Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

all right good evening everybody welcome welcome welcome welcome uh welcome to the uh um The witness today, y'all got me flustered. The June 18th, 2026 meeting in the Mountain View Municipal and Regional Planning Commission meeting. As you can see, we have quite a full house in here. So I was talking to our assistant city manager, and we do have fire code regulation with the amount of people in the building right now. So this room has a capacity, if I'm correct, what I was told is 89 people. I need a superhuman favor so that we can get this show rolling. And I need about 12 more people to get on towards the lobby in that way. If you can please help us out with that. We're going to... get our meeting started, but if out in the lobby, you will be able to see, should be able to hear our audio out there. It is also on the TV out there and it will give you an ample opportunity to follow us through. Thank you guys. I think that that equaled 12 people out there. So. That is wonderful. Thank you all for being here tonight, especially in difficult weather. As people leave here tonight, happy or indifferent or wherever we are, please make sure you drive safely. I was making a comment earlier today that for some reason, it seems like even in the dry months that on the third Thursday of every month, we are blessed with rain. And so I don't know whether or not it's planning commission or lack of planning, maybe on our behalf that I did not bring an umbrella and that I was running a little bit behind and I am like many others parked far away and Had to dance through the raindrops in order to get here. But thank you all for being here this evening. I do want to start off, especially with a lot in attendance this evening. I want to talk about a quorum. It reads as 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 a quorum to be present. In the event 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 business requiring action by the commission. So like to read that out loud. Also, as we get going tonight, I do want to make a quick announcement, a quick welcome announcement. We do have a new member of the planning commission joining us tonight. We'd like to welcome Ms. Jennifer Brown on board. I did put a little pressure on and told her everybody's only here tonight just for her. So this is how we welcome new members to the planning commission. So Jennifer, thank you for your willingness to serve. Thank you for being here this evening. And we look forward to having you as a member of the planning commission. So thank you so much. That being said, our next item up tonight will be to set our agenda. I do have a few requested changes. And just let me know if anyone should object to anything that I'm asking for. I would like to request that item 7C and 7D, 7C is to review the final master development plan site plan for Benton Plaza located at 12440 and 12370 Lebanon Road be moved to the consent agenda. Item 7D is to review the mass grading plan for the Sutton located at 2468, 2530 and 2640 East Division Street and Golden Bear Gateway be moved to the consent agenda. I would also like to request, and no cheering as I asked for this one right here, I would also like to request items 11A, 11B, and 11C be moved to immediately follow the consent agenda. So those would be heard prior to 7A. I do believe that we have many in attendance in regards to the submittal for 11A, which is a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners as reviewed annexation request for Avalon located at 10495 Central Pike. 11B is a recommendation item as well to the Board of Commissioners. It reviewed the plan of services for Avalon located at 10495 Central Pike. Item 11C is a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners. It reviewed the preliminary master development plan PUD, including a rezone from Wilson County R1 to RS20 PUD for Avalon located at 10495 Central Pike. Once again, I'd like to move that to the front of the agenda to immediately follow the consent. Any objection to any of the moves being requested? Seeing none, we will set the agenda as stated. With that being said, our next item up on the agenda this evening will be our staff reports. Begin with Mr. John Boffman, our city planner.

Sure thing. I would just like to say welcome to Jennifer, too. We've already got our name tag and everything, and Starting off with a bang here with a big one. Happy trails here.

Yes.

Shane, talk to us about Public Works.

I'd also like to welcome Jennifer to the Planning Commission. Welcome and have fun tonight for sure.

You good? Can you hear me now? I got him on.

ahead i'd like to welcome jennifer to the planning commission i think she's going to have fun tonight a lot of people makes it a lot of energy in the room love that uh the one thing i do want to hit on and this one's been a long time coming and a lot of people put work into it is the groundbreaking ceremony for the widening of oakland and dirt road uh that will be taking place this coming monday june 22nd at 5 p.m at page drive in jackson hollow so uh

Thank you.

A lot of people put a lot of work into that project, and I know it'll be two more years before we get complete, but it's been one of the biggest projects that has been going on since I've been with the city. So happy for Director White and get that thing going. So with that, that concludes my report.

Shane, I know you guys are going to have a lot to do with it now, especially with a big audience here tonight. Do you want to make mention of anything that the city has going on in regards to the Fourth of July celebration and 250 for America here?

Can I defer to the deputy city manager? I don't want to misspeak on all the things that are going on. He might have a better idea.

Yeah, the celebration is on obviously on July 4th. It's on West Division Street at the Circle P Ranch. Events start earlier in the afternoon with a concert. Celebrate Mount Julia Day. Then we're going to conclude that with the 4th of July show. There's also a secondary show going to be taking place that day. sponsored by Needham's Nursery. So it will be a big 250, and everybody should come out and visit.

Wonderful. Thank you, guys. Thank you all for what you're doing on that. And everybody that is out that night, it's a big anniversary for us as a country, celebrating 250 years. So I know that we all celebrating together been watching the soccer and see how that's unifying a lot of people out there from different backgrounds and it's exciting to see that and hopefully a celebration like that will continue to help bring people together uh with that being said um Our next item up on the agenda will be our citizen comments. 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 you to make comments. You may speak now or you may speak when the item is presented to the Planning Commission. We ask that you limit your comments to three minutes or less. So before we start this up, I want to just kind of give a little forewarn up here. Obviously, we got a lot of people and we really want to hear what anybody and everybody has to say. One thing that I'd like to encourage anyone that wants to speak, please make your comments precise. concise as well and to the point try to limit them to under that three minutes because maybe everybody in this whole room and out in the foyer would like to speak so please be conscious of the time there also please be conscious of of any comments that you do make whether or not directed at the project or towards anybody representing the project out there as well and be nice in anything that you have to say and again you can speak now in regards to the project or when we have the project table we have discussion uh before we do a vote we do ask for citizen comments in regards to that item so it's an either or thing so don't get upset if you try to come twice it is only a one-time event that uh that we do uh allow you to speak and we would like to hear from you. So let me also make one comment. So I will keep a timer up here. If as you're speaking, you see me kind of just wave my hand at you, I am waving at you and happy to see you here. But waving right there in this case is saying that we're down to the final 60 seconds. So please close your comments at that time. I've got a gavel up here, and I really don't like to use it, but tonight I'm going to keep you tight on your three minutes there. So we'll open it up right now, and welcome citizen comments. Anyone wishing to make a comment, please come up here to the microphone and state your name and address for the record.

Thank you. I have copies for the board here, too. Anybody want to distribute these? OK, my name is Don Parker. I live at 152 Dahlgren Drive, Mount Juliet. And I'm here to talk about the application of the 10495 Central Pike with a few comments, concerns. My wife and I live on Dahlgren Drive in Mount Juliet. We're part of the Del Webb community there, about 1,000 homes. Both of us are not NIMBY people, not in my backyard. We believe owners have the right to develop their property. We also realize that this development is going to occur with either Mount Juliet or Wilson County, one of the two, but it's still gonna go. If Mount Juliet approves this, we'll have local control over the development. of that property. However, in doing so, it needs to look at future costs and not be blinded by potential property taxes, etcetera. These future costs could far exceed potential revenues. As to my concern specifically, the potential effect on existing police, fire and city personnel. If additional personnel or equipment is needed, then financing it will come from existing rest resources and not these new homes. That is a burden on our existing taxpayers. Secondly, the potential effect on sewer resources. Additional connections to our sewer system could require additional personnel and or infrastructure. Lebanon is currently experiencing a need for newer additional sewer processing facilities, and that process is not going well with property owners challenging the taking of their property for that expansion. While the resolution present indicates the property will not have sewer extended to them at this point, a telefunding mechanism is approved. Hopefully that has been considered prior to this annexation. Find, lastly, the effect on additional vehicles. Approximately 800 new vehicles on Mount Juliet roads. These added to our local roads will make them even more congested. Presently, there's a moratorium on development of residential high density buildings within the city of Mount Juliet due to severe congestion on major roads. Mount Juliet, Lebanon Pike, and Beckwith, for example. I realize this development is exempt, but it still adds multiple vehicles to a situation which is already extremely overburdened. It seems like the spirit of that moratorium is being ignored. Overall, other than local control, I don't see the upside for doing this annexation. Hopefully that upside will be pointed out in this meeting. Additionally, our dev web community will have lifestyle changes coming from this potential development related to construction noise, air pollution, various animal movements, flooding, dynamiting, et cetera, all of which affect the enjoyment of our property. Obviously, we'll be looking to the city and our county for restrictions to be imposed on our developer to lessen these problems. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Don.

Please. Hello. My name is Leslie Emmits and I live at Cairns Drive East in Willoughby Station, one of the neighborhoods directly affected by the proposed Kensington Ridge development. And thank you to the Commission for letting me speak. I would also like to thank the builders and developers for meeting with us, many of us, on Tuesday night. That was very helpful and very kind of them. They were willing to listen to the residents and discuss possible solutions. first traffic one of the most encouraging things i heard tuesday night was the discussion about the modification of the road design so that it would not create an easy cut through between port kembla and willoughby station and in hickory hills neighborhood i want to encourage that conversation to continue that was very encouraging for us Second, the drainage. 20 years ago, a specific drainage problem requiring a unique solution. And today, Cairns Drive East has an open concrete drainage channel running between our homes or behind our homes in our yards. It is not visible from the roadway. It's not something that can be fully understood from plans or maps alone. Residents have photos. We have videos, firsthand knowledge of the river that runs through our backyard right after a rainstorm. My request is that the developers and engineers, city as well, take a look behind our homes in Willoughby Station because we're the only road in that area in Willoughby that has anything like that. This could uniquely affect how the new neighborhood will upstream come down and affect our unwillingly and unknowingly, but it could very well happen. So my third concern is blasting. This is just feet from our home, measurable feet. And I understand that there will be a process to document existing conditions before the blasting begins, as the builders told us on Tuesday. And I appreciate that protection. Could someone explain to me how a homeowner will go about being notified when blasting is occurring? OK. what kind of advance notice we'll get, what can we expect, and how damage claims are evaluated if a homeowner believes blasting has affected their property. Finally, I would like to discuss what I believe the best long-term solution is. Providing a future connection across the railroad tracks to West Division Street would give this new neighborhood its own direct outlet and significantly reduce the cut through between the two existing neighborhoods, which would be their only way out. If that is not an option, Devonshire meets up to West Division. And if we could deal with the railroad system and get that plan in effect, that would also help the whole traffic situation. And I understand working with the railroad is a significant challenge. What can we do as citizens? How can we help you? If there are meetings that we can attend, agencies to contact, letters to write, or other ways we can help, please let us know. We understand this is an uphill battle, but we are here in Mount Juliet, and we do not shy away from a challenge, clearly, from what you see in here. So thank you for your time.

Thank you. Steve Turner at 176 Privateer Lane in the Del Webb community. I'd just like to voice my concern about the Avalaine development. Based on the information I have, I'm using the maps on pages C1 and L1 for my comments. The safety of the Delaware community, citizens, environmental protections regarding proper drainage grading and maintenance of natural ponds and drainage to Stoners Creek and the possible loss of existing canopy trees and root systems critical for slope management. Those are my concerns. The Delaware community is a restricted access senior community and if proper borders are not maintained for unwanted pets, children and other invited guests, they will have the ability to enter into the Del Webb property. Subjecting your current citizens who are highly vulnerable to home theft vandalism just seems wrong to me. I'm recommending the elimination of a proposed walking path north of Kilkenny Road in order to limit the access of these strangers into the Del Webb community. It's up on the northeast corner. Also, I'd like to recommend that that whole pond area and the northeast corner be a do not disturb area. It has a lot of sensitivities, a lot of water ponds, creeks, and I think a do not disturb classification would be the best. I am not sure what the current classification is for any changes. Accepting my recommendations, the safety of the current conditions will be kept in place for the benefit of both communities, Avalon and Del Webb. An overriding thought I have is that crime prevention through environmental design principles should be an overriding thought. Drainage and landscaping, it was difficult to find the proposed land grading and topography map changes that are being recommended. The natural topography gradients performs a critical function for the rain runoff for all the existing properties and allowing water flows into Stoners Creek and protecting the current vegetation and canopy trees. And the canopy trees and the vegetation would be both the assets to both the Abilene community and the Del Webb community. One thing I'd also like to point out with existing slopes is that Del Webb has had to address some landslides in past years. And the sensitivity of that should be acknowledged. Reviewing the staff pages, the reports on page 68 to 71, they recommend a positive approval of the city workers here, subject to a number of waivers. I encourage the Commission to look closely at these waivers as relating to slope disturbance, stream buffers, and landscaping. The reasons these policies were put in place originally was to protect the citizens and granting a number of waivers. You wonder why the policies were in effect in the first place. So in conclusion, I'd just like to recommend that the commission looks at the do not disturb policies for the landscaping and protect our existing constituents. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Turner.

Good evening, Jane Turner, 176 Privateer Lane, also about the Eveline Project. I wanna say thank you for notifying us of this issue and also the opportunity to speak tonight. Part of what makes Mount Juliet special is the Del Webb community, known for its safety and tranquility. Preserving the integrity and reputation of Del Webb is important to us but also to Mount Juliet as a whole. Not all adjoining land uses are the same. Given the vulnerable nature of Del Webb residents, many members have limited mobility, cognitive impairment, or diminished ability to self-protect. The responsibility to implement responsible planning practices is therefore elevated. of particular concern is the potential loss of the existing natural buffer. The natural separation that exists currently communicates that Del Webb is controlled, secure, which significantly contributes to the sense of well-being that is essential to quality of life. It's also what sets Del Webb apart. The proposed boundary, as we understand it, is too close. The number of persons that will be in close proximity to our community's perimeter, including residents, visitors, tradespeople, and delivery personnel, significantly increase the likelihood of boundary crossings, whether incidental or deliberate. With less than a do not disturb buffer, the perimeter of our community will be undefined and undefended. So to maintain that boundary, just to expand on what Steve said, the do not disturb buffer, preserving the trees. And I'm going to let other people, because I know in their comments, talk about the root systems. our infrastructure drainage the wetlands drainage pathways all of that will be coming we also want to just emphasize eliminating that walking trail because as it is now it's close to the property line and creates an immediate liability for us and for the new owners and a public safety concern So in the short amount of time that we've had, we've collected over 400 signatures in support of our concerns across Del Webb. We have some example pictures of what the tree lines and the land behind our homes looks like, and then just some other copies of things. So thank you so much for this opportunity.

Thank you. Any additional citizen comments at this time? Kind of giving it the dedicated pause that way if I do have anybody out in the lobby that wanted to speak, it gives them a chance to give me a chance to see them. Last call at this point in time. All right, we'll move on with our next item up on the agenda. First item up on our agenda tonight will be item 5A, which is our minutes approval. It's to review and adopt the minutes from the May 21st, 2026, Majulet Regional Planning Commission meeting minutes. Any changes, typos, adjustments? Seeing none, looking for a motion in regards to this item on our agenda. It's a motion.

Second.

Second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye and raising your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? So approved. Next item up on our agenda will be our consent agenda items. We'll begin with item 6A, which is review the final plat for Legacy Point. Lots 12 and 15 located up Legacy Point Boulevard and Bear Crossing. Item 7C, review the final master development plan site plan for Benton Plaza located at 12-440 and 12-370 Lebanon Road. Item 7D, review the mass grading plan for the Sutton 2468, 2530, and 2640 East Division Street and Golden Bear Gateway. Mr. John, any comments towards these? Yes, sir.

Recommend approval for at least I can speak to uh 6a and 7c i recommend approval with the conditions listed um i will say that for benton plaza that was not on consent because they had two waiver requests that today they removed those requests so there's no no waiver no variance requests so it can be on consent and that's all for those two thank you

chain anything from public works staff recommends approval with our conditions thank you one quick question i had on uh seven day the sutton um is that gonna have access from division and from golden bear how is how are we getting in and out during this process portion of it

So, golden bear from.

So, I just want to clarify.

Yeah, I believe it's from golden bear.

Right there next to the current restroom facility and parking? Yes.

Great.

That's kind of what I thought. So at this point, for the mass grading, we're not coming in and out of division? definitely okay perfect that's kind of what i wanted to just make sure try to keep this bigger machinery that you use during that process they're showing two two construction entrances off golden bear one of which is the trailhead all right um and just wanted to also reiterate the comment i think we made it during that plan approval uh no uh erosion control measure silt fence or whatever uh with lies within the buffer all of those outside of the buffer area so we don't disturb them

We'll recapture those in the FMDP as well.

Perfect. Further questions, comments from the commission? Anyone wishing to make citizen comments about any item on the consent agenda is welcome. We encourage you to do so. Please come to the microphone. State your name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments this time. Commissioner Rask?

Just for the consent agenda, I have to abstain on 7D due to a conflict of interest.

Very well. Thank you. Seeing no additional citizen comments, I do need to close our planning commission meeting in order to open a public hearing. The public hearing is in regards to item 6A, which is to review the final plat for Legacy Point, lots 12 and 15, located off of Legacy Point Boulevard and Bear Crossing. Anyone wishing to make a comment about that one item during the public hearing is welcome and encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, we'll close our public hearing, reopen our planning commission meeting, and at which time I am looking for a motion in regards to the items on our consent agenda. Motion? Second. Second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye and raising your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions?

Very well.

So approved. All right, next item up on our agenda will be item 11a. This is a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners. Item 11a is to review the annexation request for Avalon, located at 10495 Central Pike. I do want to make a comment real quick. During this particular point in the request, the only discussion we are having is regards to the annexation. Not about the plan, but just the annexation of the property itself. So as you look through our agenda, two items away will be where we will discuss the plan. But at this point in time, it is the annexation portion of this request only. So it's just going to be Ms. Jill, please.

Good evening. We've got a full house here, so we'll try to get through this as quickly as we can. We have worked with the applicant for quite some time prior to the submission of this proposal. They've worked diligently to get through a lot of the concerns that staff has had. This property with the annexation would be approximately 175 acres into the city limits. It currently sits within Wilson County. um zoning of r1 if the annexation is approved it does meet within the land use plan so it would be approved by right under the land use plan there is no requirement of any changes to that so at this point in time staff does recommend approval or excuse me positive recommendation of the land excuse me cannot talk of the annexation to the board of commissioners

Very well. Shane, Public Works, have any comments in regards to this item? No, sir. Very well. Questions or comments from the Commission? Seeing no questions at this time, we'll go ahead and open up for public comment in regards to the annexation. Anyone wishing to make a comment in regards to the annexation of this project? Welcome. I encourage you to do so. Please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, I'd like to ask for a motion in regards to this item on our agenda.

I'll make a motion for a positive recommendation.

Very well. That's a motion and a second for a positive recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying aye and raising your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? There's a positive recommendation. Next item up on our agenda is item 11B, to review the plan of, this is also a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners, to review the plan of services for Adeline, located at 10495 Central Pike. Again, at this point in time, we're only discussing the plan of services for this proposed project before us.

So, Ms. Jill, please. The plan of services does fall in line with the annexation and just sets forth all of the requirements of the city to provide to this new development.

Very well. Shane, anything from Public Works on this one? Yes, sir. Very well. Questions or comments from the commission? Seeing none, at this time, I'd like to call for citizen comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Anyone wish to make comment in regards to the plan of services in regards to this request are welcome and encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, I'd like to ask for a motion in regards to this item on our agenda. Please. Oh, I did not. Very good. Thank you for catching me. With that being said, this item does require public hearing. So I need to close our planning commission meeting and reopen and open a public hearing. Public hearing is regards to item 11B, which is a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners. Review the final or review the plan of services for Adeline located at 10495 Central Pike. Anyone wishing to make comment during the public hearing is welcome and encouraged 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 close our public hearing, reopen our planning commission meeting. And at which time, I am looking for a motion in regards to this item on our agenda.

I make a motion for a positive recommendation.

That's a motion.

Second.

And a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye and raising your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? It is a positive recommendation. Next item up on the agenda also is a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners. It is to review the preliminary master development plan PUD, including a rezone from Wilson County R1 to RS20 PUD for Avalon, located at 10495 Central Pike. Before we get started, you hear me say on this one right here, this is a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners. Basically what that means is regardless of the action approval or declination of this project here before the Planning Commission tonight, it does move forward to the Board of Commissioners where the final opinion and decision is made. So I'd like to ask Jill, when would this item be before our Board of Commissioners? I know we've got some holidays and stuff coming up, but at what meeting?

The BOC meets on the second and fourth Mondays of the month, so it would be the second Monday of July.

Second Monday of July. Very well. I just wanted to clarify that out there for everyone present here tonight. So the floor is yours, Ms. Jill, please.

Thank you. As you previously stated, this development is going to be 10495 Central Pike. It is approximately 175 acres to be rezoned into the city. They're requesting RS 20, which is the residential. The current proposed density is 1.94 units per acre. The max density under that zoning is 2.2, so they are under the max density for that zoning. If the zoning is approved, they are permitted by right with this proposed use. They are proposing 340 single family homes with a wide array of amenities throughout the subdivision. They have met and appear to be compliant with the majority of the subdivision regulations and the zoning amendments and ordinances as set forth. There are several waiver and variance requests that are listed within your report. The majority of those are standard that we see on a lot of these large scale subdivisions like what is being proposed. Staff does support, as noted, the majority of these waiver and variance requests. The only one is number three, which is your supplemental design provisions. We previously had noted that we did not support the request on the material percentages because it was not clearly defined. As of today, we did receive additional documentation from the applicant, and they are here to represent the project to answer any additional questions. But their proposal of how they would like to do the materials on the homes is spelled out a little bit more in detail, more so with the cementious siding homes that they're wanting to do. Basically, they're wanting to break the subdivision down into a 50-50, 50% of them being primarily masonry homes, 50% being primarily cementious siding. this developer previously had done a subdivision within the city of Mount Juliet the majority of you are familiar with of Jackson Hills this builder will be Signature Homes who developed that so it will have a very similar look and layout to that subdivision so that kind of gives you an idea of the elevation and the type and the designs that they are laying forth for that so i would definitely like representation to speak more to the elevations but with the explanation and the details that were provided to us earlier today staff does now support their request on this waiver for that for the elevations and the designs Going through everything else, like I said, we worked diligently with this applicant for several weeks prior to the submittal. We have reviewed it. It looks like it's going to be a very good development. It is infill within the city. It's currently in the county. So as said, it's either going to be a county developed project or it's going to be a city developed project. and being under the city we do have very strict regulations i feel like that they would adhere to i think it would be an ideal development for the city and after reviewing everything and going through everything the comments are pretty standard that we see typically on these developments so with that staff does recommend a positive recommendation to the board of commissioner when we just request that you put our conditions approval as part of that recommendation

thank you shane uh public works please from a utility site perspective the challenging part of this development was sewer availability the applicant went uh went with our recommendations to perform flow testing they gathered data for 30 days to uh to see if there was line capacity we have an issue I don't even want to call it bottleneck. The segment of line that was in question was inherited from the old Cumberland Utility District in Belinda City that we did not have survey information for. So that was what our primary focus was on inflow testing. They did that with their own resources and funding and provided a report that did indeed show that capacity was sufficient for this development for 340 lots. With that, all the sewer infrastructure will be public. There are pump stations being proposed that will have to be built to city spec. And with a site like this, any karst features that do come up will have to be remediated, and I've captured that condition. uh number nine uh any wet ponds that are proposed within the development shall be aerated we do want to be cognizant of that uh eliminating standing water so if they do decide to uh go with those aesthetic features we'll take care of that with iteration and we've also uh put a note that indicates all TDEC buffers shall be adhered to as the plan comes through and ultimately to construction. With that, I'll toss it over to Todd for transportation and roadways. Please.

Thank you, Tom. This development drives direct access from Central Pike. It also stubs into a future extension that's currently under construction to Walton's Grove. Kilkenny Way will be the name of the street once that's completed. That does provide it with access to Beckwith Road as well. As far as off-site improvements, this development's a little unique where it does not front a road that is ever going to be in the city. Central Pike along its frontage is outside our UGB. There's some regulatory complications with that, or jurisdictional, I guess would be more accurate, where that is a TDOT road. TDOT will not help them acquire right away. That's not going to be a problem along the frontage to get a turn lane in. However, one of our offsite improvements is adding a left turn lane at Beckwith Road on Central Pike. The applicant does intend to negotiate with landowners in good faith to get that that term line in. However, that it's out of our control whether or not that does happen. TDOT doesn't require right away for private improvements. As well as that turn lane though, the big ask that we've placed on the development on behalf of the Wilson County Road Commission is replacing the bridge on Beckwith Road about 800 feet north of Central Pike. If you're familiar with the area, that bridge is about 15 feet wide at tops with no bridge rail whatsoever. It's had either six or seven crashes in the last five years, multiple injuries. It's a hazard. And the development has stated they're willing to take care of that for us. Thank you. Oh, sorry. One last thing. On conditions 13 and 15, I think we got our triggers backwards. Were the turn lane on central pike into our driveway that should be triggered the land disturbance permit and the turn lane on at beckwith road on central bike should be uh the phase two plat okay i want to start off with just a few questions that uh that i've got and i'll turn it over and ask the remainder of the commission um

Very familiar with that bridge. Very thankful to see that bridge included in this. As a comment, I like to read staff's comments before I ever open the plan and look at it and then go back and reference. As I saw the location on this, that bridge immediately came into my mind and then it was Nice to see that in staff comments. Since that is a county road over there, have the initial discussions been had and the county will allow this to happen? This request came directly from the county. Very well.

That answers that question.

So in just looking at the aerial provided, and I'm on sheet C10, the Kilkenny Way, as it ties over there to the Meritage development to the east, Is that road completed all the way over to Rutland right now? So it just on our aerial or the GIS that I'm looking at on this plan, the road would be available.

They've completed paving this year. I think they're about to start going vertical in that last phase.

So by the time, should this move forward, that access point would be available to them to tie into immediately.

Yes, sir.

Um, It's just one comment. This is back, planning comment 23, just talking about the wet ponds. I wanted to make sure we kept that comment of a fountain or something in there for any wet pond to make sure that that doesn't get just stagnant pond water on that. also one and and this one is probably going to have to wait for representation i know we worked really hard uh to make sure especially uh this was years and years ago um that we amended our ordinance to require minimum square footages on garages. And that's the 5.104. We advertise ourself as a city between the lakes. And many of the time before, our garages weren't functional for more than one car due to steps, water heaters, impeding into your ability to get anything much more than a scooter or a golf cart into that other bay of garage. So I just want to talk to... development about that. I just want to make sure I add two comments. Two for consistency. One is no erosion control on any of the buffers. Buffers remain undisturbed. The erosion control can mark as that barrier of non-disturbance to such. We do have nice proposed buffers. to many of the areas right here, and I want to see those buffers remain like that so the erosion control can act like a temporary fence separating what's going to be graded, developed from what should not be harmed during the process of either. Second is I want to make sure that we add the comment for entrance lighting, particularly at the central point, central pike access point down there. Make it a requirement that decorative lighting is applied at that entrance point. That will be a very dark area at night and want to make sure it can be well seen as best as possible. Final comment will be there are immediately as you come into the entrance off Central Pike, you immediately have a step out road to your right that is a dead end to the property to the east. I want to make sure that those four lots that would be fronting Central Pike, that they are rear loading lots so that the front of the house faces Central Pike, that we don't want to see the back of those houses from Central Pike at that point in time.

Those are a few comments I just wanted to include.

Let me open it up to the rest of the Commission for questions, comments. Any additional questions or comments from the Commission? Commissioner Franklin.

I guess I'm a bit confused on the engineering 15. If there is no guarantee that right-of-way can be acquired through eminent domain, is it queued up in the second phase? It may never happen. Is that our position?

Yeah. And I really want to be upfront about this because I believe it's come up on other projects in the area in the past. If right away acquisition is not possible by the development team and they run into significant opposition, that turn lane won't happen. we don't really have a mechanism to help them along there. I would recommend we add a clause to that condition stating what happens if that is the case, whether that be that it comes back before the TC or the DOC. I don't really know. I just wanted to make it clear to you all that that is a possibility.

good further questions comments i wanted you to explain about the garage inside the garage again on that 400 feet versus 440 required yeah let me let everybody uh because i'll hold that one i'm going to bring that one up again when we do ask for representation so i'll re-ask that one we'll get them to explain then i'll be happy to expand on that so give yeah i've got a question

After we redid all of the road widths and all that last week, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't we recommend roundabouts for traffic calming measures where possible?

Or am I... That is... a very astute observation. I have talked with the development team about that. Technically speaking, because this development pre-apped before that went through, they were receptive to doing it. I talked to them like two days ago about it.

These are racetracks. Yeah, I mean, these are very straight, very long roads through here. And I see a minimum of four intersections that would be ideal for roundabouts as traffic calming measures. I mean, they've done they did at least a few of them in Jackson Hills. And it works because if they weren't there, those would be Yeah, yeah, I they're currently working on

Putting the roundabout in at the intersection of the main collector in Kilkenny Way that central intersection But if you would also like to see that lower road on the collector That would also be a Good location for it.

Yeah, I was thinking kind of the four box here these two and those two and It's kind of tough on any of these corners as well with those long straights and then the cross.

You tell me. By the letter of the code that was passed last time, that southwest corner would not require it. That makes sense. I could see that. That said, the intersection with the stub to the west there, that would qualify for that as well. I think that's probably a topic we'd like to talk through with representation. Yeah, understood.

Could we ask Sam this question? Should the project move forward with recommendations? Could one of the recommendations include that this plan, should it be approved by BOC, come into compliance with our new road standards and regulations? Could we make that as a condition since it is a PUD request?

I wouldn't, no, I wouldn't recommend it. I thought it was right that whoever has, if you apply before the show, it just happens. Maybe it was popular. Representation. Very well.

Great. Thank you. Commissioner Jobs, please. While we may not can, we can absolutely vote against it for safety reasons. because that is a safety initiative as well. So, you know, I hope that they will be, you know, I hope that they'll want to do that.

Tom, you'll have to speak to the CPS.

Commissioner Ratz.

Any further questions from the commission? Commissioner Bowman, please.

I would love to see those front lots just become a beautiful drive with nice open field up there. We're kind of separating them from those high-voltage TVA lines, and it just looks so disjointed. Same thing with the ones on the east, those six lots. It just looks like it's a, you know, and that's when the developer's up here. I just feel like there would be such a better use for that. More comment than a requirement.

Commissioner Giles? Yeah, and they may have announced this. Are the streets public or private? All of them. All of them. Yes, sir. Okay. And why is that?

These Generally, the recommendation for private streets comes with the caveat that those streets just would never serve the public, even if we did have the maintenance responsibility. The plan as laid out does follow our future transportation plan. There's a couple places across the property that call for collectors. I believe that the plan calls for that east-west road to connect all the way into Rutland to the west should any of the properties in between develop. So with more public available connectivity in the future, they're serving a public good. We allow public streets.

i was in a meeting today and we talked about this not this this subdivision but another one and on those streets that are not used that much they don't connect to something else that subdivision they do They agreed to have that private because we need all that we can to help the reoccurring expenses in the city. I would suggest whoever this is that's bringing this, look at some of your streets and want to make this private. I also suggest, and this is a question that came up in this meeting today, if a street is public, can the sidewalks be private? There's going to be a... This is not up to the curb, is it?

This is going to be a... No, sir. Along the collectors, we have a six-foot grass strip and a 10-foot shared use path. And along the lesser classified streets, we'd have a six-foot grass strip, five-foot sidewalk. those are called for in our subdivision regulations as within our right-of-way and public that said a subdivision regulation we could waive that um well i think the question is we as we talked about today in that meeting was when it's a public street can the sidewalks be private in the development

um you see what i'm going with this please i'm trying to save the city for reoccurring expenses on this stuff commissioner i can help answer that question okay um i mean i suppose they could but they'd have to be outside of our right-of-way so i imagine that would push the sidewalk further into the yards

We would have to waive the standard width and the subdivision regulations to reduce the right-of-way and then separately require the private sidewalk with a public access easement.

Okay, and we could do that, but then the grass strip would be minimized, right?

Not necessarily.

Okay.

Sorry.

Well, this is coming up because we're obviously trying to save money for the city. And from the BOC side, we're trying these reoccurring expenses that are coming up through the city, and everybody knows I'm pro-sidewalks. And even the bee packer out here looking at what we need to repair and et cetera, et cetera. We can do videos now about it. But this is something I think that we need to look going forward because you've got an HOA in here and, you know, they can maintain these sidewalks. I mean, most of the public's not going to be on here anyway except this subdivision. There'll be a few maybe, but most people won't. It'll be the people that truly is in this subdivision. But yet the city's taking care of those sidewalks. You know, so I just think we need to look at this and see what we can come up legally and what to do. So like the subdivision, it's not that I don't like the subdivision. I'm just trying to help the city.

So I have two thoughts. The first one is I think we probably want to amend those sub regs again. If this is the path that the board wants to go down once, I imagine it's going to happen a lot. So if we can just codify it that the private residence has its own sidewalk, that would make it much clearer across the board. My other thought was being, if the sidewalks are private, do we lose the ability to maintain them? What happens when they fall into disrepair?

The HOA better be carrying some umbrellas over their general liability limits is what they need to be doing.

Another magic question. If they become private and I decide I don't want it in my front yard, can I not just tear it up?

No, that would be a restriction in the subdivision.

if it's a butt condition now i don't know how we enforce that yeah i don't know how you get enforced down the road they joy disassembles itself and whose sidewalks are they then well there might be some kind of clause that could go in there at first thought this is not something that i would recommend providing roads and streets is generally a government function that's just what we do but I can look into it further.

Let's do. Let's just research it and whether it's on this one or something in the future.

Let's go ahead and ask for representation in this project, please. Please come to the microphone and name and address for the record. Let's hear a little bit more.

good evening matt huff with kimley horn 173 london lane franklin tennessee and i've got a brief presentation if you guys would entertain it um do you mind if i pull up some boards and sure Thank you. Again, landscape architect with Kim Lee Horne, Matt Huff representing the applicant this evening. There's no greater compliment than being asked to come back. Jackson Hills belongs to Mount Juliet. You embraced it, took pride in it and made it the standard. Signature and Summit are deeply humbled by the trust that this community has placed in us. And tonight, we're genuinely excited to show you what we believe is our best work yet. That's a quote from the Summit team. We want to thank staff for their review and recommendation and would note for the record that we are agreeable to the conditions as presented tonight. We understand that there are additional details to refine at FMDP and look forward to continuing to work with staff through that process. As we approach this plan, we looked closely at what's been successful in Mount Juliet, particularly communities that go beyond just lot layout and really function as neighborhoods. Jackson Hills is a good example of that. And it's also a community that was delivered by this same developer where open space amenities and walkability come together in a way that people actually use on a daily basis. That's the same general approach that helped us inform how this plan is structured. Starting with the master plan, which you see here on the board, at a high level, this layout is doing two things. It's creating strong edges around the property and connected experiences within it. Along the northern property line, adjacent to the Del Webb community, you can see that we've established a continuous 30-foot buffer, including a 20-foot no-disturbance buffer using open space and existing vegetation. This is five feet wider than the 25 foot buffer on the Del Webb property. This will provide a minimum of 55 feet of open space between the backs of lots. And this condition extends only the length of 12 lots. We're also not proposing a connection to the Del Webb community. So that edge functions as a transition rather than an extension. As you look across the plan, you'll notice that open space isn't pushed to the edges or treated as a leftover. It's spread throughout the site and ultimately comes together around the central amenity core. You have green corridors, ponds, natural areas, and trails that connect the neighborhood together. We've tried to orient the lots around these features where possible. So as you move through the neighborhood, you're moving through a sequence of connected places, not just streets and lots. The open space is spread throughout the neighborhood, but it has a strong central core. You'll see pocket parks, open space corridors, and natural trail systems distributed throughout the site, meaning most residents are within a short walk of open space. At the center, that system is anchored by the main amenity area, including the pool, clubhouse, pickleball, event lawn, and playground, which serves as the primary gathering space. This creates both everyday neighborhood access to open space and a recognizable center of activity for the community. Additional buffering is provided where amenities interface with residential lots and details such as lighting and landscaping will be refined at the FMVP. The architecture board shows a range of home types across the different lot conditions, alley-loaded, front-loaded, and larger lot products. But more importantly, it shows how these homes work together across the neighborhood. This isn't just variety for the sake of variety. It's controlled and intentional. First is consistency and quality. Across all product types, you're seeing a consistent level of material and architectural character. So the neighborhood reads as one cohesive place. Second is variation in form and elevation. There's clear diversity in massing, roof lines, and facade treatments, which helps prevent repetition across the streetscape. And third is placement within the plan. Homes in more visible locations along key streets, corners, and adjacent to open space are designed with additional attention, so those areas contribute to the overall character. I think if you look at the other communities that this developer has completed locally, you'll see these same ideas show up, including in Jackson Hills, where the streetscape ends up feeling both consistent and varied at the same time. That's the same approach we're carrying forward here. Additionally, we've sent an updated description of our intent behind the architecture to staff, and we'll be working with them to finalize how that reads, looks, and feels for this community. Our primary objective has always been to build on what Mount Juliet already loves about Jackson Hills and Signature Homes. That rich, diverse architectural character that's aged so beautifully and become the benchmark for how great development looks in this city. Aveline is designed to carry that same spirit forward and frankly raise the bar even further. We believe that this updated language makes the intent crystal clear. We want the same robust diversity in housing architecture that made Jackson Hills something the whole community is proud of. Avaline will be that community for the next generation. In summary, this plan establishes strong, respectful edges where needed, uses open space as an organizing framework for the neighborhood, and it provides a system of distributed open space anchored by a strong central core. It also delivers a cohesive, high-quality residential product that you all are beginning to expect of developers like Signature Home. We appreciate the trust this community has placed in this team through projects like Jackson Hills, and we're excited at the opportunity to build on that further with Avalyn. We appreciate staff's recommendation. We agree with the conditions as presented, and we look forward to continuing coordination as this moves forward. With that, I'll turn it over to Joe Haddix with Heritage Civil who can walk through the traffic and other technical aspects of the project.

Thanks, Matt. Joe Haddock, Heritage Civil, 2055 North Mount Juliet Road. Just really to touch on a couple of the questions and comments we heard earlier. Fully in agreement with the lighting throughout and at the entries. I believe that is noted in planning and zoning condition 21. Waiver and variance request five is shown on page 68 of your packet, which is regarding the minimum lot or dimensions of the garage. We've actually removed that request. The home builder can comply with that requirement, so we no longer need waiver number five. That's shown on page 68. Regarding the lots close to Central Pike, We actually have about 50 feet from the future dedicated right-of-way of Central Pike to the rear lot line there, which would give us about 30 feet when we account for the water line easement behind the right-of-way. We'd ask to prepare a buffer plan in that 30 feet between the rear of those lots and the Central Pike right-of-way to see if we could achieve a screening that would be acceptable probably start with planning staff and public works and then we could present it at voc see if we can't achieve the same thing uh to screen the rear of those homes instead of just strictly requiring them to be rear loaded to the front space central pike if that would be acceptable to this body regarding the central pike widening at beckwith road we've already started looking at that we we know there's 50 foot right at least a 50 foot right away there we know we can get three lanes in there our question now and the research we're doing is the utilities right down there we have two sets of water lines overhead power lines So we're doing a little research right now to see if we can get our three lanes in there without having to relocate utilities and keep everything in that existing right away. But we will have that answered ahead of first reading at BOC. Todd mentioned we've discussed this week regarding a roundabout there at Kilkenny Way and our main north-south road. We are happy to evaluate Kilkenny and our western north-south road as well as our main north-south road at the first east-west road.

I know I threw a lot of cardinal directions in there, so sorry about that.

But we'll look at those three locations to see if we're able to achieve roundabouts there. And then happy to work with staff and yourself, Commissioner Giles, and perhaps the city attorney to look at road sections as this moves forward. Here to answer any additional questions. Matt did mention about the buffer specifically about the Northern property line. So y'all have any questions there or anything else we're happy to answer.

Thank you for your time. Start off where you got one real quick. One of the initial citizen comments, I don't see it on my plan. I just want to make sure it's clear was a discussion of a walk path at the Northern this point. I guess behind these houses, I do not see a walk path up there. Okay. Yeah.

If you look at that first page, that's probably, yeah.

I mean, we're at least 50 feet off the property line. Yeah. Okay. I wanted to, that's what I was looking for something to the north side of the property up there. Um, yeah. as it was kind of explained so that makes sense um and just make sure her right withdrawing the request for the uh garage square footage size correct meet the 440 square very good Uh, that's going to come up again, Linda. So we'll on another project tonight, we'll may have an option to discuss it then. Um, the, uh, and then tell me real quick, cause you heard me mention about, uh, Allie loading the front for your proposal is to do what again?

We would ask that we'll call that option A for those four lots. Uh, option B let us work on preparing a buffering or landscape plan. for between the rear of those lot lines and the Central Pike right away to see if we can achieve some screening with the same desired effect of perhaps hiding those homes a little bit instead of just mandating that the front of those homes face Central Pike.

Only comment on having that is to make that work, you have to do evergreen And then those evergreens are going to get substantially large, which is probably going to affect your sight lines as you come in and out of your neighborhood there. I'll remain on those that I would rather those be alley. Cause that'd be, I've got some green giants that started in my yard at four feet, three years ago, and they're 11 feet now. And, and I've already pretty impressed with them. I wish I could grow them always like that, but, but yeah, it, it, could eventually get into your sight line out there. So I'd rather remain there. Um, makes sense on everything else. Let me open it up. Uh, questions, comments from the commission at this point in time, Mr. Rice.

Just got a request from staff. We've seen different things come in at this stage and then in the final. Could we get preliminary as part of that package when they come in for final just as a comparison of where we were, where we are in the future? Okay. and as far as the roundabouts we'll try to get them in i don't know that we have a mechanism to force them to be placed yeah we'll we will definitely evaluate those okay questions comments come from the commission please is there is there any appetite to do away with some of those homes up front i i'm

are going to be what 800k to 1.2 million maybe give or take and i think the builder is going to be hard pressed to find someone to buy a home of that magnitude with high voltage lines crisscrossing their property so it's i don't know i know we're trying to maximize number of locks in a given space but i would i would seriously contemplate that so something to think about yeah

other questions comments please commissioner george uh so the playgrounds the mail kiosk how do you how do you view a citizen going to get their mail or let me let me rephrase i'll add a little bit more to my loaded question how do you um envision a disabled person let's say getting to a mail kiosk or an elderly person? Is the expectation if I live on lot 223 that I've got to walk all the way? Because I don't see any some of the newer subdivisions where there's a little bit of a turnoff so you can still park your car. I don't see any way other than walking to have access to those.

We will provide parking for 88 accessible parking will be a requirement of the postal service to be able to access those.

And that's all mail kiosks? in general i guess i can't speak for all but that's the my understanding you got several so i just want to make sure that oh yes i see what you're i see what you're saying yeah that would the intent would be that they would have an accessible option and i i guess that if we'll go to the uh top left mail kiosk in between 315 and 304 i just don't see where you can put a parking spot um that's just one of them i'd just be interested to see where those parking spots are going to go

I was going to state that in between now and FMDP, those mail kiosks have to be approved by the postmaster. So where they may be now may not be where they land at FMDP because we have had several of them moved in between these stages. So that is something that they do take into consideration and also will require under federal law with ADA compliance. Yes, sir. He just also reminded me we do have the ordinance recently passed regarding mail kiosks and the placement. So we will make sure between now and FMDP that we address those concerns.

Okay.

Thank you. And then just a general concern I share with Commissioner Bowman. I mean, you've got to talk about how nice of a subdivision it's going to be. But I'd really hate to be a person to get locked 6 through 13 right under power lines. Nothing says million-dollar home like walking out and looking at power lines. other concern that i've got is when you look at maybe 310 to 314 just seems like you're just kind of fitting houses to get them there and then honestly i kind of feel the same way between 208 and 210 so just my opinions of the overall project thank you thank you further questions comments thank you guys

all right at this point in time we're gonna uh open it up uh for citizen comments regards this item on the agenda just once again as a little reminder if you see me uh up here i'm not waving because i'm excited or whatnot up here but if you see me wave my hand please try to uh uh do your or uh conclude your comments right there that means You have one minute left to your three-minute time allotment. So with that being said, anyone wishing to make citizen comments this time, welcome. I encourage you to do so. Come to the microphone and name and address for the record, please.

My name is Sean Spade. I live at 10601 Central Pike, which is the Borders of the East property line of the Humphrey Farm. I've lived here a long time. Ms. Armistead was my English teacher back in high school, graduated in 86 from Mount Juliet. I know some of you guys, and I want to say I appreciate what you guys do. It's a thankless job for what y'all do. The staff, y'all get yelled at all the time, so I thank you. I am not here to yell at anybody for doing a development. I mean, who am I to say what you can and cannot do with your property? I'm not that guy. The concern I have is where I live, I've spent thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars to control the rainwater that comes off the Humphrey Farm as it is now. My driveway, I'm tired of spending money on gravel and millings because that's what I've done every year. My concern is the rainwater runoff. If that can be addressed and be where it will not affect my home, my yard, my pool, I'm okay. So be it. Because like I said, who am I to say you cannot do this with your property? That's not me. Again, thank you all for what you all do. I appreciate you. Thank you.

Thank you.

GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. VICE CHAIRMAN, REPRESENTATIVES OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND OTHER COMMISSIONERS AND PLANNING STAFF. AND I JUST WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO TYLER GUTERRES, WHO WAS JUST VERY HELPFUL IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING US READY TO BE HERE TONIGHT. HE PROBABLY THINK HE DIDN'T KNOW PREGNITION, BUT I THOUGHT HE NEEDED IT TONIGHT. MY NAME IS MARK GUERRICELLA. I LIVE AT 127 MARCH PLACE, AND I'M NOT ONLY SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF 50 RESIDENTS THAT are being impacted by this development, but also the close to 2,000 residents in Del Webb that own property that's adjacent to this development. And I say adjacent because it's the HOA that owns the land between our residence property and this development. The residents do not own what's called the buffer, for lack of a better word. So it was important for the HOA to be involved. And I see a lot of board members here this evening, which is good. But we as residents took the initiative to get 400 signatures on a petition to support our request this evening. I'd also note that we found out in the process of notification that the HOA did not receive a letter. The attempt was made to send them on, but quote, the business was closed and it did not get delivered. Nor did the second attempt. So by word of mouth, obviously, we've got board members here today of the HOA, but I don't know if that's a regulation that all members, everyone should be, I guess the receipt, the certificate of receipt of a certified letter should be acknowledged before you have a meeting, especially when it's an HOA of 2,000 residents, okay?

Okay.

I'm going to go right to specific requests and then come back, as time allows, as to why. OK?

You have a minute and a half.

A minute and a half. OK. Fair enough. First of all, we would request a minimum of a 50-foot do not disturb buffer with preservation of existing mature trees and retention of the existing fence or a new comparable fence No grading and giant arborvitaes planted on the property of the development at the beginning of their buffer. And I'll tell you why later based on time. Number two. reduce the density of housing in the row of houses adjacent to the delweb community those might make them more attractive lots but it also would address our concerns about the delweb community and protecting the integrity of it number three minimize construction impacts from the anticipated multi-year build-out, albeit I would guess most of the infrastructure will be in year one, and then phases of house construction subsequently. but it could be as much as eight years and we'll deal with blasting. And blasting is a specific concern for us. We're not experts in this arena, but we don't know how we get communicated to in terms of how do we file a claim? If we have a problem, how do we know the effect of any blasting event? Who monitors that event is the city or the state? Um, Fourth, we want assurances that water runoff from 340 homes won't affect our community. I'm sure that's been looked at, but we need assurances. I guess eliminating the walking path would be a preference if we could get that. Bottom line, I guess we just want assurance that there's a protection of the quality of life within Del Webb. The average age in Del Webb is 78. with health issues.

I need you to wrap it up, Mr. Hall.

Okay.

Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry about that.

My name is Janice Armstrong. I live at 105 March Place in Del Webb, and I just have some comments that I'm going to pass out.

Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Janice.

please good evening community involvement is critical and i really appreciate the opportunity to provide some input to you name and address for the record real quick and to your process i'm stephen felber i live at 146 felgren and i've got over 46 40 years in civil structural environmental engineering as well as executive and project management roles on private and public projects i'm a registered professional civil engineer I have one comment and three recommendations. One is, the comment is, the proposed preliminary master development plan needs further discussion to address stormwater runoff. In Mount Juliet, onsite stormwater management and volume control are mandatory for all new developments and developers are required to manage and contain stormwater runoff within the subdivision boundaries and to prevent downstream flooding and water quality degradation. proposed plan includes channeling stormwater runoff from a significant portion of the development into an engineered stream with a riparian buffer this will dump substantial stormwater runoff to potentially settle in a low point area immediately adjacent to the del web boundary and stormwater runoff will also overflow off the proposed development property to a stream that flows into stoner creek My recommendation is to, as a body, ensure the proposed stormwater management system does not result in standing water near the Del Webb boundary, nor cause adverse impacts downstream of the proposed development boundary. Engineering reports, calculations, and drawings should include geotechnical data, hydrologic and hydraulic calculations, and environmental data and impacts. As this is a multi-year construction project, the conditions at this new development during each phase of construction from clearing and grubbing and rough grading through construction completion should address as conditions change and it doesn't stop the rain from coming. Recommendation two is identify on the drawings existing conservation land areas such as wetlands, floodplains, slopes over 20% and underground streams. Note on the design that they are unsuitable for development. And finally, recommendation three, establish and maintain a tree and vegetation buffer zone at the Del Webb property boundary to minimize potential erosion issues. Preserve the existing trees and vegetation at the Del Webb property boundary for the same reason. Thank you for your attention. Thank you. A copy of my remarks.

Hi, good evening. My name is Lorna Felber. I'm at 146 Dahlgren in the Del Webb community. Thank you for hearing us tonight. I appreciate your attention. My concern is that Del Webb is a very large, quiet, established neighborhood of over 1,000 homes which comprise about 2,000 residents, senior residents. Residents chose this community specifically because it offered a very peaceful environment where they could enjoy their retirement years and remain in their homes long term. You have already heard concerns about safety and security concerns relating to our boundary shared with the Avaline Development Project. I want to focus specifically on the impact of what will likely be years of construction activity adjacent to our peaceful community. The proposed construction process will involve repeated phases of significant disruption, including heavy equipment and machinery during clearing and grubbing, machine grading operations and blasting during the site preparation phase, infrastructure construction involving continued heavy equipment, machinery and blasting, extended residential construction with ongoing heavy equipment, machinery and tools. For hundreds of senior residents in our community, especially those living adjacent to this development, this means years of constant noise, dust exposure, ground vibration, and disruption to the quiet environment they intentionally chose for their retirement years. I strongly recommend that the committee require the development to establish an expanded tree and vegetation buffer zone at the boundary of Del Webb before any construction begins. In addition, the committee should require preservation of all existing trees and vegetation along the shared boundary within the Del Webb Lake Providence community. Proactively establishing a large tree and vegetation buffer zone and preserving existing trees and vegetation at the Del Webb property boundary before construction begins will help reduce the adverse impact of dust, noise, erosion, blasting, and ground vibration throughout this multi-year construction process. while also providing long-term sustainable environmental and community benefits. I ask that you consider not only the future development, but also the existing development community of our nearly 2,000 senior residents, voting residents, whose quality of life can be affected for years to come. I just have one other question for the developer, if he can answer. What is the estate lot? in the back of the property? What are the future plans for this estate lot? And I recommend that it be zoned a wetland, which it is, and it remains a wetland preserved for our wildlife. Thank you for your attention to this.

And I'll get you an answer to that last question once we finish our citizen comments. So let's continue with the citizen comments. Anyone would like to make additional comments at this time? I got a question real quick. How many are here from Del Webb? Nice. Great turnout. How many were here, I think, 10 years ago? when Del Webb was proposing going onto this property. Not many. Yeah. Just for a little informational purposes, at one point in time, Del Webb was looking to expand on this property and do your same development all the way down. was just a project that we looked at at one point here, and it was met with the same objection that we've had here tonight. So I was just curious how many had been here that long. All right. That being said, let me go ahead and call for representation, help answer that final question that we got there.

Yeah, so Joe Haddix again. So the large estate lot is shown as lot 340 on your plan that will be retained by the property seller for her to build a home or for the developer to build her a home on that parcel. So we are setting the max density at 340 units, that being one lot of the 340.

Very well. So basically it's going to be open space. He said that that one lot is going to be preserved for the seller of this property back through the developer with the intent for that seller to maintain residence on the property on that specific piece for one house. It is part of the 300 and how many?

It's in 340 total. 340 total.

It's part of the 340 total lots here before us tonight. So it will be one house on that piece. Thank you.

Thank you. Heard it numerous times. There is no walkway or path between those northernmost homes and Del Webb, correct?

Correct. So between the rear lot line, we are showing a 10-foot area that likely run some utility in or additional buffer, 20-foot no-disturb buffer from there for a total of 30-foot on our side of the property line. Understood. Thank you.

Mr. Joe, you know, there was a question about blasting staff. Help me out on this. If I'm incorrect, um, the, the blasting is, is maintained, uh, by the state. If you have any kind of, of complaint, most of the time they have pre blasting surveys that they will offer. Um, the residents, depending on how close they are, you do have to pay for that. If I'm not mistaken.

I don't know exactly on the paying for that. I think some of that responsibility is borne by the development. But I can confirm with our fire marshal on Monday when we're back in the offices, we're closed tomorrow for the holiday. But all of the blasting complaints are done through the state fire marshal's office. our fire marshal locally has no control or jurisdiction over that it all goes to the state fire marshal's office we do have that information available contact on our website yes but if anyone wants to reach out to us at the office we'll be happy to coordinate that effort and there's a number on there for you to make a complaint to the state and that's how a lot of times the state will come out and inspect and i also want you to know that the city tried

And they actually did pass some legislation, and then the state came in and said we couldn't do it. I think actually I was gone during that period. So we've tried, and it's out of our hands. So it is a state regulated thing. And I think it's on the, I know it's on the website, but I think it's on the fire departments too, if I'm not mistaken. Yeah.

All right. Thank you. Any further questions from the commission? At this point in time, I'm looking for a recommendation in regards to this item on our agenda. I'll make a motion for a positive recommendation with several additions to it. My additions are, I know this is within our regulations, but I want it on the record, signs noting temporary cul-de-sacs or temporary stubs, permanent in nature signs, no erosion control within any buffers, so the buffers are maintained accordingly. lighting at the entrance that's already in there but just want to reiterate that no construction traffic to go through kilkenny way to access this site condition that if right away cannot be obtained for the widening or improvements requested out at central pike and or the bridge that the project comes back to planning. Any wet pond has a functional fountain that lies within it. I would like to make a request to the applicant to come within compliance of our current road standards That's up to BOC and staff whether or not that is done, just a simple request. Noting the request by the applicant with discussion with staff about three potential roundabout locations. Also want to add, this one comes from a comment by Mr. Spate, adjoining property owner, to the, I guess it's going to be the southeast corner at the Central Pike exit. We do have a access road there at that point. I want to make sure that that access point has curve and gutter that does not allow the flow down that street to come right onto Mr. Spate's property, that it is handled within our storm water management program and is not a free flow at the end of that stub out until that is completed right there. And It would be my recommendation.

Please. Before I second that it's been busy on this issue, but did we get a definition of the percentages?

Joe, I think you had that, or John.

So on the primary masonry, it's 75% masonry. Okay. And on the primary hardy, it's going to be 75% hardy, 25% masonry. They propose the water table masonry on the base of the houses.

Okay. Just want to make sure we had that. I think I can second.

But I have one more as well. That the front four lots on Central Pike to become alley load lots as an additional condition.

And Commissioner George, you just want to make sure that we're removing waiver variance five as agreed to. And then on engineering 13, we're changing that from phase two final plot to the issuance of the land disturbance permit. And then on 15, that will be at the signing of the phase two plot instead of the land disturbance.

I support that addition to my motion. That second remain? So second. It's a motion and a second for a positive recommendation. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Raise your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? That is a positive recommendation. For those in attendance, just as a reminder, the second Tuesday, it will move forward to the Board of Commissioners for its first reading in regards to this project. Thank you all. Second Monday. Second Monday. Sorry. Second Monday is when this project would... The 13th? Monday the 13th. July 13th. I'm going to take about a two-minute pause because I have a feeling that we're going to clear out so we can hear everybody.

minutes

If everybody could please make your way out and make your discussions out into the foyer of the hallway. Everybody please be mindful that we are underneath the meeting. And we need to resume our meeting but we need the discussions to remove from the room please. All right, we will move on with our next item on tonight's agenda. Somehow we've been here two hours. So our next item up on the agenda, and thank you all for your patience. It's always a good group. It's one of my favorite things about just being in Mount Juliet is, you know, it's just an awesome place. Our next item up on the agenda is item 7A. It's review the site plan for the Providence Church expansion located at 2293 South Rutland Road. Mr. John.

Yes, sir. South Rutland Road, yes, existing church site. They've already been the BZA. It's a conditional use because it's residentially zoned. They've already been the BZA for the expansion here that you have before you. The expansion is quite substantial. It's 49,428 square feet. As you've probably seen in the elevations, they're kind of taking the existing appearance and expanding on it or matching it for the expansion. They have three waivers listed in the plan, but there's only four rather, but there's only three that we have to actually hear. One of them is not applicable.

The landscape one that you'll see on there, it's not applicable.

So I removed that off the staff report. And we have three of them. And they are building facade material, as shown. Depending on the facade, it is primarily masonry. I think there's maybe one side that maybe is primarily hardy fiber cement. But overall, I think the building was good. The second waiver worth noting is the parapet wall screening of the HVAC. They have a pretty substantial sight line study in here as to how much of that's going to be showing. And I believe from the front of the building, you're not going to see them anyway. They're wrapped around the back. It covers a lot of the equipment, but not quite the height level at the top of it, like the code reads. So they're asking for that. I support it, given the location of that equipment and the screening that they do provide. And then building height to exceed 35 feet in areas due to grade. And if you'll look at the plan, notice on the plans that grade drops off on the rear of the building to where they, it's like a basement lot or something. It's 35 feet primarily. They have a good exhibit in there as well that shows the areas where it exceeds. But from the front of the building, it's not going to appear as greatly in excess of 35. So staff recommends that waiver be approved as well. And that is the bulk of it, I think. It's a lot of additional parking. They've got buffers along the Belinda City lots there. They've got the sidewalk connection to the right-of-way, which I don't believe the original one had, did it? What else? This one was pretty buttoned up. If it weren't for the waivers, it would be pretty close to meeting every code. So staff does recommend approval. But just so you know, again, to reiterate, it's 49,428 square feet. And I think one of the areas of the staff report said 9,000. conditions we have listed here planning they're pretty straightforward for a site plan just the waivers are the uh outstanding items here i would say as far as planning and zoning goes thank you well thank you shane anything from uh public works uh staff recommends approval with our conditions uh they did provide an event management plan i'll let todd hit on that that's great todd please

Yeah. So while they're doubling demand, they are essentially doubling capacity. Their current operations, I believe, is a one-way loop during services to more conveniently move people. Now we're going to do two separate entrances with ushers and signage on site, telling people which way they're to correctly go to most efficiently get off site. And that both driveways, there will be traffic control officers.

Wow.

Questions, comments from the commission?

Go ahead and ask for representation to this project. Come up and name an address for the record, please.

305 Clown Avenue, Nashville. I'm standing in for my partner, Kevin, who's worked with staff on this project. We appreciate staff's efforts and working with us through these. We have no objections to the conditions of approval that are listed here. So we just appreciate everybody's help to get this to the finish line.

Thank you. Any questions? Thank you. Seeing no questions at this time, I'd like to ask for citizen comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Any citizens wishing to make a comment are welcome and encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. Please.

My name is Ron Glasscock. I'm a 25-year resident of Mount Juliet and taxpayer. I live at 1404 Hilltop Drive. I don't have anything against the church expanding. They had a meeting with us on Monday night. Some of the concerns that the people on Hilltop and Rolling Meadow, I know what they've addressed the concerns from the people at the cul-de-sac on Rolling Meadow. By changing their plan to build a 12-foot rock wall behind that to keep from water evasion and separate the houses there because according to their initial plan, the extended parking that they're having is one issue that I have. Being at 1404, they're actually going to come very close to our property lines with a parking lot. that is not visible from Rutland Road. I have a safety concern with that. I don't have a fence between me and the woods that we have now, which is a buffer between us on Hilltop and Rutland Road. At the meeting that the church called and we went to to see, I appreciate what they did and they laid out that they were gonna take 30 parking lot spaces away from right behind the church to separate the end of the cul-de-sac on Rolling Meadow. My concern is they have not issued any kind of thing to say what we're gonna have is a buffer on Hilltop Drive. With the parking lot, the size, they're going from 297 parking places, they're adding 400, they want 700 parking places for the church. And like I said, the parking is gonna be coming up behind Rolling Meadow, all the way behind Hilltop Drive, is going to be not seen from Rutland Road. You're not going to be able to see that from Rutland Road. And I understand. They said, well, we're just there Sunday. I understand that. But the seven days and 24 hours a day that that parking lot's there and nobody's at the church and somebody can enter that property at night and pull it to that back parking area, sight unseen, it opens us up to a security level that we could have people breaking in the back of houses. My house and two other houses don't have fences between us and that property where the property line is. And the other thing that I'd like to bring up is water abatement. When you add 400 parking lots of 400 more parking spaces, Where is that water going to go? We already have issues. There's a 10-foot easement between me at 1404 and 1402 that's a drainage ditch that comes off Hilltop Drive. It goes down three houses behind Rolling Meadow, and there's a concrete culvert that it flows through and then flows under Rolling Meadow to the creek that runs behind Rolling Meadow. They've already had issues on that creek before. And that's a concern for the people that are on Rolling Meadow Drive is where's that water going to go? So those are the just two concerns that I have. Like I said, I've talked to the people there. I don't have any problem with them expanding, but it's taking all the trees down that are back there. I've lived there for 25 years. That wood's always been an easement or a barrier between us and Rutland Road. And the Dale Webb community is right across the street from it. And I know down in the low spot that, that, uh, wet water spring feeds the Dale Webb lake over there that drains underneath, uh, Rutland road and goes into the Dale Webb area. So there is water concerns. There is the parking lot. Uh, you know, I know that they've got, they've got a buffer of 25 feet on that. Uh, but all the trees will be down and, uh, My main concern is the visibility. There's no visibility for the back of that parking lot. That's around way around to the right side of where they're building their new sanctuary. So I would appreciate just having that looked at and see if there's anything that we can work out with them to maybe adjust that and get a privacy fence or something in between that area to keep us from having security issues on Hilltop Drive. And that's a lot of the residents all the way up Hilltop Drive. 1402 1404 1406 1408 they all all up through there like that on that side and i appreciate your attention thank you for letting me comment thank you we have uh any additional citizen comments at this time do you want to yeah commissioner bowman go ahead for the uh representation

Oh, to maybe persuade that gentleman's concerns, can you speak to general security at the facility, whether it be any cameras, signage? How often? I know it's not necessarily just Sunday, you know, that folks are at churches that scale. So could you give us some info? Absolutely. Thank you.

Good evening. Thank you all again for your time this evening. My name is Dan Lenz. I'm the executive pastor at Providence Church. I live at 489 Northwest Rutland Road. Yeah, so the building is actually used seven days a week, also in the evenings. And so as far as, you know, we've tried to strike the balance between addressing as many community concerns as we could while also keeping our people safe. And so that's what we've been trying to do. I will say, and I'm willing to offer this to the residents that he just outlined along Hilltop Drive, 1402 through 1408. We would be happy to set up a privacy fence if that would allay the concerns of those four houses there and connect it to what we have. That's That's something that we'd be willing to do if that would kind of assuage the security concerns of our neighbors. That's what we want to do.

That's cool.

Appreciate it. Thank you.

Further questions, comments? Commissioner Rice?

I'm missing it in the plans here, but what is the buffer? It's a 20-foot setback I'm seeing, but I'm not seeing the actual buffer.

can we state it is that a not do not disturb or okay if you put that out if we put that out there they'd have to maintain all boundaries though wouldn't it right

community facility school as the church is so there's no buffer required there right um but it would be you know the rest of the perimeter they got to require they got a b buffer okay yeah the original plan called for uh maintaining the existing buffer along that line and i'm not sure what the what the b buffer is but

That was our intent, so we'll do whatever the code requires. Yes, thank you.

Thank you.

Maybe one additional comment there. I think our landscape plan addresses the buffer on that side. I think there is one small area near the dumpster that it gets less than 20 feet. There is a buffer identified that requirement as well. So while it may not be a buffer across the entire frontage, it will be everywhere except for that one small section.

I just didn't see landscaping plans in here.

Yeah, our package, we have, does not have a landscaping plan in it. It did? Okay. Okay. Further questions or comments?

I'm Taurus Bolden. I live at 1416 Hilltop Drive. And I guess my question is, I heard him say 1402 through 1408. Well, what happens to 1410, 1412, 16 and all of that? What happens to that with a buffer? Is a buffer going to be put between our property and this parking lot as well? Or is that buffer stopping at 1408?

Sounds like what is probably going to be recommended is just that we're going to do a Class D buffer, which would encompass the entire project and kick in that requirement underneath the Class D buffer. So it would take care of you guys, too.

The area from 1408 on is not being developed. The trees are staying there. The parking lot only extends to 1408. Actually, it extends to 1406, and we extended it to 1408 to make sure that we were covering all of our bases. So we're not developing it, and the parking lot doesn't go past 1406, really, if you look at the drawings. That's why I didn't say the additional houses along that street.

for the questions, comments. That being said, I'd like to ask for a motion in regards to the . Oh, sorry, John. Please.

It should be certain. Let's add the debuffer with an opaque privacy fence as a condition, please. Very well. Thank you.

Can I ask a question? Please. Is the privacy fence extending all the way to the road, or does it stop at the 14-0, stop where the development stops?

It has to be on the inside edge of the landscape buffer. So wherever you have that landscape buffer, inside edge, plantings on the outside edge of it towards the external properties.

And if we don't develop it and there's a forest there?

Leave it, yes. That's fine. That's fine. It would have to be the extent of the develop there. Thank you.

And for a motion regards this item on our agenda.

I'll make a motion for a positive recommendation to the board of commissioners.

This is a siphon. You approve it.

Yep. Motion for approval.

Motion for approval.

Based on all previously discussed conditions.

Did you want to add Mr. Boffman's comment? He recommended that you add a condition for the Class D buffer. It's a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye and raising your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? You are approved. Next item up on the agenda is item 7B, to review the site plan for Commercial Strip Center, located at 3007 North Mount Juliet Road. Mr. Chair?

Thank you. This is the third time this has come across your table for this development at 3007 North Mountain Juliet Road. Just a little back history. We presented this in April of 2006. It failed due to no representation at the meeting. The second time we saw this, it was in May, but the applicant had deferred to coordinate efforts between his engineering and architectural staff, and it's been brought back before you again, yet again. There still are a great deal of conditions on this plan. I did want to state on the recommendation, it originally said we recommended approval. We do not recommend approval of this site plan due to there's still a lot of safety concerns, conditions. One of the main ones is the circulation around the entire site, both planning and zoning and engineering staff do recommend a full loop around the building for safety provisions, for loading, for the dumpster, for fire safety, police protection and so forth. The loading zones are still a concern because of the locations. This is just a very tight compact location that's trying to pack a lot into a very small location. It's got a lot of challenges, topography and so forth. So it's pretty much still the same plan you all have seen. There's been some slight changes. The ingress-egress has been moved further to the north. I will let Todd speak to that as far as concerns with that. But i still think there's work to be done on this i'm not saying that it's it's not possible or capable of um coming to fruition but i think there's more work to be done before we bring it back before y'all and at this time we change our things who do not recommend approval well thank you shane anything you wish to add

yes sir i'm going along with the sentiment miss johnson uh the sewer routing will they've changed that from uh going through uh the united methodist church going to now going north uh to hit a gravity sewer line so um don't think the survey information is successful yet towards grades i think it'll work fine but that's that's one change i'm going to hit on what ms johnson talked about a building circulation and i was not here at the meeting last month but i did watch that the specific request of this board was to include circulation around the building And that has not been done. And the parking at this site can limit the uses or future uses of this building once constructed. And there could, you know, depending on what business could come in after this is built, could severely limit or, you know, cause a parking shortfall. So

issues can be worked through but i still think we need some more work on it and uh i'll let todd talk about the driveway please yeah so the the they did change the location of the driveway per city request because they weren't reading site distance this new location technically does meet site distance uh for 50 miles per hour which we know is the 85th percentile speed on north ontario road in this section That said, that sight line does get pretty close to the ground, so hopefully you can get real good eyes, but as far as code goes, it's fine and it's acceptable from what TDOT would require. As Jill mentioned, though, without full circulation around the building, I think that southern loading zone is inaccessible at worst or at best, then the one behind the building would just be a pain in the butt. This would not be very friendly to your delivery vehicles.

Thank you. And open up any questions or comments.

Let me jump on that one real quick.

Please. We were here at the last and middle, and we made our opinions known and our requests known about circulation, about sight distance. And as an engineer, I understand sight distance, but there's a big difference between sitting in a Corvette and sitting in an F-150. And if you got, I won't call it limited sight distance because the calculations show it, but sightedness on mount julia road is an issue um but based on the lack of listening to our recommendations and our requirements i'd i'd just like to cut this one short and i move to just deny at this point if we can hold that we have to go through the formality of the citizen comments so with that being said uh commissioner jobs you want to add anything no one's got a question um

i know that and i asked before the meeting and i talked to uh the builder actually i think um about that circulation and i'm just wondering you know and i'm just looking at it if one of those was was cut out and that makes the building obviously not as long i think that circulation could go through there

so i might be wrong and i'm just wondering same thing we said last minute in the meeting before you might need fewer parking places and you might be able to have a you know got a narrow road in the back too so you might it would create small uh less parking spaces and have larger buildings same thing we said last meeting in the meeting before yep please name and address for the record

With CEG, we're the civil engineers on the project representing here tonight. And, again, I appreciate all the work staff has put into this. We really enjoyed working with the staff in this process. I think up until last month, just a point of clarification, the circulation comments were in the staff comments. And we looked at that and we met with the fire, the comments were actually with the fire department there. And so the team here met with the fire department, showed them the topographic concerns there with that circulation. And then we got a positive response from the fire department and we showed them the circulation. We were meeting the international fire code standards for turning fire trucks around in there and they're large trucks and still getting had adequate access all the way around the building. So we were actually really, really happy that we were able to cross that barrier with the fire department. So the first time we saw the comments in the staff requirements from planning and engineering for the circulation actually were last week when we got staff comments there. I'm hearing what what the Planning Commission here is saying that that's that's really important to the city here Admittedly, there's a there's a 35-foot or 32-foot rather fall across this site, which makes it topographically challenging So when you're asking for circulation It would be easier for us to have a one-way out to still allow access around it than to try and provide a full width and full parking and everything around there, still working with those topographical challenges. Would it be acceptable to the commission here to allow one way out there for the emergency access?

Commissioner Frank?

Well, what we experience in Mount Juliet on a daily basis is they send supply trucks in from everywhere. Some people can speak English. Some people can't. Some people can read a GPS. Some people don't. And you're going to get tractor trailer trucks jackknifed in the back of this thing. And people who rent a property in here are going to get their cars damaged. Or any number of things can happen. Yeah, maybe a fire truck can get in there when you don't have a jackknife tractor trailer truck in the back. I'm not even worried about the fire department getting in and out of there. They can drive and they know where the building is and they'll do their job. I'm not really worried about that. I'm worried about delivery, just day-to-day function of the thing. And, you know, cars cost almost $100,000 now. Somebody's going to park their car back there, and there's going to be a bumper of one of these tractor-trailer trucks just pull a big old scratch. That's the best thing that's going to happen with this. And that's why I can't vote. I can't support it because, you know, somebody's going to rent that, and I feel like I failed them. So that's where I'm coming from on it. Mr. Jones so they shortened that like taking one of these spaces out with that you think that would take care of might be able to make my buildings I might be able to make up square footage elsewhere but

Yeah, I know those end caps are probably the most valuable if those would be restaurants and whatnot, but if it would be possible to take out 1 of the smaller interior and then I. Drew something up as far as what that might look like with a couple end parking spots and just a path around it. I know it falls off steeply towards that side. So there'd be some engineering to be done. I know that you guys want to maximize the. You know, the amount of retail space possible, but it would be really ideal to have.

that that loop around there i'll just add to my opening comments this is the third time we've been helping them redesign this and third time we get the same design back and i have no reason to approve anything tonight

Anything additional?

Yeah, I hear you. Like I say, the first time we'd seen this outside of the fire marshal's comments on the staff report was last week. So if it's okay with you guys, I hear what everyone here on the board is saying this evening. We'd love to go ahead and incorporate that into the design.

I'm not going to recommend approval for something that we're not seeing.

yeah i totally understand that and we'd be happy with 38 deferral to go ahead and incorporate that comment does this qualify as an applicant for deferral when it's been deferred to separate times amongst this body just to be clear the first time it was the planning commission actually denied it and then it was deferred come last meeting i would probably recommend the commission just go ahead and deny it again based on their

With that, I stand with my motion to deny.

Very well.

There's a motion and a second. All those in favor, 75% aye. Raise your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? That is a deny. Next item up on our agenda is a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners. It's item 8A. It is review the rezone request from RS-40 to CRC for the property located at 10555 Lebanon Road. Mr. Johns.

A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE STRAIGHTFORWARD ONE HERE. A NICE the owner has any plans. We don't know the plans. Did he say anything about? No. I don't recall what he's going to do there. But land use plan supports it. So staff recommends positive to the BOC. We will.

Shane, anything from planning? No, sir.

If I am just a quick magic question back for staff. Should it go CRC? Should it develop just a single parcel? This parcel does not meet our setback requirements for the CRC zoning, so it would have to join to a different property for it to ever be developed. Would that be a correct statement?

They got 10 foot, 20 foot of the lot from the side setback is going to be eaten up, so he's got a tight spot.

It'd have to be a small build.

He might continue using that existing building.

Sure, sure. Questions, comments from the commission? Let's go ahead and ask for citizen comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Anyone wishing to make comments, we welcome the courage to do so. We'll cut to the microphone, name and address for the record. Seeing no assistance and comments at this time, I'm going to ask for a recommendation in regards to this item on our agenda. It's a motion and a second for a positive recommendation. All those in favor, signify by saying aye and raising your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? That is a positive recommendation. next item up on our agenda uh is also a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners it is to review the land use plan amendment for medium density residential to high density residential for kensington ridge located at 2770 west division street land use plan amendment

Please. Yes, sir. Request that they're requesting. Well, that's not the request. This is Kensington Ridge. Oh, yeah. Sorry. Fifty three point one five acres land use is medium density. And they are requesting high density residential. The ultimate path here is for an RS-15 putt. And RS-15 is a high density classification. So I will say that this isn't going to hit. the maximum density if this proceeds forward this plan it's still only going to be 2.5 units an acre but the rs15 classification is a high density one so medium density high density here for this uh infill development here that's all uh recommend approval uh shane anything on at this point from public works no sir very well thank you

Questions, comments from the question?

Help me help me understand this. The land around it is medium density at an RS 10, correct? And that's high density.

Oh, we also amended our classifications a few years ago. RS 15 used to be medium medium.

Got it.

And now it's a high density thing or a high density district. What was that?

I was looking at this guy.

It says land use and then the medium density around it. Yeah, it's the definition change.

RS-15 used to be medium.

It's really the same as the adjacent developments. And lot size, average lot size, I think, is a little bit larger. Yes. But because of our change, it kicks it to high density from a land use plan perspective versus a medium density.

It's going to be 2.5 units an acre, which is slightly above RS-20 density. RS-20 allows up to 2.2 units.

Further questions, comments? If there's any comments in regards to this item on the agenda, anyone wishing to make a comment in regards to the land use plan amendment, please welcome the courage to do so. Come to the microphone, name and address for the record. This is just the land use plan amendment only right now.

Please. Good evening again. Joe Haddix, Heritage Civil. Appreciate your time as always. So I'm here quite frequently asking for land use amendments. Very infrequently do you hear what John said. Staff recommends approval. Appreciate John's explanation. This is just that weird condition where a couple of years ago those classifications changed. You'll note the adjacent developments are the RS-10 zoning, and we're just requesting the RS-15 kind of be a little bit less dense than what's there currently. So appreciate your consideration and support on this as it moves forward. Can answer any questions you all may have.

Thank you. Seeing no additional citizen comments at this time, I'd like to ask for a recommendation in regards to this item on our agenda.

Motion for a positive recommendation.

It's a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye and raising your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? That is a positive recommendation. Next item up on our agenda is also a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners. The request is to review the annexation request for Kensington Ridge, located at 2770 West Division Street, the annexation portion of the request. So Mr. John.

Yes, sir. 53.15 acres in our UGB and also Hemmed in by the city. It's a little hole in the city limits here, so staff recommends approval of the annexation.

Shane, anything from Public Works at this point? No, sir. Very well. Questions, comments from the Commission? Seeing none at this time, let's call for assistance and comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Anyone wishing to make a comment during the annexation portion is welcome and encouraged to do so. Come to the microphone and name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, looking for a recommendation in regards to this item on our agenda.

Make a positive recommendation.

It's a motion and a second for a positive recommendation. All those in favor, signify by saying aye and raising your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? It is a positive recommendation.

Next one we do.

Next item up on our agenda is also a recommendation item, excuse me, back to the Board of Commissioners. This is to review the plan of services for Kensington Ridge, located 2770 West Division Street, the plan of services portion.

Mr. John? Well, we just recommended approval for the annexation. We've got to recommend approval for the plan of services.

If we annex them, we have to give them services. I understand. Questions, comments from the Commission? Seeing none at this time, let's call for citizen comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Anyone wishing to make comments, welcome and encouraged to do so. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, we do need to close the planning commission meeting in order to open a public hearing. Public hearing is in regards to item 9C, which is review the plan of services for Kensington Ridge, located at 2770 West Division Street. Anyone wishing to make comment during the public hearing is welcome and encouraged to do so. Seeing no citizen comments right now, we'll close our public hearing, reopen our planning commission meeting, and at which time I'm looking for a recommendation for this item on our agenda. Motion and a second for a positive recommendation. All those in favor, signify by saying aye and raising your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? That is a positive recommendation. Next item up on our agenda is also a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners, item 9D, which is to review the preliminary master development plan PUD, including a rezone from Wilson County R1 to RS15 PUD, Kensington Ridge, located at 2770 West Division Street. Mr. John.

All righty. I touched on this before. 134 single-family homes, over 53.15 acres for 2.52 units an acre. You know, honestly, they've got a pretty good amenity package here. And they're asking for waivers. I'll go through these. There's a number of them. I'll let Public Works to talk about the number one there, the steep slopes. also number two number three deviate from material standards that's residential design standards they're proposing 60 40 60 masonry 40 secondary either here i support 70 30. we've done 60 40 in the past as well um so it's uh Something you can chew on there. Request to omit the two-foot masonry column requirement for residential garage doors. That's only required on certain doors. It's not for the whole subdivision. And I'm always keen to recommend elimination of that, since it's just not very practical. um requests to deviate from garage dimensional requirements now we can talk about this so to answer your question the code requires that the interior of a two-car garage be 440 square feet with no encroachments so that means no hvac no water heater no stairs up into the house they're asking 405 square feet uh there's dimensional requirements of 20 feet they're going to meet those they're just the square footage is not going to be quite up to 440. And I say support, but a lot of times these garages are used for storage. They do have two car spaces on the drive, 22 feet long, 18 feet wide. I could go either way on that. It's not a huge ask, but we don't get it a lot. But that's what it is. That's what that 440 is supposed to be. It's supposed to be just open space, not encumbered by anything. I MIGHT FLESH THAT OUT SAY I SUPPORT 405 IF IT INCLUDES NO ENCROACHMENTS SO 405 SQUARE FEET OF WITH ZERO STAIRS ZERO HVAC ZERO ENCROACHMENTS INTO IT MOVING ON TO PAGE TWO OF THE WAIVERS Garage setback requirement for front-facing garages to allow five-foot front setback or five-foot setback from front facade in lieu of 10. Staff supports. Third car recessed bolt-on garage that will be front entry for side entry home sites located on collector and access roads. That's more of an unusual one. Now, I didn't put a recommendation in there because we don't get these a lot. I would be inclined to support it because what has happened, previously approved projects that haven't asked for this waiver, they've come back and asked about, I've had maybe, I can think of four. subdivisions that have said well what about a third car optional third car garage and it comes out it's starting to come up a lot so and we don't really have anything other than the fronting on the collector access street i don't i don't see an issue with it Bulk regulations, these are pretty straightforward. Minimum lot width is 60 feet in lieu of 75. That's actually a lot less than we typically grant, because this is going to be RS-15, which only requires 75 feet of width. A lot of times they're asking for 60 feet, where the required width is 100 or more. And request to deviate from bulk standards as follows. So the front setback is reduced from 30 to 20. the rear is the same at 20 and then the side type of inheritance essentially size of rear side is reduced from 10 feet to seven and a half none of those requests are unreasonable versus what especially not in rs15 those are sometimes granted in higher or less dense districts so staff can support those um what else what else That's the gist of it, I think. I think most of our comments are pretty standard. I don't see anything huge in here. It really is. There's a number of waivers. That's the biggest concern I have. But I think this is a good example of some infill here, some development, some households without the sprawl.

Very well.

Shane, Public Works? sewer availability has been granted has been requested granted improved development will be extending sewer from this site underneath the railroad tracks across division it hits the 30-inch interceptor line that hugs the creek which capacity won't be an issue there any uh we've discussed this with the development team no on-site grinder systems or set steps systems will be allowed in the development pretty standard comment within puds um white comment we did have there was a old sewer easement believe the system got absolved by Metro back in the late 80s, early 90s, that we needed some clarification on to make sure that there was not any existing sewer infrastructure on the site. That's an FMDP issue that can be delved out as plans are finalized. The variance request that Mr. Bachman discussed about a disturbance of steep slopes exceeding 20%, 1.95 acres. Staff supports that in a cut condition only. That's the general comment we've got. And we'd like to see a hydrologic determination at FMDP as well, just to make sure the site features are identified. And I've also got a note, number eight, with our CARTS features, just looking at the topography of the site. I want to make sure that is included and accounted for as the site develops.

With that, I'll hand it over to Todd for roadway and transportation.

Please. This site has no direct frontage. Instead, it is accessed by three stub roads within Hickory Hills and Willoughby Station. Those roads are Portsmouth Drive, Wiltshire Drive, and Port Kembla Drive. And I want to take a moment to thank the residents of Hickory Hills and Willoughby Station. The vice mayor held a community meeting on this development earlier this week. And the residents came out in force with very constructive criticism, not, you know, just showing up mad that something's coming in in their neighborhood. They came in with specific concerns And had ideas for how to solve those concerns and it was really fun to be a part of so I just moment of appreciation for those residents one of those concerns and I'd say probably the primary concern is Road B is a straight shot from Portsmouth to Port Kembla and They are equally concerned by the traffic generated by this development, but also creating a cut through from cane break in the southern side streets of Hickory Hills. As those residents are going to need to get to schools and other important businesses, most of the traffic in this area does actually lead on to South Green Hill Road. As configured, very valid point that honestly, when I did my staff report, escaped me. This is now the shortest distance from the entrance of Canebrake to the roundabout on South Green Hill, as opposed to going up to Maricourt, which becomes Willoughby Station. So the engineer has already committed to working with staff to realign those roads a little bit to try to alleviate that concern. I'm sure we will hear plenty of residents who will express that concern more concisely than I do because they live on these streets. They know them better than I do. That said, I would like to add a condition to the engineering section of the staff report that traffic calming devices be installed within the neighborhoods between Devonshire Drive and Willoughby Station Boulevard. The type of device and the number of devices to be determined at FMDP. It is kicking the can down the road a little bit, but with us working to reconfigure the site a little bit, giving us a little more time to determine what's needed and where it's needed would be appreciated.

Please. Are some of those conversations related to possibly another roundabout right in the square middle of it?

well i would love a roundabout right in the middle i would actually like to see them take road b coming from portsmouth drive and take that intersection and drive it south take road b to port kembla and move that north uh kind of create a separation between the two and increase the total distance it's going to take you to drive from devonshire to south green hill road right um make it less convenient of a cut through, add additional stops, add traffic calming devices, and force them up to the residential collector that is Maricourt and will be Station Boulevard. But that said, we haven't worked out that alignment yet. I'm sure Joel

uh explain more later but there could be some topography challenges there uh and everything's on the table right now perfect let's go ahead and open it up questions comments from the commission i've got a few uh i jumped ahead please please please go um i've heard some discussion of you know having to like meet out the possibility of a crossing to get to division yep and i understand how difficult that is i've tried to do crossings and is that something that we're going to want to require that they at least show that it's not something that uh rj corman's going to allow okay A heck no. Yeah. Okay.

That's it. One is this will create a separate HOA, right? So we'll have Willoughby Station, Hickory Hills, and then this neighborhood will be three. We don't have any joint HOA between any of them. LET'S GO AHEAD AND ASK FOR REPRESENTATION. YOU CAN HELP ME WITH MY QUESTIONS.

A COUPLE OTHER THINGS THAT I HAD HERE.

I noticed, and it used to be a bigger deal, but I think that you got the variety with where this one's coming in right there, especially with the nice amenities both Hickory Hills have and Willoughby Station have. I like the open green space and the expansive space down the middle, which I thought is fabulous. But it does not have a pool right there. but you're kind of replacing the pool with the multi or with the pickleball courts right there. Just my thought on that is even though pickleball is super popular out there, but you kind of pitch and hold foot for just one use and maybe in the design aspect, design so it's more of a multi-use where you could do pickleball on it or maybe want to play basketball on it or tennis on it. That that be more of instead of just designated for one specific use, especially since we're going to eliminate any kind of a swimming pool or anything else out there, clubhouse, just make it so that it has multiple uses within it right there. I think it's a nice amenity. It's very centralized, but just make it so that it can be for multiple uses, multiple ages out there. If they want to set it up for pickleball night, great. If they want to do tennis night, great. Basketball night, great. Or maybe they just want to have a, community meeting right there on the pickleball court and do a barbecue. I think it would be a welcome addition. One of the ones that I had a hard time on because we worked really hard for it and it's been a long time, as staff said, since we got there. For me to be able to sign up on the square footage of your garage and to really show me your floor plan and convince me of that one of how you're going to keep everything out of there. Because not only that, you're also asking for garage setback variance. So you're expanding, you're doing this and that. Then you're wanting to cut the square footage out of a usable space and ignore the ordinance that we have out there. I just have a hard time getting past that. And that ordinance was set into place out there. years ago and it's been really effective and rarely do we have uh see that should it move forward uh one of my recommendations as well um i could just gotta say i wasn't really excited to see your elevations to be honest with you um Lots 96 through 116 will be changed to 100% brick or stone as a recommendation. Every elevation that you provided us here tonight has got zero brick or stone on the rear elevation. That renovation of those particular lots, it's above West Division Street. West Division is a major corridor in and out of our community. And I really don't want to look at monolithic houses as I personally travel that road a bunch. There's no architectural design on the rear of any home elevation that you provided. They're just straight horizontal lap siding with zero creativity to the architectural design or any consideration given to covered porches, patios, awnings, anything else is provided out there. And really, you know, that's what you want to do or sell. That's great. But I just don't want to see that from the backside right there on the major thoroughfare for the community coming in and out. That's gonna be one condition that I would like added on that. And I think 996 through 116 covers anything backing up to division over there. But wanna make sure we denote that. I did see answer one of my own questions as I looked through one of your phasing plans. One of the neat small things out there is as you get into Willoughby Station, you get the Willoughby Station Hickory Hills kind of signs and you're changing into, you know, they all feel like one neighborhood. And I think that's fabulous about all of them. But then you also have signage. It kind of denotes that just so that really from a marketing or a sales standpoint that people really have a fundamental understanding that, especially since you are going to potentially have most likely three separate HOAs, that what they're buying is just for this subdivision or just for that subdivision that I have. I don't get the rights to that pool or they don't get the rights to your multi-use court or dog parks or I guess they could technically come over into the green spaces. I used to live in Hickory Hills and threw ball with my kids over in Willoughby Station all the time when they were growing up. So we did go over there and use their open green space for that. I do want to add staff put the comment on the the was Adeline it was one of the staff's comments on that project I'd like to make sure it's included on this and that is no two plants next to each other or across the street from each other I did not see that as a staff comment from planning on this project but I want to make sure that is included out there as well that's kind of Outside of that, particularly somebody that used to live in there, be excited to see what you guys work out with Todd. You know, whether or not it's a reconfiguration or the potential addition of a roundabout to be able to calm and slow that traffic. Todd already knows my sentiment and feeling on traffic calming. I call it, it's another road that my car personally can't drive down anymore. So I don't call it calming. I call it I can't go drive down a public road anymore. So I'm not a huge fan of them. So I hope that it comes to a roundabout or maybe some relocation or whatnot if that all works out. But trust staff and their judgment and the ability to work through that issue out there.

That's kind of my nickel.

Commissioner Jones?

I appreciate the way they connected all the streets because that's why those were – put there from the two other subdivisions so they matched what was there what should have been done so i like that and i don't have any problem with some of the traffic common initiatives i know you and i totally get in my subdivision and i have to slow down at 15 but you know what there's kids running around and it's i don't mind slow down at 15 every time i cross one of those

Commissioner Bowman. Sorry. Go, go, go, go.

Real quick, if those do become, end up being pickleball courts, I would strongly recommend tall plant coverings, trees around those to knock the noise down. That's going to be very central to the neighborhood, and it's just a loud sport. So it can be very, you know, disturbing to the neighbors.

Commissioner Rex?

I'll... I'll jump on something to Luke's and add a couple of my own. The garage, we got to get to 440. I think that's just the standard. We need to enforce that. I'd really like to request we get up to 7030 with the materials as well. We keep lowering the standard of what we'll accept. And To not sound personal, I'm getting kind of worn out of every time we have a standard, we're willing to accept something less than our standard. And I'd like to keep that at 70-30. As far as the third bolt-on garage, I mean, the thought behind those side load garages was so you don't have a garage door facing the street. and you have a third car bolt on with the garage door facing the street. It kind of defeats the purpose of what that regulation is. I'm not sure I'm entirely against it. I'm willing to hear some discussion on that, but I'm not entirely against it, not entirely for it. There's some other things going on in the bulk regulations that I'm not going to die on that hill tonight, but something we'll talk about in subsequent meetings.

Further questions?

Commissioner Johnson. So what is the percentage in the other two adjoining subdivisions to this? Is it 50-50?

Is it 60-40? Is it 70-30? What is it?

I can tell you as a former resident of Hickory Hills, Hickory Hills, there's some in there that are 5% masonry. 95% vinyl site. I'd say Willoughby Station, although the ordinance wasn't in effect then, but Willoughby Station I would think is more 80-20ish probably, maybe 90-10. But you do have some out there in Willoughby Station as well that are more 60-40 probably.

Well, you're getting ready to hear one that's going to come through here at 50-50. Isn't that right? Isn't that what we meant today? Wasn't that what they asked? 50-50. We can hear it, but 60-40 is sure a lot better than 50-50. Still not 70-30.

I've got one more question or clarification. I just want to make sure this is out there as well. As I looked at it too, it doesn't surprise me to hear Todd's comment in regards to both of these neighborhoods being that receptive because they're kind of our big, most established neighborhood. I mean, when Matt and Juliet really started this growth, Willoughby Station was your first one out of the gate and kind of really set a standard. I think instead of really, really good standards, a few things we may have done better. You know, it'd be nice to have some streetlights on those sidewalks through there. I've always said as a resident was in there, Hickory Hills has streetlights, no sidewalks. Willoughby Station has sidewalks and no streetlights. So as always, you know, pick which one you want to go to up there. But they've really worked out really, really well together. So that made me just think of the construction traffic. Construction traffic is going to have to come in one way or not. I just want to make sure that I'm correct in the way our ordinance is. We bond from the site back out to whatever major road. So we will be holding a letter of credit that should they tear Willoughby Station Drive up or AmeriCorps, however they give them, we're going to be holding a bond that would make sure that should they not fix it, we would have a performance bond that we would be able to exercise and make any necessary repairs. Is that correct?

the way the ordinance reads today it's if you haul out okay so whichever route you're taking okay yeah you're coming in if you're Removing fill from your site, hauling it out is when surety is required.

Okay. And I guess I'd just like to make sure that whatever staff establishes that to be, because there are multiple ways in and out to be able to perform that work on this project, make sure that that maintains from masquerading through whatever phase, the final phase or the final CO of this project, that we maintain that out there for its entirety and that it only be, that maybe we add that, you know, since the performance bond is going to be on X road, that makes B and C off limits for any of your traffic so that whenever we get that surety in place that it's very specific to them that that's their only way in, your only way out.

Yeah, we've had to enforce that this week on development that couldn't haul out for weeks. Okay. So that's how we handle that.

very good defenders so that's awesome that's all i have and i'd like to add that i agree with the 70 30 most definitely on the materials and the garage square footage maintaining the 440 as required uh but also i'm concerned i'm interested in that third car bolt-on if you didn't have a lot to say about that do you have any of that in the drawing that shows where that

Yeah, they're on C504 and C502. They're small in the blueprints portions. there's a side

the front porch that we've incorporated on there. I think that garage door is recessed well beyond 20 to 25 feet from the front of the porch.

Is that an option when they buy it?

It is an option that the customer can select that. We feel like it's a high season.

I will say that I really like that one right there. We don't offer enough product out there with three-car garages. I think you'll sell a lot of those. I think that's a nice aspect of design.

Please. Joe Haddix. If I could add one thing on the third-car garages. So the bolt-on is for your access streets and collectors. If we don't get the variance, you could still offer that. It would just be detached from the house at the end of the driveway, and it would be considered an accessory structure at that point. So we would just assume, attach it to the house, make it look correct, and request the variance.

Are you talking about the 440 square feet?

No, just the third car garage option.

stuff what's your job no you're good i also want to um echo what john was talking about because you know this is not sprawl this is putting this is filling in just like where you live you know there's there's areas there are pockets in the city and unfortunately so it's very positive this is being taken care of now and i mean i like it i agree i agree for the questions comments

I might be able to answer some of what was asked tonight, and so we appreciate the feedback and certainly take a bit of that into consideration in the first plan. Another concern on the amenity side, wanting to not have customer or homeowners using the adjoining communities as their pool use. So we wanted to include what would be a highly active amenitized community with the purpose not just pickleball courts, which we can further expand to multi-use by all means, as well as dress it up with some landscaping around it to give some buffer to the residents, but as well as walking trails, disc golf, and a playground and a play lawn that would act as a gathering area for the community as well. For the garage, right now our We have one floor plan that has a smaller garage dependent on the elevation, which is around that 405 to 408 square footage. So we do have an option to be able to extend that and meet the 440 square feet. The remaining floor plans range by elevation from the 430s to 450, so 450 square feet. So by taking the floor plans that we have that are not meeting that 440 foot threshold, we can certainly meet the intent of the ordinance and add that in there. elevation and facade requirements we can certainly add some additional stone to the rear elevations you know that's a high concern for high visible lots especially facing division street so we can adjust the elevations to incorporate some additional stone or brick and not just show that the foundation is covered if i'm wrong who

What was Ryan's? Ryan Holmes. What was the original? Because Ryan Holmes bought. Bought who? Fox Ridge. Fox Ridge.

Fox Ridge originally was one of the original builders of Hickory Hills.

Yeah, matter of fact, I'm pretty sure my home was a Fox Ridge home. Yeah, so it's funny how here we are 30 years later circling back around to finish out that over there. Pretty neat.

We look forward to the opportunity. And just to emphasize that any of the siding that we put on the home will be cementious siding, Hardy James board. And so we can make those accommodations. That's great. Thank you, guys. Yes, sir.

This time I want to call for citizen comments in regards to this item of the agenda. Any citizens wish to make comment, please come to the microphone. Name and address for the record.

Appreciate everyone's time. My name is Keith Yates. I live in nineteen seventy Dunedin Drive. I'm also a registered civil engineer in this great state of Tennessee. So appreciate everyone's opportunity to discuss some of these items. I was the one that spoke with Mr. Servant here about the traffic, specifically the traffic study that was placed. That traffic study only surrounded the perimeter of Hickory Hills and Willoughby Station. It did not study the actual three sub or the three sub streets that we'd be studying into. In some other preliminary looks that I've done, there are 314 homes in Hickory Hills that we used that as a shortcut, which was the original plan. And I agree with you, having those connections is great. But those 314 homes from Hickory Hills, plus the 276 in Canebrake, plus this new 134 homes, excuse me, totals about 590 plus different homes and if you use the ite manual here which is nine and a half trips per home that's about 4 500 row or cars on that road per day average daily traffic it is a residential street access lane or excuse me a residential street road which is designed for 500 to 1 000 cars per day So you're putting 4,500 cars on Windsor Lane, on Dunedin Lane, on Portsmouth, on Port Kimball, on Milton Terrace. It's basically almost just as busy as Willoughby Station Road is now. We'll be turning into that. So my recommendation again is to only have two of those connections made instead of all three. If we were to do that, it will limit the traffic that is going from Hickory Hills and Canebrake, unless we can open up a traffic across the street around the vision. If we can get a new access road there, we could open up all three of those connections. So that is my recommendation is to have two of the three until we can cross the vision. And once we have that, we can open up that third connection. um also on the disc golf course that they have i appreciate i've talked to the developer about this they plan to keep it all natural so it'd be a wooded area just as it is today i appreciate that the way it's shown on the plan some of the baskets are basically right up against some of the hickory hills residents properties he said that that is a very preliminary plan but they do plan to change that but i would ask that that would stay natural in a barrier appreciate your time yeah thank you

Tom Martin, resident of 2970 Melbourne Terrace, also here as the president of the HOA and will be stationed. I want to give my appreciation to the board that we stand in front of tonight. Commentary has been very fruitful, very aligned with some of the conversation that we had on Monday night. I would like to also thank Mr. Trevette for putting that together as well. Following on the comments from our last speaker and being in the position of Willoughby Station, the amount of traffic that correlates with the existing traffic plan is just not acceptable. We've got uh residents that are seeing at most maybe 100 cars going down port pembla today expanding that out up to 4 500 is is simply not tenable for that street it's it's a um It's a side street. It is not designed for that manner of traffic. And while I understand that this is an infill property, the fact that that pass-through road is a direct corridor from Hickory Hills and, by extension, Cane Break, that that thoroughfare at that point um is really a safety issue that would we would need to have taken care of um not opposed to looking at the potential for um having the i guess diverted uh street uh layout as was um brought up by the city i think that there there could be something there to disincentivize some of that traffic to come through our neighborhood. But the reality is our roads were never intended to have this amount of traffic. We all who live there and those who drive near there have seen traffic in the morning and the afternoon with Mount Juliet Elementary getting in and out of session. It's excessive as it sits today. So if we're expecting to increase that, granted this is only talking about 134 additional home spaces, that's fine. A lot of the traffic that goes through is kind of looping up and around as it sits today. The intersection at Melbourne Terrace and Willoughby Station Boulevard is already getting backed up as it is today. That would explode exponentially. So it would be my recommendation at this point in time to defer this. We need more study, we need more understanding. Definitely want to extend my appreciation to the developer for putting together the Monday night meeting that we had. And I'm anxious to be able to work with them for a solution around this. We've really stuck on the traffic here. from the public comment tonight i know from my resident standpoint we have significant drainage concerns as well that we would want to have some more definition around before we could be okay with this but appreciate your time and and thank you for taking this into consideration thank you any additional citizen comments at this time

Seeing no additional citizen comments at this time, I'd like to open it up.

I'm looking for a recommendation in regards to this item on our agenda.

I'd like to provide a second. And may I add a few additions? I'd like to, uh, to add just so that there's a note in there, uh, the potential for the traffic calming roundabout, but, uh, developer to work with staff to, uh, maybe it's a reroute of a road or a roundabout or whatever it is. Uh, so that we address those concerns. Um, the pickleball court noted to be more of a multi-use, uh, out there. The comment, planning comment, that no two plans shall be next to each other or across the street from each other, that we are not granting the waiver on the garage square footage variance. I would like to go 70-30. and support staff or i'm good with 60 40 either way also the one that is important to me is lots 96 to 106 to be 100 brick or stone and that probably even if we went 60 40 brings that into compliance just with those houses that we have there and then i don't know how to really word this but once a construction or surety is received by staff and the route identified that that route is noted and becomes a condition of this approval or recommendation so that no other routes are taken for that construction traffic other than what we hold a surety on. That would be it. Is that acceptable, as I said?

I'm trying to understand what you say on some of it, but I'm sorry, maybe I'm getting late.

It is getting late. You want me to say it again? Okay. With that, it's a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Raise your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? Positive recommendation. Next item up on our agenda is the, let me make sure I am right, Next item up for agenda is item 10A. It is a recommendation item as well. Back to the Board of Commissioners to review the preliminary master development plan PUD, including a rezone from, yeah, from Wilson County R1 to RS20 PUD for Emerson Park, located off Chandler Road. Ms. Jew?

Thank you, Chairman. You all had previously seen this plan last month and forwarded the annexation and plan of services to the Board of Commissioners with a positive recommendation. Once the preliminary master development plan came before you for a vote, the applicant deemed it time to defer due to some concerns from adjoining neighbors. with water runoff, possible karst features, and other concerns. At that time, they have revised some plans, brought this back before you. Again, this property was rezoned to RS-20 PUD, or excuse me, was annexed in. They are now requesting as part of the PMDP a rezone to RS-20 PUD. The proposed density is two units an acre with a maximum density permitted of 2.2 units per acre. The proposed use is permitted by right. There are very few waiver and variance requests. The typical, they're requesting the 7030 on the materials. Staff does support that. They are requesting the seven and a half foot side setback piercing to be quite standard now. We do support that the bulk regulations with the lot width, they're wanting a 65-foot lot in lieu of 100. We do support that. The subdivision regulations regarding the cul-de-sac length and also the internal streets, I will defer those to public works to address those two waivers. I do want to add one condition that was not included in your original staff report. It was noted after discussions with the applicant that there is an encroaching shed on the northern property. the applicant is going to and willing to provide an access easement to that shed and we have requested a condition that it be recorded the access easement be recorded at the time of final plat to give that to the the property owner to the north so we would like to add that as an additional condition And also provided it does not reduce their open space because it does encroach into it just barely. But we just want to make sure that that is noted at this time. Everything else, our comments are pretty standard across the board that you see for this type of development. So staff does recommend a positive recommendation to the board of commissioners. And we request the conditions of approval be included.

Well, I don't want to let Todd start us off with the roads.

Well, Todd, please.

Roads are relatively easy for once.

This development is proposing one access on Chandler Drive opposite Normandy Drive. staff is recommending that this be a private road generally anytime we see a cul-de-sac that's going to be our recommendation that does require waiving the future transportation plan but this road was originally supposed to connect to the western connector which my understanding there's no will from our voc to continue with that for now um They are asking for a cul-de-sac variance for length, not unit count, which is, I know you see 29 units on a cul-de-sac. They've provided that loop road, which provides a turnaround. Those units aren't counting towards that 25 maximum on a cul-de-sac. So unit-wise, they're compliant. Length-wise, they're a little bit over. better than most, you know. We are requiring a left turn lane on Chandler Drive. There is potential that that can be done within the existing striping that was installed with the left turn lane onto Normandy Drive. That's all being negotiated with the Wilson County Road Commission because Chem drives their road. We've got no intention of annexing this. some things to be made aware of is northbound or southbound, you will have to go through some pretty severe S turns to get to an artery, to get to Old Lebanon Road or to get to Central Pike. Real windy old county road. So keep that in mind as well.

Questions, comments from the commission?

back to Shane.

Oh, Shane, I'm sorry. Please.

Yeah, I was not here last month when this came through, so I'll speak to some of the things that probably didn't get hit on last month. The sewer will go through Normandy Heights, not Normandy, the Normandy subdivision across the street. It will all be gravity fed with the pump station that pumps back towards Normandy. any type of wet ponds proposed aeration will be required and the last thing i do want to speak about which we met with residents after this project was deferred last month was drainage geotech and the likes um The engineering consultant provided me a drainage area analysis preliminary that showed no karst features accounting for runoff, which in turn, and I'll let the engineer speak for this, in my opinion, I think oversizes their detention pond. we can i conveyed to the residents that city standards allow for a pond to be designed to a hundred year event with a foot of free board so which i think is more stringent than other municipalities in this area any type of um geotech that the consultant has done right now is getting them ahead of the game because one way or another engineer that stamps these plans has got to have a design that accounts for the geotech i believe that was one of the questions a member asked last month if they're required or not they required by us no but I think any engineer that's got to put a stamp to put their name to it we'll look at it sooner rather than later which is what this development did as code states the runoff generated with the proposed development cannot exceed what runoff currently coming off of the site we do try to work with developments to mitigate as much point sources on to neighboring downstream properties where we can the resident that brought up if there's a spring or water coming out of the site today That goes both ways. It could be a sinkhole that's taking all the drains right now that could take all the water leaving the site that never hits downstream. It's very hard to account for sinkholes. And the best thing we try to do is avoid using them completely. And like I said, I'll defer to the engineer on this, but they've also want to include an emergency injection. Well, basically a, Mr. Rash, you may want to use this word. I call it a regulated sinkhole that's approved by TDEC, that's designed and reviewed by the state, by me, to provide a relief if any water is coming off of this site through its natural drainage pattern. So like I said, all this is preliminary. I don't have in-depth type of surveys from the engineer as of now. I don't have a full drainage report as of now. It's not required per this submittal, which is more to get your zoning set. And then they forward on to engineering, which I did speak to that to the residents that had questions about. where they are at in the process. But I've more than welcome to be open with the residents, with the engineer, as we get through this to make sure that we have a sound site that meets code. And the analysis they provided me was above what they had to do at this point.

So with that, if y'all got any questions, if y'all want to ask the engineer of record any questions, I'll pass it back to you guys. Thank you.

TODD, YOU GOT SOMETHING ELSE YOU WISHED I HAD TOO?

YEAH, I APOLOGIZE HERE, BUT THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT, I BELIEVE OUR OPEN TECH REVIEW COMMENTS, NOT OUR FINAL STAFF REPORT COMMENTS, THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR, BUT STRIKE PUBLIC WORKS CONDITION 15 uh the variance is requested for houses to front a collector that's no longer applicable there are some other minor changes but i don't think those actually impact the intent of the ordinance well good catch questions comments from the commission make sure rest

I'll just say something. I don't think I've ever seen a packet like this before, and I just want to commend the developer for just putting together an impressive-looking packet. Certainly, there's lots of ways to present plans, but... being of the older generation, it's nice to be able to actually read some of the words on the plans without pulling out my phone and magnifying it so I can read it. So I just want to say thank you for putting something together that's readable.

When I first started on planning, we had full-size sets. Yeah. We need them. They're massive.

Further questions, comments from the commission?

Let's go ahead and open it up to representation or citizen comments. Everybody's welcome.

I'm Michael Dewey with Dewey Engineering at 2925 Berry Hill Drive in Nashville. We've got Bill Charles, a geotechnical engineer, Sam Holt with us, and a couple neighbors that we met with earlier today. And I just want to thank staff for working with us and and i just want to let you guys know that we heard the concerns of the neighbors and from you guys on the on the previous submit i just want to walk through a couple of the notable changes um one of the main changes that you'll you'll notice is that we've removed the lights from fronting uh chandler road We've increased the width of the open space on the north and south property lines. And we've shifted the stormwater area away from the north property line. And then as Shane was discussing, we did end up doing a preliminary grading plan and then more importantly a preliminary drainage analysis. um and the way we wanted to make sure because we've seen pictures from the neighbors of of the drainage concerns we've walked the site um and so we understand the concerns and uh we believe that by um assuming that no water will be going through the cars features post development that that is a conservative approach We will put in a we are proposing an injection. Well, so it's such that if there is an emergency overflow Water will get into that. Well, it'll be raised above The hundred it's our proposal at this time put it at the hundred year elevation and so ideally only the 100 year and above would get into that injection well. Furthermore, we have designed it such that we're reducing the post-developed flows 30% for some storm events up to 30% below the pre-developed flows. And all of them are double digits, 15% or greater flow reductions. So I'll let Bill Charles, the developer, talk more about conversations with the neighborhood.

I'll get my notes ready here. I'm with the development company. My name is Bill Charles. My office number is 357 Riverside Drive, Franklin, Tennessee. And I want to let everybody know I appreciate you allowing us to present tonight. I made a mistake at the last meeting. Typically when we do developments, which I've now been doing in Nashville for about 30 years, I usually try to find out what's going on with the community around us, with the neighbors. In this situation, I was completely unaware of one of the neighbors having this stormwater issue. So after we learned what happened at the last meeting, we decided to defer, as you guys know. And then we went and sat down. Well, first of all, we invited all the neighbors that came to the microphone to a meeting. We met with several of them. A lot of them are here in the audience today. And they brought up about four or five things that were actually very reasonable requests, things that they were contending with. The stormwater issue, as mentioned, is a pre-existing condition. But that does not mean that we can't find ways to help reduce the problem that they're currently having. I know what state law means, but we thought we'd come in and try to at least figure out an alternative. So the stormwater was something that our engineers have been working with city staff, city engineer, and the neighbors who we've met with a couple of times to solve. the process that we're going forward, we want to make sure is on record. So it's not something that we're just suggesting that will raise or increase the size of the detention pond. It's certainly something that we expect to be held to that standard. The other thing that we found that was of concern is that some of these residents, of course, now looking at the woods, they didn't necessarily have With us coming in as development, it's my understanding through planning that our zoning does not require a buffer. So we sat down with planning, then we sat down with the neighbors. So we're proposing a 30, 35 foot open space buffer between their property line and ours. But we didn't stop there. We're also putting a restriction on ourselves to say that we also want to include a 20-foot type A buffer that you guys have in your standard on top of that. Also, and I'd like to put this on record if I could, on the north side of the property, we adjoin a property owner, Mr. Key. We've got two things with Mr. Key that want to get on record. We're going to leave the 35-foot buffer starting at lot 29 all the way through the back of lot 26. That's going to be a tree safe, not just a buffer. So we're going to keep the trees preserved within that section. The rest of the northern side would stay as that 35-foot open space and the type A 20-foot buffer. On top of that, Mr. Key has built a barn years ago, which it appears may actually encroach over the top part of our property. Instead of sharing that barn with him, which he was reluctant to do, we've decided that if you guys would be willing, we'd like to record on our final plot as planning had, as Jill had mentioned earlier, we'd like to create an access easement around the barn as well as maybe an extra five feet around the structure itself so that he can access around. So we're both, Mr. Key and ourselves, are both in agreement with that commitment. Going to the south side of the property line, that property adjoins Billy, who's lived on this property, how old is his last name? Mr. Daniels, Billy Daniels, who's lived on that property for a considerable time. we would like to commit uh that from chandler chandler lane all the way to the end of lot 10 to leave that open space buffer as also a tree safe that we would not do anything within that open space going for the rest of the the buffer uh we of course leave the open space and then have a type a 20 foot buffer in that rest of that location that that kind of covers two of the things that we've talked about with the neighbors the uh trying to think if there was anything else we uh we needed to discuss give me one second I know that what was said earlier about Mount Juliet trying to create more restrictions on rock blasting. Uh, right now I have developments all over Nashville, about 18 of them. And this is a common conversation in all the different cities and counties. And I understand the concerns and there's just seems like it's a hard thing to describe to people as to how to manage something that It's just hard to manage. I don't disagree with the reasons for wanting to be more restrictive on it. I know that you guys, based on what was said earlier, that you guys can't restrict blasting with the rules and regulations. But for the record, I would like to try to figure out how I can. We would not disagree with adding more seismographs, particularly closer to where our property's line is to where their homes are. And I've already made that verbal commitment to the residents around us, saying that we would be willing to monitor those locations on top of what the normal standard is. Again, I know that's not something that you guys can restrict, but that is certainly something that we're willing to acknowledge. I'd like to, if there's any, am I missing anything that we talked about?

That's going to be part of the type A buffer.

What he's referring to is earlier in today we talked about in areas where I actually have to... Let me back up. We did a lot of preliminary... engineering on this site. When we learned of the issue with the homeowner with the stormwater, we immediately went out there with our geotechnical engineer, our biologist, and our civil engineer. In fact, if you have any questions, our geotechnical engineer is back here. We walked the entire site. We were trying to figure out what it was that we had to contend with because not only was this neighbor having water issues, but we also didn't want to have a development where we ended up with groundwater with the homes that we built. So when we talked about the buffers with the neighbors, which he just mentioned, we said that we would sit down and talk about the areas where we would have to put in swales, because that's what the engineering is inevitably going to require, to see how that would impact potentially into that 35-foot open space. So it's our intent to, once we get that sorted out and we understand more detail in the civil engineering drawings, we are going to go back to the neighbors that we join. And we will be showing them what the type A buffer will look like in the areas that would be disturbing because of the engineering design. That's probably something that will happen as we refine the grading plan a little bit more. Right now, we did a preliminary grading plan, but the final is still yet to be tweaked and figured out. Do you guys have any more questions for the development team?

Sure. Thanks.

Thank you.

Since this is a pod, we're able to talk about off-site improvements and the like, correct?

Sure.

Oh, sorry. The developer. sorry one of the neighbors was asking me for porsche if they didn't come up to speak against us are there are there currently i don't recall cna were there any off-site improvements besides the lines on the road and whatnot okay the pump station there in the northeast corners standard pump station correct Okay, I've seen in other developments where there were numerous pump stations that the developer will provide the city an additional backup pump or something of that nature in case 1 burns out. It's that.

typically within the housing structure of a pump station depending on how many pumps it takes to lift the flow out there'll be a slot to insert one or two more but we usually try to assess that on design to see if it's because that's based on run time to the pumps that t-deck specifies so it kind of get into the weeds to determine if you actually need it or not so but typically something like this you probably have two pumps depending on the horsepower but that's calcs i can't tell you how no i was just thinking if the developer could provide a spare in case one fails that's been a relatively common thing around the city correct

or am i mistaken that i'm pretty good he's talking about the grinders uh yeah yeah no i was probably mistaken though yeah okay so this would be different they do have to provide redundancy for t-deck okay so that would already be got it i was just thinking of a spare set aside but okay fair enough for the questions comments let's go ahead and open it up to the rest of the citizen comments

Hey there, guys.

I'm Terry Croxer. We're the property owners. That's my sister, Teresa Finch. Our mother bought this property in... You're about 14.

I was probably 14.

We live in Donaldson. She opened the business in 1958. I was born in 1959. I think she always planned on doing something with it as like a compound or something for us, but we blinked. And here we are, 167, she's 77. And I knew we're downsizing, so it's time for someone to do something with this property. I talked to different developers. I know these guys, and I knew they would come in to you guys, and I knew they would talk to the residents. And I think they've done a great job at it. And we appreciate your time and consideration for this project.

Well, when I was asked to talk about my mother, and I took the plans home, She would be so excited. And this is what I picked for her. This one. It looked like her. My dad was a city boy, and we don't talk about him, but he paid for it, too. And he lived in the city, and he would have loved this one. Because he could see his tool. This is a beautiful complex, and you're correct. It's got everything she added to her own home. She had a huge yard that she could walk around. She had lights. She had plants. She had her yard for us to play. All the things that are in here. If you want to talk about America and France, You know, I think our team did a great job. And like Terry says, we need to downsize. And there's going to be a lot of young or old. That could be old because tonight, what did I get? I'm going to get my husband because my garage is small. It's 400. And I hate the damn thing. Y'all are absolutely correct on that. Oh, my God. I even broke my shoulder in there. So, you know, it's been an interesting night. And thanks for listening to us. And I'm sure y'all keep us posted on what goes on. And she actually died here in Mount Judah. She loved pretty. Anybody, if you've been up at home.

Any additional citizen comments at this time?

No degree.

That being said, I am looking for a motion in regards to this item on our agenda.

I'll be making a positive recommendation.

I'd say a motion and a second for a positive recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying aye and raising your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? That is a positive recommendation. I know that we're on the home stretch. Would a little five recess be warranted? All right. We're going to take a five-minute recess for the Planning Commission. We will resume in five minutes. All right. Call us readjourned at 1019 p.m. With that being said, our next item up on our agenda this evening is item 12A. It's a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners. It is to review the out-of-city sewer request for 3150 Nottable Road.

Shane. This looks familiar. It is because it came to this body in April. The applicant is looking to develop for single family residents on the piece of property and with requiring a connection for taps to the sewer system. This body gave it a positive recommendation only for it to be denied at the level. But between then and now, state law changed. Let Sam talk a little bit about that.

Please.

So as part of the Tennessee legislative session this year, there was an amendment made to one of the TCAs relating to utility systems. So as of the end of May, utility systems, so the city is now required to provide connection to the sewer system if there is an existing gravity sewer line or an existing sewer force main located on or adjacent to the property. there are a few circumstances three when you could potentially deny it but those are very specific exceptions so these are only this request is just four taps four houses

Yes, sir, that's correct. The request is the exact same that you guys saw in April.

Okay. We approved a few last month if I'm not correct, didn't we?

We have some other two that were approved at this body, but both were denied at the BOC level. Okay.

Let me see.

The 1, the 1 of them we want, though, because there's not sewer there. Is that correct?

That is correct. Not right now. No coming.

Right, Siri is not exist. There's no, it's using the infrastructure for the 12, the 12 or 18 months. That's right. This 1, though, there is a force main. That's right. Running along in a lot of way. Jason.

big ounces. Well, good thing is that along with other state legislature, you only have 30 days to react going forward as well. So that's another fine piece that everybody's probably going to enjoy. Um, further questions, comments seen known right now. Um, we'll open up the citizen comments and we'll wish to make comment. Welcome to do so. And seeing no citizen comments, looking for a recommendation in regards to this item in origin. Motion? Second. And a second. All those in favor, 75% aye. Raise your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? There's a positive recommendation. Next item up on our agenda is item 13A. It's a recommendation item back to the Board of Commissioners to review the potential sale of the downtown city properties located at 50, 69, 71, and 73 East Hill Street, 46, 48, and 50 East Caldwell Street.

2365 and 2397 north mount juliet road who's got this same place i'm just going to explain why it's before you there's just a tennessee state statute that requires the planning commission to approve the sale of any city property so it's not to review the contract it's not even to review the plan it's just simply you all approving the sale of the property that's it we just moved out of them now don't need them anymore The city did put out a request for proposal to create a downtown district here. And so the BOC will soon consider a contract for that. And so then once that happens, then the Planning Commission will see and approve the plans on the property. So you will see the project at some point.

We may approve the plans on the property.

Thank you. Okay.

Today, are we approving a sale? Have these properties been sold?

You're just approving the sale of it, not for the amount, no actual parameters or anything, just for the property. We can't ask.

That's the fun part. We can't ask? I can ask.

I always vote no on these because we don't have any context of anything.

They just expect us to say, yes, you can sell this. It's the same thing that happened with that property on York Road.

My question is, why do we have that much in the first place? What was it intended for?

Oh, where were you three years ago? Or two and a half years ago? It was all over the news.

Yes, I did hear some things about that.

with our opinion whether we want it to be sold or not.

You don't have the requirement to approve it. If the planning commission disapproves it, then it just increases the required vote for the DOC. But you're just simply approving the concept of selling the property.

But it's not an abandonment of the redevelopment or the creation of a downtown district. It kind of goes hand in hand with that, correct? Correct. Okay.

Commissioner Jones? so i do want to talk about it so and uh here's what i want to say about it so we the the commissioners were were um given an opportunity to express what they wanted to do with this property came out to everybody so that we wouldn't violate the Sunshine Law. So it was individual. I'm the one, I don't care who knows it, I'm the one who said we should keep this property until interest rates come down and then we could get more money. I don't think we're getting enough money for what we're selling. We had two RFPs come in and The one that was decided, in my opinion, but they had 60 days, is less money. What I want to see if it happens, and I don't have a problem with developing... this back here with apartments and stuff like that for a walkable downtown but we we can't put the cart before the horse everybody wants infrastructure out here on hill street i've seen nothing about this and this should be this we should have a c-bid come through down here district so that the city doesn't have to pay a lot of the reoccurring maintenance maintenance coming up I've not seen that, and you're not seeing that. You're not supposed to, so I'm talking. But this Hill Street here, at the end of Hill Street on Mount Dillard Road, Nobody, none of y'all or anybody else that brought this to us has said anything about putting a light there. And if we want a downtown district, we're going to have to have a light there and a crosswalk and a light down here on Caldwell if that comes. And the light's going to be up there at Curd. You've got to have it. You've got to have the speed limit to be reduced. to be able to cross over there the reason that i'm so adamant about this hill street this street is getting ready to be opened up i call about every month to see how close it is to opening this and because sales are down because interest rates are up and things are not moving as much that's not open yet when that gets open Many of us in here is going to be using Hill Street to get down to City Hall. You and I and anybody else that's going to come through there. But think about everybody else that's going to be on Clemens that's going to use Hill Street and eventually is going to use it when it goes all the way to Golden Bear. But no one has brought anything up about putting a lot there. And you say, why do you need it? Another reason that I'm so adamant about this is because there was a young man that pulled out. No, excuse me. A young man was going down the street and a lady pulled out at the end of Hill Street and hit him. And it was a terrible wreck. And he had several. he's got pins in his left hand and and he's a cop he's a he's a captain in metro and so he's right-handed so thank the lord it wasn't his right hand and why it's so touchy is because it was my son It's my oldest son, who's a captain in Metro. And we have got to address this here. And we are not good planners sitting at this table if we don't look and think about what's in the future. We know. We know that this road is going to be open soon. Probably when interest rates go down and things start selling, probably within, what do y'all think, six months? the at the maybe the shortest or nine months it's it's coming we drove wasn't it you and i and tim we drove up uphill street and and seen where it's almost open so think about this you think about all this traffic now think about all this traffic right out here on hill street coming here so i'm not voting for anything until we have somebody will show me a lot that's going here and showing me some kind of plan for safety for this city and i don't think we're good planners if we do if we if we pass this thank you it's a good argument further questions or comments it says potential set so so nothing Not be inside it, but we don't have to sell it now. We could sell it.

And if it were to be sold, would the citizens who helped purchase this through their monies, how would they benefit from that?

The citizens?

Citizens, yeah.

Well, the way this plan is, City Hall is not going to be sold or this will parcel back here.

Keep, yeah.

you know if we've got correct me if i'm wrong we've got the the availability at another building to create a city hall there correct there has been a request to explore an option moving city hall to the cleveland drone annex and we have looked into that there is a financial cost associated with that uh so the decision of whether to make that move and include this property has also been built into the contract with this with the buyer or a proposed buyer of the the other is having the first right of refusal uh but all that has still been in the process of working out well i will say that that who the the rfp that was at least selective of 60-day extension or whatever they are going to try to do a c bit if i'm not mistaken they are and i will make one correction to what you said earlier commissioner uh the purchase price that has been agreed upon is is extremely close to the appraisal value of of what the property is appraised for and they were the high bidder in that process

but it may price for more if we set on it for just a little longer until interest rates come down.

But anyway. Further questions, comments?

Supposedly they've come to us and all of this property was provide was supposed to be purchased, and they were going to build a large hotel, they're gonna build a bank, they're gonna build a lot of commercial stuff here. With a land barrier to do that.

You remember that? There's been more than one interested in doing something over the years. I wonder if Lebanon has sewer capacity envy like we have town center envy.

The center that was supposed to be built concerning the swimming pool and the recreational center. Whatever has happened to that. Did I bring something up?

That's old Hickory Lake.

That's old Hickory Lake now. I mean, it was a big discussion. Many meetings, I remember.

You were supposed to pay for it, Seth, too, in those meetings, wasn't it?

I don't remember.

I was just going to address the comment that Commissioner Franklin said regarding the... the envy that are shared between sister cities i did want to bring it to your attention if you hadn't paid attention to the news recently apparently lebanon is the economic driver of the county uh not the city of mount jillian don't ever believe everything here in the news

Let's go ahead and call. Well, we did call for citizen comments. I'm looking for a motion in regards to Sodom and Arjun. Oh. Well, no, we have to give a recommendation, don't we?

Yeah. I'll make a motion for a negative recommendation. I'll second that.

That's a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye and raising your hand. Aye. Against? Abstentions? Aye. That is a negative recommendation. Next item up on the agenda is a discussion item, 14A, discuss the Central Pike land use plan.

Was there something? No.

No, there's not.

Just discussion.

Commissioner Franklin approached me and asked to put a discussion on my item on the agenda for this.

Absolutely love it. Please.

Let me tell you why I brought this up. We have been trying to get a Central Pike interchange since 1998. It's almost took as long to get one as it took to get a shopping center. You go back to 1967, don't even count Mount Julia until 72, take off those five years. Took about as long for Mount Julia to get a shopping center to have this interchange. This will be the last interchange we get. Think about it. There's nowhere to go west. Earhart Road's in Davidson County. There's no real way to go east 109. We're not going to back with roads, the end of our growth area. So it's it, it's a last interchange we're going to get. And right now the land use plan shows the whole area is mixed use. What does that mean? That means every developer that comes in here is going to walk 500 apartments and a 1200 square foot strip center out front. And so. We could do that. And that's what we're going to hear over the next several years. Or we could do something different. Or we could either change the mixed use zoning, which would affect the rest of the city or get change the land use in the Central Pike area to try to stop that from happening. Now, why should we stop that from happening? Well, I think everybody public mainly is relying on the central Pike interchange to be a great vacuum of traffic out of here on the South and the West side of this County, because that's why probably Providence is so bad is because during rush hour, everybody's got to get to the interchange to get either direction. And so at least we could separate that. Right. And especially around Christmas, can you imagine how much better it would be? But, um, If you start putting apartments there, and I'm not talking about a few apartments, every development we're going to get is going to be apartments. Think about it. And every time you build a set of apartments, they take 18 to two years to build, 500 units. Well, what's going to happen to the new school down there on Central Pike? It's not new anymore. They'll just be an apartment school. All the kids that were going there will be transferred to other schools until we have to build another school. I mean, is that what we want? And then whenever everybody leaves the apartments in the morning to get on the interstate, most of them trying to go to Nashville, it's going to defeat the purpose of having the Central Pike Interchange, our last interchange. So I just want to put it on the floor. I mean, I didn't bring maps or get elaborate with anything, but do we really need to leverage the development community to develop commercial on Central Pike? Yeah.

they're going to have 50 000 cars on that road anyway i ought to do it i want to i appreciate seeing this on here y'all already heard me a couple months ago that i'm on probably my swan song or my last uh years or of involvement uh in this role um was a part of that land use plan um and that land use plan study and everything it took us about a year when we adopted that i'll tell you the reason why it's multi-use it's multi-use because we did not have an interchange at the time right we did not have a proposal we did not have anything we put multi-use there for a specific reason because we couldn't give it a designation but multi-use said maybe it goes commercial maybe it goes residential. And at the time, multiuse was not manipulated the way it is today as far as multiuse. So we felt that the multiuse would give it let it develop based upon how the projects came before us. And so you couldn't really go CG. Nobody wanted to do that or commercial interstate. Nobody wanted that. Nobody wanted it to high density residential and we couldn't get there. So the only thing that everybody came through was multi-use. So what do you do? You just take your paintbrush out when you got a hole right there and you just filled in the hole with the paintbrush because we had no idea that interchange was coming up. I'll expand on that because I've been saying this is as well, even though Nashville is such a logistic hub, um, I serve the city by a member of the JCDB as well. We have our, uh, warehouse or logistics and whatnot, but I can tell you as well that the vision from the land use plan, we did have golden bears of vision at that point in time, and we had started that as a role, but I can tell you that it was never the vision as well to carry the warehouses all the way and push them to the vision. That wouldn't have been a million years if we would have been thinking of doing that, and we've done it. And so we're going to – do you want to push them all the way to Mount Jude High School? I mean, we could. It's coming. You're naive if you don't think it is. And how do you declaw? How do you tell them not? Manage plan is how you do that. And so I think, along with that, I agree with Commissioner Franklin, is that we need to identify how we want what is left of Golden Bear to develop, not let the people outside of us tell us how it's going to develop. Let's tell them. And on that corridor, I think that now with sewer, water, gas all the major utilities there you got to go down vendors fair and you got to go all the way to cedar creek yacht club because you're naive again if you think it ain't coming it's they are looking at the funding right now to go ahead and carry your sewer all the way across the uh the bridge all the way up to cedar creek yacht club and potentially there's some major tracks at the back of benders ferry it's coming and if you don't think it's coming it's coming and it we will see it i'm 53 years i'll be 53 years old this year i will see it in my lifetime and if we want what we've approved if we want 150 foot wide, 200 foot wide tracks that look like Evermore that we approved tonight. If you want a ton of those down Benders Ferry, because that's how Benders Ferry, look at it on GIS. That's how Benders Ferry is tracked out. There's a bunch of major small tracks. You can go down Benders Ferry, subdivision, subdivision, subdivision, subdivision, subdivision, subdivision, subdivision, subdivision, with zero connectivity. so you got to get out onto the main road to go to your neighbor's house and you're going to do this constant loop if we don't devise a plan and control as well what is remaining on golden bear from i-40 i go all the way as far as we can our growth boundary at least to seer creek yacht club and dictate let the land use plan dictate how we want it to be

i know that's a funding mechanism and i know that money is tight and everything that if we open up a land use plan i know that you guys most likely did not budget for a land use plan study i i didn't mean to bring up here in the whole city but you you could spot we've spot done yeah them and i think it's just those two areas we did bear we did golden bear parkway remember and it was a spot study uh i think the the chairman appointed several people a board member off here and maybe a couple people a city staff member and somebody from the community i think phil smart was on one of them but uh i'm going on you you could do a spot you you could do it by spot or you could do what the county just did please don't do that no i'm just two years corridors i don't think you want to do that you're you're out of time if you take that long Yeah, I mean, we'd already start. And look, I'm not trying to say apartments. We can't the city of Mount Jewett can't never have another apartment or that. I'm not saying that at all. I'm just saying, is that all you want? Because that is going to be what we're going to see down there. I mean, I just I can just feel it in my bones that it's such an easy. It's a business, right? Apartments are businesses. They're not residential. They're businesses. And, you know, they're easy to turn. developer can can flip one of those before he gets home and so you know whenever uh everybody started bragging about central bike interchange being in the 2029 uh construction budget tdot everybody in tennessee that develops and probably beyond knows how hard it is to build an interchange or another major corridor all the developers know that they they hear that whistle and so

I think you're spot on, too. I mean, let's not ignore the Tillman barn that's right there. That's a potential massive development. I don't think it's that far off. If that one comes through and all we got is apartments all over the place, it's going to be Providence, Jr.,

I mean, they're proposing y'all, you know, denied it, denied it, negative recommendation. There's hundreds of apartments right back here is what the proposal is to be sold. How many? I forget. Okay. Right here. So, you know, it's not going to, it's going to take, you know, you're not right here on the interstate. At least some of those up there. Maybe it could be one side of 40 and then not the other side. I don't know. You see what I'm saying? And so, and I used to be totally against the park because everybody knows that. But I also understand now that they're needed in some areas.

See, I think that they're good where if you put the density, that you also create walkability to that you have things around here. What's that, Nick?

Well, they're not going to come unless there is. I know. So if they're not the rooftops or even the apartments, it's not going to come down here.

If we had more, not high-rises, but three-, four-, five-story, white-collar buildings than something like McEwen, where it's a master plan, mixed-use, you know, apartment,

white collar office space then yeah that would be great but if you don't have all of those in the mix then i that i think that recipe falls apart so all right out of curiosity this is back at staff and all the powers to be we can't engage you to spend money um nor do i think that we can be the ones to engage a land use plan If I am correct. Can we force the study? Well, yeah. I think so.

At least what I'm suggesting is not an expensive thing. It's three or four people sitting around and saying, hey, here's what we have, here's what we could have, and then it comes to the Planning Commission. And then the Planning Commission is just a recommendation now, right? Since 2022 when the law changed. Just like a rezone, I guess.

The Planning Commission can initiate the amendment, but you're right, the Planning Commission can't force the expenditure of funds. So that's kind of where... It doesn't drive.

But I'm not talking about a lot of area here. And the only reason I'm talking about area is because it's impending. Yeah. Unless, you know, 11 o'clock is going to be the norm. Yeah. How many stories? How big is your ladder truck?

It speaks volumes to how much easier it is to play offense than it is to play defense.

I think a big part of that, and I know Ms. Mullaly is introducing it at the county level, but we need to make sure that we aren't the next target for a large-scale AI data center or that type of draw on the resources. I don't think the city...

people want to be in wilson county because we have some of the fastest accessibility to internet and almost on the eastern seaboard you got natural gas you got rail you got power and unlike williamson county or southern or even whatnot we have water and we got an international airport yep

15 minutes from my house.

Yep. Nashville is, or Mount Juliet, because of all of that, it's always strategic and controlled.

But you're right. The state just introduced a law that any data center, 50 megawatts or larger, needs to supply their own power to the TVA, right? Needs to support that. But a 50 megawatt data center is almost as much power as the entirety of Wilson County consumes, or the houses that Wilson County consumes. So what they're going to do is build a bunch of 49 megawatt data centers and get around, seriously, and get around that law, right? The state law has almost no teeth. You can put one at your house, too. What's that?

You can get your data center for your house, too, and make a bunch of money. Do you? Yep, they're offering you to do them at your house and i think i think we need we need a framework we need rules and regulations around that otherwise they're going to set them for us and they're not going to be favorable why don't uh we do this since the discussion item here tonight um it gives us an opportunity to kind of voice opinions let's put it back on the back of agenda again as a uh discussion item that gives it two published uh times and gives you 30 days to kind of think about what we've talked about and then we'll revisit it next month and at that point in time should we deem that it is something maybe you find an area that's a hot button for you guys i don't know um we'll bring it back up and if we decide to do it we'll uh we'll make it happen you give people an opportunity to talk yeah that's one i need a motion to adjourn second all those in favor say aye aye against we are adjourned