Skip to content Skip to left sidebar Skip to footer

Item 42, R-26-9-903, which addresses the Commission’s Use on Review powers

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #7712
    Andy Fox
    Participant

      Monday evening, after our meeting a constituent shared with me that a property owner in the Eighth District, at 6209 Flint Gap Road, which sits in the 8th District but is literally on the border between the 8th and 9th District, received a permit from Tennessee to allow for the discharge of water associated with industrial activities. The discharger is listed as M & M capstone Farms, LLC, and they propose to use this tract as a “borrow pit.” In other words, the industrial activities are mining activities. Mining activities are a use-on-review for agricultural zones.

      This tract is adjacent to another piece of property owned by the same person, Sandra Keck, along with Michael Malicote of Thunder Mountain. These owners previously applied for a use-on-review to allow mining activities to take place in 2020, and they were denied, case 6-F-20-UR. The denial was recommended by planning staff, and the planning commission at the time followed the recommendation, finding that the use “will have an adverse impact on the character of the neighborhood in which the site is located and significantly injure the value of adjacent property by noise, lights, fumes, odors, vibration, traffic congestion or other impacts which may detract from the immediate environment.”

      We thought we may never have to address a mining use-on-review situation after our vote on the past one, but it looks like a situation of a new (not a previous one that is revisited) use-on-review may be coming down the pike. I would think that Commissioner Thompson would agree with me that to best represent our constituents, who are the residents who will be affected, we would like to keep use-on-review in-house with the Board of Commissioners, and not delegate it to another unelected body.
      At this time, I oppose ending our current use-on-review powers.

      #7713
      Justin Cofer
      Participant

        Thank you Commissioner Fox! I have a very large group not in favor of losing this ability as well.

        I understand for some this may not be a big issue, however, once we give up our say on Use on Review, we are also giving up a layer of public accountability. These decisions can involve consequential uses, including mining and airports. When decisions of that magnitude affect a community, citizens should have the ability to bring their concerns before the officials they elected to represent them.

        This is bigger than any one Planning Commission or County Commission. It is about protecting the principle of representative government. Authority given away today may be very difficult to reclaim tomorrow.

        We have a voice. The people have a voice through us. I see no compelling reason to surrender either one.

        If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it; certainly don’t give it away.
        – Justin D Cofer

      Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
      • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.