Residents at the Oct. 9 Cheatham County Commission workshop urged commissioners to reconsider a proposed Rustic Hills commercial/residential development and raised concerns about traffic, schools and environmental impacts.

In public comment, Mike Campbell, a county resident, told commissioners the project could be locked in at 120 units if rezoned and questioned the developer's projected $6 million annual benefit. "If that property is rezoned to do what the developers wanting to do... it will be locked in at 120 units," Campbell said. Lisa Kanakan, another resident, said the site is agricultural land adjacent to Harpeth River State Park and called for preserving it as parkland. "It's gonna cause undue stress on our infrastructure, on the roads, on the community," she said.

County staff and legal counsel later addressed ownership and maintenance of Rustic Hills Road after residents asked whether the county maintains the roadway. The county attorney said the county appears to maintain the portion of Rustic Hills shown on a 1977 subdivision plat — roughly the first four lots — but does not maintain the road beyond that. "Beyond that, it has never been offered to the county to be a county road in anything that I've seen," the county attorney said, adding that the unmaintained portion is private property and would have to be formally offered, brought up to county standards and accepted before the county could assume maintenance.

Discussion at the workshop distinguished residents' concerns from formal land-use actions. No rezoning or other formal action on Rustic Hills occurred at the workshop; public comment was part of the meeting's open forum. Commission staff and counsel said any decision on a developer proposal would be handled through the formal planning and rezoning process, and that road acceptance requires a title path and improvements to county specifications.

Residents asked commissioners to weigh the traffic and school impacts associated with full-time households versus commercial or short‑term rental units and to consider the long-term implications for roads and public services. County officials noted that private road segments cannot be maintained by the county unless ownership and standards are resolved.

Commissioners did not vote on the development at the workshop; the item remains a matter for any future planning, rezoning and road‑acceptance processes.