Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission hears two rezonings and a neighborhood plan for Bridal Springs area
Summary
Montgomery County planning staff presented rezoning requests for two parcels (CZ192025 and CZ232025) and consultants previewed the Bridal Springs neighborhood plan, emphasizing connectivity, pedestrian safety and limited mixed‑residential areas; staff and planning commission recommended approval of the rezones and the neighborhood plan proceeded to a public hearing with both supporters and opposition comments.
Montgomery County planning staff introduced two zoning applications and a Bridal Springs neighborhood plan during the informal commission meeting on Dec. 1.
CZ192025 (DRG Family Partnership, agent Larry Racony) is an application to rezone a 7.96‑acre parcel at the McAdoo Creek and Highway 41A intersection to split C‑5 (2.23 acres) for highway frontage and R‑4 (5.73 acres) multifamily in the rear. Staff noted the parcel lies in the Sango planning area and the urban growth boundary and recommended approval, saying the change aligns with the comprehensive plan's neighborhood commercial future land‑use designation and provides a logical transition to adjacent lower‑density residential zones. Agent Larry Racony described a "stair‑step" approach with commercial on 41A and multifamily behind it and said a traffic study was completed and acceptable to staff.
CZ232025 (Marvin Pitts) covers about 7.62 acres fronting Guthrie Highway with proposed C‑5 and M‑1 zoning to match surrounding parcels and accommodate a subdivision in process; staff recommended approval but noted the need for a gravity sewer maintenance/extension to serve the development.
Planning staff also presented the Bridal Springs neighborhood plan, a non‑binding, 15‑20 year guiding toolkit developed with Reagan Smith. Consultants Michael Burrill and Lauren Sands said the plan centers on three priorities: connectivity/transportation (raised crosswalks, targeted sidewalks and access management), neighborhood pride and livability (park/open space and signage), and housing/neighborhood development (preserving single‑family character in large‑lot county areas while allowing limited small‑lot or mixed residential pockets near existing diversity). The plan was presented in flip‑book format and requires a public hearing before adoption as a resolution in the county.
During the hearing, resident Christine McNamara opposed elements of the plan and criticized outside consultants and development pressures following the neighborhood's tornado recovery, calling some development "opportunistic." Planning staff indicated that future site plans and TDOT reviews would determine access and engineering requirements for rezonings and that the planning commission had recommended approval for the applications.
No final zoning votes were recorded at the informal meeting; adoption would follow required public‑hearing and formal meeting procedures if the commission moves to adopt the neighborhood plan or approve zoning changes.
