Wilson County zoning board approves most variance requests, denies paving-equipment storage after neighbor objections

Lebanon, Tenn. — The Wilson County Board of Zoning Appeals on May 21 approved multiple variances and a six‑month building‑permit extension, denied a home‑occupation request to store paving equipment after adjoining property owners testified in opposition, and approved a separate variance with conditions requiring state review and a geotechnical report.

Chairman Rusty Thompson called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. at the Wilson County Courthouse and outlined public‑comment procedures. The Board — composed of Chairman Rusty Thompson, Vice Chairman Perry Neal, Secretary Howard Blaydes, member Kerry Crockett and alternate Keith Williams (voting in Sonja Robinson’s absence) — handled seven cases on the agenda.

Several property‑use requests were approved after staff recommended approval. In Case 4397, Brittany Hughes, appearing on behalf of property owner Billy Jones, sought to use 6060 Highway 109 North as a contractor’s storage yard in a C‑3 Highway Commercial zone; the Board approved the request on a motion by Secretary Howard Blaydes, seconded by Chairman Rusty Thompson. In Case 4398, Joshua Bagwell, on behalf of Brian Robinson, received a 10‑foot variance to allow a house to use an existing easement at 220 Dawn Lane; Vice Chairman Perry Neal moved to approve and Secretary Blaydes seconded the motion. Case 4399, which sought multiple variances at 2022 Sanford Drive so a pool could be located conforming to setbacks, was approved after Vice Chairman Neal pointed out and corrected a staff calculation error about lot‑size requirements; Kerry Crockett moved to approve with the corrected variance and the Board voted in favor.

The Board granted a six‑month extension for a residential building permit in Case 4400. Applicant Jared Newell had a permit posted Oct. 3, 2024, with the foundation inspected Jan. 18, 2025; Chairman Thompson moved to grant six months, and the motion passed unanimously.

Not all requests succeeded. In Case 4401, applicant Daniel Lovett asked to store paving equipment on property at 818 Norene Road under the county’s home‑occupation rules. Neighbors Beth Wood, Sandy Mack and Misty Lehew testified in opposition and submitted a video for the record; Brittany Murray also raised concerns. After staff recommended denial, Secretary Howard Blaydes moved to deny based on staff recommendations and adjoining owners’ testimony, seconded by Vice Chairman Neal, and the Board denied the request.

In Case 4402, K and A Land Surveying represented Daniel and Jessica Muchowicz seeking a 20‑foot rear‑yard variance and a 1,884‑square‑foot lot‑size variance for 500 Idlewood Court. Commissioner Perry Neal stated he had an indirect conflict and said he would abstain from the vote. Neighbors and others raised stormwater and septic concerns; Luke Winchester spoke to those technical issues during the discussion. The Board approved the variance with stipulations requiring verification from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation that soils are not compromised and a geotechnical compaction report from an engineer; the motion was made by Chairman Thompson and seconded by Keith Williams. The record shows Neal abstained and the motion passed among the remaining voting members.

Votes at a glance: Case 4397 — approved (motion: Blaydes; second: Thompson; unanimous among voting members present). Case 4398 — approved (motion: Neal; second: Blaydes; unanimous). Case 4399 — approved with corrected lot‑size variance (motion: Crockett; second: Blaydes; unanimous). Case 4400 — six‑month permit extension granted (motion: Thompson; second: Crockett; unanimous). Case 4401 — denied (motion: Blaydes; second: Neal; unanimous). Case 4402 — approved with TDEC verification and geotechnical stipulations (motion: Thompson; second: Williams; Perry Neal abstained).

What it means: The approvals allow the applicants to proceed under the conditions identified by staff and the Board; the denial in Case 4401 preserves enforcement of home‑occupation limits and addresses neighbors’ concerns about outdoor storage and equipment in a residential area. The stipulations in Case 4402 require further technical review before construction proceeds.

The Board discussed scheduling a work session after the June meeting and adjourned with no further business.