Support for proposed rural resort edges ahead at Feb. 5 Planning Commission meeting

For the first time since Cheatham County officials began debating whether or not to allow a rural resort in Kingston Springs, public support narrowly outweighed opposition at the Planning Commission’s Feb. 5 meeting.

Eleven speakers spoke in favor of the proposed rural resort concept, while nine spoke against it during the public forum. Several of those speaking in support were residents of the area around the Narrows of the Harpeth and members of the Harpeth Men’s Dining and Benevolence Society – though the organization itself has not taken a formal position on the project.

Despite the shift in public comment, the Planning Commission did not take up discussion of the proposed rural resort agricultural regulations Thursday night due to the absence of three members – Chester Hannah, Allen Nicholson and Kingston Springs representative Brian McCain. The item was again deferred to the commission’s March 5 meeting.

The proposed zoning changes stem from a plan put forward by C.B. Ragland, led by developer Michael Hayes, to build a luxury resort near the Narrows of the Harpeth River State Park. Hayes was present at the Feb. 5 meeting but did not speak during the public forum.

Arguments in favor: revenue, tourism, growth management

Supporters of the rural resort emphasized economic benefits and framed the proposal as a lower-impact alternative to residential sprawl.

Mike Hargis, vice mayor of Kingston Springs and a member of the Men’s Benevolence Society, said the resort would represent a roughly $250 million private investment and generate an estimated $6 million annually in combined tax revenue. He pointed to The Golf Club of Tennessee as an existing example of a high-end, low-visibility resort already operating in Cheatham County.

“We already have one of these,” Hargis said, arguing that such developments bring visitors and revenue without disrupting surrounding communities.

Other supporters echoed that comparison, saying destination resorts attract temporary visitors rather than permanent population growth and place less strain on schools and public services than large subdivisions.

Several speakers warned that, under current zoning and state law, the property could be subdivided into five-acre residential tracts with little county control. They argued that creating clear rural resort regulations would give the county more leverage over how development occurs.

“A developer can subdivide land into five acre tracts and put as many single family residences on those five acre tracks as he can legally create, and there is absolutely nothing that this planning commission or the county commission can do to stop it,” said Bill Herbert, a founding member of the Men’s Benevolence Society and an attorney representing C.B. Ragland during the October Planning Commission meeting. “The rural resort concept provides a developer with an alternative to subdividing into five acre tracks, replacing farmland and forest with single family homes.”

Supporters also cited tourism as a way to support local businesses year-round, create jobs for younger residents and provide opportunities for small entrepreneurs, tradespeople and farm-to-table partnerships.

“I think that the revenue that this would bring to local people, the training that can be helped by hiring young kids today to keep them in the county [is great],” said Bob Sanders, a member of the Benevolence Society. 

Additional Benevolence Society members that spoke as individuals in favor of the proposed development include: James Weaver, Ed Greer, Roger Hamiter and Dennis Bowling. 

Kingston Springs’ County Commissioner Mike Breedlove also spoke in favor of the rural resort during the public forum. “I see this project as something that would be wonderful and great for our county. I have been somewhat perplexed as to the opposition of why. Why would you not want something like this here? We're not talking about a cement plant or a methane plant, but we're talking about a project and a destination that people can come to and make memories,” Breedlove said. 

He continued, “I would really ask and plead to the planning commission to … come up with something so that at this point you can send it back to us, the commissioners, and they can decide yes or no, whether we want this project or we don't.” (Editor’s note: As of publication, Breedlove has not pulled a petition to re-run for his county seat that will expire in August.)

Ongoing opposition: growth plan, infrastructure, environmental risks

Nine community members spoke in opposition of the rural resort, including Kingston Springs’ County Commissioner, Jimmy Hedgepath, who has been adamant that he will vote in the way of the majority.

Opponents reiterated concerns raised at earlier meetings, including potential violations of the county’s growth plan, environmental impacts to the Harpeth River and surrounding state parks and the lack of road, water and sewer infrastructure to support a large-scale resort.

Several speakers argued that allowing rural resorts countywide would amount to spot zoning driven by a single developer, noting that no other developers have formally requested similar zoning changes.

Residents living near the proposed site warned that increased traffic, construction activity and tourism could permanently alter the rural character of the area.

“That’s not low density,” Jayci Whitaker said, describing fears that the development would effectively place a small town in the middle of a protected rural landscape. Whitaker and her husband, Jeremy, own property near the proposed development and have been adamant in their opposition to the rural resort since the beginning. 

Opponents also referenced the widespread petition that has gathered nearly 2,000 signatures, saying public sentiment remains largely against allowing resorts outside designated growth areas.

The Planning Commission has repeatedly deferred action on the rural resort regulations since December, with members expressing concern about balancing property rights, economic development and long-term planning. The commission is scheduled to revisit the issue at its March 5 meeting, where discussion of the draft regulations could resume.

If adopted by the Planning Commission, any zoning amendment would still require approval from the Cheatham County Commission.