Four years in, Whiskey Creek remains in limbo

79-lot tiny-home development unfinished as developer, Moore County work through access, bridge, zoning issues

12:00 p.m. Aug. 9, 2026

Editor’s note: This story is based on interviews with developer Chip Hayes, prior Observer reporting, public meetings and records, and an engineering assessment commissioned by the developer. Where Hayes and county officials differ, those positions are attributed in the story. Links to previous Observer coverage are included throughout.

DUANE CROSS
MCO Publisher•Editor

Four years after Moore County approved 79 tiny-home lots at The Retreat at Whiskey Creek, all but eight have been sold.

Only a handful of homes have gone up.

Developer Chip Hayes said electric and water infrastructure in Phase 1 is about 70% complete, with 32 lots fully finished and ready for construction. He argues that years of disputes over utilities, road access, zoning, engineering, and building permits have driven up costs and slowed the project.

County officials have raised their own concerns: unfinished utilities, bridge and road safety, emergency access, compliance with current zoning standards, and whether a second phase should move forward while the first remains incomplete.

Whiskey Creek is not stalled by one disagreement.

It is caught in a thicket of them.

A project the county created a path for

Hayes bought the Main Street property in December 2020 with plans for a vacation-home community built around small, permanent houses.

The idea did not fit Moore County’s zoning rules at the time. Planning officials spent much of 2021 working through a new R-3 and R-3A framework that would allow smaller, site-built homes rather than recreational vehicles or temporary park models.

The Retreat received approval in 2022 for 79 lots across approximately 23.5 acres. The property also included a covered bridge, two existing buildings, and a large covered pavilion near Main Street.

The original plan included nonresidential uses, including management offices and event space. But the zoning documents did not clearly separate those structures from the residential portion of the development.

Hayes calls that an honest oversight. He maintains that commercial use of the buildings was understood when the project was approved.

When Whiskey Creek later asked the Planning and Zoning Commission to clarify or rezone the front portion of the property for commercial use, commissioners raised questions about access, parking, and how the request fit the original approval. The request did not advance.

The county abolished R-3 zoning in September 2024. Phase 1 kept its approvals. Phase 2 did not inherit them.

County officials say the second phase had never been approved and must meet current standards.

Utility contract became an early fault line

One of the first major breaks came through the Metro Utility Department.

In 2024, Hayes and MUD spent months disputing an unsigned utility agreement covering easements, tap and connection fees, sewer design, engineering costs, and financial guarantees.

The contract initially required $258,925 upon execution, including water and sewer tap fees, engineering costs, and connection charges.

Hayes objected to paying the fees before homes were built. He said the project had moved forward under the assumption that individual lot owners would pay those costs as they connected to the system.

MUD officials said their policies required a signed agreement and advance payment before the department performed work for a private development. Board members also argued that utility customers should not bear the financial risk of infrastructure serving Whiskey Creek.

Hayes proposed a low-pressure sewer system using grinder pumps. MUD required a gravity-fed system, citing concerns about long-term ownership and maintenance. Hayes estimated that change added about $250,000 to the project.

Another disagreement involved an easement for a planned water line. MUD later rerouted the line, and that issue went away.

The contract was approved in December 2024. By early 2025, Utilities Manager Ronnie Cunningham said the agreement had been signed and payment made. MUD’s remaining role was to review and inspect the lines as Whiskey Creek installed them.

Hayes said the cost went well beyond the upfront payment. He blames the dispute for construction delays, legal fees, financing costs, and shaken confidence among buyers who already owned lots.

Next came 799 square feet

Then the argument reached the houses.

County officials questioned whether a proposed home on Lot 56 exceeded the R-3A district’s 799-square-foot limit. The dispute came down to whether open porches counted toward the maximum or whether the limit applied only to heated and cooled living space.

Hayes argued that the home remained under 799 square feet of conditioned space and below the separate rule limiting roofed coverage to 20% of the lot.

The Board of Zoning Appeals agreed. In March, the board voted 4-1 to approve Whiskey Creek’s appeal and clear the way for the building permit. Members said the 799-square-foot cap applied to heated living space, not an open porch.

The board stopped short of settling the question for the entire development. Chairman Keith Moses said the decision applied only to Lot 56, meaning similar disputes could return to the board one permit at a time unless Metro Council clarifies the ordinance.

Whiskey Creek, meanwhile, lost more time over a rule Hayes said had been understood when the project was approved.

The bridge was only part of it

Construction access has become the project’s most persistent public dispute.

The primary entrance at 975 Main St. crosses a covered bridge that served the property before Whiskey Creek was proposed. Hayes said the bridge had been reviewed when the Spencer family operated an RV park there and that county officials later parked a firetruck on it before approving the tiny-home development.

As construction began, county officials and nearby property owners raised concerns about concrete trucks, pavement damage, road width, sight distance, emergency access, and the risk of a heavy vehicle overturning near East Fork Mulberry Creek.

Jeff Norman, whose property uses a shared driveway at 1075 Main. St. near the development, told the Planning and Zoning Commission that heavy construction traffic could damage the route and leave him without safe access.

Highway Superintendent Shannon Cauble has said in numerous Planning and Zoning meetings that the driveway had not been approved as a construction entrance and, in her opinion, was not appropriate for concrete trucks and other heavy equipment.

Hayes argues that Whiskey Creek owns or controls a secondary access point that could keep construction traffic off the covered bridge. Cauble barricaded that entrance and posted a sign citing Tennessee Code Annotated 54-7-201.

Hayes disputes that the statute gives the county authority to close the entrance.

Without that route, he said, concrete, gravel, and other materials must be unloaded before crossing the bridge, moved across in smaller loads, and reloaded for the trip uphill.

“That’s where a ton of money and time goes,” Hayes said. “The secondary, barricaded entrance would eliminate that waste.”

One report, no final answer

Hayes commissioned Bhegani Engineering to assess the bridge.

The initial report concluded that the structure was sound, code-compliant, and capable of carrying emergency vehicles and intermittent construction traffic. It found that the steel girders had more than twice the bending capacity required for the expected loads.

Questions followed.

Bhegani has said he is a certified engineer intern, not a licensed professional engineer. The Observer later confirmed that Jonathan Clark, who has a contractual relationship with Bhegani Engineering, is licensed in Tennessee as both a professional engineer and architect.

Clark said his arrangement with Bhegani includes professional-engineering supervision, though he did not personally prepare the initial bridge assessment. His direct, project-specific role would begin if Whiskey Creek moves to a stamped-and-sealed engineering submission.

The initial assessment was not sealed.

Clark’s credentials confirm Bhegani’s relationship with a licensed professional, but they do not settle whether the initial report met every professional or county requirement.

Moore County can still require a sealed structural analysis, additional documentation, or an independent engineering review before accepting the bridge for construction or emergency traffic.

The licensing dispute involving Bhegani also has moved into an administrative proceeding before the Tennessee State Board of Architectural and Engineering Examiners. The hearing has been postponed until Oct. 1. No ruling has been issued.

One question is whether the initial assessment required a licensed engineer’s signature and seal when it was issued.

What does the county need to see before the bridge question is settled?

Tourism keeps getting bigger

Whiskey Creek’s future also sits inside an economy that Tennessee continues to build around visitors.

Tourism generated a record $32.5 billion in direct visitor spending statewide in 2025, up 2.7% from the year before, according to the Tennessee Department of Tourist Development. Since 2018, visitor spending has climbed 40% – nearly twice the national growth rate of 22%.

Tennessee welcomed 150 million visits last year, with visitors spending about $89 million a day.

Tourism generated $2 billion in state tax revenue and $1.3 billion in local tax revenue in 2025, saving the average Tennessee household an estimated $1,180 in taxes. Leisure and hospitality businesses also contributed $2 billion in state sales tax collections, including $874 million directed to the state’s education fund.

That matters in Lynchburg, where tourism stretches well beyond the Distillery gates.

It also matters to Whiskey Creek.

Hayes has pitched the development from the beginning as a vacation-home community, one intended to bring overnight visitors into Moore County rather than simply send them back down the road at the end of the day.

Whether Whiskey Creek delivers on that promise remains to be seen. The full 2025 county-by-county visitor spending figures are expected in September.

But the larger trend is already clear: Tennessee tourism is still growing, and Whiskey Creek is trying to find its place in it.

And Phase 2 waits

The access and infrastructure disputes have spilled into Whiskey Creek’s proposed second phase, covering approximately 16 adjoining acres.

The Planning and Zoning Commission has held the expansion amid concerns about access, utilities, bridge safety, lot requirements, floodplain conditions, topography, and unfinished work in Phase 1.

Metro Council has required electric and water infrastructure in Phase 1 to reach 75% completion before Phase 2 will be considered.

Hayes estimates that work is now about 70% complete – roughly five percentage points shy of the council’s threshold.

He maintains that the project has the money and ability to finish the remaining work.

At the May Planning and Zoning meeting, commission member Jeff Ross pressed then-Site Manager Spencer Haithcote about money generated through earlier lot sales.

“Where’s the money?” Ross asked.

The question hung over the project: Nearly every Phase 1 lot had been sold, and the infrastructure still was not finished.

Hayes said approximately $400,000 in infrastructure work remains. He argues that Whiskey Creek can finish it if additional disputes and requirements do not keep adding costs.

Hayes also said he has retained legal representation and is preparing to engage the county in an effort to get the project moving again.

He said the homeowners who bought into Whiskey Creek deserve to know he is doing everything he can to finish Phase 1.

“Whiskey Creek has the ability to finish this project,” Hayes said. “We intend to complete what we started – for the families who purchased property here and for the Lynchburg community – no matter what new obstructions the county tries to throw up.”

Hayes has projected roughly $469,000 annually in property, occupancy, and sales taxes from a completed Whiskey Creek development.

The figure is a projection, not a guarantee. It depends on Whiskey Creek being finished, attracting visitors, and operating at the level Hayes anticipates.

Whiskey Creek still has work to finish. The county still has safety and compliance questions to resolve.

Between them are sold lots, unfinished infrastructure, disputed entrances, unresolved bridge questions, and property owners waiting for a clear path forward.