An argument against the rural resort

By Linda Ryder

It would be a terrible mistake for the Cheatham County Commission to approve the proposed development of a luxury “rural retreat” at the current Bell’s Reserve property, next door to the Narrows of the Harpeth. Allowing this or any high-density development there would irreparably harm the local community. Development of a huge rental subdivision right in the middle of state-managed natural areas that are protected from development is not appropriate for the community.

First and foremost, the property at Bell’s Reserve is not just any chunk of farmland. The area near the Narrows of the Harpeth is a special place for many who have visited. It has a rich history, from Mississippian mound builders to Montgomery Bell’s historic tunnel, that emotionally enriches visitors.  It is uniquely sandwiched between the Narrows (Harpeth River State Park) and the Cheatham Wildlife Management Area (20,810 State-owned acres managed by TWRA), bordered by the Harpeth River on one side and steep ridges on the opposite side.

The Narrows tunnel was built by Montgomery Bell using black powder and slave labor, harnessing the power of the river to operate a forge to pound pig iron into bars for blacksmithing. Built 1818-1820, it closed around 1862. Said to be the oldest manmade tunnel in the United States, it is recognized both as a National Civil Engineering Landmark and a National Historical Landmark. Visitors can look out from the top of the steep ridge above the tunnel to view the Harpeth River on one side, then take just a few steps and see the river 5 ½ miles downstream. The Narrows loop is the most popular and heaviest used section of the Harpeth and a favorite of kayakers and canoers.

The property is only a stone’s throw from Mace Bluff, where a Mississippian era scepter carved into a rock near the top still presides over the temple mound at Mound Bottom. Miles of land on both sides of the Harpeth River in this area was occupied for more than three centuries by the Mound Builders, beginning around 1500 years ago. The fate of that civilization has been left for archaeologists and historians to ascertain. Many Mississippian era relics have been recovered from the area over the years, and plans are nearly complete for the State of TN to begin construction of a park visitor center at the Gossett Tract, across from Mound Bottom.

Aside from being beautiful, historic, and tranquil, the Narrows area’s proximity to I-40 and Nashville make it easily accessible to visitors from around the world, yet the serenity of the local landscape masks the growing metropolitan area just a few miles away. This is why visitors are charmed by the area and locals fiercely demand protection of its character. It is also precisely why C.B. Ragland wants the Bell’s Reserve property. This development would remain isolated from the urban sprawl that its very existence would initiate. A lucrative investment for the developers, it would exploit environmental and community resources and harm the surrounding community.

Here are some of my thoughts disputing the most compelling arguments for allowing this development:

a) Developer’s projected County revenue: stated expectations are highly speculative and subject to later demand for tax breaks, also redirection of revenue to support growth generated by urban sprawl initiated by allowing high-density development in this area.

b) Developer’s stated prospects for local jobs: while a few local jobs would result, most construction jobs would be filled by contractors’ existing staff. Higher paying permanent jobs would be filled by experienced resort management brought in from elsewhere.

c) Concern that the property may be poorly developed later under existing codes if proposal fails: natural boundaries, lack of road frontage/utilities, environmental impact, much undevelopable land (flood risk, steep slopes, gas/power transmission lines), plus high land cost would be cost-prohibitive for typical developers. The property would also be a practical addition to TN State Parks - feasible upon rejection of this development.

d) Community interest in adding local dining/lodging options: normally accessible to guests only, any allowed public use would be incidental. Dining costs exceeding $100.00/plate and lodging exceeding $1,000/night would also be generally cost-prohibitive for most residents.

This property is outside the County’s Planned Growth Area and zoned for agriculture. County and state laws mandate that land use decisions comply with the growth plan, locating higher density development, including PUDs, in designated growth areas. Rezoning this property to allow a PUD would violate applicable laws, attract undesirable growth, and destroy the area’s character and tranquility.

The developer proposed a zoning amendment to allow this PUD, to be voted on by the Planning Commission on Oct 2.  It must fail there and the full commission vote on Nov 17. Plans for the development here should be permanently tabled.
Cheatham County Government is obligated to comply with applicable laws, and to skirt around them to accommodate a single developer for the sake of financial gain would be gravely unjust for residents of Cheatham County.

All that glitters is not gold! The Narrows is truly a sacred place for many, and an absolute gem for Cheatham County. A luxury development immediately next door would tarnish the area forever.