• Home
  • >
  • Business
  • >
  • Commission approves bond amount for Millington Farms MUPD Phase 2

Commission approves bond amount for Millington Farms MUPD Phase 2

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on email

By Bill Short

The Millington Planning Commission has approved the bond amount requested by the applicants for Phase 2 of the Millington Farms Mixed Use Planned Development.

Commission members took the action during their Dec. 15, 2025 regular monthly meeting on a motion offered by Mary Jo Thornburg and seconded by David Bodkin.

The motion was passed by six affirmative votes, with commission Vice Chairman Chuck Hurt Jr. absent.

The application was to approve the bond amount of $1,132,373.20 for the Phase 2 public infrastructure improvements.

It was submitted by Lee Davidson of The Reaves Firm Inc. on behalf of Tom Marsh and Mike Robbe of TM Farms Holdings LLC.

The property, zoned B-2, General Commercial, is east of Wilkinsville Road and south of Glencoe Way.

Ben Womble, engineer for the city’s Department of Planning and Economic Development, acknowledged that work on the subdivision was “underway.”

But he said the developers had notified the city that the public infrastructure improvements for Wilkinsville, Glencoe and Freedom Way would not begin until the bond was approved. 

Womble noted that, after working with the applicants’ engineer, some “adjustments” were made to the “end cost.”

But he said the planning staff feels “comfortable” that all the planned public improvements can be constructed for the approved bond amount.

When Thornburg asked about “contingencies” on the project, Womble said the developers have a “very short” anticipated “time of construction.”

Because it is a “one-year” bond, he said the staff will have an opportunity at that point to “re-evaluate” whether it is “short” of where it should be.

While noting that the commission does approve bonds for subdivisions, member Bethany Huffman asked if this was a “recommendation” to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen.

Planning Director Jared Darby said the bond amount will be a “condition” included in the Subdivision Development Agreement that the board will be asked to approve.

Chairman Brett Morgan recalled that this is “something” the commission has “done before.”

“We haven’t always done it,” he acknowledged, “but I think it’s good practice.”

At its August 2025 meeting, the commission unanimously approved the Engineering and Final Plats and Site Plans submitted for Phase 2 of the MUPD that encompassed two lots.

Lot 1 described a Target store and Lot 2 an Academy Sports + Outdoors store.

But during an October 2025 special called meeting, the commission approved the “first revision” requested by the applicants.

It illustrates a three-lot commercial subdivision covering 15.1 acres east of Wilkinsville and south of Glencoe.

Darby said the applicants’ “development team” had approached the planning staff about “carving out” what Millington called the “existing car wash lot” in the southeast corner of the intersection of Wilkinsville and Glencoe.

He noted that the “foundation” was still present on that site, which was known as Lot 4 of the Shelby Mall Commercial Subdivision.

Darby recalled that, when the commission approved Phase 2 of the MUPD, Lot 1 “covered” the car wash lot, which would have “gone away” when the Final Plat was recorded. 

But the applicants had chosen to turn Lot 4 of the Shelby Mall subdivision into Lot 3 of the Millington Farms MUPD Phase 2.

“So, instead of two lots that the commission approved in August,” Darby acknowledged, “we’re submitting a first revision to allow for three lots.”

He said the reason was that it was necessary to provide a right-of-way “improvement space” on Wilkinsville.

“We would not have been able to do that if we were to just carve around the existing Lot 4,” Darby noted. “It’s a much cleaner path forward to carve out that particular portion.”

Because this is the lot that will have the “stack lane” to turn right onto Glencoe, Huffman wondered how much will ultimately be used as a public right of way.

“I understand why we’re doing what we’re doing,” she acknowledged. “But is there going to be anything left that is buildable when we’re done on the right-of-way portion of it?”

“It will still be a buildable lot,” Darby replied, “or else we would not be able to subdivide it in the manner that the applicants have requested.”

Related Posts