Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, we will call this meeting to order, which is the Planning Commission meeting for September the 16th. It looks like we've got a quorum. Any public comment? Folks sign up? No, sir. All right. We need a motion or do we have any corrections to the minutes of September 2nd, 2026 of the City Council Planning Commission Joint Conceptual Workshop Meeting and the minutes of the September 2nd, 2026 Planning Commission Regular Meeting. Any amendments to that or corrections or a motion? Move for approval. Second. Motion and a second.

Vice Chair Everborder? Aye. Mr. Kerr? Aye. Mr. Harris?

Aye.

Mr. Prance?

Aye.

Mr. Rawlings?

Aye.

Mr. Wright? Aye.

Chair Halliburton? Aye. Next item on the agenda is the consent agenda. Is there anything on the consent agenda that any member of the Planning Commission would like to have as part of the meeting? And if not, do we have a motion with respect to the consent agenda? Move for approval. Second. I have a motion and a second.

Vice Chair Everbarter. Abstain. Mr. Carroll.

Abstain.

Mr. Harris.

Aye.

Mr. Prince. Aye. Mr. Rollins.

Aye. Mr. White. Abstain. Chair Halliburton. Aye. All right, the next item on the agenda is under GDO on motion. It's the NHI headquarters final design and site plan review for 23,800 square feet office building in approximately 2.03 acres zone MU and GDO 3 located along Gateway Boulevard. National Health Investors Inc. is the developer. Mr. Barbee.

Good afternoon, Chair Halliburton and members of the Murfreesboro Planning Commission. This next item on your agenda is the final design and site plan review for NHI Headquarters. And this is proposed to be located at 1340 Gateway Boulevard. As you can see here on the map, Behind some of the earlier developments, we've got three medical outbuildings around it, and it's just adjacent to the Old Fort golf course. You previously reviewed this application for initial design review on August 19th. At that time, there were no major... items of concern. The plan was generally in good condition. We'll bring it to you again today for final design review in the same condition. The major item that you'll see and change on the site plan is they have shifted their development outside of the greenway easement that's along the Stones River to the south side of the property. The discussions with Parks and Rec and with legal staff, they wanted to make sure that that area remained unobstructed for any potential future expansion of the Greenway. Other than that, the site is in good condition and staff would request that any approval be made subject to staff comments.

Any questions for Mr. Barbee? Hearing none, any discussion or motion? So moved. Subject to all staff comments. Second. And the motion is second to approve.

Vice Chair Ablewater? Aye. Mr. Kerr? Aye. Mr. Harris?

Aye. Mr. Prance? Aye. Mr. Rollins? Aye. Mr. Wright? Aye. Chair Halliburton? Aye. Next item on our agenda is Platts and Plans. The first item under that section is Kroger. Site plan for 99,982 square feet grocery store with fueling station on 13.4 acres zone PCD located along Memorial Boulevard and Tillinook Lane. Kroger Limited Partnership. I was the developer, Mr. Barbie.

Good afternoon again. As you explained, this is a proposed Kroger development at the intersection of Memorial Boulevard and Tilling Oak Lane. It currently consists of three pieces of property that will be combined into one for the Kroger grocery store and fueling center. Staff has reviewed the application. It's generally in good condition. I will mention that on the site plan the permeable pavers have been removed from the design. um staff has been in contact with the civil engineer for the project and had discussions as late as the before the meeting today those papers were represented in public meetings as something that will be provided as additional measures to manage storm water and in addition to that those papers are represented in the plan book we spoke with mr randy perry earlier during the meeting and he has agreed to put the papers back in the parking lot area mr perry He's behind me. I'll just give him a nod confirming that. Other than that, Adam, the plan's generally in good order and we would request that any approval be made subject to staff comments.

Carolyn, let the minutes reflect the nod, please. Yes.

Acknowledge the nod.

All right. Any questions for Mr. Barbie on this application? Nice canopy. There you go.

Move for approval subject to staff comments.

I have a motion and a second.

Vice Chair Everwater? Aye. Mr. Kerr? Aye. Mr. Harris?

Aye.

Mr. Prance?

Aye.

Mr. Rawlings? Aye. Mr. Wright? Aye. Chair Halliburton?

Aye. Next item on the agenda is Meadowmax Business Park master plan and preliminary plat for seven lots on 53.66 acre zone heavy industrial located along South Rutherford Boulevard B&H Capital Developers LLC is the developer Mr. Barbee.

Good afternoon once again. This development is located along South Rutherford Boulevard. This is the first seven lots of this large industrial development and this is the preliminary plat and master plan that shows the outlay for streets, drainage, utilities and other support items for the development. This master plan preliminary plan approvals, it does not confer a vested right to proceed with development of the property as shown in the preliminary plan, but rather authorizes the applicant to submit construction plans in accordance with said approval and the requirements of the subdivision regulations. Overall, the plan's in good shape however we do. We need one item we need the Planning Commission to consider today. The master plan design currently reflects Meadow-Max Boulevard as being approximately 3,000 feet terminated in a cul-de-sac. The Murfreesboro subdivision regulations state that a street that terminates in a cul-de-sac shall not exceed 1,000 feet in length from centerline of the intersecting street to the center of the turnaround without specific approval by the Planning Commission for a greater length. As presented today, the Planning Commission would need to make a specific determination if they are willing to accept that greater length for the street that's terminating in a cul-de-sac. Staff requests that if the Planning Commission does wish to approve that request, that staff is requesting that we add a condition that two emergency turnaround areas and associated easements are created in locations and out of the surface material to be determined by staff. And that's mainly because there needs to be a place where either emergency equipment that's large or other large vehicles if something breaks down, if there's an emergency somewhere in the property, This will allow them to make a turnaround to get back out and not be stuck on Meadow Max Boulevard with no place to go, basically. I'm available if there are any questions. Otherwise, the plan is in good order, and Mr. Matt Taylor with SEC is also available if you have questions as well.

So the way I understand the distance piece on the road, I mean, even though there's this... supposed limit. The purpose in this is to better for the flow of this development in and of itself. So my question is I'm sure the staff is in favor of this increased distance. Is that a correct statement?

With the additional emergency turnaround areas added for safety measures, staff feels that this would be acceptable.

Okay. Thank you Mr. Farby. Thank you.

And Mr. Halliburton, just to reiterate a couple of things. There are a couple of stub streets on the east and west side of Meadowmax Boulevard, one going to the Hoover property. Those are identified as future potential stub locations. They are committing to stub locations in the future, but not the specific location, but committing to stub out into those adjacent properties to the east and west. And so just wanted to get it on the record that that is a part of their master plan approval because you're looking at both the master plan and the preliminary plan for Section 1 and they're making the commitment that they will be providing street stubs to those adjacent properties with future sections. We believe that's very important to provide multiple ways in and out. With Section 1, it will not have multiple ways in and out. Another thing, because the street is longer than 1,000 feet long, in our subdivision regulations say that cul-de-sac streets cannot be longer than 1,000 feet and essentially this is just like one long cul-de-sac even though it's got kind of like a 90 degree turn in it that is a separate street but it's really it's really basically the equivalent of one long cul-de-sac but the planning commission has the ability or the authority by the subdivision regulations to approve cul-de-sacs with greater length than 1,000 linear feet. And if you, Mr. Barbee, if you could go to the overall master plan, There you go. So you can see that Meadowmax Boulevard, they're master planning it all the way to the southeast, of course, to ultimately get to Elam Road. But of course, there are a number of properties there that they do not control. And so whether it gets to Elam Road is really kind of out of their control. And the Manchester Pike corridor study that the city is pursuing right now will ultimately give some recommendations on the road network. But their goal ultimately is to have more than one way in and one way out, but just that will not be the case with Section 1.

I don't necessarily see... I see the stub to the east. Oh, I see it now. Okay, thank you. It's hard to find. Yeah. All right. Any other questions for Mr. Barbee? Or the applicant? If there are none, I move for approval subject to all staff comments.

Second. I have a motion and a second.

Chair, I think we do need a specific discussion of extending that, of permitting the street to be longer than 1,000 feet. Yes.

Do you want to amend that motion?

Amend the motion to what you just said. Second the amended motion. Yes, we have a motion and a second to the amended motion of the extra loop of the cul-de-sac.

I'm glad I'm not your lawyer. Vice Chair Ava Water. Aye. Mr. Kerr.

Abstain.

Mr. Harris.

Aye.

Mr. Prince.

Aye.

Mr. Rollins.

Aye.

Mr. Bright.

Aye. Chair Halliburton. Aye. The next item on the agenda is Clarius Section 1 Master Plan and Preliminary Plat for five lots on 47.52 acres zone PUD located along Northwest Broad Street. The Clarius Partners LLC is the developer. Ms. Gilliland. Aye.

Good afternoon, Chair Halliburton. Good afternoon, Commissioners. This next item on the agenda is the Preliminary Platte and Master Plan for the Clarius Subdivision, Section 1. Clarius Partners LLC is the developer. The property in question is approximately 170 acres of undeveloped land and is located along Northwest Broad Street just southeast of the I-840 interchange. Primarily residential and industrial uses surround this property with a mix of city and county zoning. Parcel also shares its northeastern property line with the city's wastewater treatment plant. On June 18, 2026, City Council voted to approve on its second and final reading the rezoning of this property to a planned unit district, or PUD, for the Clarius Park project. This plan development is for a mix of commercial and industrial uses and includes seven buildings and a pump station as well as open space and detention ponds. The proposed master plan and preliminary plat for section one of this development matches the layout of the approved PUD pattern book. Section one of the Clery subdivision displays four of the seven proposed buildings as well as the pump station on approximately 47 acres. The Section 1 development is occurring in the frontmost section of the property and includes all of the required street improvements along that State Road or Northwest Broad Street. Staff has reviewed these plans and recommends approval subject to all staff comments. Today, Planning Commission will need to discuss this application and make a recommendation concerning the approval of the preliminary plan and master plan. I'm available for any questions. Thank you.

Any questions for Ms. Gilliland? All right. Any comments, questions, or motions associated with this application? Move for approval of sub-staff comments. Second. I have a motion and a second.

Vice Chair Ava Boehner? Aye. Mr. Kerr?

Aye.

Mr. Harris?

Aye.

Mr. Prince? Aye. Mr. Rollins?

Aye. Mr. Wright? Aye. Chair Halliburton? Aye. Next item on our agenda is new business. The first item under that section is a mandatory referral. To consider the abandonment of a portion of Hartman Farm Court and Veterans Parkway rights-of-way, Gresham Smith representing the City of Murfreesboro is the applicant. Mr. Anthony.

Good afternoon, Chair Halliburton and members of the Planning Commission. As you stated, this is a mandatory referral to consider the abandonment of a portion of the Hartman Farm Court and Veterans Parkway right-of-way. This right-of-way is located along the Veterans Parkway south of the Hartman Farm Court's cul-de-sac. The request is depicted on both this map and in the applicant's exhibits in blue. The applicant, which is the city of Murfreesboro, is requesting abandonment of the right of way so that the city may construct a fire station and police precinct on the adjacent parcel to the east. If approved, the abandoned right of way would be a quick claim to the city to become a part of the adjacent parcel that will contain the fire station and police precinct. A memo from Gresham Smith is included with this application. In this memo, Gresham Smith states that the right-of-way abandonment is essential to facilitate and optimize the design and construction of the fire station and associated infrastructure. They have analyzed the proposed right-of-way abandonment and states that it will not negatively impact access to any of the adjacent properties as all the adjacent properties maintain access along either Blackman Road, Hartman Farm Court, or Veterans Parkway. The planning department has reached out to the utility providers and other city departments for comments regarding the impact of this right-of-way abandonment and staff will provide that summary from those departments at the public hearing. Staff recommends a public hearing date of September 30th, 2026 and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Any questions for Mr. Anthony? If not, do we have a motion to set a public hearing for September the 30th? Move to set the public hearing September 30th. Second. We have a motion and a second.

Vice Chair Everwater? Aye. Mr. Kerr?

Aye.

Mr. Harris?

Aye.

Mr. Prance?

Aye.

Mr. Rollins?

Aye.

Mr. Wright?

Aye. Chair Halliburton? Aye. Next item on our agenda is a zoning application for approximately 2.51 acres located along Brinkley Avenue to be rezoned from Commercial Highway to PUD. Fred H. Fair Limited Partnership is the applicant. Mr. Barbee.

Good afternoon again. This next application before you today is a zoning request for approximately 2.51 acres located along Brinkley Avenue to rezone property that's currently commercial highway to planned unit district. The main The main area that you're looking at is here before you. You have the existing Farrah Brothers rental and hardware store to the east. You have the expansion of this development as well. It's a retail. I believe there is a paint store and the property to the southwest. Across the street from this is some more Farrah Brothers properties. I believe they have an office for some of their operations as well as a moving company. And then at the corner there is a motor vehicle sales lot. Surrounding land use is all identified as general commercial in this area, as you can see in the red. This plan provides for several different uses. Almost all of those are listed within the commercial portion of our land use table. However, there are a few that are listed in the industrial table now and one of those is the rental of equipment. I'm trying to find the list of uses. Did you just pass it a second ago? Okay. This mouse is very touchy. Am I headed the right direction, Matthew?

I'm confused now. Yeah, me too. I believe it's on page 15 of their number.

Here's the list of uses as you can see. Contractors outdoor storage and contractors equipment sales rental repair. That's what they're currently doing and have been doing for I believe almost 70 years on the property at the intersection of Northwest Broad and Brinkley. This would be an expansion of that existing tool rental use. and that would allow for them to have a specific loading and unloading area so they would be able to discontinue any street loading that's occurring at this point. The additional commercial items are industrial items, custom wood products, furniture and fixtures, jewelry, and then contractor storage and door. All of these uses seem to be in line with what's already existing in the area and staff believes that this would be a good fit. The commercial listings here would already be a use by right in the commercial highway district. Planning Commission will need to review this application and schedule a public hearing for the item. Staff recommends that I can get to the page.

September 30th.

Staff recommends September 30th.

And just to add on to what Mr. Barbee was saying, so the property where the existing construction equipment rental area is located is zoned commercial highways and construction equipment rental is not permitted in the commercial highway zone, but it's grandfathered in, it's a legally established non-conforming use. But in order to be able to expand it onto the adjacent property, which is also zoned commercial highway, they would not be able to do that. So that's why they are requesting the rezoning to PUD in order to essentially be able to expand that non-conforming use onto the adjacent property that's not zoned for it. I drive by this location a lot.

So the buildings that are, it looks like they built a new building, got some plant materials around it. That, the site plan's not changing, I take it. It's just the zoning, right?

The revised site plan will be coming back before you to show those changes. The current site plan shows an L-shaped building that's about 12,000 square feet inside more towards the front along Brinkley. A smaller building along the western portion as well as some covered storage and a dumpster enclosure. They currently have the dumpster enclosure and the covered storage and I believe the western building It's probably, if it's not up, it's getting very close. This would remove the 12,000 square foot building from the site plan and it would be replaced with about, I believe it's a 3,000 square foot building with outdoor storage of that rental equipment located behind it.

Okay.

It would be screened with a fence and plant materials from the public street as a part of their zoning and part of the site design.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Barbee? If not, do we have a motion to set a public hearing for September 30th? Move to set the public hearing September 30th. Second. I have a motion and a second.

Vice Chair Agarwater? Aye. Mr. Caron?

Aye.

Mr. Harris?

Aye.

Mr. Prince?

Aye.

Mr. Rawlings? Aye. Mr. Wright? Aye. Chair Halliburton?

Aye. The next item on our agenda is staff reports and other business. First item under that section is consideration of the 2027 planning commission meeting calendar and the 2027 plans review calendar. Thank you, Chair Halliburton.

Before we get to that, I'm wondering if we could have a motion to change the meeting times of our two meetings on September 30th, bumping those up 30 minutes if that works for the Planning Commission members who are available to attend that evening. So the joint conceptual workshop would start at 4 and the regular planning commission meeting would start at 5.30. Does that work with everybody's schedules? Yes. Or mine anyway.

Mine.

Yes. Okay. If I could have a motion to change those times. A motion to change those times.

Second.

I have a motion and a second to change the times from 4-30 to 4 and Planning Commission meeting to 5-30 on September 30th. Okay.

Vice Chair Everwater? Aye. Mr. Caron? Aye. Mr. Harris? Aye. Mr. Prance? Aye. Mr. Rollins? Aye. Mr. Wright? Aye. Chair Halliburton? Aye.

Alright, so we're discussing the calendar now.

So before you are in the agenda materials are the draft 2027 planning commission meeting calendar and the 2027 plans review calendar which has all of our all of our various deadlines including our monthly submittal deadlines. I've avoided any conflict with city and county schools spring break and contacted city schools to try to get an estimate on when the fall break would be and I've avoided what they anticipate to be the fall break for 2027. As always though, if conflicts arise, we can amend the calendar. But I would ask, unless you have any objection, that you make a motion to approve the two calendars as submitted.

I'm sorry, just briefly, looking at the calendar, maybe I'm misreading this, but are not most of these meetings for the remainder of the year shown on Tuesdays and not Wednesdays? It looks like for September 29th, today's meeting is shown as September 15th. This is for 2027. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, that makes sense. I apologize.

Been a day. Apologies.

I guess we need a motion on this. Motion to approve the 2027 Planning Commission meeting calendar. Second. I have a motion and a second.

Vice Chair Anne Wehler. Aye. Mr. Carroll.

Aye.

Mr. Harris.

Aye.

Mr. Prance. Aye. Mr. Rollins.

Aye.

Mr. Wright.

Aye. Chair Halliburton. Aye. Matthew, I have a personal request. Absolutely. Can you email this one page to us, please? Oh, yeah. What I'll do, I'll take the draft off of it and I'll email it to everybody. Thank you. all right the next item on the agenda is a monthly update from our wonderful director of land management and planning mr newman wow

Thank you, Chair Halliburton, members of the Planning Commission. I do want to bring a couple of things to your attention, some things that are fairly new. So the state has passed Public Chapter 1044, which is a law that gives a shot clock to cities and counties for giving site plan or site plan plat comments back to developers within a certain amount of time and then also getting that to the Planning Commission within a certain amount of time. We've been meeting internally about this to make sure that we're compliant with the new law that takes place January 1st, 2027 and then we've had a lot of good meetings with our other municipalities within Rutherford County, meeting with Rutherford County and then also meeting with some of our peer cities across the state just to make sure that we're complying with the new law. And I'll give any updates on that. If we find anything that we need to change or update in our processes, we'll make sure to let you know that as well. But so far, looking pretty good. Thrivance update. Thrivance has come a long way in our operational assessment. I've done a really good job. We've had a lot of good meetings with that. We've had our time study that we've done. We've taken all this information, triangulated it, synthesized it, a lot of buzzwords that we're using with it. But they've done a good job with it, and they'll be coming with a presentation September 30th. I believe that's a joint conceptual workshop to go over their findings and what their recommendations are. So we'll look forward to that.

I don't think that it'll be the September 30th one. I'm sorry, but I think that was just... I think it might be the next one after that.

Okay, that's right. So they'll be coming soon to give their feedback, recommendations, and what they found on that. So we're looking forward to that. On the City Works, we've made some continuing to make good progress on City Works, becoming more efficient at that, learning how to operate within that world. I've met with CED, MTE, our reviewing partners to try to strengthen that relationship and make sure that their reviews are staying consistent with the timelines that we have within City Works, and that's going really well. And so we're really proud of that partnership that we have with them. We continue to meet with our other municipal planning partners in Rutherford County to look at our growth inside our urban growth boundary, looking at future growth and what that looks like long term. So I just want you to be aware that we do continue to have those meetings. We have good relationships with our other municipalities within Rutherford County and that a lot of that long range planning discussions do go on. Lastly, on staffing, we have our principal planner position that starts October 5th, so we're extremely happy to get Amanda Estill coming into our department, and with the experience she has, we think she'll be a really good fit. Our engineering position is still open. We've had several interviews, and we still have another interview set, and that position is still open. So we're hoping to get that filled pretty soon. So we'll keep you updated on that position next month. Thank you Mr. Newman.

Any questions for Mr. Newman? Thank you. And Mr. Chairman, I did want to make an introduction real quick. Mr. Minaj Uddin is our new intern for this semester. So far our most well-educated intern that we've had coming through the program. He was actually a lawyer in a previous career and actually just received his master's in city and regional planning from the University of Memphis. So we're very pleased to have him. He's got great expertise in various areas and the Memphis program, which is now our only planning master's program in Tennessee, produces some great graduates and so we're pleased to have Minaj on staff for this semester.

Any other business need to be brought before this commission? If not, we're adjourned.