Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision Approval topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission conditions Sagewood Phase 2 final plat on retention or easement for Lot 61
Summary
The commission approved Sagewood Phase 2 final plat but added a condition requiring the developer to retain Lot 61 or record an easement for future connectivity before selling it.
Get email alerts on the Subdivision Approval topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Tullahoma Planning Commission approved the final plat for Sagewood Phase 2, a 36‑lot subdivision off Short Springs Road, but attached a written condition requiring the developer either to retain Lot 61 or to grant a recorded easement for future connectivity before selling that lot.
Nicholas Northcutt, a surveyor representing developer Allen Howard, told the commission Phase 1 infrastructure is nearly complete and the developer seeks final approval for Phase 2. City staff said the Development Advisory Committee reviewed a modification that removed a previously required stub street to a neighboring property and found the existing fire access lane and other access provisions met fire‑department requirements.
Commissioner Sellers and several neighbors raised safety and connectivity concerns, noting the existing fire access lane in Phase 1 extends only a short distance and that removal of the stub could preclude future connection to adjacent property owned by Anderson. Mr. Northcutt said the developer removed the stub at his request but left building radii and setbacks on Lot 61 that would permit a future connection; he also said the developer intends to retain Lot 61 in the near term.
After discussion, commissioners amended the approval with a condition that the owner retain Lot 61 or grant an easement for connectivity before selling the lot; commissioners said the agreement should be in writing and recorded so future purchasers are aware of potential connectivity. The amended motion carried unanimously 6‑0; the final plat approval was made contingent on that written agreement being provided and reviewed by staff.
Commissioners and staff noted that the International Fire Code informed prior access requirements, but final approval required only that the fire‑department access and the Development Advisory Committee find the submitted plans compliant. The condition created a binding record requirement: if the developer sells Lot 61, the sale must be prefaced by a recorded easement that preserves the opportunity for future road connectivity.

