Smyrna council reviews Sewers Landing PUD amendment, debate centers on 3-acre parcel and apartment conversion

The Smyrna Town Council discussed a second-reading rezoning and PUD amendment for the Sewers Landing project, which would add about 3 acres to an existing development and change some planned housing from for‑sale condos to rental apartments.

Planning staff explained the amendment would add approximately 3 acres that had been excluded from the original rezoning, and would replace 75 for‑sale condominiums previously shown in the approved PUD with 268 for‑rent apartment units. The total area under the amendment is about 40.94 acres. Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions addressing recreational amenities, signage and materials for nonresidential buildings.

Why it matters: council members raised concerns about the scale of new rental housing and whether prior understandings with Motlow State Community College affected the three-acre parcel. One council member said the shift from for‑sale to a larger number of rental units is significant and asked when the town should consider the cumulative effect of new apartments countywide.

Motlow State Community College: Council staff said Motlow had earlier held preliminary discussions about the parcel, but Dr. Michael Torrance, Motlow’s president, told staff he did not view the town as having committed to conveying the three-acre parcel. Town staff said coordination with Motlow had been discussed but not formalized.

Developer and planning details: The PUD amendment does not change the overall road layout but modifies uses and building orientation for parts of the site. The planning commission’s approval included three conditions: provide details on recreational amenities and plazas, a signage plan compliant with the sign ordinance, and require nonresidential buildings to meet the town’s design-review materials standard (minimum 75% brick/stone/glass visible from public streets). Residential and mixed‑use buildings are to meet design-review requirements with first floors of mixed‑use buildings meeting nonresidential standards.

Council reaction and next steps: Council members asked staff to seek additional clarification about the three‑acre parcel and any expectations between Motlow and the town. Several council members requested more time to review the amended plan before second reading. The item remained scheduled for formal action at a later meeting; the workshop recorded discussion but not a vote.

Ending: Staff said they would gather more detail about the parcel’s history and any potential access easement to Motlow and would return with information for the council.