An ordinance to amend Title 17 of the Metropolitan Code of Laws, the Zoning Ordinance of The Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, by changing from RS5 to MUN-A-NS zoning for property located at 1212 Villa Place, approximately 320 feet south of Edgehill Avenue (0.28 acres) and within the Edgehill Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District, all of which is described herein (Proposal No. 2026Z-040PR-001).

Topics

Introduced: August 18, 2026
Last action: Passed on third reading · August 18, 2026

Sponsors

Terry Vo Lead

AI summary — check the source Spot-checked in audit

Council gives final OK to rezoning one lot on Villa Place in Edgehill

The Council took its third and final vote on a bill rezoning a 0.28-acre property at 1212 Villa Place, just south of Edgehill Avenue, from RS5 to MUN-A-NS. The Planning and Zoning Committee had recommended approval 8-0, and the sponsor spoke briefly in support, saying the site is surrounded by commercially zoned parcels so the change fits the existing pattern rather than standing alone. The sponsor also told colleagues she had talked with constituents and wanted it on the record that the vote should not be treated as a precedent for nearby properties. No one spoke against it, and the bill passed.

What it does

Changes the zoning on a single 0.28-acre property at 1212 Villa Place from RS5, a single-family residential category, to MUN-A-NS, a mixed-use neighborhood category that allows a wider range of uses. The property stays inside the Edgehill Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District, which keeps its own design review rules in place.

What happened, in plain language

The bill passed on third reading, which is the Council's final vote on an ordinance. In the recording, the presiding officer took it by voice vote, asking for ayes and then for any no votes or abstentions; the packet records no individual council members' positions for this item. The official action text in the packet describes the motion as seconded and approved with Yes (33), No (0), Abstain (0), and lists the 33 names. With final passage, the zoning change on the property takes effect under the normal process for an approved ordinance.

On the floor · 6 points

Context

The Planning and Zoning Committee chair reported that the committee recommended approval, 8 in favor, 0 against, 0 not voting.

a council member Watch 2:39:29
For

The bill's sponsor said the rezoning is consistent with the surrounding land use pattern and with established city policies.

a council member Watch 2:39:45
For

The sponsor argued the property is surrounded by commercially zoned parcels, which makes the change a logical and compatible transition rather than an isolated spot rezoning.

a council member Watch 2:39:53
Context

The sponsor noted she had heard from constituents and had promised them she would speak on the record about this rezoning.

a council member Watch 2:40:01
For

The sponsor said she supported moving forward on the assurance that the vote would not be viewed as a slippery slope, because each rezoning is evaluated on its own merits, its surrounding context, and consistency with adopted policies.

a council member Watch 2:40:13
Context

The presiding officer asked whether there was any further discussion on the motion to approve on third and final reading; no one spoke, and the vote was taken.

a council member Watch 2:40:32

What the AI is unsure about

The packet is internally inconsistent about the vote: voice_vote is true and the votes array is empty, but the official action text lists a 33-0-0 tally with names. Both are reported above rather than resolved. Speakers in this slice appear only as SPEAKER_NN ids, so no one is named here even though the official text identifies Council Member Vo as the sponsor who moved passage; the transcript's garbled renderings of the sponsor's name ("Vaux," "Vowe," "Bo") were not used for attribution. The transcript slice runs past this item: everything from about t=9648 onward concerns the next agenda items, BL2026-1479 and its companion BL2026-1480 on Anderson Lane, and is not part of this bill's discussion. Transcript text is auto-generated and contains obvious errors (for example "M U N A N S" for MUN-A-NS and "Edge Hill" for Edgehill).

This summary was written from the meeting transcript and the official action record, then checked by a second pass looking for claims the transcript does not support. Where the two disagree, the record and the recording are what count.

See this item in the full agenda for August 18, 2026 →

History

Considered August 18, 2026 Metropolitan Council

See the full August 18, 2026 agenda →
Passed on third reading August 18, 2026 Metropolitan Council

Official record

The bill was approved by the Planning and Zoning Committee. Council Member Vo moved that the bill be passed on third reading, which motion was seconded and approved by the following vote: Yes (33): Suara, Allen, Hill, Kimbrough, Toombs, Gamble, Cortese, Harrell, Hancock, Webb, Eslick, Evans, Bradford, Gregg, Welsch, Vo, Cash, Kupin, Horton, Taylor, Weiner, Druffel, Gadd, Preptit, Nash, Benton, Ellis, Sepulveda, Rutherford, Styles, Lee, Ewing, and Spain; No (0); Abstain (0).

See the full August 18, 2026 agenda →

The filed text for this matter has not been published here yet. It is available on Legistar.