Frequently Asked Questions
Will the development proposal plan “stop the flooding” as supporters have proclaimed?
Supporters of the rezoning proposal have made bold claims that this project will solve flooding in the south Gladeville area. They suggest that private investment, in the form of retention ponds and drainage infrastructure, will resolve the flooding issue despite massive community pushback.
But here’s the reality:
Gladeville residents never asked for a private developer from Nashville to “fix” the flooding. What residents have consistently asked for is simple — stop building massive industrial warehouses and paving over sensitive land like sinkholes that naturally manage stormwater. That’s not just common sense; it’s echoed by our own county officials.
At the May 16, 2025 Wilson County Planning Commission meeting, Planning Director Christopher Lawless clearly voiced concerns about the current site plan. He said:
“The initial master plan shows a warehouse building over top of existing sinkholes on the property, which would seemingly propose them to be capped and no longer take surface drainage into the sinkhole.”
“Staff has concerns about where the water would go — both in terms of surface runoff and within the sinkhole — the water table below ground.”
“Speaking with the county’s consulting engineer on this case, they’ve outlined that sinkholes can be capped and mitigated, but in the instance of this site — with a number of sinkholes present — a much better outcome would be to leave some of the sinkholes alone or mitigate with an injection well to allow them to continue taking on some water volume.”
“This would require any resultant site plan for construction to differ from this conceptual plan. It would likely mean a smaller building would have to be proposed to accommodate such a scenario.”
Even the developer has stated publicly that they cannot guarantee flooding will be reduced if the project moves forward.
In short: this plan doesn’t “solve” flooding — it introduces more risk, with no clear accountability, and even expert reviewers are saying the current approach is not the ideal solution for our area.
What are some other options for the Couchville Pike property (1113 Couchville Pike) instead of this proposed 3-site warehouse plan?
A much smaller footprint: As noted by the County Planning Director Christopher Lawless on May 16, 2025 (with insights from the county’s consulting engineer), the preferred and safer approach is to avoid disturbing sinkholes whenever possible or, alternatively, use injection wells to preserve drainage functions. If that approach were taken, it would require a smaller building footprint and significant changes to the current conceptual site plan.
A different use plan: The parcel can follow Land Use Plan direction for SR 840/Couchville Pike Interchange and Speedway Area which emphasizes development that serves the traveling public and nearby community, including retail, restaurants, office parks, and a possible village center.
Purchased as green space: In the May 16th, 2025 meeting, Planning Commissioner Gary Renfro explained that in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, when widespread sinkholes were causing homes to shift and foundations to crack — similar to issues in the current area—they didn’t build warehouses on the affected land. Instead, officials bought the properties and turned the area into a green space. He emphasized that this approach is documented in reports and, speaking as an engineer, suggested the problem in the current parcel is serious and goes beyond surface-level concerns.
*Note: All of the properties included in the proposed development are currently zoned Rural Residential (R-1), according to the Wilson County Zoning Ordinance (adopted 2003). This zoning is intended for very low-density, single-family housing in areas with limited public services like roads, utilities, and fire protection. Any future use — whether commercial or industrial — would require the property to be rezoned from R-1. None of these changes are guaranteed, as the current zoning does not allow for commercial development. The property owners are requesting this rezoning to increase the potential sale value of their land, despite the damage it would cause to the rural character, strained infrastructure, and long-term planning goals for this area.
Is this development truly “community-focused?”
No — because the community overwhelmingly opposes more than 70 acres of industrial zoning in a rural residential area, with only a few property owners supporting it for personal gain. A smaller, more compact design was already rejected by the county commission at the last review in 2023, making it clear that this much larger, sprawling plan is neither community-focused nor reflective of residents’ wishes. Industrial warehouses on this scale fundamentally change the character of the neighborhood, disregarding the community’s repeated opposition to rezoning and large-scale warehouse development in this rural residential area.
Who supports First Park 840?
Very few in the community — and for one clear reason: money.
Ten parcels have applied for rezoning under the First Park 840 multi-site warehouse proposal. Some of these landowners were previously outspoken opponents of the July 2023 (and much smaller) version of the plan - see their opposing takes here.
What changed? Private deals were made with the developer to sell their properties — likely at prices well above market value — if the rezoning and proposal for the site plan is approved.
To the community’s knowledge, these property owners had not expressed interest in selling, nor listed their land for sale, before being approached with these offers.
Outside of this small group, the overwhelming majority of residents strongly oppose the project. Gladeville neighbors haven’t asked for private developers to “solve” decades-long flooding issues — they’ve asked for the county to stop approving more warehouses.
Don’t homeowners have the right to sell their properties?
Absolutely — and they’re encouraged to!
Every property owner has the fundamental right to sell their property at any time, within the bounds of the zoning regulations in place when they acquired it.
What they do not have is an inherent right to rezone that property in a way that harms the surrounding community or disregards the well-being of those who will remain.
Won’t a warehouse create jobs?
While it’s true that a new warehouse facility would generate some jobs, the suggestion that Wilson County is in desperate need of employment opportunities simply doesn’t reflect reality.
As of June 2025, there are currently more than 36,000 open, unfilled jobs in Wilson County and surrounding areas, including Lebanon, Mt. Juliet, and Smyrna (source: Indeed.com). These range from general labor to skilled roles — including over 750 warehouse and distribution positions and nearly 2,700 driver-related jobs, such as delivery and warehouse transport roles. Many of these positions remain unfilled despite aggressive hiring efforts by existing employers.
It’s also important to note that a large portion of these warehouse and delivery jobs offer only minimum wage or slightly above, with high turnover and limited benefits — a reality that’s well-documented across similar industrial developments.
Wilson County also boasts a low unemployment rate of just 2.4%, well below the state average of 3.5% (source: Tennessee Department of Labor, May 2025). In other words, we’re not struggling for work — we’re already struggling to fill the jobs we have.
In short: There’s no shortage of available work in Wilson County — and many current jobs are already unfilled. This warehouse won’t fill a void; it will simply add more of the same low-wage roles. What the county truly needs are better-quality opportunities that residents want, not low-paid positions tossed in to justify industrial expansion.