by Leslie Lytle, Messenger Staff Writer

At the Nov. 4 meeting, the Monteagle Planning Commission revisited two ordinance questions involving Paco’s Cantina and Sports Bar, a Mexican restaurant at 202 E. Main St. The commission tabled taking action on a revised site plan and landscaping plan for the Monteagle Market, already under construction.

Building inspector Travis Lawyer said he had received questions about the restaurant being granted a beer license due to the business’s close proximity to Monteagle Elementary School. Lawyer read from the ordinance regulating beer sales which prohibits manufacture, distribution or sale of beer “within 200 feet any church, residence, or place of public gathering,” with measurement taken from front door to front door. Lawyer measured the front-door to front-door distance between the restaurant and school as 491 feet. “They are in compliance,” Lawyer said.

The ordinance, amended in 2021, changed the measurement parameters. “The measurement used to be property line to property line,” said Commission Chair Richard Black.

Travis suggested the application for a beer license require the applicant to state the distance to any neighboring property. Black agreed.

Commissioner Katie Trahan pointed out, “distance is not part of the qualification” for a license to sell liquor or wine, which is regulated by the Tennessee Alcoholic Beverage Commission, not the local government.

Black read from a proposed amendment clarifying when an addition to an existing structure could be approved by the building inspector based on a sketch plan, without requiring a site plan. A proposed outdoor boardwalk/deck at Paco’s Cantina and Sports Bar led to the need for clarification.

Town planner Jonathan Rush based the amendment on regulations used by other municipalities, allowing approval of additions based on a sketch plan if the addition is less than 1,000 square feet and less than one-third the total floor area of the existing building. The ordinance also provides for the building inspector to refer any questionable project to the planning commission which may require a full site plan for the project to proceed.

The commission approved the amendment and will send it to the council for final approval.

Turning to the Monteagle Market project, Lawyer said the proposed sign on the revised site plan exceeded the 120’ limit. He also expressed concern about the structural integrity of the pylons the sign would be mounted on once the existing sign was removed. “I need an engineering report [on the integrity],” Lawyer insisted.

Liz Rodriquez, engineer for the project, said the owner had been notified about the problem with the height of the proposed sign. She asked the commission to approve the revised site and landscaping plans so the project could move forward.

“If a site plan is approved with a sign shown, that constitutes approval of the sign,” objected Commissioner Alec Mosley.

The project has been plagued with hurdles. The site plan was approved conditionally in 2023 pending a Board of Zoning Appeals variance. The variance was granted and construction moved forward without the site plan being returned to the commission for final approval. The irregularity went unnoticed when the Southeast Tennessee Development town planner assigned to Monteagle changed. The developer also made changes to the site plan without commission approval, thus the necessity for approval of a revised site plan for a project already under construction.

“I am not comfortable with approving anything that is not exactly how it is going to be,” Trahan said.

The commission agreed with Rush’s recommendation to table the site plan until the sign issue was rectified. “The site plan is what is going to be built. That is the whole purpose of a site plan,” Rush stressed.

“If there is an error on the project and the building is built, where do we go with this?” Lawyer asked.

“I don’t believe there are any other issues,” Rush said.