Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Bells Reserve topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge commissioners to pause zoning changes tied to Bells Reserve and allege official-developer collusion
Summary
At the March 16 Cheatham County Commission meeting, multiple residents opposed proposed countywide zoning amendments related to the Bells Reserve resort, citing the county growth plan and alleging early collusion between county officials and the developer; commissioners were urged to uphold procedural and transparency requirements.
Several Cheatham County residents used the public forum at the March 16 commission meeting to oppose proposed countywide zoning amendments they say would clear the way for the Bells Reserve resort and to question whether county officials improperly favored the developer.
"This exemplifies the level of collusion between county officials and the developer that was already taking place early on," said Linda Ryder, who was introduced by the chair as a public commenter during the meeting. Ryder said county conversations about amending zoning to accommodate CB Ragland’s proposed resort date back to 2004 and cited Tennessee Code Annotated (TCA) 6-58-107 and the county’s growth plan when urging commissioners to scrutinize the amendments.
Other residents echoed those concerns. "I am against the Bells Reserve development," said Clay Magnus, a nearby landowner, who said the proposed project would erode the area’s rural character. Jim Delanis, a lawyer and property owner adjacent to Bell’s Reserve, argued the county’s growth plan is the controlling land-use document and submitted legal opinions that, he said, indicate a zoning amendment cannot be used to change the growth plan.
Deborah Doyle told commissioners the process lacked transparency, saying a consultant retained by the county drafted the proposed language and that many residents had not been adequately notified of the pending changes. "Out of about 40,000 people plus who are in the county, they are out there and they have no idea what you guys are planning," Doyle said, urging greater outreach by postcard, email or phone.
Speakers raised specific technical concerns the commission later discussed during the agenda item, including whether the proposed zoning category’s characterization as "low density" is compatible with the growth plan, and whether roads, water and septic systems near the proposed resort site could support increased traffic and sewage demands.
Commissioners did not take final action on Bells Reserve during the public-comment period. The zoning items tied to public hearing notices were heard later in the meeting; one rezoning request was deferred at the applicant’s request and other amendments were debated and approved (see "Zoning changes and votes" for outcomes).
