Wilson County commissioners deny First Park 840 rezoning after contentious hearing on flooding, traffic and quality of life

Wilson County commissioners voted 13–12 on July 21 to deny a request by First Industrial Realty Trust to rezone roughly 70 acres near the SR‑840/Couchville Pike interchange for an industrial development called First Park 840.

The developer and its engineers told the commission the project would pay more than $6 million in private stormwater improvements, widen portions of Couchville Pike and Underwood Road, and build a system of retention ponds and cleaned sinkholes engineered to manage a 100‑year storm. Many nearby homeowners opposed the rezoning, saying the project would harm the area’s rural character, increase heavy‑truck traffic and could make flooding worse for neighbors who remain.

The hearing drew more than 50 public commenters and multiple technical presentations. Jason Jackson, a First Industrial representative, told commissioners the proposal included a stormwater system sized to the 100‑year event and road improvements “of almost a million dollars” for Couchville Pike and Underwood Road. Jackson said the developer would install a 20‑foot undisturbed buffer—roughly double the county minimum—and limit truck access so that Underwood and Lone Oak roads would not be used for regular truck traffic.

Engineers supporting the plan described technical measures intended to reduce runoff. Mark Boyd, identified in the meeting as a senior engineer with Kimley‑Horn, said the site’s sinkholes and runoff have produced “decades‑long issues” and that the plan uses multiple on‑site ponds to detain the 100‑year storm and release water in a controlled way. Mark Herman, a geotechnical engineer with TTO, described plans to clean and line existing sinkholes with open, highly permeable material so they can function more effectively. Independent reviewer Ben Butler, a civil engineer hired to provide a third‑party analysis, said his firm found the preliminary plans could meet Wilson County stormwater regulations and that no infiltration credit was taken for the existing sinkholes during modeling.

Supporters included several homeowners who said repeated flooding has left their properties effectively unsellable. Julie Kirby said she and her family lost an estimated $80,000 in business equipment during a February flood and that First Industrial had engaged the neighborhood and offered what she called “a plan that included and helped those of us that flood.” Chad Williams, whose property is in the rezoning area, said the developer was “buying the worst land” to create a solution for the neighborhood. Multiple other residents and several county economic development and engineering professionals said the project would bring jobs and tax revenue without using county funds.

Opponents raised concerns about long‑term effects on drainage, traffic and the Glade ecosystem. Residents including Rachel Gwen, Monty Gordon and James Davis questioned whether covering sinkholes or placing filter fabric over them would change groundwater paths in unpredictable ways and warned that surface water could be routed onto other properties. Laurie Payne, who described the local Glade ecosystem as rare, said blasting and covering karst features would damage habitat. Several speakers also cited noise, added heavy‑truck traffic, perceived declines in local road maintenance and potential property devaluation.

Planning staff told the commission the application had been before the Planning Commission on May 16 and was forwarded to the county commission with no recommendation; staff also listed a set of minimum conditions it recommended be attached to any approval, including widening 1,400 feet of Underwood Road to a three‑lane section, gated emergency access points with Knox Box entry, posted signage restricting truck traffic at Underwood/Couchville, a minimum design standard that stormwater detention handle the 100‑year storm, a 20‑foot preservation buffer adjacent to residential parcels, and widening Couchville Pike right‑of‑way to match existing turn lanes.

Commissioner discussion reflected the split in the public record: some commissioners emphasized the long history of flooding and the county’s limited budget to solve the problem, and argued private investment that exceeded county standards was a rare opportunity to protect residents. Other commissioners said the volume of neighborhood opposition and concerns about traffic, quality of life and groundwater impacts weighed against rezoning.

Commissioner [Hobbs] moved to deny the rezoning on the stated grounds of quality of life; the motion was seconded (second not specified in the record) and carried by recorded vote, 13 in favor of denial, 12 opposed. The chair announced, “Therefore, the rezoning is denied.”

Because the Planning Commission forwarded the matter with no recommendation, the county commission’s vote closes this application for rezoning at this meeting. The developer and property owners may pursue future applications or alternative designs for parts of the property, subject to county land‑use processes.

Votes at the meeting also included several unrelated items (speed limit resolutions, a separate master‑plan amendment, appointments and a budget amendment). Those actions and their outcomes are summarized in a separate “Votes at a glance” article.

Sources: Wilson County public hearing transcript, July 21, 2025; presentations by First Industrial representatives and engineering consultants; public comments recorded at the hearing.