question
was
whether
or
not
a
less
intensive
zone
than
m1
could
work,
and
we
found
that
in
four
could
work
for
the
use
and
not
be
as
wide
open
as
m1.
N
As
you
know,
in
one
it's
the
most
intensive
zone
for
industrial,
while
the
size
of
the
site
does
constrain
what
you
can
do
in
terms
of
m1
uses.
We
still
feel
like
the
be
better
on
the
safe
side,
use
em
for
as
a
more
restrictive
zone
to
allow
the
wrecker
service,
but
not
all
the
other
more
noxious
in
one
uses.
So
again,
the
site
plan
shows
what
they
would
do.
N
They'd
have
parking
and-
and
some
grass
now
where,
by
and
in
terms
of
screening,
the
only
area
where
you
probably
have
to
do
any
screening
would
be
the
r2
boundary
to
the
west
and
to
the
north,
where
abuts
the
m1.
There
would
not
be
any
screening
required
so
they're
showing
I,
guess
I
know
it's
kind
of
a
rough
drawing
but
they're,
showing
what
they're
planning
to
do
some
fencing
and
screening
staff.
Again.
N
Looking
at
the
plan,
the
east
Chattanooga
area
plan
recommended
heavy
business
mix
for
this
site,
so
we
found
this
use
is
consistent
with
heavy
business
mixed
use.
So
we
again,
we
recommended
rm4,
not
m1
again
in
one
so
I
imported,
a
less
intensive
zone
than
m4
is
less
intensive
than
m1
at
Planning
Commission
there
was
no
opposition.
F
John,
this
is
I've,
been
asking
you
about.
I,
don't
know
the
Fergus
next
week
or
not,
but
I'm
trying
to
get
in
touch
with
the
community
in
areas
where
this
is
gonna
be
located
and
make
sure
they
are
fine
with.
As
you
say,
there
was
no
one
there
to
protest
it,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
they
know
about
it
sure
before
we
proceed
into
this
particular
area
John,
how
close
look
at
the
picture?
This
is
not
nearly
the
creek
is
a
railroad
track
between
the
creek
and
this
property
can.
N
E
N
This
is
on.
The
next
case
is
on
Lee
Highway
and
the
city
400
block
of
Lee
Highway,
requesting
a
rezoning
to
accommodate
a
emergency
department
addition,
so
they
were
basically
resilient
for
our
three
I
wanted
to
fast.
Look
at
this
I
think
this
is
pretty
cut-and-dry.
Some
I
disagrees.
Y'all
tell
me
going
from
R
3
to
R
4
for
a
medical
facility.
The
look
about
notice
on
the
plan.
N
Yeah
shallowford
Lee
highway
plan
recommends
heavy
business
mix
for
this
location.
So
again,
this
use
is
consistent
effect.
It's
less
intensive
than
heavy
business
mix
use.
So
it's
on
a
major
corridor,
so
staff
recommend
approval.
Without
any
conditions
didn't
have
issues.
There
was
no
opposition
at
Planning
Commission,
and
so
they
recommend
approve
so
I,
don't
I
think
that's
any
questions
for
that's
pretty
cut-and-dry,
but.
L
N
Yes-
and
this
is
in
counseling
ogle
speech
district-
this
is
right
on
the
state
line
in
Russell
community,
the
requesting
to
rezone
attractive
land
from
r1
to
c2,
to
allow
the
expansion
of
existing
neighborhood
commercial
used
to
the
south.
If
you
look
at
this
aerial,
you
can
see
immediately
to
the
south
of
the
yellow
line.
Is
an
existing
commercial
store?
N
It's
a
it's!
A
gun
store
the
by
state
law.
You
can't
have
cross
I,
think,
there's
some
regulation
in
terms
of
where
you
can
do
gun
sales,
so
essentially
the
only
reason
they're
wanting
to
rezone
this
is
to
be
able
to
basically
to
sell
in
Tennessee.
So
looking
at
the
plan,
the
the
land-use
plan
for
the
area
for
this
recommends.
This
is
where
staff
struggle,
because,
on
the
one
hand
you
do
have
it's
surrounded
on
three
sides
by
commercial.
The
Land
Use
Plan
held
will
recommend
single-family
dwellings
for
this
location,
the
property.
N
If
you
look
at
the
aerials
and
together
the
aerials,
but
other
I
should
say
the
photos,
you
can
see
that
the
house
is
not
in
great
shape.
You
can
see
that
the
commercial
structure
right
next
door,
so
in
some
ways
we
recommend
basically
approval
of
the
first
25
feet
to
accommodate
and
the
store.
But
then
we
learned
that
the
should
have
actually
seen
us
ahead
of
time
that
they
can
meet
the
setbacks.
Work
with
that.
N
So,
as
I
understand,
I
think
the
intent
at
this
point
would
be
to
go
ahead
and
resume
the
whole
parcel
to
see
to
again
a
Planning
Commission.
There
was
no
opposition,
they
go
back
here
and
Planning
Commission
found
that
it
was
consistent
with
the
development
form
the
area,
because
you
again,
if
you
look
at
the
aerial,
photo
likes
the
aerial
photo
again,
you
can
see
it's
got
a
commercial
surface
parking
lot
across
the
street.
A
commercial
structure
immediately
budding
it
to
the
south.
I
would
recommend
it
if
you
do
approve
it.
N
G
N
You
this
is
a
a
a
basically
a
rezoning
study
to
follow
up
on
an
annexation
is
recall.
The
look-out
Conservancy
requested
the
city
to
annex
them
and
by
state
law.
You
need
to
establish
permanent
zoning
because
currently
they
had
you
know
prior
to
being
annexed
in
the
city.
They
were
at
County
zones.
So
when
that,
when
the
city
annexed
these
properties,
they
were
immediately
signed
some
temporary
zones,
but
we
need
to
finish
to
review
the
razón
of
the
area
to
figure
out
what
the
permanent
city
zones
would
be.
N
So
again,
these
are
all
owned
by
the
Lookout
Mountain
Conservancy.
So
we
sent
letters
out
to
all
the
parcel
owners
in
the
area,
notifying
them
about
the
zoning
study
and
our
recommendations.
There
are
some
cleanup,
as
you
can
see
here.
Some
of
these
here
is
worried.
Again,
a
part
of
a
parcel
was
in
one's
own
part
of
it
out
of
another,
so
he
just
did
some
cleaning
up
of
the
boundaries.
N
That's
another
example
where
you
see
his
own
cutting
across
a
couple
of
different
parcels
that
was
in
the
county
again
here,
so
I'm
going
to
show
you
the
list,
so
you
can
see
here
the
list
of
properties,
the
county
zone,
the
temporary
zone
and
the
recommended
permanent
zone,
and
there
was
no
conditions
on
these
properties,
so
no
conditions
will
carry
over
with
the
rezoning
again
a
lot
of
parcels
involved
here.
It's
the
staff
recommended
again
those
permanent
zones
at
Planning
Commission.
There
was
no
opposition.
We
had
some
folks
come
up.
I
think
they
were
confused.
N
J
N
N
N
But
it's
right
there,
the
existing
building
on
the
corner,
so
this
is
again
a
vacant
lot,
that's
being
redeveloped
and
filled,
which
is
we
want
to
see
in
the
city
you
can
see
here.
There's
been
a
pattern.
We've
already
approved
some
ug
C's
in
the
area,
so
this
is
consistent
with
what
we're
already
doing
in
terms
of
zoning
changes,
so
staff
recommended
approval
with
some
conditions.
One
thing
we
knew
that
there
is
an
existing
single-family
residence.
Let
me
go
I'm
trying
to
go
the
area
real
fast.
I
can
show
you.
N
If
you
look,
you
see
the
little
upper
left-hand
corner,
there's
like
a
little
dent
in
and
the
yellow
there's
an
existing
single-family
home
one-story
structure
there.
So
we
do
think
these
probably
should
be
some
buffering
and
screening
of
that
property.
Since
you
got
townhouses
coming
up
right
up
to
a
single-family
residence
there,
but
other
than
that
staff
had
no
concerns.
N
We
recommend
approval
subject
to
providing
that
buffer
at
Planning
Commission
there
was
opposition
I
think
the
opposition
was
actually
the
building
owner
at
Griffins
was
not
sure
about
how
parking
was
going
to
be
controlled
on
the
site.
I
think
after
some
back-and-forth
I
think
they
got
his
questions,
answered
terms
of
how
that
was
going
to
be
dealt
with.
The
Planning
Commission
reckon
Kerr,
with
staffs
recommendation
to
approve
with
a
type
c
buffer,
yeah.
O
O
N
N
Let's
see
here,
you
can
see,
the
zoning
here
is
currently
zoned
r4
the
property
is
oriented
toward
Willow,
Street
I
think
you
can
see
the
pattern
where
you
again,
if
you
have
properties
that
are
already
in
toward
Willow
Street,
we've
done
either
our
four
or
UGC.
This
is
just
to
the
north
actually
of
a
prior
case
where
we
were
zone
two
UGC.
N
N
To
note
is
oriented
Willow
Street
not
to
any
of
the
locals
more
residential
streets
on
staff
didn't
have
any
concerns
with
the
zoning
subject
to
some
conditions,
because
UGC
does
allow
other
uses
that
may
not
be
appropriate
on
this
site,
so
we
recommended
to
have
no
wholesaling
or
accessory
warehousing
self-storage
facilities,
auto
auditing
uses
or
drive-through
restaurants
in
this
location,
ours,
operation
between
8
and
12,
no
dumpsters
on
the
property
and
no
outdoor
amplification.
Those
are
our
recommended
conditions.
N
There
was
opposition
some
of
the
neighbors
next
door,
we're
concerned
again
about
the
operating
hours,
making
sure
it
was
going
to
be
too
long
at
night.
That
would
bother
them
who
live
adjacent
to
this
property.
So
after
hearing
from
the
concerns
or
the
residents
in
the
area,
there
were
some
modifications
to
the
conditions.
Planning
Commission
recommend
approval
with
a
couple
tweaks.
N
One
is
that
you
can
see
the
operating
hours
went
from
2
to
10,
instead
of
12
staff
recommend
go
to
12
Planning
Commission
recommended
going
to
10,
and
the
planning
commission
also
recommended
allowing
a
dumpster,
but
limiting
the
service
hours
for
that
dumpster
from
8
to
5
p.m.
so.
Both
staff
and
PCC
recommend
approval
with
conditions.
Just
note
that
the
Planning,
Commission
and
conditions
are
a
little
more
well
are
different.
Now
I,
wouldn't
say:
they're
restrictive,
because
they're
different
they're
different
than
the
staff
conditions
I'll
leave
it
at
that
Thank.
N
Yes,
okay,
this
is
Avery
classes
in
Highland,
Park.
A
should
note.
By
the
way
we
received
a
letter,
I
think
there's
also
sense
of
these
city
council
district
representatives
office
too
I
think
they
want
to
defer
for
60
days
that
correct,
so
they're
asking
that
council
would
consider
deferring
us
for
60
days,
I
think
they're
still
meeting
with
residents
to
work
out
the
final
design.
So
what
I'm
going
to
be
talking
about
is
what
was
presented
to
us
to
staff.
N
It
might
change
a
little
bit
so
I'm,
just
showing
you
what
was
presented
us
as
part
of
the
request.
So
again
the
request
is
to
develop
this
site.
If
you
might
be
familiar
with
this,
this
is
a
former
Tennessee
temple
dorm
site.
These
would
be
a
dorm
on
this
location.
It's
currently
zoned
r4,
don't
want
to
rezone
from
our
forty
UGC
to
accommodate
an
apartment,
complex,
not
an
apartment,
building
development.
N
So
you
can
see
right
now.
Currently
the
site
is
vacant.
It
used
to
be
a
dorm
on
the
site,
the
Tennessee
artist,
a
scene
he
doesn't
in
apartment
building
to
the
north
of
this
property.
That's
recently
been
constructed
to
the
south,
you
have
some
single-family
residences
and
to
the
west,
you
have
some
single-family
residences
and
across
the
street
to
the
east.
You
see
some
more
of
the
former
campus
facilities
associated
with
Tennessee
temple
again
looking
at
the
zoning
its
own
darfur,
which
does
allow
apartments
currently.
N
N
So
again,
I
think
it's
been
a
consistent
theme,
at
least
from
what
we
looked
at
a
staff.
What
was
it
was
a
formerly
used
as
a
dorm.
The
zoning
history
in
the
past
considered
apartments.
The
current
zoning
allows
apartments.
The
question
is:
what's
the
appropriate
forum
and
a
staff
and
looking
at
the
request,
we
didn't
have
an
issue
with
the
form
of
the
building
and
a
positioning
of
the
building.
N
On
this
location,
no
commercial
use
is
permitted
to
front
on
Union
Avenue
because
you
got
residential
across
the
street
and
if
there
were
any
garages
where
presidents
that
they
should
directly
enter
from
alleys
and
share
driveways
rather
than
the
public
street
frontage,
so
we're
trying
to
minimize
curb
cuts
along
the
street.
There
was
opposition
at
the
meeting,
Planning
Commission
after
hearing
comments
from
the
applicant,
the
staff
and
the
opposition
concurred
with
staffs
recommendation
to
approve
with
these
conditions,
so
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
H
E
K
E
E
N
What
I
would
say
that
a
lot
of
Resident
feedback
had
to
do
with?
Is
there
a
way
and
again
it,
but
I
think
there
are.
As
you
know,
every
change
has
a
pro-forma
impact
right,
but
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
I
think
the
resident
wanting
to
see
more
of
a
like
forces
on
fronting
Union,
Avenue
and
other
things
which
I
think
as
your
ma
was
you
look
at
those
things.
N
All
those
things
have
a
cost
impact
if
you're
trying
to
provide
affordable
housing,
so
I
think
that's
part
of
what
Sini's
working
through
those
conversations
with
the
residents
to
hopefully
come
to
some
kind
of
a
middle
ground
as
I
understand
there
might
there
might
be.
I'm
says
there
might
be,
I'm
not
involved
in
the
discussion.
So
I
don't
know
what
will
be
the
outcome
of
it,
but
they're
trying
to
work
through
ways
to
enhance
this
design
to
meet
some
of
the
residents.
Concerns
that
a
fair
characterization.
E
N
Okay,
this
is
a
quest
for
a
special
exceptions,
permit
for
a
PUD
off
of
Julian
Road,
it's
currently
zoned
rtz,
and
that
basically
they
want
to
apply
for
a
PUD
to
allow
for
a
small,
a
lot
single-family
residential
detached
development.
It's
about
18
acres
access
would
come
off
a
worldly
way
or
we're
like
way
and
on
to
Julian
Road.
N
Again,
you
see
that's
a
currently
vacant
piece
of
property.
You
do
have
a
residential
business
developments
to
the
east
and
north
of
this
site,
as
you
can
see,
it's
already
zoned
RTC,
which
would
allow
for
apartment
mr.
townhouses
by
right
if
the
property
owner
so
chose
they're,
doing
small
lot,
single-family
detached
and
we
go
to
the
actual
site
plan.
N
Yes,
so
they're
shown
again
what
they're
doing
here
is
a
clustering
which
is
we
like
to
see
on
a
PUD,
they're
clustering,
the
the
single-family
detached
and
trying
to
minimize
the
impact
on
the
floodplain
most
of
the
floodplain
areas
being
left
as
a
community
lot,
so
staff
didn't
have
we
were.
We
were
fine
with
the
recommendation
as
presented
as
consistent
again,
a
consistent
continuation
of
the
pattern
of
the
area
protects
a
lot
of
the
floodplain,
so
we
didn't
have
any
issues.
We
recommended
approval
of
the
request.
The
there
was
some
opposition
at
the
meeting.
A
N
Think
the
other
concern
that
may
be
more
something
to
think
about
was
I,
think
there's
concern
about
the
impact
of
traffic
on
Warlick
relay
or
the
impact
of
construction
traffic,
but
that
is
the
only
place
where
they
can
access
this
site.
So
you've
already
got
a
public
street
public
right
away.
If
you
look
at
the
right
here
off
a
whorl
equaiiy
see
that
little
stub
right
there,
that's
where
they
would
access
the
site.
E
N
Look
at
the
site
plan
yeah,
you
can
see
it.
That's
dub,
coming
in
right
there
to
work
way.
So
again
it's
a
public
street
and
that's
not
uncommon.
You
know
you
gotta
get
to
the
construction
site
somehow
to
build
on
it.
So
so
they
would
again
that's
just
the
standard
development
practice.
So
again,
Planning
Commission
and
staff
both
recommended
to
approve.
E
M
E
A
E
O
P
P
Basically,
I
just
want
to
take
you
all
if
I
may,
just
through
our
process,
real
quick,
so
that
you
have
an
understanding
of
what
we're
actually
doing.
Currently
we
have
owners
or
agents
to
submit
their
application
to
the
land
development
office.
It
does
go
through
our
review
process.
Those
people
who
are
reviewing
those
applications
would
be
Emily,
Dixon
who's,
our
forum
based
code
review
person
myself
and
then,
if
neither
of
us
can
get
to
it,
we
usually
sit
in
the
stacking
them.
Possibly
one
of
these
zoning
inspectors
can
get
to
it
to
review
it.
P
We
tried
to
do
those
reviews
within
72
hours
of
receiving
those
applications.
Once
we
review
that,
then
we
do
Ford
that
application
on
to
our
PA.
If
it
is
a
non
owner-occupied,
if
it
is
r3
or
r4,
it
is
a
buyout
issue.
If
it's
an
owner-occupied,
then
we
just
review
the
code,
compliance
and
review
everything
for
compliance,
and
then
we
we
get
back
in
touch
with
the
applicant
if
it
is
a
non
owner-occupied
and
that's
what
we're
here
to
talk
about
right
now,
then
we
turned
that
application
over
to
our
PA.
P
At
that
point,
our
PA
sends
out
letters
to
all
the
property
owners
within
300
feet
of
the
property
that
the
has
been
applied
for
a
short-term
vacation
rental.
We
turn
it
over
to
the
building
inspection
department
to
our
chief
building
inspector,
who
is
working
it
into
their
schedules,
to
do
inspections,
we're
on
a
scale
or
we're
on
a
target
right
now
we're
trying
to
do
one
to
two
a
week.
P
Currently
we
have
three
building
inspectors
in
the
field
who
are
averaging
about
20
inspections
a
day,
so
we're
adding
that
one
to
them
to
try
to
get
it
worked
in
after
the
inspection
at
the
time
of
the
inspection
they
take
a
sign
out
with
them.
They
post
the
sign.
The
signs
are
for
a
period
of
15
consecutive
days
after
the
inspection
passes.
P
If
we
have
received
no
formal
complaints,
then
at
that
point
we
would
issue
them
the
certificate
if
we
receive
formal
complaints
which
we're
here
to
discuss,
then
I'm
turning
it
over
to
the
City
Attorney's
office
and
then
we're
not
the
process
to
bring
them
before
you
all.
So
any
questions
about
that
so
far,
I.
J
P
P
J
P
So
we
started
this
process
of
course,
and
we
received
our
first
complaint
on
this
property
1609
long
street.
It's
actually
is
a
multi-family
dwelling.
It's
condominiums,
the
applicants
name
is:
will
Campbell
mr.
Campbell
lives
in
Hendersonville
Tennessee?
We
had
three
citizens
in
opposition
to
this.
Those
citizens
were
Molly
Rupp,
Thomas
party
and
Gail
Neumann
he'll.
This
is
a
picture
of
the
building
that
long
street.
P
Our
second
address
that
we'd
received
complaints
on
was
26
Truitt
Street,
the
applicant
was
se
first
Holdings
a
corporation.
That's
been
set
up
for
this.
We
had
two
citizens
in
opposition
and
they
were
a
husband
and
wife,
Thomas
and
Dorothy.
Voucher.
I,
think
that
is
the
vouchers
live
at
102,
Long,
Street,
here's,
a
picture
of
the
property
that's
been
applied
for
and
here's
a
gif
screenshot
and
you
can
see
basically
where
102
lawn
street
is.
P
P
And
finally,
we
have
the
fourth
property
4302
Tennessee
Avenue,
the
applicants
or
Adam
Lutz
and
Peter
Upton.
We
had
one
citizen
and
opposition
of
that
and
that's
miss
Kathleen
knodel
and
here
is
a
screenshot
of
the
property
and
here's.
The
gis
miss
knodel
lives
at
42:20,
Seneca,
Avenue,
so
she's
about
four
houses
down
cynic
away
from
the
property.
P
It
was
my
understanding
that
all
the
members
of
council
were
provided
with
copies
of
these
letters.
I
did
not.
I
did
not
feel
that
I
needed
to
include
them
in
this
presentation.
But
if
you
need
copies
of
the
letters,
if
you
need
copies
of
the
applications,
anything
like
that
I'll
be
glad
to
provide
them
to
you
and
basically
that's
all
that
I
have
to
present
all
the
people
who
have
written
letters
in
opposition
to
these,
as
well
as
the
applicants,
I
mailed
letters
out
to
them.
P
J
L
K
P
P
L
K
K
M
L
P
K
H
L
L
Well,
the
answer
is
yes:
if
you're
renting
it,
you
get
all
right,
so
the
the
people
around,
because
they
were
all
property
owners,
got
notice
right.
Everybody
in
this
building
got
notice,
that's
great,
okay
and,
and
then
the
only
people
you
heard
from
were
people
who
weren't
in
this
building.
That's
great.
Okay!
Thank
you.
Okay,.