Future Land Use Plan 2026

This outline was generated by an LLM from a transcript and may contain errors or inaccuracies. Prefer the original recording when available.

This item is a planning document rather than a spoken meeting transcript, so there are no motions, debate timestamps, or vote outcomes to report from the source provided. The document updates Hickman County’s long-range future land use framework for a roughly 20-year horizon, emphasizing rural preservation, agricultural protection, infrastructure limits, and concentrated growth in the county’s northeast and around Centerville rather than broad countywide suburbanization.

The most consequential substance is the plan’s policy direction: keep most of the county in agricultural or rural forms, channel more intense residential and commercial growth to the TN-46 / TN-100 / TN-7 corridors and the Centerville area, recognize severe water and sewer constraints, and use the plan to guide future rezoning and infrastructure decisions. Other notable threads include the legal role of Public Chapter 1101, the relationship to the Centerville Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), public engagement results favoring rural preservation and natural-resource protection, existing land-use and population data, and zoning-compatibility recommendations for A-1, R-1, R-2, C-1, C-2, I-1, and I-2 districts.

Introduction

Plan purpose and county context

• Hickman County is presented as a rural Middle Tennessee county with one incorporated city, Centerville, plus several unincorporated communities and census-designated places including Bon Aqua Junction, Lyles, and Nunnelly.
• The plan updates the county’s earlier future land use framework, especially the 2006/2008 planning work, to reflect current growth pressures, infrastructure realities, and a new 20-year planning horizon.
• The document stresses that land-use planning is not only a state compliance task but also a way to reassess growth trends, preserve rural character, and set a preferred development pattern.

Existing planning framework

• The prior framework divided the county into four categories: Rural Areas, Crossroad Communities, Urban Growth Boundaries, and Planned Growth Areas.
• Key themes carried forward from the older plan:
  • protect farms, open space, hillsides, wooded areas, and historic corridors;
  • keep crossroad communities small in scale and historically sensitive;
  • direct the largest share of growth toward the Centerville UGB;
  • coordinate land use with infrastructure, especially sewer and water.

Relationship to state growth-plan requirements

• The document says Tennessee counties have been required since 1998 under Public Chapter 1101 to establish growth plans and coordinating committees, with a planning horizon of 20 years.
• It notes that while growth plans do not technically expire, their practical usefulness diminishes after about 20 years, and any change to the UGB or county growth areas requires a formal update.
• The plan itself does not formally amend the county growth plan, but is intended to guide a future formal update.

Key issues and opportunities

Existing land-use pattern

• The county remains overwhelmingly rural in land-use composition, with Agriculture the dominant category and Forest & Timber second.
• Residential development is concentrated in the northeast and around Centerville, while most industrial land is either inside Centerville or in clusters such as Nunnelly, northeast Hickman County, and near the Centerville Municipal Airport.
• Other notable land uses include:
  • religious retreat/camp properties such as Cedar Crest Camp and NaCoMe Camp & Retreat Center;
  • utility corridors including Tennessee Gas Pipeline and CSX right-of-way;
  • government properties including the Turney Center Industrial Complex.

Population growth and distribution

• The document describes recent growth as steady but geographically uneven.
• County population increased by about 978 residents, or 4%, between 2016 and 2023.
• A 2024 estimate places population at 25,859, about 2.5% above 2023 and roughly 200 above the Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research baseline projection for that year.
• Growth has been strongest around Centerville and Bon Aqua / northeast Hickman County, while large parts of the county reportedly saw population decline over the same period.
• The plan flags uncertainty in future projections: one state projection source suggests slight decline through 2040, but the document argues actual growth could be higher because of regional Nashville pressure, remote work, fiber internet, rising housing costs in nearby counties, and interest in rural living.

Infrastructure constraints

Potable water

• Water service is split mainly between Centerville Utilities and Bon Aqua & Lyles Utility District.
• Service is strongest along major roads and in the northeastern part of the county, with more limited coverage to the south and west and little coverage along the eastern edge.
• Areas outside utility service rely on onsite wells.

Sewer / wastewater

• Sewer availability is identified as a major constraint on future density.
• The county’s two sewer providers are Centerville Utilities and The Water Authority of Dickson County.
• Outside those limited service areas, most of the county relies on onsite septic.
• The plan notes conflict over the Water Authority of Dickson County’s planned wastewater facility and opposition to Lick Creek as a discharge location.
• Because centralized sewer is expensive and hard to support at low densities, the document suggests decentralized options such as DEWATS and STEP systems may be necessary in some areas.

Transportation and safety

• The plan identifies the TN-100 / TN-46 junction as having a disproportionate share of crashes.
• It recommends future attention to access management and roadway geometry as development pressure increases along those corridors.

Summary of key issues

• Northeast Hickman County is positioned for the greatest change because of proximity to Nashville, existing services, and recent development patterns.
• Growth is constrained by limited aquifers, water-service reach, and especially sewer-service reach.
• Natural systems—rivers, creeks, floodplains, caves, and wooded topography—are treated as major planning constraints requiring conservation-oriented decision-making.
• A large share of county workers commute elsewhere, reinforcing the desire for targeted economic development without widespread loss of rural land.

Community outreach and engagement

Round 1: issues, opportunities, and visual preferences

• The project team held 4 open-house workshops in fall 2024.
• More than 75 people attended in person.
• Workshops were held in multiple locations across the county, including Lyles, Duck River, Nunnelly, and Centerville areas.
• Public exercises asked residents to identify:
  • favorite places;
  • missing amenities;
  • where to preserve versus change;
  • preferred or disliked development “placetypes”;
  • visions for places such as Bon Aqua, Lyles, Centerville, Nunnelly, Duck River, and Pleasantville.

Round 1 online engagement

• The online survey received 143 responses.
• The interactive map received 295 comments.
• Main themes:
  • residents value quiet, small-town character and natural beauty;
  • treasured places included Lick Creek, Piney River, Duck River, farms, neighborhoods, and community centers;
  • respondents wanted more businesses, restaurants, grocery stores, and gathering places;
  • most placetypes were broadly liked except suburban living and highway retail node;
  • respondents preferred rural preservation across most of the county with growth concentrated near major roads and existing communities.

Round 2: scenario evaluation

• A second set of 4 workshops was held in late February and early March 2025.
• More than 40 people attended in person.
• Participants reviewed 3 scenarios:
  • Trend: similar growth patterns to current trajectory, especially in northeast Hickman County and along Highway 46;
  • Growth: greater population increase and stronger activity-center development at major nodes and areas with sewer capacity;
  • Compact: growth limited more tightly to northeast Hickman County and the Centerville area, consistent with existing growth areas.

Round 2 online engagement and scenario results

• The second online engagement received 465 responses.
• The Compact scenario was reported as the most preferred overall.
• The included scenario table appears to show:
  • Trend: 40% like, 60% dislike;
  • Growth: 39% like, 61% dislike;
  • Compact: 19% like, 81% dislike.
• That table conflicts with the accompanying narrative, which says the Compact scenario was the most preferred; the source therefore appears internally inconsistent.
• Priority rankings across workshops and online responses generally placed:
  • Protection of Natural Resources and Rural Preservation at or near the top;
  • Expansion of Infrastructure, Expansion of Community Services, and Increased Housing Options lower overall, though priorities varied by location.
• The document notes local differences:
  • East Hickman participants ranked infrastructure expansion and viable agriculture higher;
  • Pinewood participants prioritized maintaining community character;
  • Shady Grove participants ranked housing options and community services relatively higher;
  • online participants consistently ranked increased housing options low.

Future land use plan

Guiding principles

• The plan organizes policy around several guiding principles:
  • Protection of Natural Resources;
  • Maintain Sense of Community and Character;
  • Viable Agriculture;
  • Expansion of Infrastructure in a selective, fiscally responsible way;
  • Rural Preservation;
  • Increased Housing Options;
  • Economic Development.

Overall goals

• Core goals include:
  • preserve rivers, creeks, tree canopy, and cave systems;
  • keep agriculture the dominant land use;
  • maintain low-density rural and agricultural character across most of the county;
  • accommodate growth through conservation-oriented development;
  • broaden housing options for different ages and incomes;
  • increase tourism, jobs, and sales-tax revenue;
  • require developer-funded infrastructure where growth creates demand;
  • improve access to grocery, hardware, shopping, and recreation options.

Placetypes

• The plan uses 9 placetypes to express preferred future patterns.

Conservation

• Applies to parks, natural areas, floodplains, stream buffers, rights-of-way, and other environmentally sensitive or largely undevelopable land.
• Typical uses are recreation and open space, with residential development restricted or very limited.
• Examples include the Natchez Trace Parkway, John Noel at Bon Aqua State Natural Area, and Buford McCord Memorial Park.

Agricultural Preservation

• Intended for large areas dominated by farming, forestry, conservation, and very low-density residential use.
• Allows agriculture-related commercial uses and cottage industries but emphasizes open land and rural atmosphere.
• Most applicable to western Hickman County.

Rural Places

• Transitional low-density areas with large homesites, active small-scale farming, and limited commercial activity.
• Public sewer is unlikely; water may be public or by well.
• Examples include Shady Grove, Primm Springs, and Nunnelly.

Residential Growth

• Intended for areas outside identified centers that are already absorbing much of the county’s growth.
• Focuses on low- to medium-density residential development, mainly single-family homes, with public water and possibly sewer or hybrid systems.
• Associated especially with northeast Hickman County and Lyles.

Town Residential

• Applies in or near the areas with highest growth pressure and greatest service availability.
• Supports single-family housing, townhomes, multifamily housing, mixed use, and community commercial uses where water and sewer are available.
• Examples include Bon Aqua Junction, the Highway 46 corridor, and Centerville.

Rural Crossroads

• Envisions compact convenience-oriented nodes at crossroads serving rural residents.
• May include small commercial uses like gas stations, restaurants, or convenience stores, plus some residential and institutional uses.
• Examples include Shady Grove, Pinewood, and other highway intersections.

Community Commercial

• Intended for corridor-based commercial development such as grocery stores, strip retail, car washes, medical facilities, and similar community-serving uses.
• Higher-density housing may also be present.
• Examples include Fairfield, Bon Aqua Springs, and the Highway 46 corridor.

Interchange Area Development

• Applies to the two Interstate 40 interchanges in the county.
• Intended for larger-scale auto-oriented commercial development serving travelers.
• Examples are Exit 148 and Exit 152 areas.

Industrial

• Reserves land for light- to medium-intensity industrial activities such as warehousing, light manufacturing, machining, and wholesale uses.
• Calls for buffering to reduce noise, light, and similar impacts.
• Local examples include Industrial Drive - Nunnelly and Shipps Bend.

Future land use map

• The final map is described as mostly agricultural and rural residential, with the most intense growth concentrated in the northeast.
• The map blends pieces of the Growth, Trend, and especially Compact scenarios.
• Key geographic directions:
  • preserve much of the south and west as agricultural;
  • focus stronger residential and commercial growth along TN-46, TN-100, and TN-7;
  • identify 10 rural crossroads in established town centers or highway intersections;
  • designate both I-40 interchanges for interchange-area development.
• The plan explicitly says the future land use map is not zoning and does not determine the fate of any single parcel; instead it guides rezoning and development review alongside county zoning codes and maps.

Implementation

How the plan is intended to be used

• The document says the plan should supplement the county Zoning Resolution and guide future land-use decisions, especially rezonings.
• It also says the plan should be revisited if major catalytic changes occur, such as large sewer expansion or major industrial development.

Growth-plan coordination with Centerville

• The plan recommends a formal county growth-plan update in coordination with the Town of Centerville, whose leaders reportedly intended to update the town’s own future land use plan.
• A formal amendment would require:
  • a coordinating committee;
  • at least 1 public hearing;
  • adoption by both the Centerville Board of Mayor and Aldermen and the Hickman County Commission by resolution;
  • submission to the Local Government Planning Advisory Committee (LGPAC) within the Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development (TNECD).
• The coordinating committee should include representatives from:
  • the Hickman County mayor’s office;
  • the Centerville mayor’s office;
  • Centerville Public Works;
  • Bon Aqua-Lyles Utility District;
  • Hickman County Soil Conservation District;
  • Hickman County Schools;
  • Hickman County Chamber of Commerce;
  • and 2 at-large members each from Centerville and Hickman County.

Policies for the Centerville UGB

• The county states it accepts Centerville’s land-use plan inside the UGB.
• The preferred approach is for most land in the UGB to remain largely undeveloped until annexed into Centerville and regulated by the town.
• If landowners want to develop before annexation, the county envisions intergovernmental review to manage cross-jurisdictional impacts and preserve the option of later annexation.
• The plan discourages low-density rural development with rural infrastructure inside the UGB because that can reduce annexation feasibility and underuse land intended for more urban services.
• It also encourages county-town collaboration on interim zoning and infrastructure compatibility until annexation occurs.

Zoning compatibility recommendations

A-1 Agriculture-Forestry

• Presented as the closest fit for Conservation, Agricultural Preservation, and Rural Places.
• The plan notes tension with the Conservation placetype because A-1 still allows homes and structures, so aligning existing A-1 land with conservation goals may require tighter restrictions, downzoning, or limits on structures.
• It says A-1 is generally flexible enough to be restructured into any of the 9 placetypes if utility, use, and lot-size requirements are considered during rezoning.

R-1 Suburban Residential

• Treated as the closest fit for Residential Growth and Town Residential, and only partially compatible with Agricultural Preservation and Rural Places.
• The plan notes R-1 already allows somewhat higher density than some rural placetypes, with lots as small as 15,000 square feet.
• It could serve Town Residential where sewer or decentralized/hybrid systems exist, but some existing R-1 areas may also fit lower-intensity rural placetypes if lot size and use are appropriate.

R-2 High-Density Residential

• Considered the closest fit for Town Residential and partially compatible with Residential Growth.
• It is more suited to areas with public sewer and medium-to-high residential intensity.

C-1 General Commercial

• Considered closest to Community Commercial and partially compatible with Rural Crossroads and Interchange Area Development.
• The plan notes that C-1 does not always require public sewer on all lots, whereas the Community Commercial placetype anticipates sewer or decentralized/hybrid systems, so utility upgrades may be needed.
• Existing C-1 parcels may be more intensely developed than some of the placetypes they might be reassigned to.

C-2 Commercial

• Also considered closest to Community Commercial, with partial compatibility to Industrial, Rural Crossroads, and Interchange Area Development.
• The plan suggests some C-2 areas may be especially suitable for reuse as Rural Crossroads or Interchange Area Development because of their lower density/intensity compared with heavier commercial forms.
• In some cases C-2 land could be repurposed for light industrial use if lot, utility, and density conditions are met.

I-1 and I-2 Industrial

• These districts are treated as strongly aligned with the Industrial placetype.
• The plan advises against repurposing industrial districts into non-industrial placetypes because of use intensity, potential hazards, and the need for buffering.

Additional implementation strategies

• Beyond the map and zoning crosswalk, the plan recommends:
  • exploring Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) as a way to compensate owners for preserving farmland or environmentally sensitive land;
  • strengthening waterway buffers, greenway easements, and flood-related building standards;
  • encouraging conservation subdivision design and open-space preservation;
  • updating rural residential zoning to match intended placetypes;
  • assessing residential development suitability based on soils, floodplains, groundwater, and septic capacity;
  • requiring future subdivisions to preserve connectivity and access for adjacent undeveloped properties;
  • avoiding property-tax increases as the main source of growth-driven infrastructure funding;
  • conditioning rezonings, density increases, and large residential approvals on demonstrated infrastructure capacity or developer-funded improvements;
  • encouraging rehabilitation of derelict properties for business reuse;
  • promoting local products and tourism through county media and websites;
  • creating rural-crossroads overlay zoning for more flexible mixed-use patterns;
  • supporting agricultural capacity through tools such as small-scale meat processing or canning facilities;
  • favoring existing farm operations in nuisance regulation and a local right-to-farm approach.

Key figures and statistics

External vendors, brands, and software

Laws and policies