Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Coffee County public hearing on I‑24 industrial-site rezoning closed with no public comment

2942398 · April 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a Coffee County meeting, commissioners opened a public hearing on an amendment to the county zoning resolution to rezone four parcels at the I‑24 Industrial Site from A‑1 to M‑1; no members of the public spoke and the hearing was closed.

A public hearing on an amendment to Coffee County’s zoning resolution to rezone four large parcels at the I‑24 Industrial Site from A‑1 (agricultural) to M‑1 (industrial) opened at 5 p.m. Central and drew no public speakers, a county commissioner said.

Commissioner (unnamed) read the hearing notice, saying, “This is a public hearing that starts at 5PM Central Time regarding an amendment to our zoning resolution that rezones Tennessee, it's 4 large parcels … changing it from its A1 designation to M 1.” After asking if anyone wished to speak, the commissioner said there were no comments and “I would declare the public hearing is now closed.”

The amendment was presented as a change affecting four large parcels at the site adjacent to Interstate 24. The transcript segment includes the commissioner’s statement that the hearing was set for 5 p.m. Central and the commissioner’s closing declaration; no public testimony appears in the record excerpts provided.

The transcript also records a separate remark that “TCA plainly says that,” referring to the Tennessee Code Annotated, but the excerpt does not link that statute citation to a specific provision or to the rezoning proposal. The record in the provided transcript does not show a formal vote on the zoning amendment during the excerpted portion.

The public hearing format followed usual procedure: a staff or commissioner read the amendment and invited public comment; with no speakers, the hearing was closed. The transcript indicates the presence of multiple commissioners at the meeting (a speaker states “we got 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 commissioners out of 18”), but the excerpt does not identify which commissioners were present or whether the rezoning amendment subsequently advanced to a formal vote or further consideration later in the meeting.