Union Road project advances with eminent domain vote
The long-planned Union Road improvement project moved forward Thursday as the Farragut Board of Mayor and Aldermen unanimously approved the use of eminent domain authority to acquire easements needed for the project.
The vote came during the board’s Dec. 11 meeting.
“The purpose of this item is to approve the acquisition of easements for the Union Road improvements project under the authority of eminent domain,” Town Attorney Tom Hale said. “This agenda item seeks the board’s approval of the use of eminent domain pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated 29-17-107 with respect to one parcel of a total of 35 tracts that are part of the Union Road project that required some sort of purchasing of property interests of the adjoining property owners.”
Hale said negotiations are now focused on one remaining property, owned by the Troutt family. He recommended approval of eminent domain authority based on the town’s original offer of $61,000 for easements on the Troutt property.
“The Union Road project has been in the works for quite a long time,” Hale said, noting it is a federally funded project that the town has been working on since 2017.
“It’s been held up for a number of reasons, but it seems now it’s time to move on with it,” he said.
Alderman Drew Burnette asked whether there were any additional concessions the town could offer the property owners.
“Is there anything else we can entice them with, even further slope easements, keeping certain trees?” Burnette asked.
Town engineer Darryl Smith said staff had explored multiple options.
“We moved the shared-use path from 8 feet to 3 feet off the back of the curb,” Smith said. “We’ve looked at moving the road farther to the south, but that’s going to have a bigger impact on the other side of the road, so there’s really nothing else we can do at this point.”
Alderman Alex Cain asked whether delays could jeopardize the project’s federal funding.
“Is there a point we could lose the federal money?” Cain asked. “If we didn’t start the project by a certain time, is there an issue?”
“I don’t think there’s an issue,” Smith said.
Alderman Joe LaCroix said he had driven Union Road and questioned whether the need for improvements could be definitively established.
“I think it needs something,” LaCroix said, “but during your analysis on the need for the improvement, can you definitively determine that there’s something that needs to be done?”
“We can’t leave it the way it is, not for long,” Smith said. “Right now it needs to be rebuilt because of the condition of the road. It also has very limited sight distance in some locations that this project will take care of.”
LaCroix also asked whether residents in the surrounding neighborhoods supported the project.
“I think so, yes,” Smith said.
Vice Mayor Scott Meyer, who lives in the area, said the road poses safety concerns.
“I live in one of those neighborhoods, and I can tell you that the road needs to be improved,” Meyer said. “My kids drive on that road, and it’s extraordinarily dangerous.”
Mayor Ron Williams said he had spoken with a historian about Union Road’s origins.
“He said it was handed to him that it was an Indian trail,” Williams said. “It became a wagon trail, then they put gravel on it. Then they paved it. It’s never been engineered as a road, and if you drive down it in a rain event, you can tell that because water is going wherever water wants to go.”
Williams added that sight distance is poor in several areas.
“If somebody’s speeding, you may have an accident,” he said. “It’s very narrow in places. It does need to be improved, and I think the drainage improvements, particularly along that stretch right there, are needed.”
“All the people I talked to along that road are happy that we’re doing it, except for the Troutts,” Williams said.
Meyer said the slope and drainage easements would ultimately improve the Troutt property and emphasized that the construction easement is temporary.
“We’re not taking anyone’s property,” Meyer said. “We’re doing some improvements, and then it’s going back to the resident.”
“I think that is accurate,” Hale said. “But keep in mind there are other damages we are willing to pay to cover the trees, a fence that’s going to be removed. There is some impact on the back of the remainder of the property.”
Meyer acknowledged the discomfort surrounding the use of eminent domain.
“It’s hard to stomach eminent domain because of the term and the thought that you’re taking property from people,” he said. “But from my perspective, we are not taking property. We are improving it and giving it back to them with allowances for damages.”
