PUBLIC HEARING. Ms. Christie Hester described the request and presented the following information to the Planning Commission:

Transcription

1 STATE OF ALABAMA SHELBY COUNTY Members Present: Members Absent: Staff Present: SHELBY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting August 7, :00 PM Michael O Kelley, Chairman; Jim Davis, Vice Chairman; Bob Land; Samuetta Nesbitt Kenneth Wilder; Amy Smith; Bill Kinnebrew Chad Scroggins, Development Services Manager; Christie Pannell-Hester, Planning Services Supervisor; Sharman Brooks, Senior Planner; Josh Cameron, Planner; John Slaughter, Chief Civil Engineer PUBLIC HEARING The meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. by Michael O Kelley, Chairman. Commissioner O Kelley introduced the members of the Planning Commission and the County staff. There were approximately 13 audience members present in addition to the Planning Commission members and County staff. 1. Approval of the Minutes of the July 17, 2017 Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Land made a motion to approve the minutes of the July 17, 2017 meeting as distributed and was seconded by Commissioner Davis. By a unanimous vote of four (4-0), with Commissioners O Kelley, Land, Davis, and Nesbitt, voting in favor the minutes of the July 17, 2017 meeting were approved. 2. Case No. C Cumberland Wireless Telecommunication Facility - Conditional Use This is a request from Eco-Site, LLC, c/o N. Andrew Rotenstreich, Baker Donelson, for conditional use approval to allow for the construction of a new wireless telecommunications facility in an R-1, Single-Family District. The subject property is located at 52 Vann Drive in the North Shelby I65 Corridor Zoning Beat and situated in Section 6, Township 19 South, Range 01 West; Parcel Identification (part). Ms. Christie Hester described the request and presented the following information to the Planning Commission: The cellular tower is proposed to be constructed on Lot 2 of the Cynthia Mitchell Family subdivision, an administrative subdivision recorded on June 30, The property terrain gently slopes down to the northwest corner of the Lot with a mix of hardwood and evergreen trees. A wet weather creek crosses the site along the north western corner of the subject property. A Riverine Wetland Area is identified on the adjoining property to the west, Lot 1 of Cynthia Mitchell Family subdivision. The subject property is zoned R-1, Single Family District. Meadowbrook Corporate Park, located in Hoover city limits, is adjacent to the subject property to the north. A vacant manufactured home, used for storage, is located on the adjacent property to the east. Single

2 August 7, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 family residences in the Jimmy Hand and Old Virginia subdivisions adjoin the site to the south. These adjoining unincorporated properties are zoned R-1, Single Family. An undeveloped area of Lot 1, that contains the identified wetland area, lies between the subject site and the residences in Meadow Brook Estates 2 nd Sector. The adjoining residences within Meadow Brook Estates are zoned SD- Special District. The applicant proposes to construct a 160-foot monopole cellular tower. The proposed 160-foot tower is a conditional use in the R-1 zoning district. Wireless tower facilities are limited to an overall height of 200 feet in the R-1 zoning district. The closest adjacent residence; Lot 2 of the Jimmy Hand subdivision, is approximately 221 feet south of the proposed location of the cellular tower. Additionally, the proposed tower meets the required 160-foot setbacks from all interior property lines per the R-1 zoning. The center of the proposed tower would be constructed at an approximate elevation of 630 feet above sea level. The site will have direct access to Vann Drive, a prescriptive right-of-way. Non-vegetative screening and landscaping is required to reduce the visual impact of a wireless telecommunications compound. A minimum height of eight (8) feet consisting of brick masonry walls, solid wood fencing, berms or opaque barriers will be required in a manner that is compatible with the surrounding character of development, buildings, natural vegetation, and landscaping. Landscaping is shown on the plans; however, additional plantings may be required per Article XXI, Section 9, 4 (e) and will be reviewed through the site plan review process. Eco-Site, LLC will construct the telecommunications facility and lease antenna space on the structure and the necessary ground space for supporting equipment to T-Mobile and other wireless providers. The tower will be designed to allow three additional tenants with a ten-foot separation between designed tenants. The tower will accommodate 12 antennas at each level. No co-location opportunities are available within one mile of the proposed new tower. The purpose of 3.Conditional Uses, Article XXVI. Administration of the Zoning Regulations of Shelby County is to to establish a process that enables and facilitates review of those uses identified as conditional uses in these regulations in order to determine the appropriateness of a particular conditional use in a given location. It also allows for a process to consider the construction of wireless communication towers and height based on the underlying zoning district. According to Article XXIV of the Zoning Ordinance, a conditional use may be approved by the Planning Commission only upon determination that the application and evidence presented clearly indicate that all of the following standards have been met: 1. The proposed use shall be in harmony with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the Shelby County Comprehensive Plan, these regulations, or any other official plan, program, map or regulation of Shelby County. 2. The proposed use shall be consistent with the community welfare and not detract from the public s convenience at the specific location. 3. The proposed use shall not unduly decrease the value of neighboring property; and 4. The use shall be compatible with the surrounding area and not impose an excessive burden or have substantial negative impact on surrounding or adjacent uses or on community facilities or services. Commissioner Davis asked if the FAA was contacted.

3 August 7, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 Ms. Hester stated the applicant contacted the FAA as a requirement of submittal and provided a summary report. Commissioner Nesbitt asked if the applicant met the conditional use requirements. Ms. Hester explained that the zoning district allows uses to be considered on a case by case basis and the public hearing allows the evidence and testimony to be presented. Commissioner Nesbitt asked for clarification on the review of non-vegetative screening. Ms. Hester replied that landscaping and non-vegetative screening will be reviewed during the site plan process prior to the issuance of a building permit. She explained the ordinance requires a minimum height of eight (8) feet consisting of brick masonry walls, solid wood fencing, berms or opaque barriers and typically solid wood fencing is used for screening. Commissioner Nesbitt asked for clarification regarding Cumberland as the name of the tower and the site. Ms. Hester confirmed Cumberland was the name of the tower; however, the applicant could provide additional insight on the name. She explained that staff has been working with the applicant to address all requirements of the ordinance, including ensuring the subdivision and the applications are complete. Mr. Andy Rotenstreich, attorney, representing the applicant presented the request to the Planning Commission. He stated that Cumberland was the search range provided by T-Mobile named for this area and the applicant, Eco-Site decided to keep the name. Mr. Rotenstreich explained the property was owned by Cynthia Mitchell and originally contained approximately seven acres. He stated the property was subdivided to meet County Subdivision Regulations and sized to meet the setback requirements of the cell tower. He stated the tower height will be 155-feet with a five-foot lightning rod at the top with the entire structure totaling 160-feet tall. Mr. Rotenstreich explained to the Planning Commission that T-Mobile is requesting a new tower because there is an issue with coverage in the area and the need to offload capacity from a nearby tower. He described the nearby tower as a monopole design of approximately the same height and located behind the Sprint store across from Lloyds Restaurant on U.S. Highway 280. He further explained the T-Mobile antennae have been overloaded by heavy traffic resulting in dropped calls, busy signals or slow download speeds. He indicated this is really a two-fold request by T- Mobile to increase coverage and relieve capacity issues in the area. Mr. Rotenstreich provided handouts that documented the coverage area and described the lease area and access to the site. He explained that T-Mobile and Eco-Site only have access to the lease area, including the access drive. He said that a single monopole design with no guide wires is the strongest tower that is used in residential areas. He indicated that the topographical map showing existing towers help illustrate the coverage issues that T-Mobile has in the area. He further explained that the two ridgelines running from the northeast to the southwest in this area of the county block the type of signals used for cellular communication, referred to as line of sight. Mr. Rotenstreich stated that if you can t see the tower, you are not going to have a signal. He described the exhausted signal at the Lloyds Restaurant site and capacity issues related to demand. He continued that coverage issues were on the rise specifically interior building coverage. Further he stated that coverage improvement is expected with the new tower and compared existing to proposed interor building coverage. Mr. Rotenstreich said that there was a challenge finding a location with residential to

4 August 7, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 the south, east and west with Meadowbrook to the north and indicating that this was the only site in the area that would work for their needs. Mr. Rotenstreich concluded that the Zoning Ordinance sets forth the criteria of conditional use standards and said they had met all provisions of the zoning ordinance, not requesting variances; met all setbacks; below the maximum height of 200-feet and that a cell tower is allowed in an R- 1 District. He stated that the tower is consistent with the regulations in that it does not interfere with convenience, does provide a public service with 911 and broadband access. He further added that property valuation studies provided in the past indicate cell towers in Shelby County have not detracted from property values of nearby homes. Mr. Rotenstreich distributed an article by the American Bar Association that discusses cases/reports there is no documented devaluation of property caused by cell towers. In a closing statement he said that the cell tower was an innocuous use, monopole, located in wooded area with fence no noise, light, dust, odor, no traffic due to this use and again stated he believes they meet the criteria of a conditional use. Commissioner Davis asked where utilities would be located. Mr. Rotenstreich replied that utilities will be located along Vann Drive and along the access easement to the site and will be consistent with other utilities in the area either underground or via pole. Commissioner Davis asked if an auxiliary generator will be used. Mr. Rotenstreich replied that auxiliary generators are used sometimes when the power goes out or an emergency. He stated that if used, they are set to operate for ten minutes a week to make sure they are functional and then only when/if the power goes out. Commissioner O Kelley asked if they are typically located within the fenced area. Mr. Rotenstreich replied that everything will be located inside of the fenced area that the applicant does not have the right to use the property outside of the compound. He added that additional co-located carriers will have to keep their footprint inside the leased area as well. Commissioner Nesbitt asked how many towers are located in the area. Mr. Rotenstreich replied within two miles, T-Mobile is on four different towers. He clarified that T-Mobile doesn t necessarily own the towers. He said that while T-Mobile may own them, typically they are a tenant on the tower and pay a monthly rent rate. Commissioner Nesbitt asked if additional tenants will be located on the tower. Mr. Rotenstreich explained that Eco-Site is required by the Shelby County Ordinance to build the tower to accommodate more than one user and this tower will accommodate up to four tenants. Commissioner O Kelley asked if anyone was present to speak in favor of the request. No one spoke in favor. Commissioner O Kelley asked if anyone was present to speak in opposition.

5 August 7, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 Jeff Senkbeil, 4507 Old Tavern Rd, asked if the cell tower will affect the use of satellite TV reception. He also expressed concern about a buffer and asked if the tower could be moved over to a different location on the site, not right behind the house as shown. He also asked if one will see the tower as you are entering the street and would like the tower located on a different area of the property. He asked that the tower be camouflaged or concealed. Cary Poe, 4505 Old Tavern Rd, located the closest to the tower, indicated that the photo simulation was not accurate as provided by the applicant. He stated that when cresting the hill, the tower will be clearly visible behind homes. Jeff Senkbeil, 4507 Old Tavern Rd restated neighborhood concerns about the location of the tower, its visibility and the inaccuracy of the photo simulation provided. Pat Gordon, 4515 Old Tavern Rd, described the location of the tower and asked for clarification on the safety of the fenced area and if barbed wire would be on top of the fence. He expressed concerns about kids getting into the tower compound. He also asked about additional noise if the transformer comes on. He stated that he is concerned about property values and asked if the tower could be camouflaged as a tree like structure. Mike Means, 4510 Old Tavern Rd, expressed concerns about balancing the aesthetics of the Highway 280 corridor and the visual impact of cell towers. He acknowledged the need for cell service but is concerned about how many are needed for the area stating that with four towers in two miles, where does it end. Commissioner O Kelley asked the applicant back to the podium to respond to questions. Commissioner O Kelley asked Mr. Rotenstreich about the generator noise. Mr. Rotenstreich stated the generator will be housed in the compound and will run for 10 minutes a week during the day, if there is one on site. Commissioner O Kelley asked Mr. Rotenstreich about the interference with satellite TV service. Mr. Rotenstreich replied that it was a different frequency and not an issue. Commissioner O Kelley asked Mr. Rotenstreich about the fencing details and if there would be a barbed wire at the top. Mr. Rotenstreich replied that a typical fence would be chain link fence with 2-feet of barbed wire on top. He said the fenced area would be padlocked and gated and that the tower has anti-climbing devices to prevent anyone from climbing. Commissioner O Kelley asked Mr. Rotenstreich to describe the buffer. Mr. Rotenstreich explained the Lot is not owned by Eco-Site and they are not allowed to touch or disturb anything outside of the leased area. He said that if the County has landscaping requirements for the leased area, they would be happy to do that, although may be futile; however, landscaping will be provided if required. Commissioner O Kelley asked Mr. Rotenstreich to address the camouflaged comments, such as a tree. Mr. Rotenstreich replied that he was familiar with the tree design and they can do that, however the neighbors may be disappointed with the result. He said the tree camouflaged design is more appropriate at a different elevation and blended into an existing canopy. He said the proposed tower of 155-foot height with 80-foot trees nearby does not blend well and in his opinion neighbors will not be happy with the result.

6 August 7, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 Commissioner O Kelley asked Mr. Rotenstreich to address the last question he wrote down about the discrepancy of the photo-simulation provided by Eco-Site. He asked if the tower could be moved from directly behind the house to avoid negatively impacting the terminating vista of Old Tavern Road. Mr. Rotenstreich replied that the topography and stream limits the area to relocate the tower. He stated that they wanted to avoid exceeding a tower height of 200-feet because of the FAA requirements for lighting. He continued to explain that the elevation falls off closer to the eastern property line near the storage trailer creating the need for a taller tower. He said the property owner has not agreed to any additional acreage and that the tower was sited at the necessary location due to elevation to meet the coverage requirements. Commissioner O Kelley asked if there were any additional questions for the applicant. Commissioner Nesbitt asked if there would be warning signage on the fence. Mr. Rotenstreich replied that the FCC requires certain signage on the fence and equipment. Commissioner Nesbitt asked for clarification on warning signage. Mr. Rotenstreich confirmed no trespassing signage and emergency contact information would be installed. Commissioner Nesbitt asked if these towers ever fall. Mr. Rotenstreich explained that it is not likely, however if does fall, the structure will bend at a break point and will not fall over like a tree. He stated in an unlikely event, the tower is designed to fall at the break point into the compound. Commissioner Nesbitt reiterated that the tower, if it fell, would fall into the compound. Mr. Rotenstreich agreed and stated the tower is setback 160-feet to the nearest residence as required by the County. Commissioner Land asked if the neighbors on Old Tavern Road would see any of the fencing. Mr. Rotenstreich replied no, that the closer you are to the compound, the less you see because of the elevation difference and existing vegetation. Commissioner Land reiterated his question about visibility of the compound. Mr. Rotenstreich confirmed that the fenced compound will not be visible, only the tower itself. Commissioner Land asked staff if the trees could remain as a condition of approval. Ms. Hester replied that it could be a condition of approval. Commissioner Land restated the he understands that the fence will not be visible from the adjoining properties on Old Tavern Road.

7 August 7, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 With no further discussion, Commissioner O Kelley called for a motion. Commissioner Land made a motion in Case Z the evidence and testimony warrant Approval. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Davis and by majority vote of three (3-1), with Commissioners Land, Davis, and Nesbitt voting in favor and Commissioner O Kelley voting in opposition, the following resolution was approved: WHEREAS, Eco-Site, LLC, c/o N. Andy Rotenstreich, Baker Donelson, has petitioned the Shelby County Planning Commission for conditional use approval to allow for the construction of a new wireless telecommunications facility in an R-1, Single-Family District; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is located at 52 Vann Drive in the North Shelby I65 Corridor Zoning Beat and situated in Section 6, Township 19 South, Range 01 West; Parcel Identification (part); and, WHEREAS, the applicant has provided documentation that demonstrates other existing towers in the vicinity would not provide coverage to the specific location through colocation; and, WHEREAS, the Federal Communication Commission regulates interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable output of radio broadcast signals from all wireless service facilities and radio wave frequencies are outside the parameters of consideration by the Planning Commission; and, WHERSAS, the proposed tower is a galvanized steel monopole design; and, WHEREAS, the proposed tower is 155 feet with a five foot lightning rod for a total height of 160 feet; and, WHEREAS, the maximum allowable height for a wireless tower facility in a R-1 zoning district is 200 feet; and, WHEREAS, the proposed ground compound and tower facility will allow for the addition of at least three co-location tenants; and, WHEREAS, landscape and fencing materials meeting the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance will be required and considered during the site plan review process; and, WHEREAS, a fully engineered site plan will be reviewed and certified administratively for the proposed new tower prior to the issuance of any building permits; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shelby County Planning Commission that the application from Eco-Site, LLC, c/o N. Andy Rotenstreich, Baker Donelson, for approval of a conditional use to allow for the construction of a new wireless telecommunications facility in an R-1, Single-Family District to a maximum height of 160 feet including antennae and located at 52 Vann Drive in the North Shelby I65 Corridor Zoning Beat and situated in Section 6, Township 19 South, Range 01 West; Parcel Identification (part) be, and the same is hereby Approved, subject to: Submittal of a fully engineered site plan for review and certification. Compliance with the regulations, policies and guidelines of Shelby County, Alabama.

8 August 7, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 3. Case No. SN Highland Lakes 32 nd Sector, Phase II, 1 st Addition This is a request from Doug Eddleman, Highland Lakes Development, LTD, for approval of a final plat to subdivide acres into two (2) residential lots to be known as Highland Lakes 32nd Sector, Phase II, 1 st Addition. The property is zoned E2-SD, Single Family Estate- Special District and located at the intersection of Highland Lakes Trail and Watermill Circle, within the Highland Lakes development; Parcel Identification Number (part). Mr. Josh Cameron described the request to the Planning Commission and provided the following report: Highland Lakes is being developed as a private subdivision that received master plan approval from the Planning Commission in April This approval recognized the general street layout and established density patterns for the development of single-family homes. A number of revisions have been approved since the Master Plan was originally approved in In May 2017, the current Master Plan was approved by the Planning Commission. All lots with the Highland Lakes Development are zoned E-2 SD, Single Family Estate Special District. The subject property is located between Highland View Drive (to the West) and Waters Edge Circle (to the East). The two proposed lots would be accessed from Water Mill Circle and Highland Lakes Trail (to the North). Existing single-family residences surround the subject properties within the Highland Lakes Development. Adjacent properties to the northwest hold a water tower and a designated forested buffer area. The applicant proposes to divide part of the subject property into two lots, Lot 11 and Lot 12. Lot 11 will contain acres and Lot 12 will contain acres. Setbacks for the two proposed lots will be consistent with the established setbacks for 90 and 100 foot lots within Highland Lakes: 30 foot front and rear setback with a side yard setback of 10 feet. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Master Plan. Sanitary sewer service will be provided by Southwest Water for lots that opt to connect. Water service will be provided by the Birmingham Water Works. A 40 foot sewer easement crosses both lots from East to West and a 25-foot water line easement makes its way from the water tower property towards the Highland Lakes trail through Lot 12. Mr. Eddleman has provided a conceptual layout for single-family homes and associated driveways for the subdivision. Children in Highland Lakes will attend schools in the Chelsea School Attendance zone. The Cahaba Valley Fire Department serves this area of Highland Lakes. A proposed shared driveway access for each lot is via Water Mill Circle. The proposed house locations are conceptual based on existing site topography and subject to change once a site is further evaluated for construction. This final plat is consistent with the approved master plan for Highland Lakes. The proposed subdivision meets the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of Shelby County. Approval of the subdivision should be subject to: Applicant submitting a final plat for recording; and Compliance with the regulations, policies and guidelines of Shelby County. Commissioner O Kelley inquired if there was a review for a common access easement or shared access agreement for the site.

9 August 7, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 Mr. John Slaughter replied that the Highway Department reviews access to lots when a subdivision is submitted with a driveway shown. He explained that it is within a property owners right to have a separate third party agreement to share the driveway and it would not be reviewed. He stated the Subdivision Regulations were set up to ensure lots have frontage on a paved public road or similar standards. Commissioner O Kelley asked for clarification if Lot 11 could have a separate driveway. Mr. Slaughter stated a separate driveway seemed feasible but he was not sure of the topography. Mr. Cameron explained that there was not an easement shown on the plat for a separate driveway. Mr. Scott Vaughn, Arrington Engineering and project engineer, restated the request and explained the two lots proposed were shown on the 2017 Amended Master Plan. He indicated there were 42 lots with the previous 2015 Plan. He explained the shared drive was proposed and approximately 600-feet as shown. He stated it was possible for the future owners to share costs utilizing a shared driveway. A shared driveway could reduce the costs for utilities and construction. Commissioner Davis asked the applicant to describe the topography of the house locations shown. Mr. Vaughn stated the topography was relatively flat where the house sites were shown compared to the overall property. Mr. Vaughn stated that the home site locations were sited based on the steep topography of the sites and that the locations shown offer some of the better locations. He reminded the Commission that the locations shown were conceptual based on the initial topography of the lots. Commissioner O Kelley asked if anyone was present to speak in favor of the request. No one spoke in favor. Commissioner O Kelley asked if anyone was present to speak in opposition to the proposed subdivision. Mr. Norman Robinson, 1031 Watersedge Cir, indicated to the Commission that when he purchased his home he was told that no additional homes would be constructed behind his lot and that was one of the reasons he purchased the lot. He stated concerns about water runoff since they live downhill/adjacent to the proposed lots and property values. He questioned who will be responsible for controlling drainage and maintaining roads. He described an area of Lot 11 where trees were damaged and died during the drought last year. Mr. Michael Jarrett, 1028 Watersedge Cir, questioned whether blasting or dynamite would be used during home construction. He described the drainage from adjacent properties and stated concerns about water and sediment in the lake. He further explained that lake maintenance was overdue and Eddleman Properties was not taking care of current drainage issues. Commissioner O Kelley asked the applicant back to the podium to respond to questions. Commissioner O Kelley asked Mr. Vaughn about blasting. Mr. Vaughn stated that typically an air operated hoe ram is employed for areas where blasting is not possible due to safety or environmental issues. Dynamite would be considered a last resort. He stated that he could not speak for any future builder; however, there are strict guidelines for blasting. Commissioner O Kelley asked the applicant to respond the question of sediment flow, who monitors during construction.

10 August 7, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 Mr. Chad Scroggins, Manager Development Services, stated that an NPDES permit would be required during home construction that would monitor the storm water and best management practices. He explained the water flowing today will be the same except for the volume from the lack of infiltration, the footprint of the house, and the driveway as these are the only additional impervious surface to be created. He further explained that in this situation, there is not much infiltration due to the amount of rock and theoretically the amount of water will not increase because of the limited impervious surface. Mr. Slaughter confirmed. Commissioner O Kelley asked Mr. Vaughn about the maintenance of roads. Mr. Vaughn explained that these are not roads on the plat, rather common driveway to be shared between two individual homeowners. The driveway would be maintained by the homeowner. He described the driveway as approximately 16-feet wide compared to a subdivision road that is 27-feet wide. He explained that a pipe will be required to take the water from the upstream side of the driveway to the downstream side with the water following the natural drainage ways. Commissioner O Kelley asked Mr. Vaughn how many these two lots were in a previous approved plan. Mr. Vaughn replied 22 lots. Commissioner O Kelley asked Mr. Vaughn the approximate distance of the conceptual home sites from adjoining homes. Mr. Vaughn replied approximately 200-feet. Commissioner O Kelley asked Mr. Vaughn if there was a ridge or did the property slope up. Mr. Vaughn replied that it all slopes up that there was not a ridge. Commissioner Land questioned whether the proposed subdivision met the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations and was consistent with the approved Master Plan. He asked for clarification that Best Management Practices and land erosion controls would be addressed once the homes were approved for construction. Ms. Sharman Brooks confirmed and stated the project meets the Subdivision Regulations and adheres to the approved Master Plan. With no further discussion, Commissioner Land made a motion to Approve Case No. SN Highland Lakes 32nd Sector Phase II, 1st Addition including any remaining items to be addressed as identified in the staff report. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Davis and by unanimous vote of four (4-0), with Commissioners O Kelley, Land, Davis, and Nesbitt voting in favor, the following resolution was approved: WHEREAS, Doug Eddleman, Highland Lakes Development, LTD, has petitioned the Shelby County Planning Commission for the approval of a final plat to subdivide acres into two (2) residential lots to be known as Highland Lakes 32nd Sector, Phase II, 1st Addition; and, WHEREAS, subject property is located within the Highland Lakes Development at the intersection of Highland Lakes Trail and Watermill Circle, in the Chelsea North Dunnavant Valley South Westover North Zoning Beat and situated in Section 4, Township 19 South, Range 1 West; Parcel Identification No (part); and, WHEREAS, the Master Plan for Highland Lakes, a residential development of more than 1,592 lots on approximately 1,750 acres was approved by the Planning Commission in April 1991; and, WHEREAS, the May 2017 amended Master Plan for Highland Lakes reduced the total lot count by 80 lots and removed four road extensions; and,

11 August 7, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 WHEREAS, setbacks for the two proposed lots will be consistent with the established setbacks for 90 and 100 foot lots within Highland Lakes: 30 foot front and rear setback with a side yard setback of 10 feet; and, WHEREAS, the final plat is consistent with the May 2017 approved Master Plan for Highland Lakes; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shelby County Planning Commission that the request of Doug Eddleman, Highland Lakes Development, LTD, for the approval of a final plat to subdivide acres into two (2) residential lots to be known as Highland Lakes 32nd Sector, Phase II, 1st Addition, within the Highland Lakes Development at the intersection of Highland Lakes Trail and Watermill Circle, in the Chelsea North Dunnavant Valley South Westover North Zoning Beat; Parcel Identification No (part); be, and the same is hereby APPROVED subject to: Applicant submitting a final plat for recording; and Compliance with the regulations, policies and guidelines of Shelby County. 4. Case No. Z Daniel Corp. Rezoning A-1 to R-2--Continued from July 17, 2017 This is a request from James Phillips, DR Horton, on behalf of Daniel Corporation, property owner, for approval of a change in the zone district boundaries from A-1, Agricultural District to R-2, Single Family Residential District for approximately 13.5 acres for the development of a single family residential subdivision. The subject property is zoned A-1 and is located in the North Shelby I65 Corridor zoning beat on Highway 119; Parcel Identification No Mr. Cameron stated that the applicant requested to withdraw the case. This case had been Continued from the June 19, 2017 and July 17, 2017 Planning Commission meetings to allow the applicant additional time to complete their due diligence on the property. No one present spoke in favor of or opposition of the request to withdraw. With no further discussion, Commissioner Nesbitt made a motion to Withdraw Case No. Z Daniel Corp. Rezoning A-1 to R-2 as requested by the applicant. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Davis and by unanimous vote of four (4-0), with Commissioners O Kelley, Land, Davis, and Nesbitt, voting in favor, the following resolution was approved: WHEREAS, James Phillips, D.R. Horton, has petitioned the Shelby County Planning Commission for approval of a change in the zone district boundaries from the A-1, Agricultural District to the R-2, Single Family Residential District for approximately 13.5 acres for the development of a single family residential subdivision; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is located in the North Shelby - I65 Corridor zoning beat on Highway 119; Parcel Identification No ; and, WHEREAS, on June 19, 2017, at the applicant s request, the Planning Commission Continued the case to July 17, 2017 to allow the applicant additional time to complete their due diligence on the property; and, WHEREAS, on July 17, 2017, at the applicant s request, the Planning Commission Continued the case to August 7, 2017 to allow the applicant additional time to complete their due diligence on the property; and,

12 August 7, 2017 Planning Commission Minutes Page 12 WHEREAS, the applicant has requested the case be Withdrawn; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shelby County Planning Commission that the request from James Phillips, D.R. Horton, for approval of a change in zone district boundaries from the A-1, Agricultural District to the R-2, Single Family Residential District for approximately 13.5 acres for the development of a single family residential subdivision; and located in the North Shelby - I65 Corridor zoning beat on Highway 119; Parcel Identification No , be, and the same is hereby WITHDRAWN. There being no further business, Commissioner Land made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Davis and by a unanimous vote of four (4-0), with Commissioners O Kelley, Davis, Nesbitt, and Land voting in favor, the meeting of August 7, 2017 was adjourned at 7:17 P.M. Christie Pannell-Hester Michael O Kelley, Chairman Planning Services Supervisor Shelby County Planning Commission