On February 29, 2012 I sent an email to the community with the following options.
1.) Submit an application to change the policy from Medium Residential to Residential Low Medium.
Update 4/7/12 - Planning has advised that policy cannot be changed on a property where significant construction has occurred. Policy can be reviewed for changes on all undeveloped parcels.
Changes to reduce the number of units for this property could have been made from the original PUD approval date in 1979 until 2005 before any dirt was pushed on this property. To change the policy to Residential Low Medium during this period could have reduced the number of units for this property from 73 to 46.
2.) Make application to planning to downzone the property by amending the PUD to specify building materials and to reduce the number of units.
Update 4/7/12 – Information has been received that the community was ok with 73 units on this small parcel of property since they were to be homeownership. As a result of the community’s approval in 2005 and all activities from 2005, 2008 until present, vesting rights are now attached to the property. Legal has advised that rights become vested when "substantial construction or substantial liabilities" have been incurred. Infrastructure is there today that was not there in 2005.
*Note - To clear up misinformation distributed by others about this approval in 2005, I was not the school board member at the time this project was approved in 2005 and I am not listed on the paperwork. http://www.nashville.gov/mpc/docs/meetings/2005/120805m.pdf - Minutes Scroll down to Page 70-74 - Meeting Minutes and Staff Reports of the Planning Commission December 2005 - no one showed up from District 29
As stated in the first option, changes to reduce the number of units for this property could have been made from the original PUD approval date in 1979 until 2005 before any dirt was pushed on this property.
I initiated a traffic study as requested to provide current information for 2012. Comparisons can be made to the approvals from 2005 and 2008 where the community expressed they were ok with 73 units on this small parcel since they were homeownership. Metro Planning will provide a report on the traffic study at the meeting scheduled for Thursday, April 12, 2012. *Note - Metro Legal has shared that Metro Government has no power to regulate whether a townhome, single family home, duplex or any approved structure is homeownership or rental.
3.) Work with the developer to try to increase the quality of the development building materials, issues around driveway access and construction with a community meeting.
Concluding Comments:
Thank you to everyone who has invited me to come and speak with them personally as well as those who have responded to my emails, made phone calls and attended office hours for District 29 on these parcels.
I will speak at the Planning Commission's meeting on Thursday, April 12, 2012 to the concerns expressed to me which are to continue to push for a reduction in the number of units and traffic concerns present as of 2012. I will also continue to express that the community does not want this development/project to proceed due to the units not being homeownership.
I attended the THDA board meeting that was held on Tuesday, March 27, 2012 to express the concerns around the approval for this project, the market analysis that led to their approval and Rental versus Homeownership and that our community is already oversaturated. I will also continue to speak to the concerns expressed around homeownership versus rental at the Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for Thursday, April 12, 2012 understanding that Metro Government has no power to regulate homeownership versus rental.
Community Meetings will be scheduled now that the periodic review has unveiled all information relative to these parcels.
