Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission defers rezoning request for McCreary Road project amid infrastructure concerns
Summary
Developers seeking land‑use amendments and rezoning for parcels along McCreary Road told the county their requests are tied to planned road and flood improvements; the commission voted to defer one rezoning request to allow infrastructure work to proceed.
The Wilson County Commission on Aug. 18 heard a public hearing on two land‑use amendment and rezoning requests for properties on McCreary Road and deferred one of the requests after commissioners said infrastructure commitments need to be completed first.
Nathan Quinn, representing the developers, told commissioners both rezoning requests are closely tied to roadway widening, a realignment of McCreary Road and flood mitigation work, including replacing the existing bridge over Hurricane Creek. "These improvements and these rezoning requests are tied to those improvements," Quinn said. He added the developers had committed that a building permit would not be issued until the roadway improvements were completed.
The two cases were described to the commission as: - McCreary iOS Ventures LLC: a land‑use amendment from low‑density residential to high‑intensity commercial and a rezoning from R‑1 (rural residential) to C‑3 PUD (highway commercial planned unit development). The parcel totals approximately 5.01 acres at 3410 McCreary Road (tax map reference included in the packet). The applicant requested a one‑month deferral for this case. - McCreary Ventures East LLC and Tanny Mattingly: a land‑use amendment from low‑density residential to medium/high intensity commercial and a rezoning from R‑1 to C‑2 (general commercial) with a PUD overlay for approximately 3.98 acres at parcels listed on the county tax map.
Commissioners pressed for infrastructure assurances. Commissioner Evans and others said several projects in the area had been approved but not completed, and they asked that infrastructure catch up before additional approvals. After discussion, the commission voted to defer the McCreary Ventures East LLC case for 90 days. The motion to defer passed with the majority in favor; two commissioners registered opposition before the motion passed.
Discussion vs. decision: The transcript records developer commitments that building permits and site access would be contingent on completing the roadway improvements and flood mitigation. The commission’s formal action was a motion to defer one of the rezoning requests (McCreary Ventures East LLC) for approximately 90 days; that deferral passed.
What the record shows and what it does not: The developer said the corner case would be tied to road improvements and that a one‑month deferral was requested for the other case; the transcript records a 90‑day deferral vote for the McCreary Ventures East LLC case. The transcript does not record a formal schedule for the roadway work or a county staff assignment to oversee the developer's commitments.
Ending: With the 90‑day deferral, the McCreary Ventures East LLC rezoning will return to the commission at a later meeting for further consideration; the McCreary iOS Ventures LLC deferral request (one month) was presented to the commission for consideration during the hearing and may return at the commission’s September meeting per the applicant request and staff process.
