Planning panel defers Kittrell Glen after safety audit flags Baxter Road deficiencies

The Rutherford County Regional Planning Commission on Oct. 27 deferred consideration of the Kittrell Glen preliminary plan, a proposed 156‑lot subdivision on roughly 150.2 acres along Baxter Road, after commissioners raised safety concerns about the primary access road.

Staff said the applicant, Castle Rock Communities, Tennessee LLC, proposes 156 lots (about 151 for single‑family homes) with the primary entrance on Baxter Road and a secondary connection to Upper Glade Court in the Baird's Corner subdivision. Planner Doug DeMasi told the commission the item was initially deferred in May to allow the developer to address safety recommendations from a traffic impact study and a follow‑up safety audit.

The county’s reviewing engineer, Mike Hughes, summarized the safety audit: “lack of basic pavement marking, signage, clarity, vegetation, obstruction, the views and signage, missing stop control devices, substandard sign height,” and added that there were roadside safety concerns at a nearby bridge, inadequate drainage and damaged signage. Hughes said many of the items are maintenance or geometric issues that would be addressed during construction plan review but that Highway Department cooperation will be needed for some fixes.

Commissioners repeatedly flagged Baxter Road's narrow widths and substandard pavement. Commissioner Robert Peay said he was “very concerned about Baxter Road” and warned that the existing road network and nearby school capacity raised objections to placing 152 additional houses on the corridor. Multiple commissioners said turn lanes were not recommended by the traffic study for current conditions but worried that traffic patterns would change as development occurs, potentially triggering needs that could be harder to retrofit later.

A motion to deny the application, made citing inadequate roads and safety concerns, failed on a roll call. The minutes record the votes on the denial motion as follows: Matt Phillips — yes; Mike Kush — no; Lee Vogel — no; Charlotte P. — yes; Trey Gooch — yes; Jason Beavers — no; Amber Brown — no. After further discussion planners and commissioners agreed it would be prudent to involve the Highway Department directly. The applicant agreed to a deferral to allow county staff, the Highway Department and the developer to meet; the commission formalized a deferral by motion and voice vote.

Commissioners and staff said any required roadway improvements and the Highway Department's willingness to work with the developer will be considered at the construction‑plan stage if the application moves forward. The applicant indicated the development would be constructed in phases (approximately 50 lots per section) and that final plats for each section would return to the county for review.

The commission did not adopt or deny the preliminary plan at this meeting; the item is deferred to permit further coordination and possible resubmission.

Ending: The commission asked staff to arrange a meeting with the Highway Department and the developer and to include the district commissioner in those conversations before the item returns for action.