Planning Commission · Meeting · Jan 6, 2026

Tue, Jan 6, 2026

Reviews land-use requests, subdivision plats, and long-range growth plans for unincorporated areas of Hickman County.

Official website

Outline

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

The Planning Commission’s substantive action was straightforward: it approved a site plan for the City of Fairview police training shooting range and recommended approval of two rezoning requests, including one for reopening a former store on Highway 7 and another more controversial request on Piney/Primm Springs Road tied to a commercial-vehicle dealer’s license. The latter drew the most policy discussion because members noted the applicant had first been denied a BZA route and that a C1 rezoning would stay with the property permanently, potentially allowing broader commercial uses later.

Other notable threads included annual state ethics-interest filing requirements for planning and BZA members, notice of a separate rezoning in Centerville’s urban growth boundary already approved by the city planning commission, and a significant procedural change: special exceptions are being put on hold while the county updates its zoning language to match state law limiting the BZA to an appellate role.

## Call to Order 3:46

- Meeting called to order for the January 2026 Planning Commission meeting.

## Roll Call 3:55

- 3:57 Roll call showed **9 present**, **1 absent**, and **1 vacant seat**.

## Approval of Minutes and Agenda

- 4:22 Minutes from the **November** meeting were presented; there had been **no December meeting** due to no business.
- 4:30 Motion, second, and voice vote approved the prior minutes.
- 4:50 Motion, second, and voice vote approved the agenda as presented.

## Public Comments 5:15

- Public comment period was opened; no additional speakers came forward.

## Unfinished Business 5:28

- No old business was listed or raised.

## New Business / Agenda Items

### Site plan review: Fairview police training shooting range on Danbury Drive 5:39

- 5:49 Staff presented the proposed City of Fairview police training facility / shooting range, explaining it did **not** require a special exception because it qualifies as a government/community facility use under the zoning resolution rather than a commercial outdoor shooting range.
- 6:29 Staff said the proposal met county zoning requirements and was therefore before the Planning Commission as a site-plan matter.
- 6:42 A member clarified that “community facility” referred to the zoning-use category, similar to post offices or fire stations, not to public access; staff confirmed the range is not a public recreational facility.
- 8:02 Members asked whether, because of that use classification, the matter bypassed rezoning or BZA review and came directly to site-plan review before this body alone; staff confirmed that understanding.
- 8:41 A member noted that Sheriff Jason Craft or the chief deputy had attended prior discussions and asked why no county law-enforcement representative was present for this final review.
- 9:22 The project consultant, Jay Camelly of Civil & Environmental Consultants, said Chief Humphreys was absent because of a scheduling/family conflict but that Fairview police and the sheriff’s office had developed the facility together.
- 9:41 The consultant said the range is intended to benefit both Fairview residents and Hickman County through law-enforcement training, but it is **not open to the public** and is expected to remain strictly a training facility.
- 10:14 The consultant added that some nearby residents had expressed support for increased law-enforcement presence in the area.
- 11:08 Motion and second to approve the site plan.
- 11:35 Roll-call vote approved the site plan **9–0**, with **1 absent** and **1 vacant seat**.

### Rezoning request: Andrew Mesh, Highway 7, A-1 to C-1 11:56

- 12:08 Staff presented a request to rezone property on Highway 7 from **A-1** to **C-1**.
- 12:18 Staff said the site had historically been used commercially but had been inactive for several years, so it had lost its grandfathered commercial status and now needed formal rezoning to resume business use.
- 12:31 Staff said the site was appropriate for commercial zoning because it is a sufficiently large tract located on a principal thoroughfare / main highway.
- 12:42 The intended use was described as a country store or general store.
- 13:01 Applicant Andrew Mesh said he was in the process of purchasing the property; the current owner was also present.
- 13:12 Members confirmed their understanding that the property had been a store many years earlier and that the request was simply to restore legal commercial zoning after the prior nonconforming status lapsed.
- 13:32 Motion and second to approve the rezoning recommendation.
- 13:50 Roll-call vote approved the request **9–0**, with **1 absent** and **1 vacant seat**.

### Rezoning request: Terry Michael Lee, Primm/Piney Springs Road, A-1 to C-1 14:12

- 14:22 Staff presented a request to rezone property on Primm Springs Road from **A-1** to **C-1**.
- 14:26 Staff said the applicant wanted zoning needed to obtain a dealer’s license for commercial vehicles.
- 14:32 Staff explained the applicant had already gone to the BZA and been denied there.
- 14:47 The stated need for the dealer’s license was to participate in online bidding processes; staff said the applicant was **not** proposing to keep **20 or 30** commercial vehicles on site, but only a small number.
- 15:07 Staff identified two issues: uncertainty whether Primm Springs Road qualifies as a principal thoroughfare for **C-1** zoning, and the fact that there is already a residential building/use on the property.
- 15:42 Members asked why the BZA had denied the earlier request.
- 15:47 Staff said the BZA discussion centered on the proposed building arrangement not fitting the requirements for a type-two home occupation/special-exception route: the building intended as the business office/use sat at the front of the property while the house was behind it, which did not fit the ordinance layout requirements.
- 16:24 Staff stated the tract contains **21 acres**.
- 16:52 Members asked whether, once rezoned commercial, the property would remain commercial if sold; staff confirmed that it would.
- 17:08 Members explored whether the applicant might still have another path under a type-two approval if a compliant building were used instead of rezoning the whole tract.
- 17:25 Staff confirmed the applicant still had that avenue available if they used a building arrangement that met the type-two rules.
- 17:38 One member characterized the rezoning request as sounding more like a convenience issue than a land-use necessity, given that another compliance path may exist.
- 18:03 Members worked through the policy implications: the applicant first sought permission to conduct the business while remaining **A-1**, was denied, and was now seeking a full **C-1** rezoning instead.
- 19:16 A member warned that even if the current application seemed reasonable, granting **C-1** would permanently attach a wider range of commercial rights to the land and could enable more intensive future uses if the property changed hands.
- 19:52 Staff confirmed that, regardless of the Planning Commission’s recommendation, the request would still proceed to the County Commission unless the applicant withdrew it, though this body’s recommendation carries weight.
- 20:19 Members noted the applicant was not present and staff said they had been unable to reach them.
- 20:38 Motion and second were made to recommend approval despite the concerns discussed.
- 20:49 Roll-call vote approved the rezoning recommendation **9–0**, with **1 absent** and **1 vacant seat**.

## Department / Official Reports

### Chairperson report 21:26

- 21:28 The chair indicated there was no substantive chairperson report.

### Planner / staff report: annual ethics filings 21:37

- 21:46 Staff reminded members that planning commission and BZA members must file annual statements of interest.
- 21:50 The filings are required each year for state and local officeholders, candidates, and appointees in covered positions.
- 22:17 Staff said the deadline is **January 31** and that electronic filing is preferred through the Tennessee ethics portal/email process.
- 22:32 Staff stressed the state takes the requirement seriously; failure to file triggers warning notices and can escalate to threatened fines of **$500** or **$1,000**.
- 23:08 Members were told the form had been distributed electronically through Austin Brown’s office.

### Planner / staff report: Edgecroft LLC rezoning in Centerville urban growth boundary 23:17

- 23:21 Staff informed the commission of a rezoning request by Edgecroft LLC involving property within Centerville’s urban growth boundary.
- 23:29 Staff said part of the property lies in the city and part in the county; the city portion is believed already zoned **C-1**, while the county portion is **A-1**.
- 23:39 Because the property lies in the urban growth boundary, the matter went to Centerville’s Planning Commission but still must go to the Hickman County Commission.
- 23:57 Staff reported the rezoning had been approved by Centerville’s Planning Commission.
- 24:04 Members were told the matter would go to the County Commission later this month for its **first hearing**.

### Planner / staff report: state-law change affecting special exceptions and BZA role 24:28

- 24:31 Staff raised a broader zoning-administration issue discussed with Sam Edwards: changes in Tennessee law mean the BZA now functions only as an appellate board.
- 24:48 Staff said authority over special exceptions has therefore shifted to the building commissioner or another appointed staff member rather than the BZA acting as the original deciding body.
- 25:03 Staff said the county’s zoning ordinance/resolution must be amended to reflect the new state-law structure.
- 25:12 Until the county language is updated to conform with state law, staff said all special-exception requests are being placed on hold.
- 25:28 Members asked whether staff would draft the needed wording quickly enough to move the amendment through this body at the next meeting before forwarding it to the County Commission.
- 25:41 Members also asked whether the practical effect is that staff will make initial special-exception decisions, with appeals then going to the board.
- 25:46 Staff said that is effectively correct once the wording is updated: the initial decision would be administrative, and dissatisfied applicants could appeal.
- 26:12 Staff added the amendment would likely also need to go through Centerville’s process.

## Adjournment 26:22

- 26:22 With no further business, the meeting moved to adjournment.

## Key figures and statistics

| Figure | Type | Context / topic | Timestamp |
|---|---:|---|---|
| **January 2026** | Date | Meeting month and year | 3:52 |
| **9 present** | Attendance | Roll call attendance | 4:10 |
| **1 absent** | Attendance | Roll call attendance | 4:10 |
| **1 vacant** | Seat count | Roll call vacancy | 4:10 |
| **November** | Month | Minutes approved were from the November meeting | 4:22 |
| **No December meeting** | Schedule | December meeting canceled for lack of business | 4:26 |
| **82 pages** | Document length | Full site-plan packet length for Fairview shooting range | 7:37 |
| **9–0** | Vote | Approval of Fairview shooting-range site plan | 11:35 |
| **A-1 to C-1** | Zoning change | Andrew Mesh Highway 7 rezoning request | 12:01 |
| **9–0** | Vote | Approval recommendation for Highway 7 rezoning | 13:50 |
| **A-1 to C-1** | Zoning change | Terry Michael Lee Primm Springs rezoning request | 14:16 |
| **20 or 30** | Vehicle count | Staff said applicant was not proposing to keep this many commercial vehicles on site | 14:57 |
| **21 acres** | Acreage | Size of Terry Michael Lee property | 16:40 |
| **9–0** | Vote | Approval recommendation for Terry Michael Lee rezoning | 20:49 |
| **January 31** | Deadline | Statement of interest filing due date | 22:17 |
| **$500** | Potential fine | Ethics filing enforcement penalty mentioned | 22:45 |
| **$1,000** | Potential fine | Ethics filing enforcement penalty mentioned | 22:45 |
| **C-1** | Zoning | City portion of Edgecroft property believed already zoned commercial | 23:34 |
| **A-1** | Zoning | County portion of Edgecroft property currently zoned agricultural | 23:36 |
| **First hearing** | Process stage | Edgecroft rezoning to go to County Commission this month | 24:08 |

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

The Planning Commission’s substantive action was straightforward: it approved a site plan for the City of Fairview police training shooting range and recommended approval of two rezoning requests, including one for reopening a former store on Highway 7 and another more controversial request on Piney/Primm Springs Road tied to a commercial-vehicle dealer’s license. The latter drew the most policy discussion because members noted the applicant had first been denied a BZA route and that a C1 rezoning would stay with the property permanently, potentially allowing broader commercial uses later.

Other notable threads included annual state ethics-interest filing requirements for planning and BZA members, notice of a separate rezoning in Centerville’s urban growth boundary already approved by the city planning commission, and a significant procedural change: special exceptions are being put on hold while the county updates its zoning language to match state law limiting the BZA to an appellate role.

Call to Order 3:46

Meeting called to order for the January 2026 Planning Commission meeting.

Roll Call 3:55

3:57 Roll call showed 9 present, 1 absent, and 1 vacant seat.

Approval of Minutes and Agenda

4:22 Minutes from the November meeting were presented; there had been no December meeting due to no business.
4:30 Motion, second, and voice vote approved the prior minutes.
4:50 Motion, second, and voice vote approved the agenda as presented.

Public Comments 5:15

Public comment period was opened; no additional speakers came forward.

Unfinished Business 5:28

No old business was listed or raised.

New Business / Agenda Items

Site plan review: Fairview police training shooting range on Danbury Drive 5:39

5:49 Staff presented the proposed City of Fairview police training facility / shooting range, explaining it did not require a special exception because it qualifies as a government/community facility use under the zoning resolution rather than a commercial outdoor shooting range.
6:29 Staff said the proposal met county zoning requirements and was therefore before the Planning Commission as a site-plan matter.
6:42 A member clarified that “community facility” referred to the zoning-use category, similar to post offices or fire stations, not to public access; staff confirmed the range is not a public recreational facility.
8:02 Members asked whether, because of that use classification, the matter bypassed rezoning or BZA review and came directly to site-plan review before this body alone; staff confirmed that understanding.
8:41 A member noted that Sheriff Jason Craft or the chief deputy had attended prior discussions and asked why no county law-enforcement representative was present for this final review.
9:22 The project consultant, Jay Camelly of Civil & Environmental Consultants, said Chief Humphreys was absent because of a scheduling/family conflict but that Fairview police and the sheriff’s office had developed the facility together.
9:41 The consultant said the range is intended to benefit both Fairview residents and Hickman County through law-enforcement training, but it is not open to the public and is expected to remain strictly a training facility.
10:14 The consultant added that some nearby residents had expressed support for increased law-enforcement presence in the area.
11:08 Motion and second to approve the site plan.
11:35 Roll-call vote approved the site plan 9–0, with 1 absent and 1 vacant seat.

Rezoning request: Andrew Mesh, Highway 7, A-1 to C-1 11:56

12:08 Staff presented a request to rezone property on Highway 7 from A-1 to C-1.
12:18 Staff said the site had historically been used commercially but had been inactive for several years, so it had lost its grandfathered commercial status and now needed formal rezoning to resume business use.
12:31 Staff said the site was appropriate for commercial zoning because it is a sufficiently large tract located on a principal thoroughfare / main highway.
12:42 The intended use was described as a country store or general store.
13:01 Applicant Andrew Mesh said he was in the process of purchasing the property; the current owner was also present.
13:12 Members confirmed their understanding that the property had been a store many years earlier and that the request was simply to restore legal commercial zoning after the prior nonconforming status lapsed.
13:32 Motion and second to approve the rezoning recommendation.
13:50 Roll-call vote approved the request 9–0, with 1 absent and 1 vacant seat.

Rezoning request: Terry Michael Lee, Primm/Piney Springs Road, A-1 to C-1 14:12

14:22 Staff presented a request to rezone property on Primm Springs Road from A-1 to C-1.
14:26 Staff said the applicant wanted zoning needed to obtain a dealer’s license for commercial vehicles.
14:32 Staff explained the applicant had already gone to the BZA and been denied there.
14:47 The stated need for the dealer’s license was to participate in online bidding processes; staff said the applicant was not proposing to keep 20 or 30 commercial vehicles on site, but only a small number.
15:07 Staff identified two issues: uncertainty whether Primm Springs Road qualifies as a principal thoroughfare for C-1 zoning, and the fact that there is already a residential building/use on the property.
15:42 Members asked why the BZA had denied the earlier request.
15:47 Staff said the BZA discussion centered on the proposed building arrangement not fitting the requirements for a type-two home occupation/special-exception route: the building intended as the business office/use sat at the front of the property while the house was behind it, which did not fit the ordinance layout requirements.
16:24 Staff stated the tract contains 21 acres.
16:52 Members asked whether, once rezoned commercial, the property would remain commercial if sold; staff confirmed that it would.
17:08 Members explored whether the applicant might still have another path under a type-two approval if a compliant building were used instead of rezoning the whole tract.
17:25 Staff confirmed the applicant still had that avenue available if they used a building arrangement that met the type-two rules.
17:38 One member characterized the rezoning request as sounding more like a convenience issue than a land-use necessity, given that another compliance path may exist.
18:03 Members worked through the policy implications: the applicant first sought permission to conduct the business while remaining A-1, was denied, and was now seeking a full C-1 rezoning instead.
19:16 A member warned that even if the current application seemed reasonable, granting C-1 would permanently attach a wider range of commercial rights to the land and could enable more intensive future uses if the property changed hands.
19:52 Staff confirmed that, regardless of the Planning Commission’s recommendation, the request would still proceed to the County Commission unless the applicant withdrew it, though this body’s recommendation carries weight.
20:19 Members noted the applicant was not present and staff said they had been unable to reach them.
20:38 Motion and second were made to recommend approval despite the concerns discussed.
20:49 Roll-call vote approved the rezoning recommendation 9–0, with 1 absent and 1 vacant seat.

Department / Official Reports

Chairperson report 21:26

21:28 The chair indicated there was no substantive chairperson report.

Planner / staff report: annual ethics filings 21:37

21:46 Staff reminded members that planning commission and BZA members must file annual statements of interest.
21:50 The filings are required each year for state and local officeholders, candidates, and appointees in covered positions.
22:17 Staff said the deadline is January 31 and that electronic filing is preferred through the Tennessee ethics portal/email process.
22:32 Staff stressed the state takes the requirement seriously; failure to file triggers warning notices and can escalate to threatened fines of $500 or $1,000.
23:08 Members were told the form had been distributed electronically through Austin Brown’s office.

Planner / staff report: Edgecroft LLC rezoning in Centerville urban growth boundary 23:17

23:21 Staff informed the commission of a rezoning request by Edgecroft LLC involving property within Centerville’s urban growth boundary.
23:29 Staff said part of the property lies in the city and part in the county; the city portion is believed already zoned C-1, while the county portion is A-1.
23:39 Because the property lies in the urban growth boundary, the matter went to Centerville’s Planning Commission but still must go to the Hickman County Commission.
23:57 Staff reported the rezoning had been approved by Centerville’s Planning Commission.
24:04 Members were told the matter would go to the County Commission later this month for its first hearing.

Planner / staff report: state-law change affecting special exceptions and BZA role 24:28

24:31 Staff raised a broader zoning-administration issue discussed with Sam Edwards: changes in Tennessee law mean the BZA now functions only as an appellate board.
24:48 Staff said authority over special exceptions has therefore shifted to the building commissioner or another appointed staff member rather than the BZA acting as the original deciding body.
25:03 Staff said the county’s zoning ordinance/resolution must be amended to reflect the new state-law structure.
25:12 Until the county language is updated to conform with state law, staff said all special-exception requests are being placed on hold.
25:28 Members asked whether staff would draft the needed wording quickly enough to move the amendment through this body at the next meeting before forwarding it to the County Commission.
25:41 Members also asked whether the practical effect is that staff will make initial special-exception decisions, with appeals then going to the board.
25:46 Staff said that is effectively correct once the wording is updated: the initial decision would be administrative, and dissatisfied applicants could appeal.
26:12 Staff added the amendment would likely also need to go through Centerville’s process.

Adjournment 26:22

26:22 With no further business, the meeting moved to adjournment.

Key figures and statistics

Figure	Type	Context / topic	Timestamp
January 2026	Date	Meeting month and year	3:52
9 present	Attendance	Roll call attendance	4:10
1 absent	Attendance	Roll call attendance	4:10
1 vacant	Seat count	Roll call vacancy	4:10
November	Month	Minutes approved were from the November meeting	4:22
No December meeting	Schedule	December meeting canceled for lack of business	4:26
82 pages	Document length	Full site-plan packet length for Fairview shooting range	7:37
9–0	Vote	Approval of Fairview shooting-range site plan	11:35
A-1 to C-1	Zoning change	Andrew Mesh Highway 7 rezoning request	12:01
9–0	Vote	Approval recommendation for Highway 7 rezoning	13:50
A-1 to C-1	Zoning change	Terry Michael Lee Primm Springs rezoning request	14:16
20 or 30	Vehicle count	Staff said applicant was not proposing to keep this many commercial vehicles on site	14:57
21 acres	Acreage	Size of Terry Michael Lee property	16:40
9–0	Vote	Approval recommendation for Terry Michael Lee rezoning	20:49
January 31	Deadline	Statement of interest filing due date	22:17
$500	Potential fine	Ethics filing enforcement penalty mentioned	22:45
$1,000	Potential fine	Ethics filing enforcement penalty mentioned	22:45
C-1	Zoning	City portion of Edgecroft property believed already zoned commercial	23:34
A-1	Zoning	County portion of Edgecroft property currently zoned agricultural	23:36
First hearing	Process stage	Edgecroft rezoning to go to County Commission this month	24:08

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oy8ZHz0AfuA 1/6/2025 Planning Commission Audio - Hickman County, TN Jan 6, 2026 0:00 behind a computer, you know, 12 0:13 and out of 0:30 It looks like it does in the summer. 0:34 Never bo 0:38 when I was in the third grade. 0:42 Shady girl 0:49 back. 0:55 And I remember not sitting down and 0:57 rubbing it on her face. The next day she 0:59 was like, "Yes." 1:01 Yeah. And I didn't have nothing. I 1:03 always felt so bad. Then I thought, 1:06 "But I thought you idiot. You had it on 1:07 your hand." 1:18 The guy in the front 1:37 I was thinking in the next week and 1:38 so 1:44 I 1:46 does that work. 1:57 Good thing you didn't show up 2:04 there. 2:13 I didn't think he was running. 2:16 You have a lovely day. 2:17 That was missing. 2:19 Did you miss the 2:19 children? 2:34 That's yours, 2:35 too. Basically, 2:38 that's yours, 2:38 too. 2:52 I don't know how they'll do her. 3:00 Well, it means they're 3:04 back. 3:06 Oh, yeah. And then the market so good, 3:08 you know. 3:19 Exactly. 3:35 Okay. and Black 3:39 and Kane down. 3:41 Y'all good up over there? 3:43 Yes. 3:43 Good. 3:44 Are you good, sir? 3:45 Yes. 3:46 All right. I'm going to call this 3:47 meeting to order. 3:49 Uh 3:52 January 3:53 2026 Planning Commission. If we could 3:55 have a roll call. 3:57 William Mayberry, 3:58 present. 3:58 Jeff Church 3:59 here. Taylor, 4:02 here. 4:02 Clark here. Eddie B 4:04 present. 4:06 Carter 4:06 here. 4:08 Here 4:10 Maddox n president one absent one bank. 4:14 Okay. 4:15 Um 4:19 the uh 4:22 you had a email that had the minutes 4:24 from the November meeting. We did not 4:26 have a December meeting uh due to no 4:29 business. 4:30 You also have a copy of those with the 4:33 agenda. We'll need a motion to approve 4:35 those. 4:40 Commissioner Clark second. 4:45 Any discussion? 4:47 All in favor say I. 4:49 I. 4:50 Uh if you have an agenda in front of 4:52 you, we will need a motion to approve 4:55 the agenda. 5:04 Motion to approve the agenda as it is. 5:08 Second caps on the second. 5:13 All in favor say I. 5:15 Next on the agenda is public comment 5:17 period. There's a sheet. I should have 5:19 announced it. I apologize. U. 5:21 Okay. Was there anybody that's not on 5:24 the that would like to speak? 5:26 Okay. 5:28 All right. Uh old business. There's none 5:30 listed on the agenda. Is there any old 5:32 business that the uh members know of? 5:37 Moving on to new business. 5:39 Uh the first one is site site plan 5:42 review city of Fairview shooting range 5:44 on property located on Danbury Drive. 5:49 So this is the proposed Fair View Police 5:54 um training facility shooting range. Um 5:58 the reason they don't need a special 5:59 exception for this um type of use is 6:03 because they are allowed as a community 6:05 facility 6:08 under the government use and clause 6:11 whereas in other cases we haven't been 6:12 able to have like commercial outdoor 6:15 shooting ranges. Since this is a 6:18 community facility by the um zoning 6:22 ordinance or zoning resolution I should 6:24 say um it is allowed under that use and 6:29 over the um studying of this it meets 6:33 all of our zoning requirements. 6:40 Okay. 6:42 Yeah. When you say community, you're 6:43 just you're speaking of just for them 6:46 though. Correct. It's not a community 6:48 facility. 6:48 No. No. It's community facility can 6:51 include things like post offices, fire 6:54 stations. Gotcha. Gotcha. 6:55 It's just a type of facility 6:59 within the use classification schedule 7:00 in the zoning resolution. 7:02 Gotcha. 7:15 And does everybody have the um property 7:18 location and a view of the site plan? 7:34 And if anybody needs the full I have it 7:37 here, but it is 82 pages. So, if any of 7:40 y'all want to look through that, you are 7:41 welcome to, but 7:48 we just went with the sheet that was the 7:50 overview of the site. 7:58 So, so this because this is a community 8:02 facility, government use facility, then 8:06 It doesn't have to go through any other 8:08 kind of reszoning through the BZA 8:10 everything. So it goes from wherever we 8:13 were straight to a site plan. 8:16 Um 8:19 and 8:21 site plans are done by this body, this 8:23 body only. And beyond that there's 8:26 there's no no other wrinkles in this. 8:28 Correct. Okay. 8:41 Um, you know, I'm looking around here. 8:44 Uh, the last time we talked about this, 8:48 the sheriff or the chief deputy were 8:51 here, you know, speaking in support of 8:55 this. 8:56 Is there a reason they're not here 8:58 tonight? 9:03 I'm assuming this is still in line with 9:06 what they were 9:07 thinking. 9:14 Good evening. 9:17 I'll stand over here. Try and answer 9:19 your questions. 9:20 Well, introduce yourself. 9:22 My name is Jay Camelly. I'm with Civil 9:24 and Environmental Consultants. We're the 9:26 consultants for the project. Um, Chief, 9:30 pardon me, Chief Humphre actually has 9:31 his kids tonight, so he wasn't able to 9:33 attend. 9:34 Say it one more time. 9:34 Chief Humphre wasn't actually able to 9:36 attend tonight because he has his kids 9:38 tonight. 9:38 Okay, gotcha. 9:39 Um, but he and the sheriff have been 9:41 working together hand in hand to develop 9:44 the facility. Uh, it it is a community 9:48 facility in the in in the regard that 9:50 you guys talked about. It's going to be 9:52 for the benefit of both uh the citizens 9:54 of Fairview and for Hickman County 9:56 alike. So, um, that's how it was 10:00 developed. It's not open to the public. 10:02 Will never be open to the public as far 10:04 as I know. Um, 10:07 it's strictly a training facility. Um, 10:10 that uh will be be there and 10:14 you know, even talking to maybe a couple 10:16 of the residents around, they kind of 10:18 like the idea of having a little bit 10:19 more of a presence out in that that area 10:21 where they don't have quite as much 10:24 right now. So, 10:26 And again, and my question was, you 10:28 know, in the past, every time you, you 10:30 know, we've had this discussion about 10:32 this, either Sheriff Craft or the Chief 10:35 Deputy has been here kind of a, 10:38 you know, this is a lot dependent on on 10:41 their needs and their desires to have 10:43 this done. Andre, I was just kind of 10:45 surprised to hear this site plan review 10:47 that they they weren't here. 10:50 I think it was more of a scheduling 10:52 conflict. I think they both want to be 10:54 here just to make sure everybody was 10:58 knowing that they were on the same page 10:59 as 11:01 as y'all. 11:04 Okay. 11:08 We will need a motion. 11:15 I make motion to approve. 11:22 We have a 11:24 motion and a second. Any more 11:27 discussion? 11:33 None. We'll call vote, please, sir. 11:35 Eddie Boon, 11:36 yes. 11:37 Danny Clark, 11:38 yes. 11:38 Tommy Catz, 11:39 yes. 11:40 Keith Nash, 11:42 yes. 11:42 Claude Calott, 11:43 yes. 11:44 Jason Carter, 11:45 yes. 11:46 Tony Taylor, 11:47 yes. 11:47 Jeff Church, 11:48 yes. 11:49 Wayne Maker, 11:50 yes. 11:51 Nine yes, one absent, one. 11:56 Uh, next item, request by Andrew Mesh 12:01 resone property on Highway 7 from A1 to 12:04 C1. 12:08 Um, this is a property on 12:13 Highway 7. Um, it actually used to be a 12:18 commercial use, 12:21 but it has not been in business for 12:23 several years. So, it has lost its 12:26 grandfather clause, so it has to be 12:28 reszoned to commercial, 12:31 but it is an appropriate location for 12:34 commercial. It's a large enough lot. 12:37 It's along a principal thorough fair, a 12:40 main highway, 12:42 and um they're looking turn it into a 12:46 like country store, general store style. 12:51 Okay. 12:55 Um I'm assuming you guys since y'all 12:57 y'all y'all eased your way up here, 13:00 y'all y'all are the guys, right? 13:01 I'm I'm Andrew Mesh. I'm in the process 13:04 of purchasing the property. 13:07 And this is Darren, the property owner. 13:09 So are are I mean this this used to be 13:12 many many years ago a store? 13:14 Yeah. Yes. 13:15 And so is it is that we're going to go 13:18 back to a store? 13:19 Yes, sir. 13:21 And the reason y'all are here is because 13:23 since it's set idle for so long, you 13:25 have to redo that. 13:27 Correct. Yeah. 13:32 Make a motion to approve. 13:33 Okay. Motion to approve. Is there a 13:35 second? 13:36 Second. Any 13:41 discussion? Any more discussion? 13:50 Roll call vote. 13:52 Mayberry, 13:52 yes. 13:53 Jeff Church, 13:54 yes. 13:54 Tony Taylor, 13:55 yes. 13:55 Tommy Catz, 13:56 yes. 13:56 Ben Clark, 13:57 yes. 13:58 Teddy Bone, 13:58 yes. 13:59 Jess Carter, 14:00 yes. 14:01 Calcott, 14:02 yes. Keith Match, 14:03 yes. 14:04 Nine, yes. One absent, one B. 14:07 Okay, thank you. Yeah, 14:12 next item u request by Terry Michael Lee 14:16 reszone property Prim Springs 14:20 from A1 to C1. 14:22 Um they have come in asking for zoning 14:26 because they are looking to acquire a 14:29 dealer's license. They have already been 14:32 to BCA. Um, have been denied by the BZA. 14:36 Um, 14:37 as I said, they're looking to do a 14:39 dealership for 14:42 they're doing it for commercial 14:44 vehicles, 14:46 but the reason they're needing a 14:47 dealer's license is because to be able 14:50 to do any of the bidding processes 14:53 online, 14:55 they have to have a dealer's license. 14:57 They're not looking to keep 20, 30 15:00 commercial vehicles on the property, 15:03 just a handful. 15:05 Um, but an issue with this is that this 15:07 road for it to be C1, 15:10 I don't believe Prim Springs is a 15:13 principal thoroughare. I would have to 15:16 look on our road map. Um, but another 15:19 issue with it is that there's also 15:21 currently a residential prop a 15:24 residential use building on the 15:26 property. 15:33 Okay. 15:42 What was the the BCA? They turned it 15:44 down. What was the discussion there? 15:47 um that it didn't need to go to them or 15:52 that the building that they were looking 15:54 to use as the 16:00 main building of it was not appropriate 16:03 for the type two home occupancy 16:06 where it needed to be in the rear of the 16:08 property. It was sitting out front 16:12 the house actually being behind 16:15 the um 16:18 pole bar 16:20 or the shop I should say. 16:21 How many acres is the 16:24 property 16:27 here? 16:30 Okay. 16:34 is 21 16:40 it is 21 acres 16:43 around still 16:45 yes 16:52 I mean if was to go commercial the 16:55 property sold it would stay commercial 16:59 Yes. 17:08 Am I reading into this that 17:12 they could operate this under a type two 17:15 that got denied as a type two 17:18 be because of the building? 17:20 Yes. 17:20 They 21 acres. 17:22 Yes. 17:25 They still have an avenue for a type 17:26 two. is just going to require them to 17:28 use a building that fits within all the 17:30 rules of the type two. 17:32 That's correct. 17:38 Sounds almost like a convenience issue. 17:58 Mr. 17:59 So I really don't understand exactly 18:03 what's happened here. So 18:07 does this property 18:11 fall into a category 18:14 that all other things being said it can 18:18 go from A1 to C1. 18:23 Is it in the right area? I mean I mean 18:26 I'm trying to make sure I 18:28 C1 doesn't have to be in. 18:31 Okay. So, uh, is there any other C's 18:34 around here? 18:36 And 18:38 but before they came here for this 18:39 reasonzoning, they went to BZA to get a 18:43 special exception. 18:45 I'm trying to make sure I understand. 18:47 So, they're trying to run some sort of 18:49 business. 18:49 Yes. 18:50 And they went to the BZA to get that 18:52 special exception. 18:55 and and keeping it in the A1 zone. That 18:58 got denied. 19:01 So then they backed up and said, "Okay, 19:04 since we can't get the A1 19:07 and a special exception, 19:09 we're going to 19:11 go big, I guess, and go see one 19:14 in terms of 19:16 and the problem with that is if you give 19:18 them a C1 and it may be the most 19:22 wonderful application in the entire 19:24 world 19:26 today, 19:27 they sell this property to the next 19:30 person. And now you have C1 with all of 19:34 those wicked opportunities 19:38 in the middle of the A1. 19:40 Okay. And that's where we're at. 19:42 Okay. 19:43 Okay. 19:49 Um, 19:52 correct me if I'm wrong, but whether or 19:53 not this 19:55 commission recommends or does not 19:57 recommend, it's still going to go to the 19:59 county commission. Correct. 20:01 Unless the applicant withdraws it. 20:03 Yes. 20:06 So, but I will say this, this body's 20:09 recommendation carries some weight when 20:12 it gets to the confirmation. 20:19 Is the applicant here? 20:23 No, 20:23 they're not. 20:24 No, I wasn't able to reach 20:38 motion. 20:41 Second. Any more discussion? 20:49 Roll call vote. 20:50 Mayberry. 20:52 Yes. 20:55 Yes. 20:56 Jeff Church. 20:57 Yes. 20:59 Tony Taylor. 21:00 Yes. 21:00 Tommy Caps. 21:01 Yes. 21:02 Denny Clark. 21:02 Yes. 21:03 Eddie B. 21:04 Yes. 21:05 Carter. 21:06 Yes. 21:08 Yes. Keith Mash. 21:10 Yes. 21:11 Nine. Yes. One absent. one. Okay. 21:17 Uh 21:19 up next, uh sorry, is there any new 21:22 business? Any more new business? 21:26 Next is chairperson, director, and 21:28 planner reports. I got nothing. 21:32 Director, I see something on the next 21:33 page here. 21:37 Oh, okay. Um, so you've got uh I think 21:42 at your at your spot has been 21:44 distributed. Oh, 21:46 okay. Um, so every year 21:50 you all are required to file a statement 21:52 of interests which uh for for state and 21:56 local office holders, candidates and 21:58 appointees to such positions non-general 22:01 assembly members. This looks like it 22:03 looks like this. Um, for you commission 22:05 members, uh, for you county commission 22:07 members, this ought to already be very 22:08 familiar to you because you're required 22:10 to file one anyway, uh, for your 22:12 position on the county commission. Um, 22:15 but planning commission members and BCA 22:17 members need to file this by December or 22:19 by December, goodness, by January 31st. 22:22 Um, they prefer it to be filed 22:24 electronically. There's a teeny tiny 22:26 little ethics council tn.gov 22:29 um, that you can email this into. um 22:32 they do take this filing pretty 22:34 seriously. You'll get a little nasty 22:36 gram from the Tennessee Bureau of Ethics 22:38 if you don't. And then um if you if you 22:42 don't respond to that, then they send 22:43 you another nasty gram threatening to 22:45 find you for like 500 or $1,000. I know 22:48 this because someone listed me as a 22:51 planning commission member instead of a 22:52 staff member once. Um and I got one of 22:55 those nasty grams and it took a hot 22:56 minute to get that worked out. So, 22:58 please don't list staff as members of 23:00 your planning commission. 23:02 We're not members. We're not voting 23:04 members. We just act like one. Um, so, 23:08 um, this has been provided 23:09 electronically to, um, to Austin's 23:12 office. So, you all should be receiving 23:13 that. So, please don't forget to file 23:15 that. 23:17 And then I have one as well. There has 23:21 been a request by EdgecRoft LLC to 23:24 reszone property in Centerville's urban 23:27 growth boundary. 23:29 Um, part of the properties in the city, 23:32 part of the properties in the county. I 23:34 believe the city park is already zoned 23:36 C1, but the county park is zoned A1. And 23:39 since it is in the urban growth 23:41 boundary, that goes to Centerville's 23:45 planning commission, but it will go to 23:47 our county commission. 23:50 And so I just wanted to make y'all aware 23:52 of that. I believe do we know they have 23:54 approved it? 23:57 It was approved in the meeting. 23:59 Okay. So it was approved. 24:00 I have the minutes you can provide to it 24:04 was approved in that meeting. So it will 24:05 be going to this month's county 24:08 commission for the first hearing. 24:10 Okay. 24:16 Anything else? 24:22 motion. We are 24:24 about right there. 24:28 I have one more thing. 24:29 Oh, sorry. Um we had talked with Sam 24:31 Edwards about uh some of you are aware 24:35 of the issues now with the BCA with them 24:38 changing the Tennessee code annotated 24:40 that now 24:42 that they are only an appellent 24:46 board. 24:48 So it has now given 24:51 the building commissioner or other 24:55 appointed staff member 24:57 the ability and authority over special 25:01 exceptions. 25:03 And so we will have to reflect our 25:06 zoning ordinance or zoning resolution to 25:09 change that. 25:12 And so until we get our language 25:15 um in line with the states, we are 25:19 currently putting all of our special 25:20 exception requests on hold. 25:28 So are you going to sit down and 25:31 promulgate the new wording that needs to 25:33 be put in there so that we can push this 25:37 through next month? 25:41 Does that mean that you are now the one 25:43 that makes the decision on the special 25:45 exception? 25:46 Um, 25:48 technically no. But whenever we get the 25:50 wording, yes, and if they don't like me 25:52 saying no, they can then appeal it to 25:55 the board. 25:58 Very interesting. 26:01 But you're going to get that done 26:03 for this next meeting in this body 26:06 because it has to come through this body 26:09 cursory if nothing else before it goes 26:11 to the county commission for those rules 26:12 to be changed. 26:12 I believe it'll also have to go through 26:14 centerles as well. 26:16 Okay. 26:19 Fun times. 26:22 Now we're unless you got something else 26:24 you want. 26:27 I do not. 26:30 Thank you.