MICHELLE WILLARD, Post Staff Writer
Posted: Sunday, May 24, 2009 9:03 am

Rutherford County is embarking on a two-year long process to revamp its sorely outdated zoning resolution.

There are many reasons for the current laws ruling development to be cast aside, but we’ve boiled them down to the Top 10 (11, because there really are that many) reasons why Rutherford County needs a new zoning resolution.

The reasons have surfaced in court cases, as well as stakeholder – like local municipalities, the Chamber of Commerce and professional organizations – and steering committee interviews conducted by Parsons Brinkerhoff, the consultant charged with developing the county’s comprehensive land-use plan and revising the zoning resolution and subdivision regulations.

1. The courts say so. In 2001, Chancellor Robert Corlew told the county it needs to take a very close look at its zoning laws. Corlew found “a number of shortcomings and Rutherford County would certainly do well to consider the zoning issue afresh,” in the 2001 case David E. Crockett v. Rutherford County. The ruling was upheld on appeal and has been sited in several cases since, including Shelton v. Rutherford County, the infamous Bible Park rezoning case that the county is currently appealing.

2. It hasn’t been updated since the ‘80s. Written in the 1984, Rutherford County’s zoning resolution hasn’t seen a major update since. “We’re dealing with a zoning resolution that was written in the ‘60s and rewritten in 1984,” Demosi said previously. “We need something that’s more responsive to what we’re experiencing.” The resolution was amended in 1999, which saw some minor changes in wording to clarify some sections and the planning department has recently made minor revisions. But major revisions haven’t been made since the county population was half of the more than 240,000 it is now. The county has seen explosive growth over the past 25 years and the current zoning resolution isn’t written to easily manage that growth.

3. It’s inconsistent. There is a perception among stakeholders and the courts that Rutherford County’s zoning resolution “is inconsistent and can lack objectivity,” Parsons Brinkerhoff’s report said. The county relies on a conditional-use permit system, which allows for individuals and developers to request spot-zoning changes. Demosi said, with the new resolution, the county will probably move away from the conditional-use permit approach to zoning and implement more uses by right in the revamped zoning regulation.

4. Blanket residential zoning needs to go. When the resolution was initially written in 1984, it placed the entire county in a residential zone. “As a planning commissioner for 11 years I became convinced that our blanket zoning of R-15/Agriculture was an obstacle to coherent community development,” said Mayo Taylor, one of the 15 Comprehensive Plan’s Steering Committee members. Not only does it prohibit coherent community development, it sets the stage for many lawsuits against the county.

5. It doesn’t protect the community’s identity. Some of the stakeholders interviewed by Parsons Brinkerhoff expressed concern that distinct communities in the county are losing their individual identities, because of the blanket residential zoning. At the last steering committee meeting, members were concerned about protecting the county’s agricultural heritage and preserving its rural feel. But the bucolic countryside is often swallowed by development, which pays no heed to what is unique about Rutherford County, some committee members said. “With community input into this Comprehensive Plan, Rutherford County can find a balance that will both stimulate our economy and protect our sense of community,” said Susan Allen, steering committee member and Rutherford Neighborhood Alliance representative.

6. RuCo needs the tools to deal with growth. Several steering committee members feel the county does not have the tools necessary to deal with the rapid growth the county has seen. Between 2000 and 2008, Rutherford County added 39.6 percent to its population, topping out at more than 230,000. “I am keenly aware – having attended county committee and commission meetings over the last 6 years or so – that the planning department, planning commission and commissioners do not have the tools they need to make sound decisions for smart, sustainable future growth,” Allen said.

7. RuCo needs to position itself for future economic development. The county needs to develop commercial zones and industrial Super Sites, like Montgomery and Hamilton counties that attracted Hemlock Semiconductor to Clarksville and Volkswagon to Chattanooga. “We welcomed Nissan and it paid off,” steering committee member Ernie Johns said. But the committee isn’t just looking at manufacturing jobs, many members expressed the need to attract white-collar and blue-collar employers. Patrick said she’d like to capitalize on Nashville’s health care industry and the local hospitals to attract more investment from the medical field.

8. Commercial growth. One problem that keeps the county in a financial hole is its dependence on property taxes. Very little of the county’s revenue comes from local option sales tax. Taylor said the county needs to develop more commercial zones and move away from the conditional-use permit approach.

9. Growth doesn’t pay for itself. While growth is good for the local economy, it taxes local government, which ends up playing catch up. Although Rutherford is the fastest growing county in the state, all the growth has placed demands on the local infrastructure and the county’s budget. “Rapid population growth, along with annexation and rezoning by the municipalities, has created a negative fiscal impact on the county,” Allen explained.

10. Unchecked growth taxes the water supply. The blanket residential zoning has created sprawl, which taxes the local infrastructure and placed a heavy burden as the local water supply. Among stakeholders, the quantity of water Consolidated Utility District can pull from J. Percy Priest Lake has become a concern. CUD has the capacity the pump 16 million gallons per day and a standing request to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to double its capacity to 32 million gallons a day. The current level is adequate during the winter months, but in the dog days of summer the utility runs at capacity. Unless CUD finds another water source, the well may run dry sometime in the near future, CUD Director Larry McElroy said in a previous interview.

11. Existing plans don’t mesh. Currently, the county has land-use plans for Blackman, Christiana-Buchanan, LeAnna-Walter Hill-Lascassas, Salem Pike and Smyrna, as well as zoning regulations from Murfreesboro, Smyrna and La Vergne. While each is distinctive, they should all work under the “umbrella” of the county’s zoning regulations, said David Hafley from Parsons Brinkerhoff. Taylor said she is serving on the committee to help develop a “clear, community-derived direction for the future development of the county,” which should be covered by the comprehensive community plan.

Michelle Willard can be contacted at 615-869-0816 or mwillard@murfreesboropost.com.