Hello neighbors, I'm Jorge (George) Catasus, a 5 year resident of Sylvan Park. I have just had a very animated conversation with our City Councilman John Summers on the likelihood of overlay in our neighborhood. Though I was deeply disappointed by his acrimonious demeanor during our conversation. I admit that I may have not left the most pleasant message on his answering machine. When I left my message of concern about Sylvan Park being next to fall under the government imposed overlay, but I was only trying to be concise about my concerns. He called me back with an initially VERY AGGRESSIVE ATTITUDE. He even went as far to threaten to put his reputation up against mine. (Which is understandable given the personal attacks he has suffered from the opponents of conservation in Cherokee Park.) But does that excuse an elected official from berating the legitimate concerns of not only a resident, but also neighbor 7 doors down? So after a very heated conversation on the issue (his personal position is pro overlay in Sylvan park) we agree to squelch the acrimony and speak as gentlemen.
Regardless, we fundamentally disagree on the impact of overlay in our neigh hood.
My wife and I live in a beautiful LITTLE house on Wyoming. Only 7 homes East of Councilman?’s Summers Spectacular large home. I tried to express my concerns that and overlay would force us to move to a larger home and keep this home as a LOW DOLLAR RENTAL. Should we have a child ( or twins) we would have no choice to move and would keep this property as a rental to who ever could cover the mortgage. This would denigrate the value of the street. He was not very concerned about losing good neighbors.
That is the last thing my wife and I want. Mr. Summers assured me that this would not be an issue for at least 10 months, so in his words my worries are ?“premature?”.
I disagree. I have a wonderful design ready to expand my home in the best traditions of the neighborhood. Overlay would make this very difficult if not impossible or prohibitively expensive to do.
Thus, I would like to begin an effort to study this issue as it applies specifically to Sylvan Park. As you may or not know there are substantial differences in the property values and demographics between Cherokee Park and Sylvan Park. Many of the homes in our neighborhood are classic Craftsman Cottages that are very small. This overlay would restrict the methods homeowners can build onto their properties and the profits one may ultimately make.
The folks that are primarily for it seem to be the larger homeowners. It is my goal to organize NOW! The smaller homeowners that want to substantially increase the resale value of their property without government interference is substantial in Sylvan Park. Can you afford to ad on ?“RIGHT NOW?” to your home? 10 months is not a long time when cash is tight.
So what are folks that agree with my position do? Sell now? Wait? Sell for less than maximum value? NO, we must ORGANIZE NOW. Not when MR. Summers and the SPNA have us beat in a less than scientific petition drive. We must learn from the mistakes of the Cherokee association. We cannot let our under represented neighborhood association take the initiative in this matter!
We can start a web site. Complete with yard signs NOW. Call every councilperson to express your concerns in a cordial way.
I will do all I can to prevent this government intrusion into our homes.
Please write every councilperson to express your thoughts.
For further organization please e-mail me at jcatasus@home.com. You may also call myself or my wife Kathleen @ 615-298-1556.
All Metro Council members may be contact through the following link: http://www.nashville.org/council/council_roster.html

pardon my ignorance but...

I don't know what an ''overlay'' is and what the implications are. I get from the gist of your message that it has something to do with conserving the current architecture in the neighborhood to the point where no one can make additions to an existing home. Am I right? I have a few questions:
Are there ever any exceptions to the rule?
Does it prevent older homes from being razed so newer homes can be built instead?
Does it apply to add-ons like decks or porches?
Does it apply to detached buildings like sheds and garages?

You might not have the answer but perhaps someone else can respond to this post. Thanks for your post and the information you have made available.

I don't have all the answers

But I would guess either John Summers or Nick Bailey can answer most of your questions.

What I've learned from reading a previous proposal and talking to others is that it would apply to any major visible-from-the-street feature of your property, such as the addition of a dormer or garage/shed. It could prevent older homes being razed for newer ones.

I've heard there are no immediate plans to introduce the proposal. I hope that's correct, because it seems to me the controversy it would bring would be worse than the protection it would provide.

Followup

Councilman Summers talked about conservation zoning at our meeting last Monday night. He was willing to answer any and all questions and to stay as long as anyone wanted to talk. (We made it easy on him, since we'd been there for over an hour already.)

Basically, John's for it, but he has no plans to do anything about it anytime soon. He's also not going to request it unless the majority of residents in Sylvan Park are for it. He sees it as our decision. Maybe next year sometime the issue might come up for us. The homes that would be protected would be approximately pre-1950's.
---
Doug