Dickson County Considering New Appearance Standards for Commercial Development

CHARLOTTE, Tenn. — New commercial developments in portions of unincorporated Dickson County could soon face new standards governing everything from building materials and exterior appearance to dumpsters and mechanical equipment.

The Dickson County Commission moved forward with proposed non-residential development standards during its Sept. 21 meeting, setting the proposal up for a final vote at the commission's next regular meeting.

The regulations are the result of months of work by the Dickson County Planning Commission and a Planning Commission subcommittee.

County attorney Andrew Mills told commissioners the proposal had been under consideration for approximately six months and had generated considerable debate before receiving a unanimous recommendation from the Planning Commission.

The goal is to give the county some basic standards for the appearance and design of new commercial development.

Counties, Mills explained, do not have the same authority as municipalities when it comes to design review.

"This is about as much as we can put in place," Mills told commissioners.

Standards Would Not Apply Everywhere

The proposed regulations would have a limited geographic reach.

They would apply to certain C-1 and C-2 commercial developments located within the county's Planned Growth Areas and the urban growth boundaries surrounding municipalities.

They would not apply to the county's rural areas or to property zoned A-1 or A-2.

During the meeting, commissioners specifically sought clarification on that point.

Mills explained that even a C-1 property located in a rural portion of the county would not be subject to the proposed standards. The property would have to fall within one of the areas covered by the proposal.

That means the standards would be concentrated primarily around areas where more commercial development is anticipated rather than applying uniformly across rural Dickson County.

What Would Change?

For developments covered by the regulations, one of the most noticeable changes would be how commercial buildings are positioned and presented to the public.

Buildings would be required to orient toward the public road. Developers could not simply place a large blank wall facing the roadway.

The building would also need to maintain a consistent architectural style.

Officials described requirements for buildings to have a defined base, middle and cap, while still leaving developers considerable flexibility over the architectural style they choose.

The proposal also establishes standards for exterior materials.

Brick, stone, precast concrete and Hardie board are among the materials discussed as acceptable under the proposal.

Metal siding would also remain an option in some cases — an issue that generated considerable debate during the Planning Commission's review.

Metal Siding Became Major Point of Debate

Rather than completely prohibiting metal siding, the Planning Commission settled on a compromise intended in part to protect smaller businesses from potentially higher construction costs.

Under the proposal, 26-gauge metal siding could be used on buildings under 10,000 square feet.

Larger buildings would have to use other approved materials.

Mills said the provision was designed to allow smaller businesses to continue using metal siding on their buildings while establishing a different standard for larger developments.

Exposed vinyl siding would be prohibited for developments covered by the regulations.

The appearance and material standards would also apply to portions of buildings visible from public rights-of-way. Areas such as loading docks at the rear of a building could still be treated differently when they are not visible from the road.

Dumpsters and Equipment Would Have to Be Screened

The proposed standards extend beyond the buildings themselves.

Trash storage would generally have to be placed behind a building or otherwise screened from view from a public roadway.

Mechanical equipment would face similar requirements.

Gas station canopies would have to use a style and materials similar to the main building, creating a more consistent appearance across the development.

The proposal also includes open-space provisions and incorporates existing signage requirements.

Those elements would become part of the project's approved site plan, meaning a developer could not receive approval under one design and then substantially change the development's appearance later.

Planning Commission Viewed Proposal as Starting Point

Mills told commissioners that the Planning Commission considered additional requirements during its months of discussions but ultimately removed some of them.

Planning officials determined the county was not ready for some of the more restrictive standards that had been considered.

What emerged was described as a starting point for regulating the character and appearance of commercial development in the county's non-rural growth areas.

The Planning Commission ultimately voted unanimously to recommend the proposal to the County Commission.

The Sept. 21 action did not make the standards county law.

Because the zoning amendment requires a public hearing, commissioners were following a multi-step process. The public hearing was held during the September meeting, with no one signed up to speak on the proposal.

Commissioners then voted to advance the measure to their next regular meeting, when it can be considered for final approval.

That next vote will determine whether Dickson County adopts its new standards for commercial development — establishing new expectations for what businesses built in some of the county's fastest-growing areas will look like from the road.