Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

[Music] [Music] Good evening.

Excuse me. Good evening. I'm going to call to order the Simrna Municipal Planning Commission meeting for October uh 2nd, 2025. And with that, if you'll stand for prayer and pledge. Father, we thank you for today. We thank you for our town. Be with us tonight as we go about the business of this town. I pray that all our decisions will be pleasing to you, that all our decisions will be made with the utmost consideration and with discernment and wisdom. Father, I pray pray for our employees of the town. Bless them. Keep them safe. I'd ask for an extra hedge of protection around our first responders, our police and fire. Father, take them into your arms and help them get through each shift that they work. Thank you again for all that you do for us and thank you for all the opportunities that you've so abundantly blessed us with in this town. For it's in Jesus name we pray. Amen.

Amen. So, faith flag, you join me in the pledge. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Okay, first up tonight we have two public hearings. Um our first one will be plan of services for Armenius Development Group LLC 101 McNary Lane. Yeah, this is just the the plan of services for the area if the town were to choose to annex this property. Um the town um would be providing all services to this area um except for water uh which is already provided by Consolidated Utility District and would continue to be provided by Consolidated Utility District. Um all other services uh sewer would have to be extended to the property by the the owner. That's not something the town would be doing. Um and then all other services, streets, police, fire, all those would be provided by the town upon the effective date of annexation. Uh again, if the town chooses to to go forward with the annexation, that's that's what this plan of services would be.

Okay. I'll now open uh the plan of services uh up for a public hearing. If there's anyone that like would like to come forward and speak either for or against this plan of services, uh do so at this time. And I'll remind everybody that uh you will have three minutes to uh to do this. And if you do decide to speak on the plan of services, we'll need your name, address, uh and whether or not you live within the town limits. I would like to speak in opposition. My name is Michael. Michael. Yeah. Can I I tell you what. Yeah, you can do that.

Yes. And then if you'll come to the podium and then if you'll recall name, address, uh, and whether you live in the town limits or not. Address and whether or not you live in the town limits.

Okay. My name is Michael Wilson. I live at 230s People Drive. I do not live in a town limits. Um, I do have to say I've learned a lot about local government the last 24 hours, probably more than my last 59 years. So, thank you all very much for what you do and for being here. Uh, I also learned a lot about our neighborhood over the last 24 hours. Um, that I know of. Only Derek Boswell received notification for this hearing which he shared with a neighborhood Facebook group uh late Tuesday evening and it didn't really start to take off and and uh until yesterday morning. But look what we've had here. We've also been able to secure over 180 signatures in opposition in those 24 hours. I've submitted a map, and I apologize for not being here earlier, uh, of the area I'm speaking about and a few notes raising my concerns for the traffic issues we already have facing our neighborhood. Uh, my wife and I built in 2019 with our boys still in school and at the time was a very slowpaced neighborhood with a lot of walking, bike riding, and kids playing. As neighborhoods popped up surrounding One Mile and Baker Road, our traffic continually got worse. as students from the area started using peeles as a cutthrough uh to and from Stewart's Creek High School. The speeding is constant and four out of 10 don't even slow down for the stop signs. It also became evident 840 traffic started using peoples at a cut through uh back and forth to one mile. Since the construction of Amville station and signal signalization at one mile in Amavville, this problem's more than doubled. With the future addition of a new high school off Lee Road that's going to dump even more traffic on Amville, which will then create a further overflow of traffic through our neighborhood. I contacted the county road superintendent a couple of months ago with my concerns and learned that a lot of the development done in the onemaker

road area was approved and completed without adequate traffic studies. A traffic corridor study was conducted in 22 for the potential widening of Amville Road which the study found necessary under the conditions at that time. widening did not happen, but commercial and residential growth hasn't slowed down. And now I understand the state of Tennessee has declined the uh the widening of Amadville. This in addition to the mess we grapple with at I24. A further safer streets for all study was conducted and with the completion of Jefferson Pike, Amavville Road is now priority number one. Adding additional commercial property in an established residential neighborhood will certainly not make anything or anyone safer, nor will it make traffic any better, only worse. I concede that a lot of these prior decisions were made by past councils and commissions and urge the current commission and council to stop the bleeding, save our neighborhood, don't add to further traffic issues on Amavville, and suggest declination for the request of annexation. the gentleman that I mentioned earlier, Derek Boswell, his family is living in the house next door in his house.

Michael, your three minutes are up. Uh, if you have anything else, you can submit it in writing. And just to remind everybody, we're talking about the plan of services at this point. I know that it it appears that you've signed up under citizens comments as well. So, u you do have that time available.

Oh, I'm sorry. Was that not this time? No, right now we're having a public service and I'm gonna get Kevin to clarify. I'm sorry, we're having a public hearing on the plan of services. So, I'm gonna let Kevin clarify what we're having the public uh, you know, come up and comment about. Yeah, this we have we're required by state law anytime the town considers a request for annexation, the planning commission is required to hold a public hearing on the plan of services, which is basically the town's putting in writing our plan for how we would be providing services to the property if we choose to annex it. Um, and so we are required, the planning commission is required to hold this public hearing. the council if it goes to council and c and and gets to this second reading the council also holds a public hearing on the plan of services separate from the vote on the annexation as well. So um so but anyway this is for just for the plan of services. You do have you are signed up under citizen comments that would be coming up later just after these two public hearings. Um you won't be able to speak you you would be able to speak again though. So you

I won't be able to speak again. No you would be you would be So you want me to do all this again? Well I'm No, it sounds like you may have some things to finish. Maybe you can finish what you were not able to get to. I I just had one more one more. Well, let's let's go ahead and save that. And you are scheduled. You're the third speaker scheduled under citizens comments. So, we'll let you come back at that time. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. My 30 my three minutes will be 30 seconds. Okay, that's fine. Okay. Is there anyone else here to speak for or against the plan of services uh for 101 McNary Lane?

All right. Hearing nobody else. I'm just confirming there's several of us on the list that resp all the same things that Michael did. You may have some other things that you want to bring up, but that's going to be entirely uh during your three minutes and you're more than welcome to do so at that point. Okay. All right. So, uh let's go to our next item under public hearing was a is a plan of services for CLU uh CLQ land 5198 Lee Road. Yeah, this is a a SE um again would also the developer would be required to extend sewer to it as well um at at their expense. Um all other services would be provided by the town um if we do choose to to follow through with the annexation. That's all that I've got.

Okay. So now I will uh go to the public and I'll open up the public hearing portion for anyone that would like to come forward to comment on the plan of services for CLQ land services.

Yes, ma'am. If you could give us your name, address, and whether you live in the town limits or not. 541 Lee Roads. I'm sorry. services for 5198 Lee Road. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing and I will call the planning commission. Have anything else that you uh didn't quite get to or or want to add after your three minutes has expired? Uh you can certainly submit those in writing and and uh it will get to us. So with that, the first person I have is Tanya Hadley. Is Miss Hadley here? I am. Good. If you can give us your name, address, uh, and whether or not

effort that was quickly shot down by the developer that was actually supposed to be here today that was going to submit one of his plan as a services. They have made it obvious the catalyst design group, they are not interested in compromise, only squeezing every inch of profit from the land of 5 ft of trees behind Saddle Grove. Why do believe Why do we believe they will treat any other neighborhood any differently? This is not sustainable growth. In fact, just Monday, the Daily News Journal reported that Steuart Creek Elementary continues to be at capacity, over capacity, with no plans to build an driven density at the expense of privacy and our quality of life. And as the photos I've shared earlier tonight, many of our homes extend all the way to the tree line and touch our property lines and replaced with saplings. This is not preservation. Replanting is not a solution. It would take decades for these new trees to provide protection that we have today. While ecosystems and wildlife were currently preserving will be destroyed along with the current drainage. Their track record has said it all to us. They have rejected a reasonable 25- ft mature tree blind buffer, ignored every email, and when I finally got on the phone with them after Mitchell Wman's guidance, they hung up on me. feet originally restored plus the proposed 10-ft easement.

Okay. All right. Thank you. And if you have anything else, you can certainly submit that in writing. We appreciate your comments. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Next, we have Caitlyn Alferman. Uh if you'd come forward, there you are. If you give us your name, address, and whether or not you live within the town limits or not.

Good evening. Thank you for allowing me this time to speak, and thank you, Mr. Riggsby, for taking my call yesterday and explaining things to me. My name is Caitlyn Alferman. My husband Ted and I live just outside city limits at 1198 Peebles. We've been homeowners and residents of Smyrna for eight years. Ted works for TWWRA, managing Percy Priest Lake in Smyrna and other reservoirs of Middle Tennessee. My contribution to the town includes to serve as the volunteer coordinator of Smyrna's Azure Standard grocery delivery, which helps provide families of our community with healthy, natural, affordable grocery options. I've also recently been nominated to serve on the board of the Smyrna baseball league and I look forward to working with the town to continue Smyrna's wonderful baseball program. When I was made aware of the request of our new neighbors at 10 101 McNary Lane, the Armus Development Group, I immediately reached out to other neighbors to organize. In under 24 hours, we collected 175 signatures on a petition to oppose the annexation and resoning request. You should have received that uh petition, but if not, I also brought copies. As we spoke with our neighbors about this issue, no one, not one single person disagreed that if granted, this request will be harmful to our neighborhood. So, I'm speaking not only for myself, but for the almost 200 others who also oppose this request, many of whom you see here tonight. When I drive home from Nashville or Murphy'sboro and take Almavville Road to my neighborhood just a mile away, I pass seven fast food restaurants, six gas stations, two alcohol stores, two vape shops, and a store selling CBD. I do not pass a pharmacy where I could get medication for my children or a clean store where I could buy fresh

produce for my family. This section of town is inundated with these types of businesses and we do not need anymore. Uh before any of you consider recommending that this request be granted, I encourage you to visit the other establishment owned and operated by the Armus Development Group, Grocery Hub, located at 1932 Amavville Road and just go and judge for yourself the quality of the businesses that they bring to our community. The notion that another similar business could quite literally be in my friend and neighbors backyard is appalling. Please don't allow this to happen to the good families who live here. Please recommend a rejection of this request to the council. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. And and did you all receive? Yes, we did. Thank you very much. Thank you. Michael Wilson. Michael, you want to get come up and give us your name and address and your your 30 seconds? No. Well, pick up say I want to point out Derek. Got to get you on the microphone. I wanted to point out Derek as the owner of the next door uh next door to the house in question. And I just want to ask you I'm going to stop you a little bit so we can stay within what our regs here. Yeah. Let's get your name, address, Michael Wilson, 230 Peeles Drive. And I'm not in the town. All right. Now you can go.

Okay. So, so this is the gentleman and his family that's been in the house uh next to the property we're talking about for 38 years. And I want you to think about as you look at him and and ask yourself if you would like anybody opening up a commercial business next door to you in a residential neighborhood. This is not a highway. This is not farmland. This is in a neighborhood. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Michael. Uh, Thomas RWS, I think you know name, address, and whether or not you're in the town limits or not.

My name is Thomas Ross. I live on 226 Wellington Way, and I'm not in the city limits. Uh, I would like to um apologize to the council. Uh, I was not added uh to the list as a speaker. I did uh respectfully sign the uh petition that came through against the uh annexation on 101 McNairing and my wife will be speaking later. So, thank you. Thank you, Mr. RS. Tammy RS.

Hi, Tammy RWS. I'm at 226 Wellington Way in Smyrna, Tennessee. We are not within the city limits. Um, the people that have spoken already have voiced a lot of my comments that I had. Um, my husband and I moved into our home in 1993. We moved out of Antioch, Tennessee, and we moved to Smyrna for a quiet neighborhood, a growing neighborhood within limits. And I feel like this request within a neighborhood setting is totally uh unacceptable. Um, and we chose to be totally opposition. Um, like I said, we've lived there since 93. And with all the new subdivisions and business growth that we've seen since 1993, there has been no infrastructure development. And I don't know if you've ever driven out between 230 and 4:30 on Elmville Road. It is backed up all the way to Popppler Wood uh both ways. And it's because of all the new growth. So, I do ask you to deny this request and we appreciate your time. Thank you. Uh, next we have Conrad Boston. If I mispronounced your last name, I apologize.

You didn't butcher too bad. All right, I'm gonna let you straighten me out and give it your address and whether or not you're within the town or not.

Conrad Bian 150 McMary Lane, and we're just outside the city limits. Uh, commission members, thank you for this opportunity to speak before you on this matter. Six years ago, my wife and I moved into Twin Creeks. To this day, we still feel blessed to be there. We're continually reminded of our attention to the rural feeling and sense of community. This is home. We've become attached to the charm of this residential neighborhood. I say again, residential neighborhood. Twin Creeks, however, isn't blessed with sidewalks where children can ride their bikes, dog owners can walk their pets, and young parents can safely push their children in strollers. We are relegated to the edge of the road, grandfathered so to speak. It has worked well to this point, but recently there has already been a noticeable increase in vehicular traffic that from Elmadville Road to McNary to to Milesdale in an effort to avoid the traffic light at one mile and in Elmville Road. Stop signs are quite often ignored as being just a suggestion. My wife and I have a firsthand experience of a near catastrophic inter encounter while on a walk when an automobile completely blew through the stop sign at Milesdale and McNary Lane. If you intend to convert Almadville Road into the next Sam Ridley, the increase in vehicular traffic encounters with pedestrians will only increase exponentially as more and more vehicles use this route as a bypass. I submit to you that any benefit to this surrounding area of whatever business proposed by the petitioner for the property at 101 McNary he could equally be accomplished on land nearby that's already been com zoned for commercial use. We will be watching closely over the next month and a half as this matter progresses the committee and the city council. I assure you that come election time, there are

going to be either a whole lot of very angry or very appreciative voters with a long memory. I will knock on every door with this list of names to ensure they remember every every way either either way. And I thank you for your time. Thank you. Laura Voan the second time. What? They do better the second time on your last name. That's fine. Um I live at I'm trying

I live at 115 McNary against this uh very few homes in our neighborhood since we moved there six years ago. There have been nine homes within arms reach that have been sold, transferred to family members um and and sold for or or turned over for profit. Our home values have gone up tremendously. This home on the corner is a very real mystery as to why it wasn't sold a normal way. No realators involved. All of a sudden we see the fact that this is going up for auction. That's very very suspicious seeing as again nine homes people came from California. people people have stalked our area in order to get homes in this section. And to turn that home commercial when you could have a family in there taking care of that home in a good school system with a wonderful backyard and a garage and somebody who could take care of that versus butchering it and and turning it into the business. as um somebody previously mentioned, it's it's become very dirty and there's some questionable activity going in there and um it's just not right. So, thank you for your time.

Thank you. Uh next, Frank Smith.

My name is Frank Smith. I live at 123 McNary Lane, just outside of city limits on the street in question. Uh my wife and I have lived there for 26 years. Speaking tonight in opposition of um reszoning this property at 101 from residential to commercial. We don't really have a problem with the property being annexed by Smyrna. problem comes with um development groups coming in and buying it up and poaching it and turning it into commercial property. This 101 McNary isn't uh solely a road frontage property. It's contained almost wholly within our uh subdivision. So, it's bordered on three sides by families. two across the street. Um this gentleman to the side and then and then one behind. So there I I don't see a real reason that Smyrna is so starved for commercial real estate that they need to have poaching of individual homes uh within a subdivision. Um uh lands being annexed uh left and right in this town. So, I think that individual homes being sold out and poached from uh wellestablished subdivisions is just not necessary.

Thank you. All right. Thank you, Joshua Boswell.

Good evening. Um my name is Joshua Derek Boswell. Um I live at uh 105 McNary Lane, just outside of town limits. Um I work for the street department here. I have proudly worked for the street department for almost five years now. Um, the house that we currently live in, it's more than just our home. Our generations of our family have lived there. My wife's grandfather bought it in ' 87 when it was built. He, his family, my wife and I were raising our kids, making memories, forming bonds with neighbors. I'm here tonight to urge against the annexation and resoning. Um, let me share why this matters. so deeply. Just over a month ago, Armiste bought the house. The buyers told my wife that day that they planned to live there, fence it in, bring some goats, eventually move their families. It sounded like they were joining the community as residents. But that's not what's happened. Instead, many nights around 10:00 or even later, they brought in workers with trucks and equipment. Twice now, my family has witnessed them slaughtering dozens of goats and sheep on their property, which I can only assume is for their grocery hub down the road. This isn't residential living. It's covert commercial activity, and it feels like deception from the very beginning. We've only learned of this resoning request 48 hours ago, and I was the only one who was notified. Only 48 hours. And and we've done this in only 48 hours during the middle of a busy work week. We're a tight-knit community. We may not have a Smyrna. We may not be in Smyrna town limits, but we have Smyrna addresses. We are the embodiment of what Smyrna promotes as what they want to represent. Communities and families looking out for each other. Contrast the situation to James Elnot who opened an accounting service in our neighborhood just a few years ago. He did it the right way. He reached out to

the community. He sent letters. He asked for our support. Armies has done the opposite. They've misled us and operated under the cover of night and deception has no place in our community. We support growth. It's it's why I work here. We support the town. But there are plenty of commercial zones available without encroaching on residential areas like ours. Reszoning here, it it risks, you know, people have already mentioned increased traffic, choking the streets. It risks higher crime rates. It risks plummeting property values, driving families away. I would urge you to vote in denial of this resoning. Please protect our neighborhood, honor our community's voice, and protect the Smyrna that we love. Thank you so much. [Applause]

Okay. Uh Sarah Bear.

Good evening and thank you for allowing me this time to speak. My name is Sarah Bear. My husband and I live at Oh, I'm sorry. Sarah Bear, 231 Wellington Way, and we are just outside the city limits. Thank you, Sarah.

Okay. Um, I am a homeschooling mom of six years who serves in my um, children church's children ministry and teaches at a local homeschool co-op. I live near 101 McNary, the residential property recently purchased formas Group LLC, who is seeking to reszone the property for commercial use. Tonight, I request that you deny the recommendation of the annexation and reszoning request to convert this property um to commercial. I want to share why this matters to me so much. Approving this resoning risks opening the door to businesses that undermine family values and disrupt the safe family centered character of our community now and in the future. The well-being of our children is paramount, which makes me seriously question the appropriateness and the necessity of commercial use for this property. My family and I chose this area because of its community of homes, not businesses. Allowing a residential property to be converted into a commercial one may benefit a single owner, but it would have lasting negative effects on the families who live here. Not to mention the additional increased traffic, which further d disrupts peace and safety we are trying to preserve. The recently built gas station at the corner of Almaville Road and OneMile Lane illustrates how such development increase traffic and create safety hazards. There are already commercial zones in our community where businesses can thrive. We don't need to sacrifice a residential neighborhood to achieve growth. On behalf of my family and neighbors who could not be here this evening, thank you.

Thank you. Okay. And with that, uh that concludes the citizens comment. So we are on to our next item is approval of corrections of the minutes for the September 4th 2025 regular meeting councelor of the meeting minutes in order. They're in order as to for unless you have any changes you'd like to make. Are there any changes uh or recommendations from the commission? If not, I'll enter a motion. I move to approve the minutes. I have a motion to approve the minutes. Do I have a second? Motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of approving the September 4th, 2025 meeting minutes, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed. The minutes are approved. Uh we're now on to new business, annexation, zoning, and plan of service request. Uh Kevin, my understanding is the first agenda item, Catalyst Design Group, has withdrawn. That is correct. Okay. So, no further action at this time. Correct. All right. Next up under new business, Armas Development Group LLC, 101 McNary Lane, annexation and C2 zoning.

Yeah, this is uh the request for annexation and C2 zoning at 101 McNary Lane. So just over about 1.27 acres of property approximately currently zoned RM uh under the Rutherford County zoning ordinance. Um the surrounding zoning on the south side of uh of Amville Road is all RM as well. Across the street um is directly across the street is I2 zoning. Uh there is C2 zoning as you go to the east there along on the north side of Amal Road. The vacant tracks as you go to the east there. Um land use plan would support medium density single family residential development in this area. Uh the major thoroughfare plan does designate Amalable Road as a minor arterial and as it is a state highway any future rightway requirements will have to be coordinated with T dot. Uh the closest sewer connection uh to this project is within Midway Lane approximately,000 ft away. So developer would be required to extend a sewer main to serve this parcel. U this land just as a additional information this land does lie entirely uh within the 100-year flood plane. So any development would require them to meet all FEMA requirements for development within a flood plane. Um I think we did have this just this shows the zoning. The other first map had the the city limits. This does show that that surrounding zoning there. Uh obviously we've heard tonight from several people. We as a staff had heard from several people as well. Phone calls, emails, um all in opposition to this request. I think that's all I've got at this time.

Kevin, did you ever have any discussion with the uh uh the owners of this as far as what the intended commercial use was?

Um, I did talk about it a little bit. They they did not indicate a specific use. Um, they they did uh want to request a a generic zoning like C2. um they did not want to come in as a pud with a specific use in a a specific site plan or anything like that. They did want to request a C2 zoning. So, I don't know if they have a specific use in mind or if this is speculative in nature and that they would want to uh C2 is our one of one of the most open zonings as far as the breadth of uses that are allowed in in it. And so, uh, that's would be my assumption as to why they would want to request C2. Um, but I did not, as far as a specific use, I do not have or knowledge of what they're looking to build there.

Other questions for Kevin?

Go ahead. So, uh, no questions for you, but, uh, the only comments I'll make is, um, just down the street at seminary, uh, we had a similar request maybe a year or so ago, uh, someone wanted to convert a house into C2 use for, I think, a gas station or market or something. We denied that request, decided it didn't fit there, uh, wasn't appropriate. Uh generally as a council and as a planning commission for the 10 years I've been on council, we've always tried to make sure that residential doesn't generally back up or abut C2. Uh C2 is our most general and can be almost anything. Um residential right beside it is just not a good fit. Um, we've always kind of looked at at a me at a maximum a C4 use potentially, which is more like a dentist office or a doctor's office or an accounting office potentially. But even in that case, it's still commercial to residential and it may not fit. Uh, so um, for that for those two reasons, I I don't I don't see how this could possibly fit this area.

And I'll chime in. Derek, you spoke about the business that's out in the front that faces Almavville Road. To me, that's out in the front facing Almavville. It's not inside the dwelling of the neighborhood or the roadway into the neighborhood. Um, uh, quick story. In 1987, when Twin Creeks and Wellington were being birthed is when I began a real estate career. I worked out of that home that is now a business for many times. And some of those homes in there, I probably sold to some of your family over the years. But a while back, we also closed the connection from Milesdale over into the next subdivision over to help your neighborhood keep from having traffic buzzing through there to get to the schools. Um, we did that with intention just to make sure that the neighborhood got to keep its its feeling of a neighborhood. Uh, I agree with Steve. Uh, today I probably answered or called nine or 10 people, if you emailed me or if you left me your phone number in your email, you received a call from me today. And if not, I emailed you back. And the whole purpose of that is because I wanted all of you to know my feelings for your subdivision are the same as yours. I think it's one of those subdivisions that I was a part of. And I like the fact that it's you're in the county. We get that you're in the county. you could be asked to annex and we bring you some services. But but we we know that may not be what you want. But uh that said, I agree with Steve. I don't the land use plan obviously fits something that would come in there, but the land use plan already fits what's there, right? So in my opinion, I agree with Steve and I don't know about the rest of the you guys, but I'll let you talk about that. Another concern I had was if that were to reach approval, it's all in the flood plane there. every bit of it's in the flood plane and that's

going to have to be raised the elevation of that whatever came because I doubt very seriously you as homeowners would see that house remain there over time it would become something else probably most likely meaning it's going to have to have a foundation raised to meet out of flood elevation for Derek and any neighbor within that region right there the lights are going to set higher everything's going to be more effective on the neighbors of that subdivision So, um, T do DOT would have to have a cut because if not, they'd be coming into the subdivision to get into the business. That's another whole challenge. T DOT just doesn't grant cuts. Uh, you have seen Amal Road grow and you have seen that interchange become a nightmare at certain hours of the day. I promise you, this council is working on that as much as we can. But I hope everybody understands that is a state road and a federal highway. and our hands get a little tied and we we beg we get on our knees for help over there. We had a big meeting about this just the other day. So that will come. I can't promise you when. But for this product right here sitting where it sits, I personally know how I'm going to vote already. So well, let me let me add this. If you guys can just There might be time later for that. But first of all, I'm no longer on the council, so I'm not getting the texts or the emails.

You need to come back. But you you send them to two capable people. You know, what we do here is and what we try to do is fair and what we try to do is be consistent. It's not whether or not it's going to get us votes or take votes away for us when when you're elected. And certainly no one up here is elected is something that that we all have a passion for and and we want to serve. We had a similar project and you know I mentioned consistency on the other side of town and it was someone that wanted to bring a C2 uh to that neighborhood, Florence Road.

Florence Road. and uh I voted no on that because it wasn't consistent and it uh was not in keeping with the integrity of the neighborhood. So I think that pretty much sums up how I feel tonight about this. I'd like to make a motion. Okay. Uh to deny uh requests uh based on lack of consistency of surrounding areas. I'm happy to second that. Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny. Any further discussion? For clarification, just for the we have an audience, this is a recommendation to the council to deny. This is not the final vote. So, just want to make sure everyone's clear. Yeah. Let's Yeah. Great.

There's two council there's two council members currently sitting up here that feel the same way. Right. Sure. I'm just saying I just want to make sure. Yeah. We're making this recommendation and this it still has to go to council. We'll go to council since it's resoning. Okay. So, I have a motion and a second to deny this request. Any further discussion? All those in favor of denying this request, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed. This motion is uh denied. Okay. We're we're [Applause] all right. So, if you'd like to stay with us, you're more than welcome. But if uh you would like to leave, we'll give you a couple of moments to uh and and by the way, if you guys go out in the lobby and talk, remember, we can hear all that noise. So, thank you for coming tonight. Can I ask you when is the next meeting on this? October 14th. It will be October 14th. That'll be a town council meeting.

14. Thank you. All right.

Yeah. Kevin, what we need to do is uh offer this period of time for advertisement. Thank you. Also, we could we could run a Simma commercial or something like that. Okay. Uh next up, under new business, CLQ land, 5198 Lee Road.

Yes, this is an annexation and R3 zoning request for 21.7 acres on on Lee Road. Um it is uh adjacent to the town limits on its west side and then this portion of Lee Road has been annexed into the town as well and so would now be to it does border the town limits there as well. Um the surrounding zoning in town is PRD which is the Oak Meadows PRD which is again that property to the west and then RM in Rutherford County. Uh Lanny's plan for this area is the 24 gateway character area which would support a mix of uses and services both local and regional in scale such as uh hospitality, retail, restaurant and multif family. This does slide kind of when within that it's in the very edge of that area. Um the major thoroughfare plan does designate Lee Road as a collector. So right away dedication of 30 ft from the center line would be required as a part of the development of the property. A sewer main will be required to be extended from the Olive Branch sewer line to this site. An off-site sewer easement will be required to be attained would be a minimum of about 1,200 ft in length from that current main. Uh CUD does have an existing 6itch water man along Lee Road. However, this does lie within the town's uh water area, water service area. So that that main is is there and needs to be everyone needs to be cognizant of that main but um they would not be service serving this property. They do not currently or would not be serving that property. So um again this request is for an R3 zoning. I did talk with the developer. There was um initially they were talking about a different zoning district request. Uh but in talking with them that's not what they really wanted to build. They they wanted to build a single family

development. So, um that they did request this um R3 request or for for zoning purposes. Uh and again, as I stated earlier during the plan of services, the town would be providing all services um if the town chooses to move forward with annexation. So, that's all I've got this time. Kevin, can you refresh everybody's memory? And and for folks here, uh when we're looking at an R3, what's the minimum lot size that we're looking at here? Minimum lot size is 10,000 square feet. Okay. Is that that's consistent or better than what's bordering it

bordering that is a PRD. Those lots u they may average 10. There's some that certainly some that are smaller. Um that's all all the development kind of to the west there is is all BRD lots size lots. Mark, I think that was the first thing that uh I noticed that there's a lot of uh PRD here. And um this is rec this is requesting an R3 which you know does establish a larger minimum lot size and I think it's a product that um we've kind of been looking for.

Actually, it's refreshing a little bit to see an R3 request instead of a PRD request. There's good and bad to that. The The R3 does allow larger lots and uh but the PRDS give us more control over design and and so forth where R3 really does not, right? They meet the 10,000 lot threshold and they can build and design the way they want pretty much. And so, um, but I do it's refreshing to see something with a larger lot proposal. Other questions or or comments? Have we received a site plan on this?

This is just annexation.

Yeah, we have not at this time. No. Um and with an R3, you wouldn't have to. Um again, I've talked with them and I kind of they're looking at, you know, single all single family 10,000 foot lots minimum. There is, as you can kind of see from the aerial, there's a a fairly large electrical u easement that goes through kind of the eastern side of this property that's going to affect the layout certainly, but beyond that, um, that's that's all I know about the particular layout. Kevin, for clarification, I know we have somebody in the audience that spoke a while ago and the group that was here prior. We've heard it consistently say, "I'm the only one that got notified and uh we just found out about it." Can you touch on that so that the public understands what we're governed by and what we do? Yeah, our our process um there's certain things we're required to do by state law. Um and there's certain things that we do over and above state law. Uh what we're required to do on an annexation is different than a reszoning, but since both of these are annexation requests, I I'll cover both of them. What we're required by state law to do is number one, you have to hold a public hearing on the plan of services, which you all did tonight. Uh, and then council has to hold a public hearing with at least 21 days notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the name in the community. Um, that used to be 15 days. It's now 21 days. And we are also required uh also with at least 21 days before that public hearing at the council. We're required to put up signs that that are dictated to the height and size of those signs in state law with the date, time, and location of the public hearing that the council will be holding. Uh that's again those don't go up until uh 21 days or at least 21

days prior to that second public hearing because not often such as the one you all just recommended. Uh we don't that those cost money for us to get those signs printed and those kind of things. So we will wait on that to be sure that there's actually going to be that public hearing. Um but in addition, we do we do send letters to surrounding property owners that 21 days with all that information within 200 ft of the property. Uh and again with a copy of the plan of services, all those things that we're required to do. Um in addition to that, we do send letters like these folks did here tonight. Um even though there's not necessarily required to do that before until that 21 days ahead of the public hearing, we do send letters after we know something is going on the agenda for the planning commission. We don't send letters to people if a pro because sometimes projects get withdrawn some before they ever even get to the agenda or we're working through the review process. It's not ready to come to this. They're not a complete enough uh application to even put the put it on your agenda yet. And so there's really notifying neighbors about a meeting that is not going to happen is doesn't make sense. So we always want to make sure that there's actually going to be an item on an agenda before we start sending letters those letters those initial letters which are again over and above what we're required to do um to the to surrounding property owners. Again for annexation we heard only one gentleman received it more should have received them. they were sent. That's all I can say in that regard. Um because we again we we notify anybody within 200 feet of their request whether that's or joining across the street whatever whatever the situation is.

So could you refresh my memory on the tree canopy requirements for a development like this there? There the town for something like this. This is not a pud. Uh there wouldn't be anything. Uh we do have buffering requirements now things of that nature. Uh by just by a strict ordinance there would not be anything here. Is that the 15 or the 25 ft? That's the 20 ft 20 ft. And now within a PRD town requires a 20 foot buffer when they were budding um you know joining residential elements and or vacant land and that sort of thing. And that's sort of the give and take of having a straight R3

versus a PRD. Usually your lots are going to be smaller in a PRD,

but you have more governance over it. With an R3, we don't have that strict guideline, but you do get the larger lots. I venture to say the uh developers been hearing a lot of planning meetings, town council meetings, the subject of PRDS. Um I hear all almost all the time about we have enough inventory on apartments and town houses and starter homes and the bigger houses are what we're short on. This is refreshing to see. And we do hear some of that, but but in retrospect of some of that, too, you've got people selling their land trying to

trying to pocket what their family left them. They don't want to work the farms anymore. And so, um, it's it's kind of like it's growing and we all know it's growing. Growth isn't a bad thing if it's managed. infrastructure always runs behind the growth typically, but you've got a lot of uh businesses that do well because of the growth. You have a lot of churches, synagogues, things like that that do well because of the growth. In other words, the flock can be bigger. So, there's a lot of pluses to it. There's a lot of headaches with it and it just has to be managed correctly in my opinion.

Other questions or comments? One other thing uh based on what Ken just asked, some of this is zoning zoning driven. And when we talk about the number of apartments that we have in town, I venture to say most of us that sit on planning and council have probably uh probably have a lot of that same feeling. But much of what you have seen that is apartments and town homes was zoned for it

and we cannot change that. We don't have the authority to change what's already zoned. It has to be res requested by that land owner. And unfortunately we had a lot of historical highdensity zoning over off Sam Ridley and that's what you're seeing the result of. But we did have a lot of uh it was a kind of a PRD. It was a public it was a commercial development and it gave us oversight. At least at least those people came in and requested it in a in a fashion that would allow us to have that oversight. They didn't have to. It's like R3 doesn't have to. But those R sixs did change. And they came in and asked us to give them ideas on design and things like that, which it kind of became a partnership. They were going to get it either way because of their zoning. But I'm glad now that they at least came in and let us say, "You need to make it look better. You need to do this." And that's that's the benefit of having a PUB versus a straight R six zone. So,

well, I don't want to belver, but let me add this. uh when we look at Sam Ridley where you know you hear u discussion and uh maybe sometimes even frustration about apartments when you look at the frontage there where you're seeing the restaurants and the retail and some of the other establishments going in that entire track from Old Nashville Highway to Mlo was zoned R six. So if you're hearing a discussion and you know they're saying x number of apartments are going here, you could pretty much count on that had not the development of commercial businesses happened on the front side of that could have had more uh at least the same. So, there's a little bit of of tradeoff and and give and take uh with that. And it it has been good to see the commercial development that occupies a lot of the frontage uh on Sam Ridley so that when you're seeing something about R six or apartments or whatever behind it, you know, it's nice to keep in mind it could have all been that way from uh right off of Sam Ridley all the way to the back of the the uh town limits there. But we're way off topic.

So, it just got brought up. I thought it was worth addressing. No, no, I'm I'm was I'm with you on that one. All right. So, we're discussing uh CL uh Q land uh annexation and R3 zoning. Any other questions or discussions concerning this? If not, I'll entertain a motion. I motion that we approve the request. Have a motion to approve. Do I have a with staff comments? Do I have a second? Second. Motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I.

Opposed. This motion is approved. We are now on to oh we're still we have one more resoning request under new business and that is Unico TN LLC Amable Road reszoning P to C2.

Yeah, this is a resoning request. This is uh a not an annexation. It is already within the town limits. Uh it's about 9100s of an acre, just under one acre. Uh it's a separate parcel of land. It's currently zone PID. Uh requested to be reszoned to C2. Uh this was part uh directly kind of to the to the west of this is an industrial building there. And it was part of the the planned industrial development that was approved when that was built. Um and this was kind of a leftover piece of that property was not utilized as part of that development. U it was separated off as a separate track of land and now they have um are requesting it be reszoned to C2. The surrounding zoning other than that PD P is all C2 all other sides of it. Um the land use plan for this area is the 24 gateway character area. again would support a mix of uses and services local and regional in scale such as hospitality, retail, restaurant and multif family. Major thoroughfare plan does designate Amville Road as a minor arterial. Uh as it is a state highway, any future rideway requirements will have to be coordinated with T dot. This parcel has no frontage on Amville Road, but it is accessed through two separate adjoining tracks from Amville Road. Um, CUD does have an existing 12-inch water man along Alville Road that currently serves this property and can meet our the fireflow requirements for for commercial development. Um, again, this is believe um an adjoining one of the adjoining property owners have purchased this and want want to develop it in a a retail commercial type manner. Uh, and so that's why they requested this reszoning. That's all that I have. Uh Kevin, with

this uh request to go to C2, are there any concerns as far as parking? Has that substantially changed going from an industrial to a commercial? Certainly, it would it would change. It would be based on the use, whatever the when they if this is reszoned and the site plan comes in, they'll have to meet their parking requirements for whatever use they Okay. I just want to make sure it was kind of a heads up there. Y Okay. Other questions or comments? And when you look at this in totality, it is more C2 than it is industrial or P for that matter. It

it would fit much more in a C2 zone for development purposes. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Along with, you know, what we said earlier about consistency and C2 not belonging in certain areas. This is one of those areas where C2 does belong. And um you know I I always have a little bit of pause with C2s because it is so wide open, but in this case it's almost surrounded by other C2s. So it just fits. Okay. Anything else? You got an O'Reilly is a car wash and a strip mall right there. So it's kind of fitting for sure. Okay. Do I have a motion?

Move to approve with staff comments. Have a motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Second motion and a second. Further discussion. All those in favor of approving this motion, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed. This motion is approved. Uh we are now on to preliminary plats. The first one is Bradley Downs Rocky Fork Amalable Road. Browley Road owner developer Dreamfinder Homes. Yeah, this is the preliminary plan for Bryley Downs. Uh this is the PRD that was just uh recently amended uh to add some some additional land and five additional lots. Um and so this is just a revised plat because the the layout of the lots changed somewhat from what was originally uh approval and and different thing and again with the additional lots that were added. Um this is 190 lots 53.81 acres um off of Rocky Pork Enville Road as well as Browley Road. Uh several comments which many of them are are standard comments. Um I will point out the rock major third fair plan does designate rocky pork for comable road as a minor arterial and adequate rideway is shown being dedicated with this plat. Um there was a traffic study that was done for this project originally and and those improvements uh would be required to be made. Uh so that that's would still be consistent with what was on the original preliminary flat. Um fire flow stream crossing details uh believe have already those were have been submitted my understanding is from the public works uh as part of the grading plans. Um we had a few comments that were uh staff comments that have been addressed. Number six regarding the providing dimensions and labeling uh the easements that has been done and can be removed. Uh utilities had a request to make sure because with some some lot lines moving and and changing want to make sure each individual each lot had

its own individual sewer service and that was shown and that's been done. Uh they had some of our our older subreg crosssections were shown that show the correct cross-sections. So that's been taken care of. So number eight can be removed. Uh number nine can be uh removed as well. There was some drainage easements that were not along the rear property lines. They were kind of crossing across some of the middle some of those lines and we did ask them to move those and that has been taken care of on all those lots. We can take that off. Um comment number 10. Uh again provide some additional labeling and dimensioning of all the proposed easements. Uh minimum width of the public drainage easements are 20. Uh they did respond that the cons construction drawings were approved with some 15oot drainage easements. So they are requesting to keep those. I want to keep that comment just to be sure um public works has had a chance to look at that and determine clarify on that what they want on those with those easements. Uh two of the lots 216 and 217 did not have a sewer main extension to serve those and that has been shown and been taken care of. So comment 11 can be removed and then comment 12 is just regarding the plans are being reviewed about to be reviewed by CUD. So we need to keep 12. So, uh, in the end, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 11 can all be removed and then just keep that last sentence on 10 just to let public works take a look at those. But it's again, it is consistent with the revised PRD that just recently was approved. And so, we would recommend approval with those remaining comments. And as submitted, it meets all of our rag and ordinances that we have in place for VRD

that were in place when this was approved. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Other questions or comments? Um I did a little work on this one some time back, so I'm going to abstain from the vote. Mitch, if you would make that note.

Anyone else from the commission? Notice the minimum lot size 5850 square feet. How are we doing on green space comparative to lot size? It's got a mixture of lot sizes in here.

There there's a mixture of lot sizes. the the the that was reviewed again when we looked at the PRD as far as um there is quite a bit of common areas, swimming pools and things of that nature in addition to to some just some other walking trails and things of that nature uh within the development. So um so they're they're meeting the requirements that we have with that common area. Anything else? Make a motion to approve the staff comments. I have a motion to approve. Do I have a second? Motion and second. Further discussion. All those in favor of approving this motion, please by saying I.

Opposed. This motion is approved. Uh, next under preliminary flats, Greystone phase 3A, Divine Dawn Road, owner, developer, Meritage Homes of Tennessee, Inc. Yeah, this is a a PRD or not PUR request, a request within the Greystone PRD uh from phase 3A, 9.43 acres, 43 lots are proposed. Again, we had several standard comments really one through uh one through eight would all need to remain. Comment number nine was really just anformational comment uh comment. There's phase 1D that needs to be um has to be installed and built really before they can start on 3A. Um we 911 approval needs to be submitted for the road names. There's a couple names there we still need to get have the approval on. So, we need to keep 10. And then we still need the roadway lighting plan. Comment uh 12 can be removed. Uh there was a a kind of a a drainage easement to kind of because of where the property lines are crosses a odd angle and so we want to make sure we had enough dimensions there to know those dimensions are on each lot there. So that's been can be removed has been addressed. And comment number 13 was a comment we had made regarding that is the new requirements in our fire code. However, because this project was as a vesting was vested under our old rags, they can continue per state law to to develop u under the new rags or or the old regs um for a length of time that they're still within. So, we need to remove comment number 13 that'll have to just meet the the old regs as far as the those culde-sac diameters. So, so we basic basically we would recommend approval with comments 1 through 11.

You said 1 through 11. Yes. Okay.

Questions for Kevin concerning this? Kevin, except for the property immediately to the north of this piece. This is the They're just about at the end of their land, right? They have land still to the north of they they have some It's kind of to the north and the property kind of extends to the west from there as well. So, this isn't the farthest west, but it's the

It's the farthest west right here. If it's further north, you can go further. [Applause] Other questions [Applause] hearing? None. Do I have a motion? Make a motion to approve staff comments. I have a motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Second motion and a second. Further discussion. All those in favor, please signify by saying I.

I.

Opposed. This motion is approved. Next, we're on to Olive Branch Estate, section one, Rocky Fork Road, owner developer, Old South Properties, Inc. This is um section one of the Olive Branch Estates, which is a thought that's been approved for quite some time. Uh this is the first phase of the uh development that's being proposed. This um it's 35 lots I believe on this one. Um again several standard comments um here that we would all still need to remain comments really one through seven. Uh I will point out comment six uh regarding the M Rocky Fork Road. Major third fair plan does designate that road as a principal arterial and rightway dedication is required as part of this development and that has been shown. So do want to point that out. Um a second connection uh will be required to be built prior to 100 lots. This is only 35 so it's not an issue right now but that was anformational comment so that they know that that is coming. U a portion of this uh property does lie within the 100year flood plane. So they will be required to submit a flood plan development permit and go through all the necessary documentation before they submit that grading plan to public works. Uh and per the approved uh PUD uh a connection will need to be provided from the there's a future phase of this with town homes uh to uh will be u provided is required to be provided from those town home areas to the primary open space along the creek. Um and they're proposing to do that. That would would be done in a future phase which but that would be required. Again was kind of anformational comment that they would would have to do that. Uh comment number 11 uh regarding a 30- foot wide sewer easement. Uh they had shown this easement um but it was wasn't

dimensioned correctly. They've actually moved it slightly but it is still it is shown now as a 30-ft easement. So we can take that comment off. Um number 12 asked them to provide the average water quality buffer width as well as the specific distance anywhere it drops below that average that has been done. It can be removed comment can be removed. Uh ask them to show the correct existing sewer line pipe size on the utility plan sheet. That has been done uh can be remove comment can be removed. We asked them to provide a utility master plan for the project. We did receive that. So we can remove that comment. Uh we asked them to label all the critical lots. um that that is still something that needs to be done. There are several lots that have flood plane on them uh that would be required to be designated critical lots. Then the other there's some slope some of the slopes on some of the lots might anything above 15% does have to be designated as a critical lot. So that would be the other thing. So they need to still need to address that. So we need to keep comment 15. Uh we did ask for a revised traffic study for the development. The p with the putt approval did require a revised traffic study to be submitted. Um they did uh reflect that that they are counting traffic and and that study is underway but we have not received that yet. So we would want to keep comment number 16. Uh they do still need to submit the roadway lighting plan. Uh ask them to label all the streams on the existing conditions page. that's been done. So that comment can be removed. Uh comment number 19 can be removed. The setback details consistent uh on all sheets and so that's been taken care of and it is consistent with the approved PRD. Comments 20 and 21 are from CUD and so we would want to keep those two just as their comments. So we

can remove um basically 11 12 13 14 uh 18 and 19. And with those remaining comments, we would recommend approval. Okay. Questions for uh Kevin concerning this? Hey Kevin, along Rocky Fork Road, there's three boxes that are pulling out commercial lots. That is correct. That's part already been approved.

Yeah, that was a part of the approved pud. Uh there are um those are C4 uses. I think one of those lots was approved as a potential gas station location. Um but the longterm this would be a part of that connection to Williamson County through Rocky Court the Springs Extension. So um but but that was approved to answer your question directly. Yes, it was approved as part of the the PUD. This is when this came through a couple a year and a half, two years ago now, I think. Um, so that that is already in place. Yes. Okay. Other questions?

I just got a comment. Sure.

Concern. You know, we've heard multiple people talking about the Stewarts Creek schools having capacity issues. We know they're going to be building another high school out here. Um, at what point do we reach saturation where we've got to get some of those amenities in place before these start getting built? Infrastructure type things. By infrastructure, you're talking schools. I think that's a uh discussion that would and actually I think is already underway between the mayors and school board and whatnot. But from our function here, what we're going to do is, you know, our focus needs to be um you know, is this something uh that meets our land use plan, zoning requirements, you know, traffic studies? Um and again, this one is not new. It's not a new inventory. It's something that's been on the books. it's consistent with what's previously been submitted, meets the rules and rags uh that were uh required and I think that's that's our focus as a as the planning commission and I don't disagree with those other things that you know need to be looked at but I think that's something that leadership in the county is looking at in general.

I figured you'd give such a good explanation that was more for the general population and asking lots of questions. Okay. Anything else? If not, I'll entertain a motion.

I'll move to approve with staff comments. I have a motion to approve with staff comments from Matt. Do I have a second? I'll second. Motion and a second. Further discussion. All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed? This motion's approved. Uh, last item under preliminary plan, Sims Ridge, section two, Tamlin Avenue, owner developer, Old South Properties in this section two of Sims Ridge. This is an existing approved uh BRD. This is 34 lots, 14.69 69 acres. Uh again, this is eventually would would tie into Ena Springs Road. This this phase would not, but um several standard comments that would remain really comments uh one through eight really all standard comments and the U comments 9 and 10 areformational comments. I do want to point them out that there would be a separate site plan required for the town home lot as well as the amenity areas uh site the amenity buildings and those sort of things. So those would have to come back to you for site plans on those lots. Um number 11, a proposed road within this development is proposed and this is something that was considered at certainly at the at the uh when this PRD came through uh that this would be something that would be coming at some point. Now this is the plat where it actually is proposed to cross property that is actually owned by the town to connect to Wildwood Drive. So an easement or something will need to be provided approved by council in order for that roadway connection to be made. That is property that was donated to the town by Rutherford County. Um and so um I don't think I think if I'm not mistaken I think there's we could not it's not something we could we still have to maintain ownership of it. It couldn't be something that becomes u a part of their development or anything

like that. So, so it would have to be an easement or granted to to build that right away there. Um, number 12, uh, submit road names and 911 approval for those names. They indicated that they had submitted that to us, but we we didn't did not receive it yet. So, we do still need to keep that one. Uh, number 13 asked them to label the political lots. That has been done. So, we can remove that comment. Uh comment number 14 has a concern about some of the minimum lot widths meeting the PRD that's been taken care of and can be addressed or removed rather number so 14 uh number 15 uh they do still need to show the size of all the existing and proposed sewer manes. Uh number 16 the roadway lighting plan still needs to be submitted. Uh number 17 they're grading a drainage plan uh including the necessary public easements. um they've indicated all that will be submitted as a part of their construction drawings. They do still they do need to be shown on the preliminary plat as well. So I want to keep those comments there. Uh comment number 18. Uh we did ask them to move one of the rideway lines to get behind the sidewalk there. And so that's been done. It can be removed. We did ask them to show the rideway widths and that's been done. It can be removed. Um comment 20 to provide a temporary turnaround at the end of Guardian Road. that's been done so that can be removed and then to label the roads. Some of these roads are private, some of these roads are public. So we just ask them to to label that as as applicable and so that's been done as well. Um so we can remove comments 13 14 18 19 20 and 21. Um and with those remaining comments, staff would recommend approval

consistent with what's been previously submitted. It is consistent with the approved PRD. Yes, sir. It meets or met all rules regences at the time. That's correct.

Other questions? Um I'm assuming it's based on the topography, but what what makes these lots critical?

Um topography is a big portion of that. I think none of those are there's no flood plan on on those. Um I think some of them also had some um there were potential sink holes as well on one one of them maybe or some other geological reason.

Yeah, it looks like 61 and 62 may have sink hole but I just noticed that sorry I just noticed that uh the topography lines seems like they have significant slope. Yeah. And and and that's really the it's anything above 15% slope is when it be designated as a critical lot. So I think that's where most of those are. Got it. Okay. Looks like there's seven of those. Correct. Or eight. Eight. Yeah. Seven or eight. Yeah, it's eight.

All right. Other questions or comments? I will entertain a motion. Motion to approve with staff comments. A motion to approve with staff comments. I have a second. Second. Motion and a second. Further discussion. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. Opposed? This motion is approved. Okay, we're now on to final plats. First one, King Fields, Sharp Springs Road. owner developer of Landmark Homes LLC.

Yeah, this is the next two are are related to one another, but there are separate. One is just to create kind of the the lot of record uh and easements, utility easements. Uh this is for the Kingfield development which is a an all single family development but it's developed as being developed as an HPR type uh not so basically removing comment for uh with those remaining comments staff would recommend approval.

Questions come in concerning this uh for Kevin or staff been on the books for several years already has it. Yeah, it's been it's been it was approved several years ago and they're of course under development now. They are move of the infrastructure at least. Anything else? Move to approve the staff comments. Have a motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Second. Motion and a second. Further discussion. All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I. Opposed?

That is not correct. Um they are showing the utility easements but they are not labeled as public utility easements and they are do need to be labeled public. So we need to keep comment five. In comment six they are showing 16 foot wide driveways. They should be 18 in order to provide the full full width requirements that we do for for four parking spaces outside the uh outside the house. So I do need to direct those two issues. And so but with those remaining again removing comment for those remaining approve the staff comments. A motion to approve the staff comments from Mark. Do I have a second? Second.

Motion is second. Further discussion. All those in favor of this motion please signify by saying I. Opposed. This motion is approved. We are now on to site plans. The first

uh that is there on Alville Road. Um, this one is this portion of it is is 21 lots. Um, this is there's this PRD is a mix of there's some single family homes. There's some what they call villas, the duplex uh that will be sold either side will be sold separately and then there are some town homes and then there's are some commercial lots along road as well. So foot wide. There is one drain foot wide. There is one in the drainage east across lot 65 that's not labeled as public that should be. So they need to to label that. So we want to keep that or tweak that comment number six and keep it. Uh there will be required this isformational really but that comment seven um because of the town homes there we will a a separate HBR plat will be required for that lot and before they can to record to to sell those town homes. All those in favor of approve All those in favor of approving this final plaque, please signify by saying I. I

oppose. This motion is approved. Next, site plans. Thank you. Uh f uh the first one additions to valley village of valley green section 4 phase two in springs road and west and wildwood drive owner developer prosper holdings group. This is a site plan for addition valley green p. This was reszone back in 2004 to a pud. As part of this PUD, a residential and commercial component were approved as does require 2,978 square feet of landscaping. Applicant is showing for 7500 meeting our requirements. Total parking required is 198 spaces that are showing for 199 and no handicap parking spaces are required due to it being a town home development. Landscape plan shows a 10- foot wide landscape buffer along the property boundaries abiding the single family dwellings. Additional vegetation is shown along Indian Springs Road West and within the development. A type-C landscape buffer is required along the property boundaries due to the requirement of buffers in the zoning ordinance. Whenever we do have the higher density residential abing single family, that type C kicks in as a requirement. Architectural elevations show the dwellings be finished nearly entirely in fiber cement board siding on the sides and rear of the units. The front of the units are to be finished with a mixture of brick, stone, and fiber cement glass fiber cement siding and glass. Standard comments 1 through 7 will all remain at this time. Uh staff comment one is more of anformational comment that the electrical services for the units are to be mounted on a monument for each of the buildings. Comment two, more of anformational comment. The amend, this is an amendment to the previously approved plan which did have

a commercial component to it along with 47 apartments. So, u it is being modified now to show the entire town homes instead of mixture of apartments and commercial. Count number three, we asked them to submit road names and E91 approval for those road names and to show those names on the plans. That count will remain at this time. Uh, number four is a public works comment. They did submit a hydraulic study that public works will review, but at this time we will leave that comment just so public works can have adequate time to review that, make sure it is sufficient enough. Number five, we asked them to show street trees along Springs Road West meet designer review. Uh, the applicant has noted and there are some overhead utilities that do make planting street trees in that area difficult. So they have substituted street trees with some ornamental trees. So staff is sufficient okay with that comment uh for what they have shown. So we can remove comment number five. We asked them to submit a landscape plan as their second did not have landscape plan as part of it. So the first sentence of this comment can be removed but the second part of this comment will remain in regards to the type-c landscape offer to be shown in all areas really along the eastern and the northern property lines where it does above the single family dwellings. Comment number seven the auto turn. Uh so our fire department is not satisfied with the auto turn at this time. So comment number seven will remain. And then number eight was a utilities comment that has been addressed. So that can be removed. Uh so with that staff comments five and eight can be removed and then the first sentence of comment six can also be removed but with that staff does recommend approval. Mitch these towns are oriented in such a way that they're um forward facing. In other words, the

front elevations are facing uh the roadway versus having a rear elevation. Would that be correct? With the exception of 41 through 44, the the units that are along um along Union Springs would be facing Enan Springs. Yes. And the units that the 13 along Wildwood Drive all do face Baldwood Drive. So 33 through 40 does face Enon Sprint. That is correct. Yeah, they have rear entry driveway. Correct. That is That's correct. Yeah,

I guess 41 is the only one that really does not a size. And they all have 35. Correct. They're all actually technically 38 ft from the that internal private street. Yes. And this site has been zoned for this use for how long? Long time. Since 2004. Years. 2004.

Yeah. And it of course it was and and a plan was was submitted with a small commercial building and and 47 apartments. And so this would be kind of in lie of that. And this is still within the PUD that was approved. So, um, if you recall correctly, the apartments did not have garage parking. No, they were not. They were all surface parking. Yeah, I think I did not support it originally because of that. Did they just conclude commercial didn't work? I I would have refer to them. I that would be my assumption that

I think from a discussion we had during the time of request. I think the commercial was kind back and forth and and the location of it was just kind of out there a little bit to expect any major commercial but and are they constructing the sidewalk on Eno Springs? I don't believe they have. I don't think there's a sidewalk shown on Eno Springs. I'm sorry. We we're not requiring a sidewalk on Enon Springs. I think I think that was I think that was part of the discussion is that we would when when Enan Springs gets improved to to full width, we would look at sidewalks at that time.

There's another two lanes of rightway on Enan Springs. Correct. Right. So at some point when they widen they would you would the city then put those in upon that widening? Yes. Any sidewalk at this point would pretty much just be out the woods, out the trees or the grass.

Well, it makes sense to do it one time when it's completed versus what Steve's talking about and tearing it out and redoing it. Other questions or comments? Uh just for Charles. Um what's the status on the second connection to the school, the second road? Uh Spring Hill Drive U scheduled to be resurface next week here in Fall.

Anything else? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve with staff comments. A motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have second? Second. Motion and a second. That was Ken, right? Yeah. Thank you. Okay. A horse, kid. I got you now. I thought that was you when you made it. I just want to make sure. Uh, further discussion. All those in favor of approving this motion, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed. This motion is approved. Next site plan is McDonald's 216 Lee Victory Parkway. Owner developer McDonald's. And this is a new location within the Kroger commercial subdivision on the corner of Bulldog Drive and Lee Victory Parkway. Access would be provided via an access drive into the Kroger development. Uh the access to Bulldog Drive would be entry only with the opposite closest to Bulldog Drive would be entry only with the opposite point for exit only. Uh Q- lanes for the drive-thru show double stacking narrowing down to a single lane. They have shown about 15 vehicles would be accommodated with stacking in these Q lanes. Uh some of these numbers have been slightly updated since packets went out here. Not too big of a change, but uh the vehicular use area on the site has been up to just under 3/4 of an acre at 74. That is does require 3,225 ft of open space landscaping. They are showing for 5,365 ft. Total parking 39 spaces is required and they are showing for 47 which also requires two handicap stalls which are being shown. The landscape plan shows trees and shrubs planted throughout the site and within landscape islands. Uh street trees uh streetcaping is provided along Bulldog Drive and on Lean Victory Parkway. Uh since we received revised plans, landscaping was one of those items that need to be addressed and has been updated. So uh there street trees are now being shown on Lean Victory Parkway. The landscape plan will have to be revised to meet designer view. However, there are the tree species that we have issues that don't meet our designer view requirements. We have a list of species in there. So, uh just need to change up the species that are being shown and as well as the caliper size of those trees as well. So, some pretty minor modifications on that are still needed.

Designer view. The architectural elevations show the these were also updated since packets went out. The elevations do show the building to be finished with a variety of materials including brick stone glass glazing ephus and woodlook battens and ACM panels. All four elevations do meet the 75% primary material requirement. When packets went out, the applicant was exceeding our requirement of no more than 10% of the building to be finished in accent materials which in this case would be metal. They have down that below 10% now. So that second or that last sentence with the desire view not being met can be removed as it has been addressed sufficiently. So as it stands all things considered it does meet desire view today. Standard comments one through six all remain. Staff comment one more of aformational comment. The final plat for the Kroger development has not been recorded yet. So uh we are holding up the other developments that have you have seen within this development until that final plot does get recorded. This is in that list as well. Comment number two the no road impro road improvements must be done before the work can begin on the site. Comment number three there is a 15oot utility easement shown along Bulldog Drive on this lot in the final plat. It does not appear any public utilities are shown in that easement on the construction plan. So town staff does not know why this easement is needed. The upkin has noted that they are not a responsible party as part of the final plat. So um they really have no saying that as well. Comment number four is a uh comment. We ask them to show town utilities town details where applicable. uh that comment will remain to ensure that whatever utilities we either public works or utilities need to see is done accordingly. So uh comment number four will remain.

Number five is regarding the architectural elevations. They have addressed that. Now the metal is now down below the 10% threshold. So staff is satisfied with that comment. Number six, the landscaping. As mentioned earlier, we had a lack of street trees and streetscaping along Le Victory Parkway, which is now being shown, but they do need to swap out those species and the caliper sizes accordingly. So, comment number six will remain. Number seven, there was a discrepancy in the site data table numbers that are shown on the site plan versus what was shown in the data tables has been addressed can be removed. And then number eight is what we just asked them to show what the anticipated queuing max would be in their drive-thru facility, which would be about 15 vehicles. So that comment comment can be removed as well. Uh comments five, seven, and eight all removed. The rest will remain and staff would recommend approval with those remaining comments.

Mitch, I like the fact that the ingress and egress is off bulldog. Not on Bulldog, correct? Yeah. is off of Bulldog. Yeah. So, with that, is staff comfortable uh that we have enough in the way of stacking on the lot to keep it, I guess, where we're not wrapped around the easement on the Bulldog. That was something we just looked at today. Um 15 vehicles is I mean, there's 15 and that's just in the stacking area. there's some additional property on the property itself. There's room there for additional beyond that. So, so it could it could actually loop there.

It be more I'm I think I don't think there'd be an issue there with that and with the parking lot being uh even if they get out of this property, they're in the parking lot of Kroger. They're not in Bulldog. So, so we're good that you're you're satisfied that bulldog will remain available, right, for traffic movement, right? Okay. How many seats does this restaurant have?

I don't know on the number of seats. Uh, their interior design is not required at this stage, more so the exterior. So, um, but it's not the drive-thru focus McDonald's that we have on Sam Ridley. I'm sure they're focused on a drive-thru best. No, no, but I mean, the one on Sam Ridley is almost 6,000 square ft. So, it's almost 4,000 square feet. Given the parking, it looks like this.

Yeah, I think there are more seats. Probably are more seats here than the other one. the one on Sam Ridley. They're also constrained with the parcel as well trying to get it. So the size really I remember that sorry I didn't mean to catch up. Item number two, the road improvements. I'm assuming you mean Bulldog Drive, right? Okay. [Applause] This isn't really a question for staff. I'm just curious about the entrance for the drive-thru is next to the entrance for the parking lot. Is there some way to delineate that? I mean, what if you get stuck in the wrong line? And

I don't know. That's That's for McDonald's. I guess they can figure that out. You know, they usually put a sign up. Yeah. I mean, people really pay attention though, don't they, Kim? My guess is they're going to get quite a bit of foot traffic from the high school. So I expect so I ask me my question is high school open campus for lunchtime with the kids they will be us whether they are or not it was it was when I was a senior but before that it was not so I don't know what it is now they started monopoly back right so I yeah I don't see it on these drawings but is there pedestrian safety lanes for kids coming across Bulldog I mean there's Kroger build

yeah there sidewall folks along Bulldog will be built as part of this development certainly and but and as also as part of with Kroger we did require it's a little further north of that's north I think it's yeah north along away from this property there is will have a raised median across Bulldog drive yes I always thought you couldn't have a McDonald's near another McDonald's but this isn't too far from the one down by Nissan this will be number five limits four or five franchising is they should just gotten softer next to McDonald just to say Smyrna High it's going to be their biggest client base

about the only thing they could have done different is put this one in the high school weird yeah okay any other comments I will entertain a motion. Motion to approve with staff comments. A motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Second. Motion. Second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I. I.

Oppose. This motion is approved. Uh, next we have Rock Springs Town Homes and Single Family Homes, 608 Rock Springs Road. Owner to developer Aub Eshack. This is a site plan for Rock Springs Town Homes and single family uh development. This does consist of 23 total units, 13 town homes and 10 single family homes. This property was reszoned to PRD earlier this year in January. The site is supposed to be serviced by a single private street with access off of Rock Springs Road. The amenities as part of this development would include a pavilion, dog park, and playground. Vehicular use there on the site just over a half acre and that does require 2540 square ft of land landscaping. They're showing for 4,250 park required of 99 spaces and they're showing for 104 and they're also showing one handicap parking space over by the uh amenity areas. The landscape plan shows a type-c landscape buffer along the western property line but budding the existing single family residences per the approved PRD. The existing vegetation shall be preserved to create this type-c buffer. Streetscaping is shown along Rock Springs Road as well. Additional vegetation is shown in the front yards of the residences and around the community parking areas. Ar architectural elevations show both the single family dwellings and town homes to have a mixture of brick and fiber cement board siding. The entirety of the first floor is shown to be finished with brick while the second level is to be finished with fiber cement board. The proposed elevations are consistent with the approved PRD standard comments 1 through 7 will remain. Uh comment staff comments one, two, and three are allformational. Comment one that no burn permits will be allowed within this area. Two, the final plat must be recorded prior to issuance of any building permits. And three, the

electric services for the town homes must be mounted on a monument off buildings. Comment number four, we asked them to connect the proposed water line to the existing 8 inch off of the spring branch subdivision to the north of the site and they have done that. So comment four can be removed. Comment five, we asked them to grade units one through 10 towards the street to be sure it drains towards the detention pond which is being shown to be removed. And then comment number six, uh we asked them that there was grading work shown in the buffer strip along the western property line. Per this approved PRD the that area should remain in order to preserve the existing vegetation that is along that area to retain the buffer. There most of the grading work has been removed outside of that area. There are some lines in the back part on the grading plan in the north side of the development nearby where the amenities are at that do show it trickling into the buffer area. So we want to make sure that all grading work is kept outside of that buffer area to make sure it is maintained for those existing single family homes that are out there. So comments four and five can removed uh one two three and six will remain but with that staff does recommend approval. This is consistent with uh the preliminary

uh with the PRD. Yes. Is this the old PRD or the most recent adopted PRD? The reason I asked is they're calling out for 15T buffer instead of the 20s. Oh, 15 was what was required as part of this

when this was originally? Yes. Just making sure. Other questions or comments? Hearing? None. I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve with staff comments. Have a motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Second. Further discussion. All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I.

I.

Opposed. This motion is approved. We are now on to Rutherford County Baptist Church, 2000 Memorable Road. Owner, developer, Rutherford County Baptist Church. This site plan was previously approved back in 2021. The Rutherford County Baptist Church is planning to relocate their facility from the current location on Seminary Road. This proposed relocation to is to property with frontage on Almanville Road across from OneM Lane. Access to the site has a primary access off of Almanville Road with an access easement which is shared among four other commercial tracks of land. At this time, the church is only constructing the main building and a playground with an additional future detached building expansion planned at a later date. There's also a multi-purpose field and baseball softball field planned for the future. Vehicular use area on the site uh has been tweaked minorly since packets went out. We're up to 1.98 acres uh of vehicle use area and that does require 8,630 ft of landscaping. They are showing for 9,000 ft. Parking required is 133 spaces and they are showing for 178 and that does require six handicap parking stalls which they are showing for 10. So meeting all requirements there. The landscape plan shows a variety of canopy trees throughout the site in landscape islands and along Almondville Road. Shrubs are proposed to be planted around the base of the building and in landscape islands. Architectural elevations show primary materials including brick, stone, glass and secondary material of stucco. The architectural elevations when packets went out did not meet design review in quite a bit of number of ways. They have revised those since then. So a couple of these the second part of this design

review has been updated accordingly. The south elevation facing mobile road is shown at 19% stucco and 75% primary materials which are the brickstone glass glazing. East and west elevations show 79% primary materials with the remainder as stucco and accent materials. The north elevation which does face the parking lot area shows 75% primary materials as shown. These revised elevations now do meet designer review. Standard comments 1 through 7 will all remain at this time. Staff comment one, we ask them to submit sewer construction plans to our utilities department. Second comment, moreformational. Additional access permit to Almville Road will be subject to approval by T DOT. Three, the signal heads will be required to be added to the mast arms for the access to the north side of Almanville Road. Number four, the we asked them to provide dumpster enclosure elevation labeling the materials to be used. This comment will remain the they do show a couple different items with this. The elevations show CMU block. Uh but there are plans that show it detailed as brick. So we just need to provide consistency. We will require brick not CMU block for those for the dumpster enclosure. Number five is regarding the architectural elevations not mean design review. They now do. So com number five can be removed. Number six, there was a discrepancy in square footage shown. So that has been addressed and can be removed as well. And then comment number seven, the designer review previously did not meet design review, but it now does. So number seven can be removed as well. Comments number eight and nine are CUD as this does lie within COD's service area. There was an additional comment I wanted to add here. The there's some additional landscape that is shown on top of some COD water lines. So I want to make sure that those landscaping and COD lines don't conflict

with one another. So that was just an additional staff comment to add. Uh comments five, five, six, and seven can all be removed with the rest to remain. And with that, we previously had a recommendation to defer or deny the item due to the uh numerous items not meeting desire review, but now with those items meeting desire review, uh staff would recommend approval with those remaining comments. Thank you for working with us to meet design review. You don't know how difficult it is when you're a believer and you have a church here and they don't meet design review. And I was seeing all sorts of fire and brimstone.

Pray all the way home. Yeah. I didn't want to I did not want to do that vote. Yeah. But do appreciate you working with staff and and working with the town and and and being a part of the town that you know it shows that you care. I mean I know that you care but just there's a care for Smyrna too. So I appreciate you doing that. You know, back in August, uh, mayor and I both had the privilege of going out to celebrate this with the church and and, uh, I can tell you your congregation really was very, very welcoming and excited and we're excited for you.

So glad to see it coming. You know, I made a comment a while ago. I think about growth and um the church is part of the reason you get to grow. When there's more people living in a town, there's more people coming to church. So, glad to have you all there. Any other questions or comments? Was there also discussion of a school at some point on this site? I know I know there was discussion the church is potentially having that. I don't want to I can't speak for them though but I think that's been in discussion at some point in the past. Yes.

Don't know if that's still something they're looking at or not. So for the purposes of tonight though tonight this is just for the church. We're just looking at the church. Yeah. I would uh if there's no other questions I'll make the motion to approve all the staff comments. There's a motion to approve with staff comments. Do I have a second? Second. Motion and a second. Further discussion. All those in favor of this motion, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed. This motion is approved.

I think we are uh we are now on to the bond review report. Yes. And I apologize on the front end because it's a long one tonight. So, we'll go through as quickly as we can though. Oh man.

Um, first uh item, the Derby Run phase 2A. Did talk to the developer on that one. They're looking to pave in the spring, so would recommend a six-month extension on that one. Uh, Walnut Ridge section one. This is the end of their maintenance period. There's still quite a bit of work still to be done though. not major things, but still several things that need to get cleaned up on that. So, I I doubt they're going to get that done. So, I would recommend a six-month extension on that one for to give them time. They are working on some things, but give them time to get that done. Gwen Farms 2A. Um, this is one we've had about three and a half years now. They are about 90% or so built out. I would not recommend much anything more than six month on that one. Um, get that one. I need to go ahead and start working on There's several Gwen Forest uh phases on this this in this report. They need to get some work done. Um Bankside section 5 phase two. This is kind of a weird one. This is one we've had a bond for many years um for an secondary access to this neighborhood. U long term um everything's done with the development. There's not an issue there. they have several future phases in that development and that they would be this was put in place to ensure a secondary access got built. So they're not looking to do anything additional right out there right now. Um so I would just recommend that this was just kind of a driveway act secondary access for emergency purposes only recommend a one-year um extension on that one at this time. So, just curious, how long do we hold it before we just use it to build the road

there? Where this was proposed originally? Um, we we were kind of looking at it long term. They have a future connection from this development over to Kedron Church Road. They're going to rebuild Ketan Church Road. Um and that's longterm the better access point um where they would this would kind of come through the development through kind of a detention area lot over to over to Morton Road. And so long term the the other access is better. Um for whatever reason they're not making any doing any additional development out there right now in that development. Um, and so that's why it's not been built yet. But, uh, I don't know why they're right next to Sewward Schools. You would think they would be moving forward, but they're not. So, how long do we want to wait? You know,

I mean, it's been a while. Quite frankly, 15,000 is probably not enough anymore to do. No, it's not. So, we never like doing this, do we? We'd rather them do it, right? Yeah, it's just that's the point in the bond is to ensure it gets done, right? And eventually I think for them to do any more development, they're going to have to do it. And then maybe why they're not doing any more development right now, I don't know. You might have figured that out. Yeah. Yeah. Um because that's going to be have something they have to do to get a secondary. There's only one way in and out of that development, the entire development right now. So, uh, there's some sub streets and different things, but there's nothing else there.

And I just, you know, I'd hate to be in a situation where we've sat on this for now five years and another five goes by and then there actually happens to be an emergency situation and we been set on a bond for 10 years. You know, that's what I'm that's I understand. If this was just, you know, cleanup or sewer drains got to be raised or something, it' be one thing, but we're see access.

I'm going to ask Mr. Peach a question. put them on the spot. In this situation where we have a bond for something that started in 2020 and here it is 2025, is there a mechanism and I'm probably isn't but I'm asking is there a mechanism to increase the bond each year because costs increase each year? Escalation development agreement now.

Yeah. So we we've placed something in development agreements now, but these that that came before that did not have that same language. So the language we have in there now allows us to to uh take them to court to get the remaining uh portion that we had to spend over and above those bond costs. So we've we've seen that and dealt with that for these that are are previous to that change. uh doesn't mean we still wouldn't be able to battle it out, but it's spelled out perfectly in the in the the new development agreement. Okay. Sorry, slow us down there.

No, I know it's good discussion. I guess it's got me thinking it would behoove us to to get an estimated cost to to to finish that and then maybe review this. And what what did you recommend? I said a year. We could certainly shorten that time. We review six Six months. Maybe look at a cost. Okay. Yeah, because we're going into the winter now. Yeah, we would want to do that. Six months would take us to the spring,

right? Or six months. All right. Uh, next one's Twin Farms. Um, phase 3, section two. This is one we've only had a year. Uh, however, they are at at 100% built out. I had initially recommended 6 months or a year on that. I would have changed that to 6 months because I think they're built out. They need to move forward and finish things up. Um, next one is Derby Run phase 2D. Again, the developer did talk with them. They're looking to pave in the spring. So, I would recommend just a six-month extension on that. Want to get them through the spring so they can get those paving done. Helms Replace. This is a end of a maintenance period. They had five or six items, cleanup items there. They're getting bids on that. They're they're they are working towards getting this finished up. And so I would recommend release of that. Um if they can get everything done by the 9th of November. If not, extend it. But they are again they are trying to get everything cleaned up on that one. Uh Hunter Point section 3 phase two. This is one. Um, it's a small little section there. There's only eight lots. He's built five of them. Did talk to the developer. He's there. Some of those last two lots are going to require some pretty extensive grading and and actually build some retaining wall. Those are some pretty steep lots. He would like to wait on final paving till after you get that heavy equipment work complete, which he anticipates being done next summer. Um, so would recommend just a six-month extension on that. Get us closer to that summer time frame and see if we'll follow up with him then on that one. Uh, sewage landing. This is lot one there just of that development. Um, a large pretty large substantial

bond because they recorded it with nothing done. They've got a lot of that work done now. Still need to put final topping and stroppings. There's still some things to do, but that as far as that first lot, I would recommend uh reduction on that one. Um and then reducing it or extending it rather one year. Um Gwen Farms phase one section two, it's another one, no more than six month extension on that one. They are built out on that. So they need to finish that one up. Um Oak Meadows section two, we've had this one a couple years now. uh developer to indicate they're getting working on those items, but would recommend a a six-month extension there. Um they had it there. Again, they're almost built out. Hidden Hills section 5 phase one. This is end of the maintenance period. They got one little item they need to clean up. Um would recommend release if that gets completed. Otherwise, a six-month extension. Um I think they're hopefully we'll get that done soon. Um, uh, buyer subdivision. This is a small just a couple of lots where Mr. Buyers basically created a couple lots for each for each of his kids. Um, but the area is going to have he is having to extend public utilities to make that happen. So, uh, sewer I did talk with him since the packet went out. Sewer is now complete. U as far as installation is complete. It's it's in the the inspection the 30-day window they have to wait and then u water is in the fire hydrant should be he was to being done this week. So he's getting close would recommend an extension on this one uh just to make sure everything gets completed but everything is getting close on that one. Um, Quinn Farms phase one section one. Again, it's another one of Farms that no

more than a six-month extension on that one. Um, they need to that phase is completely built out. Woodmont phase 8A um to talk to the developer there. They have uh everything is all the these repairs and and paving and all is is slated to be completed in mid October. Um, so if they're able to get that done and complete it on time, we can reduce that to 25% just um 123,600 uh and extend that extend it one year as a maintenance pond if they're able to get that done. Otherwise, just a six-month extension at the same amount. Spring Branchtown Homes, this one's only about 19% built. Had it a year. U would recommend a one-year extension on that one. That's primarily just for some U because that those are all private streets in there. So, uh just utility issues on that one. Um the oak subdivision, this one's a kind of a unique situation. The property owner there was a homeowner and they had three lots and they created took those three lots, one of which had a house their house on it and then um created created turn those three lots into five lots which would require extension of a culde-sac. That's they're not going to move forward with that. Um and they're looking to to liquidate their assets there. Been working talking with them. They have a real estate agent working with them. So, I think that one's probably going to go away, but we still need to keep the bond just in case. Um, Buckingham Place section one, end of the maintenance period. Um, if they get done, there's three little items to clean up there. Hopefully, they they're working on it. Hopefully, they'll get done. Otherwise, the three-month extension vintage block one, they have paved all the streets in

that phase of of the vintage there. Um, then just a few items to clean up there. would recommend keeping this. This has already reduced it once. I would recommend extension of that at the same amount for the maintenance bond for one year. Wood crest 4 u the developer is finally getting ready to to pave in that section which is good. Um so hopefully that he's got that scheduled soon. um would recommend a 3-month extension on that one because that's one he's hopefully he will follow through and get done, but I want to be sure he does. So, I want to give him a very long extension. Hunter's points annex section 3 phase one. There's about three little items there to clean up. He's hoping to get there that everything done there within the next month and a half barring any weather issues. So, if he's able to, we can release it. Otherwise, um six month extension there. Gwen subdivision lots one and two. This is not Gwen Farms. is across the street from there. Um, basically it was one house or it was existing house and created an additional lot. This is just to extend sewer to serve that second lot. Developer is not looking to he's not looking to make that be do anything with that at this time. Um, so it's really just to serve his lot. So we recommend it's a one-year extension there. Um, coreyards creek phase one. Uh, we've only had this one a year. They're they're moving along pretty quickly with this phase. Um but would recommend a one-year extension on that. They are looking to make those final get those done soon, but would recommend a one-year extension. And then the Patterson property, uh this is the the private developer part of portion of this. This is include the Spring Hill Drive extension that that Charles spoke about earlier that we're paving next week. But um this is the the private portion of this. would recommend they're about 41% built out there. So would

recommend a six-month extension on that one. We have had it about 3 and 1/2 years. U building seems to be moving a little slow up there, but would recommend a six-month extension. That's all I've got. Okay. You're sure? That's positive. Finally, we've heard the bond review report. Are there any questions? Released. If not, I'll entertain a motion. An enthusiastic motion to approve this is just as enthusiastic. Second, I

think Charles and Mark are ready to go. All right, we've got a motion and a second. Further discussion. All those in favor of approving the bond review report, please signify by saying I. Opposed? It is approved. Uh staff uh comments, any other business?

You don't have any other business? do want to let the commission know. I think there's been some discussion, but just um the council did budget for an update to the comprehensive plan this year. We did put out an RFP. We did receive proposals. We're currently evaluating those. So, we will be having soon hopefully hopefully October maybe November council meeting. I don't know if when we'll get that finalized, but have a contract there to get consultant under way to to update the comprehensive plan. So, I just wanted to certainly the planning commission will be very involved in that process as we go through that. So, I just want to let you know that. That's all I've got. Anybody else? Anything? Just one quick thing. Happy birthday, Mr. Jean Hardan this week. 97 years old.

All right. What an asset he has been to our community. So, yeah. Thank you. You know, uh definitely a challenging night. Uh I know you guys uh the planning staff and all the the ancillary uh departments that that work with you guys. Uh thank you very much. I want you to know that I appreciate you and I know that the commission appreciates you. Uh you have us prepared each each meeting. Um and I know how hard you guys work behind the scenes. So thank you very much for that. Thank you. Absolutely. And with that we stand adjourned. a good job for you, Mr. Chairman. Uh you guys