Decision on 136 Home Proposal Behind Oakmont School Delayed Over Entrance Plan

DICKSON — A proposal to build 136 homes behind Oakmont School is on hold while Dickson planning commissioners wait for a formal agreement involving the development’s main entrance.

At its Oct. 20 meeting, the Planning Commission postponed KB2 LLC’s request to build homes on smaller lots within a 61.41-acre property. The land is already zoned for single-family housing.

The developer is requesting a “cluster” layout, which groups homes on smaller lots to work around a creek, steep slopes and other difficult terrain. City staff said the change would not increase the overall number of homes allowed under the existing zoning.

The biggest unresolved issue is access.

The proposed main entrance would connect to Blakemore and use part of the school board’s property. That arrangement would help resolve a problem with an existing driveway occupying part of the development’s access route.

In return, the developer has discussed making improvements to school property, including parking lot work, paving and sidewalks connecting the neighborhood to the school.

However, commissioners had no formal school board agreement to review. They chose to wait for documentation rather than approve the request with conditions.

“What if we approve something and that deal just falls apart?” one commissioner asked.

Nearby residents also voiced opposition, questioning whether surrounding streets and infrastructure could handle 136 additional homes. Some said the smaller lots would not fit the established neighborhood.

“The infrastructure won’t take it,” resident David Kelly told commissioners.

City staff said traffic studies and preliminary discussions had identified road and intersection improvements, but more detailed plans would come later.

The commission’s vote did not approve or reject the housing development. It delayed the request until officials receive documentation of the school board arrangement. Additional review of detailed subdivision plans would still be required if the proposal moves forward.