by Leslie Lytle, Messenger Staff Writer

After lengthy discussion at the March 3 meeting, the Monteagle Planning Commission voted to approve an ordinance amendment defining the circumstances when the building inspector can approve modifications to a site plan. The commission also grappled with new regulations for the downtown business district, but tabled approval until following a workshop.

In its initial form, the amendment addressing the building inspector’s authority said post approval by the planning commission, the inspector could approve “minor modifications” to a site plan such as those addressing parking and landscaping, but not modifications to the building. In the case of major modifications, the amended site plan must be approved by the planning commission.

“My only concern is that many minor modifications could add up to a big change,” said Commission Katie Trahan. She suggested after a certain number of minor changes planning commission review be required.

“It depends on how strict you want to make it,” said town planner Jonathan Rush.

Commissioner Alec Mosley observed, “It would be hard to give a number” to what constituted a substantial change.

“If you give the building inspector responsibility, you need to give him authority,” insisted Commission President Richard Black.

The commission approved the amendment authorizing the building inspector to approve minor changes with the added language, “A minor change may not be approved if when combined with other changes, it substantially alters the overall nature of the site plan approved.”

The ordinance amendment also stipulated applicants for site plan approval must complete a checklist verifying the site plan addressed all ordinance requirements. Rush explained, “The check list means the site plan shows what it is supposed to show, but it does not mean the staff, such as the town engineer, have given approval.” The amendment also stipulates the staff, including the engineer, building inspector, and others, complete a check list with review comments to be given to the applicant.

“This addresses a complaint the town did not do a good job of telling applicants what was expected,” Black said. The commission considered the amendment in 2023, but never moved forward with adoption. The amendment will go to the town council for final approval.

The proposed new zoning ordinance regulations for the downtown business district resulted from the Imagine Monteagle initiative receiving a grant to enlist a consultant to use zoning as a tool to spur downtown development.

Rather than being referred to as the C-1 “commercial corridor,” the area would be called the “downtown zoning district,” essentially encompassing the property between Highway 41 South and Wren’s Nest Road. The rule changes distinguish between “primary Main Street” and “other,” with “primary” referring to property from the elementary school to CVS and “other” referring to property from High Point Restaurant to the school.

“In general, these regulations make it easier to build than what we have,” said Monteagle Alderman Nate Wilson. “They do away with or reduce minimum lot sizes and parking requirements. It’s about changing priorities to encourage the sort of small-scale development that builds downtowns.”

The new rules limit the maximum building footprint to 8,000 square feet and add two uses to the current allowed list: makerspace (collaborative workspace for crafts and learning) and brew pubs with small capacity brewing facilities. Industrial breweries would not be allowed. The “primary” section allows “mixed use residential” (i.e. a residence and business in the same building), but no other residential. The only architectural regulations in the “primary” section limit building height and prescribe the percentage of windows on street facing exteriors.

Black requested the new regulations include “a table of uses.” Alderman Grant Fletcher proposed some regulation of building material type. “What if we say, no prefab metal buildings. I’m just trying to get rid of the ugliest of the ugly.”

Rush expressed concern regulating materials required the ordinance to include “design review.”

“Design review killed development in Sewanee,” Wilson said.

The commission will take up the materials and property use questions at a workshop in the near future.

Commissioner Dan Sargent brought to the commission’s attention property with an approved site plan had a new owner/developer. Located on the corner of Highway 41 and Ingman Road, the site plan called for ten patio homes. Sargent said the developer only intended to build six homes, none on lots exiting on Highway 41. Rush said he spoke with the developer who speculated patio homes might not be the best use of the property fronting Highway 41. He could build on the other lots according to the approved site plan, Rush confirmed. Changes to the lots fronting Highway 41 would require approval of an amended site plan.