OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Goodlettsville, Tennessee/Board of Commissioners
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Goodlettsville Study Session on I-65 Widening Noise and Property Impact - Nov 13, 2025

Board of Commissioners — Thursday, November 13, 2025
BodyGoodlettsville, Tennessee
SessionBoard of Commissioners
DateThursday, November 13, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
Meeting Thumbnail
⇩ GET FROM SOURCE

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Original source
Transcript — Verbatim

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording. Names come from transcript evidence. “Possibly” marks uncertain attribution.

Speaker 1

0:00

This evening this study session is solely in regards to the I65 segment one widening and in particular the clearing of property that's occurred on T Dot right away but also impacting the property owners adjacent to that primarily on Braxton Park Lane and on Loretta Drive.

0:28

At your desk, I have the noise technical report that T DOT had done that is dated August 2020.

0:38

And if you'll turn to page page one, which is actually the fourth page in your packet, I want to read the first thing.

0:54

The project will not substantially increase existing noise levels at adjacent properties and noise levels at most land uses are predicted to be lower than the NAC.

1:09

However, 57 activity group B residences in four NAAs and the activity category C, which is Metro Baptist Church picnic shelter where no one lives, are predicted to be impacted with design year noise levels of 66 decibels or higher.

1:35

So you turn to the second page, and this is uh really what has gotten us here.

1:45

Noise barriers were evaluated for areas four and five.

1:51

For noise barriers to be included in a project, they must be determined to be both feasible and reasonable in accordance with T DOT's noise policy.

Unassigned speaker

2:04

The

Speaker 1

2:04

underlying sentence is this no barriers for the NAAs were determined to be feasible.

2:40

Great job.

2:42

Just unplug it for right now.

Speaker 2

2:45

Thank you.

Speaker 1

3:06

Okay, we'll try to work through this.

3:08

Uh repeating this noise barriers for both NAAs were determined to be feasible, however, the required noise barrier area per benefited residents for each each NAA is much higher than the allowable noise barrier area per benefited residents.

3:30

So in other words, um what this is saying, and what we know is the noise levels were exceeding what was uh allowed at the time in 2020 prior to the clearance occurring.

3:50

It impacts 57, they have identified 57 um residences.

3:56

Um, the noise barriers of those are not reasonable, and noise abatement is not currently proposed for this project.

4:06

And that um commissioners is where we are this evening.

4:10

Uh T Dot did meet with uh the residents last Thursday at Calvary uh church.

4:19

They have made a promise to replace the trees once they have opportunity to determine species and type that could be put replaced.

Unassigned speaker

4:31

However, we have no idea what the maturity level of those trees would be, and based upon what the findings in this report is and the impact that the residents have experienced this evening, there is a resolution in your packet requesting T DOT to do an additional sound study based upon the true impact with the trees being already remote, not prior to as was done in 2020, but where we are now, and not only that, but to expand the range of the impacted uh properties further than what what it is in their report.

Speaker 1

5:19

And I'll open it up for any questions y'all may have.

Speaker 3

5:28

Any questions from the board?

Speaker 4

5:30

I do have one, and I don't know who can answer this.

5:35

Has there ever been a sound barrier put up that did not meet a requirement like this?

Unassigned speaker

5:44

I

Speaker 4

5:44

didn't know in the past if they have put one up, gone around somebody, done something, gone above somebody.

Speaker 1

5:51

I

Speaker 4

5:52

and I don't know who to ask that for.

Speaker 1

5:54

I am sure that there is.

5:57

Um I don't have specifics.

Speaker 4

6:00

Understood.

Speaker 1

6:01

I can tell you this that the sound barrier wall on I 65 from Pleasant Green Park to out to Loma was done in a different phase from when the other uh sound walls were installed.

6:20

That that was a where it came back as a different evaluation, and they were installed at a later time as a part of their third phase, which was kind of down at the 65 Trinity Lane split.

6:35

Um they included it in that project.

6:39

So I know that does not answer your question because I don't have the means to answer that question.

Speaker 4

6:44

I just bring that out to everyone because I don't know who can answer that, but I do know from that meeting last week that we all attended T DOT was quite clear that the noise is not the issue, it's the number that it affects, and I don't know how how we can expand it to affect more people to do a new study if it'll affect enough

Unassigned speaker

7:06

just for a minute

Speaker 4

7:11

because when I kind of asked T Dot, like what what's the number that we have and what do we have to be at?

7:16

It looked like it had to be over double what it was going to affect what the current was.

Speaker 1

7:22

I I know, and the reason why I feel like and I do not know where they're seeing the report, I know it's a lot less than 57 homes in the area that that wall was installed years ago, and it was done as a as another phase, I guess you would say at a later time.

Unassigned speaker

7:47

Thank

Speaker 3

7:48

you, Mr.

7:48

Ellis.

Speaker 5

7:49

Any other members?

Speaker 3

7:51

Questions or comments.

7:56

Oh

Speaker 2

7:58

and again, just from perspective of the study that would be done.

8:03

Obviously, this study in 2020 was done prior to any construction being underway, and the flow of traffic obviously is drastically changed at this point in time.

8:18

Um, I'm wondering, and this would be a noise study question, I guess.

8:25

That obviously that are they going to do the noise study at midnight, or are they going to do it at 4 30 in the afternoon or while the construction's going on?

8:37

Because I think at all different times of the day over there, and maybe Mr.

8:40

Gilmore

Unassigned speaker

8:41

could

Speaker 2

8:42

maybe have some personal uh experience with this, and what I've heard from others along the Loretta corridor is that it is extremely loud at some times, other than others.

8:59

And it

Unassigned speaker

9:00

I

Speaker 2

9:00

don't know if they take into consideration that the traffic is slowed down, you get a lot of the jake breaking as it's called and that sort of thing.

9:09

But obviously

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Engineering And Infrastructure██████████████████████████████████████████42%
Public Engagement███████████████████19%
Environmental Protection███████████11%
Zoning and Land Use███████████11%
Technology and Innovation█████████9%
Transportation Safety████████8%
Summary of Proceedings

Goodlettsville Board of Commissioners Study Session on I-65 Widening: Noise Abatement and Property Impacts - November 13, 2025

The Goodlettsville Board of Commissioners held a study session on November 13, 2025, to discuss the I-65 Segment 1 widening project. The discussion focused on property clearing on T DOT right-of-way adjacent to Braxton Park Lane and Loretta Drive, the findings of an August 2020 noise technical report, and a proposed resolution requesting a new noise study from T DOT based on current conditions.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Robert Coop, a resident with a PhD in Computer Engineering, criticized the noise technical report. He stated the traffic noise model was not validated, which he argued renders the entire report potentially unreliable.
  • Jeff Parnell (109 Loretta Drive) noted that T DOT admits noise levels warrant a wall (Step 1) and a wall would help (Step 2), but the project fails on Step 3, the cost-benefit calculation per resident. He questioned who established the cost-benefit formula and who has the authority to override it.
  • Lynn Solomon (100 Lampley Court) stated that T DOT said neither Davidson nor Sumner County has noise reduction legislation. She urged the commission to consider passing such local regulations.
  • Emily Sanders (816 Loretta Drive, Attorney) cited federal regulations (Title 23, Part 772, Section 13) requiring highway agencies to solicit the viewpoints of benefited property owners on noise abatement, arguing this process was not conducted and that the number of impacted homes is greater than the study indicates.
  • Jeff Allen (Lampley) expressed frustration over extensive property damage, including the removal of 55-year-old trees and debris left in yards by the contractor. He requested cleanup assistance and described feeling bullied by T DOT.

Discussion Items

  • The board reviewed the 2020 Noise Technical Report, which predicted 57 residences would be impacted by noise levels of 66 decibels or higher.
  • The report found noise barriers were feasible for the impacted analysis areas but were not reasonable under T DOT standards because the required noise barrier area per benefited resident exceeded the allowable limit.
  • Board members questioned whether T DOT has ever installed sound walls that did not initially meet the standard cost-benefit threshold, discussing a prior I-65 phase as a potential precedent.
  • Commissioners noted the 2020 study was conducted before trees were removed and construction began. A resolution was introduced requesting T DOT to perform an additional sound study reflecting the current post-clearing environment, current traffic patterns, and an expanded study area.
  • The board discussed unintended consequences of the clearing, including contractor equipment pulling root systems into private backyards and leaving debris.
  • A commissioner suggested that while local noise regulations could be considered, T DOT will ultimately follow federal cost-benefit metrics.

Key Outcomes

  • The board indicated its intent to pass the resolution at the subsequent regular commission meeting (6:30 PM).
  • The resolution, if passed, will formally request T DOT to conduct a new noise study based on current post-clearing impact conditions and to expand the geographic range of the impacted properties analyzed.
  • The resolution will be certified by the city recorder and delivered to the T DOT commissioner.
  • The board committed to advocating for the affected residents and offering direct assistance with property concerns.

Meeting Transcript

This evening this study session is solely in regards to the I65 segment one widening and in particular the clearing of property that's occurred on T Dot right away but also impacting the property owners adjacent to that primarily on Braxton Park Lane and on Loretta Drive. At your desk, I have the noise technical report that T DOT had done that is dated August 2020. And if you'll turn to page page one, which is actually the fourth page in your packet, I want to read the first thing. The project will not substantially increase existing noise levels at adjacent properties and noise levels at most land uses are predicted to be lower than the NAC. However, 57 activity group B residences in four NAAs and the activity category C, which is Metro Baptist Church picnic shelter where no one lives, are predicted to be impacted with design year noise levels of 66 decibels or higher. So you turn to the second page, and this is uh really what has gotten us here. Noise barriers were evaluated for areas four and five. For noise barriers to be included in a project, they must be determined to be both feasible and reasonable in accordance with T DOT's noise policy. The underlying sentence is this no barriers for the NAAs were determined to be feasible. Great job. Just unplug it for right now. Thank you. Okay, we'll try to work through this. Uh repeating this noise barriers for both NAAs were determined to be feasible, however, the required noise barrier area per benefited residents for each each NAA is much higher than the allowable noise barrier area per benefited residents. So in other words, um what this is saying, and what we know is the noise levels were exceeding what was uh allowed at the time in 2020 prior to the clearance occurring. It impacts 57, they have identified 57 um residences. Um, the noise barriers of those are not reasonable, and noise abatement is not currently proposed for this project. And that um commissioners is where we are this evening. Uh T Dot did meet with uh the residents last Thursday at Calvary uh church. They have made a promise to replace the trees once they have opportunity to determine species and type that could be put replaced. However, we have no idea what the maturity level of those trees would be, and based upon what the findings in this report is and the impact that the residents have experienced this evening, there is a resolution in your packet requesting T DOT to do an additional sound study based upon the true impact with the trees being already remote, not prior to as was done in 2020, but where we are now, and not only that, but to expand the range of the impacted uh properties further than what what it is in their report. And I'll open it up for any questions y'all may have. Any questions from the board? I do have one, and I don't know who can answer this. Has there ever been a sound barrier put up that did not meet a requirement like this? I didn't know in the past if they have put one up, gone around somebody, done something, gone above somebody. I and I don't know who to ask that for. I am sure that there is. Um I don't have specifics. Understood. I can tell you this that the sound barrier wall on I 65 from Pleasant Green Park to out to Loma was done in a different phase from when the other uh sound walls were installed. That that was a where it came back as a different evaluation, and they were installed at a later time as a part of their third phase, which was kind of down at the 65 Trinity Lane split. Um they included it in that project. So I know that does not answer your question because I don't have the means to answer that question. I just bring that out to everyone because I don't know who can answer that, but I do know from that meeting last week that we all attended T DOT was quite clear that the noise is not the issue, it's the number that it affects, and I don't know how how we can expand it to affect more people to do a new study if it'll affect enough just for a minute because when I kind of asked T Dot, like what what's the number that we have and what do we have to be at? It looked like it had to be over double what it was going to affect what the current was. I I know, and the reason why I feel like and I do not know where they're seeing the report, I know it's a lot less than 57 homes in the area that that wall was installed years ago, and it was done as a as another phase, I guess you would say at a later time. Thank you, Mr. Ellis. Any other members? Questions or comments. Oh and again, just from perspective of the study that would be done. Obviously, this study in 2020 was done prior to any construction being underway, and the flow of traffic obviously is drastically changed at this point in time.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com