[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6606181,"mediaKeyId","2979396-7417ed729d1a9e638d7708b5a343563d","parentId",2979396,"title","Commission begins final review of subdivision regulations; staff recommends changes on street trees, amenities and traffic calming","audioSeconds",1661,"startMs",4827000,"endMs",6488000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2979396-7417ed729d1a9e638d7708b5a343563d&start=4827&end=6488","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2979396-7417ed729d1a9e638d7708b5a343563d/thumbnail_4827000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6606181/Tennessee/Commission-begins-final-review-of-subdivision-regulations-staff-recommends-changes-on-street-trees-amenities-and-traffic-calming","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6606181-eb1bd40f429aae940cd581eae34d73f3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771135756&Signature=MsFD6kHaVQtpeokGhd2WNG5paNO7~KQucM91AmMta5yYDouBDggZQe8hMGN1orVysfjeMbPXJOrQBijz1ya3M0fOcY1EO19PcVIjLlc5VMyzqTCXVq2jcuGfbxnDlwTjO2hhHeCWa3-ZQEe-0Xu4O4GlzytpEwl2~DsDi3E5KHpNI4m112Z-DRRui3fkuU1vJmLQ3XrnFZS4hQ2SBevh2TMBx092rOezA0-TTErvlgoIGxm1L21bAemCQWAA05rCLk-8AFQogR7pj6Bxh1bWBEexVj6JrJOc7Cou7lYnwLdTy0aRyYJ7htLFcdgLF1lUnF9A5aPtlAj-rDyzGui9bw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Town of Nolensville, TN ","date","2025-04-08T00:00:00Z","article","Planning staff presented a discussion draft April 8 proposing substantive amendments to Section 5 and appendices C and F of Nolensville’s subdivision regulations, focusing on standards for streets, utilities, landscaping, trails, and site design.

Staff recommended deleting Appendix C (a template form) so administrative updates do not require a formal regulation change and proposed a number of edits to Appendix F and the Section 5 narrative. Among the issues staff asked the commission to consider were street‑tree placement, amenity timing, and traffic calming.

On street trees, staff said the town currently incurs “anywhere from $20,000 to as much as $30,000 a year replacing sections of sidewalks” because trees planted in narrow curb/sidewalk strips push up sidewalks and curbs. Staff asked whether the town wants trees in the curb strip and, if so, whether the strip should be widened or planting techniques (root barriers, different species) mandated, or whether trees should instead be planted in front yards to avoid future damage.

On amenities, staff proposed accelerating the existing threshold so that required amenities (for example, a community center, pool, playground) would be triggered when a development reaches roughly 30% of its dwelling-unit buildout instead of 50%, a change staff said would reduce the number of years residents wait before seeing neighborhood amenities.

Staff also proposed requiring traffic‑calming measures and adding clearer traffic‑impact-study references into the subdivision regulations. The presentation named design tools — offsets, medians, textured crossings, and other features — as means to slow traffic through neighborhood design rather than relying on post‑construction fixes.

Commissioners broadly supported further work on these topics. Commissioner Salameda asked staff to research best practices and provide alternative design examples that place street trees in front yards rather than a narrow park strip. The commissioners discussed potential tradeoffs between increased upfront design costs and the long‑term benefits of safer streets and reduced sidewalk repair costs; one commissioner noted that trail access, ownership, and maintenance (often conveyed to homeowners associations) should be clarified in the regulations.

Staff said illustrations in Appendix F will be updated with help from a consultant; the commission directed staff to return next month for detailed review, after which a public hearing and resolution could be scheduled to adopt changes. Staff also suggested consolidating the updated pieces into a single readopted document with a single effective date after the last section is completed.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Commission Regular Meeting Tuesday, April 8, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Planning staff introduced revisions to Section 5 and appendices of Nolensville’s subdivision regulations, urging the commission to consider changes to street-tree location rules, accelerate amenity triggers to 30% completion, and require traffic-calming elements as part of subdivision design.","taxTitle","Town of Nolensville, Williamson County, Tennessee","taxId",53926,"location","Tennessee","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6606184,"Planning commission backs annexation of York Road parcel but withholds recommendation to rezone to CD‑3",3114,39000,3153000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2979396-7417ed729d1a9e638d7708b5a343563d&start=39&end=3153","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2979396-7417ed729d1a9e638d7708b5a343563d/thumbnail_39000.jpg","/articles/6606184/Tennessee/Planning-commission-backs-annexation-of-York-Road-parcel-but-withholds-recommendation-to-rezone-to-CD3","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6606184-b7c0544725143d555db1e9ea5aa344dc/orig.mp4?Expires=1771135756&Signature=LKagUTt~vEmruCXhlISZ6K9FiBT3YiB2bPKUoQCq2g2mxAICmysUNi5Yv3U5ddAh275~8CyV2-vM4GKgwTzI50HhUWMllRlmts5lGPNT68keD4x-AjplGWQqvihYD24dGbzizFjAwvGruuvZoeDuzoMGN9OJqaQJWpkK9BZue59wetEjPyNWyRy2kI-t5jwWWMo-vir-qeDo9Go3XO~2tv53XdFfzYNsg7~nEeX5azQvYpuyq4C49CSjgXEjF4Da01xghlK8BxJ8H-3oNuqJnsxAZxJXgXVustrSf0ekAWUzzkDTP6SzxNU0IRCGkfDSCZAEG5myKO~5H~KhcvRdAQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Nolensville Planning Commission voted April 8 to recommend that the Board of Commissioners approve annexation and an associated plan of service for an unaddressed parcel on York Road (Map 058, Parcel 05200) but did not recommend the applicant’s requested rezoning to Character District CD‑3.

Staff told the commission the parcel is contiguous to town limits, lies inside the town’s urban growth boundary and, in the plan of service, the applicant was made aware that Metro Water Sewer Authority is not issuing sewer-availability letters at this time. “The applicant is moving at risk,” staff said. The staff report combined rezoning and annexation materials and recommended CD‑3; staff noted similar lot sizes in neighboring Annecy as part of its rationale.

The applicant said the goal of annexation and rezoning was to follow Nolensville standards rather than county guidance and to pursue a CD‑3 neighborhood form. The applicant’s concept plan, shown to the Board of Commissioners and presented for context, showed topographic constraints including a dry creek bed and steep areas that would limit developable acreage in the northern part of the parcel.

Commissioners raised land‑use and procedural concerns. Several said the town intended lower-density character districts at the urban growth boundary and expressed reluctance to “upzone” at the perimeter without a sketch plan. One commissioner summarized the concern: approving annexation does not automatically require the commission to approve a change to CD‑3. Counsel and staff confirmed that newly annexed property receives an initial zoning of CD‑2 or CD‑2L under the zoning ordinance if rezoning is not approved.

On the votes, the commission recorded a unanimous recommendation in favor of annexation; the separate motion to recommend rezoning to CD‑3 failed (the minutes record an abstention and the motion ultimately did not pass). The planning commission made clear the annexation recommendation would proceed to the Board of Commissioners without an endorsement for CD‑3.

Commissioners and staff also discussed a related code question about whether a sketch plan is required for rezoning; staff and counsel said the ordinance language treats site‑specific rezoning differently than development of already‑zoned land, and clarified the town could require a sketch plan when the rezoning request changes entitlements. The applicant indicated they might withdraw the rezoning request if annexation proceeds without rezoning and instead pursue county development, or else revise the submittal for later consideration.

The planning commission’s action means the annexation recommendation will be sent to the Board of Commissioners, and the rezoning request will arrive at the Board without a favorable recommendation from the planning commission.","The commission recommended annexation of an unaddressed York Road parcel into the Town of Nolensville but did not support the applicant’s simultaneous request to rezone the property to Character District CD‑3; staff noted sewer availability from Metro is not currently provided and the applicant proceeds at risk.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6606188,"Planning commission approves McCormick and Stewart minor plats tied to Darcy project",321,2161000,2482000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2979396-7417ed729d1a9e638d7708b5a343563d&start=2161&end=2482","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2979396-7417ed729d1a9e638d7708b5a343563d/thumbnail_2161000.jpg","/articles/6606188/Tennessee/Planning-commission-approves-McCormick-and-Stewart-minor-plats-tied-to-Darcy-project","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6606188-65a9444b3872655bcd289f3c8372abd3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771135756&Signature=WJwqgYU329pRMksMEQfTZZUrFiwycf6pcgw1PijNv6INPnsVdCmFaeBtXjhGrZCPqnYhf3~BOehy08By~3v3vYYBiWTSYa9~BvkJtRoCaWw0LtMRqXpAQS8NpL-0Ozkkjg7orWc-FeCWd3cvfDFROQwMGXnqw45tToRoQo0LYqaN7Tfg0OuxL6EjwsDZ8VpfU2~TzijdaSJHxpJwLoAWi7panWIYghgdPVROrV1t7x25FK-EALZE5LSwMyR94JCOUytQjjyTRFFcTlU90rcUIap3PT5NdwJ4t1-7B5z-Os4TQpBy0QDTm8nlOiC3S5k7t4Xs9KIsCQDZuOGj5sBlUg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Nolensville Planning Commission voted unanimously April 8 to approve two final minor subdivision plats — the McCormick and Stewart plats — that create lots intended for future development within the Darcy planned development.

Staff described the McCormick final plat as a subdivision of approximately 5.29 acres at 2034 Williams Road (tax map 064, parcel 06600) into two lots: one to remain residential and one to be developed commercially as part of Darcy. The staff report noted a barn that straddled a property line required an easement; the applicant later provided revised text clarifying that the barn easement is temporary until the barn is raised or relocated. Staff recommended approval with two conditions; commissioners approved the plat and amended the motion to include staff comments before final passage.

The Stewart final plat covers approximately 7.22 acres at 2042 Williams Road (tax map 064, parcel 06401). The newly created Lot 2 will contain right of way for the approved Old Nolensville Road, required landscape buffers, surface parking, and part of a western mixed-use building in Darcy. The plat also shows a 10-foot multiuse path connection to Williams Road. Staff recommended approval with conditions; commissioners approved the plat with staff recommendations.

During both items, commissioners confirmed with staff that the subdivided parcels are already incorporated into the approved Darcy planned development (PD). Both motions passed by voice vote and were recorded in the minutes as unanimous approvals.","The commission approved two final minor subdivision plats — McCormick and Stewart — that create lots to be developed as part of the Darcy planned development; both approvals included staff conditions.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6606192,"Planning commission rejects Annecy street-tree substitutions, cites planting errors and timing concerns",1304,743000,2047000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2979396-7417ed729d1a9e638d7708b5a343563d&start=743&end=2047","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2979396-7417ed729d1a9e638d7708b5a343563d/thumbnail_743000.jpg","/articles/6606192/Tennessee/Planning-commission-rejects-Annecy-street-tree-substitutions-cites-planting-errors-and-timing-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6606192-a823b4c8d035f91f82b1a1c144875a75/orig.mp4?Expires=1771135756&Signature=XUxa7HmnCvvBTGgMAB1nj~HHTdr~r6NYe3hm0e6F88SKI3oSl7mGfqYAkXYHgYMchTl1bv0S13eg1Tjicoygdb0H-8tVqos7kzIrF2DGgoQpjUTzPq9hb3oThZ8gGE3ez1EBIGZhcTFywN5fNHDQu5Oq7Xlo-~AcaSEKmx5CZqaExUBpifqtvFWK9UYZvb-X3yink-7u6ez9Mvxk56GSL6b9xEJZZ629KmxfkUSq9tJYvTpuSBThNGMi25wouIuGaZu4iflrvXgXZ8RoSNS8s19040eD0vKfPBzaLDQL6vDGUzwvXqdo9jWZJLlrspGPQyJ7fXXYVwGUQq9aeXIMUg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Nolensville Planning Commission on April 8 unanimously rejected a request from the developer Old Smith to approve relocated street-tree planting locations and substitute species in Annecy phases 1 and 3.

The revision request sought permission to leave already-planted trees in the grass strip between curb and sidewalk rather than dig them up and replant the large-canopy trees in front yards as shown on the approved cross sections. Jay Easter, a landscape architect with Reagan Smith who worked on the project, told the commission he and a colleague were trying “to make the best of a difficult situation to help get this closed out with the least amount of impact to the current residents.” He said many substituted species appear on street-tree lists used by surrounding municipalities.

Commissioners and several residents disputed that approach. “The easy solution to this, in my opinion, is do it right the first time,” Commissioner Adams said, arguing the approved plans called for large canopy trees in front yards rather than between curb and sidewalk. Adams and others noted trees planted in the narrow grass strip have damaged sidewalks and curbs in other parts of town and expressed concern about future maintenance costs.

Resident Leona Kaborov described multiple streets where trees were planted in the wrong locations or with species not on Nolensville’s approved list. Another resident, Joe Kirsinger, asked the commission to clarify vested-rights and permit questions related to nearby Darcy development during public comment.

Staff said the grass strip along Annecy Parkway is 7 feet wide and that the local neighborhood streets were originally specified to have canopy trees in front yards. Staff also said the developer submitted a revised plan after the agenda was published and that the town had received 11 emails on the topic.

Commissioners discussed three practical options: accept the substitutions and replace dead trees with matching species, remove and replant to match the approved plan, or transplant living trees into front yards and replace dead ones. The landscape architect said roughly “over 60” trees were involved and estimated that a full wholesale replacement of the side streets could be “over a hundred trees.” Staff clarified that some trees planted are cultivars of American elm (Princeton, Valley Forge) and that similar cultivars (Jefferson, Patriot) appear on other municipal lists.

Timing factored heavily in the debate. Commissioners noted the developer’s bond for the subdivision expires in June and that to meet the town’s agenda deadlines any revised plan would need to be submitted in May. Commissioner Adams said that left essentially 30 days to resolve and implement a replanting before the June bond review.

After discussion, the commission took a voice vote on the street-tree revision request; the motion failed, and the minutes record the outcome as “Motion fails unanimously.” The applicant may return with a revised plan or pursue bond-extension options with the town.

The commission also asked staff to contact the developer and request their attendance at future meetings when these items are discussed.","The Nolensville Planning Commission voted against a developer request to accept relocated or substituted street trees in Annecy phases 1 and 3, after residents and commissioners argued the original plans were not implemented correctly and the bond/repair timeline is tight.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission begins final review of subdivision regulations; staff recommends changes on street trees, amenities and traffic calming

Planning commission backs annexation of York Road parcel but withholds recommendation to rezone to CD‑3

Planning commission approves McCormick and Stewart minor plats tied to Darcy project

Planning commission rejects Annecy street-tree substitutions, cites planting errors and timing concerns