At the January MPC, the item was postponed to the next regular meeting due to the late arrival of information to the board. The MPC voted at the February meeting to "postpone indefinitely" a recommendation on the proposal for Lakeland Commons. After that meeting, Lakeland Commons was brought as an agenda item to the Economic Development Commission by EDC Chairman Mark Lawrence as "Presentation and possible action on Lakeland Commons Site & Occupancy Planning by Cory Brady". Discussion occurred at the February EDC meeeting. The item will be presented again at the Mar. 27 EDC meeting.
Additional details and articles to be posted soon.
Top of Page
The site has been updated with details from the latest preliminary development plan for Lakeland Commons. Click here to review the changes. The meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, January 22, 2008 at 6:30 p.m.
Top of Page
The item on the agenda at the Municipal Planning Commission (MPC) was the request submitted by residents to amend the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (LUP) for two parcels located at Seed Tick and Memphis Arlington to change the current designations which allow for commercial development to residential-only designations.
Jay Higbee, the city's growth management director, started off with a slide show and described the area on the (LUP), some of the history of that area and the land use plan, and other related issues. The staff's recommendation to the MPC was to not make any decisions at this time due to several significant reports that are due in the next several months. [Note: the exact wording of the staff's recommendation is unknown.] The issue of civic uses was discussed in relation to the Town Center concept, as the 'Mixed Use' designation on one of the parcels in questions allows for civic uses. There was a study in 2004 on the Town Center concept, and a 2006 update modified the study's recommendations. The new plan has 3 options, but they are recommendations and city can use those locations or not.
The staff's overall recommendation was that there is no downside to deferring a decision due to the relevant information that is forthcoming. This information includes: road plan (late 2007), regulations re-write (2008), master rezoning (2008), Canada Road context sensitive design (2008), Town Center (unknown).
Also part of the original request by residents was to restore the designation of Memphis Arlington Road between Canada Rd and Seed Tick to 'Scenic Corridor'. This designation is not on the LUP although all of Memphis Arlington from the eastern city boundary up to Seed Tick does have the scenic corridor designation. Mr. Higbee stated that this issue will be addressed as part of the major road plan update that is forthcoming.
Several residents spoke in support of the amendment request. Frances Lancaster presented a handout that shows significant overlap of 'service areas' that were defined during the process of updating the LUP. The concept of the service area was to show how Lakeland residents can purchase their necessary goods within the city. The service areas differ in the size of the commercial center and thereby the size of the area they serve. The smaller 'convenience' shopping area would serve the area within a 1/2 mile radius. The medium 'neighborhood' shopping area would serve a 1 mile radius, and the larger 'community' shopping area would serve a 2 mile radius. The service areas could also serve areas up to 1, 2 and 4 miles, respectively. The map shows that there is a significant amount over overlap in service areas along Highway 70 between Canada Road and Seed Tick and that overall, there is no shortage of commercial services planned for this area. She further pointed out that the recommended location of the commercial at Seed Tick was the only commercial recommendation in the middle of an established residential area. Other areas have existing commercial zoning or are primarily undeveloped land. Click
here to view the map.
She also stated that the residents who are in support of the amendment are not opposed to all commercial development. They are concerned, however, with over-commercialization. She also reiterated that this is not just an issue of 'not in my backyard'. This issue has highlighted a deficiency in the notification process as relates to changes to the LUP whereby specific, direct notice to adjacent property owners is not required even though the LUP makes zoning recommendations that affect property owners.
Several other residents also spoke in support of the amendment request. Thomas Lucas reiterated the concerns over allowing excessive commercial development and cited the vacant commercial property at Highway 70 and Appling, asking how Lakeland could support large scale development when a larger city like Bartlett cannot. Steve Butler referenced a conversation with a sheriff's deputy that he had after his neighbor's home had been burglarized. He explained the two Cs: commercial and crime, they go hand-in-hand. Mr. Butler relayed the conversation he had with the deputy. An example the deputy gave was the increase in crime in the residential areas adjacent to the new Kroger in Arlington.
After the public discussion, the board members began their discussion of the issue. Questions were asked by board member to city staff about the nature of the forthcoming reports as to the information they will provide that may guide any decision on the amendment request. There was also some discussion on the requested designation of 'Ex-Urban Residential' and whether that was the right residential category. [Note: 'Ex-Urban' is a category in the LUP that provides for large lots, 2-5 acres.] City staff was not in favor of the Ex-Urban designation if MPC wanted to make the change to a residential category. Mayor Carmichael made a motion to approve the amendment request to an undecided residential category. The motion failed because it did not receive a second. Commissioner Hartz made a motion to postpone indefinitely. The motion received a second and passed, with Mayor Carmichael voting against the motion. The general position of the MPC was to wait for the forthcoming information before making a decision, due to the relevance of the information to their decision.
- Read the East Shelby Review article here
Top of Page
No action was taken at the Municipal Planning Commission meeting on Monday, October 15 at the request of the Mayor, who was unable to attend the meeting. Since there was public turnout for the meeting, several residents did speak about the issue of the requested amendments to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The matter will be addressed at the next MPC meeting to be held on November 19, 2007.
Mr. Larry Hamilton, former owner of the 40 acre property west of Seed Tick and current owner of the property east of Seed Tick, spoke against the residents' request for the amendment to the Land Use Plan. He made statements in support of commercial uses on Hwy 70 and Hwy 64 and cited Collierville's development along Poplar Avenue as a success story of a strong commercial tax base. He stated that he didn't think the residents should be using a petition as a method of their opposition to the proposed development. He cited the public meetings that were held as part of the update to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan as the opportunity the citizens had to voice their positions. And he stated that in order to make a profit off his land, he'll have to turn it into a hog or chicken farm, suggesting whether the neighbors would prefer that over commercial development.
Ms. Shirlee Clark spoke in favor of the residents' request for the amendment. She cited the petition statistics of nearly 400 signatures of Lakeland residents who want this area to remain residential. She pointed out that although it may seem like a small number, it's nearly 25% of the total number of people who voted in the last Lakeland election. She also reiterated the point that the reason this issue is before the commission is because the process is flawed. She described the situation as a conundrum. The zoning ordinances acknowledge the impact on adjacent property owners by requiring written notice before the change. However, the commitment of property usage within the Land Use Plan does not require written notice to adjacent property owners.
- Read the East Shelby Review article here
- Read the Commercial Appeal article here
Top of Page
At the Municipal Planning Commission Meeting on Monday 9/17, there was discussion under New Business regarding the requested amendment to the Land Use Plan for the property located at Seed Tick between Memphis Arlington and Highway 70. This allowed residents, city staff, and board members to discuss various aspects of the issue.
Residents reiterated their concerns over communication regarding the significant changes within the plan that did not require specific notification to adjacent properties, that the recommendations were not consistent with the residential area, and that residents did not move to Lakeland for convenient retail.
J. Higbee (city staff, Growth Management Director) addressed the public. He commented that the city would like to work better with residents on future projects. There is currently a code writing project underway that would be a good project to start with.
As for the most recent Comprehensive Plan update, Mr. Higbee maintains that the city went over-and-above the minimum standards and held 6 public meetings with an additional 4 MPC meetings where the Land Use Plan was discussed. Regarding the specific property in question, he stated that the design firm (Dugan Design Group) made the recommendations and that 'service nodes' along a highway is a standard feature. He also said that it would not be seen as an unusual recommendation if the property had been designated either way. In other words, a commercial recommendation was reasonable, but a residential recommendation would have been reasonable as well.
Several of the commissioners also commented on the issue. Mr. Barber noted the significance that they are hearing the voice of the residents on this matter and mentioned looking at the entire plan rather than just one section. Mr. Hartz made a statement that the Land Use Plan makes 'strong recommendations' but that it is not law. Mr. Brownlee agreed about the voice of the residents, but also questioned what the other side's concerns would be in terms of future residents and needs of the community. (Note: additional comments may have also been made by these or other members of the MPC)
Next steps: the amendment request will be brought to the next MPC meeting (Monday, October 15) as an ACTION ITEM. As the adopting body for the Land Use Plan, it is the MPC that must formally initiate any changes. The process for those changes is dictated by is the TCA (Tennessee Code Annotated). Although it is not a specific requirement under TCA, staff is recommending that the amendment be publicly advertised through a variety of channels, in a similar manner to what occurred in the past. Thereafter, there will be a vote to adopt the changes.
Below is the TCA excerpt:
13-4-202. Adoption of plan - Manner.
The commission may adopt the plan as a whole by a single resolution, or, as the work of making the whole plan progresses, may from time to time adopt a part or parts thereof, any such part to correspond generally with one (1) or more of the functional subdivisions of the subject matter of the plan. The adoption of the plan or any part, amendment or addition shall be by resolution carried by the affirmative votes of not less than a majority of all the members of the commission. The resolution shall refer expressly to the maps, descriptive matter and other matters intended by the commission to form the whole or part of the plan, and the action taken shall be recorded on the adopted plan or part thereof and descriptive matter by the identifying signature of the secretary of the commission, and a copy of the plan or part thereof shall be certified to the chief legislative body.
[Acts 1935, ch. 34, sec. 4; C. Supp. 1950, sec. 3493.4; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), sec. 13-504.]
Top of Page
At the Municipal Planning Commission meeting on Monday, the MPC voted 6-0 to recommend denial to the Board of Commissioners. There was great turnout by the public in opposition to the Lakeland Commons proposed development. Many residents spoke out citing that they moved to Lakeland to get away from other over-commercialized areas in the Mid-South. And there was not a single resident who voiced support for this development.
There were several articles written about the meeting:
- Read the East Shelby Review article here
- Read the Commercial Appeal article here
Subsequent to that meeting, the applicant (Lakeland Commons LP) withdrew their application from consideration by the Board of Commissioners. They are considering changes to the plan for refiling with the Municipal Planning Commission. It is not known when the revised plan will be presented to MPC. This is only a small victory, so your support is still essential to preventing commercial development at this location!
This may not be in your neighborhood today, but it might be there tomorrow! If you are concerned by this issue, then please take action! Call, write or fax each commissioner. Send us an email to let us know you want to help.
Further, learn about every candidate seeking election to the Board of Commissioners and make sure they will promote your values and priorities in their role as an elected official. Be sure that you understand the voting process:
you should cast 3 votes on election day.
Top of Page