[0:03] It is 5:03 PM on August 24th, 2026. We
have 5 commissioners.
[0:10] We have a quorum.
[0:11] I'm not starting off very well. We have
all 5 commissioners here. We have a
[0:15] all 5 commissioners here. We have a
quorum.
[0:15] Um, we will call to order the Board of
Commissioners regular work session agenda
[0:19] Commissioners regular work session agenda
for
[0:19] August 24th, 2026. Our first item on the
agenda is Pledge of Allegiance.
[0:23] Please join us in the pledge.
[0:24] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the
[0:31] United States of America and to the
republic
[0:32] for which it stands, one nation under God,
indivisible,
[0:37] with liberty and justice for all.
[0:39] The next item on the agenda is
[0:43] approval of the agenda.
[0:46] Is there a motion?
[0:48] Motion to approve.
[0:49] Second. Any discussion for the agenda?
[0:53] Uh, just one thing. The presentation for
the Buddy Cup Committee check,
[0:57] I believe we need to include the library
in that, if I'm not mistaken.
[1:01] Okay, so when we get to the item on the
agenda, that—
[1:07] because that will be for the voting
meeting for September,
[1:13] we can add it in then.
[1:15] Okay.
[1:17] Um, I'd like to make a motion to add a
discussion item to discuss the
[1:20] discussion item to discuss the
Tarver-Ringman
[1:20] annexation from the August voting meeting.
[1:25] Second.
[1:26] We have a motion and a second. This is
just for discussion purposes.
[1:31] We, we— this was on the agenda in the last
voting meeting.
[1:35] We had discussed it at the workshop but
did not have a motion or a second in the
[1:40] voting meeting, and so there was no
discussion during the voting meeting.
[1:45] So this is just to add some context and,
and discussion.
[1:49] Any Discussion on the amendment to the
agenda?
[1:52] All in favor of the amendment to the
agenda signify by saying aye.
[1:57] Aye.
[1:57] All opposed? Motion passes unanimously.
[1:59] That takes us back to the main motion,
which is the agenda as amended.
[2:04] Any other amendments or discussion?
[2:06] All in favor of the agenda as amended
signify by saying aye.
[2:09] Aye.
[2:10] All opposed? Motion passes unanimously.
[2:12] The next item on the agenda is approval of
the minutes for the work session
[2:17] for July 27th, 2026. Is there a motion?
[2:19] Motion to approve.
[2:21] Second.
[2:22] We have a motion and a second. Any
discussion for the minutes for July 27th?
[2:27] All in favor signify by saying aye.
[2:30] Aye.
[2:30] All opposed? Motion passes unanimously.
[2:33] The next item on the agenda— actually,
before we get to citizens' comments,
[2:38] we have a very special birthday to
celebrate today.
[2:41] And so I hope you will all join me. We're
not going to sing.
[2:46] We're not going to sing, but today is—
[2:48] I can feel it.
[2:50] Well, free choice. You are all welcome to
sing,
[2:52] but I don't want to wait till the end of
the meeting to make sure that we recognize
[2:57] Vice Mayor Jessica Salamida on her 21st
birthday. Is that where we're at now?
[3:01] Something like that.
[3:02] Something like that.
[3:03] With a few years experience. So happy
birthday, Jessica.
[3:05] Happy birthday, Vice Mayor. Thank you.
[3:08] Okay, now we will get on to citizen
comments.
[3:10] So the first person for citizen comments
is John M. Tarver.
[3:19] Good afternoon. My name is John Mark
Tarver.
[3:22] Thank you for adding our item to the
discussion,
[3:26] but I wanted to go ahead and say that we
have presented the Ordinance 2614 and
[3:31] Resolution 26077 to annex and zone the
Ringman property on Kidd Road.
[3:36] And again, we appreciate you bringing it
back up for discussion.
[3:41] We know from the previous comments made
and from talking to staff that the board
[3:46] and from talking to staff that the board
may
[3:47] not support rezoning the property to CD-3,
[3:50] and we just want to learn more about what
the board would support or might support.
[3:55] We've looked at our site plan following
the last Board of Commissioners meeting,
[4:01] and we've talked with our engineers,
[4:04] and we want to consider other options for
this property based on your feedback.
[4:09] Thank you.
[4:10] And we hope that we can talk more about
the project and find a plan that works for
[4:14] everyone. Thanks.
[4:15] Thank you. Anyone else for citizen
[4:20] comments? All right.
[4:24] The next item on the agenda is our
[4:29] discussion. First is item A,
[4:34] allowing alternative waste systems in
[4:40] the UGB. As soon as I get connected
[4:46] there.
[4:47] That's my best friend.
[4:50] Well, that's my I'm going to try to share
my screen,
[4:57] but evidently I'm not getting the one that
I want
[5:04] here. Let me try this and see if that does
anything.
[5:11] Oh, there we go. There we go.
[5:15] All right.
[5:16] Fantastic.
[5:17] So we've had discussion for a couple of
sessions now where we've talked about what
[5:24] is allowed in the urban growth boundary.
[5:28] What's not allowed in the Urban Growth
Boundary.
[5:32] And so I wanted to take it just a little
bit further and talk about what could be
[5:39] done in the Urban Growth Boundary.
[5:42] And then with the idea that we prompt some
discussion among you all of is that
[5:49] something that is of interest of you all
to see done or not?
[5:54] Yes.
[5:57] The urban growth boundary is about a
little over 800 acres, about 862 acres.
[6:04] That's the area highlighted in blue on the
screen in there.
[6:08] And so looked at it from our perspective,
our perspective,
[6:13] if we annexed that whole area and it was
zoned CD-2L,
[6:18] and 2L is a half unit per acre.
[6:20] Yes.
[6:21] per acre. The maximum number of units in
that whole area could be 431.
[6:27] That's if you could use every acre for
construction.
[6:31] But the way that our zoning code is
written,
[6:35] that's an impossibility to do because
you've got certain lot sizes,
[6:41] and then you also have to have roads and
you have to have other infrastructure to
[6:48] you have to have other infrastructure to
be
[6:48] put in there. And so just in looking at
all of that together, we said, okay, well,
[6:55] if roughly 60% of the property ends up
being able to be developed,
[7:00] then what's 60% of that particular set of
development?
[7:05] And then so it would end up being like 258
units, I believe.
[7:10] Yeah.
[7:11] 258 units. But then if it was CD-2 at 1.1,
what's the maximum there?
[7:16] Uh, or what's the likely there? And that's
going to be about 500 and almost 570.
[7:23] If it were CD-3L and then also CD-3, of
course, uh,
[7:27] what would those numbers look like?
[7:30] And the reason why I put that out there is
one of the things that when we look at
[7:37] our urban growth boundaries is what is the
What's the level of development with
[7:44] regard to what is the potential for cost
of development,
[7:48] the cost of the services in having to deal
with that development?
[7:54] And I've not run an analysis on CD-2L or
CD-2.
[7:58] I've not run a fiscal analysis to say,
well,
[8:01] will 258 homes pay for the services that
it's going to take In order to put fire
[8:08] down in that area and then our police in
that area.
[8:12] And we would obviously—
[8:14] we would no longer get any of the dollars
for fire response if we annex that area.
[8:21] So I just wanted you all to know what the
levels of development might be.
[8:27] Now, what this doesn't take into account
is that if you all would think that some
[8:34] is that if you all would think that some
of
[8:34] that property that fronts onto Nolensville
Road would have commercial potential and
[8:41] you'd want to develop some commercial in
some of it.
[8:46] Obviously that would change some of the
reasons, I guess, why to annex.
[8:52] But then I also wanted to show, okay,
well, what,
[8:56] what could happen if we don't annex it?
[8:59] We have MGA is— MGA-1 is what is in the
county zoning right now.
[9:05] On the north side, and just kind of put
this in perspective.
[9:10] Let me go back to this screen.
[9:12] If you look right here where my cursor is
kind of sliding,
[9:17] you guys can't see my cursor. See if this
will light things up at all.
[9:23] All right, so right here. Is Sanford Road.
[9:26] Sanford comes down and then takes a hard
turn, 90-degree turn.
[9:32] And if you look at the, the counties,
[9:35] you can see Sanford Road obviously right
there. That's that same location.
[9:41] And so everything below Sanford Road is
actually RD-5,
[9:46] which is Rural Development 5 versus MGA-1.
2 different zones.
[9:51] RD-5 is 1 unit for 5 acres.
[9:53] MGA-1 is 1 unit per acre in the county
zone,
[9:57] and they have different standards and what
all.
[10:01] One of the things about RD-5 is it has—
[10:04] it can be developed in what's called a
conservation development,
[10:09] which means they can drop down. They don't
have to be 5-acre lots.
[10:15] The density is still only allowed at 1 per
5.
[10:19] Right.
[10:19] But they can be dropped down to a minimum
of a half-acre lot and grouped tightly so
[10:25] that the infrastructure is really
contained, and then you have lots of green
[10:31] contained, and then you have lots of green
space.
[10:31] So if you've got 200 acres and you can
only develop 1 per 5,
[10:35] so you get 40 homes is all that's allowed
on that property,
[10:40] that 40 homes could be condensed into 20
acres,
[10:43] essentially 20-25 acres with the remaining
property remaining green.
[10:48] And what I'll—
[10:49] with that, um, so you all are in the
driver's seat with regard to these
[10:55] driver's seat with regard to these
properties.
[10:56] Um, the, the city has the final say with
the— anything,
[11:00] any of the development in the UGB because
of the way that the county has chose to
[11:07] operate Which is to defer.
[11:09] If it's in the UGB, the county is not
going to approve it unless the town says,
[11:15] we give you the authority.
[11:17] We have— we are denying annexation, and we
give you the authority, uh, county,
[11:23] to go ahead and approve something.
[11:26] Um, the city has, has the ability to
choose to annex it or choose not to annex
[11:32] choose to annex it or choose not to annex
it.
[11:32] The town has the ability to not allow
development until it's in the town's best
[11:38] interest. So to, to wait on development
until the town wants to annex it and then
[11:45] allow it to develop under the town's
authority.
[11:49] Or you can choose to give that authority
to Williamson County.
[11:53] You can say you can develop it but only
under the existing standards,
[11:59] or you can say you can let it develop and
develop it under alternative wastewater
[12:05] systems. So the city is really in there.
[12:08] The town's really in the driver's seat
with what they choose to allow in these
[12:15] with what they choose to allow in these
pro—
[12:15] in, in these, uh, uh, UGB areas.
[12:17] When you say that, you mean specifically
for areas that Metro Sewer will not serve?
[12:22] Because if Metro Sewer will serve it,
[12:24] they will give a letter if capacity is
available,
[12:27] regardless of whether we want it or not.
[12:29] That's correct. I am talking about
everything that is, uh,
[12:33] to the south of that yellow line across
the paper,
[12:36] because that is That's that dividing line
that we've been talking about.
[12:41] That's that ridgeline and is the boundary
line for Metro.
[12:44] And Metro has confirmed with us that they
don't have territory beyond that line.
[12:49] They don't intend to ever want territory
beyond that line.
[12:53] And they would have to acquire it.
[12:55] None of the agreements, original
agreements back years ago,
[12:59] go any farther south than that line.
[13:02] So—
[13:03] We're talking about, uh, the areas where
you all, you all control it.
[13:08] It's just in this blue area.
[13:10] But this is this relatively the same area
in which we already denied annexation for
[13:16] very reasonable reasons,
[13:18] both at the Planning Commission and at the
Board of Commission level, correct?
[13:23] That is correct. And all I want to do is
just There were questions about, well,
[13:29] what are the options? What are we— you
know, what do we have the authority to do?
[13:35] And I just wanted to kind of lay out what
that authority is and then show you the
[13:42] differences in what— the way it develops
and what could go out there, I guess.
[13:48] So when you say that we have already
denied annexation,
[13:52] are you referring to the This property
south?
[13:55] Correct.
[13:56] Okay, just to be clear for myself and for
the board,
[14:01] we didn't actually deny annexation.
[14:04] We discussed— I'm getting, I'm getting
there with that.
[14:09] So, um, because that carries certain
implications.
[14:14] Um, so this is— I'm probably mostly the
reason why this is on the agenda
[14:21] tonight. Some of my questioning at the
last meeting,
[14:26] I wanted to really understand what the
options were for the properties that lie
[14:33] south of where Metro will serve— service.
[14:37] Victor, can you tell me if a property
owner is in the UGB in one of these blue
[14:45] areas and chooses to develop according to
what the county allows without any
[14:52] rezone or anything like that,
[14:55] what action triggers us having to give
them permission?
[15:00] Because that's kind of how it reads here,
is that they— we have to allow that.
[15:08] So what triggers that?
[15:10] So the first thing that the county will
do,
[15:13] if they approach the county for
development, the county would reach out to
[15:19] development, the county would reach out to
us.
[15:19] And say, uh, town, this group or this
property owner has asked to develop, uh,
[15:25] it falls within your UGB.
[15:27] If it is the town's desire to see this
property develop inside the town and
[15:32] according to town standards, uh, let us
know because otherwise we plan to— plan
[15:38] know because otherwise we plan to— plan
on—
[15:38] well, they plan on denying it unless we
give them specific authorization to move
[15:44] forward.
[15:45] Okay.
[15:46] So, okay.
[15:48] That's the way that Mike Mattson has told
me that he approaches properties in the
[15:55] UGB.
[15:55] So this almost sounds like more of a,
[15:58] like a policy guidance kind of thing for
future annexations, because if we have
[16:05] future annexations, because if we have
the—
[16:05] if we have the authority to approve or
deny annexations,
[16:10] it sounds like a property owner in these
blue areas The only way they could develop
[16:17] any kind of sewer is if we annex them into
Nolensville,
[16:22] or we deny annexation and they go through
the county.
[16:26] Well, you would have to deny annexation
and tell the county that you did not want
[16:32] and tell the county that you did not want
to
[16:32] annex them in the future, because you
could say, no, we don't want you to annex,
[16:38] or we, we don't annex you right now, It's
not in our best interest,
[16:43] but we do still plan on annexing you in
the future at some point in time when it
[16:49] the future at some point in time when it
is.
[16:49] So there's— it's kind of twofold here.
[16:52] Um, and you can deny the annexation and
hold off with the county, uh,
[16:57] until the county gets an approval that
says you—
[17:00] it's not your intent to annex further.
[17:03] So in In thinking of all of these theories
of what could be,
[17:09] if we are truly not ready to annex to this
level of a property,
[17:15] but we know that we will,
[17:17] the consequence of that could be what?
[17:21] If you think that you know that you will
at some point in
[17:26] time, then the consequence is that that
property does not—
[17:30] is not Well, I'll just say my concern
might be a moot point because I—
[17:36] my concern was that we have these
properties south of the service area for
[17:43] properties south of the service area for
Metro
[17:43] that are kind of being held hostage in a
sense where we are—
[17:48] I think that's a good point.
[17:51] Saying you can't— or that, you know, we're
not ready to annex you.
[17:56] This was my thought before I kind of heard
you speak today, is that, well,
[18:02] we're not ready to annex you and you can't
develop because we don't allow
[18:09] alternative sewer systems.
[18:11] When it sounds like the reality is that if
property owners in this area want to
[18:18] develop, they're going to have to go
through a process of—
[18:23] Right.
[18:23] of us telling them we don't want to annex
you and we're okay with—
[18:29] it's very convoluted.
[18:31] Well, um, yeah, you would have to say we
don't annex and we're—
[18:36] we give the county essentially the
authority to allow you to develop, uh,
[18:41] and we allow— we give the county authority
to allow you to develop with an
[18:46] alternative sewer system.
[18:51] Outside of that too,
[18:52] something to note which was a big
discussion in all of this was the services
[18:58] discussion in all of this was the services
that we
[18:58] are then providing and therefore the lack
of service time to this particular area.
[19:04] And so if these do start to become annexed
properties,
[19:08] that Firehouse Number 2 timeline
definitely changes.
[19:11] The amount of police officers that you are
hiring And the timeline for that changes.
[19:17] So sewer is, is a large part in how these
properties can develop and our thought
[19:23] process, but also the services that will
have to be provided to them and the cost
[19:28] have to be provided to them and the cost
of
[19:29] the residents.
[19:30] Sure.
[19:30] That will increase.
[19:31] Yeah, which is— which was my reasoning
for,
[19:35] for not supporting initial annexation. I
won't belabor this.
[19:41] I am curious though, so I think this was
addressed before,
[19:46] but for clarity, if prop—
[19:48] who responds currently to the development
across the street,
[19:54] the enclave? Like, who, who responds for
public safety to that area?
[20:00] Is that us or is that the county?
[20:04] If it is a fire, we will respond. Um, and
get the $250 per response charge.
[20:11] Sure.
[20:12] If it is police, then typically I think
the Sheriff's Department responds to that
[20:18] area. We might— we've had a lot of— I've
had a lot of conversation with Mr.
[20:24] Hoffer and, and then also with Allison
today on where we respond,
[20:29] how do we respond with regard to our
police department,
[20:33] and Lots of times it depends on the call.
[20:36] We may— if it's a, a true emergency, we
may respond, get started.
[20:42] When the county gets there, we give them
the scene and we come back home, or,
[20:48] or back them up if we need to, to help
them with regard to police services.
[20:53] We're responding to calls outside of our
jurisdiction, outside of mutual aid.
[21:02] If we're asked to under mutual aid.
[21:04] I'd have to assume it's based on severity
of the call.
[21:07] That is correct.
[21:10] Yeah, it seems a bit of a catch-22 because
if we don't develop it,
[21:15] we're still responding based on the
severity of the call.
[21:20] And if we do annex and allow development,
we're still responding more often.
[21:26] All of this is— I mean,
[21:28] I think my main point and the reason why I
wanted this on the agenda was just to
[21:34] kind of talk about that alternative sewer
thing.
[21:38] But it—
[21:41] I mean, it seems like that's the only
option past Metro's
[21:47] service area and that right now the only
real avenue is—
[21:52] Yeah.
[21:52] is for this board to either approve or
deny annexation.
[21:57] I mean, I, I don't know that there's a
policy that really has to be made and put
[22:04] forward regarding alternative sewer
systems until we have a property that
[22:11] systems until we have a property that
falls
[22:11] outside of Metro that we decide to annex
into the town.
[22:16] Okay.
[22:19] So I think that— I don't want to speak for
them, but I,
[22:23] I believe that the property that wanted
annexation withdrew because they knew if
[22:28] they got a negative vote, they couldn't
come back for a year.
[22:33] But I think they very much still want
consideration for annexation,
[22:38] and I'm judging that by the fact that they
continually come to our meetings and I
[22:43] think have continually reached out to us.
[22:46] So I imagine if It— I'm going to go out on
a limb and say they're willing to go
[22:52] through that process.
[22:53] So that if, if that's what we're waiting
for, uh,
[22:57] that'll probably happen pretty soon.
[23:00] Um, to me, one of the issues—
[23:02] so areas where we already serve in the
unincorporated Williamson County obviously
[23:07] unincorporated Williamson County obviously
is
[23:08] a hot topic for me because The citizens of
Nolensville pay a specific amount of
[23:13] property tax each year to help fund the
services that the town provides.
[23:18] Um, I always support mutual aid.
[23:21] I think it's challenging when we have
primary response outside of our
[23:25] primary response outside of our
jurisdiction,
[23:26] um, because why would you ever annex into
the town if you can get the services for
[23:32] free? Um, If you look at the particular
property that's in question now,
[23:37] because of the annexations from the
Williams Farm and the Vance-Like Farm,
[23:43] it's about half a mile as the crow flies
from one corner of it to the Jenkins
[23:48] property. I think it's about 1.1 miles
along Nolensville Road.
[23:53] Um, I, I guess the other part that is
different now that we've had the other
[23:58] annexations is response to St.
[24:00] Michael's Academy, which I would imagine—
why don't—
[24:04] I haven't ever asked the police department
how they respond to St.
[24:09] Michael's Academy or how often they may or
may not be going down there.
[24:14] But I do think it's a challenge if things
develop in our urban growth boundary and
[24:20] we are going to continually have to
service them.
[24:23] I've yet to figure out how Brentwood
manages not to do that because Brentwood
[24:29] manages not to do that because Brentwood
will
[24:29] not even service something that is a
stone's throw from their Their, um,
[24:34] border with the Split Log curve that is
quite possibly the worst curve in
[24:39] quite possibly the worst curve in
Williamson
[24:40] County. So I find it challenging for us to
allow alternative waste systems in the
[24:46] UGB because at that point any property
within this map that Victor has shown has
[24:51] within this map that Victor has shown has
no
[24:51] incentive to annex into the town if we're
continuing to provide them fire service
[24:57] And apparently will also provide police
service.
[25:01] Um, that makes me think that it's in the
town's best interest to annex when we have
[25:07] a willing property owner.
[25:08] There's still the South Point Church
property,
[25:12] which is what connects to the Van Slyke
property,
[25:15] and then a couple of smaller parcels.
[25:18] Smaller parcels are always going to be
more challenging to potentially annex
[25:23] more challenging to potentially annex
under
[25:24] current annexation laws.
[25:25] And are far less likely to aggregate to
have enough acreage to—
[25:30] for future development.
[25:31] I think the hole that we have within our
zoning ordinance is that we didn't really
[25:37] contemplate MGA-5 versus MGA-1 because
almost everything was in the MGA-1 zone.
[25:43] Um, and so the most—
[25:44] the least dense zone that we currently
have is 1.1 units per acre.
[25:49] Okay.
[25:51] So I, I do have a concern with taking
something that is currently 1 unit per 5
[25:57] something that is currently 1 unit per 5
acres
[25:57] and upzoning it to 1.1 unit per acre.
[26:00] And perhaps a compromise in that is some—
[26:03] so we have the ability to add additional
zones in the zoning ordinance.
[26:08] And so perhaps, um, the zone that we took
out as part of the zoning Rewrite.
[26:14] Brad, I don't know if you remember what
that one was,
[26:18] but there was one that was like 2 units
per acre.
[26:22] That's all still in there.
[26:25] 2 units per acre is still in there?
[26:27] No, it's 1 unit per 2 acres is CD-2L,
[26:30] and nothing has been changed or proposed
to be changed with CD-2L.
[26:35] And so maybe that is some sort of a
compromise If again we still have
[26:42] to service it for public safety.
[26:45] I don't think Franklin goes outside of
their boundaries either,
[26:50] so like, I'm— yeah, anyways, that, that's
my—
[26:54] I don't think— I don't think they do, and
I agree with you with Brentwood,
[26:59] but they are looking at far larger fire
department and police departments than we
[27:05] department and police departments than we
in
[27:05] Nolensville. And so we aid, we, we give
aid, we get aid.
[27:09] In a lot of our calls that go back and
forth with our fire and police department,
[27:14] fire mainly. I know police get support as
well, but fire mainly.
[27:19] So I, I do not disagree with you, um,
[27:21] in what you've said about the potential of
annexing.
[27:25] To me, this is too far away still, but I,
I hear what you're saying.
[27:29] My biggest concern is that there will need
to be bigger conversation while we aid
[27:35] them right now. You may get a call.
[27:37] If you are putting in a neighborhood, you
will get far more call volume,
[27:42] which means that you will have to look at
the firehouse number 2 and fire station—
[27:47] fire station, firehouse—
[27:49] and additional apparatus as well as
employees if this comes online sooner
[27:54] employees if this comes online sooner
rather
[27:54] than later.
[27:55] Um, I realize that this is on the fly, but
do we have any ballpark number of what—
[28:02] I mean, we— there's several communities in
the neighborhood, myself as, you know,
[28:10] being one of them. How often per day, per
week,
[28:14] are fire and police being called to
specific neighborhoods?
[28:19] Um, do you— how many, how many calls?
[28:23] And I know we've had 180 calls roughly in
the last 6 months.
[28:29] That were outside the town?
[28:33] Correct.
[28:34] How many—
[28:35] do you know how many we've had inside the
town?
[28:36] Inside the town?
[28:44] So I can— I was working on some of that
data today.
[28:48] Um, where I saved it at, I don't know,
because I wasn't planning on that tonight.
[28:53] Um, it was— we're at 904, I believe, is
what the monthly report Says, I believe,
[28:58] that I sent— is that what it was?
[29:00] I believe now there's been a few more
since I did that data. So 904 minus 180.
[29:05] So the, the calendar year, right?
[29:07] For this calendar year.
[29:08] So just call it 900, 700, 720 calls has
been in the town.
[29:13] Okay.
[29:15] Welcome to your first meeting, Interim
Chief. We're glad you're here.
[29:18] It's all good.
[29:19] Keeping you on your toes. So, okay, so
that's rough.
[29:24] Okay, I'm not going to try to do math on
the fly.
[29:28] Um, okay, well, I guess what I'm thinking
and processing through here is I actually
[29:35] agree a lot with what the mayor said.
[29:38] I don't, I don't think that we should
necessarily give up the property or any of
[29:45] those properties to the county Unless
there's this very specific special issue
[29:52] there's this very specific special issue
like
[29:52] she kind of mentioned with some of the
smaller ones.
[29:57] But, and we have moved past the point of
annexing the,
[30:01] the 2 properties that take us further down
Nolensville Road.
[30:07] Um, I have some concerns about the fact
that with some of these annexations we can
[30:14] say, well, we're annexing this property
but nothing's going to happen for a couple
[30:21] years because of Metro, you know, not
being able to expand sewer quick enough,
[30:28] being able to expand sewer quick enough,
and—
[30:28] but these properties can develop without
that.
[30:32] But I also feel like it's almost probably
close to a wash when you look at the calls
[30:39] that we already would have to make out
there if it were to develop into the
[30:46] there if it were to develop into the
county.
[30:46] So I guess all that to say, I agree with
the mayor.
[30:51] I see value in this conversation that
we're having regarding any willing
[30:57] we're having regarding any willing
property
[30:58] owner that comes forward with these kind
of conversations.
[31:03] Am I right in understanding that it's
about— is that like 0.8 miles from—
[31:09] 0.8 miles.
[31:11] I guess it's about— Victor, that 1.3 miles
on the, the image, is that from—
[31:16] That's actually from the yellow line.
Okay, the original line.
[31:20] And you can add— I don't, I don't know,
it's, uh,
[31:23] probably another tenth of a mile or so on
up to our closest point of annexation.
[31:28] Okay.
[31:29] Are we able to share that really great
work that Chief Weingart did, um,
[31:34] sharing the calls that we have in
unincorporated Williamson County,
[31:40] because you can see all the calls for the
enclave at Dove Lake.
[31:45] Also, I don't know if that's appropriate
to share just because it does give dots,
[31:51] but you can see the call responses for the
enclave in Dove Lake in that.
[31:56] And so it kind of gives you a feel for
what a neighborhood— And again,
[32:02] we're already going, we are already going
to that neighborhood. fairly consistently.
[32:08] I feel like we're headed— I mean,
[32:11] we don't know when because the board will
have to decide this,
[32:16] but I'm not terribly concerned about that
Firehouse 2 argument because I,
[32:21] I think there's going to have to be
multiple properties developing for us to
[32:27] multiple properties developing for us to
really
[32:27] be pushed to that. And I think that we
understand that's several years away
[32:33] understand that's several years away
because
[32:34] we're going to have to get the police
station going.
[32:38] And then as far as like the, the pressure
to get there,
[32:42] it's not a major concern of mine.
[32:44] I mean, I do still feel concern and
pressure for, um, Fire Station 2.
[32:49] I, I think that's why I've been asking
some of the questions about understanding
[32:55] response time both within town limits and
outside of town limits.
[32:59] Because I, I do think we want to maintain
a certain ISO rating,
[33:04] and we all agreed to that when we signed
that interlocal agreement with Williamson
[33:09] County. So I, I know it's on the horizon,
and it will come very quickly, um,
[33:14] after the police station.
[33:16] I didn't say that quite PC. I apologize.
I, I support the fire station.
[33:24] Yeah, I've I think we need to reconsider
the Jenkins Farm.
[33:29] I mean, I, I think that we need to either
take all these properties out of our UGB
[33:35] but understand that they very well may end
up developing in neighborhoods like the
[33:42] Enclave in Dove Lake, um,
[33:44] or I think we need to consider annexing it
for a less intensive use than what I
[33:50] think was originally proposed, but perhaps
more intensive than 1 unit per 5-acre.
[33:57] I would support that.
[34:01] Commissioner Gill or Commissioner
Strupert, do you have any comments?
[34:09] I do appreciate the concept of annexation
to continue to build our tax base because
[34:15] that's really what's going to serve us
ultimately as a town.
[34:20] I'm not sure at this point in time looking
at the map with streams and a major
[34:26] electrical line running through some of
those properties that you're going to get
[34:33] those properties that you're going to get
a
[34:33] sizable tax base to really offset running
services down there.
[34:38] With that said though,
[34:40] I do see there is benefit to bringing it
into the town at some point in time.
[34:46] Is the time right? I'm not sure.
[34:48] I don't feel comfortable with it right
now, but those are my thoughts.
[34:54] I will echo Commissioner Streufert's
comment that I think that the next step
[34:59] comment that I think that the next step
for us
[34:59] would be to working toward annexation,
[35:02] but looking at it in the holistic reality
of those particular properties,
[35:06] it may not be as developed as would
otherwise be because of the restrictions
[35:11] otherwise be because of the restrictions
already
[35:11] there and the inherent— with just what he
just said,
[35:15] all the things that are going on with it,
[35:17] it's not going to be able to develop as
much as maybe other parcels in our
[35:22] community. However, we are already
providing significant services to that
[35:27] providing significant services to that
region
[35:27] anyway, and at some point it would be
better for us to be able to expand our tax
[35:32] base to compensate for that.
[35:34] And I will offer a ditto to the birthday
commissioner up here today.
[35:38] I think it's wise— there's wisdom to be
found in what she said about the sooner
[35:43] found in what she said about the sooner
that
[35:44] gets developed, the sooner we're going to
have to move forward with providing
[35:48] additional services in the form of, for
example, an additional fire station.
[35:53] And that's already on our horizon. It's
already on our agenda. We know it's
[35:58] already on our agenda. We know it's
coming.
[35:59] But it will accelerate whenever we add
more specific properties into the town.
[36:04] And we might as well have a tax base that
can support it if So Victor,
[36:08] this discussion item, what are you looking
at from us?
[36:12] What do you need from us for this
particular discussion?
[36:15] Um, I don't know that I necessarily need,
need anything.
[36:19] I'm just trying to provide you all as much
information as possible so that you all
[36:24] can, can determine a direction to go.
[36:27] We do know that we, we have property that,
[36:30] that's out there and there Their
annexation is kind of hanging in the
[36:35] annexation is kind of hanging in the
balance.
[36:36] It has not been dealt with.
[36:37] And so it's ultimately trying to just get
direction from you all on what you would
[36:43] want to see there. Do you want us to
ultimately bring that back,
[36:48] put it on the agenda, and bring it through
the process?
[36:52] Do you all want to have more discussion on
this particular issue?
[36:56] Is there some additional financial
analysis that that you would like us to,
[37:02] to try to develop over this.
[37:04] Um, as, as I look at these areas, one of
the things that, that I would say,
[37:09] as you're— as we're going through our
zoning ordinance, um,
[37:13] having been on a property such as, uh, I'm
going to say it, the Jenkins Farm,
[37:19] where you've got that large acreage there,
[37:22] to me it does make sense if you're going
to to have a density of—
[37:26] we'll just say our least dense, which is
CD-2L, uh, half unit per acre or,
[37:32] or 1 unit per 2 acres. All right.
[37:34] So that is— that's what, 300 and— what is
it, almost 400 acres?
[37:39] 300.
[37:40] 3— almost 300 acres. All right.
[37:42] So on growth side at that, you're looking
at 150 homes on the max side.
[37:47] But we know that you can't get 150 on
there and with all roads and sewer and
[37:53] there and with all roads and sewer and
stuff
[37:54] like that unless you allow a compact
design.
[37:57] And only if within the zoning ordinance we
allow some flexibility of those standards
[38:03] so that you can actually develop a compact
design, um,
[38:08] would that then make sense for us, mostly
just because You're going to, uh,
[38:13] you're going to have lots of roads that
you are going to have to maintain.
[38:19] And when you're saying— when you, you look
at that much acreage, that much roads,
[38:25] for the amount of state street aid dollars
that you get to replace those roads,
[38:31] you need those roads to be few versus
winding throughout the entire property.
[38:37] Does that make sense?
[38:39] Yes. Yeah, I guess my question would be,
[38:43] if that's an approach to take in this
situation,
[38:47] you're not going to put one house on a
little over an acre because
[38:54] you're going to create density by creating
this workaround to say
[39:00] you've got all this conservation area, X,
Y, and Z.
[39:05] Right.
[39:07] But now you've got massive houses that are
50 feet away from each other.
[39:13] And just looking at it just realistically
there,
[39:16] you're going to create a conservation
zone,
[39:19] but you're just going to create the
density by forcing homes to be built
[39:25] density by forcing homes to be built
closer
[39:25] together in whatever you're going to
develop. I'm not sure that's a trade-off.
[39:31] develop. I'm not sure that's a trade-off.
I—
[39:32] The more I think about this, the more I'm
open— more open to annexation.
[39:39] I would like to base my decision more in
data.
[39:44] And I think what I would like to know is
hypothetical development goes in,
[39:51] what does it cost for all of the services
that we will have to render?
[39:58] And would, would our current property tax
rate applied to the hypothetical—
[40:06] I realize it's all hypothetical, but—
[40:10] Actually—
[40:10] Would it be enough to generate— because
I'll finish.
[40:15] This is the most important part.
[40:17] I'm pretty, I'm pretty nervous about this
next legislative session and what's going
[40:24] to come out. come through with property
taxes.
[40:28] Because if our hands are tied, I mean,
[40:32] it's going to be really challenging to
meet the needs that we have already.
[40:38] And so if I could get information that
says current tax rate,
[40:43] what could be generated from this property
is enough for it to be neutral,
[40:50] then that would go a long way to
convincing me You mentioned the fiscal
[40:56] convincing me You mentioned the fiscal
analysis.
[40:57] I think, uh, I worked with the property
owners and a, uh,
[41:00] someone that was looking at the property
at one time to try to get it annexed,
[41:05] and I think I did actually a fiscal
analysis on that.
[41:09] Uh, I will see if I can pull that up and
provide to you all.
[41:13] You did. I would like you to revisit it
though, because it was, it was a while
[41:18] though, because it was, it was a while
ago,
[41:18] and I don't believe I remember it taking
into consideration like the above and
[41:23] beyond that we would have to— like the
financial cost of hiring additional
[41:27] financial cost of hiring additional
officers.
[41:28] And maybe it did, but if you could just
revisit it before—
[41:31] Oh, absolutely.
[41:32] I think it had service of use but not
additional,
[41:35] because that was going to be my question,
is if you are servicing this area, um,
[41:41] not fire but police, and you're servicing
this area,
[41:44] we know that they drive through
neighborhoods on the daily,
[41:48] that they are active with calls that they—
this, at least for me,
[41:52] and in talking to the department, this
really adds an additional officer per
[41:57] really adds an additional officer per
shift.
[41:58] This is their, their placement.
[42:00] And my assumption is, as you start this
and people— right, you want to annex,
[42:05] and now there's a school there,
[42:07] and their children are going to want to
cross the road safely,
[42:11] to all the things we have experienced in
other parts of town.
[42:15] Yes.
[42:15] If you annex this and this becomes what we
have seen with Rocky Fork and Sunset,
[42:22] um, you will experience that here, and
that's not going to happen with 3
[42:27] that's not going to happen with 3
officers.
[42:28] Okay, I appreciate all that,
[42:30] but those same arguments would apply to
the Van Slyke and Williams
[42:34] properties. I mean, that, that— I don't
disagree with you.
[42:38] I think that there are hires that have to
be made and decisions that are going to
[42:43] have to be made this year where we know we
are behind.
[42:46] And with 600 acres, roughly a little over,
and this property,
[42:50] there will be some very big decisions to
be made.
[42:53] Okay, any other discussion for this?
[42:56] I, I do not support allowing alternative
waste systems in the UGB.
[43:00] I think if there's going to be development
in the UGB, it should be within the town.
[43:07] Is my position on this particular topic.
[43:10] If other people want to allow alternative
waste systems in the UGB,
[43:15] I do think Victor needs that feedback.
[43:18] I think, again, it's a moot point because
we— even if we said, you know,
[43:24] we will allow it, it's more complex than
that because we would have to deny
[43:30] annexation and grant approval.
[43:33] And so for those reasons, I don't think
it's worth Thank you all.
[43:39] Appreciate the discussion.
[43:40] Okay, our next discussion is the
pedestrian bridge and signal update from,
[43:44] pedestrian bridge and signal update from,
um,
[43:45] Assistant Town Manager Downham.
[43:46] This is probably going to be a little bit
of a tag team between Mr.
[43:51] Lay and our town engineer as well.
[43:53] Where we left it The last time we had a
discussion with you all is that we were
[43:59] going to try to seek proposals and input
from consultant engineers,
[44:04] as well as take stock of equipment that we
currently have.
[44:08] We know from kind of an eyeball inventory
of equipment,
[44:12] as well as anticipated equipment that
we'll be gaining with some other traffic
[44:17] signal projects in town,
[44:19] that we may be able to part and piece this
thing together so that we can upgrade the
[44:25] existing signal system at the elementary
school.
[44:28] Yes.
[44:29] To be a full functioning traffic signal.
[44:31] But we will need to get input from our
signal contractors to make sure that we
[44:36] signal contractors to make sure that we
have
[44:36] all the parts and pieces to do that.
[44:39] Obviously, things like mast arms, signal
heads, cabinets,
[44:42] controllers all require a long lead,
[44:45] not to mention the volatility that we're
seeing in some parts of our market right
[44:50] now because of tariffs and other things in
terms of cost escalation. So just—
[44:55] Yes.
[44:55] A lot of things to consider.
[44:57] We also are looking at the pedestrian
signal at the park and, again,
[45:01] looking at opportunities where we can do
some cost savings measures, again,
[45:06] taking advantage of existing equipment
that we may have on hand from other
[45:11] that we may have on hand from other
projects
[45:12] that we can kind of pull together with
this.
[45:15] However, we know that there's going to be
engineering that's going to be required
[45:20] for this.
[45:21] Yes.
[45:22] We don't have existing walkways from the
trail system on Sunset to the edge of
[45:27] pavement on the street.
[45:28] We've also got a sidewalk or walkway
segment that we're going to have to
[45:33] segment that we're going to have to
construct,
[45:33] including some engineering analysis
because of the topography involved,
[45:38] to get that sidewalk basically from the
edge of pavement around to the park entry
[45:43] walkway that we have along the driveway.
[45:45] Okay.
[45:48] Again, depending on the amount of work
that we need,
[45:50] you may have land surveying work that's
going to be required from a topographic
[45:55] analysis standpoint and then the actual
engineering work itself.
[45:58] We're continuing to put numbers together
as well as input to try to figure out what
[46:03] we can do to, number one, save money for
the town,
[46:05] to take advantage of existing equipment
where we can,
[46:08] but also to identify where we are going to
have to spend money,
[46:11] whether that's in engineering and survey
work.
[46:14] Yes.
[46:15] As well as any equipment that we don't
have currently on hand that we may have to
[46:19] purchase, uh, or find other means to try
to get that equipment in order to make a
[46:23] full installation for the PET signal.
[46:25] Uh, we know that some of the equipment can
be moved from one site to another.
[46:30] Uh, not sure if all of it can be moved at
that point.
[46:32] Rely a little bit more on Victor and Enoch
to see if they have anything else that
[46:37] they wanted to add to that.
[46:38] Only thing that I would just add to it is,
[46:41] Because of all the other construction
projects going around town, i.e.,
[46:45] at York Road and Nolensville Road, um, we
have a,
[46:49] a essentially a brand new controller that
we put in after a lightning strike that
[46:54] will be pulled out. Will it be ours? Be
sitting in our reserves.
[46:58] So we have things, some of those things
that do take a long lead time,
[47:02] we will actually own that could be
repurposed elsewhere.
[47:06] Um, we have Uh, at the Summerlin
intersection, uh, when that intersection
[47:11] intersection, uh, when that intersection
is—
[47:11] or when the, um, the Kroger side develops,
[47:14] that's actually going to replace all of
those poles on that.
[47:17] So we'll have all of that infrastructure
as well, including the controller from it.
[47:23] So we're going to have these pieces that
we think that we can put together and
[47:28] we think that we can put together and
place
[47:28] in other things. We'll be putting together
an RFP.
[47:31] It's going to be one that's going to be a
little bit unusual because it's—
[47:36] we're going to be asking a couple of the
signal companies to come in and evaluate
[47:41] our equipment that we have and then give
us a proposal for essentially reinstalling
[47:46] that equipment. What's that going to cost
since we don't have a contract per se with
[47:52] any particular one of them?
[47:54] Ultimately, when we Uh, get ready to do
that, we'll be back to you all and say,
[47:59] okay, here's our RFP, here's what we want
to go.
[48:02] We think that we'll be able to have
something in hand to show you at the next
[48:07] something in hand to show you at the next
work
[48:07] session, so you'll all be able to take a
look at that.
[48:10] That won't be the bid, that'll just be
our, our stuff ready to go to bid on it.
[48:15] But, um, we have opportunity to, I think,
[48:18] repurpose a lot of equipment and save
ourselves a lot of time in the long run.
[48:23] Thank you.
[48:26] I like the creativity.
[48:27] Try to be when we can.
[48:31] Any questions or discussion for the
pedestrian bridge and signal update?
[48:37] Thank you, ma'am.
[48:41] All right, the next item is no parking or
standing at Sugar Mill and Burrus Drive,
[48:46] which is for Town Engineer Jarrell and
Jonathan Weaver from the Sherwood Green
[48:51] Estates HOA, who I see is not here, but
maybe Enoch can help us.
[48:55] Yeah, met with Jonathan a time or two and
walked the site with him.
[49:00] Knowles Elementary on Rocky Fork, they
have, uh,
[49:03] people that are parking on Sugar Mill and
the intersection of Burris,
[49:09] walking even over to the school, leaving
their car,
[49:13] coming back to pick their kids up to the
crosswalks.
[49:17] And it's just creating some traffic
issues.
[49:20] So their HOA has requested that we put a
no parking or standing, uh,
[49:25] and I know Chuck's— we may have to do some
update to our ordinance because according
[49:31] to Mr. Hoffer here, if you're sitting in
your car, you're standing,
[49:37] you're not in traffic.
[49:38] So we, we have, you know, similar things
at, um, Telfair and at Aiden Rose.
[49:44] Um, for the Sunset schools, and then even
on, um, Bradfield for the high school,
[49:50] similar signs. And their request is 9:30
to— or 7:30 to 9:30 AM, and I think it's,
[49:56] uh, what, 2:30 to 4:30 on PM for no
parking or standing.
[50:01] Mayor, also just to state, my address is
3201 Burrus Drive.
[50:05] I live in Sherwood Green,
[50:06] and I have spoken with Charles There is no
benefit to me financially for signage.
[50:12] So you're saying it's not a conflict of
interest because there's no financial
[50:17] benefit to you personally?
[50:19] I, uh, support a no parking sign.
[50:23] I, I find the no standing sign a little
[50:27] strange.
[50:28] If you're standing on the sidewalk, that's
fine, right?
[50:32] But if you're sitting in your car and
Michael may be able to jump in here.
[50:36] It's considered you're not— you're
standing, right?
[50:39] If you're sitting in your car, it's not
literally standing. It's the—
[50:42] if you're sitting in your car parked on
the street, you're standing, not parking.
[50:45] Sorry, not to— but it's not like you're
standing there.
[50:48] It's, um, that you're— and the first
experience we had of this was Bradfield,
[50:53] and now— and then Telfair.
[50:55] And so now it seems to be where parents
will pull rather than waiting in line at
[51:00] They're doing that on streets, and then
their children are walking.
[51:04] You're standing on the sidewalk, on the
sidewalk, you're fine.
[51:07] If you're sitting in your car parked on
the street, you're considered standing,
[51:11] not parking. So that's the reason for the
no, no parking or standing signs.
[51:15] Thank you for that clarification.
[51:17] Along with defining this no parking zone,
[51:20] we'll need to amend the municipal code to
properly define and enact a provision
[51:24] dealing specifically with standing.
[51:26] So we'll look for examples and make sure
that that's part of the ordinance that you
[51:31] all consider in the future.
[51:33] So is— do we need to update the ordinance
first?
[51:37] You'll need to update the order if you're
going to post that location,
[51:42] no parking or standing.
[51:43] We need to have a standing provision
that's in our municipal code to enforce.
[51:48] Right now we do not have such.
[51:50] Okay.
[51:52] Excuse me, the current signs—
[51:53] Like the municipal code.
[51:57] Okay, thank you.
[51:57] Behind it.
[51:58] We did this over at Eden Rose about a year
ago, I guess it was.
[52:02] And with this, I guess those signs say no
parking.
[52:05] I frankly never looked at them close
enough to say whether they say no
[52:09] enough to say whether they say no
standing.
[52:09] But back to the ranch, we also had a
conversation at that point about the
[52:14] conversation at that point about the
timeline,
[52:14] and I Made a suggestion then.
[52:16] I appreciate my colleagues absorbing it
and trusting me on it because at that time
[52:21] and trusting me on it because at that time
I
[52:21] had a daughter in elementary school and I
knew it was 4:30.
[52:25] So when people— I think we changed what
had been proposed to us by that HOA.
[52:30] Is this going to be consistent with what
we've got every other sign?
[52:34] So in the other 3 neighborhoods, it sounds
like they're similar,
[52:38] but they have different bell times at
different schools.
[52:41] So I think the 7:30, 9:30, 2:30, 4:30 One
of maybe 2 to 4,
[52:45] but it has to do with their bell times.
[52:47] It's a 2-hour timeframe morning and
evening,
[52:50] but it matches the bell times more than
anything else.
[52:53] Because this one we're dealing with just
Nolensville Elementary School, right?
[52:56] It's not a middle school component, right?
[52:58] It's 8:38 is their bell time and then
2:38, I think.
[53:02] Thank you.
[53:03] Have we reviewed with the police
department just operational challenges
[53:07] department just operational challenges
with
[53:07] actually enforcing them?
[53:09] I have received Comments from members of
the public before about how difficult it
[53:14] the public before about how difficult it
is
[53:14] to get— and then also for police officers
to have time during these high-traffic
[53:19] time periods for everybody getting to
school where there's other calls,
[53:23] and then it becomes difficult to enforce
these signs.
[53:27] I know typically the board has always
supported each HOA that has requested
[53:31] supported each HOA that has requested
them.
[53:32] We've also had challenges with trying to
keep the signage as consistent as possible
[53:37] Because I believe they're special order
signs.
[53:40] So if one goes down, um, it does seem like
it, it expands everywhere.
[53:44] But like, are we able to actually enforce
these signs from the police department
[53:49] perspective? And, and Lieutenant Hoffer,
if you don't mind, we can't— the,
[53:54] the live stream won't pick you up unless
she's talking to the microphone.
[53:58] We can enforce them, but that's typically
around our busiest time of day.
[54:04] So it really dictates on whether or not we
have officers available.
[54:10] Uh, typically we are able to go into the
area,
[54:14] but because of whether it be the signing,
[54:17] the signage and the lack of the standing
portion of it, and they'll even correct
[54:23] portion of it, and they'll even correct
us,
[54:24] we're not parked, we're standing. So
they're aware of that as well.
[54:29] Okay.
[54:31] Okay, so you're saying all signs should
have both to go along with what our new
[54:35] verbiage should be?
[54:36] Yes, ma'am.
[54:37] That's a pretty good legal argument.
[54:39] I respect anybody who's brought that up to
us, actually.
[54:41] All right, any other discussion on an
ordinance that would allow for no parking
[54:47] ordinance that would allow for no parking
or
[54:47] standing at Sugar Mill and Burrus Drive
and a corresponding code update to define
[54:53] standing within the code?
[54:55] So is it fair to assume this will be on
the next voting agenda,
[54:59] or will it need more time to prepare for
the, the code update?
[55:04] We will do our best to have it on the
upcoming agenda for first read.
[55:07] Okay.
[55:09] All right, the next item is geotechnical
services for pedestrian bridge at Chris
[55:13] Maun-Brown Park.
[55:14] Okay, the, um, the Chris Maun-Brown Park
has a pedestrian bridge There was not any
[55:20] kind of geotechnical analysis done.
[55:22] The bridge designer has come back and he
made some assumptions for the design based
[55:28] off of the specifications of 1,500 pounds
per square foot bearing capacity.
[55:34] He's asked the town, if you don't have a
geotechnical showing that that'll work,
[55:40] you're taking on some liability for the
designer if there's a problem.
[55:45] They want to put the liability on us
instead of them.
[55:49] Okay.
[55:50] We took proposals from Terracon, who's
done the work out there at the park
[55:55] done the work out there at the park
already.
[55:56] They just sent it today.
[55:57] $4,800 would be to dig 4 test pits and
confirm that bearing capacity.
[56:02] It's basically insurance for us.
[56:04] It's $4,800 to confirm that it has the
adequate bearing capacity so that we don't
[56:09] take any liability on that bridge if it—
if the foundations are not you know,
[56:14] built on solid ground and fails.
[56:16] So it's, it's an insurance policy for us
because it's a pretty expensive bridge.
[56:21] It's 50-foot long, you know, it's up in
the air.
[56:24] So it's just a geotechnical analysis to
confirm the bearing capacities.
[56:29] So since that's within Victor's spending
authority, if— is that something—
[56:34] It's— it would actually not be.
[56:36] Um, the initial contract with Terracon was
done back in 2023,
[56:40] And we have been piggybacking off of that
original contract.
[56:44] Change Order 1 was for Greystone Park at
$2,500.
[56:48] We had another change order for Greystone
Park to do air quality testing,
[56:52] as well as sampling at the end of the
demolition process.
[56:56] And then we also, if you recall,
[56:58] we did core drilling on the police
headquarters location for foundation
[57:03] headquarters location for foundation
design.
[57:03] All of that is in excess of $10,000. So
this being Change Order Number 4.
[57:08] Yes.
[57:09] We're coming to you all for your
authorization,
[57:12] so we'll be presenting a resolution to you
for your consideration with the
[57:17] addendum as an attachment to that.
[57:19] Okay, any questions about the request for
geotechnical services for the pedestrian
[57:24] bridge at Chris Mann Brown Park?
[57:25] Thank you.
[57:29] All right, the next item is a partnership
with the National Fire Safety Council
[57:33] within the fire department.
[57:35] I think we jumped ahead, Mayor.
[57:37] Actually, it is reduce the speed limit on
Maxwell Drive near Kings
[57:42] Barn Drive, which is also Enoch,
[57:44] and then it'll be the fire department.
[57:47] The, um, we've had a couple of folks
that's run off the road, uh, on, uh,
[57:52] and that's Maxwell right there where
Britton and Maxwell change.
[57:56] Folks, Kings Barn, have had several say
they have Poor sight distance,
[58:01] which they do. Um, I've been out there
several times and I know the police sit
[58:06] several times and I know the police sit
there
[58:07] and monitor it. Um, I went back and looked
at AASHTO,
[58:10] which is the highway transportation
officials, the Green Book,
[58:14] which is the standards for the entire
country for that.
[58:18] And a 200-foot radius, uh, would, would
support a 25-mile-an-hour design,
[58:23] and the road is currently 35 miles an
hour.
[58:26] Okay.
[58:27] So I would like to, uh, for the board to
allow us to put up some sharp curve signs.
[58:31] It'll say sharp curve, 25 miles an hour.
[58:34] It might not slow people down, it might
not keep them from driving off the road,
[58:38] but hopefully it would alert someone to
slow them down.
[58:41] Because the police says once they're
off-road,
[58:43] they're probably doing 30 or 40 anyway.
They're doing 50 maybe.
[58:47] But, uh, but I think these, these sharp
curve 25 mile an hour signs, uh,
[58:51] can improve safety out there. Thank you.
[58:55] And this is something that we would have
to vote on as a board?
[58:57] I think anytime we change speed limits,
we— the board votes on it, my
[59:02] we— the board votes on it, my
understanding.
[59:03] But y'all tell me.
[59:04] So will there be an ordinance on the first
reading of an ordinance on the voting
[59:11] agenda?
[59:11] Correct. That's what I understand. It
would take an ordinance to do that.
[59:14] Any questions for Enoch?
[59:16] All right, the next item is for the fire
department,
[59:20] and it's a partnership with the National
Fire Safety Council.
[59:24] I'm going to request to pull this from the
agenda.
[59:27] Okay, um, then the next item is also the
fire department,
[59:31] which is a repair of Nolensville Fire and
Rescue Engine 92.
[59:46] All right, so back in February we noticed
that we had some issues with the engine,
[59:52] so we took it in. They kind of looked at
it and said, hey, the pump is bad,
[59:57] we're gonna need some major repairs on
this.
[1:00:00] Um, it went in in February, uh, it was
supposed to be done this past fiscal year.
[1:00:05] Parts were hard to come by, wrong parts
were shipped,
[1:00:09] the one part that came in was bad.
[1:00:11] Yeah.
[1:00:12] So here we are now in August. That engine
came from the nonprofit, from the 501.
[1:00:18] They traded 2 other trucks for this truck.
[1:00:21] We're uncertain on the amount of money
that they were asking for.
[1:00:25] They did buy it used. It's from the East
Coast.
[1:00:29] Currently, that truck has 106,397 miles on
it. Engine hours is Just over 8,400.
[1:00:35] If we do the wear miles,
[1:00:36] because the truck idles so much more and
pumping at higher RPMs,
[1:00:41] it's equivalent to 283,000 miles right now
on that truck is what it's equivalent to.
[1:00:47] It's our reserve engine. We need that
reserve engine.
[1:00:51] There's a lot of areas that our ladder
truck, even though it has a pump,
[1:00:56] cannot get to. So we need that second
engine as a reserve.
[1:01:00] So we went ahead to start fixing the
engine.
[1:01:04] Okay.
[1:01:04] And as of right now, they did the pump
repairs,
[1:01:07] and that totaled $27,163 just for the pump
and the parts and labor.
[1:01:12] While they were doing the pump and took it
out of the truck,
[1:01:17] there was a large diameter discharge that
we use for relay pumping,
[1:01:21] and also the truck exhaust itself needed
to come off,
[1:01:25] and they found that they were bad in order
to put back on in order for it to pass
[1:01:31] the pump test. So that was another
$5,889.59.
[1:01:35] Then they did the annual pump test, which
it passed, so that's great,
[1:01:40] which is required for us to present to ISO
every, every revisit when they come.
[1:01:45] We show them each, each year that each
truck that we had passed pump test.
[1:01:51] So that was done, that was $250.
[1:01:53] We had the annual maintenance done on it,
oil filters, etc.
[1:01:59] Etc.
[1:01:59] We have that done on all of our trucks,
[1:02:02] and annually it's an average of about
$2,000 per truck.
[1:02:05] So as of right now today,
[1:02:07] we owe Siddons Martin $35,303.11 for this
truck to come back. I met with Victor.
[1:02:12] I also met in depth with engineer Nick
Kyriasis, who is our maintenance
[1:02:17] Kyriasis, who is our maintenance
coordinator.
[1:02:18] He's researches this stuff in and out. He
knows it very well.
[1:02:22] And they gave— they included a list for us
of multiple things that needed to be done
[1:02:27] as well, just beyond what they've already
completed. One of them is an air leak.
[1:02:33] We have a couple of air leaks, which we
know it's an air brake system.
[1:02:37] So with the air brakes, large air leaks
cause a problem. We just can't go
[1:02:42] cause a problem. We just can't go
anywhere.
[1:02:43] It'll lock the brakes up. And so we don't
travel anywhere.
[1:02:47] So that needs to be fixed, and that's
$3,497.
[1:02:50] There's a check engine light that they
diagnosed,
[1:02:53] that there's a knock sensor that is bad.
[1:02:55] That determines how much fuel is sent to
the system.
[1:02:59] If we flood it with too much fuel, it can
go into limp mode.
[1:03:03] That's a safety issue for us when we're
pumping because it'll drop the RPMs and
[1:03:08] pumping because it'll drop the RPMs and
not
[1:03:08] let the truck run appropriately.
[1:03:10] So that's a safety issue, especially
during times of a fire and if we have Uh,
[1:03:16] personnel interior. There's a lube system
on there as well that needs to be filled.
[1:03:21] That's only $200. What that does is just
periodic times based on the hours on the,
[1:03:27] on the engine itself,
[1:03:28] it'll start lubing appropriate spots and
just prevent unnecessary wear.
[1:03:33] They said the batteries were bad, which we
knew was coming,
[1:03:37] and then with it sitting for so long
before they got the parts.
[1:03:41] Okay.
[1:03:42] Um, it's time for that as well.
[1:03:44] Um, the steering we could probably do
without at the moment.
[1:03:48] It's not as bad as what y'all might think.
[1:03:51] It needs to probably be addressed at some
point,
[1:03:54] but right now we could make it work due to
that this engine is going into reserve
[1:03:59] status. And then Nick also wanted me to
mention to y'all that these are the items
[1:04:05] that we're not addressing.
[1:04:07] Okay.
[1:04:08] There's some oil leaks, transmission
pass-through harness leak.
[1:04:13] Front and rear tires need to be replaced
soon,
[1:04:16] but they're still adequate per DOT specs
at 5/32. The AC is not working.
[1:04:21] That's one that's hard to tell if we—
[1:04:23] once we get in there and find out if it's
compressor,
[1:04:27] if it's just a simple leak or if it's
catastrophic. They're not sure.
[1:04:32] Step lights, marker lights.
[1:04:33] Okay.
[1:04:34] Etc. Just that there is about $11,700
with, uh, with the steering.
[1:04:39] So currently, uh, we have $43,264
remaining in the budget for maintenance.
[1:04:44] Our maintenance budget started at $50,000
for the year.
[1:04:48] We did ladder testing by a third-party
company for ground ladders and the aerial
[1:04:54] ladder that came out of maintenance.
[1:04:56] And then Nick has just finished Um, annual
PMs— excuse me—
[1:05:00] on Engine 91 and Ladder 91 as well.
[1:05:03] So that was deducted from the $50,000, and
we're down to $43,264.56.
[1:05:08] With the necessary repairs including into
that the NOx sensor, the air leaks, etc.,
[1:05:13] this would be $41,538.
[1:05:15] So that leaves us just under $2,000 left
for the rest of this fiscal year.
[1:05:20] So we're just Coming to say we're going to
go ahead and get those repairs,
[1:05:25] but we're probably going to need a budget
amendment down the road for that line
[1:05:31] item. We kind of went together, Nick and
I,
[1:05:34] and put together what if everything goes
as planned,
[1:05:38] kind of how much more we would need for
the rest of the year.
[1:05:42] And we got DEF fluid, we got oil changes,
miscellaneous items, wiper blades, etc.
[1:05:48] Nick pulled from last year what we kind of
spent.
[1:05:51] And then some miscellaneous repairs, uh,
would be somewhere around like $8,000
[1:05:57] would be somewhere around like $8,000
more.
[1:05:57] And that doesn't include if we fix
everything on that engine, which is 53238.
[1:06:03] So you're saying if you go with the 53,
[1:06:05] there's still potential for an additional
8,
[1:06:09] or is that if we go with the 41?
[1:06:11] So if we go with the 41538, um, we'll
probably need—
[1:06:14] we're going to need some more money down
the road as a budget amendment just to The
[1:06:19] less than 2,000 will not get us through
until next July.
[1:06:23] And actually, even if you do the 53,
you're still going to need—
[1:06:28] Still going to need—
[1:06:29] You're going to need probably 10 at that
point because you've got 2 remaining.
[1:06:35] So it's just— Yeah.
[1:06:39] Yeah. It's— the truck, when we inherited
it from the 501, it looks beautiful.
[1:06:44] They had a brand new paint job put on it
right before they took delivery,
[1:06:49] but unfortunately it's got 283,000 wear
miles on it,
[1:06:52] so it has served its purpose for us and
for the community that it served in East
[1:06:58] Coast prior to us.
[1:06:59] Well, sir, on that note, this is a serious
issue for our town.
[1:07:03] We want the equipment to be the best and
we want it to be working,
[1:07:08] and we don't want to have to— now,
[1:07:10] just a short Not even 2 full months into
the new budget year to be exhausting our
[1:07:15] maintenance budget.
[1:07:16] Correct.
[1:07:17] So I might impose upon you and Victor to
maybe—
[1:07:19] and I realize this is a reserve unit.
[1:07:21] Yes, so it'll be at our ISO Station 2, the
old firehouse.
[1:07:25] Not only reserve though,
[1:07:26] our volunteers that we do have will come
in and staff that too if we're on a large
[1:07:31] incident, to either backfill into the town
or to come to that large incident.
[1:07:36] So it will be used A little bit more than
normal.
[1:07:39] Thank you for that feedback.
[1:07:40] But in full view of the fact it is a
reserve unit, nonetheless,
[1:07:44] I might impose upon you and Victor at a
future meeting,
[1:07:47] just kind of give us some feedback on what
we might look at as far as a full
[1:07:52] replacement of it before we go down this
path.
[1:07:54] Um, a serious issue, but I could almost
frankly,
[1:07:57] whenever you were going through the line
items of things that have to be fixed on
[1:08:02] it, especially when you got to items that
you're not addressing,
[1:08:06] There's an episode of The Andy Griffith
Show where Barney buys an old car from Ms.
[1:08:10] Lesh, and it drives for just a few miles
and then it comes all apart.
[1:08:14] And when Elmer comes back in from Wally's
filling station to tell him what's going
[1:08:19] to have to be necessary to fix Barney's
car, he pretty much recites,
[1:08:23] a brand new car. Everything on the car was
damaged, not working, ruined,
[1:08:27] and it's got to be fixed.
[1:08:29] That's what I was thinking, like, wow, is
this truck really worth fixing?
[1:08:33] That's really my question today.
[1:08:35] Is it worth fixing now that we're 6 to 7
weeks into our new budget year and
[1:08:39] exhausting, as well as having to add
additional money from through a budget
[1:08:43] amendment from our maintenance budget? Is
it worth fixing or not?
[1:08:47] The last truck that we purchased, um, we,
we found it, um,
[1:08:52] while it was being constructed.
[1:08:55] They had Didn't have a— it wasn't special
ordered, they just had started a spec one.
[1:09:02] And I think we spent $690— what, about
$620 on it, um, plus equipment.
[1:09:07] Yeah, well, a lot of the equipment will
transfer if you're,
[1:09:12] if you're taking it completely out of
service, and a lot of your equipment
[1:09:19] service, and a lot of your equipment
transfer.
[1:09:19] But nonetheless, that was 3 years ago, 4
years ago.
[1:09:24] Uh, when we bought that one, 2022.
[1:09:26] So it's, um, I think you're probably
looking in the 7s, 7s to 8s probably now.
[1:09:33] I'm just hearing a 13-year-old vehicle
that's got nearly 300,000 service miles on
[1:09:38] that's got nearly 300,000 service miles on
it
[1:09:38] one way or another by your math,
[1:09:40] and I'm just wondering at what point do we
say it's not worth fixing?
[1:09:44] And I keep looking out at our former chief
there.
[1:09:47] I appreciate the sign language he was
offering there.
[1:09:56] So, so to ask you, um,
[1:09:57] obviously it's used and we never know
exactly how our vehicles are gonna hold
[1:10:04] exactly how our vehicles are gonna hold
out,
[1:10:04] right? But knowing that this is a reserve,
[1:10:07] if we were to offer you the complete
repair, let's just say that's an option,
[1:10:13] repair, let's just say that's an option,
um,
[1:10:14] do you have faith in this being
operational for quite some time based on
[1:10:20] operational for quite some time based on
it being
[1:10:20] reserve. And when I say quite some time,
[1:10:23] I mean enough time that gets us to a point
of responsible spending for a new
[1:10:29] apparatus. So 2 years, 4 years potential.
[1:10:33] I think if we put the $53,000, the
complete repair, into it,
[1:10:36] I think we could probably get enough time
out of it for us to start the process of
[1:10:41] ordering something on that 2 to 3 year
lead time?
[1:10:44] She asked it better than I did. That was
the answer. Thank you.
[1:10:48] I mean, I look— listen, we know that,
again, you're buying a used vehicle,
[1:10:52] and so there are always the hidden, right?
[1:10:55] Like you said, you, you painted it with
some fancy lipstick and it looks really
[1:11:00] great, but you don't ever know.
[1:11:02] And so I guess my, my concern— and I
agree, like,
[1:11:05] at some point you will have to purchase
Something new,
[1:11:09] but based on it being a reserve and at
Sanford, or— well,
[1:11:13] I guess it'll be at the county building.
[1:11:15] But if you put this money into it and we
know that it will facilitate what we need
[1:11:21] for runs for enough time to really allow
responsible financial spending for a new
[1:11:26] apparatus, if you feel that— and things
can always go wrong, so I understand that—
[1:11:31] but if that's— Looking at that $53,000 to
complete that reserve gives us enough time
[1:11:37] to really focus on what we would need to
purchase for future and the spending that
[1:11:42] comes with that, then I appreciate that.
So thank you.
[1:11:45] I'm always going to support repair
requests that you guys want.
[1:11:50] I mean, in the budget,
[1:11:51] we have always traditionally approved
whatever repair budget has been
[1:11:55] whatever repair budget has been
recommended by
[1:11:56] the department. So I— my husband works on
cars. I do not.
[1:12:00] I have no frame of reference for the
values that are put forward here.
[1:12:05] But if you say you need to repair an
engine, I'm always going to support that.
[1:12:10] Um, Victor and Christina, where do you see
these additional funds coming from,
[1:12:14] from our budget amendment?
[1:12:16] So we've got a couple things that we've
been looking at.
[1:12:20] Um, one is there— we have operational
dollars were being forecasted for the
[1:12:26] interconnect with the library parking lot.
[1:12:29] To the tune of about— we budgeted about
$75,000 for that.
[1:12:33] So that's one place that if we're not
going to do that project now because the
[1:12:39] library piece did not get funded, that we,
[1:12:43] we have that already in our operational
budget.
[1:12:46] But secondly, we've got our sales tax
numbers still continue to come in really
[1:12:52] strong. We've really only got one month in
on this fiscal year,
[1:12:57] but looking at those last 3 months and the
way that they've trended,
[1:13:02] it's been even more than where we thought
we were headed.
[1:13:06] If you prorated the single month that
we've got and the rest of the year went
[1:13:12] we've got and the rest of the year went
the
[1:13:12] same direction, then we could have an
additional $200,000 to $300,000 coming in
[1:13:18] additional $200,000 to $300,000 coming in
from
[1:13:19] our—
[1:13:19] Revenue.
[1:13:21] beyond what we had already projected for
sales tax.
[1:13:23] So there's a couple pieces that we're
looking at.
[1:13:26] So, um, I appreciate the library may be an
option.
[1:13:29] I feel like staff as well as the 5 of us
definitely conveyed that that was a
[1:13:34] definitely conveyed that that was a
project
[1:13:35] that they wanted to continue based on the
ease and usability of having the
[1:13:39] additional exit in and out of Town Hall as
well as the connection between the
[1:13:44] library. So I would For me, at least, I
would prefer to not see that go away.
[1:13:49] Is there a way that you and Christina
could potentially just give us that
[1:13:54] could potentially just give us that
projected
[1:13:55] tax revenue so that we can look at those
numbers as we're considering the totality
[1:14:00] of what he has with the $53,000?
[1:14:02] Yeah, we'll put together a report on that.
[1:14:04] So the—
[1:14:07] I mean, the general fund detail report
that's on the agenda right now shows that
[1:14:12] that's on the agenda right now shows that
for
[1:14:12] July it was $313,900, which I think was
closer to February of 2025 numbers,
[1:14:17] which would really be December
collections.
[1:14:20] So I mean, the, the sales tax— and if you
take that $313,000 times 12,
[1:14:24] that puts you in really almost $400,000
above what we budgeted,
[1:14:28] because we budgeted $3.4 million for sales
tax this year.
[1:14:32] Um, I, I keep a running total of the
percent each month Brings in for the
[1:14:39] percent each month Brings in for the
entire
[1:14:40] year. And last year, July was 8.9% of the
entire year.
[1:14:45] So if you take the 313 and you— that,
[1:14:48] that's what's my proration is 319 divided
by 0.089.
[1:14:53] And it came up to about a $3.7 million, a
little over $3.7 million. We budgeted $3.
[1:15:01] 3.4. So that was, that was why when I said
200 to 300, just to give some fluff,
[1:15:08] maybe 3, hopefully it's 300 to 400.
[1:15:11] And then also in the engineering update, I
believe Enoch shared, um,
[1:15:17] that Kroger is forecasting to open in
January.
[1:15:22] Is that still— I just say that because of
sales tax.
[1:15:26] They're, uh, pretty confident they're
going to open by January 30th.
[1:15:33] Like of 2027?
[1:15:36] Correct.
[1:15:41] Huh.
[1:15:44] All right, any other discussion for the
repair request and the corresponding
[1:15:49] repair request and the corresponding
budget
[1:15:49] amendment? I would just say also that,
like, you should— in my opinion,
[1:15:54] you should have repair budget left,
[1:15:56] and we shouldn't cut it so close that you
have to come back to the board.
[1:16:01] So I would hope to see whatever the budget
amendment gives you all a reasonable
[1:16:06] amount that in your judgment you can get
through, because I mean, we should—
[1:16:11] whether it's the ladder truck, the
engines, we should be repairing those
[1:16:16] engines, we should be repairing those
regularly.
[1:16:16] Yeah, I, you know, there's incidentals
that we can't forecast, but yeah,
[1:16:21] I can work with Victor and with Nick and
we come up with an adequate
[1:16:26] number.
[1:16:27] Okay.
[1:16:29] Just, yeah, I appreciate you doing this,
putting this all together.
[1:16:33] I would encourage you to include the
steering adjustment of $5,000.
[1:16:37] That looks like between your remaining
maintenance and what was left here,
[1:16:41] about $23,000. I would also, as the mayor
said,
[1:16:44] give yourself some more buffer for the
rest of the year.
[1:16:48] Yeah, let's, let's get this fixed and get
on the road and Hopefully it gives us a
[1:16:53] couple extra years to prepare and it's
serviceable and we can meet the needs and
[1:16:58] expectations of our citizens.
[1:16:59] Perfect.
[1:17:02] Thank you. 2 items in one meeting.
[1:17:04] I know.
[1:17:06] Thank you.
[1:17:06] Do you want another one? Should we, should
we add another?
[1:17:08] Yeah, you got one.
[1:17:09] All right, the next item for discussion is
the flag design campaign.
[1:17:20] All right, so do you all have any
questions about the flag design campaign?
[1:17:25] Do we want to do it? So, um, right now we
have a campaign open.
[1:17:30] Um, the deadline to submit is Monday,
August 31st at 4:00 PM.
[1:17:34] At this time we do not have any
submissions, so if you know of anyone, let
[1:17:39] submissions, so if you know of anyone, let
us know.
[1:17:40] We reached out to the schools and also the
Artists Guild and asked them them to kind
[1:17:46] of help us. Um, hoping that we get some at
the last minute,
[1:17:50] but the selected design will be the
official town flag.
[1:17:54] We will also put a replica in it—
[1:17:56] of it into the time capsule that we plan
to bury on October 3rd for our Founders
[1:18:02] Day. So if you can help spread the word,
we would really appreciate it.
[1:18:07] And everything is online for, um, for the
submission form.
[1:18:11] And the, um, we have a few parameters
where they need to—
[1:18:15] we would like them to be a Nolensville
resident.
[1:18:18] So that's one of the requirements of it as
well. I want to make sure I mention that.
[1:18:24] So a week from today?
[1:18:27] Yes.
[1:18:27] Right.
[1:18:28] And then what we will do is we'll send it
to you all.
[1:18:31] You'll have until the 31st till the 2nd to
review it,
[1:18:34] let us which one you would recommend,
[1:18:36] and then we would probably put it on the
agenda for you all to vote on.
[1:18:40] So it will be a voting item.
[1:18:42] I'll talk to both art teachers at the high
school tomorrow.
[1:18:48] Thank you. And you all can submit
something too.
[1:18:52] I think Mr. Carpenter is the one over
here.
[1:18:57] Tyler's the one over here.
[1:18:57] Yeah, it is Tyler. It's a lot of pressure,
Tyler.
[1:19:00] And I probably will reach out to the
community members.
[1:19:02] And see if some of them will present to
you. That might be a good idea.
[1:19:05] I'll look at my existing portfolio.
[1:19:07] All right, any other discussion for the
flag design campaign,
[1:19:11] which is an exciting addition to
celebrating the town's 30th
[1:19:16] birthday?
[1:19:17] I can't wait to see— I hope we receive
some. I'm so excited to see them.
[1:19:20] All right, the next item for discussion—
were you going to say something? Oh, okay.
[1:19:26] The next item for discussion is The
Tarver-Ringman annexation from the August
[1:19:31] Tarver-Ringman annexation from the August
voting
[1:19:32] meeting. Um, we had— I'll go first,
although unless anybody else wants to.
[1:19:37] We had discussed this at the workshop and
at a workshop prior to it going to the
[1:19:43] Planning Commission, but in the voting
meeting it did not have a motion or a
[1:19:49] meeting it did not have a motion or a
second,
[1:19:49] and so there was no discussion. We don't
discuss unless there's a motion.
[1:19:55] Um, and While that is proper, I think
probably if there's someone on the agenda,
[1:20:01] my opinion now is that we probably should
have at least had a motion for discussion
[1:20:07] or something. But just wanted to reiterate
that my reasons for not supporting the
[1:20:13] annexation was because of the expansion of
the CD-3 zone.
[1:20:17] That was in the zoning ordinance, a
transitional zone.
[1:20:21] And if we start setting the precedent that
we will apply that zone as we expand down
[1:20:27] Kidd Road, I think that the precedent that
sets is that everything down Kidd Road
[1:20:33] should be the CD-3 at 4 units per acre,
[1:20:36] which is not something that I was
comfortable with.
[1:20:39] The CD-3 application directly left of that
particular parcel was transitioned from
[1:20:45] office industrial into the residential.
[1:20:48] And then the 2 parcels that are to the
right of that parcel, that CD-3, are the
[1:20:54] right of that parcel, that CD-3, are the
CD—
[1:20:54] I think it's 2L, but it's the low-density
residential.
[1:20:58] And so I, I have concern about a clear
delineation between South Davidson County
[1:21:04] delineation between South Davidson County
and
[1:21:04] Nolensville, but also making sure that we
don't set a precedent that we expand CD-3.
[1:21:10] everywhere.
[1:21:13] And so I don't know if anybody else wants
to share their opinions on that particular
[1:21:17] annexation since we didn't discuss it in
the voting meeting, but if so,
[1:21:20] I would encourage you to, to do so.
[1:21:22] So I don't take issue with the annexation.
[1:21:25] Obviously it's contiguous, and so I don't
have any issue with that.
[1:21:30] In looking at this both from the Planning
Commission side as well as the BOC side
[1:21:36] and looking at the ask for CD 3.
[1:21:38] I agree, not only is this the proper—
[1:21:41] improper use of that zone for moving
further out of town,
[1:21:45] but if you look at the topography of it,
[1:21:48] this kind of goes back to Bench Lakes and
Williams property and annexing in,
[1:21:54] but being willing to wait and consider
what we are reworking with the zoning and
[1:22:00] what is possible for that land.
[1:22:02] If you look at that particular parcel,
Again, the creek line,
[1:22:06] the potential connectivity that it has.
[1:22:09] There is, there is a use for it, but what
is that? And CD-3 is, is not something.
[1:22:15] So in terms of annexation, yes, I would
support that. The rezone, I would not.
[1:22:21] Certainly support CD-3, as I've stated,
[1:22:24] but I don't know what the proper is for
that without sitting down with staff
[1:22:29] that without sitting down with staff
first.
[1:22:30] Thank you.
[1:22:31] Well, again, and having further discussion
on that.
[1:22:34] Yeah, I'm going to echo the sentiment of
the prior 2 Commissioners.
[1:22:38] I think the annexation is not the question
here.
[1:22:42] I think it is appropriate density in an
area that is clearly transitional and what
[1:22:48] that really looks like in terms of design
for both that piece of property and
[1:22:53] connectivity to the town as we always push
with development.
[1:23:02] I echo everything that they just said.
[1:23:05] I—
[1:23:07] yeah, I don't support 3. I do support
annexation. I agree with them.
[1:23:12] Well, since we've got 5 Commissioners now
that echo the same thing,
[1:23:16] we're in favor of annexation,
[1:23:18] but it was apparently the CD-3 that was
causing the heartburn,
[1:23:22] and it was certainly mine. Problem as
well.
[1:23:24] We— that is, that area of town needs to be
the transition into something such as
[1:23:29] CD-3. And that being the case, Victor, we
didn't vote on it,
[1:23:33] so it didn't get voted down. It just
failed for lack of a motion that night.
[1:23:37] Is it something we could bring back up at
the next meeting and have a vote on
[1:23:42] perhaps annexation? And do— and I
appreciate what Jessica said, we,
[1:23:46] we took the Williams property and went
down to CD-2L, I believe.
[1:23:50] Yes.
[1:23:51] the entry level, if you will, and see
where we go from there.
[1:23:54] Is that a possibility procedurally?
[1:23:56] You can renew the motion,
[1:23:58] and that would give you the opportunity to
bring it back up.
[1:24:04] That's something that you would have to do
at the voting meeting,
[1:24:10] is specifically renew the motion.
[1:24:13] And so it Basically, at the—
[1:24:16] the process would be during your approval
of the agenda,
[1:24:21] you would ask to renew the motion and add
it to the agenda.
[1:24:27] Okay.
[1:24:28] And then you all could reconsider that.
[1:24:31] Charlie wants to say something.
[1:24:34] And if the, uh, the zone was to change
after the first, uh, discussion of the
[1:24:39] after the first, uh, discussion of the
BOC,
[1:24:39] it would need to go back to the PC.
[1:24:45] Charles, that would be strictly for
annexation, but if zone changed,
[1:24:49] they would go through the process which
would start at the Planning Commission and
[1:24:54] then return. Is that correct? Is that what
I'm understanding?
[1:24:58] Annexation here, rezone, planning, back to
BOC?
[1:25:00] Yes.
[1:25:04] If zoning of what it was proposed as
changes, it goes back to the POC.
[1:25:09] PC, yeah.
[1:25:10] So I'm seeing some head nods, and one of
them is mine.
[1:25:16] I don't know why I said that.
[1:25:20] So what Vice Mayor is saying, I—
[1:25:23] so Victor and I discussed this,
[1:25:27] and I I think like it's challenging the
way that the—
[1:25:33] the way that we do things where we have an
annexation and then
[1:25:41] there is a formal process even to get the
2L or the 2.
[1:25:47] And because they sought a 3 with
annexation,
[1:25:52] can we even vote on annexation before it
goes back through PC?
[1:26:00] Yes.
[1:26:00] Basically, can we vote on annexation
without voting on a rezone?
[1:26:04] Yes.
[1:26:07] Yes.
[1:26:09] Okay, so we don't have to vote on a
rezone. It automatically defaults to the
[1:26:16] rezone. It automatically defaults to the
lowest.
[1:26:17] Yeah, no different than what Williams and
Bench Lake, correct?
[1:26:22] They didn't. We voted on—
[1:26:24] Oh, you're saying because there was— oh, I
see. I'm sorry.
[1:26:28] I'm saying we have a formal process where
it's not just an— it doesn't default.
[1:26:32] We actually have to vote to rezone.
[1:26:34] So I think one way to address this is to
allow staff and legal time to confer and
[1:26:40] also discuss with the applicant if that's
something that they would want to pursue,
[1:26:46] because I think like legal advice on the
fly is also difficult because zoning and
[1:26:52] land use is Yes. is complex and difficult.
[1:26:55] So I would encourage us, instead of trying
to work that out in the meeting,
[1:27:01] to let staff work together with legal if
that is something that the Board is
[1:27:07] supportive of, of annexation at a lesser
zone and the applicant is considered—
[1:27:12] wants that. I would also encourage us to
really focus in on the connection Between
[1:27:18] Kidd Road, that was one of the areas that
I felt really uncomfortable with.
[1:27:24] I know that there is a creek there, but
there's—
[1:27:28] having a connection between Kidd Road
going into South Walk long-term for our
[1:27:33] community would be a really important
connection.
[1:27:37] And so if there's a way to have more
certainty around that as a requirement to
[1:27:43] development for either of parcels, that
would be important to me as well.
[1:27:48] But did that, did that address what you
were talking about, Commissioner
[1:27:54] were talking about, Commissioner
Carpenter,
[1:27:54] with the legal part of it?
[1:27:56] Yes.
[1:27:59] Okay.
[1:28:00] Yeah, it sounds like— I can't speak for
the, the applicant,
[1:28:06] but it sounds like the best, like,
[1:28:09] route here would be to wait until we've
work through some of the regulations,
[1:28:16] because we've discussed the—
[1:28:19] what's the term where you can change
certain aspects of—
[1:28:24] Modification of standards.
[1:28:26] Yes, the modification of standards. But
we're working through that.
[1:28:30] And I mean, if the applicant wants to
pursue the 2 or 2L, that's fine,
[1:28:35] but it sounds like This is a tough
property.
[1:28:38] And so I don't know, I'm— if we're looking
for directions to go here,
[1:28:43] I think it's really up to the applicant.
[1:28:46] Would the applicant like to speak?
[1:28:48] I know typically when we have an
annexation request,
[1:28:50] we didn't have a motion last time,
[1:28:52] so I think it would be appropriate for the
applicant to speak since we're in a—
[1:28:56] we're discussion.
[1:28:57] Sure. Yeah, thank you.
[1:28:58] Um, when we designed the property, uh,
Under CD-3, the site plan that I—
[1:29:04] we submitted with our rezoning request was
really the maximum number of units that
[1:29:11] the property could support under CD-3.
[1:29:14] And in hindsight, that may not have been
wise because it may not be feasible—
[1:29:20] it is not feasible, really,
[1:29:23] for us to build the number of units that
we showed on the site plan.
[1:29:28] So we are going back and we've talked with
our engineers.
[1:29:33] We have another site plan that shows some
connectivity to the east and west and has
[1:29:40] 26 units shown in the site plan.
[1:29:42] The problem we've run into, and I think
Commissioner Carpenter alluded to it,
[1:29:49] is that there's really not a zoning
designation that allows for 26 units on
[1:29:55] designation that allows for 26 units on
this
[1:29:55] property because CD-3 is a number of units
per acre.
[1:29:59] Yes.
[1:30:00] CD-3L is a square footage and it's not
units per acre over the entire property.
[1:30:06] So CD-3L is 20,000 square foot lots.
[1:30:09] And so that sounds like, you know, half
the density of CD-3,
[1:30:14] but it's actually a lot less than half the
density of CD-3.
[1:30:19] So we have new site plans that conform to
CD-3L as as well.
[1:30:24] And so for us, we have to think about
what's economically feasible for us.
[1:30:30] And CD3L, we think we maybe could make
that work.
[1:30:34] I think once we get below CD3L,
[1:30:36] we would have to really take a hard look
at whether or not it's feasible for us.
[1:30:43] But I don't know if you're able to give
feedback right now, but just—
[1:30:48] Is CD3L something that the Board would So
it's 20,000-square-foot lots.
[1:30:55] So essentially, you're talking about 2
units per acre. Is that correct?
[1:30:58] Well, it comes out to less than that.
[1:31:01] Because you've got all the other roads and
stuff like that that you have to—
[1:31:04] Correct.
[1:31:05] Our target when we redesigned it was 2
units per acre.
[1:31:09] And you said connectivity east and west,
but not south?
[1:31:17] Issue with connectivity directly south.
[1:31:20] Well, one, the property directly to our
south has a driveway,
[1:31:25] a flag that comes up north on the east
side of our property,
[1:31:30] and that is one of their entrances.
[1:31:32] And so we border that property to the
south across the creek, but also to the
[1:31:38] south across the creek, but also to the
east,
[1:31:39] their driveway that That goes up and hits
Kidd Road.
[1:31:43] Building a bridge on our property across
the creek to provide connectivity to the
[1:31:49] property in the south, which we don't
control, the property in the south,
[1:31:55] would be very expensive,
[1:31:57] likely prohibitively expensive to build a
bridge to connect directly to the south.
[1:32:03] But since their driveway borders our
property to the east,
[1:32:08] Connecting to that property to the east
would be a lot cheaper and easier.
[1:32:14] So again, if you look at this,
[1:32:16] when we were going through discussion
Planning Commission level, this property,
[1:32:22] like some in Nolensville,
[1:32:24] is extremely unique in the topography that
it holds and what is buildable.
[1:32:30] I won't say I'm necessarily opposed to the
3L,
[1:32:34] but I still have a lot of questions about
the 3L and the original intent of what the
[1:32:40] Board of Commissioners had for, um, the
growth on the outskirts of town,
[1:32:46] or as we transitioned, if you will.
[1:32:48] Um, but I do understand the challenge of
the, the creek.
[1:32:53] Even when we were looking at this
originally and saying there's no way
[1:32:58] originally and saying there's no way
they're going
[1:32:59] to be able to, to give us that even with C
with 3 C's.
[1:33:03] Mm-hmm.
[1:33:05] So it sounds like for the east, it's a
stub.
[1:33:07] And then when that little sliver should
get developed at any point, if it does,
[1:33:13] then you would have your connectivity to
the south.
[1:33:16] Again, that's just— it's one of those
pieces to this unique property is that
[1:33:21] pieces to this unique property is that
there
[1:33:21] is— I hate to say it,
[1:33:23] but the density of what you would need to
actually financially be able to do what
[1:33:28] the town would hope with a lot like this
is, is much heavier than, than what,
[1:33:33] at least for myself, I would be willing to
allow to do.
[1:33:37] So if you're looking for that connectivity
to the south,
[1:33:40] it really only comes from that property—
well, really to the east,
[1:33:45] or the potential of the one— no, even the
west has some creek line in it.
[1:33:50] So yeah, it's really just the east.
[1:33:52] Just, uh, if you can imagine it,
[1:33:54] Kidd Road and then the Ringman property
and then the creek and then the properties
[1:33:59] to the south. The property to the south
continues up.
[1:34:03] So if the property to the south, directly
south of us, is developed,
[1:34:07] which it's been rezoned and we understand
it is going to be developed, um,
[1:34:12] I can't speak for the owners,
[1:34:14] but if the property directly to our south
is developed, they will presumably—
[1:34:19] You—
[1:34:20] it's not a separate parcel.
[1:34:22] So they will presumably use that as a
driveway and we could connect to that
[1:34:27] there. We thought that was a good
compromise.
[1:34:30] I think I would support a 3L.
[1:34:33] I have been fixated really since I started
getting into this on this idea that we
[1:34:39] have got a lot of zoned property that just
cannot be developed to standards.
[1:34:45] I mean, it's just not— they're to the
regulations, it's just not possible.
[1:34:50] And so I'm sympathetic to that.
[1:34:53] It's good to hear that you all think that
you might be able to get to 3L because
[1:34:59] that was, that was kind of where I was at
before the last meeting.
[1:35:04] I'm, I'm not comfortable with 3, and I
know it's, it's hard.
[1:35:09] That's why I'm glad we're working through
this.
[1:35:13] Yes.
[1:35:13] At the Planning Commission because it is
hard to sit up here and say, you know, oh,
[1:35:19] I trust you, you'll build to a certain
level when you have this ability to— well,
[1:35:25] you have a theoretical ability,
[1:35:28] hypothetical ability to go to what you
were allowed per zoning.
[1:35:32] So I could— I believe I could get to 3L. I
appreciate you revisiting that.
[1:35:38] Yeah, that's kind of where I'm at right
now.
[1:35:41] One thing that we did think of,
[1:35:45] I don't know if this is something that
Nolensville does,
[1:35:51] but since there is that gap between CD-3
and CD-3L,
[1:35:56] we would be willing to restrict the
property to a specific unit
[1:36:03] count in CD-3. But, you know, hard capped
at X number of units?
[1:36:09] That's something that's under
consideration by the Planning Commission,
[1:36:14] but right now we don't have the authority
to do that.
[1:36:18] We do have the authority within the zoning
ordinance for a special zone,
[1:36:23] but that zone then has to become available
for anyone else to use.
[1:36:28] And I imagine Planning Commission has also
been discussing that.
[1:36:32] And if there needs to be a different
transitional zone out from CD-3.
[1:36:37] You are referencing the special district
discussions?
[1:36:43] Yes.
[1:36:44] I'm not sure I understand the provisions
as well as I would like to as they are
[1:36:49] currently written as it relates to the
special district provisions.
[1:36:53] So I'm not sure what guidance I could
give.
[1:36:57] Charles says it's not helpful at all.
[1:36:58] Yeah, there you go.
[1:36:59] That's a, that's a better way to say it.
[1:37:00] So this is kind of where I went back to,
um,
[1:37:03] with the 2 properties that were currently
annexed.
[1:37:06] They are, um, I won't— I don't want to say
in a hurry,
[1:37:10] but willing to work through the Planning
Commission finalizing.
[1:37:14] We have a document that is not always
usable, as you have experienced,
[1:37:19] and so we are trying to get to a place
Where not only is it maintaining the level
[1:37:24] that we would like for development in
Nolensville,
[1:37:27] but it is also something that developers
are able to come and build more easily and
[1:37:32] understand. And so we are very much so in
that process.
[1:37:36] And one of those is looking at if there is
a modification of standards to be allowed
[1:37:41] and how that approval process— but we are
working through it.
[1:37:45] And I would love to say that it will be—
[1:37:48] Yes.
[1:37:49] Done soon, but I'm going to say soonish
that it will be complete.
[1:37:53] It is a very large document with a lot of
changes that are needing to be made.
[1:37:59] So again, I don't disagree with
Commissioner Carpenter.
[1:38:03] Just 3L, I think it eases my comfort level
a little,
[1:38:07] but I don't know that I'm completely there
yet.
[1:38:10] Working through just the piece of land is
where I'm having some issue with how many
[1:38:16] units go there and what it could
potentially become.
[1:38:20] So not a no, but definitely some more
information needed.
[1:38:24] And we are very eager to keep having these
conversations as well.
[1:38:29] Hopefully we can make everybody happy and
get to a place where everybody understands
[1:38:35] what we are trying to do.
[1:38:37] I will say if we are talking about the
code,
[1:38:41] what something that we found when working
through CD-3 versus CD-3L is if CD-3L
[1:38:47] provided a number of units per acre
instead of square footage, that would
[1:38:53] instead of square footage, that would
really,
[1:38:53] I think, make it easier for us to develop
in CD-3L.
[1:38:57] Thank you. Appreciate that.
[1:38:59] Yeah.
[1:39:00] Thank you all very much.
[1:39:01] Thank you, sir.
[1:39:02] All right. The next item on the agenda is
our proposed agenda for September 3rd,
[1:39:08] 2020. 26. We will have recognition for the
Nolensville Little League baseball team
[1:39:14] for District 7 champion, for Tennessee
state champion,
[1:39:18] and the Southeast Little League region
runner-up.
[1:39:21] We'll also have presentations for the
Buttercup Festival donation checks.
[1:39:27] And Commissioner Struford,
[1:39:29] you pointed out earlier that this should
be amended to also say the Nolensville
[1:39:35] Library. Okay, he said yes very quietly.
[1:39:38] Mayor, if you don't mind, can I just go
back to A for a quick second?
[1:39:41] Montique, I sent you and Katie the
information.
[1:39:44] Was it— I'm waiting for Coach's name.
Yeah, okay, but is there anything else?
[1:39:48] That's all we would need to make. Okay,
perfect.
[1:39:50] Okay, thank you.
[1:39:51] Thank you for that.
[1:39:53] And then we will have public hearing for
Ordinance
[1:39:58] 26-15. I see that Chuck is coming to the
podium.
[1:40:02] Just a very quick reminder that we have an
amendment to that ordinance that we're
[1:40:06] going to be introducing during the regular
meeting.
[1:40:09] We'll try to get you that well in advance,
[1:40:11] but it deals with the plumbing code and
specifically the plumbing permit fees.
[1:40:16] We're going to try to match them up with
the new software that we have,
[1:40:19] so we'll be mirroring what we do for
mechanical fees.
[1:40:24] During the public hearing,
[1:40:25] will we need to recognize you so that you
can share that at that time?
[1:40:28] I'll make that available for the, for the
hearing so people can see that in advance.
[1:40:32] And then we also have public hearing for
Ordinance 26-17,
[1:40:36] an ordinance amending the fiscal year 2027
budget by the Board of Commissioners.
[1:40:42] Any item or discussion for this public
hearing?
[1:40:45] And will our budget amendment for the fire
department be included in this So we'll
[1:40:51] probably need to follow suit with how we
handle the plan review ordinance and at
[1:40:56] least mention that during the public
hearing.
[1:40:59] Is that something the fire department will
handle, or will, uh,
[1:41:04] who will handle that in the public hearing
so that we know who to call on?
[1:41:09] Christina.
[1:41:11] Okay.
[1:41:17] All right, the next item on the agenda is
our consent agenda.
[1:41:21] Any questions about any of the—
[1:41:23] either the budget report from the finance
director or any departmental reports or
[1:41:27] reports from town committees?
[1:41:29] Excited to see the new report from Public
Works.
[1:41:35] Looks good.
[1:41:35] You guys have been working hard on keeping
that grass mowed.
[1:41:40] Um, the— this summer has been ridiculous
with the amount of rain,
[1:41:45] and you're doing a good job.
[1:41:47] I don't know how you're keeping up with it
because my husband has not kept up with
[1:41:53] our yard.
[1:41:54] Yeah, we've been working very hard to
implement the new work order system.
[1:41:59] If you've seen the reports, we had a total
of 258 work orders.
[1:42:04] The majority of those were obviously
completed.
[1:42:07] Right now our average completion time is 3
days.
[1:42:10] Um, we spent Friday logging our sidewalk
sections.
[1:42:14] We have a total of 42 sidewalk sections
that need to be completed.
[1:42:18] Because we're putting in those sidewalk
work orders now,
[1:42:22] you are going to see an increase to the
work order time.
[1:42:26] We are very, very busy with mowing right
now,
[1:42:29] but we will be working to get to those
sidewalk sections as quickly as possible.
[1:42:35] Thank you.
[1:42:36] And then as the mowing season dies down,
[1:42:39] we will be able to get to those sections
much more quickly.
[1:42:42] Thank you, Kyle.
[1:42:45] Mayor, I'll just give you some feedback
about mowing.
[1:42:48] When Will turns to be about 16 and wants
gas money, that,
[1:42:52] that's a great incentive to get the yard
mowed around the family house.
[1:42:57] He, he actually already does mow now.
[1:43:00] Um, he, he actually knows how to use his
Your turn as well, Kyle.
[1:43:04] We've just got a lot of grass, man. We've
got a lot of grass to mow.
[1:43:08] Have you considered a goat?
[1:43:10] I have, actually, I have, but I'm not very
good with farm animals and/or plants.
[1:43:17] Okay, any other comments on the—
[1:43:20] do we want to talk through the capital
project update?
[1:43:25] Do we—
[1:43:26] there was some good information in Enoch's
as well.
[1:43:29] Is there anything else anyone wants to
talk through?
[1:43:33] I do want to recognize the TAPS committee
for the grant that they got notification
[1:43:38] in the last week or so.
[1:43:40] It is also a component of the 30th
birthday for the town,
[1:43:43] and that it is visual storytelling for
interviewing people from Nolensville's
[1:43:48] interviewing people from Nolensville's
past.
[1:43:49] There's several different individuals that
were identified that were a part of the
[1:43:54] incorporation of the town,
[1:43:56] and I think it will be a really special
and unique way to recognize the 30th
[1:44:01] birthday and capture some of those stories
that we won't have the luxury of
[1:44:06] capturing forever. So, uh, TAPS committee
is, is doing great things.
[1:44:11] All right, unfinished business.
[1:44:13] We have second reading of Ordinance 26-17,
[1:44:15] an ordinance amending the fiscal year '27
budget by the Board of Commissioners.
[1:44:21] Any discussion on this?
[1:44:22] We'll have New business, Ordinance 26-18,
an ordinance to amend Title 3, Chapter 2,
[1:44:28] Section 3-205 to establish collection of
unpaid fines and costs.
[1:44:32] Any discussion on this item or
presentation from staff?
[1:44:36] Able to answer any questions you have.
[1:44:38] The ordinance is to provide a mechanism
for us to be able to enter into an
[1:44:44] for us to be able to enter into an
agreement
[1:44:45] with a third-party consultant To collect
unpaid fines and fees.
[1:44:49] You can see the dollar value in the staff
report.
[1:44:53] This goes back many, many years before our
current staff.
[1:44:57] Typically, the success rate declines over
time because the information that we have
[1:45:03] on the defendant gets old,
[1:45:05] but we're going to do everything we can to
engage a third-party consultant with the
[1:45:11] intent of trying to collect Collect as
much of that bad debt as we can.
[1:45:17] This is the first critical step to making
that happen.
[1:45:21] Is there any objection to this being on
the consent agenda?
[1:45:25] The next item on the agenda is Resolution
26-091,
[1:45:28] a resolution to approve vendor services
agreement between Town of Nolensville and
[1:45:33] Steelhead Building Group, LLC for
construction of Chrisman Brown Park
[1:45:38] construction of Chrisman Brown Park
project.
[1:45:41] As you recall, we have gone through a
request for proposal process.
[1:45:45] We had a number of qualified contractors
that proposed on the project.
[1:45:49] The low apparent bidder was Steelhead
Building Group.
[1:45:52] We have gone through, done the proper due
diligence on the company.
[1:45:56] Everything was found to be in good order.
We have negotiated a contract.
[1:46:01] That contract is before you for your
consideration.
[1:46:04] Thank you.
[1:46:05] You can see that we basically in the
contract, we reflected not only the base
[1:46:10] contract, we reflected not only the base
bid,
[1:46:10] but also alternate bids for alternate
number 1 to enlarge the restroom to
[1:46:14] number 1 to enlarge the restroom to
include
[1:46:14] that overhang porch area.
[1:46:16] We think that was beneficial,
[1:46:17] especially with the inclement weather to
give people a place of refuge.
[1:46:21] And then also substituting the shingle
roof for a standing seam metal roof,
[1:46:26] which we think will be a much more durable
finish,
[1:46:29] especially given Some of the hail events
that we have here.
[1:46:32] Hopefully that'll hold up a little bit
better on the investment.
[1:46:36] The contract, as you can see, the dollar
amounts that are provided in it,
[1:46:40] we are anticipating issuing a notice to
proceed around the middle of September
[1:46:44] following contract approval.
[1:46:46] We have to first submit documentation to
the state to get their concurrence on the
[1:46:50] contract instrument itself.
[1:46:52] Once we receive that, we'll issue a notice
to proceed soon after that.
[1:46:56] Thank you.
[1:46:57] Contractor has 304 days, roughly 10 months
to complete the work.
[1:47:01] That would put the completion date
sometime mid-July.
[1:47:04] We are hopeful that they will finish well
in advance of that, but again,
[1:47:08] that is the contract terms that we have.
[1:47:11] There is a liquidated damage provision in
this contract that was provided.
[1:47:15] So again, part of one of the concerns you
all had expressed was making sure that we
[1:47:20] had some—
[1:47:21] Yes.
[1:47:22] Additional mechanisms to ensure timely
delivery.
[1:47:25] Happy to address any other questions you
might have, but, uh,
[1:47:28] staff's recommendation is to approve the
resolution that would approve the contract
[1:47:33] and also authorize the mayor for
signature.
[1:47:36] We've included also a project contingency.
[1:47:38] Uh, if you recall the geotechnical work
that we have for the bridge abutment and
[1:47:43] foundation systems, we would be using
money out of that contingency.
[1:47:47] Thank you.
[1:47:47] for that purpose. Happy to address any
questions you might have.
[1:47:51] And we also have James Polland here in
case you want to put a face with the
[1:47:55] contractor. They've done a lot of good
work here and around Middle Tennessee,
[1:47:59] so if you have any specific questions of
the contractor,
[1:48:02] I'm sure he could step up and address
those for you as well.
[1:48:06] I think the only change to the contract I
would request is that we have a staff
[1:48:12] member be where official notices are
delivered as opposed to the, the mayor,
[1:48:18] just because as mayor I'm not here all the
time, but staff is.
[1:48:23] And so I noticed on page 7 and 8 there's
notices and other communications shall be
[1:48:29] deemed sufficiently given if they're
delivered to— it has my name.
[1:48:35] So my preference would be not me.
[1:48:37] Okay, we could put the town manager in
your
[1:48:43] place if you'd like. It's usually
customary.
[1:48:48] Or assistant town manager, one of the two.
[1:48:50] Yeah, you're the—
[1:48:51] you're the—
[1:48:51] you're the executive.
[1:48:52] We could put Tyler. I mean, I think Tyler
would do great. Just not—
[1:48:54] Yeah, I'm here. I'm here often.
[1:48:56] I know other contracts have had the
mayor's name.
[1:48:59] Yeah, you're the executive leader within
the group.
[1:49:02] So we frequently do town Manager too.
Okay, it's fine. You can do that.
[1:49:06] All right, I should have kept my mouth
shut.
[1:49:09] Hopefully—
[1:49:10] any other questions?
[1:49:11] Hopefully we won't have any notices that
will need to come,
[1:49:14] so good smooth construction process.
[1:49:15] Okay, any objections to that being on the
consent agenda?
[1:49:20] If it's on consent agenda, then it's
definitely Monday.
[1:49:25] Well, no, let's just take it off the menu.
Have the—
[1:49:29] yeah.
[1:49:29] Okay.
[1:49:31] All right. Number 3 is Resolution 26-092,
[1:49:34] a resolution to enter into a professional
services agreement with Civil
[1:49:38] Infrastructure Associates for servicing
surveying services.
[1:49:43] This is for surveying for Baronswood and
the area for sidewalks.
[1:49:47] Any questions or discussion on this?
[1:49:50] One of the things that we owe you is a
professional services agreement to
[1:49:53] professional services agreement to
accompany
[1:49:53] the resolution. We will be preparing that
to include with the agenda package.
[1:49:57] Happy to address any other questions you
might have.
[1:49:59] I think the value was around $16,000 for
the contract plus a $10,000 contingency.
[1:50:05] And I just want to point out that this
project is funded through sidewalk in lieu
[1:50:12] project is funded through sidewalk in lieu
of
[1:50:12] payments that were made by development
along the Kidd Road area,
[1:50:17] also fees that were Specifically allocated
from the Beezer development,
[1:50:22] some of which had to be used on certain
roads.
[1:50:26] So this wasn't just, oh, let's put
sidewalks everywhere.
[1:50:30] It was specifically tied to certain
development that impacted these areas.
[1:50:36] Any discussion or concern with this being
on consent?
[1:50:40] I guess you don't want it on consent, do
you, Chuck? Are you okay with it consent?
[1:50:46] You haven't seen the agreement yet.
[1:50:48] So it might be appropriate to keep that on
the regular part of the
[1:50:52] agenda, but that's your decision.
[1:50:54] Okay, next one is Resolution 26-094,
[1:50:57] a resolution accepting a $10,000 donation
from the Tennessee Internet Crimes Against
[1:51:02] Children Clearinghouse for internet crimes
against children investigative purposes.
[1:51:08] Any discussion or presentation about this
particular donation?
[1:51:13] I think it's a shame that we to have this.
[1:51:16] I, I appreciate that there are donations
for investigating these areas.
[1:51:21] I hate that this is an issue in, in our
community or any community.
[1:51:25] So this is through the Tennessee Office of
Criminal Justice Programs.
[1:51:31] It's a $10,000 grant, and the funds go
specifically to specialized training,
[1:51:37] any travel or investigative services that
go in line with ICAT cases.
[1:51:42] Uh, there should also be a forensic
computer that they're donating as well.
[1:51:48] A ballpark of between $2,000 and $3,000 is
estimated value of that forensic.
[1:51:57] So any questions or comments about this
donation?
[1:52:01] Thank you, Lieutenant.
[1:52:03] Any objection to this being on consent?
[1:52:09] No.
[1:52:09] The next item is Resolution 26-095,
[1:52:11] a resolution to authorize the purchase of
a zero-turn mower for the Public Works
[1:52:18] Department. Any questions or objection to
consent?
[1:52:21] You're welcome to talk if you want, Kyle,
[1:52:25] but you don't have to if you don't want
to.
[1:52:28] Just, just so you're aware,
[1:52:30] I believe we had $15,500 budgeted for that
zero-turn mower.
[1:52:33] We can always use a zero-turn mower.
[1:52:36] It'll help us get those work orders done
even faster.
[1:52:39] When the multi-purpose field comes on at
Christen Braun Park,
[1:52:43] it will also be dedicated to that
specifically.
[1:52:46] I know when we talked about budgeting for
it,
[1:52:49] there was some concern about if we used a
mower that you all used for right-of-way
[1:52:54] mowing in the park area that we would get
weeds in the multi-use field.
[1:52:58] So like, are we no longer concerned about
that, or—
[1:53:01] Well, we are. What we would have to do is
clean it up very well, uh,
[1:53:05] get it cleaned up, and then once it's
being used on that field, that's what—
[1:53:08] that's what it would be for.
[1:53:09] Okay. Any other questions or objection to
consent?
[1:53:16] No, ma'am.
[1:53:18] The next item is Resolution 26-096,
[1:53:20] the resolution to accept the Judy Housley
Safety Partners matching grant program
[1:53:25] from Public Entity Partners for the
purchase of police safety equipment.
[1:53:29] I would like to disclose that I work for
Public Entity Partners,
[1:53:33] but this is a grant giving money to the
town.
[1:53:36] I don't have a financial interest or
involvement in administration of the grant
[1:53:41] programs for Public Entity Partners.
[1:53:44] Any questions about the grant or what
we're applying for?
[1:53:47] I'm not going to put that on consent
because I'll say that in the meeting too.
[1:53:52] All right, the next item would be
appointments to the Historic Nolensville
[1:53:57] appointments to the Historic Nolensville
Buttercup
[1:53:57] Committee, and we would make those in the
live meeting.
[1:54:01] I know the TAPS committee member still
wants to be on the Buttercup Committee,
[1:54:06] and I believe I understand that everybody
that served previously from town
[1:54:11] committees wants to continue on,
[1:54:13] but I do believe at least one member of
the Buttercup Festival committee is moving
[1:54:18] out of town, and so, um,
[1:54:19] maybe we can get some information before
the voting meeting just to confirm so
[1:54:24] everybody is clear about who wants to stay
on.
[1:54:27] And Tracy, you're welcome to come up and
share if you want to share now,
[1:54:32] or you can do it later.
[1:54:33] I have no new information.
[1:54:35] Okay, that takes us to other. Any other
items that we need to review?
[1:54:41] I know this was a really tough couple
weeks for our community,
[1:54:46] and I know it's also tough on staff,
[1:54:48] and I don't really think there's the right
words to share for the tragedy that
[1:54:55] happened in our community a little over a
week ago,
[1:54:59] but I'm thankful to the first responders
that were there to serve the community,
[1:55:05] and I know that tragedies like the loss of
life impact everybody,
[1:55:10] from children that go to school to anybody
that lives in the neighborhood or the
[1:55:16] broader community. So like I said, there's
really not the right words,
[1:55:22] but I'm appreciative for everyone who
stepped up to serve the community.
[1:55:27] Yeah, thank you for that.
[1:55:29] I don't have anything to add, but I do
appreciate you bringing that up.
[1:55:38] I have one, one thing that I just wanted
to bring up.
[1:55:42] When I removed Lance Sutton's item,
[1:55:44] I did not know that we had a guest in the
audience for that item that drove here
[1:55:51] from Cincinnati.
[1:55:52] Amen.
[1:55:54] And so I wanted to just recognize him.
[1:55:58] Carlton Smith, is that right,
[1:56:01] is with the National Fire Safety Council,
is that correct?
[1:56:07] Lance's presentation was going to be
wrapped around
[1:56:13] basically a, a, almost a fundraiser type
of a thing.
[1:56:19] Yeah, we would welcome you to the podium.
[1:56:27] Lance and Chief Weingart have the
information.
[1:56:30] They may have already shared it with you,
[1:56:33] but we're a 501 nonprofit and we've been
around since 1955.
[1:56:37] We used to do the missing and exploited
children on the milk cartons.
[1:56:42] I don't know if any of you are old enough
to remember that, but, uh,
[1:56:47] they used to get at the grocery store.
[1:56:49] We help departments Raise money to provide
materials for child safety education,
[1:56:55] fire safety education. And we do that
through fundraising through the
[1:57:00] through fundraising through the
department.
[1:57:01] Basically what happens is we have a letter
format that goes out under the chief's
[1:57:06] signature on your letterhead.
[1:57:09] So it's coming from you or from the chief
to the community.
[1:57:13] And, um, If the business— it goes to
businesses.
[1:57:16] If the business wants to make a donation
to help support fire safety education,
[1:57:22] they return a check and it comes here
first. And then it comes to me.
[1:57:27] So there's no, it's all transparent.
There's no smoke and mirrors.
[1:57:31] Um, the money goes into an account
specifically for your department.
[1:57:36] And then we have materials, which I've
given them samples to, Uh, look at that,
[1:57:42] of the materials that we have, and they
can choose from those products to, uh,
[1:57:47] get the information out to the community.
[1:57:50] So it's, uh, I just, uh, wanted to make
sure that, uh, you know,
[1:57:55] I appreciate the opportunity.
[1:57:57] I'm sorry Lance isn't feeling well, and I
just wanted to put a face with the name.
[1:58:02] I'm the contact. So, uh, from the time the
decision is made Yes or no.
[1:58:07] If it's yes, then every phone call comes
to me. I handle the ordering.
[1:58:12] I handle helping design the products that
you might want to take to the kids if you
[1:58:18] want my help. And if not, then it's, it's
all good.
[1:58:22] But we appreciate the opportunity,
[1:58:24] and I'm sure they'll have an opportunity
to bring that to you in the future.
[1:58:29] But just wanted to put a face with the
name and let you know I'm your guy.
[1:58:35] So any of the funds that happen to be
donated from this community come right
[1:58:39] donated from this community come right
back to
[1:58:40] this community through, through you?
[1:58:42] Exactly right. They can, they stay in your
fund balance.
[1:58:46] The only thing that happens the first
year, uh, postage is free up to 500
[1:58:51] year, uh, postage is free up to 500
mailings.
[1:58:51] After that, we deduct postage.
[1:58:53] So if we mailed, it's $1.28 this year per
mailing,
[1:58:57] and that includes the envelope we mail it
in, the check return. Return envelope.
[1:59:02] They send their check back in as well as
the letter.
[1:59:06] And if they make a donation, we send a
thank you note under the chief's
[1:59:11] thank you note under the chief's
signature,
[1:59:11] thanking them for their donation and
giving them a tax deductible receipt
[1:59:16] giving them a tax deductible receipt
because it
[1:59:17] is tax deductible. So that's all included
for your $1.28 per donation.
[1:59:22] So if we mailed 100 letters, it would be
$128. If we mail 1,000, it would be
[1:59:27] $128. If we mail 1,000, it would be
$1,280.
[1:59:27] Okay.
[1:59:28] Yeah, it won't happen here.
[1:59:30] But, um, other than that, the funds go
into your account. They stay there.
[1:59:36] Uh, if you don't spend them all this year,
it can roll to the next year.
[1:59:42] Uh, so it's not, it never leaves.
[1:59:45] And if you decided you didn't want to
continue the program,
[1:59:49] then until you spend the money, it stays
there. We can't give it to anybody else.
[1:59:56] And so it's, it's yours.
[1:59:58] The, uh, I lost my train of thought for a
second, but, um, sorry.
[2:00:04] Any other questions while I'm trying to
think about it?
[2:00:08] It happens to us all the time.
[2:00:10] Uh, so I'm sure there'll be questions. Oh,
I know what it was.
[2:00:15] There's no contract, no commitment other
than to say Yeah, we'll give it a try.
[2:00:20] If you try it for a year and you don't
like it,
[2:00:23] you can say it's not for us and we won't
mail for you any longer.
[2:00:27] If you do like it, then we just continue
on.
[2:00:30] We have a— we enjoy a 95% renewal rate
year over year,
[2:00:34] and we service about 2,000 fire
departments across the country.
[2:00:38] Okay.
[2:00:40] I think it sounds good.
[2:00:41] Thank you.
[2:00:42] Sounds like a wonderful program,
[2:00:43] and I think another opportunity for us to
provide an service in town.
[2:00:47] Like Victor said, donation is from here
but stays here,
[2:00:50] and we are able to provide that to
families.
[2:00:52] So thank you both to the department and
yourself.
[2:00:55] And there's no— again, if they don't want
to make a donation,
[2:00:59] they throw it in the trash and they hear
not back from us until next year.
[2:01:03] Um, so thank you very much. Have a good
evening. I appreciate you letting me
[2:01:08] evening. I appreciate you letting me
speak.
[2:01:12] All right, any other items before we
[2:01:17] adjourn? Is there a motion to adjourn?
[2:01:21] Motion to adjourn.
[2:01:24] Second.
[2:01:25] All in favor of adjournment signify by
saying aye.
[2:01:28] Aye.
[2:01:28] All opposed?
[2:01:30] Motion passes unanimously. We are
adjourned.