Memphis Council rejects appeal to overturn approval of Grandview Avenue subdivision

The Memphis City Council convened on May 20, 2025, to address several key agenda items, including a contentious appeal regarding a residential subdivision on Grandview Avenue.

The meeting began with a vote on item 7, which was ultimately rejected. Council members Easter Thomas, Ford, Green, Walker, Warren, White, and Chairman Canale all voted against the item, leading to its failure.

Following this, the council moved to item 8, a resolution concerning the appeal of David Wade on behalf of residents along Grandview Avenue. The appeal sought to overturn a decision made by the Memphis and Shelby County Land Use Control Board, which had approved a two-lot residential subdivision at 4014 Grandview Avenue. This item was sponsored by the Division of Planning and Development and had been held over from a previous meeting on April 22. Notably, Councilman Carlisle recused himself from discussions regarding this item.

The Vice Chair recognized the Division of Planning and Development, which recommended approval of the subdivision. Director John Zena provided insights into the criteria that the governing body must consider when reviewing a preliminary subdivision plan. He outlined that the plan must comply with various standards, including the availability of public facilities and conformity with development codes.

Zena confirmed that the proposed subdivision met the necessary criteria and was consistent with the character of the neighborhood. He referenced a previous presentation that detailed the surrounding properties and their characteristics, asserting that the subdivision aligned with the existing development patterns.

The council then opened the floor for public comments, with David Wade representing the opposing residents. Wade expressed strong opposition to the subdivision, arguing that it would disrupt the longstanding character of Grandview Avenue, which features larger lots and has been established since the 1930s. He emphasized that nearly 80% of the neighbors were against the development, citing concerns over the potential impact on the neighborhood's aesthetic and community values.

As the meeting progressed, the council continued to deliberate on the implications of the proposed subdivision, weighing the perspectives of both the planning department and the concerned residents. The outcome of this appeal remains to be seen as further discussions are anticipated in future meetings.