Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning John Duke topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dickson County Commission denies John Duke rezoning after neighbor opposition
Summary
The Dickson County Commission voted 8–3 to deny a request by John Duke to rezone about 19.36 acres from A-1 (Agricultural) to M-1 (Heavy Industrial) on N. Hummingbird Lane after neighbors and a letter seeking postponement were recorded in the public hearing.
The Dickson County Commission voted 8–3 on Jan. 21, 2025 to deny a request from John Duke to rezone roughly 19.36 acres on N. Hummingbird Lane (Tax Map 93, p/o Parcel 48.02) from A-1 (Agricultural) to M-1 (Heavy Industrial).
The denial followed a public hearing in which a letter read by Mr. Darnell asked that the matter be postponed and several residents were recorded as opposing the rezoning. The transcript lists Tonya Larkins Bowen, Eddie Cochran, John Stritikus, Jeff Hunziker, Emily McCartney, Ellen Yancey, Stefan Gerville-Reache and Cody Katz as speaking against the proposal; Carrie Joyce was recorded as offering no comment. The applicant, John Duke, was not in attendance when the item moved forward.
Commissioner Rusty Grove moved to deny the rezoning and Commissioner Ray Ledger seconded. Commissioners Randy Simpkins, Ray Ledger, Becky Spicer, Carl Buckner, Jody Britt, Danny Williams, Rusty Grove and Cindi Gray voted to deny (8). Commissioners Dwight McIllwain, Stacey Batey and Mike Petty voted in favor of the rezoning (3). The motion passed without recorded abstentions.
Why it matters: The requested change from agricultural zoning to heavy industrial would alter allowable uses on the 19.36-acre parcel in the 10th District. Nearby residents expressed opposition during the public hearing; the commission’s denial leaves the parcel zoned A-1. The item was later recorded again under "Other Business" where the formal motion to deny and the roll-call tally were captured.
The commission did not adopt any mitigation conditions or direct staff to return with alternative proposals during the meeting. The next step for the applicant, if pursued, would be to revise the application or seek rehearing at a future meeting.
