Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee recommends rezoning at 6309 Nolensville Pike to allow 119-unit development after developer concessions

Metropolitan Council Planning & Zoning Committee · October 21, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning & Zoning committee recommended approval of a rezoning at 6309 Nolensville Pike to permit a 119-unit multifamily development after the sponsor said amendment 2 codified community concessions including removal of a sidewalk connection and the addition of a security gate.

The Planning & Zoning committee recommended approval of a rezoning ordinance (BL 20 25 10 36) to change zoning at 6309 Nolensville Pike from R2A to SP to permit a 119-unit multifamily residential development. The committee also recommended approval of a companion bill (BL 20 25 10 37) that authorizes related building-material restrictions.

Sponsor Councilmember Cortez said the amendment (amendment 2) codifies two concessions negotiated with the developer: removing a sidewalk connection from the new development into an established single-family neighborhood and adding a security gate at the neighborhood entrance. Cortez said the community had been engaged for roughly half a year and that the concessions were offered to secure local buy-in. Cortez stated on the record that the amendment “solidifies two of the concessions that the developer was willing to give to get this project moving.”

Amendment 2 was adopted 10-0, the rezoning ordinance as amended was recommended for approval 10-0, and the companion building-materials ordinance was recommended for approval 10-0. The committee’s record identifies the project site as approximately 130 feet east of Fair Meadows Drive at 6309 Nolensville Pike; the transcript does not include additional specifics such as developer name, exact unit mix, or recorded conditions beyond the two concessions noted on the record.

Because the transcript records the concessions (sidewalk connection removed; security gate added) as part of the amendment language, the committee’s recommendation reflects those changes. The sponsor indicated the community supported the project contingent on those concessions; no formal public-comment testimony on the item appears in the committee record.