Debate Emerges Over Growth Boundaries Near Montgomery Bell State Park

Charlotte, TN — A new flashpoint may be emerging in Dickson County’s long term growth planning process — and it centers on the land surrounding one of the county’s most treasured natural assets: Montgomery Bell State Park.

During Monday night’s County Commission meeting, a local landowner and ecological restoration advocate urged commissioners to reconsider proposed Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs) that would place property near the park inside potential city expansion zones.

Her concern: today’s map could shape tomorrow’s development.

“This Is the Right Time”

Deborah Rosenthal, who owns Best Hope Farm along Highway 47 East near the park’s back entrance, addressed commissioners during a public hearing on the county’s updated growth plan.

Rosenthal and neighboring landowners are currently working on prairie, savanna, and woodland restoration efforts in partnership with the Southeastern Grasslands Institute. She warned that placing land near the park inside city UGBs — including portions tied to Burns, White Bluff, and the City of Dickson — could eventually open the door to higher-density development.

“If the land in the overlay zone is placed inside city UGBs, annexation could override those protections,” Rosenthal told commissioners.

She asked that land near the park remain designated as rural county property rather than included inside municipal growth boundaries.

What’s at Stake?

Urban Growth Boundaries do not immediately change zoning, taxes, or governance. Under current Tennessee law, annexation generally requires property owner consent.

However, Rosenthal argued that growth maps are long-term planning documents, and once land is placed inside a UGB, future annexation becomes more likely.

“Annexation may be slow and may require a property owner’s request,” she said. “But the park has existed for 83 years. Few would have predicted back then that it would be surrounded by as much development as it is today.”

Her concern is that if annexation eventually occurs, city zoning rules could allow denser development patterns than current agricultural zoning under county control.

Overlay District in the Works

Rosenthal referenced ongoing work by a county committee that has been studying the possibility of a protective overlay district around the park.

She noted that commissioners — including Commissioner Gray and others — have been working on land-use standards designed to protect open space and reduce environmental pressure near the park.

Placing that same land inside municipal growth areas, she argued, could undermine those efforts if annexation later shifts zoning authority.

“I would have loved to have raised this issue before a map was drawn,” Rosenthal said, urging commissioners to use the current amendment process to align growth boundaries with conservation goals.

The Bigger Process

The debate arises as Dickson County updates its comprehensive growth plan for the first time in nearly two decades.

The growth plan, required by state law, designates:

• Municipal limits

• Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs)

• Planned Growth Areas (PGAs) for the county

• Rural areas

Each city and the county must submit its proposed boundaries to a coordinating committee, which will reconcile differences and produce a unified plan for final approval.

County officials emphasized that the map currently under consideration is part of that broader process and is not yet final.

Still, Rosenthal’s comments highlight a deeper tension: how to balance development, tax base expansion, and housing growth with environmental protection and preservation of the county’s natural character.