Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Welcome to the December 18th, 2025 meeting of the Mount Jud Municipal and Regional Planning Commission meeting. Um, thank you all for your patience. I needed to get an answer to a few things that uh something we have upcoming on our agenda. And thank you all for being here. It's nice to see a full house and especially nice to see a full house when the weather is as terrible as what it is out there. So, I hope everyone uh not only arrived here safely, which I see, please make it home safely. Uh patience and patience and patience. Uh right now, uh it seems like this time of the year, uh the roads are a little bit aggressive in case uh you guys hadn't noticed that. My daughter was telling me about an instance that she had uh just yesterday. Uh a little bit aggressive. uh tis the season and and time for patience, time for uh love in our hearts, joy in our hearts, and uh remember all those things and and family and friends that are special to us. Uh it's our last meeting of 2025. Got to say thank you to uh to all my fellow planning commission members uh for a for a great 25 for us. Thank you to all the staff um that you hear from tonight. And I guarantee there's just as many more behind the scenes um that work to do all we can to not only have Mount JW the way it is uh today uh but to help build us all a great future um for us today and and our children and and years to come. So we certainly do all we can. Grateful for uh for those that uh that support us in these roles and a lot of times those that are supporting us are our families as well that we leave at home when we come to do this. and um and see these projects through. So, uh thank you all for being here and thank you to planning commission and staff as well. And may everyone have a very safe and happy holiday season. With that being said, our uh um first item up uh tonight, well, let me read this. I like to do this at the beginning of meeting, especially when the full house, you never know. Uh if this is

your first meeting, u it is in regards to our quorum. says, "The presence of five members of the commission shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. The 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 that a member is required to leave a meeting prior to adjournment and the departure causes a loss of quorum, no further official action may be taken until a quorum is restored other than an adjournment. [clears throat] 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 I do like to uh to read that out loud as we begin. First item up is going to be uh setting our agenda. Uh any amendments, changes, adjustments? Seeing none, we will set our agenda as uh stated. Our uh next item up is going to be our staff reports. begin. Uh, city planner, Mr. John,

I would hope this works. Um, I would just like to, uh, introduce Jennifer over here. Yes. She's been with us maybe about three weeks. So, and been very glad to have her on board. Been great so far. Wonderful. Thank you. Welcome aboard. That's all. Merry Christmas. Jill, anything for us? Wonderful. Thank you. Todd, you want to give us a public works? Yeah, Shane's out tonight. Uh he's taken some time to support his family. Uh he did prep me with any sewer related topics that might come up. So feel free to still fire away with those questions and he is available via text if needed.

Very well. Thank you. And I know that public works is uh responsible for uh for a lot of the coordination and uh events that uh that go on within the city. I'm sure planning probably has an avenue in it, but I understand that the Christmas parade this year was just a m monumental success. Well attended. Um, mother nature cooperated and gave us good weather for that. So, uh, uh, thank you to everybody that that put that on, had a had a great Christmas parade here in the celebration for the season. Um, next item up on our agenda falls underneath our citizen comments. Uh, at this time, we will take citizen comments. Public is welcome and encouraged to make public comment about any item on our agenda. There will be two opportunities uh for comments. You may speak now or you may speak when the item is presented to the planning commission. We do ask that you limit your comments to three minutes or less. Um as I say that right there, um I always say that uh in that three minutes right there, you see what if everybody in here wanted to talk. So we want to make sure that we all lot the time for everybody to talk. If you're up here speaking and um um you see me raise my hand, just kind of wave at you like this, that uh means that we're two minutes in, about a minute left up there. So, if you can try to summarize and focus your comments at that point, uh to allow for other people to speak as well, that would be fabulous. So, um anyone that wishes to address the planning commission at this time is welcome, encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. Seeing please. Yeah. I've got a handout. If I can hand this out first,

please. Okay. You want to hand it right there to Todd? Todd will help us to get it uh around to the members. Give me your name and address for the record real quick. Sure. Lauren Breeze, 1014 um Mount Jul, Mount Juliet. Um I'm county commissioner for district 18, vice chair of the education committee for the county commission. Wonderful. Wonderful. Welcome. Thank you. And if y'all if you don't mind waiting for the clock to start until everybody gets You bet.

documentation. I think we're good. Rock on. Everybody's got it. Yes, ma'am.

Okay. So what you have in your hand is actually building capacity numbers for schools. Um so if you take a look at the first sheet, these are all of the schools in the M well it's actually all the schools in the district. The highlighted ones are ones that are at 85% or more capacity. And the ones that are bolded are actually ones that um the city of Mount Juliet would feed into. And if you look at that last column there, that's actually the total approved new housing units that the city and this body have approved that haven't either are in process of being built or have at least been approved. There's 6435 units. So, if you'll take a look at Lake Mount Juliet High School, it's at 87% capacity right now. And you've approved 4,926 residential units that will feed into Mount Juliet High School. And I know that the city doesn't have to pay for schools, but the county does. So, I want to make sure that as you guys are approving units and approving plans that you're taking all this into consideration, especially for PUDS. So, if you look at the second page of your handout, that actually came from um City of Mount Juliet. You can kind of see the breakdown of all the units that have been approved. The third page in your handout actually is the the easiest way for me to quantify what's actually been permitted. So this is residential aft payments across the county for the last five fiscal years. Um Mount Juliet's only permitted 2565 in the last five years but a 5-year annual average is 513. So if that continues like that then this is manageable. But if say those 6,400 units are you know completed in the next five years then we're in a bind. So, I'm

just asking that if you actually go to the next page, you can see these are your preliminary master development pud checklists. And if you notice the highlighted sentence there, it specifically says reservations for public uses including schools. I'd like you guys to all please keep that in mind and as you're approving PUDS, possibly follow this guidance and leave a space for a school. ask these developers to provide a provide land for an elementary school if you've got 500 units and so on. So that way we can all try to start working together to be able to best um serve our citizens. So the county, if you look at the last page, um and sorry it's um not the final version, but this is what we passed on Monday night. Um, we redid our PUD guidelines which hopefully should be on the website in the next week or two. It's my understanding. But, um, this is section 5.53018D. And if you take a look at that on the county side, what we did is for every 300 dwelling units proposed, land dedication with suitable building sites for a public facility such as a fire station, a sheriff's office, a school public parks facility, or some other comparable facilities approved by the Wilson County Commission shall be incorporated into the design of the development. So, I'm just here to ask you guys to partner with us a little closer. I think that's something that we're not always the best at working together between city and county. I'd like to try to work on that. So, as you approve more developments, if you would just kind of keep this in mind and figure out ways that maybe we could try to make sure that we don't end up having to build, you know, five schools at one time potentially.

Sure. And just stay cognizant as to, you know, these numbers that we're already dealing with at the moment as you're adding large developments. So, that's my request. Wonderful. Quick, tell me what district you're in again. District 18, which is the Lake View Elementary area. Okay. To Saundersville Road north through Saundersville Ferry. Yeah, that is fabulous. I've I've been up on this body for 20 years, and you're the first, of course, our county commissioner, Mr. Franklin, has been uh uh on this body as well, but you're probably the first one that has taken the time to come up here and speak to the planning commission in this form or fashion.

Wow. So that is uh um yeah I just hit 20 years back in September. So uh you were the first one that's taken the time to provide quantitative information such as this. So this is good information and we uh certainly uh part of my discussion was in regards to county commission leading up to uh to the delay in our meeting tonight actually and uh so that was I was trying to find out some information out there. So communication is the key to all successes in my belief. I agree 100% which is why I'm here. So, and I think I know I know a lot of you guys. So, those that don't know me, please reach out anytime you've got questions. As I said, I'd really like to work together.

Does the school system currently own any additional land for a future school right now in our UGB? So, Jewish UGB right now. They do own um a plot off of Golden Bear. Okay. But I don't think it actually has road access to Golden Bear. So, I know that Director Leil is um working on that. I spoke to him yesterday about all of this. Okay. Um, full disclosure, you know, I have I also work in county finance, so we've run this through finance. I spoke to the mayor this morning, so there everybody on the county side is aware that I was coming to speak to you guys because again, I just think that it's it's advantageous to all of our citizens if we all work together a little closer.

So, um, so they do have that plot of land, but that's that's basically it. Is that is that I've I've heard that's the reason why I kind of asking on that because um I heard that there was a parcel over there but I'm not 100% familiar with it. Is the parcel over there significant enough to handle a campus i.e. elementary, middle, and high? Or is it just big enough to handle one of the three? I don't think that it can handle three. It may be able to handle two, but I'm not 100% sure. Linda may be able to Can you Do you have any information on that? I think it was two big enough because the high school mount Julia is so close to it. You would want to put another high school there, right? That was my understanding as well. [laughter] And if you go back

We hope not. We hope not. Yeah. I never imagined green knew where it is to do that. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. So, I think if you really look at this, I think the the biggest numbers are Wells Wilson Middle School where you're at 86% capacity and again we just rebuilt that and put it at I think the capacity is at 1500. So, we're at 86% right now and there's 4,457 housing units that will feed into West Wilson Middle School approved currently right now. That's

And then the other one is Stoner Stoner Creek Elementary which is at 93% capacity. And again, that's the other one that we just rebuilt and added additional um seats there, too. So, we're at 1,000 seats there. And that has an additional 2531 residential units that are approved right now to feed into it. Does the Gladville number take in account the new school or the existing? So, um the Gladeville is the current number. Okay. Okay. With the 88%. So, Central Pike obviously will open this summer. Okay. Hopefully for, you know, for the 2026 school year. Exactly. So, that'll take off some pressure with with both Gladeville as well as the Rutland campus. Okay.

That'll [clears throat] pull, you know, from both of those. I think the biggest biggest heartache right now is going to be the middle school situation. Sure. So, is the old Glabel Elementary going to remain open as a as a facility or is it Yes. Okay. Yeah. Nothing's closing. We're just adding on. Just adding on. Exactly. Yes, ma'am. So, yes. Wonderful. I am grateful that you attended today. Any I've been the one kind of speaking up here. So, I want to before I'm going to give you more than three minutes. Anybody has, please. Absolutely.

Sure. Uh Lauren, I appreciate that. I mean, no one has worked with us, you know, given us these numbers, at least not since I've been on this board. The one thing that I'll say is that we also need that communication back from the school board because if you go through our packet, everything that we have before us, they are given a seat at the table to comment on and every one of them says no comments received. So, we need more we need more communication from them. It's not that we don't care about it, but we've got to have that coordination, too.

Absolutely. Well, I'll talk to Director Electrol about that again. So, and I think that's where I know I've spoken to some city commissioners and I know that they work with Director Electrol, but from a school perspective, the county commission is the funding body. So, there's a disconnect there. So, you may be reading in the school director, but if the county commission isn't being read in so that we can start from a budgetary perspective planning for some of these expenditures, which I'm sure you understand are, you know, significant. um it makes it difficult for everybody which again just trying to open communication here. So I will definitely talk to director about that. Good point.

Um from a schoolboard perspective I'm kind of s well I'm I'm surprised but at the same time I guess maybe they don't necessarily see their role could be we just need to coordinate and figure out what that is so that we're more in the the know and understanding when we have plans come to us. Right. Absolutely. Yeah. just I mean a simple feedback that if you got something zoned for Stoner Creek and there's a project before us and you see that this project would have an influx all to Stoner Creek Mount J middle Jud high say just shoot a sheet like that back says here's your capacity of Stoner Creek here's your capacity of Mount J middle here's your capacity of Mount Jw those are our comments right right

so just shooting that this kind of data at us it would be value in itself if if even no comments, right? Well, I put this together myself and it was just so the building capacity in the first every column with the exception of the last one actually came from our county commission packet um in November with enrollment data. And then the last column, actually I spoke to um Scott Hefner and he sent me some GIS maps that are being put together by the city and I just pulled the housing numbers directly from the Matt Juliet GIS data. It's all there.

So it is it's all there. It just isn't put together. Now the um and the second map actually came from the city as well. Now the residential AFT payment that that came from me and the county, but yeah, if anybody is ever interested in that data, reach out to me. I'll get it for you. That's fabulous. Commissioner Franking to have these total approved new housing units um converted into potential students as well just based upon um whatever the applicable standards are on the sizes of the homes be or apartments or whatever being produced. That would just be interesting because 4,

457 houses or units for West Wilson Middle School could be 8,000 kids. That's eight Absolutely. That's eight new middle schools. [clears throat] Exactly. Give or take. And those are some of the questions that I've asked as well. Um because again, these, you know, this is all coming through the city. Um so I have asked that um for some more clarification. The other thing that I have asked about is timelines on this So, um, like I spoke to to Scott and his thought was 80 to 90% of this was be built out in the next five years. And if that's the case, then that's a whole that's something we're going to have to face right now.

However, your planning director actually told me he feels it's closer to 12 to 15 years to be built out. Yeah. So, again, I, you know, that really does factor in a lot. I think that they're working on some data is my understanding like project by project as to really what that looks like which will be really helpful on both sides for us to understand and be able to plan. But I think my my request more than anything is that as you are especially with puds since you have the ability to negotiate with puds

is really factor in how they're going to affect schools and if you could see because I know that the city does negotiate for things like you know road infrastructure and sewer infrastructure and so on but they've never negotiated for cities or for for schools infrastructure [clears throat] And yearon year, at least the last 5 to seven years, 85% of the additional roof talks that have occurred in this county have occurred within city limits, both in Mount Juliet and Lebanon, but still within city limits. And the county doesn't have a seat at the table to do any of these negotiations. So, we've never been able to actually say if you're going to build 500 rooftops, that's going to require an elementary school, and we would really like you to reserve 30 acres at the front of your development and hand it over so that way we can build a school. But those conversations have never occurred because, you know, again, it's the difference between the city and the county. Sure.

Which is why I'm hoping that we can try to figure out a way to work closer together. Good start. Let me Commissioner Franklin's got a Yeah.

One one of the scarier things about this subject for me is that uh probably [clears throat] the fastest growing years of the city of Mount Juliet were at least for single family residential probably between 02 07 at five years. It was growing about as fast as well it was it was growing as fast as possible. And when I say possible there's only so many dump trucks there's only so many contractors. There's so many projects in Middle Tennessee that to get over 500 building permits, 600 building permits a year, it's almost impossible in a single family residential um neighborhood just because there's so much work in Middle Tennessee and there's just not enough people to do it. What's scary [clears throat] about it is the multifamily uh portion of this is built much quicker and much easier and does and and in many cases people are flown in from across the country to do it anyway. So they're not competing with what's limiting you know five or 600 a year. It could it could be easily jump to a,500 in a year with the multifamily aspect that we seem to be approving a lot of lately.

Good points. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Good stuff. Any additional citizen comments this time? Very sorry that was much longer than three minutes, but I hope that um that's some good information. At least it was for me. I promise that. Uh we'll close this and comments, move on to our next item up on the agenda. [gasps] Next item up uh falls underneath item 5A which is to review the minutes from from the November 20th, 2025 meeting of the Mount Juliet Planning Commission. Any changes, adjustments, typos, errors? Looking for a motion regards this item on our agenda.

It's a motion and a second by Commissioner Armstead. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. So approved. [clears throat] Next item up on our agenda uh is our consent agenda. Um we'll begin with item 6A which is to approve the 2025 required continuing education hours from the 2025 training seminars. Item 6B is to review the final plat for Thomasson Point phase 5 located off Kurd road. Open up staff comments. [sighs and gasps] Anything on consent agenda Mr. John? Nothing other than what we would find in the conditions of approval.

Very well, Todd. Anything from public works? Approved with conditions. Very well. Questions, comments from the commission.

Seeing none, at this time, I do need to close our planning commission meeting in order to open a uh public hearing. Public hearing is in regards to item 6B. It's review the final plat for Thomasson Point phase 5 located off Kurd Road. Anyone wishing to make comment during the public hearing in regards to this one item, welcome 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 reopen our planning commission meeting. And at the same uh anyone wish to make comment about any item on our consent agendas, welcome and encourage to do so. Please come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. See no citizen comments at this time but for a motion regards the items on our consent agenda. It's a

motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against extensions. So approved. Next item up on our agenda is a recommendation item back uh to the board of commissioners. It's item 7A. It's to review the PUD amendment to the Bender Cove subdivision regarding the CO trigger tied to Bender Ferry Road improvements. Mr. job. This is I'll defer to Todd for this. This is for him. Oh, Todd, please. Public works. Honestly, we're going to defer to you to to the applicant.

We No, the planning commission. This is a purely a co trigger. They're not trying to get out of work. They're just trying to change when they do it. So, that's that's a decision for the board. We have no comment. Very well. Call for representation. Yeah, let's go ahead and call for Do we have representation regards this item tonight, please? I do have name and address for the record. My name is Kelly Frank, uh, 10 Lee Avenue, Nashville. Um, I do have some packets that I'd like to hand out if y'all are okay with that.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Um,

yes. So, good evening. Um, thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. My name is Kelly Frank. Uh, I'm the civil engineer with Kimley Horn, who's overseeing all of the work both on-site and off-site for uh the Bender Cove development. Um, I'm here tonight, um, as the applicant on behalf of my client, Meritage Homes, um, to request a modification to one of the conditions of approval in the original PUD for this community. Um, that condition of approval, uh, was the, uh, method by which the Benders Road offsite improvements, uh, which we're doing as part of this project, which is, uh, about 3,000 linear feet of widening that road from two lanes to three lanes. Um it was originally in the ordinance tied to um the first certificate of occupancy pending our ability to acquire the necessary right ofway for that project. Um if that extended over uh a certain period of time we were then uh allowed to move to 25 cos um that did happen. You know we we pursued the right-of-way acquisition. uh it extended beyond 120 days of negotiations um which flipped us into that 25 co trigger. Um at this time we are uh we're out there actively working on site. I'm sure many of you have have seen it. Um we've completed a good portion of the construction uh most of the work uh that is in our frontage uh of the project. Um but uh unfortunately uh the contractor has found a conflict with a gas man that's out there [snorts] um one of Piedmont's mains. Uh we knew where some of it was up uh kind of on the north end, but unfortunately um it turns out that there's a portion that will need to be relocated. Um we've been working diligently with Piedmont um to get that work done. Uh they actually were supposed to start this week and I believe they have uh with a 45day construction schedule um at which time

we'll be able to get back in and complete the work. Um while they're working, we're still trying to make progress on this job and have uh been completing work down at the intersection with Lebanon Road. Um trying to continue pushing that forward. Um but due to the conflict um we requesting this CO extension um to change the uh the trigger to 75 certificates of occupancy instead of 25 which will allow um the uh work on site to continue to continue building houses while we work through this delay. Um, obviously we are are still continuing to attempt to complete the road widening in as expeditiously as possible a manner. Um, we would like to be done and we'll continue, you know, to to work hard to push that schedule. Um, I'm here tonight uh to ask for just a little bit of relief so that we can keep building houses and keep the community uh progressing in its buildout um while we work through these unexpected conflicts. Um, so I'm happy to answer any questions. um that you might have. But thank you.

Thoughts, questions, comments? Yeah. One right off the top of my head. Um this road widening was part of the original putt that that Maritage agreed with. Yes, sir. Uh how was the gas mane not discovered during an initial survey of the widening was my primary question.

Yeah. Um so a survey was completed um and uh with underground utilities particularly um utilities that are pressurized um there aren't as many above ground um ways that we can see where they are and so um it's actually very difficult to know exactly where a pressure utility is without actually digging it up. Um we were relying on uh what we could see above ground as well as GIS data of where it was located. um feedback from Piedmont, we knew they were working in the area. Um but this was an area that they weren't working on and so we didn't have precise knowledge of the location. Um we were trying to work around it, but with obviously with work in the rightway and utilities needing to be, you know, storm has to be along the curb line, we only had so much flexibility. So, um that's how we ran into this conflict.

Okay. I feel like there's probably a miss there in that Piedmont probably should have been involved very early on and told you guys exactly where their equipment was. Um, and then and then you guys tell them what you're planning to do and they say, "Well, whoa, that's not going to work, right?" So, you could have tackled this six or eight months ago or whenever this road work started as opposed to now, you know, working through changing CO requirements and all those things. Again, it comes back to coordination of tasks and I know it's a huge a huge lift with one of these big neighborhoods, but it's it's pretty critical because uh there are a lot of folks that were probably expecting the widening of vendors fairy to be done, especially with additional folks moving into these homes and and it's just not it's narrow through there still. That would be my feedback.

Commissioner Rice, not to give them a free pass, but I will say I mean I do roadway design for a living my whole career. This happens all the time. They'll they'll give you their GIS data. They'll come out and even paint them on the road or you see the paint marks. Their actual utility can be anywhere between 10 and 12 feet from where those markings are. So, you do your best and there are advanced techniques to find these utilities, but they're very expensive. They actually go and hydroac it out and they survey find it, but they're it's very expensive and as a standard of practice, we don't normally do that. Uh especially for a developer like this, they wouldn't do anything like that. But it it it happens all the time.

And like I said, not to give a free pass, but it does happen all the time. Yeah. Commissioner Frank. Yeah. I have a question for staff. Is is this a major minor amendment to the bud? Would it be considered a minor amendment that we can do here? Does it got to go to the full bo? This is if it's a put amendment to the condition, which I believe it is. It's a it would have to go to BOC. Be a major amendment. Okay. [clears throat]

What? It is a long project. I' I'm in and my paying job. I go back and forth past this development almost on a daily basis. Um I have a ton of friends and and almost family that live down uh Bender Ferry as well. So, as we saw this project, we've seen relative projects down Bender Ferry. It's it's always been a personal hot button to me. And I think we had something on here uh last month and it was a direct question by myself uh uh about that CO trigger. Um I was reminded of the able to get 25 and keep going. Um I think the main point of relief and and I agree with Commissioner Rast and my paying job too. I'm familiar with Pedmont's uh misconception of of their lines. Um, I watched a guy get blown 30 ft out of a ditch one time because they said it was a low pressure line and it was high pressure and didn't even know what they had in their own ground.

Jeez. Um, but the the main point of contention here is to get some relief at Bender Ferry and Lebanon Road when will the turning lanes and all of that be in place?

Um, so that's the piece highlighted in yellow um on your packet. Uh we expect that portion to be done in January, so next month. Um and I should say, I don't know actually if it's indicated on here, um we're expecting completion Oh, it is in May of 2026. The original schedule um expected us to be fully complete around February of 2026. So, um it it's not a drastic increase to the schedule, um but but one that impacts the work on site um with this trigger. So, President.

Yeah, I think I'll just say for me the contention for the past two and a half years that I've been on this board is around the amount of development that we do off Ender Ferry. We tied it to the first CO. The city was gracious enough to extend that to the 25th CO. I don't see tripling it. I don't think that's any benefit to the citizens that are not a part of these developments. They're having having to live through this construction. So for me, I have no problem with y'all sitting and waiting until it's completely done. Personally, because at the end of the day, there's people that are around this development that have lived there for 20 plus years that are having to deal with this. And while they don't like development, this was a selling point to them of, hey, you're going to get a road improvement. I would feel more comfortable waiting until the roads completely and then you can continue past your 26. That's just me though.

Staff does an opinion towards this either which way, right? Is that correct? It's up to planning commission. So with that being said, if it's a major amendment, we would recommend be a recommendation. So positive or negative recommendation and ultimately up to the BOC in order to make a final decision. Everyone.

Yeah. I think for me the um familiar with holdouts, familiar with utility relocation and everything, [clears throat] I agree with Preston. It was a hot hot button of mine was this road improvement down Bender Ferry and it's significant and I think it's going to be great once it's done. I wish we could get the whole Lebanon road section and everything in but that's uh out of your guys control and doesn't have anything uh there really waiting on the state there um and some right away and and whatnot to get there. Um I I yeah torn on that. Other questions, comments?

Just for consideration if the 120 days triggered or the the 25th CO that that triggered that for getting the rideway. Seems like it's going to be another 120 days for them to finish the doing the road improvements, which I'm just doing simple math. I don't know a whole lot about development, but 50 would be a better number for me. I was almost going to say that another 25 for 120 days, not not another 50. Yeah.

Yeah. I guess question back is the reason for wanting the 75 do they think that you guys can go where where is it at now? Um I don't know if I have the answer to that question of how many are built currently. Um but based on their current sales projections, they don't expect any more than 75 to be completed by that point. Um you know at they're working based on a schedule how they're how they're going and so that that's where they anticipate to be in May. Yeah. They can still Yeah. They can still pull the permits, still build them. They just can't get a co That's right.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. They can build as many as they want. Yeah. They just can't sell them. Yep. Yep. They just can't sell them without a co. Yep. Yep. Yeah. Do we know how many cos they have issued so far? I know you guys aren't direct correlation with the building department. Very well. Any any additional questions from the commission at this time? Thank you. We go and open it up to assistant comments uh on this item. Any uh when wishing to make comment at this time, please go to the microphone and name and address for the record.

Were you able to find that, John? All right. See no citizen comments this time. I'm looking for a recommendation regards this item on our agenda. [clears throat] I'll make a motion for a negative recommendation. It's a motion. Can I hold that for one moment? Do we have the ability to modify or or request them to request? I think you could give them 26 cos if you want. Is that correct? They've asked for 75. So you'd have to ask the applicant if they're willing to change their request and then you can vote on that.

Let me go ahead and ask the applicant real quick. Would you be willing to or reduce your request should it be requested up here? The first Todd I I think I think we'd be open to it. Um depending on Yeah, depending on what it is. Basically your thought is anything's better than 25. Sure. [laughter] 26 might be tough, but but uh yeah, I mean I'd certainly happy to discuss it. Sure. Todd, do you had some input, please? 25 cos right now. 25 cos right now, so they can't make any more money. So that's why they're sell.

Yeah, it's just me. I just I don't like when we like we start with one thing and then we start how do the citizens look at us at the end of the day. That's where I kind of land on it. I do have a uh motion on the floor for a negative recommendation. Do I have a second today? Seeing no second or is that a second? A second. That's a motion and a second for a negative recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying I and raise your hand. Against abstensions. So that would be a positive recommendation. Thank you. Is that correct?

Motion fails. It doesn't automatically do the reverse. So, we would need a motion for a positive recommendation. Pleaseot. So, the do I need to announce that the negative recommendation failed and it failed. So, I'd like to reopen the table for a new motion. Commissioner Franklin, you have a floor. Open up 25 more. Just 25. Uh that's a motion for 25 more COs. Yes. Does that have a second? That's a motion and a second. So 50 total cos an additional 25. Is that correct in the recommendation? Yes.

For a positive recommendation for that. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. That would be a positive recommendation. Next item up on the agenda is also a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. Uh it falls underneath annexations and reszones. Item 8A is to review the reszone request from RS40 to CRC for 13135 Lebanon Road. Mr. Jill,

um this reszone request is coming to you tonight um at 13135 Lebanon Road. Uh the current zoning is RS40 which is low density residential but it does sit along the major thorough affair of Lebanon Road. They are requesting a reszone to CRC commercial retail uh center zoning. Um there is no land use request included because it's not needed. The future land use does support this as surfair commercial. Uh it also supports the reszone to commercial retail center because it does fall within that land use designation. um the intended use per the applicant's discussions we've had previously. It's just for a business office at this time. There are no intentions for any exterior changes to the elevation. It likely will only be interior moving some walls around that would fall backwards to the building codes department. Um there has been no uh discussions of any site plan that's going to be needed, but um the applicant has been made aware that it would have to come back toward planning commission if they're they meet that certain criteria that would force it into a site plan. So staff does support this. Sending um the recommendation to the board of commissioners including our conditions is recommended.

Very well. Public works have anything on this? Very well. Questions, comments from the commissioner. I think just one question from me. The one of the properties next door already has CRC. Is that correct? Very well. Perfect. See no questions or comments from the commission. Let me call for assistant comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Anyone wishing to make comment, welcome encourage to do so. Please come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. See no citizen comments at this time. Like to ask for a motion or recommendation in regards to this item on our agenda. Motion for a positive recommendation.

It's a motion and a second for a positive recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against extensions is a positive recommendation. Next item up on our agenda is item 8B. It's also a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. Review the annexation and plan of services for the property located at 6325 Central Pike. J, please.

I will um kind of give y'all a heads up on this one. 8 B or 8 A, 8 B, 8 C, 8 D, 8 E, and 8F are all um consecutive develop or properties sitting right next to each other. The homeowners brought these in to correspond at the same time because their intent is the same. So, I'm going to kind of speak to them as a whole, but you will have to vote on those individually. Um, all of the homeowners are uh submitting these consecutively consecutively, excuse me, due to the forthcoming Central Pike interchange. They're all current single family residences. There is no intent to change from that at this time. Basically, um they've seen where the recent approval of the Tilman subdivision. So, they're starting to see that development spurt because of the Central Pike interchange and they want the availability to market these um future potential with the interchange coming in by obtaining the entitlements proactively through this. Um no land use is needed as a future land use shows this corridor as mixed use. Um the annexation would be from Wilson County RM1, excuse me, R1 to CMU, which is the commercial mixeduse designation. Um 6235 6365 are both approximately 1 acre. 6391 is mislabeled. I apologize is uh less than an acre. It's approximately two acres. So they're all pretty much the same size. Um under the zoning action, the staff finds all the requests meet the findings of approval for these. So staff does recommend a positive recommendation to be sent to the board of commissioners including our conditions of approval.

Very well. Me ask our city attorney one question real quick. Um am I able hearing this uh from staff that these six items u following are really all kind of uniformly tied together. Am I able to get permission of the planning commission at this time to hear all six together?

Keep them separate. I would keep them separate, but I could hear 8 B, 8 C together, and C ones that are connected to each property.

So, me ask uh the planning commission, would there be any objection to hearing 8B and 8 C together? Seeing no objection, uh we will be hearing u um item 8 B which is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners to review the annexation plan of services for the property located at 6325 Central Pike. Item 8 C is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners to review the reszone from Wilson County R1 to CMU for the property located at 6325 Central Pike. With that being said, uh any questions, comments from the commission at this time? Seeing none, um, let me open up for citizen comments. Any citizens wish to make comment are welcome encouraged to do so. See no citizen comments at this time. I'm looking for a recommendation in regards to items 8B and 8 C.

Chairman, we need a public hearing for Oh, yes, ma'am. Excuse me. One second real quick. Do need to close our planning commission meeting in order to open a public hearing. The public hearing is in regards to item 8B. It's a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners to review the annexation of plan of services for the property located at 6325 Central Pike. Anyone wishing to make comment of this item during the public hearing is welcome encouraged to do so. See no assisting comments at this time. We'll close our public hearing reopen our planning commission meeting and I'm looking for a recommendation in regards to these items on our agenda. It's a motion for positive and second by Commissioner Rast. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand.

I I against abstensions. That is a positive recommendation. Next item uh or let me ask the uh commission any objection to hearing items 8D and 8E together? Seeing no objection, we will hear items 8D and 8E together. Item 8 D is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners is to review the annexation of plan of services for the property located at 6365 Central Pike. Item 8E is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners to review the reszone from Wilson County R1 CMU for the property located at 6365 Central Pike. I'm assuming that staff comments remain the same. Yes, sir.

Very well. Uh any questions or comments from the commission this time like to ask for citizen comments in regards to these items on our agenda. Seeing no assisting comments at this time, we'll need to close our planning commission meeting in order to open a public hearing. Public hearing is in regards to item 8D. Uh it's a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. Review the annexation and plan of services for the property located at 6365 Central Pike. Anyone wish to make comment during the public hearing is welcome and encouraged to do so. See no citizen comments at this time. We'll close our public hearing, reopen our plan commission meeting, and at which time I'm looking for a recommendation in regards to these items on our agenda. Positive recommendation.

It's a positive recommendation and a second by Commissioner Christensen. Uh all those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against abstensions. That's positive recommendation. Any objection from the planning commission hearing items 8F and 8G together. See no objection to that. We'll hear items 8F and 8G together. Item 8F is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. This review annexation plan of services for the property located at 6391 Central Pike. Item 8G is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. review the reszone from Wilson County R1 to CMU for the property located at 6391 Central Pike. Again, I assuming that planning comments are much the same.

Very well. This time, I'd like to call for citizen comments in regards to [laughter] excuse me, these items on the agenda. Anyone wishing to make comments, welcome, encouraged to do so. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, we do need to close our planning commission meeting in order to open a public hearing. A public hearing is in regards to item 8F, which is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. Review the annexation plan of services for the property located at 6391 Central Pike. Anyone wishing to make comment during the public hearings? Welcome, encouraged to do so. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, we'll close our public hearing, reopen our planning commission meeting, and at which time I'm looking for a recommendation in regards to these items on our agenda.

Positive recommendation and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising their hand. I against abstensions. It is a positive recommendation. We had a short uh consent agenda, but I feel like I just reearned my consent agenda comments on on those six items right there. Um uh next item up on our agenda does fall underneath the site plans. Item 9A is to review the site plan for Beckwick parking located at 4009 Beckwick Road. Mr. John plenty.

So in an effort to heir on the side of transparency and you know caution that's why you have a parking lot here in front of you. I couldn't actually find in the code anything clear enough to satiate my desire to you know make a decision on whether or not to put this on the agenda or not. But this is a piece of property that we've seen fairly recently reszoned a CI up here. And what they are proposing here is simply it's RV storage. It's a parking lot for for recreational vehicles. There's no hookups included. I believe only electric is being run to the site for the self-pay kiosk. Um it's not like they're going to be hooking their utilities up there or anything. It's simply storage of RVs. And I've looked through the definitions in here and our self storage, you know, that falls into industrial zoning. Um, but you got to have a you got to have a structure for it to be called self- storage. So, it's a parking lot which is permitted by right and CI zoning.

Very well done. Anything from public works? Yeah, pretty unique site in that it does not require any water or sewer. There is no real structure on the site. Uh traffic wise, we're talking maybe a couple people a day coming in. This is meant to be storage, not really a in-n-out sort of operation. Sure.

Uh not really any big concerns except for maybe the throat length. If someone has a particularly large towed RV instead of the single unit, you you might back into the rightway a little bit, but other than that, it's pretty straightforward. It's a parking lot.

Yeah. And um when I saw it, I kind of determined that as well, and we advertise oursel as a city between the lakes and then most of the puds we do approve. You're not allowed to put boats or anything in your driveways and whatnot. So, definitely uh identified the need. uh lies within our own advertising for our city uh kind of right here. So u questions, comments from the commission. See no uh questions, comments this time. Let's call for citizen comments regards this item on the agenda. Any assistants wish to make comment or welcome encourage to do so. Please go the microphone name and address for the record. See no citizen comments at this time. I'd like to make a motion in or uh right to call for a motion in regards to this item on our agenda. Yeah.

Motion for a positive recommendation or your approval this time. You get to approve it this time. Yeah. Motion for approval. There's a second. Uh I got a motion in a second. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against extensions. So approved. Next item up on our agenda is item 9B is to review the site plan for the Hibbit Station clubhouse located at 940 Kurd Road. Miss Johnson.

Thank you. Um you've seen this originally the PUD was established for the Hibbit Station um community back in 2019. [clears throat and cough] the recent um changes in this staff is pleased that there's been a new general contractor on board because we had had some delay in getting this clubhouse and these amenities built for quite some time. The new general contractor that has come on board within probably the last three months at best has worked swiftly and earnestly to try and get these amenities in here for these citizens and the residents which we are very thankful for. Um the clubhouse is approximately 273 square ft. They've got over 12,000 square feet of sitting area, grilling areas. They are also including a pot with benches, a 2600 foot bark park, and over 30,000 ft of walking trails around this facility. The male kiosk is currently in place, and it will be located west of the clubhouse. They're providing 19 parking spaces, two of which will be ADA. They also have a sixoot sidewalk that will go around this amenity area. They are not requesting a waiver or variance of any kind. It's going to be 100% brick or stone. So, a full masonry product. The playground they have submitted is IPMA certified, which is something that we have been looking for as far as commercial grade equipment. We're very, very thankful for that. This area will also include a bike rack, decorative trash cans, benches, pestway station, and also some grill stations within brick bases as required by code. Um staff does recommend approval of the site plan of clubhouse and amenity area with the conditions as recommended.

Todd, anything from public works on this one? Second. Very well. Questions, comments from the commission? I have a general question regarding this project, maybe all projects in general. Do we put anything in the requirements that the landscaping needs to be done by a certain point of occupancy or anything along those lines? The land or can we

we possibly can or the landscape plans have to be approved prior to construction plans being submitted to public works for their review. Generally there are provisions within the requirements that uh the landscape is done prior to the CO's being issued. So the landscape would have to be done before they do a final life safety on this this product and provide the CO for the amenity center. So what about the project in general? The project as a whole? Yeah,

same thing. The certificate of occupancy it the landscape would have to be approved before or excuse me would have to be completed before that final CO is issued for the entire development. Okay. So, I I drive by this numerous times every day and uh the whole front of it is is kind of a train wreck to be honest. So, it's a situation where all of and people are living there actively living there now. Um I feel like it's a situation where that should have been dealt with probably a year ago or more. Unfortunately, the area you're speaking to on Kurd Road is a wetland and they can't touch it. Oh, they So, there won't be grass. There will not be grass in that area. all the shrub land is done. Yeah, unfortunately under Tex's recommendations. Yes.

Wow. Yeah. That it it's it's sad, but that's the way it is. Know that. Okay, fair enough. I'm glad I asked. Good to know. Thank you. When uh I got one because I'm pretty familiar with this project. Um the uh um when will the pivot monument come online or have they decided yet? That's something with this new general contractor. They're trying to go back and and delve into what was decided, what was looked upon, and they've given us um every indication that they have the intent of finishing as soon as possible. They were looking to get some recommendations for it. So, I anticipate we will see something probably coming through within the next month or two. Fabulous.

So, I have no doubt in this new general contractor. They've they've been very forthright and have worked diligently to try and get this advanced as quickly as possible because of the immense delays that the prior general contractor had. So they've they've stepped up and done everything they've said. So I have no doubt at this time that they'll get that monument in place and we will make sure that we stay on top of them and have it done before the the final CO is issued. Third owner. Yes, sir. Is that right? Mhm. Y will. Questions, comments from the commission, we go ahead and call for assistant comments regards this item on the agenda. Anyone wishing to make comment in regards to this item, please come to the microphone name and address for the record. See no citizen comments at this time. I'm looking for a motion regards this item on the agenda.

Motion for approval. It's a motion for approval. Second by Commissioner George. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I

against extensions. So approved. Next item uh up on our agenda um falls underneath the East Division Business Park item 10A. Uh it's a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. review the land use plan amendment from medium density residential to business development center impact zone for the project known as East Division Business Park located off East Division Street. Mr. John, sure thing. As you said, it's a recommendation item. Got a couple couple different items wrapped into one here. Panexation, land use amendment, and a PMDP for a pot overlay establishment resigning. This is 47 acres uh southwest quadrant of division and Golden Bear Gateway. Um most of it's in the county right now. I believe there's one parcel that's in the city already and that parcel is zoned OPS. The proposed use here is for warehouses and quite a number of semi-ruck parking spaces. Um, for this particular use, they need to have industrial zoning. The land use calls for medium density residential for all of these parcels here. They're requesting business development center impact zone, which is the land use associated with industrial. And the zoning they're asking for is IR pud, industrial restrictive pud, which would make this use permissible. Here, I believe there are four buildings ranging in size. Uh what we got here? We got 123,200 ft up to 151,840 square ft. So, what do we got here? 597,520

square feet of lot building coverage u which is underneath of our maximums impervious surfaces are under the maximums required. Parking obviously is more than accommodated for. Some of the deficiencies here that they're asking for waiverss on include a 100 foot wide landscape buffer where adjacent to residential zoning. So that would be the east side. Let me think. No, south side and the west side where they're going to have residential zoning up against this industrial use. And I believe the south side they meet the 100 foot wide buffer. So the waiver is not for that. It would be on the west side where it is considerably narrower. The code does offer the planning commission the authority to approve a lesser buffer section provided other additional plantings are are included. some other type of enhancement to offset that impact. And like I said, it's not the entire buffer yard, it's just the west side. So that's variance number one we have to weigh in on. And the second request is the building facade. Industrial buildings, much like any other building in the city, is subject to the 100% masonry requirement. They're requesting for a full I believe it's full concrete tilt panel. So, so no masonry involved here. I believe there's precedent set with other warehouses around town with similar materials. Um, staff does not support the landscape buffer given it's adjacent to residential, the reduction in the landscape buffer. We do not support the

100% deviation from the design regs either for the waiverss. Um and further uh staff has a hard time recommending this project at all because we have a land use plan which does not support this use this zoning here. So staff does not recommend approval of the land use amendment or the resonance. Guess I turn my own microphone back on. Uh questions, comments, uh from the commission.

See no questions. We'll ask for representation of this project. Uh name and address for the record for your time tonight. um

for you east division street business park um directly abuing uh Amazon to the east. Um looking at a a holistic view of the land use plan in this area. I cannot deny that these parcels are shown to be medium density residential directly next to business development impact center as Amazon and then as we work back to the west mixeduse zoning or mixeduse land use to highdensity residential town center. Um it appears that this part as as projects have been working their way west to east and then east to west. We're kind of in the middle, right? You have high density development to the west, high intensity development to the east and Amazon. Um we feel that this project while uh 2D view looks like any other warehouse there at at Beckwood Farms uh we do offer some distinction. Um you can see we're only showing a maximum height of about 38 feet. U it's not the 50 60 75 ft. You've heard me request for for the more typical logistics high cube distribution buildings. Um, these buildings are set up to market to multi-tenant. Um, you know, anywhere 10, 15, 25, up to 50,000 square feet per user. Um, I think your office showrooms, right? Ferguson, you walk in, there's some office, nice showroom space, but they have some product in the back that they're able to do. Um, I will throw myself under the bus here a little bit. We did not do a very good job. uh showing the intent of the dock positions. I think the architect did a

pretty decent job showing about one dock position per 10,000 feet uh of building. So, you know, you're looking 15 to 16 per building and not 75 that we currently have shown. Um so, we can clean that up for you. Um, I think we're in agreement with all staff comments. Um, including public works. Uh, we're showing about 1500 feet of road improvements to Division Street, which essentially grabs where Amazon stopped, um, and brings it to the west, uh, using the city's design that they have incorporated for the the global improvement along Division. Um, as someone who drives Division multiple times a day and overlooks it daily, uh, I can tell you this section of Division Street where the culvert is and the wetlands and the stream crossing that we would now under undertake the permitting and take that off of the city's plate. To me, that's one of the worst sections of division right there. Just the drop offs on the side that we can help greatly improve. Um again these are these are smallcale smaller users multiusers this is not your true bulk warehouse distribution type of use even though it appears looking at it to the uh oh again I think the the only the only comment we would like to discuss with planning uh on the PMDP as we get there would the setback requirement off of division street. But as John mentioned, we are showing the 100 foot buffer along the southern property where the residents are. There's a 20 foot tall landscape burm um as shown. I believe we have conceptual

landscaping in your packets. Uh these buildings sit lower um than the buildings that are to the east. Um, so the view is the view from the the existing residence to the south would be over top of the landscape burm and up into the sky. Shouldn't ever see the tops of these buildings. Again, we've limited the height, not asking for a height variance. Um, and I think we could we can work on the landscape buffer working back to the west uh in conjunction with some of the property owners, property setters. Happy to answer any questions y'all may have. Appreciate your time. Questions, comments from the commission. Got one real quick just because you mentioned that on the loading docks. The plan calls for or says 685 spaces. How much of those 685 what is the car really I guess that surrounds the perimeter? What are what are the number of car spaces?

The 685 is that is 685 is car. So that doesn't include that does not include what looks like tractor parking. Correct. Gotcha. Okay. Questions. Commissioner Frank. Just one question for staff. When do you think East Division is going to be under construction and ultimately driven on as a real road instead of a railroad track? Uh I'll get into that more with the putt, but I'm I'd say uh 2032.

2032. [clears throat] You know, in planning there's a yes, there's a no, and there's a not yet. This has got to be a not yet for me. I can't unleash this amount of stuff on each division and wait on 2032. Further questions, comments. Thank you, Joe. At this time, uh, like to call for citizen comments in regards to this item on our agenda. Any citizens wishing to make comment are welcome, encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Uh my name is Derek Stol. I live at 533 Hunting Hills Drive, right behind uh this proposed industrial park. Uh we live on the south side where they were talking about the 100 foot uh buffer. Uh I'm here tonight on behalf of some of our neighbors uh that live across the street from us. Uh last Friday afternoon, I received a letter about a reasonzoning of lots connected to our lot. We quickly as a neighborhood got together to find the documents that were submitted for approval tonight. These documents show a proposal for a massive industrial building project along with a rendering showing four separate five-story buildings. Now, he just said they're 38 feet tall, which four stories, and they said 20 feet of a buffer. Uh our house is two stories h tall and we look right into that lot. Uh even with that buffer and being four stories high, we're going to look directly into this park. Um with all the uh lights uh is a concern. Um based off the documents submitted, we as a community have the following concerns. The city's future land use plan

designates this property as medium density residential and city staff has stated the requested industrial land use is not supported by that plan. Next is around staff findings in the document. City staff has found that this request is not consistent with the general plan and does not meet required zoning findings. Next is around the residential buffer in the document. The project directly abutes existing homes and the applicant is requesting a reduction of the required 100 foot buffer. Staff does not support this request. Along with that, we have issues with the noise, the lights, uh the semi-truckss that are going to come through there, um the building process that's going to take place. Um, we also is the unknown industrial uses in this place. The spec the specific industrial users and operations for this site have not yet been identified. Now, I know he says they're going to be this and they're going to be that, but they haven't been identified. We don't know what's going in there. We don't know what kind of noise. Um, next is around the scale and intensity of this project. The proposal includes buildings up to supposedly 50 ft tall and nearly double the required parking, including truck parking immediately next to residential property. We respectfully ask this commission to follow the adopted land use plan and rely on staff's professional findings when making this decision. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening. Uh, my name is Amanda Kern. I live at 534 Hunting Hills, directly across from Derek. Um, as Derek stated, um, one of my biggest concerns is noise as well as, uh, light. Uh, we do live right next to the massive Amazon warehouse, Medline, and, uh, the SA logistics plant that's behind our house. Uh, we do have a lot of light that come come from those buildings. Um, and noise. We hear semi-truckss at night. Uh we hear them load and unload. Um and so I can't imagine what this is, especially if it's lower. That burm that's behind us does provide a lot of buffer. And so if this is lower, we're going to see it. We're going to hear it. So I would like to just make sure whatever's going to happen, there's a a higher buffer. There's a way to avoid noise and light for our neighborhood. Um, our big one of our biggest concerns is that nothing ever connects Hunting Hills to Division. It is a quaint, nice, secluded piece of neighborhood and we love it for our kids, for our families, and we want to preserve that, but it is starting to get noisier and noisier. And the more warehouses we put back there, it it's making it worse. And so, I do respectfully ask you to consider um adding those. Um, and originally when I saw this, I thought good, you know, if we're going to put the warehouses, keep them towards division. And when this came and I saw it get really close, I got concerned about how close it's coming towards our houses. So, um, you know, I love I call it the Christmas tree farm. If you've been down in on Hunting Hills, it's really, it is nice and pretty next to our property. We have a nice fence the county helps city helps maintain. Thank you. Nice big burm, but I don't want to see a warehouse when I look out the property next door. And so I I respectfully ask for you guys to think through this about how this close this is going to get to our properties

um across the street from us. Thank you. Thank you.

My name is Connie Mitchell. I live at 511 Hunting Hills. Been a resident there for 40 years this year. Uh Mount Juliet has changed. We have grown exponentially and it's wonderful to see that we have things coming in that is good for the people to shop and to eat and to live their daily lives. However, the noise is a problem. The light is a problem. But my number one concern as a citizen of Mount Juliet is Division Street. I drive that road at least twice a day going towards Golden Bear and coming back to Mount Juliet Road. That road is dangerous. I don't know if you drive that road. There's an accident there just about every day. We have quite a few tractor trailer trucks already running up and down that trail and there are a lot of sections where my mirror was knocked off my truck and it's quite scary. I thought my truck was going to be knocked off the road and I just feel like Division Street cannot handle that traffic. I know you said 19 u like 20 32 maybe for expansion maybe. Uh I just do not see division handling this traffic safely and there are a lot of people that travel that road especially students that go to Mount Juliet High School. So that is my concern. Thank you.

I am Fisa Allen and I live at 1380 Northwest Rutland Road. I am the house you look at when you come off of Hunting Hills and I wanted to speak on behalf of I would like to not see our neighborhood be cut through from East Division on and that is just my main concern. We have a S-curve a onelane bridge on our road that we live on and it is a quaint quaint neighborhood that live we live back in there and to think of cars using that as a cut through would not be a good thing. So, I would just kind of like to have that on record as you think about developing things. Thank you.

Any additional citizen comments at this time? Seeing uh no additional citizen comments at this time, we will uh please please. [clears throat] I

am Jay New. I live at 1172 Northwest Rutland. Um, just had a couple questions here. This is my first time at one of these things, so I don't know what I'm doing, but I appreciate that all of y'all are here. Uh, Hunting Hills are our neighbors, and good to see you all out here. Um, I had a couple questions. Um, what can we get some clarity on on east division what the addresses are that this would cover? There's a lot of south into this and east into this and is there something that states like from from this current address to that current address is where they're looking at? No, we got a map partial but physicals

or or how do we see that online for for us? I'm thinking not just about this issue but future ones as well. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Um, for for issues like this, is it possible for us to ask for like a preliminary vote from the commission to see how that's going to go? Nothing like that, huh? No. Okay. I'm just thinking in terms of discussion. Sure.

Uh, all right. uh in terms of uh connecting east division to Hunting Hills or Northwest Rutland or whether directly or indirectly. Is there language in the current PUD that restricts or denies that possibility? Do you want to answer that John or Todd? Do you want to answer that?

Yeah. access in in a pud is set in stone. So, while it's not explicitly stated that they're not allowed to access that road, because it's not explicitly stated that they get an access there, they are not allowed to access that right away. Okay. I just want to make sure that there's that difference in there's no plan or intent to do it versus it's expressly prohibited. So, it sounds like it is expressly prohibited. Correct. Okay. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you. Any additional citizen comments? See no additional citizen comments. I do want to make a uh a note here prior to uh to asking for a recommendation in regards to this item on the agenda. Uh as you heard us go through our meeting tonight, seems like we did have a lot of uh um recommendation items back to the board of commissioners. Uh this being a another item. Um if it uh should receive a positive recommendation, it uh does go to our board of commissioners uh for its ultimate final decision. Uh if it receives a negative recommendation, um it is still able to go to our board of commissioners, but it has to be sponsored by one of the existing commissioners in order to do so. So, uh, regardless of the outcome of tonight's meeting, just wanted to explain to you all that, uh it still would have the opportunity to move forward, even if it were a negative recommendation, but it would need a sponsor by an existing uh city commissioner uh in order to do so. So, just wanted to clarify that for uh people like Jay that first time here. So, uh, so you understand kind of the process and procedures when you hear us doing recommendation items versus actual voting on, uh, an item. And this is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. Um, so with that being said, I am looking for a recommendation uh, in regards to this item on our agenda.

Make a motion for a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I raising your hand. I against abstensions is a negative recommendation. Let me uh ask the applicant this um at this time we are able to hear item 10B which is uh to review the is a recommendation item as well is to review the annexation plan services for for the project known as east division business park located off east division street. Would you like for us to defer or would you like for us to hear item 10B?

Uh, sorry, chairman. 10B with the uh would be just the annexation and plan of services. Would you also consider hearing 10 C at this time? No, sir. No. Uh, we would just request deferral on 10.

Would you like to go ahead and request 10 C? Yes sir. Very well. That is uh let's read it for the record. Uh item 10B which is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners review the annexation and plan of services for the project known as East Division Business Park located off East Division Street has been deferred for the request of the applicant. Item 10 C, which is a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners, is to review the preliminary master development plan PUD with a reszone from Wilson County R1 and Mount Jul for the project known as East Division Business Park located off East Division Street. Has been deferred for the request of the applicant. Next item up on our agenda um falls underneath a zoning ordinance amendment. It's item 11A. Also a recommendation item back to the board of commissioners. It is to review the zoning ordinance amendment to article 8 section 207.5 open space requirements for planned unit developments. Mr. John Sure thing. Um okay. So there it is. This amendment is for open minimum open improved open space requirements for mixeduse puds. Mixeduse puds are permitted with CMUbased zoning and CTCbased zoning. Um, the way the code is set up now, it basically refers any mixeduse PUD back to RM8, RM16 standards, um, higher density zoning districts, which is what you would get in a mixeduse pud. So, a mixeduse pud typically falls under RM8 RM16. This will separate the open space requirements from a straight straight residential RM8 or RM16 pud which is at 20%. What this amendment will do is for mixeduse puds. So when we have

commercial and residential like a Sutton or a Golden Bear Place or a name name a few other ones around town. Um, we're proposing to increase the open space requirements as shown in here. And it would be 30.5% of a CTC pod. So, that's a commercial town center pod. Uh, those are more downtown areas, not uh not necessarily interstate commercial areas. Um, CMU, that's all over the city, concentrated in some areas. that number where we're suggesting 37.5%. So basically 50% give or take more than what is required. Now um this is a forward item to the board of commissioners since it's a zoning ordinance amendment. Um and I will say that the impetus for this amendment came from the board of commissioners. So with that staff is recommending approval of the amendment as written. Questions, comments from the commission,

please. I guess I misunderstood. Does this have So, this doesn't increase uh residential pud open space. What What is that currently ra 20 20%. On these CMUs and CTC's, do they have a concentration sometimes of shared use of residential in them? Yes. Yes. So each of these two could be affected by it as far as residential goes.

Yes. Yes. It's basically saying if you have a high density mixeduse pud something like we saw last month downtown the uh Caldwell they would be held to 20% open space improved open space right now. This would bump it up to that that would be a CMU I believe or CTC 30 or 37 and a half whatever whatever 1200. So it would only apply to those two districts and all mixed use pods have to be or all mixeduse developments have to be a planned unit development. Um all multifamily has to be a planned unit development.

So this but this this amendment just affects when you have residents residences in a mixeduse pod in CTC zoning or CMU zoning. and improved recreational open space isn't a parking lot, right? We're talking about grass areas. No, no, there's uh there's language in here which specifies what can be improved and yeah, it's Yeah, I see that down below. Okay. Oh, I thanks for Jill reminding me. Um uh in the ordinance you'll see it's I put a three-year sunset on it. That was a per request of the board of commissioners as well. You mean it would go away in three years unless you unless you want to keep it. Yeah.

You know, but kind of the when I first looked at this, I was all for it. I thought it's great, you know,

but but but kind of the more I'm thinking about it is, you know, this is going to show up somewhere, right? and the cost of whatever developer is building. And if it does translate into residential uh as far as a mixeduse part of this, then you've just raised the level of residential building up another little notch. And right now there is no entry level residential in Juliet that I know of. I mean, if anybody wants to enter the market for $4,000 a month, 450 or 550 if you can find one maybe. And what this will probably do is inch this up another 30 or 40 grand. I mean, the land's going to come from something. And so, is it worth that tradeoff? Are we just going to for forgo um I hate to say affordable? All all housing is affordable to somebody, but affordable to younger folk. I mean, are we just going to eventually just price ourselves right out of that market completely with things like this?

Well, this this thing's piece of legisl I think with regards to your question with with all of our standards and and building codes and whatnot. It's [clears throat] we're you're you're correct, right? Affordable affordable housing, I'm not sure it exists anywhere in Middle Tennessee, truth be told. just with land costs at a bare minimum kind of forces forces builder's hands.

But I think that's what this is is it's I mean you're you're taking something and you're increasing the value for a certain percent. So I don't know if this does any benefit to the city or if this caters to the people that that build and sell. So if anything and and I I agree with you all for sure. If anything, it may meter the speed at which these developments come in because they become less affordable for the developer tax. And by the three years sunset, maybe it's just a moratorum or it will function as a moratorum for three years. And maybe this is me being pessimistic. Hi. Hi.

The devil's advocate in me says that because the sunset clause is in there, we're going to basically there's going to be a price tag leveraged on current approved items that don't have to follow this. And that's why the three-year sunset's there. I feel like there's a little bit more to the story than we're getting. So, you take whatever's currently approved out there and your your value is a heck of a lot more. So, if you want to sell that off to somebody, um this doesn't seem like it benefits to the city, though. This is it seems like this is just strictly political and it's sad that this is what we've gotten to when we talk about things like this. But maybe I'm just maybe that's just devil's advocate in me. But wow.

You know the old guy that used to do the planning for us. I asked him what's the worst thing about planning commissions. You know I was that green and he said they don't plan. Said they're just approval commissions. You know, he said that's the number one thing wrong with planning commissions is they don't plan. Too busy approving things. And in the case of stuff like this, it kind of begs the question of how you plan for your community and what segments are we forgoing and are I mean, are people that are going to work with their hands in our community going to be living in apartments and in their parents' basement? I mean, are we pretty much saying things like that when we up the the entry level here? is this is going to take it up there. I mean, I don't see it getting under 600 grand after this. I mean,

you're doubling the open space. Worry there. The average new home sale in Wilson County is already 580 or average home sale, not new. Average home sale is already 58. Yeah, I'm talking about this is going to be the floor though. Oh, it maybe I'm just old. [laughter] You said it,

brother. Good discussion. I mean, absolutely. Excellent. Um, further questions, comments. Let's go ahead and ask for citizen comments in regards to this item on the agenda. Anyone wish to make comments, welcome, encouraged to do so. Please come to the microphone, name and address for the record. Seeing no citizen comments at this time, I'd like to call for recommendation in regards to this item on the agenda. I'll make a motion for a negative recommendation. I'll second. It's a motion and a second for a negative recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying I raising your hand. I I against abstensions. That is a negative recommendation. For the last time 2025, I'd like to ask for a motion to adjourn.

Motion to [laughter] Good luck. Y'all decipher who got second on that. Got a motion and a second for adjournment. All those in favor signify by saying I and raising your hand. I against we are journed.