Subdivision

Concept Plan

2-SE-01-C

Recommended for approval
by the Planning Commission

Approve variance 1 and concept plan subject to 6 conditions.


See case notes below

Details

Request

Property Info

Case Notes

What's next?

Details of Action

+
Approve variance 1 and concept plan subject to 6 conditions.

Applicant Request

+
Subdivision
Barber Lane Estates
Lots
30 (Split)
Proposed Density
2.94 du/ac

Variances

1. Sight distance variance to the northeast along W. Beaver Creek Dr. from 400' to approximately 300'.


Property Information

+
Location
Southeast side of W. Beaver Creek Drive, northeast of Fairlane Rd.

Commission District 6


Size
10.20 acres

Sector
North County

Currently on the Property
A residence and vacant land

Growth Plan
Planned Growth Area

Case Notes

+
Staff Recommendation
Deny variance because it would create a traffic hazard.

DENY the Concept Plan because the proposed entrance does not meet the minimum sight distance requirements of the Subdivision Regulations.

1. Connection to sanitary sewer and meeting any other relevant requirements of the Knox County Health Department.
2. Provision of street names which are consistent with the Uniform Street Naming and Addressing System within Knox County (County Ord. 91-1-102).
3. Meeting all applicable requirements of the Knox County Department of Engineering and Public Works.
4. Place a note on the final plat that all lots will have access only to the internal street system.
5. Meeting all applicable requirements of the Knox County Zoning Ordinance.
6. A final plat application based on this concept plan will not be accepted for review by the MPC until certification of design plan approval has been submitted to the MPC staff.
Disposition Summary
Approve variance 1 and concept plan subject to 6 conditions.
Details of Action
Approve variance 1 and concept plan subject to 6 conditions.

What's next?

+
After the Planning CommissionAppeals of Concept Plans and Final Plats are filed with Chancery CourtThe Process
Applicant

Barber Lane Estates

Harry Lane Properties


Case History