Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Welcome to the uh February 19th, 2026 meeting of the Mount Juliet Municipal and Regional Planning Commission meeting. Uh it's good as always to see a full househ. Um I will go ahead as we uh we begin our meeting tonight. Uh I apologize for those. I'm sure many of you all were here uh for our January meeting. uh came to the door only to see the notification that we were not able to establish quorum. Uh so I uh at the same time there we we have our responsibilities here. So I would like to uh for any of those that did take the time to show up attend the January meeting only to find out that we did have to cancel our meeting in Louisville Corum. Um my sincerest apologies. Thank you for being involved. Thank you for continuing to follow the project. If you're here for something that was January and that is now February, uh we're grateful for your presence. Look forward to hearing uh your feedback, comments, and concerns as the meeting does progress. So, I just wanted to make a a quick comment for that as we begin our uh February meeting here. Do like to uh to announce as we begin um our quorum requirements. It reads as such. It says, "The presence of five members of the commission shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Chairperson may at his or her discretion wait up to 30 minutes after the scheduled meeting time for quorum to be present. In the event that a member is required to leave a meeting prior to adjournment and the departure causes a loss of quorum, no further official action may be taken until a quorum is restored other than an adjournment. A majority vote of those commissioners present and in no case less than four affirmative votes shall be required to decide any item of uh business requiring action by the commission. So do like to announce those especially if it's your first time attending one of our planning commission meetings. Uh with that being said we will move on. Our first item of business

is to set our agenda. Not aware of any changes or amendments uh this evening. Seeing none, we will set our agenda as stated, as published. Moving on to our next item of business, we'll begin with our staff reports. Uh, Mr. John, planning. I have nothing to say, which is probably a good thing. It means all is normal. Um, good to see everybody. It's been a while.

Yes, sir. Thank you, Shane. Anything from public works? You guys, uh, just few weeks removed from, uh, probably a tall task over there at public works. Yeah, first I want to give a shout out to those guys. Every single one of them. Uh they they kept the city operational through uh through that ice storm under the direction of Matt White and Tim Forham helping out as well. Um I'd like to find somebody else in America as good as those guys because they're the best and they deserve it. They don't like to be talked about, but I want to praise on them a lot because they they are truly the best group of guys that anybody can be working around and the dedication they have to this city is second to none. Um, one project I do want to talk about that they'll be opening bids on tomorrow is 11 dirt road widening. It's a big project been years in the making and uh, uh, I know director Barlo was working on it when I first got to the city and now that Matt's carrying it through. So, it's the, you know, realizing of a big big deal that's going to happen. I know it's going to probably cause a lot of heartache and pain, but in the interim, but it's going to be something that the city needs. And, uh, we'll be they'll be opening bids tomorrow on that. That That's all I've got for tonight. L., thank you.

Yes, sir. That is uh that is great. And I guess uh uh all of the public works staff, the reward for getting the ice and the roads cleared is now uh onto the chippers and tree pickup and removal and debris and get it off the roads and everything else. So, it's been the gift that keeps on giving for uh for many of us out there. And uh yeah, grateful to to be in a city that jumps on it like that. Um I'm one of those that was on Middle Tennessee Electric. So, we're certainly grateful to be Middle Tennessee Electric. I know both NES and Middle Tennessee Electric both services us uh out there and it was kind of uh kind of eye opening and and planning during the uh during the time also a good time where you saw a lot of neighbors and continue to see a lot of neighbors working together and I think that's one of the best things reminds me kind of the tornado period that we went through where everybody just kind of finds a way to lend a hand and if you're out there with a chainsaw in your front yard it's funny how you got so many neighbors that'll continue to come and show up to you and hey can I help you or can I bring you something or what can I do? And and that's a spirit that u that to me uh signifies being in Mount Jul. All right, our uh next item up will be our citizen comments. At this time, we will take citizen comments. The public is welcome and encouraged to make public comment about any item on our agenda. There will be two opportunities for comments. You may speak now or you may speak when the item is presented to the planning commission. We do ask that you limit your comments to three minutes or less. So before we uh we come up for the uh uh citizen comments, do want to make mention of the or right there. Uh if you're here to speak in regards to an item, uh the or means either right now at this opportunity or when the item specifically uh gets tabled for discussion here at planning, I will call for citizen comments in regards to that item specifically. So it's either now or or then. Either one is fantastic by us here. Um, if you're up here speaking,

especially with the full house, we do like to kind of try to stick as close as I can to those three minute comments. If, uh, as you're up here speaking, if you see me kind of just wave my hand like this, um, I'm waving to say hi, but more or less I'm waving to you to to you're you're about one minute left. And so, if you see me kind of raise my hand as you're speaking up there, um, that is kind of the cue to uh, to kind of get your 60-second summary. uh gather your facts, your information, uh continue to speak there. I hate to use the gavvel to stop people from speaking, but we do want to make sure we all lot time for anybody and everybody that chooses to speak to allow them the same opportunity to do so. So, if you see me waving at you, um it is a hello, but it's also a cue to kind of summarize for the final minute. So, with that being said, uh any citizens wishing to make comment at this time, I welcome encourage you to do so. Please come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, we'll move forward to our first item on our agenda. Our first item on our agenda is a 5A to review the minutes from the December 18th, 2025 Magulant Planning Commission meeting. Any amendments, changes, typos, adjustments? Seeing none, I'm looking for a motion in regard to this item on our agenda.

It's a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. So approved. All right. Next item up on our agenda is our consent agenda. Please bear with me. We do have a uh a large one here this evening. First item up is item 6A. It's development letter of credit number 423879800 for canvas at Mount Juliet Park Glenn phase 7 through9 in the amount of 348,000 $536.61 can be released. Item 6B review the final plat for Cedar Creek Estates located at 10:30 Nonville Road. Item 6 C review the final plat for the proposed restaurant located at 1209 Rutland Drive. Item 6 D, review the final plat for McFarland Farms phase 1C located off Old Lebanon Dirt Road and Cedar Drive. Item 6E, review the final plat for Legacy Point at Golden Bear lots 13 and 14 located at 205 Bear Crossing. Item 6F, review the site plan for the Joy Church Hope Center located at 100085 Lebanon Road. Item 6G, review the site plan for the Lynwood Station Amenity Center located at 10 Lee Avenue. Item 6H, review the final plat for Villages of Green Hill located at 13206 Lebanon Road. Item 6 I, review the final plat for Bradshaw Farms phase 3A located off Viviver Lane. Item 6J, review the final plat for Griffith Creekide Estates located off West Division Street. And item 6K, review the final plat for Tomlinson Point phase 6 located at 9434 Lebanon Road. Begin with staff comments. Mr. John, anything from planning?

Nothing other than what you'll find in the conditions. Wonderful. Thank you, Shane. Anything from public works? We recommend approval with our comments. Very well. Thank you. Questions, comments, concerns from the commission. Commissioner Bowman.

Uh, two real hopefully real quick things on 6E. I couldn't get the blueprint to match up with what was put in the memorandum. I'm seeing like lots 10, 11, and this is talking about lots 12, 13, 14. I wasn't sure if the blueprint itself was wrong or or if I'm just interpreting it wrong. Probably a formality, but Good catch. Yeah, I think it's This is the we have furthest but this is the wrong. We had two legacy points. one being a staff review one which is lock

10 and this one that is in your packet is yeah the right report but the plat that is associated with it is not correct

would that be John let me ask you this right here. Would that be something that you guys if we look now if we just pushed it to the back of our agenda at this moment that you could possibly get us copies to review up here because I'm assuming that your comments are towards 13 and 14, but we just need to review the plat that you could possibly get us some copies. If this was a plat from last meeting, the 60 days will pass. So, the commissioner needs to take We need to take action on Very well. Yes. So, let's do that.

Let me pull the commission at this point in time. Uh, would there be any objection uh to us moving item 6E to the back of our agenda to follow uh item 13B in order to get us the correct uh plat to review. See no objection to that. We will move item 6E off of the consent agenda and to the back of the agenda to be heard after um item 13B. Good catch. The only other probably very minor thing that I had was on 6J. Um I saw within the history there were a lot of blanks on dates and approvals and whatnot and that seemed pertinent, but maybe it isn't. We'll look for those. I think they were added. I don't know why. Maybe move this one off to the back. Move that one to the back as well.

6J any u please. Let's go ahead and I think this is the one I was wondering in which direction is the front of the of these homes facing west division. They are right behind it. What was again? The Griffith Creek side estates. Those are alley mode. Yes. A front division. And then the back is the back.

So there's no street or anything in front of that. So the owners will take care of the roads as a private

area. With that being said, let me pull the commission. Any issues uh from the commission with moving item 6J um would be moved to the back of our agenda. Now it would immediately follow item 6E. See no objection to that. We'll move item 6J to the back of our agenda. It will immediately follow item 6E. And I have one more question concerning um the villages of Green Hill located off of um Lebanon Road and is that South Mount Juliet Road?

South Green Hill. Green Hill. Green Hill Road. South Green Hill, not Lev. Um, so it says, um, I'm looking at the PL. I just want to verify that this correct. Um, that section one, lot one rather, is in the middle of that. That's the commercial area. No, the one is residential. Is the commercial area fronting Leman Road. Okay. Did it say?

Okay. So, it says lot one will be for commercial use. Yeah. And I was thinking that that can't be right.

So, lot one is the commercial use. No. No. Okay. So, we're going to change that wordage wording rather. And then lot two is the resident is the commercial. Tyler, did you capture that? Okay. So, it's an error on the plat. Is that correct? Uh, in the Oh, in the not an error in our comment in our staff comments. Yes. Okay. Very well.

Analysis area. Very well. Further questions or comments? Seeing none at this time, let me go ahead and open the floor up to citizen comments. A citizen wishing to make comment about any item on our consent agenda is welcome to encourage you to do so. Please come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments at this time. Do need to close the planning commission meeting in order to open a public hearing. Public hearing is in regards to items 6B, 6 C, 6D, 6E, 6H, 6 I, 6 J, and 6 K, which 6B reads as review the final plat for Cedar Creek Estates located at 10:30 Nonal Road. Item 6 C is review the final plat for the proposed restaurant located at 1209 Rutland Drive. Item 6 D is to review the final plat for McFarland Farms phase 1C located off Old Lebanon Dirt Road in Cedar Drive. Item 6E is to review the final plat for Legacy Point at Golden Bear Lots 13 and 14 located Oh, excuse me. Take that one to the end. Excuse me. That will be at the end of our agenda. Item 6H, which is to review the final plat for Villages of Green Hill located at 13206 Lebanon Road. Item 6 I, review the final plat for Bradshaw Farms phase 3A located off Vivet Road. Item 6K is to review the final plat for Thomas and Point phase 6 located at 9434 Lebanon Road. Anyone wishing to make comment about any of those items during the public hearing is welcome and encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, we'll close our public hearing in and reopen our planning commission meeting and at which time I am looking for a motion in regards to the items on the consent agenda.

Motion to approve. Got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. So approved. Next item up uh on our agenda falls underneath a PUD amendment is item 7A which is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. It's to review the PUD amendment to Golden Bear Place for Wawa located at lot two of Golden Bear Place off Golden Bear Parkway. John planning.

Sure thing. Waw wa convenience store and gas station. It's in the obviously the Golden Bear Place pod. What they're asking for here is three three items. Um one of them is alternate materials in lie of masonry on on the gas canopy. Something that we see frequently as a practical practical hardship putting masonry on a canopy. um staff supports it with the caveat that there be some masonry component on the columns and I suggest suggested in here maybe 25% up from the ground uh you know just dress it up a little bit. The other two are supplemental regulation uh waiverss from for convenience uses. These are ones that we see frequently with uh filling stations like this. And it's CRC zoning in this pud. It's near a commercial interchange. And the reason it was a CRC based zoning in that Golden Bear Pud escapes me for the moment, but the land use here would have would have been CI, commercial interchange. And I bring that up because if if it were to be zoned CI, it would be permitted by right to have the eight pumps be with the relationship being with it being close to the inter the interstate there. Um so what they're asking for is in lie of the eight pumps or in lie of four pumps the code requires it'd be eight pumps with uh two

handles a piece for 16 fueling stations or spots and uh staff supports that in this vicinity for sure. Um, and then the other one is increase the gross floor area of the store. Supplemental rags for convenience stores, cap them at 5,000 square feet. They're asking for 6,500 ft. Um, for reference, uh, 7-Eleven down the road has 11 pumps and 22 spot pump or handles. And uh staff supports that request as well. All all three of them with the caveat of some masonry maybe 25% of the bottom part of the column for the canopy with stone or something something that looks nice.

Very well. Thank you. That's the extent of the request. So staff recommends positive recommendation. Very well. Shane, do you have anything from public works on this one? No, sir. Very well. Questions or comments from the commission? Commissioner Bowman, please. That this has come back before us again and it has that I know it's somewhat aside from this, but it has that left hand in. Was that the BOC thing or because I know we had shot that down the first time and it's back consent at BOC? Yep. Both first and second meeting.

Okay. Thank you, Barbara. Any additional questions, comments? Seeing none at this time, let's go ahead and call for citizen comments. Anyone wish to make comment in regards this item on the agenda, welcome to encourage to do so. Please come to the microphone and name and address for the record. See no citizen comments at this time. Looking for recommendation in regards to this item on our agenda.

Motion for a positive recommendation and a second. It's a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. So approved. Next item up on our agenda falls underneath a preliminary master development plan. Um this is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners as well. It's to review the preliminary master development plan, including a reszone from RS40 to RS20 PUD for the Keel subdivision located at 115 Oakmont Drive. start with uh planning on this. Miss J.

Ella, this is a plan that you all had seen previously, I believe in December, November, December back of last year. Um not much has changed from the previous iteration that you all had received. Um this proposal is still for a 15 single lot subdivision um with RS20 PUD zoning. The reszone request is compliant with the city's land use regulations. The overall density is still at 1.33 units per acre and it's well below the maximum permitted of 2.2 units per acre. So the density is definitely less than um what they are allowed. The average lot size is 22,000 square foot with a minimum lot size of approximately 11,000 square foot. Um the applicant has met all the requirements of the preliminary master development plan checklist that is required by um the planning department. One of the um concerns that was addressed previously was um over the cemetery. This applicant has gone and met with the T, excuse me, the Tennessee Historical Commission. Um they've even had a representative of the state come out on site and walked this entire property with the applicant um to determine if there are in fact any graves. They've done a lot of research, deed research, trying to find uh previous heirs to any of the potential people that are buried in that subdivision. They could not find any markers, any gravestones. Um any indication that anybody is buried there amidst um very deep research done with this cemetery. They have given several provisions of which by um a adjoining property owner could maintain a subdivision, excuse me, cemetery, but there are some very strict provisions within that. You can't just outright take over a cemetery because it's not um allotted to you. It's under deed restriction. So in lie of being able to find heirs, which they've not been able to find any yet, one of the provisions

that they could u maintain the cemetery or take over the maintenance of it is to allow a uh boy scout troop to do it. There are some provisions under TCA also to it can be deemed a nuisance by the city and county um and then therefore a adjacent property owner can take over the maintenance, but there are still very strict regulations by which that can be done. So um in saying that we do have all the information provided to us that we can lay out as part of the provisions or conditions of approval with this as to how this cemetery can be maintained. The applicant has um stated that they are willing to do whatever the commission would like as far as the maintenance of this. They they express interest in taking care of it. Um I know this has been a very vital um topic with the community there on Oakmont. It's very important to them rightfully so. So, we want to make sure this cemetery is is done right by whether or not we can find the heirs. We still want to make sure it's maintained and given the grace and respect that it deserves. Um, also too, they did um get rid of one of the lots um because that had been a concern of the commission as well that there was too many lots within this subdivision. Um, another requirement too that we've not seen yet is they do have to have 10% improved open space and it does not appear that they have met that at this time. So that is another condition of approval that we would like to add back into there that they do meet that 10% required open space. So but at this time everything else is pretty much the same. Nothing has changed with the density really the lot sizes or anything at this time. But other than that the cemetery and open space seem to be the major concerns at this point.

Shane public works just to recap as it came in December. Um the uh sewer availability has to be requested and there are two options for this site to be served with sewer. Uh staff recommends that the gravity sewer option be utilized going north through Oakhall to connect and I've caveed uh my comment number B that if there are any topographical restrictions on the site that they then go with grinders. Uh we just want to cut down on maintenance for the future uh with our SE department. So trying to build gravity as much as we can. Um then note number 10, we did include a a disclaimer on flood plane if any lots are included within the flooding lot, which I believe they did correct that. We just wanted to be transparent with the staff report to show that uh FEMA approval will be required if you got any building on boards within the flood plane. that I'll hand it over to Todd for a recap on the roads.

Todd, please.

Uh, this subdivision's asking for a few waiverss. Uh, pretty common ones specifically related to culde-sacs. Uh, the existing Oakmont includes 15 lots. You're allowed in our subdivision regulations 25 on the culde-sac. Now, they are proposing 16. um which obviously puts them over 25. Uh the Oakmont's already non-compliant for length and they are asking to to extend it further. Um I believe the exact lengths are on the cover sheet. Um yeah, they're they're looking to go from about 1,600 ft to about 2400 ft. Um to mitigate that request, staff asked that they provide a temporary stub to the Martin property to the south in case that were to that were to develop. It was the largest track of land to get to Card Road to provide to points of entry to Oakmont. Uh but I I think we there was some discussion at the the last meeting about that. I can't remember which which way that went. Um, this development did not have to submit a traffic impact study because they generated fewer trips than the threshold required. They did prepare a safety study evaluating Oakmont at uh, North Mount Juliet Road, including a site distance analysis using T dot standard that site distance is compliant at at that intersection. Thank you guys. Open it up. Uh questions, comments from the commission. Commissioner Franklin. Well, um yeah, on the improved open space since we're so all over the map, so to

speak, when it comes to amenity packages, I mean, everything from trails to swing sets to I mean, can we really can we really approve this? just essentially saying you got to have some and not name what it is. I mean I just I guess just a question. I mean I I don't know how we can just generally say that's a condition when in the history of this board has been pretty like I say all over the place.

Approval and have it required by FMDP. you know, have them sus it out with staff to see what kind of of improved open space they're willing to provide and then that way it can be a determination made once it comes to FMDP and then that way y'all can vote it up or vote it down at that time.

Well, the the I guess the only question I'd have on that is the preliminary master development plan has to have sufficient information to disclose. I mean, we we'll have to decide on the final master development plan whether it's in substantial compliance and we won't have anything from which to compare to. It won't be any way to make a determination at that point whether or not it's a I guess my question is I mean I would feel more comfortable if I knew what it was. I mean I'm not I'm not trying to build a three story swimming pool over here. It's a very small planet development. I just whether it's a walking trail or a bike ride. I mean, I don't know what whatever they want to propose, but I mean, I think we we're going to have to hold them to accountable when they come in here on final, and I don't see how we can do it if we don't have anything to hold them to.

I I definitely would recommend you could ask um representation to see what they're willing to provide and put it in the conditions of approval tonight. And then if it's something um such as walking trails or you know playground amenities or whatever if it's something that can be more honed in on but at least we have as you said the general basis of what is being proposed and if y'all are willing to accept it or not. Okay. You said standards 10%. Yes sir. That's a sign that would be like all of lot 101. That's a significant amount this would change in its entirety. Yeah. with 10% of this being improved space.

Yeah. Within the putt, it is a condition of improved open space defined as yeah necessary and appropriate for the benefit and enjoyment of the occupants of such development. That's what offers I noticed that in these letters from residents that they had called out that uh home in lot 101 is appearing to be unused. Maybe that is a good location for that 10% improved space. But again, don't know what what the story is with that. So,

Commissioner Jobs representation can maybe explain what they're going to do with that house, but I was going to tell if if the board if if you haven't read that letter from that guy about the the law, it was really enlightening to see that Jill. was it was really something because that was something I didn't know. So, if I had talked to the attorney, we sure can hold somebody accountable to do something against the law. So, uh there's some options in there that that Jill read about and that kind of thing. I also want to say that that this development is really going in my opinion beyond what they have to dealing with that cemetery because what I've learned is is that cemetery is not on this property. That's a whole separate piece of property, which that means it butts up against someone else. We're so used to a piece of I mean a cemetery being in the middle of our development. You and I or you know there's other people that's been very very strong on saying you've got to fence that whole thing and etc etc and provide in this situation. It butts up to someone else's property too and nobody's ever done that. They've been a they've been a ride away to get in there. This development is proposing to have a fence along theirs. And I if I lived in one of those lots, I would want that. I live in a subdivision where there's also a a very historic um u cemetery and those houses there's no fence. They just a lot of them bought that and didn't even know there was a cemetery there. And um um so I think they're they're going well beyond what they would really have to. They're providing some parking for that, too. I'm not for sure about that rideway. I talked to someone in the city and I don't remember. Um I I thought that rideway went through that Church of Christ property on Kurd Road. Is that correct?

It appears it's it's just part of the parcel stretches down the Kurd road, but does it not go next to that church? It does, I believe. So that Okay. Okay. So, if he provides an access from the street in this subdivision, will that still have to remain down through there? I don't think you can abandon the easement, can you? Well, could that not be used also as green space to go all the way down to the road? We don't have sidewalks right there on Kurd Road, but that doesn't mean we won't someday, but that would be it. It might be able to be utilized for a path or something. I'm just talking out loud about it. We're talking about green spot. We're talking about this 10%.

I agree with you. It's part of the parcel that just extends to Kurd road. I I mean I'm not I don't I'm not sure there's an easement or anything on it even. I I it's just unless unless unless public works knows otherwise, but it is part of the land. Oh wow. So it's not an ement it's actually piece of this property. Okay. Yeah. disagree that would go all the way to Kurd road. Has like a flag lot that goes all the way down. It's not It's actually part of itself. The actual rideway is part of this product. That would be a good use for that. I think

not the rightway. It is just the parcel of the cemetery parcel, not our parcel in question. So, be able to access it as part of that cemetery. Yes. The cemetery connects to the road. It's a flag lot. Yeah. Yeah. But they want to put a a I mean, you know, I mean, yeah. So, yeah. And and I'll reverse that then. That was in that property, but it also that cemetery also butts up to other pieces of property, too. Um,

and since it is ownership, it's going to be hard to do anything. So, again, I applaud them for putting that fence around that. And now they've got all that green space enough they want to utilize it. So, that probably adds to what we were not counting, but they don't own the green space. Yeah, they can't they can't use the green. That's just the Well, she said that it's part of it went to the Kurd road. It's a separate property, but it's a separate part, separate property belongs to the cemetery. So, they have no use of that. They can they have no J. Okay. Yeah, just as an easement, but but they just can't provide it off another street is what I'm saying now. So, you know, nobody's going to park down there to walk up through there to go to that cemetery.

And I don't know the history of the church. Uh yeah, nobody's going to walk that far. I don't know the history of the church, but I mean, take this this and reading that letter and everything that it could have been something initially done as part of the the church. I mean, I don't think anybody really knows. That's part of the point of of where we're at here today with it. Todd, you get some input, please.

All right. More questions than input, unfortunately. Um, so the the cemetery owns that section of the flag lot, which means this development doesn't. We're now putting a public road across it, across land that they don't own. Can we do that? That would be Miss Bernett. Not unless the development got across it, I guess. So, you'd have to sit right now. That's cemetery property.

So, we have a cemetery that's owned by someone, but no one knows who. dividing this lot in half and with without permission I don't know if we can get to the a public road across exactly or a private road even for that I don't I don't know how they're access utilities you're going to have to cross it either which way so you're public road public utilities one of the way it's public and nobody grant public access so it's deemed a nuisance though because nobody can explained that

I've never looked at eminent domain across the cemetery that beyond that.

Let's go and call for representation please. Name and address for the record. Join join the quandry now. Associates address is 302 North Calwell Street of Paris, Tennessee. So, um, regarding the flag lot, that, uh, that is an easement going through there. We have surveyors on staff that we did our own, uh, boundary survey on this and determined that it was an easement. Um, and to my knowledge, uh, of course, we we stamped the easement as far as going through our property, but my memory serves correct. It goes all the way down to Kurd Road like everybody stated.

So, it's an easement. That's right. Across your property, but you don't own that piece right there then, do you? Well, it's our property, but we allow the cemetery to to have use that for access. Is that an accurate? It does not appear to be an accurate statement, but if he's got a legal survey. I'd have to see the fair day and look at the register based on the GIS that is a flag. GIS would be wrong. Yeah, and you're right. I believe the tax shows it to be a flag lot like that, but I believe the deed says says otherwise.

I can't answer that question right now. Oh yeah, here we are again at another quandry on your deal. I can provide you guys this the stamp survey that that we have. Yeah, I think that'd have to be submitted to uh uh to our city attorney for review and approval to make sure because yeah, we couldn't grant uh can't build a cross piece of property that nobody owns. Oh yeah, that'd be big trouble. That's right. That'd be big trouble.

Yeah, that'd be no problem. Yeah, let me go ahead because it sound like you you may have to defer to resolve this issue because I'm not sure that we can really take action without a review from the city attorney on this. You've heard several concerns both from staff and a few members of the planning commission. I actually want to address one or two myself real quick just so at least that you got the feedback right here uh in regards this or or you can hear as many comments as possible. So, should you defer that you can finally have an opportunity to hopefully get us to where we can take action upon this uh at a meeting and especially if you're driving from Paris, that's a nice little drive for you back and forth. Yes, sir.

So, be conscious about that. One of my thoughts as I as I was looking at this um you've got challenging MBSLs um and footprints to build houses on your proposed lot sizes out here. Then you got the challenge of your additional 10% green space. And then if we put a fence around, it's dependent upon whether or not we apply a condition of uh of to supply parking as well for them. One of the things that you're definitely missing on it as well as a male kiosk station right here.

Um and my concerns were of this temporary culde-sac that's coming down through there and really what it's doing on that. Um, I kind of I'm not sure what a bad thing about getting old is your eyes fade along with it really quick. Um, I can't read your lots down here on the temporary 202 triangle. Okay.

So, it's kind of a a slight reconfiguration. Basically, it's an elimination of that temporary culde-sac and and kind of a a shallow horseshoe as you come through right there. Uh, and that gives you additional potential green space between the main road as you loop around like that that you can call your open green space.

Um, then directly to what I'm going to call north of your where your temporary culde-sac road meets your main road right there, Oakmont. Uh, that lot right there definitely presents its challenges of how in the world you're going to get a house on that particular lot. Again, that looks like a very advantageous place and an opportunity for parking, mail kiosk, open space, potential amenity. Looks like a grand opportunity with and I'm happy to give you what I've even got right here.

Uh or I can provide it to staff so when you discuss it with them, they would have an opportunity to look at this. Um and it's just a reconfiguration because I know that staff made comments on it. I've heard from letters and emails and stuff. uh concerns with what's going to happen with this temporary s culde-sac. What are we going to do? Um it appears in my opinion that it actually creates more room and greater opportunity to build what I'm hoping that could be built on these. Um so I can provide that to staff should you set up another meeting with them. They would have uh um they would have that with them and kind of my notes that would follow along with it. Uh, and that's just my notes out here, not the rest of the commission. Um, one of the additional comments that, uh, would be near and dear because I'm sure that we got a lot of people here from, uh, Oakall and Timber Trail, uh, becoming now one of our larger neighborhoods here, particularly situated in the center of Mount Juliet. Um, I know one of them, uh, one of their biggest concerns that I've heard has been in regards to the tree buffer and everything, um, and the protection of the existing, uh, greenery at S. I'm sure that's a staff comment. Um, couple of my comments were going to be to make sure we don't have erosion control that lies within the buffer. Uh, possibly even protecting that buffer uh further with a uh with a chain link fence as you go through the development. And then as you turn it over and develop each lot, you can remove it uh as you uh as you work down through that. Uh but something to kind of pro provide the protection and ensure some of those neighbors that we're not going to get into those uh those particular areas. So those are really my my only comments right there. I think that and then you know as as everybody would like to know what is going to happen with that old existing house up there. My understanding is not in the fairest of condition out there and of course some would choose to repurpose a foundation and some would choose to tear it down. But you know it's kind of an an eitheror that would

give you guys the option as a uh as development should it be approved out there. Um I too agree with Commissioner Franklin uh that if we are adding green space and amenities um we're going to see a project later that is in significant compliance with uh PMDP that we saw and we're hearing it tonight for final master development plan. Uh again in my opinion it doesn't look like what I originally wanted to approve uh become a little hot button of mine individually personally here. Um, so I'd like to be able to PMDP approve what I'm going to see at final master development plan. And that way it's clear and concise to the commission, to the board of commissioners, and particularly all of our residents out here to um that if they're that maybe the only time they see it is here to make sure that, you know, that might be their only impression, then they drive down it 10 years later like, man, that doesn't look anything like it. So try to do that right there. Um, I think you've got some merit, few tweaks and can possibly get there, but definitely got to figure out what's going on with

is this an easement? Is this actual flaglight property? Uh, and I would assume if you got a legal survey um from a surveyor that that denotes that it is actually your property and it is an easement that Miss Bernett could decipher that. I can answer the question right now. I just pulled it from the register of deeds. says that there is a rightaway easement for public travel from the east side of the cemetery southward along the east side of the colored church of Christ road to Kurd road said right away being 20 ft wide along the cemetery and 30 feet wide thereafter so it is an east so they own the property so therefore they can continue to proceed I would like to look at it a little further but I did find that one document

okay and get a copy of their survey as well to Just be 100% on the Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Commissioner Jobs, please. And if that's so then, which I believe it is, then they could use that as green space. Correct. Well, it's an ement for right away for public access, but I know and it's a rideway, but most people's not going to park down there and walk all the way up there when they've got an easier way to get there. Still access to the cemetery. I don't think our rightway is usually counted as green. So, got some

I looked on that letter and saw if I recognized any of the names there. There was a series on there. Yeah. Then all the people that's listed here are all dead, but they have grandchildren, children. Yeah. On Cur Road. There's two two location on Curry Road that I know that Mr. Martin named here. Okay. Is his grandkids. Okay. If you looking to find them, I noticed one one last name on the original owners in this letter was a McFarland and the county historian was a McFarland Farland. Anybody else called that?

And and the Robinsons live still some of the Robinson grandkids still live on Curry Road. Okay. Is that might the name might be Foster instead of Martin? Okay. Because of marriage. Larry, do you know the the Henry Cersei? Pardon? Do you know the Henry Cersei? Yeah, I know Henry Cersei. That's he's one of the owners. Yeah, he did. Is he? Well, here's here's are his uh are his heirs still his heirs uh I don't know where they are very much. They used to live over here on Clemens Road. Yes, sir. Remember? Yep. If you remember,

but I think they all they sold the property. I don't know where they are.

Commissioner Rass, please. I've got two comments. one is a request I guess uh with the blessing of public works along that that southern culde-sac stub um just from personal experience I mean it's a temporary but it's probably going to be temporary for many many many years I'd prefer to see sidewalk go all the way around it just continuation around so people are taking walks they can just continue on that

um the other point um and I'm going to ask Shane this Um, typically every development we see and they're either requesting grinders or we're just making a clear point that they don't we don't accept grinders is that just want to be clear that is our exception. If there's a hardship where they ab absolutely have to have grinders, they can show that, but it it shouldn't be just a matter of practice. Correct. Correct. if when if or when gravity sewer is accessible. Okay.

There's just areas in town that don't have gravity sewer. That's I'd say a hardship or topography. But but in this case, they do have access. They would have to obtain easements, but there is gravity sewer to the north. I believe it's on the Okal Timber Trail HOA property. Okay. I' I'd like to reinforce that then. No riders. If they've got access, get to it. No need to have them there.

Further questions, comments at this time. I think it would be the desire of staff that I can tell right now and our city attorney to opinion on this easement before we continue to proceed. That be correct and accurate statement. So, with that, would you be willing to uh to present a one-mon deferral? Allow provide staff with with that information. I'll provide my notes as well as full comments. I think you've gathered all comments and maybe maybe one more month later, come back and see us.

Yeah, that'd be all right. I do have one question um regarding the amenities. U believe you were asking you'd like to see an idea of what to expect. Um how would you like to see that as far as plans goes? I mean, we've got some ideas, but do you just want to like have a note in stating, you know, what kind of amenities we had in mind or or, you know, plan to have or Do you want to address that, Commissioner Frank? Well, well, me personally, I I'm not um I was more on the technical side of not wanting to see a final master development plan and not have anything to measure to. Staff's pretty good at at recommending things like that. I mean, they're maybe too good sometimes, some developers say, but uh I bet I bet they could offer you some suggestions.

Yeah, the biggest reasons for for the the locations of the two green spaces, they're kind of in lower areas, and we're going to utilize those for detention and then have the amenities kind of in that as well and the available space left in. Yeah, we really just want to see it on the actual blueprints and whatnot.

Yeah, I'd have to agree with that statement. Very well. One month deferral would be good. Granted, thank you. Thank you. is to review the preliminary master development plan PUD including a reszone from RS40 to RS20 PUD for the KE subdivision located at 115 Oakmont Drive. That is a granted one month deferral uh for that project. That being said, our next uh uh project up uh for on our agenda falls underneath land use plan amendments and reszone. This is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. It is to review the land use plan amendment from medium density residential to town center located at 107 Timber Drive.

Miss Jim,

um this subject property that we are talking about has road frontage on not only North Mount Juliet Road but also Oakall and Timber Trail. Um the primary uh entrance for the subdivision or this parcel is off of uh typically supposed to be off of Oakall Drive, at least for a subdivision. Um there this was the initial home of this farm that created the old call and timber trail subdivisions there. Um the property is approximately 5 acres. The request is for both a land use amendment because the current land use the front portion of the property that fronts Mount Juliet Road approximately 1 acre currently uh under the land use map is town center. The back half of the property which is probably three4s of it I would say approximately four three and a half to four acres is showing as medium density residential. The request for the land use amendment is to um do a land use map amendment and have the entire 4.92 acres um under town center. that would be consistent with properties along uh North Mount Juliet Road um and also um on both sides of North Mount Juliet Road on the east and west sides of it. So I didn't know if you want to start with the land use map amendment to begin with and then there's a reason to follow as well to vote on them separate or to speak of them. Uh they're on our agenda together. They're on the agenda together, but y'all typically do vote on the land use amendments separately because this partially complies with our land use.

What would be the will of the commission? Hear them together. Hear them both together. Any objection? Let's continue on. We'll hear them together.

Okay. The uh zoning for the property currently is shown as CTC on the front and then the rear portion again the approximately three and a half to four acres is uh AR40. as I said that belong to the farm that created this that entire subdivision. They are just requesting the zoning um to match with their requested land use of commercial town center. So they are able to market this property as a commercial in its entirety. There are no set plans at this time per the applicant, but they are going to be able to have that marketing potential of the entire parcel because it is confusing. And we do have several of these throughout the city. Um, and we have seen this in past president where they do incorporate the entire land use onto the parcel itself.

May I May I also add if you go on the south side of Oak Hall, the land use designation for that whole portion. So basically directly south of this this this property, that's all neighborhood commercial. So it's a commercial land use on the south side of Oakall. Um, and if you look to the east, the bulk of this parcel just fronts Timber Trail Drive. There isn't a lot of commercial area that's going to be adjacent to, you know, not separated by the road at least. 601, 603, those will be the ones that the lots adjacent to the commercial. Of course, if it gets resounded to commercial, it's subject to all buffering requirements found and commercial. So, I I would say the impact to the east is relatively low.

Very well. Let me go ahead and ask I think I know the answer to this, but Shane, anything from public works? No. Very well. Thank you. Uh, let's open it up. Questions, comments from the commission. Seeing none, uh, let's go ahead and call for representation this project. Uh, can we please come to the microphone? Name and address for the record.

Sweet 204. um engineer on the project on behalf of the developer and uh everything that staff has stated is accurate to to date and I'm here if you have any other questions though. So no clear user at this time. This is basically just the combination and attempt to clean and make it all one. Exactly. Like I said, like Phil said, it's it's a little bit more confusing whenever you market different land uses and different zonings. And I think CTC is the um the more broad commercial zoning for the city. So that's what they're trying to go for. If you see someone

who looks at this area and they see that they may shy away and go somewhere else. Yeah. So we need it this way so that it's very marketable outside the city for someone else to come in. Sure. Yeah. Makes it kind of diluted. I do have one question. Commissioner Franklin, please. Is a mixeduse uh is is is high density or multifamily? It's not available on anything on this small track, would it? So on a mixeduse, there wouldn't be any RM8 or RM16 could possibly come here. Right. Correct.

Any further questions, comments? still a little bit confused about which part of this is is up against North Mount Julia Road. I know I it's it's labeled as 3155 Mount Juliet Road. It's got a like on my map like

it should I gota Okay. All right. Understand.

Maybe it was a combination of the parcels. At one point we had did approved development on that at one point and I think it's since expired now. Okay. With that? Yeah. Very well. Thank you. Let's go ahead and open this uh this item up for one second, please. Commissioner Ras,

I'm being slow here. Um just just for clarity, can you explain the difference between town center neighborhood commercial? What what are what are the differences from a high level? We'll start with town center designed to provide a wide range of commercial uses concerned with retail trading, consumer services, eating, drinking places, financial institutions, and offices. things like that. Neighborhood commercial districts are intended to provide locations for retail and personal service operations serving a limited market area and engage in retail sale of goods and/or services from the site of frequently and reoccurring needed items for personal consumption or household use. It's a good question. I think being fronting on Mount Juliet Road CTC does make sense. the major commercial thorough affair. Okay. Thank you. Questions? Any further questions, comments? Well, thank you. Let's go and call for citizen comments in regards to this item on our agenda. Anyone wishing to make comments, welcome, encouraged to do so. Please go to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. I'm I'm Dave Fountain. I live 704 Timber Oak Drive. It's hard to hear you guys out here. We can't hear you back here. So when you hawk on your mics, it just you can't even hear. But uh anyway, I've been in Mount Juliet 16 years. Been 13 years in Timber Trail. I brag on this because it's probably the quietest neighborhood around. I'm the vice president of HOA there. So I do know what's going on. that big area out

there. If you if any of you remember March the 2nd, 2020 had a big table and tent out there that was going to do something. March the 3rd, remember what happened? It blew the table and tent and everything away. So, nothing ever happened. We thought, praise the Lord, it's not enough going to build the service or something there. That's my question. I know the developer said didn't know what it was going to build yet. But the service station, I mean, anything that's really busy like that, I would vehemently oppose that and all. And I speak for everybody on the HOA board and a lot of neighbors in the area. I know you don't know what's going to happen when you change it, but several things is going to have to happen around it. Uh, originally the rumor was I was going to put in an assisted living home. That would have been so bad for a service station, 24-hour care, Lord forbid. Let me just say I would I would not ever see that at all. The traffic and the noise is enough like it is. So getting in and out of that road unless you put light further down the hill there is going to be near impossible. Architect owns that house right on the corner across from Bowwow right there. I don't think he's going anywhere. So I just leave that to you guys to come up with something because I'd really like to know what's going to go in there.

We don't know either. You got any kind of time frame? I think that uh I'd have to defer to what the applicant just uh expressed to us that they're doing it to clean it up and allow them to market it as one whole property. That way it's not diluted where with multiple land use uh um items over top of it. So it is all underneath one uniform uh zoning. Just hinging off what somebody else said about uh sewer drains trying in from Oakmont through Oakh Hall. When they said sewer, they talked about sanity sanitation sewer. Are they talking about water drain off? Sanitary.

Sanitary. Yes, sir. Okay. Because the water drains off whole call goes into migratory bird pond that we've got on the property there at Timber Trail. So, uh that that concerned me, but uh there's only two ways in and out of that neighborhood. I don't want to create more traffic going out the back way off Davis Drive. So, I'm really anxious to see what what what the developer is going to do. So, I hope that news can get out so just we don't get blindsided. Yeah. As uh as we would be interested as well. That's for sure

because I mean you live here longer than I have obviously, but Mount Juliet's got two roads, one east, one west, one north, one south. Golden Bears took a lot of traffic off of that area which makes a difference. You go to other towns, even smaller and older towns. Uh, for instance, Cookville built north and south. He must have five roads going out north and south. I know you're not going to go blow through somebody's house over here and blow it off in division street and go back to the interstate. That's not going to happen. But that's a that's a problem to it because certainly we got a light there with traffic. So, that's all I got. Yes, sir.

Thank you. I agree. I've got a lot of personal friends over in Oakall and Timber Trail uh that are uh near near and dear to me as well. Just as a clarification on just because I don't remember this and come on up real quick while I'm asking staff this. I don't ever recall any kind of a service station ever being proposed on that property. Have we ever seen anything like that?

No. the uh northern parcel um the portion of the 3155 and then also 3215 North Mount Juliet Road originally had a land use change from neighborhood commercial to to commercial town center because they were going to do the assisted living facility there. There has not been a service station to my knowledge and okay yeah I've been in the department for many years and it's there's never been a service station there. That's what I mentioned to Commissioner Giles as well as we were up here that I remember the assisted living which I thought would be a great idea and use for the property but I don't I was just clarifying I didn't I did not recall service station on that. So the uh please name and address for the record.

Okay sure John Suada 6003 Crest View Court which is there in Timber. So, we live very close to this parcel and when we moved into the area and I looked at the zoning maps, it looked to me like the portion that's agricultural residential is sort of a buffer zone between Timber Trail and the commercial the CTC, you know, strip along Mount Juliet Road, which makes sense. But if that were to turn into a commercial enterprise directly adjacent to the Timber Trail neighborhood, I think that would be detrimental, you know, to the quality of life there, property values, um, to the noise level. So, you personally, I'm opposed to this proposal because since we don't even know what might go in there, it's opening the door to something that, you know, could be detrimental to the neighborhood.

Thank you. Let me go ahead and ask staff real quick because that'll help uh answer that question there. um buffer classification when you have to go commercial against a residential. It's a class D buffer which is our most intensive requirement and

that we impose and so hopefully should something come up it's it's the our most intensive that get into can't touch any of the trees can't disturb the property kind of a thing and and almost similar to what I made mention of that residential property is my concern because of friends and family and whatnot that I know in your great neighborhood over there is uh maintaining the what is a green space or our designated buffer requirement right there. Try not to do anything to disturb that to maintain it as it is. Um what is the 50 feet? Is that is that a class D? How how big is a class D? Yeah, probably went a little bit big on that, didn't I?

It's usually 20 feet with vegetation and a and a fence, but it could be wider based on the type of material you put in the amount of material put into it. So, it depends on the situation. Okay. If you want it to be wider, it can be or if they put more material in it, given the circumstance, it could be 20 feet with a fence. Um, but that's the minimum. Um, and it's ba, you know, it would be based on the specific, okay, how it how the site plan or whatever comes forward and ends up looking.

Hopefully, John, hopefully it gives you a little bit of information towards that. I know it's something that we try to be conscious of particularly should something develop like that commercial and being adjacent to your residential that um try to pay real close attention to uh is that preservation and quality. Commissioner Giles, please. And also if it comes in as a PUD, we're going to have jurisdiction over that and have a lot of them to make decisions on some of the the buffer type stuff. And even if it's straight zoning, correct me if I'm wrong, we could also ask them to do some more stuff. For example, my business, I put a double fence. I put one in the back and I put one in front and I totally enclosed it in which keeps the noise down from the subdivision behind. When I did that, there was a complaint come into the city because what's our job doing? Well, it cost a lot more money, but yet they don't hear that noise as much because we've got two fences,

you know, and um they probably don't hear us doing music at the office either. So, um but um so there's there's we can ask for that and and people can come out to subdivision saying, "Hey, would you do some more some more buffering besides just the the 20 or 30 feet?" And most of the time developments are are they don't mind doing some stuff. I mean they know it's going to come up for approval. So please I just want to confirm you are correct though the section the standard D section is 50 ft wide. Okay. Yeah. Longevity does give you something. Come on please. Next. Yes sir. Name and address for the record.

Yes sir. Uh Daniel Sutton. I'm the property owner of 4010 Timber Ridge Court over there in Timber Trail. Second everything that's been said already. Um, and the biggest unease that I have here is the sheer not knowing what is going to happen with it. I would have been perfectly fine with that retirement development community going in. That would have been great. Would been nice and quiet. Um, the property itself is situated on a hill. It slopes upwards from Mount Julie and then sloped downward into um Timber Trail. And even though I'm not a direct lot share, I'm a couple lots removed over there in the culde-sac. If you had a two-story building, I'd be able to see it from my property. There's an awful lot of people who go in and out of there. And I do think it would affect the curb appeal, just the feel of the neighborhood, not to mention bringing in potentially additional traffic. It really for me boils down to what is going to go here. And I know we don't have that answer. Um the concern that I have here is that the property owner is future planning. The developer is getting a theatic compiling done, but the homeowners are left with this big hanging question. And I would submit to the commission that rather than reszoning now, if we just let it stand until we had more concrete plans, that would give the homeowners a better opportunity to respond upon the impact of the community. Thank you.

Thank you. Any additional citizen comments this time? Only one chance. Only one chance. I'm sorry about that. Only one chance. That being said, we'll close this in comments. Uh, and at which time I'm looking for a recommendation in regards to this item on the agenda. Motion for recommendation.

It's a motion for a positive recommendation. That's a motion. I'll second it. It's a motion and a second for a positive recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against is a positive recommendation. Next item up on our uh agenda uh also falls underneath uh uh land use plan amendments and reszone. Oh, no, no, it doesn't. Excuse me. We're on item B. There we go. Next item up is falls underneath final master development plan site plans. Item 10 A. It is to review the final master development plan site plan for village at Pleasant Grove phase 2 vintage Vines located at 855 Pleasant Grove Road. Mr. John this is a this is a final master development plan and a site plan and this is for phase two of the villages of Pleasant Grove called that phase is called vintage vines. I know there's been some confusion about that in the past, but we've got it figured out. Um, as you alluded to earlier, this is another it's another it's an FMDP of which you saw a preliminary master development plan a while back. It's probably in here 2021. This is for phase two. This consists of the residential component of phase 2, the two out parcels that you see towards the north along old along Pleasant Grove Road, not part of this particular FMDP and site plan. And as we talked mentioned before, I have in here 8-03

the criteria in the code for which determines substantial compliance between an FMDP and a PMDP. And as you can see in the staff report that is accommodated there is there's nothing that violates those those requirements. Um, some of the things you'll see obviously the building shapes and the locations have been tweaked a little bit. Uh, also 20 of these residential units in the PNBP were were town home units along the south uh, drive there kind of where it connects to phase one around the church. Those units have been captured in the multifamily buildings now. So, there's no longer the pound home component, but I don't think I had a lot of other issues with this. Not not that that was an issue, but I don't think there was a lot of other differences that warrant any discussion um or any problem with code uh compliance. Um and we do recommend approval of both final master development plan by time with the conditions listed and we have any questions. Great.

Very well ch anything from uh public works. Our comments were minor in nature and we recommend approval uh with our comments. Very well. Please John, I just wanted to comment that I believe the applicant would like to speak too. Yes, sir. Any uh questions, comments from the commission at this time? I'm just concerned about the Pleasant Grove Road and the number of units. Do we have a timeline on this? Is this forthcoming or uh to be I'm sure he's going to explain that to us in just a moment. But uh yeah,

that's a concern timeline versus access to what's going to be down the road, Central Pike and that curvy road until it gets done. Um, so yeah, let's go ahead and uh call for representation this item on the agenda and name and address for the microphone.

Uh, good evening. Matt Gardner, 4603 Skymont Drive, Nashville, Tennessee. Um, thank you for the opportunity to speak. Uh, to answer your question, we are shooting for uh, roughly a year from now to break ground. Uh, so very end of 26 or beginning of 27 to break ground on this phase. Um, one of the things that passed, I guess a week ago, Monday, uh, during the BOC was we shifted some of our off-site um, improvements uh, to help at the request of um, uh, public works staff to go ahead and do the widening of Pleasant Grove Road consistent with the city's plan in front of our parcel uh, and also in front of the church um, assuming the uh, the city gets those um, the right of way from the church figured out. Uh so to that traffic point, we're we're planning on doing that as part of a uh PUD modification that the BOC finally approved a week ago. Um kind of to John's point, um we you know the plan is substantially similar to what you had or substantially the same on uh for our original PUD um and PMPP. The difference of the site plan actually has more to do with um uh the Army Corps of Engineers than anything else. Um when we went and got this preliminary master development plan approved back in 21 uh you can see I think it's the uh the third page of the packet um it has it shows a stream through the site um that was uh the state did not call that a blue line stream but the Army Corps of Engineers did. So we had to leave that as a buffer. Since then, the Supreme Court has changed the rules that the uh Army Corps of Engineers went by to bring it a little bit more in line with Tennessee. Good job, Tennessee. And so that blue line stream does no longer exist. And so because of that, we were able to capture that space more and kind of keep our site more contained and not have the

town houses that um were further away from our amenity spaces than we really wanted them to. But that was the way the topo and the site plan worked. So it allowed us to kind of consolidate the multif family piece a little together. Where the multif family is generally is in the same place as it was in building one in the original PMDP, excuse me. Um commercial parcels are the same. Um you should be seeing in the next couple of months a FMVP for the Papa Joe house on the northwest corner. It's um we they just approved a elevations this morning on that. So, that should be coming along um also, but that is a separate pro uh process from from this one. Um any questions that you guys may have, I'm happy to answer.

This is not a 55 and over. No, ma'am. Okay. So, you had 245 units. Yes, ma'am. This one um I know you have the pool and it said you omitted the playground. Yes, ma'am. Uh

reason why we did that. the tenant mix that we have. So, we were the developers who did um Finish Station North and are under construction at Vintage Pleasant Grove on the other side of the church from this parcel. And our residents tend to be older and without kids. We tend to have younger professionals and then empty nesters and opposed to uh families with kids. And so, our amenity spaces are uh are geared more towards who lives in our building. So, we've got a large dog park, um big pool area, grill stations, um versus a more childfocused playground. Grandchildren,

that's uh they can come play in the pool. We're certainly not restricting anybody to come in, but that's the uh that's the goal um of who we're targeting with our rental demographics. That's the vintage. Yes. Well, the vines were we're nodding to Miss Beretta's uh vines. She's growing wine next door. So that was the that was the little head knock for them. So we bought this property from her this I still like the playground. Yeah. Uh I I got a couple real quick. So your purpose of the reconfiguration of the buildings is solely based upon the blue being identified as a blue line right there.

It blue line and allowed us from uh the grading to do that. Um, as we got further into the geotechnical and the um the survey with the topog topography, uh, the building footprint now is much easier to construct as opposed to the building footprint and the way that the topo came in before. And so it's it allowed us to build a a more efficient building um, with the blue line stream shifting the site plan. So, let me and of course I've had a little bit of issue with PMDPS and FMDPS and what looked like one and now it looks like another. So, feel like that even though FNDP you can't make significant changes out there on it.

Um there's a few because to me it it it changes the feel of it and so some of and the walkability connectivity things like that. Um, and I know I have to agree with staff on this here, but a couple things. All of the buildings are 100% residential and they are um, perfect. That that kind of answers my question on that. So, my biggest thing is this here is that um, uh, looking at your topo, you guys are are from Pleasant Grove falling, right?

Yes, sir. And so the bulk of your parking is at the bottom. I don't know how you're going to mass grade and how level that you're going to create the site when you finish when you complete your mass grading over there to be able to compliant. You have to be overly sensitive. I'm aware of how you what you have to do, what you can and can't do adjacent to a blue line right there. So that creates uh all the parking places being at the low elevation. So we're all going to get a little exercise. We're going to walk uphill every time.

Not really. And and so one of the tweaks we've done to the site plan was to actually change that. So the uh the building on the northwest portion of the FMVP, not the commercial out parcels, um that building and the unit mix in that building should be able to park in that parking lot right there next to it. Unit J. Uh let me

because unit J is where where I'm about to go with my comments. Uh uh no sir. Uh building L. So building L park parks in those parking spaces just between it and N. N is Papa Joe's house. Building J does park in the parking spaces behind building uh K. So that that leads me right there to it. Um I know you got to have your handicap requirements right there. Yes, sir. But as well with your target market out there, we are Door Dash. We are all of the things in mix. We're giving them no place to queue and park those cars. Uh there's space along the drive seven places are going to be for us for uh 30 minute only, 15 minute only.

Yes sir. So we'll have that and my civil engineers here that there is space along for that. Um and they're also in front of building K. So the little small piece on building K that looks uh that kind of goes north south that caps the end of the opening. That's our leasing and amenity center. it's connected to the building, but there are short-term parking spaces in front of there as well as space for, you know, Amazon, FedEx, Postal Service, or all those right there. So, that's kind of that main entrance. And that building K, one reason that it's a horseshoe is there's a secondary entrance on the very southeast corner of that building. So, all the people in that building that are parking in that parking lot can walk in right there and then take the elevator to their floor and walk around. So, it really is this building Jay and as you said, we're trying to, you know, work with the Blue Line stream that does run along the Western property line. Um, and and they'll just walk over. And I'm normally not a big fan of this, but if you use it for appropriate for your Amazon deliveries, your food deliveries, and stuff like that, the onroad kind of turnoff parking, it looks to me that you could potentially slide that sidewalk towards Jay uh right there in front of it and and potentially do some on street parking because your road is narrow.

And so mine is more that temporaryes or if I'm moving in per se, right? Either or out there. Uh any one of those three statements I think are very applicable to that that Jay seems like it's living over there on its own island which is going to be great for a tenant especially balconies are going to overlook undisturbed creek and whatnot should be super popular units from a marketability standpoint but not necessarily the most best design and safety and applicability department. Yes sir.

So I would love to see and and any anything that you guys change would be volunteer on your behalf. understand that we're at FMDP on that. Uh so, and this would be of course per staff. Todd's probably over there mad at me for asking for some on street parking or whatnot, but just that kind of 30 minute or less, 15 minute or less, however your signage denotes there can stripe it appropriately. Your HOA on I know that you guys have done a great job at Vend Station North with your HOA and and how that's being managed over there. Um, but the same kind of thing here that you guys try to run a a nice ship and and whatnot for your tenants. Um, so it kind of helps in in looking at this, but I would love to see possible on site right there an additional crosswalk um to what I'm going to call your southern sidewalk connection point. You see how your sidewalk stubs don't match up at that point?

Yes, sir. I'd love for that to be a stripe crosswalk right there because that's the one, not your northern one towards Pleasant Grove. that nobody's walking that far up to go to building J. They're going to go ahead and cross at the path of least resistance. Yes, sir. I think we do have some uh some crosswalks. I'm looking at 52 is where I am. 50 I think has the crosswalks shown on it. And I see it, but it's at the northern side of the site instead of the southern side. And if all you're parking south, they're not going to walk. Yeah. I mean, most people don't walk further to get to a crosswalk. They're going to go to whatever's fastest. Yeah, we we can we can add a crosswalk there on the I see what you're saying on the bottom of building K and see how those two sidewalks just don't

we can do a we can do a diagonal crosswalk there. Yeah, diagonal or or just another connection back there to your curb with a little bit of additional concrete. Probably what a five, six foot grass strip maybe at best. Or just move that that that sidewalk stub. Just move it up. And I think there's some grade issues there that my civil engineer saying from an ADA standpoint. I think the grade starts which is why we put it where we did fallen. Yes, sir. Yeah, we've I think that's the I think that's also the reason why is we do have um to answer your first question on the bottom of that building, building J, we do have the two handicap spaces. We can mark some of those other spaces. One of those seven

as a 30, you know, do you know do a 30-minut space there for honestly you leave your handicap. I'd love to see all seven go to short-term parking for something like that because to me that just enhances it as a tenant that enhances it. If not, I mean, you know, I'm going to put my car there, my second car, and I'm going to leave it right there. There's strategy in and everything like that. Before I was a homeowner, I've spent a lot of years in apartment and yeah, we we played swap with my neighbors, everything else on it. I'm fine if that crosswalk is elevated like that. Just some striping because I feel like that's where people are going to go. Yes, sir. Um I mean, it's just logical.

Well, I here's what I can promise you without double-checking and looking at the exact grades. As long as we can make that work with ADA slope requirements, we'll absolutely add a second crosswalk down there. Um, but I I don't want to promise something that the grades don't work with drainage and I don't want to get foul of ADA. I'd be good with that. Those are just my two comments of some additional crosswalk right there. And I'd love to see those seven parking places outside of your handicap parking places. All be noted, especially if staff rounds upon on street parking. Sounds like you're going to have a great issue. If you can't do an ADA ramp, you're not going to be able to move your sidewalk and do all that. So, or your on street parking. So, you're going to that idea of on street is gone.

I'd love to see the the entire seven go to short-term parking for deliveries, moving in, so on so forth over there since that is your only building that has really a lack of adjacent parking. That'd be my only comment. Commissioner Jobs, I've got a question on G. It's not in the putt, it says, but it's so small I can't see even with readers on the side of that. Is that that's the cell tower that the church owns, correct? Oh, yes, sir. Okay. And the church still owns it. And there's some kind of access there, but I can't see it on this. So,

there is. Yes, sir. Um, if you look on pl uh page C5.0, this access is already built. Actually, by the way, um, if you look at the very bottom right of page C 5.0, zero. We've got our main drive of the existing phase and then we've got the new access that curls around the south end of the existing church parcel and then there's a little kind of hash section um right there at the property line that comes off and goes down. I think I see it. I don't know. It is. Can you see it? It's right there. Okay.

There's a little kind of hash section right there. And that is an easement that has actually already been built for that cell tower. Yes. Okay. Okay. That was part of our phase one. Um that was we we shifted an access point. Actually Verizon was out there last week putting new lines to the cell tower. So that has already been solved I guess. Okay. Thank you. Further questions, comments from the commission? No pickle ball. No m

Commissioner Bowman, did you have a question? Yeah, this isn't uh quite as egregious as the McFarland farms, but it still feels almost like a little bit of a bait and switch. I I I genuinely like the previous the PMDP layout with the town houses. It has a better flow. Uh you're not looking at a mass of of parking to the south there. Any given parking view is only a couple couple lots or lots wide. So, um yeah, I I wish there was some way that we could deal with that. in codify it.

Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Further questions, comments? Thank you, guys. Thank you, sir. Let's go and call for citizen comments. Any assistant wish to make a comment in regards item on the agenda. Welcome, encourage you to do so. Please come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, I'm looking for a motion in regards item on our agenda. I'll make a motion with the conditions and the comments from staff and the additional comments that they're going to try to miss anything. Nope. Okay,

I'll second that. Included some comments for me. So, that's a motion and a second. All those in favor? Todd, do you have something you wish to add to that? I'd just like some clarification in that motion because I did review the grades where that crosswalk would go and it's steep. Can it go?

Yeah. If it can't meet ADA and the requirements set for then I know we cannot do anything about it. Uh maybe signage or something some kind of compromise. Well, I was just wondering if if we were open to shifting the location of that of of a different crosswalk to because right now it's about 10% there and if we can shift where that slope is, we should get the crosswalk in. Otherwise, it's it's not going to get in.

Yeah, it's a good attempt to Yeah. If you can't get it in because of ADA, you obviously ADA trumps what we're doing here. So, it's just some striping is really safety concerns. Maybe as you look at it, if it can't meet ADA requirements there, I'd say maybe some signage just to to note because you're probably following it's some kind of a path like that right there. Um, I think I'd be receptive to staff's comment on that. So, a motion in a second. Be good, Commissioner Giles. All those in favor signify by saying I raise your hand. I against abstensions. So approved. Next item up on our agenda is item 10B. Also under the final master development plan site plans review the final master development plan site plan for the villas at Elliot Reserve located at 12440 and 12582 Lebanon Road. Mr. John,

I'll take this one on for him. Um this is um the final master development plan and site plan for the village villas at Elliot Reserve. Um this is um this final master development plan and site plan are in substantial conformance with the previously approved PMDP that was approved in 2024. Um they have uh provided for 64 town home units. Uh the majority of staff's comments have already been addressed. Those remaining are minor in nature. um they are providing the requested amenities that were approved back during the PMDP. That includes um a very large commercial playground, a dog park, pickle ball, and pavilions. Um overall, everything is in compliance. They're following through with the bulk rigs that were approved under the um ordinance as well. Um again, staff recommends approval subject to the conditions that we've provided within your staff report.

Thank you. Okay. public works. Again, our comments are minor in nature or general notes and uh we recommend approval with all comments, questions, comments from the commission. I think the mail kiosk is without parking space. Is that something that's allowed with with not having parking spaces near them or Looks like it's got four. Oh, does it? Yes, I think so. Um yeah, it's actually on the It looks like it's on the um western side of the main drive coming in. So they do have parking space. Yes, ma'am.

And is that a requirement for any kind of area where there is a mail kiosk? Generally, we request at least one ADA space available and and a secondary space, but yeah, we always do request at least one parking space for the mail kiosk. That's good. Thank you. Two uh two quick questions back for uh uh for you guys. I saw planning zoning comment minimum 2,000 foot clubhouse required per multif family regulations. I thought that we did provide them the waiver on that on for the residential. Is that not correct?

We did. That was an error. Yeah, it's just a standard list of typical comments that we put in with these PMDPS especially with the multif family. Okay. So it was just an error because generally we do request those but they did provide additional amenities in lie of

okay and then uh one back for probably shame uh comment three underneath your uh engineering we had the traffic or potential traffic calming on Sunset Drive or Todd I don't remember that being an initial comment on this one or why this doesn't connect to Sunset does it? No, but the concern when the pud came through was that the overall development was going to add cut through traffic on sunset. Uh so it was it's a condition of the pud. Uh we're recommending deferring that action until the commercial FMDP.

Okay. Do they touch does this touch sunset though? No sir. Okay. But we we we get plenty of complaints about cut through traffic on Sunset. I know we do. Um so anytime we have development in the area, we're we're looking at that.

Yeah. I haven't been down Sunset in a long time and I went down it the other day and yeah, I used to have some close friends in high school live right there on Sunset. Uh sort of just right off there. Yes, it's a it's a interesting one. both access points to pull out too. Whether or not trying to come out there next to the volunteer state or down there where the hair salon and Mossesh is over there at the either entrance or tricky tricky. I don't know why people think it's short because my opinion it's never shorter. Yeah. I almost want to say man I'll race you. I promise you I'll beat you just going the right the easy way on that. 5 seconds won't change anything. Uh questions, further questions, comments from the commission. Wonderful. We have uh representation for the project name and address for there Jake Porter Herrick Civil 2055 North Road sweet 4 204 204 um engineering project we started it uh with the the PMDP however long ago that's been now and the mass grading is taking place masquerading I know everybody sees that daily um just to update their next I'd say maybe two months and they should be done with the masquerading portion of these. This is just the FDP FMDP for the top of the hill to the 64 town homes. Um I just texted uh the owners I believe and Shane you may know more than I do. I think they've already done the Sunset Drive items but I I yeah I could be wrong but either way if they're not installed they're they're um they have agreed to and are going to do those if they're not already installed. So, um I think as staff said that we mainly conform with all the the comments they provided and uh looking forward to get this getting

this one underway. Um I'm here if you have any more comments or questions questions comments from the commissioner. Commissioner John say please.

You know, so this was approved before I got back into office this whole thing. So I have I have been uh historically I I don't I don't vote for this just because I didn't start from the very beginning. We've had some issues not not anything against the civil but we've had issues with the blasting as we do all over the city. So, I had a meeting scheduled that we for um uh for them and and they came out for Nicholls because it was affecting them just like a lot of the blasting affects me and some others in the the areas and um we learned a lot about the state. I've asked the city, they've now come up with a flyer that we're able to send to anybody that's got a question about the blast and that kind of thing. And then there's some other clarification issues that uh instead of us going back and forth, I've also called another meeting. I just want to go and say in case there's some people here from Nicholls, um it's for next Thursday night, a week from tonight in in here. So, um, you know, they've just been a lot with this this subdivision coming in and and you know, even with and I I called today even with the the um the pond back in the back will be closed up and things like that. So, there's there's there's a lot to this. So, anyway, I just I wanted to explain, you know, why I vote against or abstain from this is that that reason.

Sure. Thank you. See no additional questions, comments. Um, thank you. Please comment if I may.

Um, just to back up. I know the blasting is always a big sensitive area. Um, the majority of the blasting for this whole the whole putt, everything was back on the commercial side of the front. Um, and specifically, we actually have it in here as note number 20 on our um on C0.03 on one of our site sheets. Um but it's it it's uh what Commissioner Hefner had kind of written that spiel about half shots and um all of the extended uh notifications and items like that. Um our anticipation for this particular portion of the project, the town homes is if there's blasting, it is just that the utility trenches. Everything up there should be mostly fill material going upwards um except the utilities. So that that will all be um I know that the city's not technically able to enforce those things, but that is something that we have we agreed to at PUD and um intend to do it as well for this for this part of it. So

may I say something on this too because I this this blasting thing we we as the the elected officials get so many calls and emails and now with this new flyer that's getting ready to come out. It's going to be on the website too. There's there's a code there and you can scan it and and we as citizens need to start making complaints to our our senators and our representatives to change the laws in Tennessee so that municipalities can be can enforce a little bit stronger u rules and stuff on this on this blasting and it's going to take everybody to to be able to do it because we our hands are tied in the city. we really can't do anything. So that make sure you look for that flyer. It'll be on on the website, too. And and and that's a resource that you can go to and complain.

Yes. Oh, I thought you were asking me. I agree. Yeah, I was going to say a lot of our remaining land, larger tracks that are remain available are available because of the rock. Yeah. The ones with good dirt or whatnot. So glad for all that. Wonderful. Thank you. I mean throughout the city. Let me go ahead and call for assistant comments regards this item on the agenda. Anyone wishing to make comments, uh, please go to the microphone. Name and address for the record.

Good evening. My name is Shauna Summers and I'm at 5225 Southport Boulevard, Old Hickory. Um, I'm representing Stephanie Beamer who is uh on 513 Montrose Drive, Mount Juliet uh in Nichols. um she was unable to to attend this meeting um because she's actually with the Tennessee Road Builders this week off off site. Um she did want me to take a couple of minutes and uh make some comments. She says the Elliot's Reserve is still a large issue of contention for the Nichols Veil neighborhood due to the poor drainage design by the Elliots Reserve developers firm design of the neighborhood. First and foremost, Nicholls residents had to pay for drainage repairs that did not meet city code, which were designed by the Elliots Reserve developer developers design firm. This continues to be an issue where the city does not monitor the designers and developers on what they're doing after the city approves their designs and the residents pay for it. Elliot's Reserve developers and contractors started site grading without having drainage drainage control measures in place when they started work and we had to call the city to tell them that the SWIP was not in place. Any person in construction knows that erosion control measures need to be in place before site grading, but they didn't do it. They've taken down trees and branches, which you've told them not to touch, and ripped out bushes, even though the city gave a 20- foot no touch buffer. The contractors are digging all the way to the edge of Nichols property lines on top of on top of our barbed wire fences, and video was provided to the city. Their contractors are stepping over property lines and continue to work on Nicholsville homeowners properties. In addition, the original site plans on file with the city say that Nicholsville's property owners had landscape conservation e easements on their property. The original ordinance states that the 30foot PUD runs parallel to the former landscape conservation easement given back to the owners of the property as per the new ordinance where the original ordinance says the

conservation buffers are along and not within the PUD. Landscape conservation easements are separate separate agreements from PUDS. The city is now stating that the conver the conservation easement is within the PUD. We have been requesting the paperwork from the city that states that the conservation easement is now a new agreement and within the PUD. The city has not provided this since December since it's been requested. We are still looking for the agreement that says the conservation easement is now part of the PUD. I have the drawings and an original ordinance here. Um she say goes on to state our privacy is b is gone because Elliot's reserve developers took our bushes and trees and have done sight grading to our property lines and not 20 ft from the buffer that on those are on Montrose Drive. The city has acted in bad faith by promising the homeowners that our trees would not be touched that the conservation easements were the property owners and now stating that they can let the developers build and drain onto our already poorly drained property that was designed by Mr. Porter and his firm. We've had we've paid thousands of dollars between French drain installation, pre-blast surveys, property surveys, and legal consultations because of the city and letting this development push through. Several residents have already sold with many more selling currently are going up for sale. These town homes were proposed to the city as $600 to $800,000 town homes. The market will not sell for that price, especially with the lack of amenities that are proposed. Dog park and pickle ball court. You have approved the developments already that have become 100% rentals because they're not being sold. You have continued to approve these developments with no consideration to transportation infrastructure in the area between Vendor Ferry and South Green Hill Road. No consideration for school capacity. He said fire trucks could get up a hill to the fire in one of those town homes that are within 20 ft of our 200 feet of our homes with the grade proposed on the road. I doubt they could, especially with the recent ice storm and weather events happening every year. It seems

pointless to say anything because the city continues to give this developer approval approvals. Nichols, Kelsey Glenn, and Laguardo Elementary, all examples of irresponsible approvals of poorly designed de development approved in Wilson County that residents and homeowners are paying the price for and the city has no accountability. Please start listening to your residents. This development should have never been approved in the first place. Thank you. Thank you. Any additional citizen comments?

Uh Lyn Wea, uh 515 Montrose Drive in Nicholls Bale. Um again, I 100% fully support what uh was just said to you. Um also concerned about things. I'm right next door to to Stephanie and the main drainage that they're talking about comes into my yard. Um I have issues about as she stated like emergency vehicles if that ice storm comes again. We can't get out of our road with just a little bit of snow cover. How would emergency vehicles get into this one that's like, you know, 10 million feet higher than ours? Um, I also would like to see this so-called agreement that says the e easement is part of the pud. I used to have, you know, privacy in my backyard and it's completely gone and cleared out now. Um there, you know, the the 20 foot no touch buffer is completely gone. And I was told that that was supposed to be ours and the workers up there have just been completely like rude, you know, when we try to talk to them and stuff about coming onto our property. They've climbed fences and walked right onto our properties to go look at stuff. And, you know, we've said, you know, please don't be on our property. and they're like, "Well, we can do what we want. We were told we can do whatever. This all has to be, you know, taken care of." A lot of things that we brought up as a neighborhood, you know, none of it's been addressed. And I really think this needs more time and looking into before it's completely passed. So, that's what I've got for you.

Thank you. Hello, my name is Kendra Nits. I live at 437 Whitley Way. Um, I have been a resident of Mount Juliet uh as said seven years as of today and I love the city and I'm also a realtor in the area and fully believe in what we have here. Um, something that is so important to me, I live in the corner of where this Elliot Reserve is going to be. Um, excuse me. And I have the 20 foot no touch buffer that was given back to us. I don't have trees on my side. Those were taken out. We have a mulch bed and some plants in there, but I don't I never had a thick um line of trees. I can see directly across the field and where this developer has taken down all the trees on Montro. I can see directly into people's backyards. I can see into their houses now from this no touch buffer that has been completely touched and ripped down. So, my request here, I know this is going to be voted through. It is what it is. The um landscaping plans has not been approved yet. So, I just ask that y'all take into account the current residents who live here when this land was sold originally and Nichollsville was established. You put in buffers for the current land owners to benefit them. And I just ask that you take into account us when we have these landscaping plans approved. So, that is all.

Thank you. Thank you.

Any additional citizen comments? Good evening. I'm Jarvis Johnson. I live on 543 Montro Drive. And my neighborhood, I mean my um home uh property line butts right up against um this development. And I believe uh according to the plans, um my property line butts right up against where they're going to have like the common area, the dog park and stuff like that. And like currently out my window right now is a big mount of dirt. Um but with the tree line and everything like that being moved, I think it's extremely important like everybody else has stated here that that um buffer be maintained especially even for noise cuz if that's going to be a common area right outside my my property line um you the last thing I I warned is like you know I look out my my fence and then there's you know a big group of people or you know a bunch of dogs barking and stuff out of my backyard. So, I would like y'all to take that in consideration, you know, as this development continues that that be maintained. I mean, if they're going to cut them down, plant some more there. You know, rebuild that area back up. That way, we do have some kind of buffer or noise buffer between our property and uh that development. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any additional citizen comments? See not at this time we'll close our citizen comments at which time I'm looking for a motion in regards to this item on our agenda. Make a motion to approve subject to staff comments. Motion and a second. Motion a second for approval subject to staff comments. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. Disapproved.

Positive or approval fails doesn't mean it just automatically fails. That's correct. So you need to do a motion in the reverse and you need to state exactly why we're denying it and why it's not in substantial compliance. there. So, we'll go back to the uh uh for those that uh had a negative vote for that. Um I'll just sort of start right to left. Uh if you can let us know the reason why you voted no.

Um for me, it comes down to the fact that the current homeowners in Nickels have been disrespected with the buffers. Um, and also, uh, from what I understand, the price point in some of these town homes, we were told one thing and they have gone to something else and we're kind of saturated with it. So, that's

Mr. R. Uh my reasoning is it the duplicate was the the buffers and I I don't want to use the word respect for the buffers but m maintenance of the buffers. We went through quite a bit of discussion about where the rose control fence should be placed and everything beyond that not disturbed and contractors went out there and did what they wanted to do and when they needed to do it. And until we have some asurances that that's going to be replaced or remedied in some way, I don't have any reason to approve this.

Commissioner John. Well, and I stated earlier why I had to and and one of the reasons too is that all of this as far as the price and all that that was when I wasn't here. And then when I think about the these the people is talking about to me that's there's a safety aspect there is also where people are able to look and see. The gentleman was talking about the dogs and everything and the people somebody said that you can see over and now you can see in there. So, it's just a safety aspect, but I just feel like I I should because of that. I think I might be wrong, but you know, Commissioner B. Yeah. Um, buffers, we need I need a reassurance that that's going to be dealt with moving forward before I can give a positive recommendation.

Thank Did you vote against I did. Commissioner Franklin, please. Figure it's non non-compliance. If they agreed to non-touch buffers and they touched them, they're non-compliant with their preliminary master development plan. Well, if they want to reestablish those buffers, bring in compliance, probably get my vote. Very well. It's my vote. And we had you voted four, correct? Okay. Very well. All right, Miss Bernett, does that get you?

Very well. You can go ahead and call for the motion. Right. But a failed vote doesn't mean that automatically gets denied. So if the planning commission feels that they have explained um a reason for it not being in substantial compliance, then you'll need to do a motion to deny it and have that pass. make a motion to this request until we can get something resolved for the

second that motion and a second

question. Mr. for just wondering what the basis for any of the complaints that were provided to you tonight are. The developer so far has encroached on a 10-ft buffer one time six to eight months ago by 3 feet into the non-disturbance buffer which kept them seven feet off of everyone's property still. They got a stop work order nearly immediately as Commissioner Giles who was his district has been fully aware of all of these things. They have been forced. I say forced. Wait, they did it. They did. It was wrong and they need to go back and fix that. And they did to the the city's standard that was required. Took two weeks. I think we kept putting more and more. Got that that got that resolved. To date, I have never I have not been personally or the developer personally been contacted about any other infractions causing any issues other than be as respectful as I can. People coming up here and saying things that they don't have proof of. You can see through the trees in the winter time because trees go dormant in the winter time. I understand that some properties didn't have buffers before because the properties didn't have buffers. Some of them have thin buffers, some have thick buffers. We moved the dog park internal to the site as staff's recommendation was. We still have to have a pavilion. It went back where the dog park was many, many, many, many iterations ago. Everything, and again, I I don't mean to be rude here at all, but every comment that I just got a no from is I don't want to use the word illegal, but not correct. There's no there's no basis to vote against it on anything except for Commissioner Franklin um saying that we maybe didn't adhere to the previous put thing, but I just explained that it's been remedied and it has been fixed. And again, just having people come up here and tell you things that are not, at least to my knowledge, true with no proof and now you're going to vote

against something without even again. In fact, y'all didn't ask me to come back up and to give you the developer side of it. We're out there every day doing more than most developments in Mount Juliet do for neighbors. And if you don't believe that, you can ask Commissioner Giles who again respectfully will vote against this regardless because that's his area when his project originally. I understand that. But he has been on the forefront with me and with the developers on trying to fix number one fix Nicholsville problems that were not our responsibility. Number two, work with the neighbors to take even more water now back the other direction to fix drainage problems. And number three, all the buffers we're talking about have already been established, meaning the putt establishes that you're required to put this buffer in a 20 foot type D buffer just like everywhere else in the city, plus our extra I think it was five or 10 feet of setbacks for buildings. And when that property gets developed at this FMDP level, they will be required to install the type D buffer. Anything that's existing there counts will count as per the city code and anything additional will be included. So again, I'm at the point tonight where if you still can't vote for it, then I I just see it as being a a major issue because there's no grounds to not vote for it that has been presented other than neighbors coming up with noredit credibility. reading letters from other people.

Let me ask staff that is or Sam, do you want to speak to this or should we refer back to staff to I mean is the statement from representative correct? I would encourage the board to ask staff. Um they'll be able to answer the question if there's any current software orders or what the current condition is out there since the last time you've been there. that be through planning or by public works in this case that you can opinion and comment on if there's any actions lack of or requests that have not been remedied or non-compliant.

I can give a summary of I have been out on site multiple times there as Mr. Porter acknowledged as construction commenced with uh erosion controls being installed, they did encroach in the no touch buffer which was on the Elliot reserve site by 3 feet. Um I measured that off uh with other members of storm water. We did put a stop work order on the site. We went through planning to acknowledge that all shrubs and brush were re-established or replanted to a manner of city code. I don't just disclaimer I'm not a buffer expert. So we did uh we went through uh Miss Hamlin who was working with Mr. Porter and Commissioner Jaws. If I'm wrong Art, let me know. But that was in uh those were installed. To my knowledge from storm water or public works, no other stop work orders have been issued since then. Uh, one other comment that I will uh can attest to is there currently is a sediment pond right behind the homes on Montrose. that is temporary. That will be removed when the town homes are constructed as the developer uh reshifted the drainage patterns to drain north back towards Lebanon Road. Sediment pond is there to uh acquies to TEC requirements for sediment ponds as

part of their mass grading. And once they start grading for their town homes, that will shift the final drainage pattern back towards Le Road. Do you I heard another comment in regards to the landscape plan or whatnot. Does planning want an opinion towards that? This plan as presented that we're looking at right here is compliant with all regulations for landscape buffers for this type of development adjacent to this type of subsidies.

I've got a question. or was significant vegetation removed prior to any of this going in place that would not have legally fall fallen under the PUD. So I know there's some gray area there about an owner. Yeah. In a situation like this, this plan or this this plan shows what has to be when it's done should complete at the end when it's completed when it's built. Often times existing vegetation goes away because it doesn't meet the require the buffer that they're going to install is going to be better as an offer most times than what is there. What is on this plan is what has to be done. when the project is completed. Yeah.

How they get there.

And I think that's I think that's an important statement for all of those in attendance as well. Right. We want to maintain the 50 foot hardwoods as much as possible, but as long as the developer legally maintains a standard buffer as outlined in the prints and diagrams. We have we're beholden to those legal standards, which is really difficult to say, right? They can replace a giant maple with 15 foot tall shrubbery as long as it blocks the view. That type of thing. That's not a very legal perspective, but that's what's going on here.

Question. I mean, they can re resubmit a final master development plan if they want to and and and show me how they have mitigated, you know, not being in compliance. You know, life goes on. If they want to sue us, we got insurance. Go for it. But I mean, if you if you're not in substantial compliance, I'm not going to approve you. If you want my vote, just prove to me you are, and you haven't. Commissioner, unfortunately, everything that we've looked at, the plan is in substantial compliance as it stands right now with the PMBB that was passed. Touching a non-touch buffer was touched. you both said

it's my understanding though that that has been remedied through the storm water when they've been out there and did the stop work order that was remedied to that extent and then the additional landscape buffer that will be added by the end of the project that is as required. So they'll have essentially 30 feet, but the putt allows you to work within it though within the non-touch the PUD PD does. Yeah, please please jump.

Well, see what happened when I wasn't here was something was taken away and this is this is one of the reasons and it was put back or done something with. This is one of the reasons I want this meeting next Thursday is so I mean I hear the terms I hear from my constituents in that area that they were told one thing this happened that happened and and I don't know you know we we we hear the term the PUD I know what it is I know what a conservation easement is I hear that conservation easement can be separate I hear it's not separate you know and so we've got a a presentation u coming on next Thursday chronologically that shows everything that happened and that's why I called that. So it it's very confusing to me.

Um and that's why I mean I guess from my standpoint it complies with post public works staff and your planning staff that they're not and I have to rely on them because that's what it says. But I also I need to know because I don't know because I wasn't here and and all this happened and so I've got all these several people living over there. I mean, I want to represent who I'm supposed to represent, you know. Let's go ahead and let's try to get it to a motion. Okay.

Just got one more quick thing. I'm hearing two different aspects, right, from the citizens that have spoken. I heard that a lot of the drainage was because of this new development. And then from the developer, I'm hearing that they fixed the drainage. So, in staff's opinion, who's right? Or was there was there truly a drainage problem and or was it caused or was it fixed? I'll disclaim that I'm not sat out there and watched the site when it's rained.

Sure. Um, what I can say is that I'm not saying this. I'm not trying I'm probably going to rebut you with another question. Yeah.

Um, are the drainage issues based on the mass grading plan or are we talking about what's been presented and approved? Not approved, what's been presented and reviewed as part of the final master development plan? That's that's my question because drainage issues now with mass grading plan are compliant with what was approved and again what they've shown tenatively at at construction plans we will re I'll do a page by page review of the drainage report to ensure that it is compliant with city code. So I guess that's my question is are we talking about now or later?

Yeah, understood. I'm just trying to understand where that's you know was was is the was the drainage problem as these residents right they're living it. So was the drainage problem caused because of this development or was it always a thing and now it's just been exacerbated that type of situation. That's good. So, let me ask we currently got a motion and a second on the table uh for a declination. And does your motion and your second remain on the table?

You wish to resend your motion and your second? There we go. That is proper order. Is that correct? Very well. Um, so with that being said, at this point in time, I'm looking for a A motion regards this item. Urgent for recommendation. It would be a motion for approval. Not positive recommendation. Approval. Motion for approval and then a second. Motion for approval. Subject to staff comments. Commissioner Armstead. Second holds to that. Subject to staff comments.

Motion in a second. Uh for approval. Uh subject to staff comments. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. So approve. Chairman wanted comment for the record to all the neighbors that are here. Um I again want to raise Mount Juliet. I've been here my whole life. This is what I'm here for. I am a local developer, a local engineer, and I want to produce projects. Um, I spoke today actually with um, Mark Hinsley in the chamber about why I started this company here. There was comments about a previous firm. I did not not did not design Nichols. That is not a part of my um, track record, if you will. I do agree there was some things that happened in Nichols that were problematic. Um, the intent of this particular project has been and still is to alleviate all the problems that we had been presented with at the beginning. I I do think that we added extra buffers. We add we should at the end of all of this, we'll fix all of the um all the water will not be going towards those houses anymore. It will be going back to back towards the large pond down towards Leven Road. Um but I just wanted to say for the record, that's who I am. That's what our our firm is trying to do. And I am I am at this point begging because Commissioner Giles and staff has shared I think most everything complaintwise that comes from this site which is a lot and I get that. Um but if there's and they give them to me and I have answered and he I think he just forwards them back out to people. my my name and my number, my email and my address, everything is on these plans, then I welcome you all that have particular problems to reach out to your commissioner first of all, but then I would be glad to meet with you at your house. Um, you know, whatever it is, specifically to the neighbors at I think 513 and 515 have been very rude to us

completely. We were not not allowed on their property. I don't know why. Um, we are attempting to fix all these problems or help with all these problems and I would rather people not jump on the bandwagon of hating development and come out and see if we can actually fix whatever your problem is if indeed it is a legitimate problem. So, I just again I don't there's no hostility on our side. I'm just trying to develop, you know, as good as our client wants, something that would make our city a better place and let um previous owners how use her land how she wanted to and still, you know, abide by the regulations at hand. So, thank you for letting me say that. And again, I'll be here the rest of night. I have a couple more things.

Let me go ahead and mention in in lie of that, open the floor back to Commissioner Giles. Tell us again real quick while we're here on record. Your meeting is here. Next Thursday at 6 PM. Next Thursday 6 pm this. No, it's 6, not 6:30, right? No. No, it is 6. Yeah. Yeah. 6 o'clock. 6 p.m. in here. Okay. Wanted to make sure we Oh, well that the people at Nicholls that you know that comes up next to the property and loans or anybody in Nicholsville. What I will start an introductory and then the our our um our city staff will take it from there and and go through the presentation.

I'd like to see real quick. We're two and a half hours in here real quick. Uh any objection taking about a five minute quick break here? Any objection from staff? My apologies. We'll be very quick. Give us a five minute recess. We'll reconvene our meeting.

Let me put my microphone on and say that one more time. Now it's 9:02 and 30 seconds. Uh we will readjourn our planning commission meeting. Uh thank you all for the quick break right there. Uh we promised to press through and get everybody home in a in a good time. So our next item up on our agenda this evening uh is also falls underneath final master development plan site plans. Item 10 C. It's reviewed the final master development plan preliminary plat for triple crown phase three section 1D in phases four through six located off triple crown parkway. Miss Jill.

Hello. This is a continuing work in progress of Triple Crown. Most of you that have lived here know that this has been um this was approved back in 1997. They've had work continually going on in this subdivision since that time um with some of the latest approvals we've had as of 2021. Um, this property in its whole is 114 acres. It's on the west side of Katpa Drive and north of Pleasant Grove Road. This is just an extension of the existing neighborhood. Um, they are in um, compliance with the preliminary master development plan that was approved back in 1997. Um, there are no violations of the PMDP. This new FMDP and preliminary plat is going to provide 176 single family homes. um at a later date they do intend to um include 70 condos but that will come in at a later phase. Those were as John said those were in the original PMDP as well as an approval. Um one of the improvements upon the PMDP was they were originally approved for minimum square footage lot of 5,500 square ft. The current average minimum of the lots now are much larger at 8,000 square feet. So that is an improvement with that overall. Um, one of the nice things too for those of you that are here, um, and unfortunately we lived through the tornadoes, there was only the one means of ingress egress out of Triple Crown and that posed a very, very major safety problem for first responders. One of the improvements with this is there will be two means of additional ingress and egress. one to the uh through Kelsey Glenn via Patty Drive and then there'll be an additional means of ingress and eress on Dogwood via Pleasant Grove estates that will dump you out onto Pleasant Grove Road. So that way we now will have three means of ingress and ingress for this subdivision which is a massive improvement and we're very thankful that they've included this um for safety

reasons. Other than that, the plan is of substantial compliance with the original PMDP. Um, if you have any questions, we'll be happy to answer those, but we just ask that you uh approve it with the conditions as provided in the staff report.

Okay. Public works. Um, I'll be working with the developers and their engineers uh to try to straighten out roadway culverts as they build their proposed roads to ease maintenance concerns since that will be the city's uh maintenance responsibility. make sure we can actually maintain, you know, any type of brush trees within roadway culverts. Um, we're going to have them revise building envelopes to avoid stream buffers. And staff does support uh the steep slope requirement, which are existing slopes of 18 to 20% greater to uh to build foundations as long as they are in cut conditions. We do support that. Roads. I'll hand it over to Todd.

This is a little bit of a new situation where uh they are requesting variances at the FMDP. Um specifically they're requesting variances to the subdivision regulations which uh as we we saw last year when we amended those are the the sole responsibility of the the planning commission. So it it was our opinion that they probably can ask for variances at the FMDP level. Uh as such they're asking for culde-sac variances for both length and unit count. um on the grounds that Secretariat Drive and road A uh were supposed to connect uh and they have run into hardships with T dot uh the T deck sorry T deck um where they've been asked to reduce stream crossings. Uh so they are asking to exceed units on Secretariat Drive and they are asking to exceed u allowable length on both Secretariat Drive and Road A. They're also asking for lots fronting a residential collector. Our code really doesn't allow that. There's a clause that we can wave it if uh all lots exceed 100 feet or more frontage. Um, but that that will also require a waiver from from y'all.

Well, thank you. Questions, comments from the commission. I just got a question on that. Were they standards when this was improved ultimately in 1997? Did we have th though? I mean, I I can't remember them. Maybe we did.

It It's hard to say though. The easiest one for me is lots on a collector, right? Because we look at the rest of Triple Crown and there's no lots for a collector. Um the culde-sac lengths and whatnot, I've got no way to know. I I'm holding them to 25 units being our latest threshold up from 14 when we amended it last year. But if we had any guidance at all in 1997, it's almost impossible to say. Mr. Jones,

the laws that you referring to, are they over the 100 ft that you're talking about on the plans in front of you? No. But I I've talked with their engineer. He he does feel they can configure the lots in a way that they can get to 100 ft. Okay. And they're in agreeance with that. Yes. Okay. Um and as long as that's a condition of approval and it's currently written in the staff report that way, uh they would be held to that at construction. Good. Other questions come? Commissioner Rest

just a concern and I'm sure representation will come up but these would be the only six lot on that entire road on sec I believe that's secretary the only ones that have access or direct access to the road which is kind of odd to not do that way so we we'll get to that I'm sure. Um, and my other concern is it I understand what TDC asked or requested, but to not connect those two culde-sacs seems just like a way to get some extra lots in there, especially in phase three when it's already, you know, beyond what we would deem appropriate. and then adding one, two, three, four, five more lots to that site.

It's that same blue line that came up on that two projects ago. Yeah, Commissioner Jos. I think originally though, and I understand, but I think originally they they didn't have as many ingress and egress in there. So, we're trading Yeah. to me that's a safety aspect that we need. And I appreciate that that in there. I think that's important. So, you know, I I would much rather trade that for that than and and myself because we went through the tornado. We went through this freeze other week. So, hopefully we won't go through nothing else anytime soon.

Let's go ahead and call representation. Name and address for Nashville. uh representative on the on the property here, civil engineer record. Just want to add a couple little things. Um on the east side road A, there will be a temporary turnaround for the coach on road A until the condos come in. So we will make sure that that's maintained. So the variance for the length is really mostly for secretariat. Uh we are committing to making that road 24 foot in width. Uh per recommendation from from Todd, the another point that was brought up was the res residential lots on the commercial road. Uh we have already figured out a way to make that work. Uh we rotated a few lots from them on secondary roads and we made the lots that remain on the collector 100 foot wide. We did pass that along to staff. So we are committed to making that change. That's all that I had, but I'd be happy to answer any other questions that you have. just question as far as far far as uh you know the hardship of I mean I I do appreciate you know the additional connections and everything else I some we folks at Kelsey Glenn I'm one of them we knew about that you know that it's coming but that that one string crossing that you're avoiding you're still going to have to add another one when you put in the tile notes

that's right

I'd feel much better connecting those two up those two culde-sacs up provide more circulation and better access to those additional ingress and egresses. I know you'd lose some lots doing it, but I think we would actually gain lots. The problem was a couple years ago uh when we were taking the CDs through uh we were forced into an individual permit situation and one of the steps you have to take during that process with TDC is show that you are reducing impacts wherever possible. That crossing was the sacrificial crossing to get them on board with hopefully issuing that permit. It was a direct request from Tday to reduce impacts. But to your point, u also we are we are at the allowable units. So making that connection or not wouldn't wouldn't sway the numbers either way. But I I do hear you. We're just we're kind of hamstrung with Tekk right now. Further questions, comments? I guess I got just one. The uh construction traffic is going to run through Triple Crown. Is that right?

Perfect. Not through Kelsey Glenn. We can put it through Kelsey Glenn if you prefer. I hear an amendment. Yeah. Don't want to hear that. Very well. See no uh additional questions or comments. Let's go ahead and open it up uh for citizen comments. Any citizen wish to make comments? Welcome. Encourage to do so. Please come to the microphone. State your name and address for the record.

See no citizen comments at this time. Like to ask for a motion in regards to this item on our agenda. I'll make a motion for approval for the conditions that's been stated and also for the um the comments and I guess that would be a condition on the 100 foot at least a minimum of 100 foot reconfiguration of those already provided to planning if I understand right we have that correct John or Jill we have that bless you bless It's great. Y'all have those already.

Readwork of the lots that Kyle spoke of. Okay. But you will get Okay. And it'll show them.

Okay. Got a motion and second. Motion and second for approval. So staff comments. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against extensions. So approve. Next item up on our agenda falls underneath the site plans. Item 11 A to review the site plan for National Healthcare located at 10645 Lebanon Road. Mr. John, what we have before you here is a 64,100 foot rehabilitation center um at the location you specified in district three. Oh, that can't be district three. Oh, maybe it is. um 120 beds and I think this plan was excellent. They built very little comments from us planning. Um they are asking for one waiver from the design standards and that was for a 40% masonry yeah 40% masonry and 60% secondary materials. Now, this building has a courtyard area. I am okay with Hardy Board in in in that area. It won't be seen from the outside. It's the courtyard. It's enclosed. um for the rest of the building the visit the outward facing walls I think in keeping with our standard or more more our precedents uh that we've established with other such pro projects 60% masonry and 40% uh hardy flippant you know they have they they're requesting 40% masonry I would be more uh apt to support 60% masonry on the m uh on the masonry Um, obviously it's no vinyl, no metal uh

permitted. And let me take a look through the conditions here. There is there was not much. Um, John, is that a typo in the waivers and variances? No, that's correct. That you say masonry and 40% vinyl. Oh, yeah. That that's a Yeah, that meant to be no vinyl. Yeah, it's uh Yeah, sorry. Um got a lot of those today. Um but uh yeah, that's what I meant. Staff supports 60% Mason Street and 40% Hardy concrete fiber wall. Yeah, concrete fiber. No vinyl. No metal.

Okay. Um not the interior core. Not not not applying to that. Um, let me see what else. Yeah, all the comments that we have are pretty minor. Um, standard stuff for a site plan and only 10 of them at that. So, staff does recommend approval. Um, I think this is this is going to be a nice facility. Well, thank you,

Shane. Public works. We have minimal comments as well, but I do want to touch on a couple of our major ones. Um, you'll notice within the plan set that this development is not proposing detention. The reason that is is due to its proximity to the creek. Um, they will have to provide a timing study to show that they can get water off their site faster than the creek rises. You don't want to add water to a high creek. That just makes it worse. So, and a detriment to the site itself. So, they'll have to show that the water does indeed pass through the creek before it rises. And typically within the lower 10% of the basin, which this is right sits right at at the creek, uh it's good guidance, good engineering practice to to assume that, but they've got to show that and that'll be presented at construction plan review. Uh we've also included a note there is flood plane in the area that they stay out of it to not slow down their permitting process because they wouldn't need a map provision or clo and uh impacting the flood plan like I said any development we try to avoid that at any cost just due to the fact of of the FEMA process um and sewer availability was requested and granted. I know people have uh been asking about capacity line capacity issues on the north side of town where this development will be tying into sewer line capacity is not an issue. The line capacity issues are east of this site as you approach Benders Fairy Road. So, they've got capacity. Uh they're not

proposing detention and they'll prove that at construction plan review and we've asked them not to impact the flood plan in any way. I'll hand it off to Todd for any transportation road comments.

Thanks, Todd. Uh this development is has two points of access. One at the signalized intersection of Lebanon Road and Park Glenn. They're adding a fourth leg to that intersection. Uh so signalized access. That's great. Uh and then there's a second access um more so to have two points of entry to the site uh off York Road. Um we've had many many conversations with them about how emergency vehicles are going to access the site. it does make the most sense to take Lebanon Road and take the this the signal. Um so we're not as concerned about York Road being in flood plane u because there's still plenty of access to the site. Um the Lebanon Road access will require an access easement. Uh it is technically on the adjacent property. Uh but it is my understanding that that property owner is more than happy to let someone else build his new driveway. Uh

sure. And he will derive access from that when he uh comes forward with that property. U they do still need their T dot permit. That will be required before they can break ground. Uh I expect that to look very similar to what it looked like when this was proposed to be the hardware store development. So likely adding a right turn lane on Lebanon Road into the site. Um and a signal modification plan will be submitted u with construction plans.

Questions, comments from the commission? Commissioner Jos, please. Just FYI, it's not district three, it's district one. And the commissioners are job. I was going to say it needed to be thrown out because that but you know I'm just not I'm just kidding you. Yeah.

Oh, I guess I got one comment. Please. You know it is it's not a bug. It's a feature coming out on York Road. I've seen York Road cut off by flood how many times in the last 20 30 years? And you know this whole area, York Road could cut through here to a stoplight because that little wetland right there at Highway 70 and York Road has flooded and cut Road off I 10 times since I've lived here. That's that's a that's a feature.

Funny you brought that up. I was having a conversation with Mr. Rescue during the break. Uh the pavement depth here is essentially in line with our residential access street standard. So traffic on this road, cut through traffic is not an issue as far as like wearing out your pavement. Um but I do caution that this is private property. There will is no access easement that's going to require them to keep that connection available to the public. Um that is a change from the the elers plan. um primarily because this is a single user on one site.

But in a flood, they probably wouldn't mind. I I would guess that wouldn't

they've given no indication that they intend to close that for any reason whatsoever. Um I'd just be remiss if I touted that as as a publicly available roadway when it isn't it is a private drive. So, let me ask a quick question uh myself. I show I see the Lebanon Road entrance and the connectivity to the parcel to the east right there. There's still a corner to the west. Is that joint ownership or do we need to plan for any connectivity? It looks like there's still a little piece down there. Probably a half acre, maybe an acre. It looks like it's within the boundaries of this property owner. Did we talk in right there?

Yes, sir. Um, that's currently part of this property. If it gets subdivided off, it would access from the access ement off of this off of this new driveway, the new leg at the intersection. It would not access from Lebanon Road.

So, looking at your talking about standards and whatnot, I know we had a like the Waw Wa entrance and right there. If that develops, it looks like this entrance you probably have a little bit of heartache with. Do we need to address a potential stub out at this point that that we are kind of dictating, you know, a four-way Todd per se right there and then kind of drop that southerntherly that may change your queuing up a little bit. It looks like, but um seems like

yeah, so we already have the four-way internally um with the the stub out to that parcel to the east if you know and I guess I'd recommend let's extend that easement to include the the road north of what that out parcel would be. So, if it does develop, um, they could access north and then do a couple right turns to get to the signal.

Yeah, because it was looking like like if I came in off 11 road and I wanted to access the property to the west, this corner right here in question or that I'm asking about, you're going to have to cross your striping and everything else. Very similar to that to that waw wa that we looked looked at earlier. it's going to make. Now, this one doesn't have raised uh uh beds or anything that we're going to have to mitigate through, but nevertheless, if you access, you're going to access through all of the striping and everything else uh to get to this point or you're going to really drive that traffic really internally into the site that is the living facility where it seems like this would probably be a good opportunity to dictate that for them. So it develops based upon what you want now versus them coming in and requesting that stub or the accessibility, you know, 50 feet in where you're having to access that site to the west in the turning lane versus the striping right there. So, that's just kind of my question right there because normally we see something like this, which I I love this. Um um sad about the hardware store because that would have been nice up there on the north side, but um I think this is just a great balance, harmonious with up there and having something like this. It is, you know, you're Davy Crockett on this. You're you're you're pioneering to do something like this on this site with proximity to the ballpark, everything else. So, I wanted to see it work long term and everything else. That would be just making sure that you're okay with how that parcel um that little corner that is common ownership will access right there. Make sure that you're okay with it.

Yeah, I I really wouldn't want to shorten that turn bay at all. Um, so I'd almost recommend removing those five parking spots immediately adjacent to that intersection and access extending the access easement into there. You'd want them to go that far into the site to access that though. It's there's not a great other option. Yeah. Yeah. That's what I was looking and we're it. hard to plan access for an out parcel that doesn't exist yet. But it it's not spaced very far from from the signal. Okay.

Um, perfect. Questions, comments from the commission. Just go ahead and land require.

That's a great question. It was a requirement of the elders development based on our warrants at signalized intersections. No, it is not. However, T while we adopted a T dot manual, it is not a T DOT standard and they might require the the right turn lane as part of the um as part of the permit to access the state rightway. They've required it with the Elders ACE hardware development at the same site. This is a much lower trip generator.

Yeah. Um, but that's in P.10. We would not require it on our own. There we go. Fantastic.

Uh, let me ask for representation. Representation uh would like welcome to come speak to your project. Name, address, for uh Jake Porter, Heritage Civil, 2055 North Mullet Road, sweet 204. Um just sorry I'm trying to track some of these questions here. Um chairman to your comment about final about the uh access easement. If there's no plan to at this point, but if that little piece does turn into an out parcel at some point they come back with a final plat at that point we would need to establish to your point um an access easement and those access points at the final plat. So to Todd's um what Todd was saying about we it's hard to say what would be the best right now but the final plaque comes through if that ever happens then I think that would still give you the opportunity to analyze maybe at that point they would know what it is but um so I make that point um the access or the drive uh is not intended as on the elders project we did prior to this one um that driveway is not the same as that one. It's not serving six or five or six out parcels. It's just serving this facility um in a neighboring property. Um I think at the original tech review meeting we were we were discussing whether to connect to York Road or not. It doesn't do um this facility any it doesn't help us by any means. Um, I'm not sure that it hurts us either, but again, it goes back to that the community feel as far as we understand that York Road floods and it floods more often than we care to uh have it do so. And not sure that there's really a way the city can fix that at this point. So, there's been a design drive to to carry any emergency access or emergency service for those neighbors

in the back um to get out during one of those events. Um, for our variance. Uh we are requesting the material waiver for 40% primary materials and 60% secondary materials. Um the intent for this facility, and I I know you have the elevations um on one of the back pages there, uh is and I I'll try to describe this as best I can. not an architect, but um somewhat of a modern farmhouse, a little more conservative than that. But if you look at that picture, you the last thing I think I would say is medical facility or commercial or whatever it is. It looks very homey, um very modern white farmhouse, which is kind of that vibe, if you will, down York Road. So, they're trying to stay within that um kind of aesthetic going more than 40% to brick and stone um and less hardy. I think that that that you could keep, you know, it's just the higher you go away from that, it just it'll change that imagery that you're seeing in front of you. I mean, if that looks good, that's what 4060 looks like. If we go 6040, it'll add more brick and stone. Um I think that they're okay with changing some of those things, but that's the intent. The intent is to have um a very nice uh again I'll say homey look a very nice non commercial medical looking building. Um, another comment that um was put on, planning's comment was put on the staff report that we um received this week was about requiring sidewalks across Lebanon Road and York and along sorry, York Road up to um and the the I want to officially or formally request a second variance or second waiver to that uh to not include the sidewalk up York Road um specifically because um As Shane just

spoke a few minutes ago about, that whole corner is flood plane. It's all FEMA controlled. Um, and I I know I'm sure every single one of you's driven down York Road or seen it. There's guardrails on both sides and it drops off down into that flood plane area. So, can we add a sidewalk? Yes, that is very possible. Can we do the FEMA required work? Yes, it's very possible. Can we build a bridge and bridge that? Yes, it's very possible. Um, is it necessary? It's I guess again to up to everyone here to decide, but um our request is to not have to go through all that process just to put a sidewalk on a road that I'm I'm guessing here, but based on a previous project we worked with with the the hardware store is that not many people down York Road want much more going down York Road. So, um requesting that sidewalk be waved. As far as a component of that one, uh about Lebanon Road having a sidewalk on it, there's already a Lebanon Lebanon Road already has a sidewalk in that area. So that is um should be accomplished already. Um I believe I believe I answered all those questions that brought up. If you have any more or have any um comments, questions, anything else I can answer, please feel free to let me know.

Thank you.

Questions, comments from the commission. Commissioner Jobs. So on the sidewalk issue, Jake, there and while that that's an added expense to do, you're you're talking about assisted living where these people can get out and walk and I think the health benefits of maybe having another way to come through there and walk and come back up would be beneficial. It may just be me and I might be one on this whole commission, but I think that would be beneficial with what this is. So, and where and and while the people on York Grove may not get any use of it, the people in that facility will. And who knows, some of us may be in that facility someday. Um, you know, so that's that's I I just think about that. That's

I think I think we also see the benefit of again I agreed whenever they put the comment. That's like I know it's part of the code as well is to add sidewalks on your front edges, but um some cases and I the I think I have a the president's stand was for u not it's next to vintage w vintage wine down there on Lebanon Road Jam Enterprises or something. I think they had the same issue there. Is it the same slope? Is that the same slope as road?

And we'd have Yes. And then for that stick down there that in that flood area it is. Um and again the problem for me uh from a design standpoint is the city allows me to go 3 to one slopes which is fairly soft. What that is that is what's standard for geotech and stability. I get that. But um those slopes right now are much steeper than that because that's just how they have been forever. So the amount of area and amount of room you're talking about having to go um I guess it would be curb and gutter Shane. I'm not real positive. What would the curb and gutter and then a gap or you going to put the sidewalk behind it? Regardless, sorry specifics. You're going seven or eight feet just going flat and then you're going to drop down at 3 to1 probably 15 or 20 more feet to get down to the bottom. At that point, you're disturbing 30 feet of wetland or I'm sorry, not wetlands, steam of flood plane and the creek that's going through there. Um we already know that I know everyone here already knows there's flooding issues at the ballpark across the street at um the putt putt and everything like that. So, you know, again, per per Shane's uh and public works stance, I think it's we're with them. If we can not touch flood plane, that's, you know, you can't create an issue if you don't mess with it. And I I just assume leave it at that if we can. But

what about this, Jake? I was looking right there. If we gave you the variance to not do it on York Road, looks like you're danger close on the internal portion of your site for connectivity on your internal sidewalks, particularly down the west side. looks to be the only place that we don't have connectivity. Maybe just a couple places uh on the north I'm going call it northeast side but internal connectivity of the sidewalks to create kind of not a greenway around it but a path internally within the site should they want to do that maybe just some internal sidewalks instead of

so somebody could go outside and you can walk around the facility just like a lot of your your employment uh you know businesses will have that I know one of the main companies I represent, they do that at the home office. They've got a a track light type thing, which this would be a sidewalk. It's the same thing. This more is this home, not home health, but is this a proposed assisted living or is this it's skilled nursing? So, it's a skilled nursing facility and and I'll look back at developers here that it's very medical. I will tell you that. I'm not I'm not the best to speak on that. Andy, if you'd like to come. I'm thinking of like general

my father was at home health. This looks similar to uh to old hickory home healthcare out there. Um and they did rehab. They go through a very speaking a little bit on behalf of them. They go through the very uh distinct and I think cumbersome process of getting these facilities um approved through the medical side because of healthcare, because of funding, all those things. Um, so very specific in what they do and what they're allowed to do, where they're allowed to go. So, um, if he'll give you a better breakdown of what it is, sorry about that. No, no, that's great. That help be helpful.

Yeah. I'm Andy Clark. I'm with National Healthcare. Glad to be here tonight. Looking forward to moving forward with this project. Um, 100 East Fine Street, Murphy'sboro, Tennessee. Yeah.

So, I want to read what the definition is for the state. Um, is a sniff a skilled nursing facility considered a health care facility in Tennessee? And the answer is yes. A skilled nursing facility is considered a healthc care facility in Tennessee and is regulated by the state's Department of Health, which licenses and certifies various healthc care facilities, including nursing homes, another name for skilled nursing facilities. Sniffs provide intensive medical and nursing care, rehab services, and medical supervision for patients who cannot function independently after a hospital stay. We also offer rehab services for those um that have accidents or hip replacements or all sorts of things and they need temporary stay um for occupational um rehab, speech rehab, things like that. Um kind of tie that in with the sidewalk issue. We've um we have no problem putting in sidewalks. It's a matter of where they go and how they function, how they serve. Of course, our um partners that operate the facility as well as the patients that stay there. Most of the patients are not going to be mobile ambulatory. However, they the the rehab portion that would be a great use. So, if we can get them outside, we have courtyards that are already designed, but if we can have additional sidewalks for connectivity for our partners, we're always always looking for ways to do things like that.

I like that. It's a good trade-off. Yeah, it is. It is. Okay. Cuz someone's child or I mean, someone's, you know, family member might come and want to certainly push them around or something just to get out. So, it's I think it would be Yeah, it would be really good. My father was at a facility similar to this. It was life care of Old Hickory. This kind of reminds me the courtyard concept and it's kind of what I thought that this was as well. I like it. I love your location.

So, we're we're very pleased with it how it's come together. Uh we love the support from the city. U you guys are outstanding. Jennifer has been over backwards to help us find the right place. Uh been very supportive of the project all through the process. Nothing but great things to say. So, thank you. Thank you. Yes, sir. Commissioner Rast,

I'll add some personal notes. Um, my mother's in a independent living facility and she has just that there's a path around that anytime a day you can see folks going around using that path. I I realize this a rehab, but that's a great idea. But I can I understand what you said, Commissioner, but I wouldn't want my mother anywhere near Cool Spring Boulevard around the facility. Amen. But and these folks probably even in worse condition. I wouldn't want them going up and down York Road. I'd want them out on the facility and supervis great. So no no real questions, just comment.

Are are you guys okay with staff's recommendation of the other variance request on the facade that staff's recommendation staying at 6040 versus your just the opposite 4060? Yes. Sorry. I will say yes and I spoke to John earlier. I don't think that the ordinance actually covers that courtyard area, but just if you want to codify 6040 on the exterior. Sure. You know, facades and that courtyard will still be hardy and nice materials. It just won't leave the brick and stone for and they will work with staff on where that sidewalk in there should go. Okay. All right. Thank you.

Further questions, comments from the commission. Thank you guys. This time I'd like to call for citizen comments. Any citizen wish to make comment? Welcome, encouraged to do so. Even though we know you name and address, I've been here before. Yes, sir.

Don SQU 101 York Road. Okay. They've answered some of the questions. One of we asked very much so to leave the trees that are on York Road. Leave them there. They make the maximum width buffer that it's a can indeed 20 50 feet whatever it is the maximum it should be wet just leave what's there it's a good good growth there on the be east side of York road just leave it there all the comments you heard earlier about the other thing would be avoided just stay away from just leave it there on the side they wouldn't have to take anything out or put anything back just leave it as it is and the traffic light I found out when the church lot wasn't included Um John they told me break the the ement be there to get traffic to the traffic light that the internal road when Yorkshire is populated will be cutting through there to make a left turn on 70 highway you know it and I know it and it's hope they can build that road to where it'll take that it won't make you a mess they know they require it to maybe they will will do so make it easier for those because York road does flood it gets two inches below the floor joist in our house on a big flood floods. That's when the North York floods now, that's what it does. A brick house right there off the off the road. U and how you going to get the water off of there before it gets to the creek, before the flood comes down the creek? I I don't understand how that going to work. I understand what it's supposed to, but how it's going to work.

I don't understand that either. And one more thing they might not have found yet. Going back to to RC Wright when he owned that, he granted an easement to the York family to go across his property when the York load floods and it's still there. You look up the deed from RC right in 1960. Not really know about that. I know about that. Okay, sir.

Okay. And then even for still there probably can't do away with that. But this access road will probably this road across there will probably cover that. But you can look it up. I thought I had the D home. I looked real quick before I left. I go to courthouse. I'm sure I can find it. It'll be it'll still be there. So So we leave the buffer on the side and the traffic lights issues and hopefully it be way to make the road enough to take care of that when Yorkshire gets populated. That's the the main things that we had we're concerned about. What kind of timeline they have construction? I haven't heard anything about that yet. Yes, sir.

And and sidewalks. York Road does not need any sidewalks. We own on both side. We own the property behind this behind this proposal and on the other side of York Road. We're on both side York Road behind this. It's not going anywhere. You've heard that before, Luke. You've heard that before. Yes, sir. So we don't need any sidewalks for a few for a few yards there. Had this discussion on Yorkshire in the back. There's no need for it. Arch your city commissioner, but you could be mayor of York. Well, I like like to meet Mart afterwards. I haven't met him before. Like if you got a few minutes, I can speak to you afterwards. Yes, sir.

I've been here. I've been here before. Okay. That's our main thing. It look like enough might be a decent thing. Just those two things primarily leave the buffer on York Road. That's the biggest thing I see from the comments tonight that a lot's been addressed. Just leave that buffer as it is. No cost to them and it's already there. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. ESC. Commissioner Jos, you know that that easement I think we need to discuss that. Is that Jake? Are you um are you aware of that? And is that road going to be on that easement? Will that take

the road will not follow that easement? I can almost guarantee that that the odds of that were very unlikely. Um but we will find out where that is at and and again if the whole point of it is to provide that emergency access and that's the purpose. Okay. But it's beyond where the building and stuff would go. It's a very it's for safety issues because it flooded so bad on that and it has been used. Believe me, you you have you had to. Well, I just I didn't want to do I just wanted them to make sure since he brought that up because I mean I didn't know that and I just think that you know you want to at least dress it address that where it is on the property just for for future

I'm no longer Jake do you happen to know uh what timeline to potentially or should it be approved? I'll look back to the Mr. Andy again, but uh again at the medical reg. I can definitely speak to that. We'd like to move quicker rather than later.

Uh it's all market conditions. Um this is a 30 plus million dollar investment, so there's a lot of timing involved with the land purchase, the documents, the actual construction. Um, best guess right now is if we have approval here by our board sometime this year, we would be open sometime 2028. Thank you. Further questions, comments from the commission. Let's go ahead and open this. Uh, any more citizen comments? Pretty open there. Wonderful. Closer citizen comments. At which time I am looking for a motion in regards item on our agenda. approval.

Second motion. Hang real quick. Motion for approval. You got all of them. Subject to staff comments. Would you like to include and grant the variance for no sidewalk on York Road? Yes. Would you like to include a comment to internal connectivity of the sidewalks on the site? Yes. That the staff will work with them on. Staff will work with them on. And that would be a second by Commissioner Armstead. So motion and a second. Would you also like to include trying to preserve as much greenery and trees along Ro? That's just a comment to staff

as long as they can. Yeah, there's anything that we can do. There's most I can do. But yes, that there you go. Motion and a second. It's a motion and a second. Uh all those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. So approved. Be honest with you all. It hasn't flooded. It hadn't flooded in probably That's true. Five or six years. Maybe eight years. That's true. Since it flooded down there. Been a while. It used to flood every time it rained, but I don't know what changed it, but it don't flood like it used to. May I comment,

please?

One of the things that changed it was when they put the bridge in u on Lebanon Road when they put that bridge in it there and put that in. And I also want to give credit to our public works department because we have so many people in the city sometimes that says, "Oh, all this new construction is causing this flooding." Let me tell you, the new construction is is is decreasing the flooding in our city because of the storm water maintenance that is applied in our city. And they've done a they've done a masterful job of it. I live in Wither Place. That whole bottom has been flooded. I moved in there in in uh uh February the 14th of 1989 and there was a Chester Gors floating in the the the lot next to me going through the guy's house where he is now. And we evacu evacuated that day. It scared me to death. Never seen anything quite like that anymore. And then that bridge was done and we've got all the things that we've done in the city through the years. Thank public works for what they've done this this storm where I mentioned. That's my opinion, but I really think that's truly that's where it is.

It's very true. South Julie Road by Robinson Park where they box covered it wide mount Julie Road. It it cleaned up flooding all through Clear View. Really helped. That's good. All right. You just have to put the fence in every time. Yes, sir. Yeah. Uh, next item up on our agenda falls underneath preliminary plat. It's item 12A to review the preliminary plat for Tate's Landing located at 212 Paul Drive. Mr. John,

Sure thing. This is uh you might remember this as the development that they uh put the killed the variable lot subdivision option in our zoning ordinance. Um, so the last one we'll ever see that this is just the preliminary plat following up after that concept plan that was approved. Um it'll be the last one you ever see. That's a variable lot subdivision. Um 17 lots and comments other than what you see in the conditions from the concept plan have been addressed. Um so staff recommends approval. Um all the uh all the usual suspects in terms of comments and conditions are are addressed and if they're not, they're in the conditions. Thank you. This goes through Nicholls, doesn't it?

Connects to watermark. Yeah. One of Okay. Change. I'm sorry. I check the public works comments are minor in nature. Um they listed it below. It's kind of like some of the other ones we've had tonight. So, we recommend approval with our comments general and minor in nature. Commissioner Jones.

Yeah. I'm sorry about it because I called today because of this wanting to know if they had asked the HOA in Nicholls because they're using their streets and I had forgotten that those streets are public streets and it had been planned from the from before. So, I wanted to bring that up. That's that's why cuz I wanted to know and that's something y'all would sign off on, but apparently it's it's nothing that that y'all can do about it. So, question about amenities.

Yeah, they've got they've added a walking trail. it's not you know for the size of this particular development I think uh that would suffice um there's not a lot of a lot more regulation that we can point to to force anything else like we discussed earlier even more so in this one because it's a basic it's a straight zone project it's not a put commissioner rest

just a couple questions Shane, and I see it on there, but the 10 foot raised walking trail on either side of that one leg, what was the motivation behind that? Usually that's on, you know, larger facilities, longer facilities. Just wondering why that came to be.

It's a great question. Um, and it actually bring to mind a problem that I completely overlooked. uh similar to what we had in Triple Crown. That stub is classified as a residential access street because it it's stubbed to an adjacent parcel. Our code requires that and they don't get waiverss or variances because they're straight which means they don't get access to that. Um or if they do it they those lots would need to be 100 100 100 ft wide.

Okay. Um and that I I completely overlooked that when this was coming through tech review. That's a great catch. Not a fan of that. And then even the walking trail connects through the culdesac to those. There's not a place for pedestrians around the culde-sac. It's just it looks really odd. Usually you you expect a walking trail along a corridor like you know some of the other developments that are proposed, but this one really seems odd.

Ask for representation speak to this as well. Yeah, please name and address for the record. Jake Porter, Heritage Civil 2055 North Mount Juliet Road, sweet 204. Um, so this is a bit of an odd to the point of connection to Nichols Veil. It was I actually believe there's a sign at the end of this street that says to be extended by authority of Mount Juliet. Um, that was part of their put way back when. Um the thoroughfare plan I believe shows a road going down the tape property uh which this is 10 acres of um it gets a little bit you know to Todd's point it's a little odd it's 17 lots do we class do we need to be classified as a residential collector going north south for these lots no but is the future intention of the current thoroughfare plan to connect to Tate Lane yes so if you look at the um the culde-sac that's to the south is a temporary culde-sac in nature. It's not supposed to not meant to be there forever. It's meant to continue and I understand that it usually takes years to happen. So, I get that.

Um the reason that they are 10 foot side or 10 foot walking trails on the size of those of that particular um street is that uh Todd correct me if I'm wrong, but there there's an option for residential collector. So that the standard residential collector for the city is a five foot sidewalk, six foot grass strip, five foot bike lane,

pavement section, bike lane, and then the same other side. So bike lane versus walking trail. We figured this is more of a walking trail area than people riding their bikes in the road. But again, I'm not sure that it matters to us. It was just the thought of as this goes further south someday towards Tate Lane or wherever it winds up connecting um having that would be the main thorough affair that have those those walks on the side instead of or I guess in lie of the bike lanes. Yeah, I think I think until then there'll be a lot of people scratching their heads wondering what what what it's doing there for sure. Okay, that's your question.

Again, one of those things I don't like, but I understand. Further questions, comments from the commission. Todd, please. I'm sorry. I the the whole residential collector thing does need resolution. because it's against subregs to have lots running a a residential collector. It It's the same situation we were dealing with with with Triple Crown and I I apologize to Jake. I should have picked up on that when this was coming through tech review.

I thought we we had talked about that and you and I don't know that code part either. I know you had mentioned it once to me. Um, but there was some a percentage of houses that were allowed to be on that residential collector and this met that was where we were at. The only other way to do is an alley load which doesn't necessarily function for three lots.

There is there is a clause that allows a certain percentage of your frontage to have um a certain percentage of the length of your collector to have frontage. Um, however, the way that reads leads me to believe uh because it uses the word anticipated volume and with this stubbing up a property line and it being in the major thoroughare plan that that anticipated volume is going to be higher than what's just generated by this development. Um, but also at this point I'm not even sure they can't just get a waiver from y'all. I I don't know at this point. It's just a subreg.

So, we would basically need to grant him a variance

essentially, which is why it's a residential collector in the first place. It's because we weren't going to grant variances because this is a variable lot subdivision and it's straight zone, not a pod. I do. Thank commercial jobs has a question on something else.

So that that south um the culdeac that south down there you're talking about. Yes, sir. What is what is on the plat where there's nothing there? And then then you've got that culdeac at 12 and 13. Is that supposed to be a stub? Here's my here's you know they're already coming through Nicholls bail to get in here. We don't know what's going to get here. It is that stubbed off on the plan? Was that originally stubbed off

in this this park? Yes. In Nicholls or whatever? Because I'm I mean, we don't know what's going to go down here and we don't know what's going to go through their subdivision even though it's public streets. I'm I'm a little concerned with that. I understand ingress and ingress and why we need it for for um uh emergency services and etc., etc., but at some point, where is it going to end? This one. Well, Todd, do you I'm sorry. You have your computer. Can you do you have ability to pull up the thoroughare plan and show them there? Is it?

So, the future transportation plan calls for collectors essentially connecting Nicholls Veil with a future collector that extends to Benton Douglas, which is the street opposite of North Green Hill. Um, and that is proposed to extend all the way down to Tate. Um, essentially bypassing the section of Tate Lane that's not a street. So that was that was originally planned on a third repair plan.

There's two separate plans, right? There's the future transportation plan which is what what calls for the connection between Benton Douglas and Tate and then there's the Nicholls pud which called for this the stub. Um, so we're kind of trying to mesh the two here, right? Like they have right to to access via Nichols Veil and they're stubbing to the south to meet the intentions of our future transportation plan. So why is the culde-sac in there instead of a stub? Because they're required a temporary turnaround. Okay.

Based on the length and number of units. emergency services is the main driver behind the temporary culde-sac and again we use the word temporary meaning to be extended eventually. We we had this this same thing come up in Kelsey Kelsey Glenn Kelsey Glenn down there at the end in that Right. and the sidewalk didn't go around it and it was supposed to and then then it was broken up or it didn't get because we didn't approve that. Right. It got put back in. It's in now.

Okay. So, um was that one the same way as this? Again, I'm just getting I know we've got to have connectivity and I'm all for it, but I'm just wondering if another piece of property couldn't connect to get over there because there's a lot of connection in in in in Nicholls. I mean, you've got Leonard Road, you've got Sunset, you've got, you know, it's so I don't I don't know. And now now this is going to be added to them. I just I don't know. So, I'm just concerned. I mean, we

the additional traffic through Yeah. Is there any way to provide a walking path? Not a really walking path, but a way from the southern walking path up to that 10-ft path. I mean, I know it's it's fire code or I guess it's IC I think that's controlling it. um just requires a 46 foot radius, 98 foot diameter turnaround for um fire trucks. Right.

So this one if we take I'm not say took curbs off, but if we have it um so that that trail just like you say bends around or we can put ramps down to it. There won't be curbs there regardless. You'll be able to get off it, walk through the culde-sac, get to that other side. Um okay. or there that that would be the most direct way. But if you have a problem with walking through a culde-sac, then we can stripe around the outside or something. Again, it's all it's all kind of a it is an o and I don't disagree. It's an odd thing. I It's up to me. I just you've seen where we're connecting on watermark. Um it's just it's just a road that drives into the trees and Yeah, it's good. Okay. I'm good. Sorry. Um Todd,

let me go ahead. While we're figuring this out, let me call for citizen comments uh on this item. Any citizen wish to make comment, welcome encourage to do so. Please go to the microphone name and address for the record. Trying to keep us smooth. any any connection that we do have to be a J. Hi, I'm Dana S. No, you're fine. Um, I'm the HOA president for Nicholls and I know tensions are very high with some of the citizens in Nicholls. Um, before we purchased Oh, sorry. 15 Klet Court is my address.

Um, before we purchased our home, we talked to the Tates and Tate said, "Uh, we're never going to sell. we've been here forever, seven generations, whatever. We're never going to sell. So, obviously, we were a little surprised when we heard about this. Um, our favorite thing is sitting on the back porch looking out through the forest, and that's not going to be there anymore. And we understand that the price of progress, and we live in an area that's growing. So, um, our biggest concerns are, uh, for the neighborhood itself, over traffic, um, coming in and out of there. Um, we have a lot of people speeding through there now. We get lots of complaints from the people who live in the neighborhood and it's just going to be more people coming in and out of there. Um, we do have where you can make a protected left off of Benton Douglas. Um, but a lot of people, you know, want to go out the front of the neighborhood and then when you've got Elliot's Preserve coming in on the other side, there's just going to be a lot of traffic. So, I would like to mention that maybe we I don't know if there's a way to put a traffic light in down at the front of Nicholsville if we're going to, you know, keep routing traffic through there. Um, and then the other thing I would say is, you know, we've got the amenities in our neighborhood. Um, and with this connecting to it and them not having an any amenities, um, that's a concern for some of the people. They've, you know, reached out to us and said, "Hey, are they going to be using our pool?" And all of this kind of stuff. And obviously they're not part of Nicholls so technically they're not but you know it's going to be up to us to please that and then and have to tell them no you guys can't do that. So those are my call outs on it. And the very last thing I would say is if there's any way in the buffer, because I know that there's got to be a 20 foot buffer at the back, if we can try and preserve some of the giant hickory trees that are back there, if there's, you know, not sick, whatever, just so that we can keep some of the forest back there for the people who do who are going to back up to this

neighborhood, that would be really appreciated. Cool. A question for Sam real quick. Um, can we make a condition that when they submit their HOA agreement that the HOA clearly define that this is not a part of Nicholls Veil HOA or subdivision? Can we make that a condition where that needs to be part of their HOA agreement itself? I would say that we could ask them to do that, but there's just very limited things that we have.

I feel the way it's going to be marketed by a realtor. Oh, it's Nichols. Yeah. Yeah, that's exactly right. They'll say it, but I mean custom gardens is never going to park according to our sales,

the mortgage companies require you to present the HOA documents, you know, prior to closing and whatnot there. So, you know, just like people don't look at their legal description before buying a piece of property to realize the easements and ingress, egress, and things around their property, but you should read those prior to purchasing as you should read your HOA agreement because that's really the proof in the pudding of what you're truly owning at the end of the day, not your sticks and bricks, but you buy the land as well. And the land can come with certain conditions and covenants. 17 homes going to have their own HOA. They would would require Yes.

The intent is to be not not not to be hostile any means but to be completely separate from Nickel B. It's a standalone piece that just happens to tie to what was um built to that property to access it. The amenity Yeah. So the amenity is the walking trail around the pond and up and down the access there which I'm sorry. culinary maintenance.

Yeah. Maint the HOA um they haven't established dues or anything like that, but there's not much to maintain. The dues wouldn't be hundreds and it's the essentials that the point of the HOA is to provide the documents like they're talking about. I think I got a nod from um developer that it that is something that is yes we can put that into there it do not use in any nickels it's not a part of this it's not our subdivision this is separate I guess if you will buyer beware put it there they probably don't they probably don't

the we have to be Everybody else we passed where they have to be street lights. Remember that wasn't that long ago. Last year I brought that. And so even though that's that's public streets in there, those lights planning we those lights would be there. Correct. And their HOA would have to pay for the lights.

Would this require that John Jill? Would this require the street lights? But they the HOA that they're having, we're talking about an HOA would have to pay for those lives. So that's that's one of the things that the HOA would have to pay for as well as the the liability on the property and hopefully DNO for their board. Hopefully they only think they better get it. I mean, insurance everybody knows. So So So do we have the collector issue all good? for the electricity.

Yeah. All right. Todd, do you want comment on this uh collector issue? We're trying to overcome. Shane ping me and said these are subdivision regulations. You guys can wave those. Okay. Obviously Sam, correct me if I'm wrong. Okay. But

yes, that is true. You can, but there it has to meet four conditions in order for you to grant variance to the subdivision res. Um, it can't be uh detrimental to the public safe health health or welfare or injurous to other property or improvements. Number two, conditions upon which the request for a variance is based on unique or that's um for variance is based on uniqueness of the property. That's what that's supposed to say. Um and then this is the big one. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topography of the specific property involved, a particular hardship is created and it cannot be self-imposed. And um the last one being the variance will not in any manner alter provisions of the land development plan

or the road plan. So, so we I don't meet the criteria. Um, I would say the third one is a top cell. There's no burden caused by property. It's done before. Can I throw something out for you, please?

Having a residential collector dump out onto a access street is completely backwards. Um, I would argue it would make sense for us to grant a variance for road B to also be in access street. Um, that ties that matches the classification of watermark way. Um, and that would be a unique circumstance from their surroundings. Um, and I'm just thinking that that discourages this from being the the main connection from Tate up to to Lebanon Road in the future, but choking them down.

Exactly. Um, I I don't know if that meets all of those criteria, but So, I think at that point the hardship would have been created by the previous project coming into the site. it'd be created by watermark way being underclassified based on what it should have been. Yeah. I mean,

I'll agree with you, Todd. If the accepting road is a lower I call it lower quality road than what's being dumped into it, then that doesn't make any sense. And I think if we do grant that then that would if Jake I don't know how tied you are to these 10 foot trails but it would allow you to remove those. And

I was going to mention it would if you don't like the 10 foot trails it would help it would take the section back down to 5 foot sidewalk six foot grass less awkward trails. Todd's point makes sense to me as far as technically what it's not. It's not it will be I'd rather have match as well now.

But getting rid of those template trails makes sense. We kosher it seems like it. I Yeah, I'd recommend granting a a waiver to allow road B to be an access street. If you're asking me, we're kosher. My opinion doesn't matter. I got another question. Commissioner the sidewalks in this the HOA. No. No. They'll be in the public part of the public streets. To which point the sidewalk is going to be more durable than a walking trail in the very long run. But ultimately the sidewalk would be a more durable option than pavement or asphalt.

So I think we got an answer. theoretical right now. If we were to grant a variance, the variance would be to row B to become a access street and therefore removing the 10-ft trail being replaced with the 5ft sidewalk and six foot grass strip. Correct. Okay. Very well. Any additional citizen comments? Try to keep us going. Thank you, Jay. Thank you. Any other questions, comments, concerns from the commission so many times when you're revisit?

Well, if we are going to have to keep up those sidewalks for the city from city expense and that's what we're we're we're doing right now, trying to to minimize our expenses and because obviously, you know, there there needs to be I think if we're going to have to do the sidewalks, they need to do some kind of path somewhere in there. So have both of them. Don't they have room for that down there on their on their on their space? They've got to have so much green space, don't they? It's a 10ft path. Well, you already got your path. Well, I thought you said you're taking the path away. No, no, this one up here. Yeah, on both sides. And replacing that with sidewalk.

Yeah, sidewalk. So, how does that connect over here then? You run across the street. Well, where you going to get on another path? Well, there's no open space. You have private ownership across the street. Okay. Commissioner Giles, that that point is where we said we could put we would put ramps down to the asphalt. So, it would be a smooth connection at the future development extension of that road. Those two sidewalks would that asphalt comes out. The sidewalks will continue south. There likely would be a crosswalk there to cross over to that trail connection. So it would ultimately have the connection. It's just the culde-sac fire code makes that a requirement.

So these people up here like seven, they're going to have to walk on the sidewalk to get over here and then cross over the street to get on the the half circle trail, but you're going to still keep that in there. Yes. The trail that goes down to the southeast corner is staying

and the HOA can choose to use that green whatever they want. All right. And we do have a sign called out specifically temporary dead end road to be extended by the authority of Mount Juliet. So I will point that out to every person I ever see coming in here because that is the least. I hate that for everyone.

That being said, I am looking for a motion in regards to this item. I'll give you a motion for approval with some help with the conditions um with the waiver to become an access street removal of the 10 foot pass along access street and replacement with curb gutter sidewalk. Um, what's your variance? That's the variance. Road B is an access route, five set sidewalks, six foot grass strip. Yes, your branch. Okay. Are there any other conditions that we

I'd like to second and I'd like to add the condition that the HOA agreement uh include um paragraph sentence something that just includes that this is not part of the Nicholls Veil HOA or community way that's we've done everything we can to make sure that they're aware of separation. So amended. So I got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I I against abstensions. So approved. Thank you Lake.

Yep. All right. There's a reason why some of these are at the end of the agenda. Next item up on our agenda is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. Uh it's item 13A. an ordinance enacting a one-year moratorum on the acceptance and approval for multifamily residential development in the city of Mount Juliet, Tennessee. Mr. John, um this is an ordinance brought forth by a commissioner. It's already been through one hearing at the board of commissioners where it passed that first hearing. Um it must go through planning commission as well. And that's all I have to say. I'm sure public works has no comment. No.

Yes. Thought that was going to be the way. Commissioner Jiles, do you want to shed us any insight on this one? Very well. I added up. We did tonight concerning homes and units of provided. We have se we tonight 792 units of um 305 single families, 70 condos, 417 town homes. Um so that's um quite a bit we've done tonight according to the numbers that are in that packet.

So be a good time to think about that.

I was thinking in terms of schools and students. I'll make just a a few brief comments out there that are should this go through. Um my question would be what is your goal and your objective? And that's the main thing that that I would have when you enact something like this. Uh it's very rare that a city take upon a moratorum upon itself. The second is how how do you how is this quantitative? So if you do something as significant as this, how you going to measure How you how you going to know? How you going to know whether or not it works? What do you what do you gain if you enact anything, you do anything? If it's immeasurable, where's your value in doing something? Everything should have a measure. How do you measure the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of this? Could be your your residual result on it. My other comment is as we also saw tonight which Linda pointed out everything's coming through here as a putt and as it comes through initially as a putt if I'm incorrect on this Sam as a put we can turn a pud down just for coming to us because it's a RM16 and we have a right to turn it down. So if we feel like it doesn't need to be here, whether or not PC gives it a positive recommendation, gets to the BMC, to me it could be shot down just as easy. I'm going to turn you down because you're M16 and then you can get away from the potential of a moratorum out there. Those would be three initial thoughts I have out there. As we also included out there, you in what we did approve tonight, there are significant amount of road improvements and off-site

improvements. So, if you shut this down, who's paying for taxpayer burden? As Commissioner Giles just spoke to right there, we're trying to reduce the impact of the taxpayer burden without having to increase taxes if the development is not funding and being the body and such to do that. Guess who's paying? So, those would just be my words out there for that. And I do believe that some of our multifamily could have better placement and so versus a moratorum I think it would be a an opening of a land use plan and looking at somewhere where we move that because some multif family can be really good because what some multif family does is in the right placement becomes good planning and good planning is connectivity walkability and everything else and that gets your cars off the street that relieves your traffic, that relieves a lot of the headaches and the things that people are coming at me about as well as I'm sure each and every one of you guys uh here. And so those would just be my comments towards it is is what do we gain and and what do we get? Make sure that if if something this significant should go through that um that's it's measurable that that there's there's there's something to gain. If not, you could also argue the ineffectiveness and and the long-term residual effects of a decision as significant as this. Those would be my comments. Let's see. I'll just echo your comments. It's got to be measurable. What what what is the desired outcome here? We don't know what that is.

I don't And it's already it's passed the first rating. I'm not sure what our opinion matters that much anyways if it's already past the first reading. Um, poor mouth. Yeah, just Yeah, don't want to sound defeish, but

or we can defer. Yeah, same would be angry at us.

Please, Commissioner Franklin. You you know one thing that gets me about this is probably the reason that multif family was added to commercial mixed use originally if you remember it was to leverage commercial investment into Mount Juliet when when we couldn't get any and we were trying to do anything in the world to get commercial de development. So we said, "Hey, you know, if you Yeah. Okay. A little little higher density, bring us some." But in looking back, I'm not sure that that ever really worked. I mean, we we did get business, but I think four-lane highways and new roads and interchanges and improved roads probably got the business. I'm not sure that any of this did. And to me, trying to leverage business in with multif family, it it it kind of it kind of trying to skew the market a little bit in a way. It's trying to tell, hey, maybe we need more business, but will the business work or is are we bringing in business to compete with business who came in here kind of realistically? I mean, is the whole mixeduse concept still as valid as it was when we first started it? And so for me, you know, I mean, we can either vote to pass, you know, recommend, non-recommend, and make some suggestions. If I was to make a suggestion and go ahead and pass this thing, it would be, hey, why don't we take a look at whether or not we want to keep on doing it this way? I mean, multif family near an interchange when 70% of the people are going to work their way to an interstate, right? That hadn't changed. But if we put one on the other side of the town, then we're just going to 70% are going to go right through our infrastructure. You know, that's more important than whether or not we do it or not. To me, it's where we put it. That would be my

kind of where I was going with that is is is this the right mechanism in order to control it in the best form and fashion. And uh the reason why we're importing technically you're elected in your role. Further discussion, questions or comments? What happens if we don't make a motion? It automatically passes, doesn't it? We don't have any citizens comments. It's like it's like everything else. It automatically constitutes a a pass, right?

Right. TCA says we have to Yeah. Let's call for citizen comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Any citizens wish to make comment are welcome encouraged to do so. Please go to the microphone name and address for the record. See no sense if we if we voted for this it passed that's not going to stop our neighbors from uh approving and they're going to use our roads. I mean 109 up there is doing like this right now. And which direction do they go when they leave from up there?

This way. So I mean we're not going to stop it. Smok of them coming up South Mullet Road. Yeah. Murphy'sboro. Yeah. Yeah. Well, if anybody would like to make a motion, I'll probably make a motion for a negative recommendation. Second. We got to tell why we're doing it. No, no, no. In this case, you don't. That's a motion and a second for a negative recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying I raising your hand. I

against abstensions. Negative recommendation. just ain't going to work. Next item up for uh uh and for the record too, Tyler, just so they get it in verbally in case you ever got to verbally review these. For the record, uh Commissioner Giles was absent from the previous vote. Next item up on our agenda um is item 13Bs. Recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. It is to review the updates the planning commission project submitt fees. M Johnson,

they really have not been updated since 2012. We are looking at updating these fees. We have been for quite some time. We're just trying to bring them in line to the amount of time, effort, um the concerted effort that's put forth by a multitude of staff that equates to to what is put into these projects and the reviews. It's not a pat on the back. It's just we're trying to be in line with the amount of time spent if you did it on an hourly basis and so forth and and spread it out amongst the staff that's reviewing this because there are multitude of people that touch these plans and it's not just a oneandone. you know, we have multiple meetings before it even gets to you all. So, we just feel like we're being fair and consistent across the board and just um providing a quality product um for the development community.

Um the before what it is now because I really I it's on the website. It's in the back. It's in here. It's a little convoluted, but it it shows you. The blue is the new and the red is the old, right? How does look at it? But I didn't Jill, how does this compare to our peers? Yeah. We are very middle of the road. The end result should all this go through. We are middle of the road. End result. How we compared to Le

um lower in some cases. A lot of the cases were we're probably pretty consistent. But um I I would say these are fair fees for what the amount of work that's put into them and what all we do. I feel I could lay my head down at night with these fees and know that we're we're not trying to take anybody for anything. We're just trying to be fair and consistent with the amount of time that we're utilizing into these projects. Sir, I didn't get that. I didn't get that in my pack. Sorry.

That's okay. I just wanted to add I understand why you might be asking that question, but my direction to staff was also we shouldn't while comparing to other cities is a good starting point just to make sure you're just even in the same arena as them. It's not really the end goal. You have to compare what our salaries are at our city, what our process is, which might be different than other cities. So, it's definitely not a direct comparison as we have to be able to justify ours, not what other cities do. In my profession, we're only behind Williamson County and what it costs.

City of Franklin is where we are only number two to currently. So, we this may put us the highest in the middle Tennessee market out there. That's the reason why I encourage us to look because that also equals potential moratorum

uh is what that can also send that signal out there too to just make sure that we we leap because there's some here I'm like golly that's just so low. Uh but then there's some out here that's like one of them um which we do see frequently. What if it's a oneacre lot? All they want to do is build a house on it. Then a land use plan amendment and then a zoning 2000

think uh that's actually something we did uh look at specifically on this there is you know you get a putt amendment and it's for the road but the fee was based on the acreage and it's a 300 it's a it's totally out of line with the it doesn't match up it doesn't make sense so that's been corrected in this and to Sam's point we really did take a look at or a thought the thought process was how much nine commissioners, five border commissioners, how much time goes into each project and they're adjusted to that accordingly. Yeah, that's what I'm just looking at is some of the some of them also cover that big putt amendment, but then as well where that balances out makes sense, but it also relates to the individual halfacre guy or the one acre guy that may need to do the same thing that all of a sudden goes from 250 to two, three grand all of a sudden just because he's dancing. There's no I mean maybe a few of them could be looked at and say hey let's cap it at a at a 1 acre site. So for residential stuff out there, um that I thought continuing to go up on some of those where it's not as intrusive, there's not as many eyes, there's not as many people on that, but if I just want to um help have a down zone, we've seen a few of those uh of recent where they down zone and whatnot that it's not going to, you know, that's a I hate it for for them. I mean, it's devalues your property some, but at the same time, it becomes more expensive for them. Just trying to think about the little guy out there.

Yeah, Mr. Frankle. Well, I want to compliment you on your concept plan, keeping it cheap.

Um, I think we see far too few of them. I mean, if developers really want to reduce their cost, bring in concept plans, doesn't cost that much, and then you don't waste a lot of people's time, you don't waste your own money, and then, you know, if it you get warm and fuzzy, you can come back and write some big checks. I mean, there is another way to look at this. But by the way, we recently took a million dollars out of our budget a year out for the taxpayers in Wilson County by shifting storm water burden of all the fees making storm water department one just one little department but it's million dollars and before that taxpayers were just paying for everybody's storm water fees. So now the development community is and I think that's what you're trying to do.

Yeah, it's crazy how slow some of these were. It's been how long? The last I could look that I noted was 2012. You forgot about cola. We've met with some resistance in the past. So, you just have to kind of temper it as the time sees fit. Okay. Well earned. Y'all do a fantastic job. Further questions, comments. Let's call for citizen comments. See no citizen comments. like to look for a recommendation regards this item on the agenda.

Positive positive recommendation. Second positive recommendation and a second. All those in favor signify to say I raise your hand. I against extensions. That is a positive recommendation. All right, hang tight. We got two at the back end. Next item up on our agenda is item 6E. Item 6E uh is to review the final plat for Legacy Point at Golden Bear lots 13 and 14 located at 205 Bear Crossing. Yeah, we did. I believe each member of the commission has been provided a updated copy of such questions, comments,

none. Yeah, you've got the correct plat. There's something, you know, some assemblage of the packet. This item was from last month. We had another legacy point this month that was a staff review. So, yeah, approval with the condition listed. Questions or comments from the commission? Shane, anything from public works on this one? We recommend approval with our comments.

Very well. See no questions or comments. Let's call for citizen comments. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, I have to close our planning commission meeting in order to open a public hearing. Public hearings in regard to item 6A. Read the final plat for Legacy Point at Golden Bear lots 13 and 14 located 205 Bear Crossing. Anyone wanting to speak during public hearing can see no public comment at this time close public hearing reopen planning commission meeting at which time I'm looking for a motion in regards to this item on our agenda. Motion to approve.

It's a motion and a second commissioner Armstead. Motion and a second. Um all those in favor send five to say I and raise your hand. I against abstensions. So approved. Next item up on our agenda is item 6J. Item 6J is to review the final plat for Griffith Creekide Estates located off West Division Street. Mr. John, so to answer the question from earlier, it should have just read the preliminary plat's already approved. Once again, we use a template and we didn't delete that and add a preliminary plat has been previously approved. That's all. I recommend approval condition. Very well. Chain public work.

Same as planning. Very well. Questions, comments from the commission. Seeing none. I think this is also Yep. need to uh close our planning commission meeting in order to open a public hearing. Public hearing is regards to item 6J which is red final plat for Griffith Creek side estates located off West Division Street. Wish to make comment during public hearing. Welcome encouraged to do so. Seeing no centing comments at this time, we'll close our public hearing. We open a planning commission meeting at which time I'm looking for a motion regards this item on our agenda.

Motion second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. At which time I'm looking for a motion to adjourn. Motion. Second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raise your hand. I against we are.