Tanyard Hill subdivision rezoning fails

Members voted 11-2 against the request as questions surfaced about smaller lots, road safety, planning process

9:14 p.m. July 20, 2026

DUANE CROSS
MCO Publisher•Editor

The Metro Council rejected the rezoning needed for a proposed subdivision on Tanyard Hill Road Monday night, voting 11-2 against moving the property from agricultural to residential zoning.

The request involved tax map 037, parcel 037.00. The change from A-1 agricultural to R-2 residential was needed because several proposed lots would fall below the five-acre minimum allowed under the property’s current zoning.

Peggy Sue Blackburn and Greg Guinn voted for the rezoning.

Voting against it were Arvis Bobo, Robert Bracewell, Gerald Burnett, Amy Cashion, Douglas Carson, Bradley Dye, Dexter Golden, Jimmy Hammond, Houston Lindsey, Sunny Rae Moorehead, and Shane Taylor.

The defeat on first reading means the request will not move to a public hearing in its current form.

Marty Cashion and John Taylor were absent.

Plan reached county in reverse order

Much of the discussion centered on how the proposed subdivision reached the council.

Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman Dexter Golden said the property had already been surveyed into smaller lots before the applicants addressed the conflict with the county’s five-acre agricultural requirement.

Under the usual process, Golden said, the commission would first review a sketch plan, identify any zoning problems, and direct the property owner to seek rezoning before the survey work was completed.

“They’re asking to rezone to match their sketch,” Golden said. “So it was kind of done backwards.”

Surveyor Nicholas Northcutt has argued that the county handbook does not spell out the steps required to obtain a rezoning. Golden said the property’s zoning classification and minimum lot requirements could have been confirmed with the county before the land was surveyed into proposed lots.

The Planning Commission met in special session Friday and voted unanimously to send the required recommendation to the council.

Golden stressed that the commission did not approve a preliminary subdivision plan. Its vote only supplied the recommendation needed for the rezoning request to move forward.

Council members also questioned whether rezoning the full parcel to R-2 could open the door to more homes beyond those currently shown along Tanyard Hill Road.

Road safety came up as well. The proposal would add several driveways along a curved section of the county road, where the speed limit is 45 mph.

County Attorney Bill Rieder told members that rezoning is a legislative decision. The council, he said, had to vote on the request before it unless the application was amended.

Trustee’s report shows general fund $1.35 million above budgeted amount

One of the night’s more notable reports came near the end of the meeting.

Budget Committee Chairman Gerald Burnett said the latest trustee’s report showed an ending general-fund balance of approximately $2.3 million. The county had budgeted for an ending balance of $950,000. That puts the reported balance about $1.35 million above the amount built into the budget.

“We significantly exceeded our budget in terms of how much money we are leaving in reserve for the general fund,” Burnett said.

He added the county’s other funds also finished above their budgeted ending balances and that the pattern has held for roughly a decade.

Burnett also pushed back against criticism over financial transparency. He said county budget, revenue, and spending reports are reviewed through state reporting systems and are available to the public.

One important distinction: An ending fund balance is not necessarily the same as cash sitting unused in a bank account. Part of the $2.3 million is committed, assigned, restricted, or needed to cover operations before the next round of property-tax revenue arrives.

Two rezoning requests advance

Two other rezoning requests passed on first reading and are expected to receive public hearings next month.

The council advanced a request by Kaycee and Steven Edwards involving tax map 010, parcel 019.03, on Woosley Road from A-1 agricultural to R-2 residential.

Members also advanced tax map 020, parcel 039, from A-1 agricultural to C-1 commercial, a planned project by Rodney and Jennifer Ervin for a storage facility along Highway 55.

A request from Simmjo LLC and Joey Simmons involving tax map 025, parcel 010, from A-1 to R-2 passed on second reading.

Jail vote completes another financing step

The council adopted a resolution tied to financing the Moore County Jail renovation and received a related letter from the Tennessee Comptroller’s Office.

Monday’s action did not authorize new spending. The council had already approved the $983,498 project when it adopted the county budget June 29. The total includes $833,498 for construction and $150,000 for equipment.

The resolution approved Monday completed another step in arranging financing for the project.

The discussion again turned to the legal notice used to solicit bids. The notice appeared in the newspaper in April but was not posted at the time to Tennessee’s statewide public-notice website.

Council member Robert Bracewell said the omission appeared to be a publishing error but noted that state law treats certain website posting errors, outages, or service interruptions as harmless when the newspaper notice is otherwise correct.

The county received one bid for the renovation.

Cease-and-desist proposal sent back

The council voted down a proposed cease-and-desist letter and sent the matter back to Planning and Zoning for more work.

The concern was not simply how the letter was worded. Members said the county needs a full procedure explaining who can authorize an order, who signs and sends it, what violations qualify, and how fines or legal costs would be determined.

The county’s codes office, run by Christine Pyrdom, does not want the responsibility of independently issuing the orders.

Council members asked that both the letter and the procedure be reworked before the proposal returns for another vote.

County may consider development pause

Golden also raised the possibility of temporarily pausing new major subdivisions while the county reviews its development rules and continues work on its long-range land-use plan.

He suggested the county could define a major subdivision as one containing five or more lots and consider a pause lasting several months. No motion was made.

Golden said the Planning Commission and codes office have been under growing pressure as development increases. Applications have become more complicated, complaints have mounted, and board members and staff have faced threats of litigation.

The conversation quickly widened beyond paperwork. Council members questioned whether the county’s schools, water system, roads, fire equipment, and volunteer emergency services are ready to absorb continued growth.

Golden said he would take the discussion back to the Planning Commission and work with county officials on a possible proposal. Any development moratorium would have to return to the council for consideration at a future meeting.