Hickman County TN

Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people. Proverbs 14:34

Planning Commission · Meeting · Jun 2, 2026

Tue, Jun 2, 2026

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

Watch the recording on YouTube

Join the Substack

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 approved an old-business rezoning on Highway 50 West, adopted previously discussed county-commission revisions to a plat-related item, and approved a rule change shifting first-hearing special exceptions to the building commissioner or appointed staff with a 30-day construction pause after approval to allow appeals. In new business, the commission approved a partial rezoning from A1 to R1 for a proposed residential development, though members questioned whether using the Plan Growth Area line as a parcel split was too arbitrary and whether the entire tract could have been rezoned instead.

The longest debate was over a proposed amendment to allow private airstrips in A1 through special exception. Members worried about noise, night operations, burden on nearby property owners, and concentrating too much discretion in one official after recent procedural changes. That item was tabled unanimously for more work. The commission also approved a site plan for diesel fueling canopies at the market at Highways 46 and 100, with discussion focused on truck traffic and difficult ingress/egress at the intersection.

Call to Order / Roll Call / Routine Approvals 3:12

  • 3:12 Meeting called to order.
  • 3:21 Roll call showed 9 present and 1 absent.
  • 3:45 Minutes from the April meeting were approved without noted opposition.
  • 4:21 Agenda approved without substantive discussion.
  • 4:38 Public comment opened; two people had signed up, but no substantive public-comment discussion was captured before the agenda moved on.

Old Business 5:56

Rezoning request: Evelyn Miller, Highway 50 West, 5-acre tract 5:56

  • 5:56 Request to rezone a 5-acre tract on Highway 50 West.
  • 6:13 Staff said the item had been postponed previously so the 5 acres could be surveyed and separated from the original parcel; the updated survey was now in the packet.
  • 6:52 Staff said nothing had changed from the prior hearing and the tract met the requirements for C1 zoning.
  • 7:37 A member asked the intended use after rezoning; response given was an office building. The chair noted that intended use was not controlling for the rezoning decision but answered a concern from the audience.
  • 8:36 Motion made to approve the rezoning.
  • 8:43 Roll-call vote approved the request unanimously, effectively 9–0.

Revised plat / county commission changes 9:09

  • 9:09 Staff presented an updated plat incorporating changes made after county commission review, along with paperwork showing where those edits occurred.
  • 9:50 Staff said there had been two main groups of revisions when the matter went to county commission: one set from another author that now met that person’s stated goals, and another set authored by staff and likewise incorporated.
  • 10:34 Motion made to approve the revised plat as changed.
  • 10:55 Roll-call vote approved the item unanimously, effectively 9–0.

Special exception procedure change 11:16

  • 11:16 Commission took up a zoning-resolution amendment on special exceptions.
  • 11:23 Staff explained the change would give the building commissioner or appointed staff authority over the first hearing on special exceptions.
  • 11:41 The amendment also added a 30-day pause on construction after first approval, intended to preserve time for any contest or appeal before work begins.
  • 14:00 Members clarified that the 30 days starts on the date of approval, not on the original application date.
  • 14:51 It was also clarified that the item remained subject to review.
  • 15:03 Motion and second to approve the amendment.
  • 15:05 Roll-call vote approved unanimously, effectively 9–0.

New Business 15:31

Rezoning request: Michael ___, parcel 6716, A1 to R1 for residential development 15:31

  • 15:31 Request to rezone part of a tract from A1 to R1 for residential development.
  • 15:50 Staff said the full property was roughly 44 acres, with about 31 acres (described more specifically as about 31.6 acres) proposed for rezoning.
  • 16:16 Staff said the split followed the Plan Growth Area boundary, with the rezoning covering the portion believed to lie inside that area.
  • 16:54 Staff reported the property met the qualifications for R1.
  • 17:21 A member questioned relying so literally on the Plan Growth Area boundary, arguing the original boundary was graphically drawn as a general area rather than a precise surveyed line and calling the split somewhat arbitrary.
  • 18:36 The applicant said the survey followed the county’s growth-area map; the front portion inside the growth area would be developed while the rear portion would remain agricultural.
  • 19:31 Discussion turned to precedent: members asked whether, if a line splits a lot, the whole tract could potentially qualify for the zoning category if most of it lies within the designated area.
  • 20:52 Members acknowledged the split might not make conceptual sense to them but also accepted that the owner specifically wanted the back portion left agricultural.
  • 21:09 Staff confirmed a survey was needed to show the line as submitted.
  • 22:31 Before action, a procedural concern was raised that the sign on the property had been posted for only about 24 hours or less, but the commission proceeded with discussion and action anyway.
  • 23:14 Roll-call vote approved the rezoning unanimously, effectively 9–0.

Proposed amendment: private airstrips in A1 by special exception 23:38

  • 23:45 Staff presented a proposed amendment for A1 properties to allow private airstrips by special exception.
  • 23:53 Staff said a county resident is interested in establishing a private airstrip, but the current resolution only addresses the Centerville Municipal Airport and does not provide a path for a private grass strip.
  • 24:24 The proposal was modeled after Blount County’s approach.
  • 24:31 Staff said applicants would still have to satisfy all FAA requirements before seeking county special-exception approval.
  • 25:30 Counsel/staff highlighted a more robust public-notice requirement than usual because of the possible impacts:
    • 25:45 Applicant would have to notify adjoining owners and all owners within 2,000 feet by registered mail.
    • 25:54 That mailing cost would be borne by the applicant, not the county.
    • 26:09 Standard sign-posting requirements would also still apply.
  • 26:47 A member questioned language requiring a “letter of agreement” from existing airstrips within a 5-mile radius, asking whether that implied a veto power.
  • 27:01 Staff said the intent was acknowledgment/notification, not veto authority, and offered to revise “agreement” to “acknowledgement” for clarity.
  • 27:35 Members said the 10-day notice period seemed short given the potential impact, even if it matched the normal special-exception timeline.
  • 29:09 Members discussed what kinds of aircraft the proposal would permit.
  • 29:48 Staff pointed to the draft text stating the landing strip would be limited to small single-engine fixed-wing craft only.
  • 30:16 Motion made to approve the amendment, but extended discussion followed before any final vote.
  • 30:27 A member argued private airstrips are unlike ordinary special exceptions because neighbors could be affected from much farther away and because, under the recently revised process, the first decision would rest with a single official rather than a board.
  • 31:51 Staff said appeals would still function as with prior BZA/BCA-style matters: if approved initially, neighboring property owners would have 30 days to appeal.
  • 32:13 Members asked whether the resolution could be drafted to better account for surrounding property impacts.
  • 33:12 Staff said one alternative would be to make the use permitted by right in A1, which would send the site plan to the full planning commission instead of a single-official special-exception decision; however, that would also narrow the review to whether standards were met.
  • 34:25 Members contrasted that with rezonings, which eventually reach county commission and can more visibly account for public impact.
  • 34:41 Members asked whether some alternate zoning path, such as a distinct airport-related district, could trigger county commission review instead of relying on special exceptions or use-by-right treatment.
  • 35:02 A member moved to table the item until next month, calling it a “slippery slope,” warning that future staff may not exercise discretion the same way current staff would, and saying the county should think through the consequences before opening the door.
  • 35:52 Additional comments supported caution, citing personal experience with low-flying helicopters and concern about night operations and long-term neighborhood disruption.
  • 36:40 Roll-call vote to table passed unanimously, effectively 9–0.
  • 36:59 After the vote, members emphasized they were not objecting to any particular applicant personally but to the risk of creating a hard-to-control precedent without clearer standards.
  • 37:44 Staff clarified that if private airstrips were made permitted by right, the matter would come only to planning commission as a site plan and would not go to county commission.
  • 38:09 Staff said requiring a rezoning to a separate airport-type district could be one way to trigger county-level approval.
  • 39:11 Staff added that design standards for private airfields are difficult to find, and that even the model ordinance relied heavily on FAA standards rather than detailed local development standards, reinforcing members’ concerns about enforceability and neighborhood protections.

Site plan approval: Southern Consulting / market at Highways 46 and 100 40:18

  • 40:18 Staff presented a site plan from Southern Consulting for the market at the corner of Highways 46 and 100.
  • 40:31 Proposal was to add a diesel-truck fueling awning/canopy.
  • 41:01 Applicant representative said the project would add 4 islands serving 4 vehicles at one time.
  • 41:18 Sewer had been a concern when the gas station was first proposed, but the representative said this project would not increase sewage demand, so it should not create a new sewer issue.
  • 41:34 The representative said the project would introduce no major new site issues beyond the new canopy and pad.
  • 43:14 Members asked whether the facility was mainly intended for semis; the response suggested it would more likely serve log trucks, dump trucks, and other local heavy vehicles, though semis could use it.
  • 43:38 Several members raised concerns about the already difficult and busy intersection and whether larger trucks would worsen safety problems when entering or exiting.
  • 44:14 Discussion clarified that trucks exiting onto Highway 100 would effectively only be able to go west from that access point.
  • 44:49 A member asked whether local regulations controlled driveway width, but staff noted the project was using existing inlets/outlets.
  • 45:39 Members noted much of the access issue likely falls under TDOT rather than planning-commission purview.
  • 46:58 Staff confirmed ingress/egress was not really in the commission’s purview here, especially with existing access already in place.
  • 47:17 A member asked whether a traffic study should be required.
  • 47:39 Staff suggested the commission could instead condition approval on signage routing truck traffic out to Highway 100.
  • 48:01 A member raised a separate concern that a traffic island that once prevented certain turning movements from Highway 100 appeared to have disappeared, and questioned whether TDOT had approved that change.
  • 49:26 Another member argued the added truck-diesel area could actually help by moving long vehicles away from the regular pumps, citing a vehicle with a 24-foot cattle trailer that had recently blocked circulation at the existing islands.
  • 50:00 Members also noted dump trucks already use the site and can obstruct traffic; the new fueling area was presented as a way to relieve that congestion.
  • 50:34 Roll-call vote approved the site plan unanimously, effectively 9–0.

Announcements / Adjournment 50:59

  • 50:59 No additional new business was raised.
  • 51:02 Director reported no further matters.
  • 51:23 Meeting adjourned on motion.

Key figures and statistics

Figure Type Context / topic Timestamp
9 present Attendance Roll call attendance 3:35
1 absent Attendance Roll call attendance 3:35
5 acres Acreage Evelyn Miller tract on Highway 50 West 5:56
C1 Zoning classification Requested zoning for Evelyn Miller tract 6:52
9–0 Vote Approval of Highway 50 West rezoning 8:43
9–0 Vote Approval of revised plat / county commission changes 10:55
30 days Time period Construction pause after first special-exception approval 11:41
30 days Time period Appeal/hold period begins on approval date 14:00
9–0 Vote Approval of special-exception procedure change 15:05
6716 Parcel/reference number Michael rezoning request 15:31
A1 Zoning classification Existing zoning on Michael tract 15:31
R1 Zoning classification Requested zoning for residential development 15:31
44 acres Acreage Approximate total size of tract 15:50
31 acres Acreage Approximate area proposed for rezoning 15:50
31.6 acres Acreage More specific rezoning area estimate 16:16
24 hours or less Time period Concern about how long rezoning sign had been posted 22:31
9–0 Vote Approval of A1-to-R1 rezoning 23:14
A1 Zoning classification District proposed for private airstrip use 23:45
2,000 feet Distance Registered-mail notice radius for private-airstrip applications 25:45
5 miles Distance Radius for notice/acknowledgement from existing airstrips 26:47
10 days Time period Registered-mail notice timing discussed for airstrip proposal 27:43
small single-engine fixed-wing craft only Use limitation Aircraft type limit in draft private-airstrip amendment 29:48
30 days Time period Appeal period after initial special-exception approval 32:05
9–0 Vote Motion to table private-airstrip amendment 36:40
46 Highway number Market site location 40:18
100 Highway number Market site location / truck exit discussion 40:18
4 islands Facility count Proposed diesel fueling islands 41:01
4 vehicles at one time Capacity Simultaneous fueling capacity 41:09
24-foot Length Cattle trailer cited in discussion of blocked circulation 49:36
9–0 Vote Approval of diesel-canopy site plan 50:34