[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6297618,"mediaKeyId","2509392-856034063e292ca15c6412275c0b48ac","parentId",2509392,"title","Planning commission approves Banks Phase 2 preliminary plat, restates temporary fire-access condition after public concern","audioSeconds",403,"startMs",218000,"endMs",621000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2509392-856034063e292ca15c6412275c0b48ac&start=218&end=621","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2509392-856034063e292ca15c6412275c0b48ac/thumbnail_218000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6297618/Gallatin-City/Sumner-County/Tennessee/Planning-commission-approves-Banks-Phase-2-preliminary-plat-restates-temporary-fire-access-condition-after-public-concern","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6297618-3fef95e83694d3fa9ea08c521ab4a506/orig.mp4?Expires=1771151502&Signature=DbuZ0nPNt1tfsjq6~pybgBeCqu6wJqB6vqcwSKYbY7piWgqRHcBjdx7Fz6G5SThb7ZLPogtn0dDeQQxsuBNwie58cTvAteJ9CDiMsY88jwVzhDme6gwA67ONm15xeUeINmlub6RoBkqtikxVEWSLSEsYibKmry4t0VLuTFV48fA3-dO9eSY~qR9oaaz57gMSe9Fn5nVehKCrCNGPLzMeobXWxrl5LYWOyviZydgKfCAbjj3p2gnswnO-kNdlzc7GoWZCIVds2R47iMw34ft-AJaE-7P06py8tWi5CHZ1UhOixu8LV1dAykxQWk0nzgkErgKFdSqD5e-favTco5YAEg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Gallatin, TN","date","2025-02-25T00:00:00Z","article","The Gallatin City Planning Commission on Feb. (date not specified) approved the Banks at Lock 4 Phase 2 preliminary plat (resolution 2025-011), a 72-lot single-family subdivision, with 11 conditions of approval and a restated condition governing a temporary fire-access drive.

The commission’s action follows public comment raising safety concerns about locating a temporary fire-access road at the same point where a prior tornado struck. “They call that Tornado Alley for a reason,” said Pascal Jones, who identified himself as a resident in Gallatin City Council District 3, and asked the commission to reconsider placing the temporary access at that location.

Planning staff presentation said the proposal includes a 20-foot-wide temporary fire-access drive off Peach Valley Road. Kimberly Atley, staff planner, summarized the revised condition: the temporary drive “is required to be functional and Fire Code compliant before building permits are issued in phase 2. If another access point is constructed that satisfies the need for the fire access prior to the connection to Peach Valley Road, that is acceptable to planning and the fire department. This condition may be waived at the discretion of the city planner.”

Brad Snyder, representing the applicant (CSDG), told the commission the applicant agreed with the restated condition and that timing with the nearby Nichols Lane development might provide an alternate permanent access before the Peach Valley connection was needed.

Commissioner Albert made the motion to approve the preliminary plat with the 11 conditions, including the redrafted fourth condition, and the commission voted to approve the item.

The approval records the commission’s requirement that the temporary access be built to Fire Code standards and be functional before building permits are issued for Phase 2, while preserving flexibility if an alternate access becomes available earlier.

Proponents and opponents of the route have cited storm and tornado damage at the same location in past severe weather; the commission’s decision does not relocate the access but ties issuance of building permits to fire-department standards and the city planner’s discretion.

The commission moved on to later agenda items following the vote.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City of Gallatin 2025-02-25","oneSentenceSummary","The Gallatin City Planning Commission approved the Banks at Lock 4 Phase 2 preliminary plat (resolution 2025-011) for 72 single-family lots, attaching 11 conditions including a restated requirement that a 20-foot temporary fire-access drive off Peach Valley Road be functional and Fire Code compliant before Phase 2 building permits are issued.","taxTitle","Gallatin City , Sumner County, Tennessee","taxId",52803,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6297604,"Commission approves Rose Avenue final master plan with variances for lot width and architecture",271,2497000,2768000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2509392-856034063e292ca15c6412275c0b48ac&start=2497&end=2768","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2509392-856034063e292ca15c6412275c0b48ac/thumbnail_2497000.jpg","/articles/6297604/Gallatin-City/Sumner-County/Tennessee/Commission-approves-Rose-Avenue-final-master-plan-with-variances-for-lot-width-and-architecture","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6297604-d1cfe140413ca32fad32f1f3ce23f053/orig.mp4?Expires=1771151502&Signature=VLDOO20g4Xv6LBQOL--NuHS6a8YBeBHmPsIixVOzZC686mC9e-53y4pV46AMGXrONwHJE2uFObozGFmGHyftgaqGEjuBG8NySnmDH5yfLh-PZK6JM0xU3Q2iO7zIAxvXxVL9m3xa7kmvbeb-KGOaqQgdw0YP~kmISy5pETTJNq4cL~31U12NvEibfLriQBy4QR4RrnFxwkjcKrhFh-goqsTxpzeoZmgbDLrn7ZYa9YItvVx-yG01WBotVMy0f7ekYjapDH-iKx3dnmv-TpUnw7--faJqPxQOV7iT9Rjoy5regx7ebarOcRWIh2KuXvAMRDmgfpApxmhb9YObRJF2tA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Gallatin City Planning Commission approved a final master development plan for two single-family detached residences on a roughly 0.39-acre lot on Rose Avenue (resolution 2025-016), granting requested variances for architecture, lot width and an alternative landscape plan.

Staff described the project as two single-family lots on property zoned R-6. Planning staff noted the architecture did not meet the 70% brick requirement and that the proposed lot widths total about 85 feet, short of the R-6 requirement; the applicant requested a 2.5-foot variance on lot width so each lot would measure 42.5 feet.

The applicant’s representative, speaking for Ferguson Greenloop Design, said the team agreed to staff comments and requested the three variances. A staff member observed there are other residential units on the block that also do not meet the 70% brick requirement.

Commission discussion focused on how the subdivision compared to possible higher-density alternatives on the same site and on whether the request would set an undesirable precedent. One commissioner abstained from voting; the motion to approve, which included granting the variances, passed.

The approval permits the applicant to move forward with the final plat and the two single-family lots, subject to normal platting requirements and conditions of approval.

","The commission approved resolution 2025-016, a final master development plan to subdivide a 0.39-acre lot into two single-family lots in R-6 zoning, granting variances for architecture (less than 70% brickstone), lot width (85 feet vs. required 90 feet total) and alternative landscape plan; one commissioner abstained.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6297608,"Commission denies duplex proposal on undersized lot, citing density and parking conflicts",767,1613000,2380000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2509392-856034063e292ca15c6412275c0b48ac&start=1613&end=2380","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2509392-856034063e292ca15c6412275c0b48ac/thumbnail_1613000.jpg","/articles/6297608/Gallatin-City/Sumner-County/Tennessee/Commission-denies-duplex-proposal-on-undersized-lot-citing-density-and-parking-conflicts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6297608-f3dac089e4a2b118965cb9cdc0d0bbef/orig.mp4?Expires=1771151502&Signature=aKDP8Sf5nynL8NS3lfcolqUOi0XO4DIeoDmTDIZxmwnfwK35pizNRUaTGJ61zcyfIp7W4oh4DUGpvG3jKJvJSLy9Z2gsYrbepjJ-adOGsIAnclGBg4d8k8XFTaZQO6t~agN4v303gmm3LGS88KA~WQN7bwMyO4Ilpv4Lehk9PMEHoKGyXTGIcWknO0krfNCyENM5E8-C8X7qOPHX9kpvO-bTQQECDB43mlAOQdDGlp1ouT4FLww~zc3PH7jQ66Mtg6ITCDwT9ptQSBQm13qI2iV-ezR~RS7IKjMR7YCIoUcZNg5a6xMw6eQMPeCzi4Yni2uLmUxjiH7vr6EdWaUqiQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Gallatin City Planning Commission denied a final master development plan (resolution 2025-015) for a proposed duplex on a 0.12-plus-or-minus acre lot zoned MRO, citing density, parking layout, and buffer-yard concerns.

Charlie Pierri, staff planner, told commissioners the lot is smaller than the ordinance’s requirements for a duplex in MRO zoning and that staff recommended denial “due to the density not being consistent with our code requirement.” The staff presentation noted the lot’s square footage falls short of the code standard discussed during the hearing.

Applicant Jason Baggett said the lot dimensions were known when he purchased the property and that the neighborhood already contains multifamily structures. Commissioners and staff identified several obstacles to approving two units on the site: insufficient lot area for required buffer yards, a driveway/parking layout that would require backing onto the street, and the site’s inability to meet minimum lot-size thresholds for two dwelling units.

Commissioners discussed whether a smaller plan or a different unit type (for example, an accessory dwelling under a future code change) could be workable; staff said changes to the city code are under consideration but would not apply immediately. Several commissioners said it was difficult to grant multiple variances to accommodate a use that appears inconsistent with zoning objectives.

A motion to deny the project, aligned with staff’s recommendation, passed by voice vote.

","The Planning Commission denied a final master development plan for a two-unit duplex on a 0.12-acre lot zoned MRO (resolution 2025-015), concluding the lot does not meet density, parking and buffer-yard requirements; staff had recommended denial because the density was not consistent with code.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6297614,"Commission approves 519 Redstone accessory structure after striking stormwater condition; staff had recommended denial for architecture",910,637000,1547000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2509392-856034063e292ca15c6412275c0b48ac&start=637&end=1547","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2509392-856034063e292ca15c6412275c0b48ac/thumbnail_637000.jpg","/articles/6297614/Gallatin-City/Sumner-County/Tennessee/Commission-approves-519-Redstone-accessory-structure-after-striking-stormwater-condition-staff-had-recommended-denial-for-architecture","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6297614-0605c01a1af4571970c2581dd9e51914/orig.mp4?Expires=1771151502&Signature=WFJrB7Nymnd6763mq-o27ZMBdBtTqqudIk7xm5vSMvc5VVjAZawRwSLgvMHPXq1yof~3eKifbiclajtHoQIiy0rgOqCw6OJyGRf4KHLVHu9vpWlQU~BcIOFU9cxyL5v-GtrwOko1DHwfWDCBJV1YbPm3IHni1vNw6rDA13kgSX31Ko4q8Jx5k9NvFDNyGKaNbSpQ1YGn6Yl0FGpZ~cokT0n7SYHD25lHWb71yE~bS-AXRM0K9aOB9ewtTtVlokqALX7gGy66Bms75ftse92bahmm4XgeMlRFTSEhvaZeH3e6VIndwZjmh8Q4I0wtf5QxgkxKs15uIlzuAlpAeY3oEg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Gallatin City Planning Commission voted to approve the site plan for a 960-square-foot accessory structure at 519 Redstone Drive after removing a stormwater-condition staff had placed on the application.

Charlie Pierri, staff planner, described the request: an accessory structure on a half-acre lot zoned R-15 with alternative architecture; planning staff recommended denial of resolution 2025-003 because “the architecture [did] not meet code requirements.”

Applicant representative Austin Christian said stormwater staff had placed a condition he could not document with written guidance. “To not have any sort of way to back up a condition … was to me is just completely unacceptable,” he said, describing his conversations with stormwater staff and asking the commission to remove the condition so he could proceed.

Stormwater staff indicated they were developing a toolbox of stormwater-control measures for accessory structures and said the condition could be considered satisfied in this instance while general guidance is developed. Commissioners said they would hear a presentation on the stormwater ordinance at a March work session.

Commission discussion centered on whether it was appropriate to enforce a condition before the city adopted formal guidance. Commissioner Albert moved to approve the plan and strike the stormwater condition (identified as condition 2 in the discussion); the motion passed. The record includes the commission chair’s statement that removing the condition “in no way sets a precedent for how we handle future, similar situations.”

Planning staff said the stormwater toolbox under development may include measures such as tree plantings, rain gardens or other landscaping that could be used in future accessory-structure reviews.

","The commission approved the site plan for a 960-square-foot accessory structure at 519 Redstone Drive (resolution 2025-003) after removing a stormwater-related condition that staff had maintained; planning had recommended denial because the structure’s architecture did not meet code.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission approves Banks Phase 2 preliminary plat, restates temporary fire-access condition after public concern

Commission approves Rose Avenue final master plan with variances for lot width and architecture

Commission denies duplex proposal on undersized lot, citing density and parking conflicts

Commission approves 519 Redstone accessory structure after striking stormwater condition; staff had recommended denial for architecture