Good Morning Everyone!
Planning Commission work session took place last night at 5:30 so I thought that I would provide you with a few notes. Please ask questions and I would be happy to explain, research, or look into anything that needs further development. Use this as a site to exchange ideas, not just read. I am noticing that most of the traffic is reader only, and I would love to see this develop into a great discussion on issues.
Okay...away we go!
Issue #1
TANYARD SPRINGS........WAKE UP!
Anybody remember the AutoZone development? Next week the planning commission will be voting on the first phase of the strip mall that will occupy the lot north of AutoZone. This is a commercial zone, and the development will be built with or without your consent, but you do have a voice in the quality of the development. Phase one is Saxby's coffee and will set the tone both in landscaping and building materials for the entire development. Currently they are proposing a red plank board material with manufactured stone accent beams etc. The building is quite modern and really quite nice (other than maybe the building materials), but if you have issue with this now is the time to let your opinions be known. After the approvals are stamped you really have very little say in the matter. Several on the board have asked Saxby's to use brick instead of plank board, and rock instead of a concrete looking material in an attempt to blend this development into Tanyard Springs. I also really like this idea, but in the end I do not live in Tanyard Springs. What do you think?
Issue #2
Wyngate Estates walking trail and playground.
The developer of Wyngate has come back to the board with plans for approval of the final phase of the Parks section. In this phase they are looking into options for a walking trail connecting the creek area to the future playground. Previously the trail was to go between houses at certain points to connect the neighborhood to a wood chip walking trail that would run across the creek to a wooden bridge etc. Now as you might imagine, in a flood plain, wood chip walkways and poorly constructed wooden bridges would not exactly cut it for the long term plan of the neighborhood. Well, luckily for us all, our voices were heard and the developer has come back with a solution that does not bring the trail between houses. It is constructed of rock and asphalt with a concrete bridge with rock facing. It seems to be a much better plan, with much more attention paid to the details by the developer. It would also seem to be a step in the right direction in finishing the playground area promised earlier in the neighborhood development. We need to show up to make sure that this latest plan is in fact this the one approved. If the paperwork is not filed in time by the developer (Thursday at noon) the plan that will be up for a vote is that of wood chip and poor planning. Show up and let your voices be heard.
Issue #3
Somerset Springs Townhomes on Port Royal Road
Another issue of much debate over walking trails throughout this future construction. The developer was not present, but Gary Martin (of Martin Engineering) was on hand to address concerns. It seems to me that the developers of these neighborhoods are far more interested in throwing up the cheapest possible construction and not always taking into account the future needs of the neighborhood.
This path that is being debated is described by the engineer as a "nature trail" and thus should not be made of rock and asphalt. It just so happens that this "nature trail" weaves in and out of a good portion of the townhomes and leads to the pool and recreational center. It also just happens that constructing this trail out of rock and asphalt is about 4 times more expensive than crushed rock.
Leading to my next point.
Issue #4
Design Standards for walking trails?
This planning commission needs to propose design standards for builders to follow when constructing walking trails for neighborhoods. The majority of Spring Hill developers are in the business of throwing up the absolute most inexpensive solution necessary. We need to bring our standards up a few notches so that the base line of construction that developers shoot for is still at a reasonable level for neighborhood use. If we do not set design standards for walking trails, we will have this debate every time at every meeting until Spring Hill is completely built. I am tired of corners being cut at every turn. There is still more than enough money to be made in building quality. In fact......I would argue that there is more money to be made in quality.
That is all for now. Get involved!
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
Planning Commission Work Session
Posted by Gorilla in the Corner at 10:06 AM
Labels: Planning Commission
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Post Ratings
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: The information on this website is a series of personal opinions and is not meant to reflect an official position by the City of Spring Hill.
14 comments:
I have to say the it seems some of these comments border on communism/socialism...
Is this where we really want Spring Hill to be headed?
Why should the people of Spring Hill get to dictate to a business owner the details of the "look" of their business? I agree with basic idea that *some* oversight is desirable, but when you start micro-managing businesses to this level, and dictating to property owners what they can and cannot do with their own property to these kinds of detailed levels is, IMHO - un-American.
I am all for people getting involved in the process – but some of this is really overboard.
I think that there is room for everyone to be pleased with the outcome. I am completely against telling anyone what to do with their property once a certain level of craftmaship is achieved. I am tired of things being done half way, and promises not lived up to.
Just out of curiosity, what is getting overboard?
I think developers should have to not go on the cheap for everything. If something is not done, anyone could build whatever crap they want all day long. Property out here is relatively cheap, it could look that way too really soon.
"overboard" - in my opinion - is "brick instead of plank board", and "rock instead of manufactured stone".
It's bad enough to have citizens making these requests on a private business, but I am especially uncomfortable with the board making these kind of one-off request/decisions that are really rather arbitrary, in that they are no uniform standards that are fair and impartial.
If the board wants to get into this kind of micro-managing of private businesses, in the spirit of fairness they need to do it like a HOA would and set out guidelines on the front end, not in arbitrary cases where it is entirely too possible for favors, influence, and special circumstances.
Do you feel the average citizen - outside of determining if they will give them their business - should get to determine the exterior fascia of a private business?
Do you agree with arbitrary restrictions instead of pre-established guidelines?
I guess in my perfect world - if a business is "cheap", then the offended persons won't do business there. If enough people agree and act similarly, then that business will go away. And the next business will either learn from their lessons - or repeat them.
That's my take - painfully right or painfully wrong - but painful any way you take it!
Oh, and did I mention the blog format is rather unappealing for meaningful discussion?
I am personally not opposed to plank board or brick. I personally do not care. My care comes in the right of neighbors (Tanyard Springs) to voice their opinions. This city has a habit of letting people know after the fact what is happening. I am glad that the gorilla has at least shed light on the fact that the decision is in fact happening before it happens. I have friends that live in Tanyard and I know for a fact that they felt betrayed by the development outside their neighborhood. Especially when it turned out to be a cinderblock Autozone.
I have no problem with a strip mall there. I have no problem with Autozone there. I have not problem with a coffee shop there.
I do have a problem with businesses not being respectful of their neighbors. I do have a problem if the city does not take care of traffic issues around business near neighborhoods. I also have a BIG problem with this city not taking more consideration in buffer zones between commercial and residential.
That is exactly what this issue relates to.
I agree that some standards must be adopted, as opposed to the Board imposing arbitrary requirements for each and every development. That will only lead to trouble. While I agree that some standards are appropriate, I also agree that a governmental entity should not go so far as attempt to second guess design for a building when presumably the applicant and his/her consultant have presumably considered the ramifications of including certain materials. It seems that materials may be recommended, but when we start telling TGI Fridays that their awnings should be maroon instead of the trademark red, things are a little out of whack. (Yes, I realize I was referring to Franklin, but the example was noted so that maybe we will look north to decide what is overboard.)
Whatever is adopted must be tightly crafted with little subjectivity. Many argue that Cities don't have the statutory authority to adopt design standards in the first place.
Finally, my concern is truly with the transitions between uses, or lack thereof. The Tanyard Springs subdivision is a prime example of how two dissimilar uses cannot co-exist happily. Commercial to Residential should have more strict transition guidelines than say, 15,000 sq. ft. lots next to 25,000 sq. ft. lots. I'm just not seeing where transition is really addressed here. I hope the Planning Commission will one day have a staff who has the time to dedicate studying Spring Hill specific issues.
Thanks Gorilla for the info!
Some good comments by Anonymous 1 and Anonymous 2...
And I agree - it's good to have discourse taking place, and just talking about it is better than having it all pushed over on us and finding out later.
I've never liked the idea of making a trail between houses. Especially when a sometimes fast moving creek is involved and children are at
play. Sounds like a disaster even if there are safe guards put in place, unsupervised kids can always get around them. Plus wood chips?
C'mon you've got to be kidding me! I may be wrong but isn't someone's fence blocking any kind of trail from coming in on the opposite side of
Bern Dr.?
First of all, I do not have a business in Spring Hill. One day I might, but the businesses I am currently involved with are in Nashville and Columbia.
I'll try to respond to your numbered points as best as I can, please bear with me.
(2). I fail to see how you can place all blame on business in regards to Campbell Station. If those homeowners didn't want to be a stone's thrown from a strip mall, perhaps they should not have purchased a home a stone's throw from a strip mall. It has been pretty clear to me as those places went up that there would be homes right beside businesses. I can't believe I was the only one who saw that.
How would I feel about the glow of signs? I'd not buy, or I'd move if I didn't like it. I would not go around trying to force everyone else to conform to what *I* want.
As for the "Jumbo Tron" - I've never had a problem with it.
The fire trucks? Sorry - I won't be caught complaining about their lights and sirens for everyone else then crying when they can't get to my house in time to save my family because of complaints about their locations.
You also presume to know why people move here "to get away from the glitz" - you don't know that, nor can you presume to speak for the citizens of Spring Hill on that matter.
As for businesses that are an eyesore - again, personal opinion. I find the houses - large or small - stuck on postage stamp lots to be an eyesore - lol.
(3). I understand Spring Hill as a city is new to some of these issues, but many of the people involved are not new to these issues. I just think it is something that needs to be looked at - and haven't heard much about it, just that they are taking these on a case-by-case basis.
(4). Again, neither you nor I can presume to speak for the 20,000+ residents of Spring Hill as to why they are here. I happen to agree that the loss or trees is something I don't like, but that does not mean 19,998 other residents agree with us ;-)
But I moved here before there were retail stores in Spring Hill, and would be just as happy if they had never showed up. Not that I am against them, but I didn't move here with some concept of betting on this or that to follow me here.
(5). Forcing a business to have "character" won't provide us with good service or a great product, will it?
As the rest of your "sea of vinyl" comments, I actually find them insulting and elitist. I happen to own a vinyl home, and am pleased to now know that we brick-deficient homeowners are lesser citizens, impeding on your visions of the ideal Spring Hill. But I guess I can't get too upset, since I don't have a specific person to direct that emotion towards - lol.
I personally don't like tiny home lots or forward facing garages. I think they detract from the city. Should I really start campaigning to others to have these things changed in Spring Hill?
You asked what attracted me to Spring Hill. That is a good question I never really thought about in detail. off the cuff, here are some of my reasons:
1. Could not afford to live in Franklin where my parents lived
2. Friends already lived here
3. Living here puts me within 20 minutes of no less than 40 immediate family members.
4. Working in Nashville - the commute up and down I65 is preferable to any of the other commuter routes into Nashville
Anyway, them's my thoughts. And before it comes up (well, it already has - lol) I don't take these discussions too personally. People can have heated, heart-felt debates both in person and online and it is a GOOD THING. If you don't like what I'm saying, post up and disagree. I've been wrong a couple of times in my life, I won't cry too much if it happens again ;-) The worst that can happen is someone ends up seeing something different than they did before, and maybe gets a little involved in the process! Why loses out if that happens? Nobody worth worrying about...
Good points about neighborhoods "built with longevity in mind and character". Sadly I think even many of the higher end homes built in Spring Hill are not built with those things in mind, past the superficial.
(BTW, when we eventually add on to our current home, we will be re-finishing the exterior in brick and stone - lol)
And I agree with the concept of a "master plan" for the city. I for one long for a true downtown area. I love the look and feel of a city square. I recently visited Marietta GA and loved the atmosphere of a walking square, similar to Franklin.
But I do think there is a fine line that must be walked when "building" a city... Given the choice, I'd rather see character built by the people, not forced on them by regulations. I tend to think forced character sounds good on the short term, but it's not the kind of thing that really stands the test of time (hey, I might be wrong).
But in short - don't mistake that I am reluctant about forced regulations to mean that I don't want the city to have a plan and move forward. On the contrary, I think that a *healthy* plan for this city requires that there people people involved in the process who are very cautious about adding volumes of regulations and restrictions to the books, and that when those people have hashed things out, the ones that get through are very well planned and implemented.
In May 2003, the Planning Commission adopted residential and commercial design standards. Within those standards, there was a requirement that the front of all new residential and commercial development must be at least 85% brick or similar approved material (including Hardie Plank Board.) After many of the residential developers cried foul, the Planning Commission voted in June 2003 to freeze only the Residential Design Standards until they could be revised. In July 2003, the Residential Design Standards were revised and approved with the brick or comparable material as a requirement for new construction design standard removed.
That's why the Planning Commission is reviewing the aesthetics of commercial property today.
If you want to compare a before and after scenario, look at the McDonald's in Campbell Station (approved prior to design standards being in place), with the Taco Bell (approved after design standards were in place.)
Interestingly, these design standards were implemented as a Subdivision Regulation change, without a complaint from any of the BOMA that the Planning Commission was over-stepping its authority.
In DRM's perfect world, the demand from the private marketplace would be the impetus for improved architectural design and aesthetics of buildings.
I agree for the most part. In reality, I believe that the current demand from the private marketplace currently affords us the ability to require more stringent standards. If Saxby's Coffee Shop decides to move on to another community because of a request from the planning commission to improve their building, I'd be willing to bet that there is a Starbuck's right behind them that will eagerly meet the planning commission's standards. In this situation, the property owner still retains his right to improve the property, and the community is improved as well.
Posted by "trach"
I hate that DRM feels that desiring more brick neighborhoods is an elitist attitude...I think devil's advocate makes a good point about what these neighborhoods are going to look like 25 years from now.
Nothing wrong with *desiring* more brick neighborhoods, My problem was with being too stringent on *requiring* brick homes, and what came across as disparaging remarks about those who already have vinly siding homes.
The Planning Commission meeting last night was very interesting. I will post more details soon, but for those of you interested...
Design requests made by the mayor on behalf Tanyard Springs were adopted. Wyngate Estates reached a reasonable conclusion on the walking trail proposed. Design standards are being written as I write regarding walking trails in neighborhoods.
Win Win Win for all last night on those issues.
Yes, let's just allow anyone to build anything and then maybe the whole city will look like those cheap, crappy trailer park business buildings on Port Royal Rd. Wouldn't the city look beautiful with those everywhere? I bet everyone would want to live here then.
Post a Comment