Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Food Trucks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nolensville officials pause on permanent food-truck permits, seek zoning fix and legal guidance
Summary
Town staff and the board discussed revisions to the mobile-food vending rules after discovering the 2021 zoning provisions were effectively repealed; staff will analyze the zoning/permit mismatch, consider removing a 10-day limit and return with proposed code and procedural changes.
Get email alerts on the Food Trucks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Town of Nolensville commissioners and staff spent extensive time Jan. 27 reviewing the town’s mobile-food vending rules and agreed to delay additional permit issuances while staff and the town attorney analyze how the zoning code and municipal permits interact.
The discussion followed public comments from local food-truck operators and nearby merchants. The issue arose because a 2021 ordinance that regulated mobile-food vending had been incorporated into an earlier zoning ordinance; when the town repealed that zoning ordinance, much of the detailed mobile-vending language was removed. Staff and counsel said the result is a gap between the municipal code, current permitting practice and zoning definitions.
Attorney Charles (Town counsel) told the board that the town cannot legally favor a vendor based solely on domicile (whether a vendor is based in Nolensville or elsewhere). He also flagged the practical difficulty of enforcing a previously proposed “10 days per calendar year” cap for mobile vendors and suggested staff consider removing that limit. Staff indicated the current permit process had issued annual permits in practice, but the zoning text treats mobile vending as a temporary use limited by days; that mismatch creates legal and administrative uncertainty.
Brad (planning staff) and Charles advised the board that several steps may be needed: (1) clarify municipal-code language to reestablish a defined permitting process and parameters for mobile vendors; (2) consider a zoning amendment if the town intends to permit temporary mobile vending in residential neighborhoods or other specific districts; and (3) adopt clear operational rules (locations, overnight rules, parking, trash, and limits on consecutive days) to avoid ad hoc enforcement.
Chair and commissioner comments stressed balancing support for existing brick-and-mortar businesses with the need for a clear, legally defensible code. Commissioner Gill and others noted the town had intended to protect in-town merchants’ investments and not give an unfair advantage to mobile vendors that did not contribute the same way to the local tax base.
At the end of the discussion staff said they would: analyze the current zoning ordinance language (including the temporary-use definition that appears to limit such uses to fewer than 60 days with one 30-day extension), reexamine the municipal permit form and duration, and draft proposed code amendments as needed. Counsel and staff also said the Planning Commission would need to review any proposed zoning amendments before the Board of Commissioners votes.
No formal ordinance change was adopted at the meeting; commissioners agreed to pause issuance of additional long-term permits until staff returns with specific draft language and a legal opinion on the options.
Next steps identified by staff include a legal memo clarifying the town’s authority to issue year-length permits where the zoning ordinance defines mobile vending as a temporary use, and a staff-drafted amendment package to present to the Planning Commission and then to the board.
