On the agenda: Bristol meeting — Data Center (Apr 20)

BRISTOL TENNESSEE MUNICIPAL-REGIONAL
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
AGENDA
Easley Municipal Annex
104 8th Street | Bristol, TN 37620
April 20, 2026
5:00 PM
I.

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL

II.

APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

III.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES
March 23, 2025

IV.

UNSCHEDULED COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

V.

REPORTS OF OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES

VI.

OLD BUSINESS

VII.

NEW BUSINESS
A. Concept Plat Review – Raytheon Road

VIII.

OTHER MATTERS
A. Discussion – Permanent Campgrounds
B. Discussion - Special Temporary Events
C. Discussion – Definition of Multifamily
D. Discussion – Junkyards
E. Discussion – Data Centers
F. City Council Update
G. Training Update
H. Site Plans and Subdivisions Report

IX.

ADJOURNMENT

BRISTOL TENNESSEE MUNICIPAL-REGIONAL
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MINUTES
Slater Center
325 McDowell St. | Bristol, TN 37620
March 23, 2026
5:15 pm
Planning Commissioners Present:
Kelly Graham – Vice-Chair
Tekai Shu – Secretary
Mahlon Luttrell
Lea Powers
Mike Schmidt
Matt Slagle
Andrew Snyder
Mark Webb

Staff Present:
Kelli Bourgeois – City Manager
Danielle Smith-City Attorney
Tom Anderson- Director Economic Development
Cherith Young-Director Community Development
Mark Quickel-Director Utility Services
Brian Ramsey-Director Engineering
Mike Carrier-Fire Chief
Matt Austin- Police Chief
Ross Peters-Planning
Heather Moore-Planning
Carty Leonard- Planning
Steve Blakenship- Planning
Nicole Lawrence- Community Development

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Vice Chairman Kelly Graham called the Bristol Tennessee Municipal-Regional Planning
Commission meeting to order at 5:15 pm on Monday, March 23, 2026. Roll call was performed,
and a quorum was declared present.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
The Commissioners approved of the agenda as presented.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Mahlon Luttrell motioned to approve February 16, 2026, Planning Commission
meeting minutes as presented with a second from Matt Slagle. The minutes were approved as
written.

1
Planning Commission
March 23,2026

UNSCHEDULED COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
A. Rezoning – RZZ26-628- Zaidi Property
Cherith Young, Director of Community Development, presented this item. The owner is Ms.
Audrey Zaidi and the applicant is Jerome Malinay, Ardent Development. The request is to rezone
133.056 of 152 acres from R-1A and R-2 to PRD (Planned Residential District). Ms. Young
explained the rezoning and development process stating the steps required to rezone property
in the city.
Rezoning is the legislative act to amend the Zoning Map to change the zoning district for a
designated parcel or land area. City staff conducts analysis and makes recommendations to the
Planning Commission. The Planning Commission makes a recommendation to City Council. The
City Council holds two readings to approve the ordinance to amend the Zoning Map and holds a
public hearing.
The second step is the work to develop the preliminary plat. The preliminary drawing indicates
the proposed layout of the subdivision. Impact studies are required at this stage. The preliminary
plat is approved in conjunction with the construction drawings for the project. Construction
drawings document the engineering design for all streets and utilities (water, sanitary sewer,
stormwater, electric). The Planning Commission has the approval authority for preliminary plats.
Site work may begin after this approval, but lots may not be sold, and no building permits are
issued at this stage
The third step is the final plat process. The Planning Commission has the approval authority for
final plats. The final plat contains addresses and proposed easements and dedications. Public
infrastructure is installed and inspected at this point or a surety instrument is approved by the
Planning Commission to ensure completion. The final plat contains signatures of surveyor,
owner, utility providers, street authority, and Secretary of the Planning Commission. Lots may
be sold and permits may be issued once the plat is approved and recorded by the Register of
Deeds.
In the fourth phase of completion, houses are constructed and sold. Public infrastructure is
accepted by the city and city services are available to new residents.
Staff Analysis of the project is as follows. Transportation Services: a complete traffic impact study
by a licensed professional engineer will be required at subdivision plat stage. Stormwater
Services: The site contains steep terrain and natural drainage corridors. Development will require
detention systems, storm drainage infrastructure, and compliance with City and State
stormwater regulations. Infrastructure will be constructed by the developer and maintained by
2
Planning Commission
March 23,2026

the city after accepted. Solid Waste Services: The proposed development is expected to generate
approximately 600 to 800 additional residential waste carts, accounting for the anticipated
number of dwelling units and the likelihood that some households utilize multiple carts. The
additional demand generated by the proposed development would bring daily collection volumes
near or at the City’s current operational capacity, particularly during peak periods. In addition to
the increase in household waste collection, the development will also generate increased
demand for bulk/brush and leaf collection services, which will place additional impact on the
City’s existing fleet and personnel resources. Due to the concentration of new customers within
a single service area and the limited remaining capacity within the current system, the
development will likely necessitate route rebalancing and may require the addition of one to two
collection vehicles and operators to maintain service levels and operational reliability as the
development builds out. Any capital and operational costs associated with expanded collection
capacity would need to be programmed within the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and the
solid waste enterprise fund. Water and Sanitary Sewer Service: An impact study on the
increased demand to the water system to include the pump station and the water storage tank
that serves this area will be required. An impact study on the increased loading into the sanitary
sewer system will be required. Two of the three potential connection points for this project are
part of the Sinking Creek Basin. A third connection point may be in the Cedar Creek Basin. The
city is conducting evaluations of the Sinking Creek Basin to identify rehabilitation projects for the
existing infrastructure. It is critical that the additional loading from this potential development
be understood. The developer would be responsible for the necessary infrastructure to serve the
development.
Staff concluded that this rezoning, assuming all infrastructure impacts are studied and addressed,
conforms to the Future Land Use Plan and Policy and recommends the Bristol Tennessee
Municipal Regional Planning Commission send a favorable recommendation to City Council for
this request.
The Commission asked staff questions at this time. Commissioner Snyder asked staff if the
property stayed in the current zoning of R-1A and R-2 compared to the PRD, would the
commission have more flexibility with the developer. Staff replied to the commission that they
would have more flexibility with the developer in the PRD zoning district.
Vice-Mayor Powers stated she understood the reason for the rezoning was due to the
topography of the property and the required setbacks. Staff replied she was correct.
Councilman Slagle expressed concerns regarding meeting the demands on our local current
infrastructure, and he stated he was not in favor of this rezoning.
3
Planning Commission
March 23,2026

Secretary Shu asked how long the impact studies for a development of this size would take
approximately. Staff replied they would require around three to six months to complete.
Commissioner Luttrell asked Mark Quickel the Director of Utility Servies about sewer services
for this area.
Councilman Slagle exits the meeting, a quorum is still present.
Commissioner Snyder asked Brian Ramsey, Director of Engineering, about the environmental
impact of the rezoning. Mr. Ramsey replied that his department would ensure all detention
ponds are designed with TDEC standards.
Commissioner Webb asked about the infrastructure, what would the city do if a developer went
forward with this development in its current zoning? Staff replied there would be discussing
the same issues.
Vice-Mayor Powers asked Brian Ramsey about the surrounding roads and future. Mr. Ramsey
replied he could not know what is exactly needed until the traffic impact study has been
completed.
Commissioner Snyder inquired about Holston View Elementary Schools capacity for future
students. Student Services Supervisor for Bristol Tennessee Schools, Dr. Kristie Coleman, was
present and informed the commission that the schools have the capacity for more students
however Mr. Curt Rutherford, the Director of Facilities for Bristol Tennessee Public Schools,
shared Holston View currently and has needed renovations for quite some time and an influx of
students may hasten the timeline for those renovations.
Commissioner Snyder expressed more concerns regarding school capacity, Vice-Mayor Powers
expressed concerns regarding the ingress and egress of the development and lacking proper
infrastructure and Secretary Shue asked if the impact studies came back with negative results,
what were the next steps. Staff stated they could not bring the preliminary plat to the Planning
Commission for approval until all issues were rectified by the developer.
Jerome Malinay, the developer, addressed the Commission at this time. Mr. Malinay stated
this land was originally created as a district identified by the Bristol Housing Authority for
affordable housing. He stated he has 85 usable acres, 50 unusable and 20 acres that will be
used as buffer zones and greenspace. He also stated as the current zoning stands, he could
build 425-450 units and with the proposed PRD zoning he can build 374-475. His plan is to
create four different developments with four different pricing levels to include affordable
housing. Mr. Malinay wanted the Commission to know this is a six-year project, it will take one
4
Planning Commission
March 23,2026

year to start and approximately five years to build out. He feels he and the city have time to
plan out the issues and address concerns over the next six years. He stated traffic will be
divided between Paperville Road and King College Road and he will provide a traffic study.
Mr. Malinay was asked by Vice-Mayor Powers if this project would receive TIF (Tax Increment
Funding) money and Mr. Malinay stated he would if approved. Vice- Mayor Powers asked if he
were not approved would he move forward with the project and he stated he would not.
Secretary Shu asked Mr. Malinay if he was to receive a denial from the Planning Commission
tonight, what would be his next steps? He stated he would take the item to the City Council for
approval.
Vice-Chair Graham opened the public hearing at this time.
Randall Cook 1810 King College Rd.- Expressed concern about loss of access to his property and
loss of water during the construction phases.
-

Staff informed Mr. Cook they would work with the developer to ensure water
service is uninterrupted during active construction. The developer always
guaranteed access to his property and would replace any damaged property and
waterlines.

Nick Rutledge 102 Galloway Rd.- Wanted to know who would pay for all the required
infrastructure improvements.
Barabra Basher,200 Trammel Rd.- Concerns over infrastructure, traffic and who pays for
improvements.
Nancy Bolger 5053 Old Jonesboro Rd.- Who pays for improvements, traffic, infrastructure and
school impact.
Rebecca Burke 1824 King College Rd.- Traffic concerns.
David Winship 1005 Beechwood Dr.- Concerns with infrastructure, strain on city services and
topography of the parcel.
Steve Doll 61 Knightsbridge Rd.- Concerns with traffic.
Earl Mattox 1045 N. Paperville Rd. – Concerns with traffic and another increase in taxes.
Miranda Ansari 1500 Rock Rose Rd.- Concerns with infrastructure and traffic.
James Stout 1818 King College Rd.- Concerns with access to his own home.
-

The developer assured Mr. Stout he would not lose access to his home or any of his
personal property.

Suzanne Morrell 1020 Beechwood Dr.- Concerns with infrastructure, topography of the parcel
and traffic.
Brian Suzek 114 Monroe Dr.- Concerns with traffic and suggested “Actionable Permits”.
5
Planning Commission
March 23,2026

Dolly McPeek 32 Knightsbridge Rd.- Concerns with fire response if there were multiple fires
throughout the city and the lack of water referencing the fire at King College several years ago.
-

Fire Chief Mark Carrier stated the city has five fire station locations strategically
placed throughout the city with multiple units, the city also has Mutual Aid
agreements with Bristol, Virginia and surrounding units from Sullivan County.

Calyton Dowell with Bristol Tennessee Essential Services was present and informed the
commission, BTES intends to purchase some of the land from Mr. Malinay and build a
substation for that area of the city.
The public hearing was closed.
City staff, representatives from BTES and Bristol Tennessee City Schools, spoke at this time,
addressing all the concerns brought up by the public hearing.
A motion was made.
The Commission began discussion regarding the motion.
Motion to send a favorable recommendation to the Bristol City Council for the
rezoning request for the Zaidi property as presented.
MOTION: Luttrell
SECOND: Snyder
FOR: Kelly Graham, Mahlon Luttrell, Leah Powers, Tekai Shu, Mike Schmidt, Andrew
Snyder, Mark Webb
AGAINST:
Motion Carried
The Commission adjourned at 7:40 pm for a break.
The meeting was called back to order at 7:47 pm.
B. Rezoning 1840 Vance Tank Road (Sullivan County)
Cherith Young presented this item. Luke Meade, Sullivan County Director of Planning, was
present to address the Commission if required. The property owners, Gary Carrier and Matt
Holden, have requested that a property identified as Sullivan County Tax Map 68, Parcel 25.50,
be rezoned from Sullivan County, R-1 (Low Density/Single-Family Residential District) to Sullivan
County, R-3 (Manufactured Residential Dwelling Park District). The 2.64-acre parcel is located on
6
Planning Commission
March 23,2026

the north side of Vance Tank Road across from Broyles Lane, in Sullivan County, Tennessee in
Bristol’s Urban Growth Boundary. The rezoning application lists a purpose for the rezoning which
states “Mobile Home Park.” The property is currently occupied by two (2) mobile homes and
outbuildings according to Tennessee Property Assessment Data.
State law requires the Bristol Tennessee Municipal-Regional Planning Commission to provide a
recommendation on the proposed rezoning because the property is located within the city’s
Urban Growth Boundary. The recommendation will be forwarded to the Sullivan County
Commission for final action.
Vice-Mayor Powers asked Mr. Meade why this is being rezoned for R-1 to R-3. Mr. Meade
replied, the owner would like to connect to the sewer and come into conformity with current
zoning.
A motion was made.
Motion to send a favorable recommendation the Sullivan County Commission for the
rezoning request as presented.
MOTION: Webb
SECOND: Luttrell
FOR: Kelly Graham, Mahlon Luttrell, Leah Powers, Tekai Shu, Mike Schmidt, Andrew
Snyder, Mark Webb
AGAINST:
ABSTAIN:
Motion Carried

C. Sullivan County Text Amendment – Data Centers
Cherith Young introduced this item. Luke Meade, Sullivan County Director of Planning, was
present to address the Commission if required. On March 3, 2026, Sullivan County staff sent the
attached proposed text amendments to the Sullivan County Zoning Resolution and for the
Appendices, for Bristol Planning Commission to review.
As state law requires, the Bristol Municipal Regional Planning Commission is requested to review
and forward a recommendation to the Sullivan County Commission regarding the proposed
changes. Bristol Planning Commission recommendations will be forwarded to the Sullivan
County Commission for review on April 9, 2026. The update will create a new PMD-3 Planning
Manufacturing District (Data and Energy Processing District) in Zoning Resolution Chapter 5.
Amendments are included in the Appendices also.
7
Planning Commission
March 23,2026

A discussion ensued with the commission regarding the need to send a recommendation and
concerns the Text Amendment in the County could affect the pending Ordinance the City of
Bristol is creating regarding Data Centers. Luke Meade explained to the Commission per state
law that a recommendation must be made to the Sullivan County Commission from the City of
Bristol Planning Commission since Bristol is a Regional Planning Commission.
A discussion ensued regarding the potential effects the County’s decision on Data Centers could
affect the city. Some Commissioners were questioning whether the city should send a favorable
recommendation to the County Commission prior to the City creating their own Ordinance on
Data Centers.
A motion was made.
Motion to send a favorable recommendation to the Sullivan County Commission for
the Text Amendment request regarding Data Centers.
MOTION: Webb
SECOND: Powers (Powers then rescinded the second of the motion)
SECOND: Graham
FOR: Kelly Graham, Tekai Shu, Mike Schmidt, Mark Webb
AGAINST: Lea Powers, Mahlon Luttrell, Andrew Snyder
Motion Carried
D. Subdivision Concept Plan - Taylor Meadows
Cherith Young presented this item to the commission. There is no action required on this item,
this is for feedback only for the developer.
Landon Taylor has submitted a concept plan for the Taylor Meadows Subdivision located
at 2616 Volunteer Parkway to the Planning Commission for review. The Subdivision
Regulations provide the option of concept review for major subdivisions before
submitting a preliminary plat. This allows the applicant to present their ideas and receive
feedback before spending additional time and funds on the project.
Landon Taylor, the developer, made a presentation to the Commission regarding his plan
for the Taylor Meadows Subdivision. Mr. Taylor described his plan as using only 12 of the
28 acres of the parcel. He plans on building 28 homes in the community with a price range
of $259,000 to $269,000. These would be stick built homes with underground utilities.
The Commission provided positive feedback regarding the design and plan and looks forward
to seeing this development move forward.
8
Planning Commission
March 23,2026

OTHER MATTERS
A. Discussion – Data Centers
Cherith Young informed the Commission that the data center working group met on March 3,
2026. The attendees included representatives from BTES and city staff. This was a productive
meeting and staff hope to have a draft ordinance for the Planning Commission to review at the
May 18, 2026, meeting.
B. Discussion – Junkyards
Cherith Young informed the Commission that the first round of Notice of Violations (NOVs) was
sent out and all identified properties acting outside the ordinance have since complied. Phase
Two will be addressing the auto service locations. Staff will begin to look at the Ordinance as
this process progresses and bring ideas of possible changes back to the Planning Commission.
C. Discussion – Permanent Campgrounds
Cherith Young informed the commission the campground “Camp at Bristol” has until April 14,
2026, to provide staff with a site plan. The owner was in the process of evicting current tenants
by the end of March 2026. The permanent campground moratorium will be heard by the City
Council on March 24, 2026, for a second and final reading.
D. City Council update
The Moratorium on Permanent Campgrounds goes before the City Council on March 24, 2026.
ADJOUNMENT
Vice Chairman Graham adjourned the meeting at 8:50 pm.

9
Planning Commission
March 23,2026

Kelly Graham – Vice-Chair

10
Planning Commission
March 23,2026

MEMO
To: Bristol, Tennessee Municipal-Regional Planning Commission
From: Steve Blankenship
Date: April 20, 2026
Subject: Raytheon Road Subdivision Concept Review

Harless Homes & Holdings, Inc. has submitted a concept plan for the Raytheon Road Subdivision located at 321
Raytheon Road to the Planning Commission for review.
The Subdivision Regulations provide the option of concept review for major subdivisions before
submitting a preliminary plat. This allows the applicant to present their ideas and receive feedback before
spending additional time and funds on the project. Per the Subdivision Regulations302.1 Purpose of Concept Review
The Planning Commission recommends the submission of a concept sketch from the developer for a preapplication conference with the Community Development Department staff. The sketch should be a concept
plan for design purposes and should be used to discover all factors that may have an impact on the proposed
development. The purpose of the review is to advise the subdivider on the proposed subdivision before
substantial amounts of time and money have been invested in a development that may contain elements
contrary to these Subdivision Regulations.
Staff will provide an overview of the concept design during the meeting, and a representative may be present
to answer questions about the project. The proposal is approximately 5.09 acres in size, and the property is
zoned R-1A (Low-Density Single-Family District). The proposed concept plan shows ten (10) lots in red; the plat
initially was submitted showing only five (5) lots in black. The plan does not indicate scale or dimensions, but
the plan shows that up to 10 homes are proposed, and the minimum lot size planned is 14,520 square feet.
The minimum road frontage proposed is a minimum of 35 feet on the cul-de-sac to a minimum of 75 feet along
Raytheon Road. The minimum lot size permitted in the R-1A zone is 14,520 square feet.
Should the applicant move forward with this project, the Planning Commission will be required to review and approve the
subdivision plats for the project.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need additional information.

Steve Blankenship
Planning Technician

22

5 Lot Concept

10 Lot Concept

MEMO
To: Bristol, Tennessee Municipal-Regional Planning Commission
From: Ross Peters
Date: April 16, 2026
Subject: Permanent Campgrounds
An ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on the establishment of permanent
campgrounds was approved in the second reading during the City Council meeting on March
24, 2026.
Currently, B-3 (General Business), PBD (Planned Business District), and M-1 (Light
Industrial/Business) districts allow an RV Park/Campground as a permitted use under NAICS
code 721211. The definition for this code states: for establishments primarily engaged in
operating sites to accommodate campers and their equipment, including tent trailers, travel
trailers, and RVs.
Staff distributed a summary sheet for permanent campgrounds on March 23, 2026. Attached
you will find the same summary sheet with additional definitions. On Monday evening, staff
will be prepared to discuss the zoning and site plan requirements currently in effect and seek
directions on possible amendments to the Zoning Ordinance related to permanent
campgrounds.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need additional information.

Ross Peters
Development and
Zoning Administrator

Permanent Campground Requirements
Definitions
•

Zoning Ordinance:
MANUFACTURED HOME - means a structure, transportable in one (1) or more sections, which is
built on a permanent chassis and designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when
attached to the required utilities. The term "manufactured home" does not include a
"recreational vehicle", unless such transportable structures are placed on a site for one hundred
eighty (180) consecutive days or longer.
MANUFACTURED HOME PARK means a parcel (or contiguous parcels) of land divided into two
(2) or more manufactured home lots for rent.

•

State law: “Organized camp” means an area, place, parcel or tract of land on which facilities are
established or maintained to provide an outdoor group-living experience for children or adults, or
where one (1) or more permanent or semi-permanent structures are established or maintained as
living or sleeping quarters for children or adults, and operated for educational, social, recreational,
religious instruction or activity, physical education or health, or vacation purposes either gratuitously
or for compensation;

•

City Code definition of Temporary Campground: Temporary campground or campground is any lot,
parcel, or tract of land, or any portion thereof, that is intended to be used, or is used, for camping
purposes on a temporary basis for periods of 14 or fewer consecutive days.

•

Permanent campgrounds are listed under 2002 NACIS 721211

Permitted Zoning Districts
Currently, B-3 (General Business), PBD (Planned Business District), and M-1 (Light Industrial/Business)
districts

Site Plan Requirements
Minor Site Plan - For projects disturbing less than 1 acre.
Required for Submission:
• A scaled plan prepared by a Tennessee licensed professional
• Information showing the project meets zoning and development requirements
Includes:
• Property and owner/developer information
• Building layout and dimensions
• Parking, sidewalks, and access points
• Utilities and drainage
• Landscaping, lighting, and erosion control
• Flood zone information
Major Site Plan (Large Projects) - For projects disturbing 1 acre or more.
What to submit:
• A detailed, scaled plan prepared by a Tennessee licensed professional
Includes everything in a Minor Site Plan, plus:
• Stormwater and erosion control plans
• Topographic information (elevation/contours)
• Drainage and water quality studies
• Traffic impact study (if required)

Paving Requirements
Zoning Ordinance Section Z-213: “All driveways, parking spaces, parking lots, circulation aisles and
entrances (collectively "parking areas") shall be paved with asphalt, concrete, impermeable or
permeable pavers, or similar type material approved by the City.” Excludes Temporary Campgrounds,
but covers other campgrounds.

Landscape Requirements
A landscaping plan is required per Chapter 11 of the Zoning Ordinance. Landscape plans
must provide landscaping strips along the right-of-way and may depending on the size of
the parking area, may require landscape islands in parking lots. Buffering for adjacent uses
is required if the campground borders a less intense land use.

MEMO
To: Bristol Tennessee Municipal-Regional Planning Commission
From: Carty Leonard
Date: April 20, 2026
Subject: Junkyard Update

During the March Planning Commission meeting, staff identified a second round of
properties determined to be in violation of Section 38-2 (Operation of Junkyards) of the
Code of Ordinances. Since that time, staff has continued to meet internally to evaluate
each property and proactively address potential remedies, particularly for sites that may
present unforeseen challenges such as limited parking availability and sight distance
constraints.
Property owners found to be in violation of Section 38-2 will be issued notices this week.
These notices will outline the violations and provide guidance regarding the steps
necessary to achieve compliance within the established timeframe. Staff will continue to
monitor progress on these cases and will provide updates to the Planning Commission.

Carty Leonard
Planner

MEMO
To: Bristol Tennessee Municipal-Regional Planning Commission
From: Cherith Young
Date: April 16, 2026
Subject: Discussion - Data Centers

Staff con�nue to work on the data center ordinance. A dra�ing commitee mee�ng was held on
March 2, 2026, and on April 10, 2026. City staff and BTES have been in atendance. A third
mee�ng is scheduled for April 30, 2026. We are working towards having a first dra� to submit to
the Planning Commission for feedback during the mee�ng on May 18, 2026.
Please let us know if you have any ques�ons or if we may provide addi�onal informa�on.
Thank you,

Cherith Young

MEMORANDUM
TO:

BRISTOL TENNESSEE MUNICIPAL REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION

FROM:

HEATHER MOORE

SUBJECT: TINY HOUSE DEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION
DATE:

SEPTEMBER 16, 2019

Planning Commission and staff began conversation on tiny houses in 2018. Staff presented a
brief overview on tiny houses at the December meeting of that year. Then in January, 2019,
Commissioners and staff discussed a regional working group on development of tiny house
communities. Bristol staff met with surrounding jurisdictions in February, and information was
shared between the participating localities. It was agreed that information will continuously be
shared as regulations are formed in each community. Bristol staff, at the Commission’s direction,
communicated with Mr. Lloyd Putney, Carpentry Teacher at Central High School who builds
tiny houses. Mr. Putney shared his agreement with staff’s interest in working towards allowance
for tiny house developments.
Bristol is interested in providing allowance for tiny house developments, aware of the national
trend towards tiny houses and recent requests regarding tiny house developments. Staff
originally noted that the Zoning Ordinance’s MH (Mobile Home) District regulations are
formatted to allow developments in a planned context. That district allows mobile homes and
modular homes, but it does not allow site-built units or homes, including tiny houses. Staff has
researched Bristol’s MH District locations and has noted that there are a relatively small number
of them. Twelve (12) MH District parcels cover approximately 157 acres of land.
Staff has received another tiny house development request since the last update to the Planning
Commission. This tiny house development concept plan, of twenty-eight (28) units arranged in
groups of three (3) and five (5) on approximately four (4) acres, is located in the R-3 (MultiFamily Residential) District. During the review of the concept, staff realized that the Zoning
Ordinance could provide for development of communities of tiny houses, without using the term
“Tiny House Development”. A development of tiny houses could follow multi-family
development standards with the exception of one impediment found with the definition of
“Multi-family Residence”. Ordinance 11-16, approved in in 2011, introduced a definition for
“Multi-family Residence” in the Zoning Ordinance “A building containing three or more dwelling units, including units that are
located one over another.”
Staff, with the assistance of Bristol City Attorney, determined in reviewing the concept plan
mentioned above, that once clusters of three (3) or more tiny houses are connected (by shared
walls or deck roofs), the current definition of “multi-family residence” has been met. A multifamily residential development of tiny houses is therefore allowable in the R-3 District.

2019 0916

Tiny House Development Discussion

Staff believes a closer look at that definition is now appropriate. A minor update to the
definition of “multi-family residence” could provide additional allowance and flexibility for tiny
house developments. Staff questioned why the definition of “multi-family residence” includes “a
building containing….” To this end, the definitions of “multi-family residence” used by
surrounding jurisdictions were gathered by staff (See attached). Most nearby jurisdictions’
definitions of “multifamily residence” include a reference to a building. Staff also contacted
MTAS (Municipal Technical Assistance Service) for opinion on the matter. MTAS saw no
problem in altering the definition of “multifamily residence” if having a home on wheels is
protected against (International Building Code, which Bristol follows, does not allow this), and
suggested the following altered definition “Building (s) of three or more dwelling units either attached or detached,
including units that are located over one another.”
In the tiny house and multi-family residential research process, staff has determined that
developments of tiny house communities are allowable as multi-family residential developments
in the B-3 (General Business) District with Special Use approval, PBD (Planned Business)
District, PRD (Planned Residential) District, R-4 (High Density Multifamily) District and R-5
(High Density Multifamily) District.
Staff has concluded that Bristol Zoning Ordinance currently provides allowance for tiny house
developments. Providing a definition for “tiny house” in the Zoning Ordinance could provide
identity for developments of that nature, but may not be necessary. A minor modification to the
definition to “multi-family residence” could provide additional flexibility for tiny house
communities as multi-family residential developments, in the R-3, B-3, PBD and PRD Districts
if Planning Commission desires. To provide future guided allowance for tiny house development
in Bristol, staff suggests the following amendments to Bristol Zoning Ordinance, and guidance:
1. Update the definition of “multi-family residential” in Zoning Ordinance Section
203 – Definitions as follows – “Building (s) of three or more dwelling units either
attached or detached, including units that are located over one another.”
2. Should revision to the MH district to allow tiny house developments be
considered for completion?
Please contact me with any questions or if I may provide additional information.

___________________________
Heather Moore, AICP

2019 0916

Tiny House Development Discussion

Multifamily Comparative Definitions
Municipality/
Source

Definition

Bristol

Johnson City

Dwelling, multifamily means a
Multifamily building
Residence: designed,
A building
constructed, or
containing reconstructed
three or
and used for
more
more than two
dwelling
dwelling units,
units,
with each
including
dwelling unit
units that
having a
are located common
one over
structural or
another.
load-bearing
wall of at least
ten lineal feet
with any other
dwelling unit on
the same floor
or building
level.

Kingsport

Sullivan
County

Dwelling,
None multiplefamily, means
a building or
portion
thereof
occupied by
more than
two families
or more than
two
housekeeping
units.

Erwin

Dwelling,
Multifamily: A
building or
portion thereof
designed for
occupancy by
three or more
families living
independently of
each other.

The Latest Illustrated
Book of Development
Definitions,
Moskowitz and
Lindbloom
Dwelling, multifamily
– A building
containing three or
more dwelling units,
including units that
are located one over
another. Comment:
Multifamily buildings
include garden
apartments and midand high-rise
apartment buildings.
Dwelling, detached –
A dwelling that is not
attached to any other
dwelling by any
means. Comment:
The detached
dwelling does not
have any roof, wall,
or floor in common
with any other
dwelling unit.

Planning Commissioners are required by TCA (Tennessee Code Annotated) to have four (4) hours of training within one year of
their appointment, and each calendar year thereafter. Also, a minimum of one (1) of the required hours must be training on
property rights. Planning staff will share the Training Hours chart with Commissioners throughout the year to facilitate ease in
reaching the four (4) training hours. Listed below the chart are training opportunities to fulfill that requirement.

Total hours Received

Property Rights (1 hr Required)

Planning Webcast - Behind the Cloud;
Planning for Data Centers

Name

Planning Commission Training Hours 2026

Kelly Graham (Term ends 6/27)

0.0

Mark Webb (Term ends 6/27)

0.0

Tekai Shu (Term ends 6/26)

0.0

Mahlon Luttrell (Term ends 6/28)

0.0

Matthew Slagle -

0.0

Lea Powers -

0.0

Andrew Snyder (Term ends 6/27)

0.0

Jason Booher (Term ends 6/26)

0.0

Michael Schmidt (Term ends 6/26)

0.0

A minimum of 1 hour of property rights training is
required.

Note: If you have any problems viewing the seminars, please let us know so we can find a resolution.

Training Opportunities (Copy and paste to directly access a class.)
•

Planning Webcast Series - https://www.ohioplanning.org/aws/APAOH/pt/sp/webcast_home_page SuggestedSustainable Urban Design: A Comprehensive Approach - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T76Dmq5ZZgg
Mapping the Food Landscape: Using Healthy Food Walk Audits to Assess Local Food Systems – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH65OqwRinw

2024 Ethics Roundup - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0Th9kl4rcE
•

TAPA training webinars – https://tennessee.planning.org/knowledge-center/videos/

From the 2025 TAPA Fall Conference –

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dm0TP9HhlA&list=PL8C3tY3Fn_k4r11aFBP2Uqf-v67hCguIp
•

Robert’s Rules session - https://youtu.be/Z0rGFVIFAro

•

Property Rights training 2024 - https://youtu.be/ZI1-ZRJo21w

•

Property Rights training 2025 - https://youtu.be/us0Ze_dz8V0

January '26 - March '26
March '26 Recorded Subdivisions

Location

Hudson Terrace Phase 1B Section 2 Lots 44-81 & 98Raceday Center Dr.
99
R.D. Music Farm Replat of Lots 4R & 5R, Block 4
Fifth St

Minor/
Major

City/U #
GB
Lots

Major

City

41

Minor

UGB

0

City/
UGB
UGB
UGB
City
City
UGB

#
Lots
1
1
0
3
4

Bell 1.62 AC Property Partition
Bell 1.80 AC Property Partition
Farm Meadows Condo Plat-Phase 1
Cox Farms Shopping Center Replat of Lot 3RR3
Joyce Property Subdivision
Reserve at Leonard Farms Phase 1A Replat of Lot
55AR

Massengill Park
Massengill Park
Highway 394
Hwy 394/Big Hollow
Gray Rd

Minor/
Major
Minor
Minor
Major
Minor
Minor

Oak View Cir

Minor

City

1

K.D. Family Properties, LLC Subdivision of Property

Avoca Rd/Volunteer

Minor

City

1

Fairmont Addition Replat Lots 30, 31, & 32 Block 58
Reserve at Leonard Farms Replat Tract 3 - Phase 1C
Lot 19

Oakwood St

Minor

City

0

Mountain Vista/Creek Side

Minor

City

4

Reserve at Leonard Farms Phase 1A Replat Tract 2B Phase1C New Lots 33 & 34
Creekside/Mountain Vista
Forest Hill III Replat Lots 27, 28, & 3.44 Acres Parcel Spanish Oak Rd

Minor
Minor

City
City

2
0

Minor/
Major
Minor
Major
Major
Minot
Minor

City/
UGB
UGB
City
City
City
City

#
Lots
1
46
28
0
0

Fox Meadows Phase 5A Replat Lots 232 & 233
Mint Dr/Fox Meadows Cir
R.D. Music Farm Replat of Part of 3 Lots 4 5 & 6 Block
Fifth St
4
Godsey's Gateway Replat Lots 1 & 4
Meadow St/Hwy 126
Fairmont Land Co. Replat Lots 2 & 3, Block 7
Pennsylvania Ave
Lakeside Land Improvement Co. Replat of Lots 1-7
Maryland Ave
Block 20

Minor

City

0

Minor

UGB

1

Minor
Minor

City
City

0
0

Minor

City

0

Reserve at Leonard Farms Ph 1A Replat Lot 55AR

Minor

City

1

Feb. '26 Recorded Subdivisions

Jan. '26 Recorded Subdivisions
Shawn Hunt Property
Fox Meadows Phase 5B
Fox Meadows Phase 6
Fox Meadows Replat of Lots 244 & 245 Ph 5A
Fox Meadows Phase 2 Replat of Lot 104

Location

Location
Sweet Knobs Tr/Hwy 394
Wisteria Dr/Zinna Cir
Wisteria Dr/Iris Dr
Mint Dr
Fox Meadows Cir/Wisteria Dr

Oak View Cir

March '26 Approved Site Plan
None

Location

Purpose

February '26 Approved Site Plan
Bristol TN City Parking Lot

Location
327 Sleepy Hollow Rd

Purpose
Parking Lot

January '26 Approved Site Plan
Farmland New Entrance

Location
3187 W. State St

Purpose
Entrance