Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bartlett board denies rezoning of 5866 Ivanhoe Road after residents cite traffic and safety concerns
Summary
After a lengthy public hearing with multiple residents urging denial, the Bartlett Board of Mayor and Aldermen voted to deny Ordinance 25-06, a rezoning request for 5866 Ivanhoe Road. Planning staff described a conceptual plan for a restaurant and multi-tenant retail building; the Planning Commission recommended against the change.
The Bartlett Board of Mayor and Aldermen voted to deny Ordinance 25-06, a request to rezone 5866 Ivanhoe Road from RS-10 (single-family residential) to CG (general commercial), after a public hearing in which multiple residents testified against the change.
Kim Taylor, director of Planning and Economic Development, told the board the 3.426-acre parcel sits amid a mix of residential and commercial zoning and that the applicant’s conceptual plan showed a 2,400-square-foot restaurant and an 8,000-square-foot multi-tenant building. Taylor said the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and returned a non-favorable recommendation to the board.
Residents who live near the site centered their testimony on traffic, safety and the loss of neighborhood character. “We feel there is no good reason to ever take residential property and make it commercial property in Old Bartlett,” said Beth Day, who lives at 5974 Ivanhoe Road. Liz Ebers, a nearby property owner, warned that a plan with roughly 85 parking spaces and three commercial buildings would “jam up Bartlett Boulevard” and Ivanhoe Road.
Amanda Tennyson, a resident at 5858 Steeplechase, said the corner is the primary entrance to her community and that commercial activity would bring “increased traffic, crime, delivery trucks, night time lighting, signage and noise.” Joe Thompson said the neighborhood and his family’s quality of life would be harmed if a commercial building replaced the trees he currently sees from his living room window.
After Planning staff answered questions, Alderman Young made a motion to deny the rezoning; Alderman Reeves seconded the motion, according to the clerk’s announcement. The board discussed parliamentary phrasing and whether to frame the vote as a motion to deny or a motion to approve; city counsel confirmed a motion to deny is procedurally acceptable. The clerk called the roll and recorded that the motion to deny passed. The transcript does not include an itemized roll-call tally for this vote.
The denial leaves the property zoned RS-10; the applicant may pursue other options, including revised applications or appeals, consistent with local procedures. The board moved on to other agenda items after the vote.
