Development Plan

Planning Commission

1-A-23-DP

Approved with Conditions

Approve the development plan for a residential subdivision with up to 24 detached dwellings, subject to 1 condition.


See case notes below

Request

Property Info

Case Notes

What's next?

Applicant Request

+

Property Information

+
Location
0 STONEYHURST LN

West side of Murphy Rd, southern terminus of Stoneyhurst Ln

Commission District 8


Size
13.48 acres

Place Type Designation
LDR (Low Density Residential), SP (Stream Protection)

Currently on the Property
Agriculture/Forestry/Vacant Land

Growth Plan
Urban Growth Area (Outside City Limits)

Case Notes

+
Disposition Summary
Approve the development plan for a residential subdivision with up to 24 detached dwellings, subject to 1 condition.
Staff Recommendation
Approve the development plan for a residential subdivision with up to 24 detached dwellings, subject to 1 condition.
1) Meeting all applicable requirements of the Knox County Zoning Ordinance.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN ANALYSIS PER ARTICLE 6, SECTION 6.50.06 (APPROVAL OR DENIAL)

In the exercise of its administrative judgment, the Planning Commission shall determine if the proposed plan is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance and adopted plans.

1) ZONING ORDINANCE
PR (Planned Residential) up to 5 du/ac:
a) The PR zone allows houses as a permitted use. The administrative procedures for the PR zone require the Planning Commission to approve the development plan before permits can be issued (Article 5, Section 5.13.15).
b) This PR zone district is approved for a maximum of 5 du/ac. For acreage zoned PR, the proposed density is 3.2 du/ac for the entire subdivision and 4.2 du/ac for phase 2. Including the 4 acres zoned RB, the density for the entire subdivision is approximately 2.8 du/ac.
c) The applicant requests a peripheral setback reduction from 35-ft to 30-ft along the southwest boundary (lots 73-75). This will mainly benefit lot 74.

2) GENERAL PLAN - DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
a) Ensure that the context of new development, including scale and compatibility, does not impact existing neighborhoods and communities (Policy 9.3) - The development will consist of detached houses, which is the same as other nearby residential developments.
b) Encourage a mixture of housing sizes and prices within planned residential developments (Policy 9.8) - This development is exclusively detached, single-family houses, which does not diversify the housing mix in the area. It is unknown if the price ranges will vary from nearby residential developments

3) NORTH CITY SECTOR PLAN
a) The property is classified LDR (Low Density Residential) and SP (Stream Protection). The LDR land use allows consideration of up to 5 du/ac. The proposed density is 3.8 du/ac.
b) The SP (Stream Protection) area aligns with the FEMA 500-year floodplain. Only a portion of the stream on the property is studied (has a FEMA flood designation). The lots will almost entirely stay out of the 500-year flood area, except lots 82-84, which will require a minimum floor elevation 1-ft above the 500-year flood elevation provided on the final plat.

4) KNOXVILLE - FARRAGUT - KNOX COUNTY GROWTH POLICY PLAN
a) The property is within the Urban Growth Boundary. The purposes of the Planned Growth Boundary designation are to encourage a reasonably compact pattern of development, promote the expansion of the Knoxville-Knox County economy, offer a wide range of housing choices, and coordinate the actions of the public and private sectors, particularly with regard to the provision of adequate roads, utilities, schools, drainage and other public facilities and services.

What's next?

+
Planning Commission decisions on Development Plans (DP) are final unless appealed.

Appeals can be filed with the Knox County Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) or a court of competent jurisdiction within 30 days of the Planning Commission's decision (Knox County, Tennessee Code of Ordinances, Appendix A, Zoning, 6.50.08).

Applicant

The Meadows at Shannon Valley

Southland Group, Inc./Josh Sanderson


Case History