Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Belmont 1185 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Smyrna planning board recommends denial of 1185 Belmont senior housing after hours of neighborhood opposition
Summary
After more than an hour of public comment, the Smyrna Planning and Zoning Board voted 6‑0 to recommend denial of rezoning application Z25‑014 for 1185 Belmont Ave., a proposed 53‑unit, one‑bedroom senior housing development. Residents cited traffic, parking, stormwater and precedent concerns; staff had recommended approval with conditions.
The Smyrna Planning and Zoning Board recommended denial on Nov. 10 of a rezoning request for 1185 Belmont Avenue that would have allowed a three‑story, 53‑unit senior living building reserved for residents 62 and older. The motion to deny passed 6‑0 after more than an hour of public testimony.
Rusty Martin, the city’s community development director, told the board staff recommended rezoning the 1.3‑acre site from General Commercial to a Residential High‑Rise PUD with multiple conditions, including a maximum building height of 35 feet, limits to one‑bedroom units and a 62+ occupancy restriction. "Staff's recommending approval of the request from GC to RHR, for 53 units at 41 units per acre," Martin said.
Neighbors urged the board to reject the change. "Approving variances of this magnitude would not just affect Belmont Avenue," said Jen Forstner, representing a petition of nearly 200 signers. "We respectfully ask the commission to deny the requested variances and uphold the integrity of Smyrna’s zoning and planning principles and protect the community that calls this neighborhood home." Other residents highlighted pedestrian safety near a neighboring school, narrow streets without sidewalks and the risk of spillover parking onto church and residential lots.
Several witnesses pressed technical and procedural concerns. Cherie Jones, a representative of the adjacent school, asked the board to delay approval until "a full traffic, parking and pedestrian impact study is completed, specific to our school's drop‑off and pickup times," and requested a performance and management plan for building operations before any approval.
Some speakers also raised allegations about a developer’s prior projects. Robert Riggins cited news reports and lawsuits tied to a project in Ithaca and said "their record shows that they don't fulfill those promises." The record presented in public comment was not debated or adjudicated during the meeting; staff noted that property‑level permitting and management details would be subject to later technical review if the project advanced.
Board members repeatedly acknowledged concerns about outreach and notice; Rusty Martin said the staff report and attachments had been posted online and staff would verify on‑site signage. Board member (speaker 6), who made the motion to deny, said the public turnout and expressed concerns weighed heavily in the board’s recommendation. The motion was seconded by Howard and adopted 6‑0.
The Planning and Zoning Board’s recommendation is advisory; the mayor and city council will consider the application at a future council meeting (staff previously noted Dec. 15 on the meeting notice).
