Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning director previews two rezoning requests and commissioners weigh state bill that could limit developer obligations
Summary
Planning Director Doug DeMasi previewed two rezoning items for next week's hearings — an auto-repair-and-sales proposal on Old Nashville Highway and a PUD for warehouses at the I-840/Amaville interchange — and commissioners discussed state bills (SB1045/HB0608) that could constrain local participation agreements.
Doug DeMasi, Rutherford County planning director, told commissioners Feb. 3 that available lot inventory stands at 1,096 and previewed two rezoning applications for the upcoming public hearings.
The first application, from an organization described as Mechanics on a Mission (applicant Brian Sweatt), would allow vehicle repairs and on-site vehicle sales at two Old Nashville Highway addresses; the planning commission recommended approval following a public hearing in which the applicant described the ministry's work and staff confirmed property cleanup.
The second application proposes a planned unit development at the I-840/Amaville Road interchange for warehouse and distribution facilities. The concept plan shows three buildings ranging from about 80,000 to 162,000 square feet with a combined cap reported as "not to exceed 375,000" square feet. DeMasi said the planning commission recommended approval subject to a participation agreement to address traffic, off-site improvements and cost-sharing; commissioners said any county approval should be contingent on an executed participation agreement.
Separately, Chairman Phillips raised Senate Bill 1045 and House Bill 0608 (cited in the meeting as introduced by Senator Reeves and Representative Rudd), which, as introduced, would prohibit state or local governments from requiring a developer to pay for infrastructure deemed "nonessential" to the development. DeMasi and others said definitions in the bill are vague and could constrain local participation agreements; DeMasi asked who would make the determination of what is "nonessential." "Who really defines what is nonessential?" he asked. Commissioners discussed tracking the bills and drafting a letter to the county's legislative delegation expressing concern.
