Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Connectivity And Variances topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cubes at Sparta Pike developers seek six variances; staff opposes multiple connectivity exceptions
Summary
Cubes at Sparta Pike LLC asked the Lebanon Planning Commission for preliminary and final plat approvals for a large office‑warehouse development and requested six variances, including exceptions for block length, block perimeter and roadway connections; staff opposed multiple requests.
Get email alerts on the Connectivity And Variances topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers for Cubes at Sparta Pike presented a combined preliminary and final plat for a proposed office‑warehouse distribution development on roughly 204.9 acres along Sparta Pike and requested six variances; staff recommended denial of several connectivity variances.
Staff told the commission the proposed Wheeler Way would be about 3,945 linear feet and that the zoning and subdivision rules require multiple north‑south connections (two to the north and two to the south) for a road of that length; the developer proposes only one connection to the south and asks for variances on block length and block perimeter (which staff said exceed allowable maximums). Several variances were granted previously with an earlier preliminary plat but expired and must be re‑requested.
Dan Curry of Crockett Surveying said he was the surveyor of record and confirmed the parties were reapplying for earlier variances because the prior approvals had lapsed. Staff told the commission the variance request to avoid connecting to Hill Lakes Lane (which currently stubs to the property) lacks a hardship because the stub already exists and could permit passenger vehicle access. Another variance related to two lots adjacent to Highway 70 was described by staff as having a valid hardship due to the lots being between Highway 70 and a railroad easement.
Staff also said this item was not eligible for deferral by the planning commission because staff had already deferred it once; it therefore will go to the regular meeting for a vote.
Ending: The commission heard the developer’s explanation and staff’s analysis. Staff does not support most of the variance requests and told the commission the item must be considered at the regular meeting for a formal decision.

