Norris Planning Minutes

October 5, 2015

Minutes of the Norris Planning Commission meeting, held in the Council Room of the Norris Community Building, 20 Chestnut Drive

Members Present:  Joy Wilson, John Barker, Matt Zorvan, Jack Black, Chris Mitchell, Ed Meyer Chairman Jeff Merritt

Public Present:  Jack Mitchell, Jim Tomlinson, Loretta Painter, Sarah Lockmiller, Ralph Pemberton, Dan Hawk Planning Adviser, City Manager Tim Hester,

I.             Call to Order:  Chairman Merritt called the meeting to order at 5:00 pm.

II.            Hear the Public:  Sarah Lockmiller said that she had reviewed the August 2015 meeting minutes and the portion that called for attachments was not attached.  Mr. Hester said he will review and if the minutes called for the attachments he would include them. 

III.           Minutes - September 8, 2015

                Chairman Merritt asked for a motion to approve as submitted.  Mr. Meyer made the motion, Matt Zorvan seconded, all voted unanimously to approve.

IV.          New Business: 

                1.  Subdivision request, 63 Dairy Pond Road

                Mr. Hester passed out to Commissioners the proposed plat.  The only signature on the plat was that of the surveyor.  Mr. Hawk said that he had reviewed the plat and that it meets all of the necessary requirements.  Mr. Hawk recommended that Commission pass the subdivision request, but not have the Norris Planning Commission Secretary sign off until all of the required signatures were in place.  Mr. Hester wanted the minutes to reflect that Lot 10A should be considered Lot 59 and Lot 10B should be considered Lot 63.

                Mr. Black made motion to approve the subdivision request subject to securing the required signatures prior to the Secretary signing off.  Mr. Zorvan seconded.  All voted unanimously to approve.

                2.  Overview of "Tiny Houses"

                Mr. Hester advised Commissioners that he had been approached by people wanting to know if Norris allowed tiny houses or could a tiny house be placed upon a lot while a conventional house was being built. 

                Mr. Hester then presented a slid showing what a typical tiny house looks like.  Mr. Hester committed that most tiny houses are mobile, meaning that they have axles and wheels allowing them to be moved.  Current ordinances would allow a "mobile" tiny house to be parked at a residence, much like a licensed Recreational Vehicle (RV).  But to be allowed as a standalone house the structure could not be mobile and would have to meet the current building code standards.

                Mr. Mitchell asked, if a tiny house was built to code with a permanent foundation, and lived in while a larger more conventional house was being constructed, could the tine house be later described as an accessory building?

                Mr. Hester answered that it depended on the location of the tine house in relation to the main structure, which is governed by current ordinances.

                Mr. Hawk suggested that the Planning Commission should consider defining "Tiny Houses" in its regulations, no decision was made. 

V.            Old Business

                1.  Schedule Rules & Procedures - Training Session

                Mr. Hawk and Planning Commission agreed to hold the training session, following the February 1, 2016 planning meeting.

                2.  Zoning Overlays & Design Standards 

                Chairman Merritt opened the conversation saying that the time line that Mr. Hawk had previously outlined would take at least a year and would be a very complicated undertaking.

                Mr. Hawk suggested that, if the Commission didn't want to create a dictatorial design board, it could implement through City Council a suggestive guideline of design standards to the chosen commercial zones.

                Mr. Hawk cited the example of Signal Mountain, Tennessee when they dealt with lighting, landscaping, parking standards and suggested design standards.  Mr. Mitchell asked Mr. Hawk to explain a design standards review board meeting with an applicant. 

                Mr. Hawk said that the standards would be established and the applicant would present to the board blueprints and other vital information concerning the project. 

                The board would approve the project or if denied suggest changes for compliance.

                Mr. Mitchell suggested that the Commission should include the C-1 zone in addition to those zones on HWY 61 and 441.  Chairman Merritt asked members to think about goals and a mission statement of a design standards board and talk again at the November 2015 meeting.



VI.          Adjourn

                With no further business being brought forward Chairman Merritt asked if any additional New Business was to be brought forward.  With no new business, Mr. Merritt asked for a motion to adjourn.  Mr. Zorvan made motion to adjourn, Mr. Barker seconded.   All voted unanimously to adjourn.

 Minutes submitted by Jeff Merritt, Chairman/Secretary