Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Council denies rezoning near Cameron Drive after residents cite flood and traffic concerns
Loading...
Summary
Henderson City Council voted 7–1 May 8 to deny a developer’s request to rezone about 40 acres near Cameron Drive to R-11, after residents raised flooding, traffic and tree-protection concerns and the Planning Board recommended denial.
Henderson City Council voted 7–1 on May 8 to deny a rezoning request for roughly 40 acres off Cameron Drive, Fernwood Drive and Tiny Broadwick Boulevard after multiple residents voiced safety and neighborhood-impact concerns.
Development Services Director Corey Williams explained LDL Holdings LLC sought to rezone the tract from RA and R-20 to R-11 (moderate density). Williams said roughly 25 of the roughly 40 acres could be buildable because a floodplain and a sewer line cross the property. Applicant Mike Marshall told council the rezoning ‘‘aligns with the City’s Comprehensive Plan’’ and could yield for-sale townhomes or single-family homes and construction jobs.
The public hearing drew several residents who opposed rezoning. Mary Rogers said moderate-density development would bring ‘‘more traffic and noise’’ and raise safety questions; Cynthia Ratliff described prior flood events that reached mailbox height and said possible egress points in the floodplain would be unsafe. T.W. Floyd urged council to consider the loss of control the change could bring; Tracy Greenway said tree protections had not been enforced nearby and urged council to follow the Planning Board’s unanimous recommendation to deny.
Council members questioned access and impacts. Councilmember D. Michael Rainey, who lives on Fairway Drive, said that road already functions as a cut-through route and ‘‘cannot handle any more traffic.’’ Councilmember Sara M. Coffey noted developers sometimes bring their own crews rather than hiring locally, questioning job-creation claims. City Attorney D. Rix Edwards reminded the council that the vote concerned only zoning, not a specific development plan; Board of Adjustment review would be required for special uses.
Councilmember Coffey moved to deny Ordinance 23-06; Councilmember Rainey seconded. The motion passed 7–1; Councilmember Melissa Elliott cast the lone no vote.
The denial leaves the property zoned RA/R-20. City staff and the applicant may pursue other options short of the R-11 rezoning; any future proposal with use beyond single-family housing would require Board of Adjustment review and additional approvals.
What’s next: The record indicates the Planning Board had recommended denial; council’s decision was final on the zoning request presented May 8. Any subsequent project proposals would follow required permitting and Board of Adjustment processes.