Planning Commission · Meeting · Feb 3, 2026

Tue, Feb 3, 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 commission quickly handled routine business, then denied a rezoning request for **6815 Taylors Creek Road** from **A-1 to C-1** that had been filed to speed up approval of a proposed commercial campground. The denial followed the zoning administrator’s recommendation that the site and surrounding area were not appropriate for **C-1 commercial** use, and members then spent additional time clarifying that a campground would still require a **special exception** even in **C-1**.

The longer discussion was over how to amend the county zoning resolution to comply with a new state law shifting special-exception decisions from the **Board of Zoning Appeals** to the **zoning administrator/building official**, leaving the BZA as an appeals body. Members supported getting into compliance but worried the draft did not yet establish notice, hearing, timing, and appeal procedures needed to protect transparency and the administrator. Rather than forward an incomplete change, they **tabled** the matter for a fuller rewrite to return next month. Other notable business included attendance, a vacant seat, and notice of an upcoming planning/zoning training on the **Open Meetings Act** and ethics.

## Call to Order 3:45

- 3:45 Meeting called to order for the Hickman County Planning Commission.
- 4:27 Roll call showed **8 present**, **2 absent**, and **1 vacant** seat.

## Approval of Minutes and Agenda 4:46

- 4:46 January meeting minutes were presented as previously emailed and attached to the agenda; approved without noted objection.
- 5:32 Agenda approved as presented.
- 5:46 No one was present for public comment.
- 5:55 Chair reported no old business.

## New Business / Agenda Items 6:01

### Rezoning request: 6815 Taylors Creek Road, A-1 to C-1 for proposed campground 6:01

- 6:01 Application from Patrick Batten for **6815 Taylors Creek Road** sought rezoning from **A-1** to **C-1** for a proposed commercial campground.
- 6:21 Staff explanation: the applicant sought rezoning because he did not want to wait through the process of changing the zoning text/book for a special exception and was trying to **expedite** the project.
- 6:38 Zoning administrator recommended **denial**, stating the location and character of the area were not appropriate for **C-1 commercial** zoning.
- 7:10 Motion made and seconded to **deny** the rezoning request.
- 7:28 Roll-call vote on denial passed unanimously among those present: **Jeff Church, Tony Taylor, Danny Clark, Eddie Boone, Jason Carter, Claude Callicott, Keith Nash, and Andy Maddox** all voted yes to deny; transcript also notes **1 vacant** seat and **2 absent**. Outcome: **request denied**.

### Follow-up discussion on campground rules and whether rezoning would even solve the problem 7:56

- 7:56 After the vote, members questioned whether a campground can ever proceed merely by rezoning to **C-1**, noting their recollection that campgrounds require a **special exception** and are tightly regulated.
- 8:22 Clarification emerged that a campground is **not** a standard permitted use in **C-1**; it appears under **uses permitted by special exception**.
- 9:47 Members noted they had assumed the applicant might also want accessory commercial activity such as a store, which had arisen in prior campground cases, but that issue had not been clearly presented in this application.
- 10:37 Discussion referenced an existing Pinewood campground operating under a **grandfathered** status established through court proceedings, underscoring that new campground approvals are difficult under current county rules.
- 11:14 Consensus view from the discussion: for a new campground, the likely path would be a **two-step** process—first rezoning from **A-1** to **C-1**, then returning for a **special exception** request—rather than rezoning alone settling the matter.

### Proposed zoning-resolution amendment on special exceptions under new state law 12:03

- 12:03 Staff introduced a proposed amendment to the Hickman County zoning resolution to align with a **new state law** on special exceptions.
- 12:25 Members were told the draft had been prepared by Amanda, with help from **Sam Edwards**, and generally shifts responsibility for deciding special exceptions from the **Board of Zoning Appeals** to the **zoning administrator or building official**.
- 12:53 Main policy change: the county would no longer have the BZA make the initial decision; instead, the administrator would approve, approve with conditions, or deny, and the BZA would serve only as an **appellate** body.
- 13:09 Members clarified that if an applicant disagrees with the administrator’s decision, the matter could go to the BZA on appeal.
- 13:29 Additional legal concern was raised that appeals likely are not limited to applicants; a neighboring or otherwise affected **aggrieved party** may also appeal.
- 14:22 Members acknowledged the change places substantial responsibility and exposure on the zoning administrator and said the county needed procedures that protect the officeholder as well as the public.

### Concerns about transparency, notice, and process before adopting the amendment 14:44

- 14:44 Members pressed on what procedural safeguards would exist if the administrator becomes the initial decision-maker: filing deadlines, cut-off dates, signs, newspaper/public notice, neighbor notification, and whether there must be a hearing.
- 15:36 A central objection was that the state-law change, by itself, does not spell out the local process well enough, creating a risk of perceived lack of transparency even if the administrator acts properly.
- 16:03 Members argued the county needs formal rules so the administrator can point applicants and neighbors to a defined process, timeline, and hearing/notice procedure instead of handling requests ad hoc.
- 17:25 Question raised whether the county had a deadline to adopt the state-law change. Response: it should be adopted **as soon as possible**, but members indicated they could continue working if the language was not yet ready.
- 18:10 Members distinguished between two tasks:
  - adopting the state-law-compliance language that grants the administrator authority; and
  - rewriting the county’s own zoning regulations and procedures so the authority can be exercised with clear standards and timelines.
- 19:27 One idea—having the administrator make the decision at a BZA meeting—was rejected in discussion because an appellate board should not be exposed to the matter before an appeal is filed, or it could compromise the appeal process.
- 20:07 Another concern: if the amendment were approved before operating procedures exist, the administrator could immediately face requests with no adopted local rules governing notice and review.
- 21:06 Members reviewed the prior process: an applicant would file for a special exception, be placed on the **BZA** agenda, signs would go up, and a notice period of roughly **two weeks** or more would run, with additional timing tied to meeting deadlines and public comment opportunities.
- 22:42 Members requested that by the next meeting the draft clearly distinguish:
  - language that is direct **state-law** text and must remain; from
  - local language the county can revise, expand, or format to Hickman County standards.
- 23:11 Members also pointed to wording in the draft requiring the administrator to review applications under standards “set forth in the zoning resolution,” arguing those local standards must be rewritten first or at least in tandem so the administrator is not left with incomplete guidance.

### Motion to table amendment package pending rewrite 24:20

- 24:20 Motion made to **table** the discussion until next month so both the proposed resolution and corresponding zoning-regulation amendments can be rewritten into Hickman County form and brought back together as **one package**.
- 24:40 Motion received a second.
- 24:46 Voice vote carried without audible opposition. Outcome: **tabled until next month**.

## Department / Official Reports 24:58

### Planning / staff report 24:58

- 25:03 Staff announced an upcoming training opportunity intended to get ahead on the year’s planning/zoning training requirements.
- 25:23 Training scheduled for **Tuesday the 10th**, at the **City of Dickson Council Chambers**, from **5:30 to 7:30**.
- 25:41 Members were told food could be catered from **McAlister’s** if they RSVP by that night or the following day; those only attending the training could also simply show up.
- 26:00 Training topics listed as the **Open Meetings Act**, **ethics**, and additional Q&A/discussion items.
- 26:16 Clarified that this was another opportunity for the **new year’s** training cycle, rather than waiting until December.

## Adjournment 26:45

- 26:45 Meeting adjourned.
- 26:47 Chair noted adjournment at about **one minute past** the hour.

## Key figures and statistics

| Figure | Type | Context / topic | Timestamp |
|---|---|---|---|
| **8** | Attendance | Members present at roll call | 4:27 |
| **2** | Attendance | Members absent at roll call | 4:27 |
| **1** | Vacancy | Vacant seat noted during roll call / vote summary | 4:27 |
| **6815 Taylors Creek Road** | Address | Property in rezoning request | 6:01 |
| **A-1** | Zoning classification | Current zoning of campground property | 6:01 |
| **C-1** | Zoning classification | Requested commercial zoning for campground property | 6:01 |
| **8–0** | Vote | Roll-call vote to deny rezoning among members present | 7:28 |
| **2-step** | Process | Members’ description of likely path for a new campground: rezoning plus special exception | 11:14 |
| **2 weeks** | Notice period | Minimum sign/notice period discussed for prior BZA process | 21:37 |
| **1 week** | Filing lead time | Additional lead time discussed before a meeting to get on agenda / public comment | 22:02 |
| **almost a month** | Time period | Approximate total prior process window discussed for special exceptions | 22:19 |
| **5 weeks** | Time period | Approximate total remembered timeline for prior special-exception process | 22:24 |
| **10th** | Date | Date of upcoming training session | 25:23 |
| **5:30** | Time | Start time of training in Dickson | 25:23 |
| **7:30** | Time | End time of training in Dickson | 25:23 |

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

The commission quickly handled routine business, then denied a rezoning request for 6815 Taylors Creek Road from A-1 to C-1 that had been filed to speed up approval of a proposed commercial campground. The denial followed the zoning administrator’s recommendation that the site and surrounding area were not appropriate for C-1 commercial use, and members then spent additional time clarifying that a campground would still require a special exception even in C-1.

The longer discussion was over how to amend the county zoning resolution to comply with a new state law shifting special-exception decisions from the Board of Zoning Appeals to the zoning administrator/building official, leaving the BZA as an appeals body. Members supported getting into compliance but worried the draft did not yet establish notice, hearing, timing, and appeal procedures needed to protect transparency and the administrator. Rather than forward an incomplete change, they tabled the matter for a fuller rewrite to return next month. Other notable business included attendance, a vacant seat, and notice of an upcoming planning/zoning training on the Open Meetings Act and ethics.

Call to Order 3:45

3:45 Meeting called to order for the Hickman County Planning Commission.
4:27 Roll call showed 8 present, 2 absent, and 1 vacant seat.

Approval of Minutes and Agenda 4:46

4:46 January meeting minutes were presented as previously emailed and attached to the agenda; approved without noted objection.
5:32 Agenda approved as presented.
5:46 No one was present for public comment.
5:55 Chair reported no old business.

New Business / Agenda Items 6:01

Rezoning request: 6815 Taylors Creek Road, A-1 to C-1 for proposed campground 6:01

6:01 Application from Patrick Batten for 6815 Taylors Creek Road sought rezoning from A-1 to C-1 for a proposed commercial campground.
6:21 Staff explanation: the applicant sought rezoning because he did not want to wait through the process of changing the zoning text/book for a special exception and was trying to expedite the project.
6:38 Zoning administrator recommended denial, stating the location and character of the area were not appropriate for C-1 commercial zoning.
7:10 Motion made and seconded to deny the rezoning request.
7:28 Roll-call vote on denial passed unanimously among those present: Jeff Church, Tony Taylor, Danny Clark, Eddie Boone, Jason Carter, Claude Callicott, Keith Nash, and Andy Maddox all voted yes to deny; transcript also notes 1 vacant seat and 2 absent. Outcome: request denied.

Follow-up discussion on campground rules and whether rezoning would even solve the problem 7:56

7:56 After the vote, members questioned whether a campground can ever proceed merely by rezoning to C-1, noting their recollection that campgrounds require a special exception and are tightly regulated.
8:22 Clarification emerged that a campground is not a standard permitted use in C-1; it appears under uses permitted by special exception.
9:47 Members noted they had assumed the applicant might also want accessory commercial activity such as a store, which had arisen in prior campground cases, but that issue had not been clearly presented in this application.
10:37 Discussion referenced an existing Pinewood campground operating under a grandfathered status established through court proceedings, underscoring that new campground approvals are difficult under current county rules.
11:14 Consensus view from the discussion: for a new campground, the likely path would be a two-step process—first rezoning from A-1 to C-1, then returning for a special exception request—rather than rezoning alone settling the matter.

Proposed zoning-resolution amendment on special exceptions under new state law 12:03

12:03 Staff introduced a proposed amendment to the Hickman County zoning resolution to align with a new state law on special exceptions.
12:25 Members were told the draft had been prepared by Amanda, with help from Sam Edwards, and generally shifts responsibility for deciding special exceptions from the Board of Zoning Appeals to the zoning administrator or building official.
12:53 Main policy change: the county would no longer have the BZA make the initial decision; instead, the administrator would approve, approve with conditions, or deny, and the BZA would serve only as an appellate body.
13:09 Members clarified that if an applicant disagrees with the administrator’s decision, the matter could go to the BZA on appeal.
13:29 Additional legal concern was raised that appeals likely are not limited to applicants; a neighboring or otherwise affected aggrieved party may also appeal.
14:22 Members acknowledged the change places substantial responsibility and exposure on the zoning administrator and said the county needed procedures that protect the officeholder as well as the public.

Concerns about transparency, notice, and process before adopting the amendment 14:44

14:44 Members pressed on what procedural safeguards would exist if the administrator becomes the initial decision-maker: filing deadlines, cut-off dates, signs, newspaper/public notice, neighbor notification, and whether there must be a hearing.
15:36 A central objection was that the state-law change, by itself, does not spell out the local process well enough, creating a risk of perceived lack of transparency even if the administrator acts properly.
16:03 Members argued the county needs formal rules so the administrator can point applicants and neighbors to a defined process, timeline, and hearing/notice procedure instead of handling requests ad hoc.
17:25 Question raised whether the county had a deadline to adopt the state-law change. Response: it should be adopted as soon as possible, but members indicated they could continue working if the language was not yet ready.
18:10 Members distinguished between two tasks:
- adopting the state-law-compliance language that grants the administrator authority; and
- rewriting the county’s own zoning regulations and procedures so the authority can be exercised with clear standards and timelines.
19:27 One idea—having the administrator make the decision at a BZA meeting—was rejected in discussion because an appellate board should not be exposed to the matter before an appeal is filed, or it could compromise the appeal process.
20:07 Another concern: if the amendment were approved before operating procedures exist, the administrator could immediately face requests with no adopted local rules governing notice and review.
21:06 Members reviewed the prior process: an applicant would file for a special exception, be placed on the BZA agenda, signs would go up, and a notice period of roughly two weeks or more would run, with additional timing tied to meeting deadlines and public comment opportunities.
22:42 Members requested that by the next meeting the draft clearly distinguish:
- language that is direct state-law text and must remain; from
- local language the county can revise, expand, or format to Hickman County standards.
23:11 Members also pointed to wording in the draft requiring the administrator to review applications under standards “set forth in the zoning resolution,” arguing those local standards must be rewritten first or at least in tandem so the administrator is not left with incomplete guidance.

Motion to table amendment package pending rewrite 24:20

24:20 Motion made to table the discussion until next month so both the proposed resolution and corresponding zoning-regulation amendments can be rewritten into Hickman County form and brought back together as one package.
24:40 Motion received a second.
24:46 Voice vote carried without audible opposition. Outcome: tabled until next month.

Department / Official Reports 24:58

Planning / staff report 24:58

25:03 Staff announced an upcoming training opportunity intended to get ahead on the year’s planning/zoning training requirements.
25:23 Training scheduled for Tuesday the 10th, at the City of Dickson Council Chambers, from 5:30 to 7:30.
25:41 Members were told food could be catered from McAlister’s if they RSVP by that night or the following day; those only attending the training could also simply show up.
26:00 Training topics listed as the Open Meetings Act, ethics, and additional Q&A/discussion items.
26:16 Clarified that this was another opportunity for the new year’s training cycle, rather than waiting until December.

Adjournment 26:45

26:45 Meeting adjourned.
26:47 Chair noted adjournment at about one minute past the hour.

Key figures and statistics

Figure	Type	Context / topic	Timestamp
8	Attendance	Members present at roll call	4:27
2	Attendance	Members absent at roll call	4:27
1	Vacancy	Vacant seat noted during roll call / vote summary	4:27
6815 Taylors Creek Road	Address	Property in rezoning request	6:01
A-1	Zoning classification	Current zoning of campground property	6:01
C-1	Zoning classification	Requested commercial zoning for campground property	6:01
8–0	Vote	Roll-call vote to deny rezoning among members present	7:28
2-step	Process	Members’ description of likely path for a new campground: rezoning plus special exception	11:14
2 weeks	Notice period	Minimum sign/notice period discussed for prior BZA process	21:37
1 week	Filing lead time	Additional lead time discussed before a meeting to get on agenda / public comment	22:02
almost a month	Time period	Approximate total prior process window discussed for special exceptions	22:19
5 weeks	Time period	Approximate total remembered timeline for prior special-exception process	22:24
10th	Date	Date of upcoming training session	25:23
5:30	Time	Start time of training in Dickson	25:23
7:30	Time	End time of training in Dickson	25:23

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxshaTJ51jU 2/3/2025 Planning Commission Audio - Hickman County, TN Feb 3, 2026 0:00 Got you. 0:05 Tommy's not going to be here. 0:07 Okay. 0:07 We were 0:09 uh were we were we were a little bit 0:13 better prepared. 0:16 When I was in 94, we didn't have a 0:18 generator. 0:26 A lot of times 0:34 half 0:37 back internet. 0:39 And I went out there today. 0:42 And here's the extra 0:45 line of the pasture, you know, and it 0:47 goes over to a pole. 0:49 It was there today. 0:51 I went out there looked 0:54 a tree probably big and one of the winds 0:57 come down and hit And 1:08 we 1:09 call him today. 1:17 But what he did 1:23 not 1:25 shine 1:27 is 1:29 It's going to be 1:30 I got a little bit more help again. 1:34 Sunday. 1:35 I got my 1:37 niece. 1:40 Yeah, I told him. I said 1:45 he's pretty bad. 1:48 It's pretty good. 1:58 Give me pine cones. 2:00 Bless his heart. 2:08 I get you back in school 2:13 in the house. 2:21 brief hello. 2:36 Marty, I was up 2:40 for about four or five hours. 2:44 Gosh. 3:01 It never gets 3:05 my next life. 3:06 Well, let's go get started. I guess 3:09 not as much as you think. Is this all 3:10 that's coming or you can buy one for 3:14 just put it in? 3:15 Okay. 3:17 Yeah, I didn't know. I saw them. I 3:18 looked at anywhere from like0. 3:41 I don't want to sit beside Austin. 3:42 I did, too. 3:45 All right, we'll call this meeting to 3:46 order. 3:48 February 3:51 2nd, 2026, Queen County Planning 3:54 Commission if we could have a roll call. 3:58 February 3rd. 4:01 It is February the 3. 4:05 That's my bad. 4:09 That's my bad. I didn't catch it. 4:14 All right. 4:15 Make that correction. 4:17 I had two Sundays last week. 4:22 Yeah, it's hard to get normal. 4:24 It's hard to get normal. If call roll, 4:26 please sir. 4:27 Wayne Mayberry. Jeff Church here. Tommy 4:31 Taylor here. Tommy Caps. Denny Clark 4:34 here. Eddie Boon. Jason Carter 4:37 here. 4:37 Calcott 4:38 here. 4:39 Keith Nash 4:40 here. 4:40 Andy Maddox 4:41 here. 4:42 Um, one bank, two absent, 4:45 eight present. 4:46 Okay. Uh, you had a copy of the minutes 4:50 from the January meeting was emailed out 4:53 as well as being in attached to the 4:56 agenda. Chair would entertain a motion 4:59 to approve the meeting the minutes. 5:10 that 5:12 Carter. 5:15 Any discussion? 5:23 Any discussion on the minutes? All in 5:26 favor say I. 5:28 Those opposed. 5:30 Uh you have an agenda in front of you. 5:32 Chair will entertain a motion to approve 5:34 the agenda. 5:35 To approve the agenda as it is 5:38 second. 5:41 All in favor say I. 5:43 I. 5:43 We have an agenda. Uh also, is there 5:46 anybody that's on the public comment 5:48 with us, sir? 5:49 There is not. 5:50 Okay. 5:54 Uh 5:55 chair is unaware of any old business, 5:58 new business. Uh there's a request by 6:01 Patrick Battery zone 6815 Taylor's Creek 6:05 Road Tennessee from A1 to C1. 6:10 So this is for a 6:14 commercial campground on um Taylor's 6:18 Creek as it says. Um, and the reason 6:21 he's applying for a reszoning is because 6:25 he did not want to wait on the process 6:30 of the book having to change for a 6:31 special exception and trying to expedite 6:34 it. Um, but due to the 6:38 location and nature of the area, 6:42 my recommendation is to deny 6:48 because this area is not 6:50 um proper for C1 for commercial use. 6:55 Okay. 7:10 Make a motion to deny. 7:12 Second. 7:16 Uh discussion 7:28 roll call vote. 7:30 Jeff Church, 7:31 this is yesterday, right? 7:33 Yes. 7:34 Tony Taylor, 7:35 yes. 7:36 Tenny Clark, 7:37 yes. 7:37 Eddie Bon, 7:38 yes. 7:39 Jason Carter, 7:40 yes. 7:40 Claude Calakott, 7:41 yes. 7:42 Keith Nash, 7:43 yes. 7:43 Andy Maddox, 7:44 yes. 7:46 vacant two absent. 7:50 Yes. 7:56 I could be wrong. It's I've had a pretty 7:58 rough week 8:00 or so, but I was thinking he's trying to 8:03 expedite this and and I'm fine with I 8:06 want I wanted to deny don't all 8:08 campgrounds require special exception. 8:11 I I'm gonna be perfect. I Danny, that's 8:14 a great question because when this 8:16 when this conversation started, I was 8:17 trying to remember even if if 8:19 campgrounds are allowed in C1. 8:22 Well, in A1 they require a special 8:25 exception and I was thinking they all 8:27 required a special exception. 8:32 because we dealt with that before 8:37 they wanted to put a store going to be 8:39 open to the public or something that 8:47 I don't personally don't see how 8:53 it is in the 8:56 is permitted use 9:00 It's a permitted use in C1. 9:03 Yes, 9:04 it's a permitted by special exception in 9:07 C1. 9:09 Okay, let's back up. 9:10 So, it's reszoning and 9:12 under permitted uses in C1. Does it say 9:17 campground? 9:17 No, it's under uses permitted by special 9:20 exception. 9:21 It's on the list of special exceptions 9:23 that be can be granted in C4. 9:25 Yeah, but but that's not what we were 9:27 doing. 9:27 They're pretty I I my mind in my mind 9:30 extremely heavily regulated. 9:34 I mean I'm just this I'm sorry just 9:36 asking this discussion. So that we 9:38 should not even have accepted a request 9:40 to reszone for a campground because a 9:43 campground is not a permitted use in C1. 9:47 I I just assume that they were wanting 9:49 to to put a store like other campgrounds 9:53 didn't I mean that's what I would have 9:55 you know that that's you know because 9:57 even if they if they ran A1 and it was 10:00 had the campground or whatever but I 10:02 mean they can't have a store open to the 10:04 public you know so that's that's that's 10:06 what I was thinking but Austin I mean 10:08 you probably know more the uh 10:10 I was not in the office I think when 10:12 they took this application 10:14 okay 10:14 again you didn't say anything about 10:16 either way Okay. But that that's just 10:18 what when it when it popped up 10:19 commercial that was because we had the 10:20 same issue in in Pinewood with with that 10:24 with that campground that they that the 10:26 store that they have is only they can 10:29 only do for their 10:31 their 10:32 Yeah. Yeah. residents, whatever you want 10:34 to call it. It's not open to you. Right. 10:37 So 10:38 they're under a grandfather 10:39 that it was it was determined in court 10:42 that that that campground was was there. 10:45 They're they're under a grandfather. But 10:47 I would without that 10:50 I I think a campground would be very 10:53 hard to do anywhere in the county. And 10:57 that's the way I was remembering it. And 10:58 and don't I'm getting older every day, 11:01 but you and even in C1, you got to have 11:04 a special exception. 11:06 And I don't think they're allowed at all 11:08 in A1. There's no avenue of a special 11:10 exception in A1 for a campground. 11:14 So to your point, Danny, the two-step 11:16 process for somebody to put a campground 11:18 in the county would be for it to be 11:20 converted from A1 to Z1. That's step 11:22 one. Once they have C1 reszoning, then 11:26 they'd have to come back and ask for the 11:28 special exception for it to be resone 11:31 for it to be uh 11:36 they are allowed I think special 11:38 exception. 11:39 They are that's the first step 11:44 and then the only reason that in my 11:46 experience that we even considered C1 11:50 was if they wanted to do a public 11:53 special. 12:01 Okay. 12:03 All right. So, that one is denied. Uh, 12:05 is there any are there is there sorry 12:08 next on the new business is the amending 12:11 the Hickman County zoning resolution 12:13 special 12:15 exception requirements 12:17 to make the new law. 12:19 You should have a copy of 12:23 um 12:25 the 12:26 resolution change in front of you. This 12:30 was put together by Amanda, I believe, 12:34 with help 12:36 from Sam Edwards 12:39 where it's just going through and 12:41 changing the 12:44 responsibility from the board of zoning 12:46 appeals to 12:48 either the zoning administrator or the 12:50 building official. 12:53 This brings us in line with state law. 12:55 Yes. Yes, it does. 12:58 puts the responsibility on you. Correct. 13:00 Yes. 13:01 And then the 13:03 BCA would be an appellent board only. 13:09 So if they So if somebody comes in and 13:10 asks for a special exception, you don't 13:13 think it needs to be granted, they don't 13:16 like that, then they can then they can 13:19 go to the BCA. Yes. 13:20 Yes. 13:22 So they would only meet if they disagree 13:24 with the decision I make. 13:29 Mr. Clark, 13:31 I think it goes both ways. If I If I 13:34 understood it right, if you grant Andy a 13:39 special exception and I, as a neighbor, 13:42 don't like him, I can go to BA, too. 13:46 I could I could be wrong on that because 13:49 I'm getting into that lawyer territory 13:51 and Perry Mason hadn't covered that yet. 13:56 I I think the appeal will work with 13:59 it doesn't have to be 14:01 you can check that out. I don't think it 14:02 has to be the applicant that appeals 14:05 your decision. I think your decision can 14:08 be appealed by somebody affected. But we 14:10 might figure that out before 14:14 it says or other agrieved party. 14:17 Okay. 14:22 I understand you. Good luck, Austin. 14:27 Thank the state of Tennessee for that 14:28 one right there. 14:31 Oh man, I'm sure it'll be fine. 14:38 At least you're not the final authority. 14:41 Yeah. Yeah. 14:42 At least it's the other way around. 14:44 Has anybody Sam or Amanda or Amanda 14:47 talked to you about in order for the BZA 14:50 to hear? There's the application, the 14:54 cut off date, the advertising. So, 14:57 how are you going to handle that if 14:59 somebody walks in for a special 15:01 exception? 15:04 You've got to put a sign up that you're 15:06 going to you're considering a special 15:07 exception or the the BCA does. 15:14 I've been thinking about this since Sam 15:15 sprung that on us that that night at 15:17 city hall of all the things that could 15:20 go wrong. 15:22 Um, 15:25 that's that's a good point because I 15:27 mean they're going the neighbors are 15:28 going to have to be notified. 15:30 Yeah. 15:33 And I'm just trying to throw the rest of 15:34 the kink in the conversation is I mean 15:36 are you going to put the sign up? Are 15:38 you going to advertise? Are you going to 15:40 hold a hearing of the party who's 15:43 petitioning and potential neighbors who 15:45 may not want it all by your lonesome? 15:50 that is not said anywhere in the state 15:53 law. 15:55 Well, I know that 15:55 that's just changing that because um 16:00 I'm not disagreeing with it, but I'm 16:01 just making sure that that you need to 16:03 think through and we need to propagate 16:04 some rules that say this is the process 16:07 because like Danny's saying, if there's 16:09 not a meeting, if there's not a 16:11 schedule, then somebody's going to come 16:12 in and say, "I want this." And they're 16:14 going to and you're going to say, "What? 16:16 I'm going to think about it." You can't, 16:18 you know, we we we don't want to leave 16:19 leave you in that type of situation. 16:22 We wanted you to say, "Thank you. I'm 16:24 going to put some signs up in two weeks. 16:27 I'll hold a uh a meeting on this date in 16:30 this location and anybody can come." You 16:33 know, whatever is required. And but but 16:35 I mean, you we need to help you not get 16:38 lambasted, 16:40 Danny. Is that what that's you're you're 16:43 you're saying this guy's about to be 16:44 vulnerable. Well, 16:48 There's a lot of the transparency could 16:51 go away. 16:53 Austin, I'm not saying that Austin would 16:55 do that, but he could easily be accused 16:57 of it. And that that's to your point, we 17:00 we need to set up some stuff that 17:02 protects him. That here's the rules. 17:04 Everybody knows the rules and I follow 17:06 the rules because the the state it's not 17:09 the first time the state of Tennessee 17:10 has done that to local government. 17:12 Here, y'all figure it out. We created 17:14 the mess. We let the dog out. You figure 17:17 out how to get him back to cage, you 17:18 know, kind of thing. 17:22 It's it's something to think about, 17:25 Mr. Nash. 17:26 Well, I mean, when when when does uh 17:29 obviously this is a state law. Do we 17:31 have a a certain date for us to adopt 17:33 this? 17:36 It is how do I say we need to get it 17:39 adopted as soon as possible but if we 17:45 are still trying to figure out the best 17:46 way to write this 17:48 we can continue 17:49 I don't know if this is it do you Danny 17:52 or do you think it would be we we just 17:55 we have to have our own you know we we 17:57 adopt this I mean now this is we still 17:59 going to have to do some work on this 18:00 because this is not Hickman County 18:04 part this obviously she wrote this but 18:06 it needs to get redone formatted for us. 18:09 Mhm. 18:10 Um but don't you think that beyond this 18:15 would we not now that we just we give 18:17 him the authority that the rules 18:20 operating 18:21 would be would the would have to be 18:22 modified to reflect that change and 18:26 that's where 18:29 the the the rubber meet in the road 18:31 would be so important that we get it 18:33 right. Again, I'm not I'm not I think 18:36 all this I think this is what we should 18:37 do. But at the same time, I don't want 18:39 somebody to come in and say in the 18:41 absence of rules, this is what I won't 18:43 give it to me. He needs to be able to 18:45 say no, here's the time frame. Here's 18:47 the process by which we're going to go 18:49 about doing this. It's similar to what 18:51 we have done in the past with one minor 18:54 caveat. And then you know whereas before 18:58 if the B you know I think Danny has so 19:00 told me this a million times the BA was 19:02 the final say 19:04 this way you can sit there and say this 19:07 is the you know there there there is a 19:09 way if you are agrieved that you can 19:12 have this reviewed and there's a process 19:21 and I had a thought but then the more 19:23 you talked I realized we probably 19:24 shouldn't do do it that way is that do 19:27 everything just like we're doing it now 19:29 but often be president to be president 19:31 at the BZA meeting and rather than 19:33 calling over the BZA he makes the 19:35 decision then but if they're if they're 19:38 an appellet process and they're already 19:40 quasi judicial they don't need to be 19:43 exposed to it that that could that could 19:46 they wouldn't good appellet process if 19:48 they were appro already exposed to it 19:50 then so that's that's not going to work 19:54 they don't need to know anything about 19:55 it. If they're if they're if they're the 19:57 appeals, they don't need to be any way 19:59 involved in it unless they're triggered 20:01 by by something. So, we'll have to 20:03 figure out something else. 20:06 Yes. 20:07 One thing about I see running into if we 20:10 approve it tonight is we don't have 20:13 system operating procedures on how he's 20:14 going to handle it already in place. as 20:16 soon as this is I mean I know that's 20:18 going to come to county court but once 20:20 it's approved 20:23 with no rules then he's he's open for 20:27 I just think they're opening a can of 20:29 worms that we're not ready to it's not 20:30 ready to be closed we got to think about 20:33 I would be hesitant because I'm thinking 20:37 it'll be the end of March before this is 20:39 actually the an amendment to the deal 20:41 but I would be we wouldn't be doing our 20:44 job if we started did a two-month uh 20:47 process, 20:49 intending on working on it all the way 20:51 through it, but we need we need to have 20:53 it finalized before we start that 20:55 two-month process. 20:56 This is my best. 20:58 Austin, help me out on how we before the 21:01 state decided to 21:03 change make force the change here. So, 21:06 um, somebody comes into the office and 21:10 they say, "I want to put 21:12 whatever home on my feet store. 21:15 There's a BCA." 21:16 Yeah. And so I, you know, and well, you 21:18 know, that's not allowed without a 21:20 special exception. So then they get put 21:22 on the agenda for the BCA and the BZA 21:25 like there's signs go up 21:28 and how many how many what's the 21:29 timeline on how how long are the signs 21:33 up and all of that? It needs to be at 21:35 least two weeks. 21:37 Okay. So, two weeks the signs up and 21:39 then they go in front of the BZA and and 21:42 there's there it's heard by the 21:44 applicant and is it heard by anybody 21:46 that would oppose it or 21:48 um I believe that there is a time for 21:51 public comment, public concerns. 21:53 Okay. Okay. So, it's a two week 21:58 like notice period or whatever. Okay. 22:01 All right. 22:02 It was a full week before that next 22:05 meeting you had to have it in 22:08 to get a public comment 22:14 extra week. 22:16 Okay. Okay. 22:17 At at least an extra week 22:19 almost a month before the meeting 22:21 schedule you had to have in 22:24 it. That's how I sort of remember like 22:28 five weeks I think actually 22:32 I think my size almost 22:36 you got the paper situation out paper, 22:39 right? 22:40 I'm assuming that part of the wording 22:42 here is straight from state law and 22:44 other is what Amanda created. 22:46 Yes, 22:46 I think it would be helpful to us in 22:48 considering this to understand what is 22:49 direct quotes that we have to have in 22:51 here and which portions are what we need 22:54 to expound on or clarify or possibly be 22:57 revised. If we could have that indicated 22:59 by the next time we meet to discuss 23:01 this, I think that would that would be 23:03 very helpful to me anyway to know what 23:05 we can change and what we can't. 23:07 Yeah, I agree. N 23:09 well I mean and I'm going to just going 23:11 to go back here to the second paragraph 23:12 of section one. The zoning 23:14 administrator/building official shall 23:16 review each application for compliance 23:18 with the specific standard and criteria 23:21 set forth in the zoning resolution and 23:24 shall and shall approve approve with 23:26 conditions or deny the application in 23:28 writing. Well, 23:31 you know, it it it keeps referring back 23:33 to the zoning resolution, but right now 23:35 the zoning resolution doesn't have all 23:37 this stuff in here. So, so my suggestion 23:40 would be and and I'm, you know, anybody 23:43 wants to volunteer to off this committee 23:45 who has time and wants to work with this 23:46 is great, but that before next month, 23:50 the resolution itself 23:53 be 23:54 rewritten to the Hickman County standard 23:57 and then these proposed zoning 24:00 regulation changes 24:03 be made so that we can accompany both of 24:06 those. 24:08 We vote on it before we send it to the 24:10 county court. Both this resolution and 24:13 the changes that required in the zoning 24:15 regulation. So this is all 24:18 one big package. 24:18 One big package. 24:20 Yeah. Because that vote is going to have 24:22 to be changed. So, I'll make a motion 24:24 that this discussion be tabled until 24:27 next month when uh the resolution and 24:31 the zoning regulations involving this 24:34 can be uh amended and brought to us for 24:38 review. 24:38 Okay. Is there a second? 24:40 Second. 24:46 All in favor say I. 24:49 Oppos. Okay. 24:54 Is there any more new business? 24:58 I do have one. Um, 25:03 well, that's report 25:07 that it's planning report. 25:09 Okay. All right. Well, go ahead cuz I 25:13 don't chairperson has nothing. 25:15 Um, Amanda is doing you want we want to 25:20 get ahead on training. Amanda is having 25:23 a training this coming Tuesday. I don't 25:26 know who would all be able to make it, 25:28 but it will be in Dixon at the City of 25:32 Dixon Council Chambers 25:34 on the 10th from 5:30 to 7:30. 25:39 Um, 25:41 if you want to have any food catered, 25:44 she's doing Calisters, let us know 25:47 either tonight or tomorrow if you're 25:49 able to make it. And if you just want to 25:52 come to the training, you will you can 25:55 just show up day of. 25:58 What is the subject of the training? 26:00 It is open meetings act ethics and 26:04 whatever else comes up in the discussion 26:06 Q&A. 26:09 That is what the topic says. 26:12 So that's pretty much what we had in our 26:14 required training already. 26:16 Just another opportunity if maybe if we 26:18 didn't make the required training. 26:19 Well, this would be for the new year. 26:23 So to get ahead of it instead of doing 26:26 it all in December. 26:32 Okay. 26:37 Anything else? Direct. 26:45 We are journed. 26:47 One minute past.