Commission defers Old Hickory Boulevard rezoning after Metro Codes flags on-site house as uninhabitable

The Planning Commission deferred consideration of a proposed specific-plan rezoning for property at 13905 Old Hickory Boulevard for one meeting to allow Metro Historic staff to inspect the interior of a structure on the site. The project — presented by Patterson Company and representatives — would rezone agricultural residential land to a specific plan permitting a multi-hundred-unit residential project and includes preservation of certain landscape features.

Attorney Tom White, representing the applicant, distributed a Codes Department letter dated the day of the hearing in which Byron Hall, director of operations at Metro Codes, wrote that staff ‘‘inspected the property...found it to be in a bad state of disrepair’’ and that ‘‘in its current condition, the property is unfit for human habitation’’ and ‘‘currently meets the criteria for demolition under the Metro codes guidelines.’’ White told the commission the owner had been told to demo the structure to avoid further Codes action.

An archaeological and historic‑resource consultant retained by the applicant, Dr. Scott Jones, told the commission he found ‘‘no significant artifacts’’ in his shovel test survey and concluded the standing house ‘‘does not retain sufficient historical integrity’’ for listing. Metro Historic staff, however, reported in the meeting files that they consider the building to be National Register‑eligible based on an exterior inspection; Metro Historic did not perform an interior inspection.

Multiple residents asked that the structure be studied further and asked for community meetings; neighbors also asked that any archaeological or historic documentation be completed before demolition or change. Several commissioners expressed concern that Metro Historic had not entered the building and that Metro Codes had declared it in poor condition the same day, and asked for interior inspection by Metro Historic staff. The applicant said it would work in good faith with Metro Historic and other agencies but asked the commission to proceed; the commission deferred one meeting to allow Metro Historic to visit the interior and report back.

Staff recommended approval with conditions, and commissioners noted the SP had been through multiple revisions with substantial inter‑departmental review. The commission’s deferral was narrowly scoped to allow Metro Historic to perform the requested interior inspection and return findings to the commission.