Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Multifamily topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission rejects developer’s request to change mixed‑use plan to age‑restricted multifamily; annexation and PUD deferred
Summary
The commission voted to recommend denial of a land‑use amendment that would have changed a future land‑use designation from commercial mixed‑use to age‑restricted multifamily for the Courtyards at McFarland; an associated annexation and preliminary PUD were deferred by the applicant.
The Mount Juliet planning commission on April 17 denied a developer request to amend the city’s future land‑use map from commercial mixed‑use to age‑restricted multifamily for the Courtyards at McFarland, a project at 5025 Old Lebanon Dirt Road.
Staff and several commissioners said the requested change removes a commercial component that the current future land‑use designation requires. Miss Johnson, planning staff, told the commission that staff does not support the amendment because it “does not adhere to the future land use map designation.” Commissioner George said commercial uses support city sales‑tax revenue and public services and urged preserving the commercial element.
Jay Easter, representing developer EFCON, said the project includes a park and greenway that the developer intends to build and deed to the city: “The park land would be given to the city and then we would construct the park improvements for the city and deed over a completed park to the city.” Easter also said the developer had withdrawn a prior CMU‑PUD submittal that had included 25% commercial and now sought solely an age‑restricted multifamily land‑use designation.
Residents at the meeting urged caution. Christopher Montini said increased development and traffic have made walking in his neighborhood difficult and asked the commission to reconsider rezoning proposals in similar corridors. Jim McDermott, who lives across from one proposed rezone, said he was concerned about safety and a new parking lot directly in front of nearby houses.
Commissioners voted on a motion to recommend denial; the clerk recorded the final voice tally as a 4–3 negative recommendation. Separately, the applicant asked that the related annexation and the preliminary master development plan (PUD) be deferred; commissioners approved the deferrals at the applicant’s request.
Why this matters: the Planning Commission’s negative recommendation keeps the city’s land‑use map intact for that parcel and preserves the future option of commercial development at the site. The developer may revise the proposal and return; annexation and preliminary PUD work were deferred, delaying final action.
What’s next: the developer can revise and resubmit, and the annexation and PUD items will return to a future Planning Commission agenda per the applicant’s deferral request.
