Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning Public Comments topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents raise water, drainage and density concerns during public comment on Bon Aqua rezoning

2760121 · March 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Several residents spoke during the public comment period to object to a proposed rezoning near Old Bon Aqua/Bates Trail, raising concerns about lot size, drainage into local ponds and waterways, and impacts on property values and access.

Residents near Old Bon Aqua/Bates Trail addressed the Hickman County Commission during the March 24 public comment period to express concerns about a pending rezoning.

John Wilson told commissioners he was “here in regard to the rezoning of a piece of property on Old Bonhoeffer Road,” and said he was attending to be informed about “what's going on in our neighborhood.” Lehi Hudgins identified a parcel at 9231 Bates Trail that adjoins nearby lots and asked whether the proposed zoning met the minimum acreage requirement for multifamily development; Hudgins said the lot is two acres and asked how residents could verify whether the parcel qualifies for multifamily use under county code. David Denton said the rezoned parcel is adjacent to his mother’s property and that a water line runs across the site; he said he was concerned the rezoning could threaten that line and change the single‑family character of the neighborhood.

Several speakers raised drainage and environmental concerns. In describing his neighbor’s pond and a small creek that feeds Big Spring Creek, a speaker said the area has “fish and everything in there that could contaminate it,” urging commissioners to consider impacts to surface water. Residents also voiced worries about increased traffic and potential negative impacts on property values if higher‑density development were allowed.

Commissioners and county staff responded that the public comment period is for statements rather than a back‑and‑forth answer session and that specific questions about zoning procedures are best handled through the planning department and at planning commission hearings. Commissioner Clark and other commissioners noted that some rezoning items on the agenda had been returned to the planning commission for more public engagement; the chair said those items would be taken up again under new business so the planning commission could provide updated information.

The transcript records that at least one related rezoning (Resolution 25‑12, for property at 10004 North Hill Road in Bon Aqua) was returned to the planning commission later in the meeting for further review and public comment. Residents who testified at the March 24 meeting were told to raise detailed procedural questions directly with the zoning office in advance of planning commission hearings and to return for the scheduled public hearings where interactive discussion is allowed.

Ending: Residents were advised that the planning commission and zoning department are the venues to obtain detailed parcel information and to present evidence at a public hearing; commissioners asked staff to ensure the remanded rezoning appears on the planning commission agenda for additional public notice and comment.