Main Page
Ethics Policy Update
Upcoming Meetings
Zoning Update
Timeline of Zoning Changes
Download - C4 Ordinance
Traffic News
2020 PLAN
Key Brentwood Stats
Tapestry Info
Streets of Brentwood - PS
Is YOUR Neighborhood next?
Sewer Issues
Sewer Capacity Analyses
State Legislation
Our Long Term Mission
CONTACT US-email sign up!


What is Tapestry?

Tapestry is to be a residential and retail complex on Centerview Drive just off Franklin Road behind the Synergy Business Park and CVS. 

Tapestry was originally presented as having owner/occupied condominiums, but it is currently intended to be entirely rentals.  The developer was able to achieve this by becoming the "owner" of all of the units.  There is no restriction on an owner leasing a unit.

Tapestry is the first project approved in the new expanded C4 zoning area. (please refer to our C4 zoning page for more information)    

Project update August 26 2013:

Brentwood's first condos on track after delays

Contractor change, rain push back projected debut

Aug. 26, 2013  
Work crews are pouring the foundation of what will be the residential structure for the Tapestry condo project in front of a parking garage.
Work crews are pouring the foundation of what will be the residential structure for the Tapestry condo project in front of a parking garage. / BONNIE BURCH / THE TENNESSSEAN

BRENTWOOD — Drivers passing by Brentwood’s soon-to-be first condominium project on Centerview Drive finally should begin to notice the actual residential buildings rising next to the already erected parking garages soon.

After a slowdown when the developer switched contractors and an abnormally wet summer, Tapestry construction work is getting busy again.

“Everything is rocking along. The foundations for the residential buildings are there now and we’re pouring the concrete slabs. We’ve been doing the foundation walls and getting the electrical in. You’re not seeing anything vertical because most of the work we’ve been doing of late has been underground. But we should be getting the sticks in the air on the residential buildings soon,” said David Hanchrow of Bristol Development Group, the real estate developer building the 393-unit condo project.

After the two concrete parking garages that will hold 673 vehicles total were built back toward the CSX railroad tracks, Bristol enlisted the help of Doster Construction Company as the general contractor for the condos.

In addition, work crews have had to battle torrential rain and sudden, unexpected thunderstorms that have plagued the area for many days of the usually dry summer months.

“That’s what we call in construction ‘nuisance rain.’ Every time you think it’ll be nice and dry out, then along comes another downpour. It’s the weirdest summer,” Hanchrow said.

The delays have pushed the opening day when residents can start moving in back to probably summer 2014, about a year after initially proposed. Doster is working on an updated construction schedule now, he said.

Retail is part of plan

When completed, the $50 million development will feature three courtyards containing an outdoor kitchen and two swimming pools, a fitness bridge connecting the two residential buildings and 4,100 square feet of retail space. Northwestern Mutual Insurance Co. is financing the project and the property is being built according to the National Association of Home Builders' Green Standards.

The units will range from 569 to 1,549 square feet and are available in one- and two-bedroom floor plans. All of the units, now for lease only, are deeded and taxed separately and are governed by a homeowners association.

It’s unlikely that another project similar to the 494,000-square-foot Tapestry could arrive in the city any time soon. In 2010, Brentwood revised some of the rules in the Town Center zoning district to allow other commercial projects within a half mile radius of the traditional Town Center area to apply for C-4 zoning standards that regulate density, building heights and more.

But after some controversy on this action, Brentwood placed a year-long moratorium on C-4 zoning requests for those projects outside the original district.

you may access the article directly here:


Below is the original ordinance from the city's website for Tapestry.

A few interesting points are highlighted in red:  total number of units, square footage range of units, point made that the code does not mandate sale of condos (and developer has been candid about rentals), and that RPM is the city's traffic consultant...the same traffic consultant for HG Hill & GBT on Streets of Brentwood.
Ordinance 2011-06
The proposed ordinance provides for the rezoning of 7.03 acres of vacant land located on the
east side of Centerview Drive, west of the CSX Railroad, and immediately north of the
Brentwood Place Shopping Center. The requested change is from the C-2 (Commercial -
Retail) zoning district to the C-4 (Commercial - Town Center) zoning district.
The application includes a concept plan that proposes the construction of a mixed use
development, primarily consisting of residential units in two four-story buildings. Parking is
provided by attached garages at the rear of each building that abut the railroad. Residents
would be able to park on a garage level and walk directly into the building to reach their
unit without using elevators. The site statistics are detailed in the following table.

Total Site Area 7.04 ac. 306,364 sq. ft.

Total Building Area (heated floor space 494,000 sf., parking garage
271,445 sf.) 765,455 sq. ft.

Total Number of One Bedroom Units 192
Total Number of Two Bedroom Units 182
Total Number of Three Bedroom Units 19
Total Number of Residential Units 393

Area of Commercial Uses (Not inc. Fitness Bridge) 8,948 sq. ft.
Number of Parking Spaces Provided (Garage (751), Angle
(26) & Parallel (7)) 784
Green Space Provided (%) 24.4%
Size of Units -- 569 sq. ft. to 1,549 sq. ft. (No minimum size required)
Rezoning of the property to C-4 is permitted because the commercial tract is located within ½
mile of the original C-4 Town Center area. Having residential units in the area should help spur
redevelopment activity by providing a critical component necessary for a successful Town
Center area. This development will also stimulate economic activity at existing nearby
businesses, which will help the tax base and hopefully feed on the synergy of activity that
is starting to occur in the district. Finally, the proposed location on Centerview Drive is
expected to have minimal impact on traffic and the surrounding business area.
The C-4 district requires that any residential development having more than four units be
formulated into a condominium arrangement, so that each residential unit may be sold as a
separate component. A unit owners association will also be established. This means that
each residential unit will be platted separately for tax purposes. The Code does not address
whether or not residential units must be sold or may be leased. As the current real estate
market is not conducive to the sale of condominium units, the developer has been candid
about its plans to lease the units until the housing market improves for selling units.
The two buildings fronting Centerview Drive are proposed to be connected on the second
floor by an enclosed space, 14 feet above the entrance street designated as the "fitness
bridge." A privately maintained street between the buildings runs from Centerview Drive, east
and ending in a cul-de-sac near the railroad. Entry to the parking garages is provided at the
end of this street.
While there are no detailed plans yet submitted for staff’s review, the proposed development
plan appears to comply with the C-4 technical and design standards. The proposed design of
each building would include enclosed courtyards. The northern building (Building One)
incorporates two connected courtyards that will include a garden setting on one side and a
swimming pool on the other. The building design incorporates a pedestrian foot bridge
connection to the future sidewalk along Centerview Drive. The southern building (Building
Two) would have only one courtyard with a pool. The visible exteriors would be over 75%
masonry materials and almost 25% of the tract is allocated for green space.
It is important to note that a site plan is not being approved for the project at this time.
Once the property is rezoned, this does not preclude the parcel from being developed
differently under the permitted range of mixed land uses allowed in the C-4 District The
information being provided on the proposed development is primarily intended to help in the
review of the request and, if approved, to facilitate the project moving forward.
If the application is approved, the developer will be responsible for upgrading public
infrastructure fronting the tract. This would include the installation of a sidewalk, to meet Code
requirements, ornamental street lighting consistent with the requirements of the Pattern Book
and installation of street trees along the building's frontage.
A traffic impact study (TIS) was included as part of the submittal as required by Code. Note
that the project, including the parking garages, reflects a gross FAR of 2.50;
however, the usable heated floor space reflects a gross FAR of 1.61. The TIS recommends
that the entrance into the project be designed to provide a three lane section, and that the
traffic signal at Church Street East and Centerview Drive be modified to include a right turn
overlap signal phase for northbound traffic
The TIS was forwarded to the RPM Traffic Consultants, the City’s traffic consultants for review
and comment. RPM concurs that the design of the access include a three lane section, with
minor modifications, and the traffic signal recommendation. RPM also recommended that
vegetation along the east side of Centerview Drive be removed to increase sight distance at
the intersection of the access.
Given the deficiency of sidewalks in the area, staff is recommending that the developer
contribute $50,000 toward the cost of an off-site extension of a new sidewalk north to Church
Street. Staff believes that this is a reasonable request since no road improvements will be
required as part of the development of the tract. More importantly, a primary public goal of the
project, if approved, is to encourage more pedestrian movement in the area to reach offices,
restaurants, shopping, etc. and at the same time providing less dependency on vehicles for
travel. Staff believes that this sidewalk investment will help to meet that goal.
Finally, because the tract includes several streams and is located across the street and
upstream from a designated flood zone, staff requested the submittal of a Flood Elevation
Study. The study indicated that a portion of the site is located in the floodway fringe area.
While development is permitted in the area, Brentwood code requires compensating cuts and
fills in the floodplain and that storm water detention be provided for the site. Because of the
limitations on disturbing stream areas to meet this requirement, the developer and engineers
are currently evaluating the feasibility of meeting both requirements by creating a basement
area under the first floor of the parking garage to allow for storm water storage during
significant rain events. Staff from the City's Engineering Department believes this is a
viable option for handling urban run-off effectively. A detailed review of the data will be
provided as part of the later site plan review
Additional information related to the proposal may be found on the City’s web site by typing the
following link into your Internet browser software –
Once the page loads, clink on the link to the July 11, 2011 City Commission agenda. When
the agenda loads, locate and click on the link for Ordinance 2011-06. The backup materials
including all attachments are available there for your review. Please feel free to contact the
Planning and Codes offices at 371-2204 should you require additional information.
The proposed rezoning was approved on first reading by the Board of Commissioners on June
14th. On July 5th, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and voted seven for and
two against (7-2) to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance to the Board of
Commissioners. The public hearing before the Board of Commissioners was conducted on
July 11, 2011.
The City Commission considers the vote on this proposal to be of such importance that it is
necessary for all commissioners to be on record with their vote. However, all City
Commissioners could not attend the original July 25, 2011 meeting. For this reason, the City
Commission has scheduled a special meeting on July 28, 2011 to consider Ordinance 2011-
06 on second and final reading. The ordinance has been removed from the July 25, 2011
agenda and placed on the July 28th agenda. Please note that the proposed Ordinance will be
the only item discussed at the July 28, 2011 meeting.

2 to 1 spoke out against the project, but Tapestry passed...

the link to this article is:

Brentwood City Commission votes in favor of controversial condo complex

By Andrew Smith, Staff Writer
Posted on: 8/4/2011

At a special called meeting held last night, Brentwood City Commission voted six to one in favor of rezoning seven acres off Centerview Drive and near Town Center for the creation of a 393-unit condominium complex. Those who voted in favor of the rezoning said the condos would increase business and tax revenue by attracting affluent “young professionals” and downsizing “empty nesters.” Mayor Paul Webb was the lone dissenting vote against the ordinance. He said he was uneasy about the plan and instead envisioned the Town Center to have one to two story residences. Vice-Mayor Rod Freeman, Jill Burgin, Betsy Crossley, Anne Dunn, Rhea Little, and Regina Smithson voted in favor. In attendance were roughly 100 Brentwood residents of whom 11 spoke in favor of the rezoning plan and 25 spoke out against.
 “I believe having residential units in the area will help spur planned Town Center concept and provide a critical element to that plan,” said Dale Rowse, senior vice president of Legends Bank, “As a businessman and employer in the Brentwood area, I have a vested interest in bringing an appealing place for young people to live who currently work in Brentwood.” Rowse also noted the land would not be vacant for long since it is already zoned for commercial use and that an office development could make traffic worse instead.
Of those who expressed favor for the ordinance were a few of the much talked about “empty nesters” that want to downsize from their current homes in Brentwood.
“This would be an exceptional spot for a condominium type development because of the location – restaurants, the Kroger’s there, Stein Mart, you’ve got the Post Office all within walking distance,” explained Ed Kendrick, who is a retired and disabled veteran. He and his wife are hoping to down size, “And if this comes to fruition, I will more than likely be of the persons purchasing a condo.”
“What people want now are smaller, walkable centers where they can park their cars and go to boutique shops or restaurants,” said resident Bert Bosse who is in favor of the rezoning. He pointed out in his speech that Brentwood is rated the highest car dependent city in Tennessee in a recent survey by Walk Score.
Concerns regarding increased traffic crime, and crowded schools were also of expressed among many who spoke against the ordinance. Opponents also believed the size of the condos and their location near railroad tracks would deter desirable occupants. Instead the condos might turn into low-end rented apartments and attract temporary residents.
Rob Francour of Atlanta, Ga., director of Real Estate Investments for Northwestern Mutual, addressed some of these concerns and spoke on his company’s interests in Brentwood. He said Northwestern Mutual envisions the condominium as a long-term investment and noted they usually holds onto their communities for seven to 10 years.
Trying to ease fears over the possibility of a foreclosure in the future, Francour said Northwestern Mutual invested with cash and that Bristol Development Group is a trusted local developer of the best quality. He also pointed out less than 10 percent are 500 to 600 square feet and those aimed at “empty nesters” range up to 1,600 square feet instead. A four-story garage would also separate the units from the railroads and create a sound barrier, he said.
Another major concern expressed by those against the rezoning was the fear of a fundamental change in Brentwood that goes to the heart of the city’s foundation,
“Where would Brentwood be today – 2011 – if we didn’t have a one-acre density requirement,” asked Andy Beasley, realtor and lifelong resident of Brentwood. He questioned the wisdom of abandoning the one unit per acre requirement. His father had been on the first planning commission, which established the ordinance for future homes built when Brentwood was incorporated in 1969. Change since then, he said, has been well controlled and thought out because of that cornerstone. “If you want to talk about traffic now,” he continued, “Franklin Road would be Gallatin Road today if it wasn’t for the one acre density requirement.”
“To pass this ordinance, you are going against the purpose and grain of which this city was formed,” reminded former city and county lawmaker Charles Craig Morrow, “I was one of the instigators who helped form the city. We came here for the purpose of having a good community home in a country one-acre lot and really [wanted] no lot of commercialism. We’ve got a lot of commercialism [than] we need.”
As for ‘young professionals’ and ‘empty nesters’, Morrow said, “You do not owe these people who want to come here or downsize, anything whatsoever.”
David Richardson also expressed similar sentiments, “Is it our responsibility to provide housing for anyone and everyone that wants to reside within our city limits?” 
The vote in favor of rezoning gives the green light to begin to develop the live-work environment for Town Center. The vote however does not change the mindset of the nay-sayers.
The Planning Commission approved the rezoning and proposed condo complex Tuesday 6 to 1. Planning Commissioners Wayne Amond, Robert Burns, Randy Campbell, Rhea Little, Neal McBrayer and William Porth vote in favor. Robert Power was the lone vote in opposition to the proposal. Carole Crigger, Mark Gorman and Sandi Wells were not present at the meeting. Proposed colors for the condo complex were rejected and Bristol Development will have to return in the future for the Planning Commission to review an updated set of colors.
 “We are setting precedent with this development. If somebody comes in here and says I want to develop … the same way, are we going to say we are going to allow 55 units to an acre? Its too big,” said Powers, “If you are going to set the precedent, you’ve got to keep going with it. I wish this had been smaller. I would have gone for it.” He would have rather seen larger 2-bedroom condo units and better parking or introduction of a trolley system to help control traffic problems. He is not opposed to apartments and said its time for Brentwood to have them.

You may visit the Tapestry website here:
You may visit the Tapestry Facebook page here:

The center illustration at top of page is from the Tapestry website.