---

Staff Recommendation

Staff has denied the requested waivers to increase the maximum sign height and sign area because the proposed sign is out of character with signage in the surrounding area and does not meet the intent of the TTCDA Design Guidelines, which is to promote a unified system of signage in the Technology Corridor, create a cohesive image for visitors traveling within the Corridor, and decrease the amount of clutter and visual disturbance along roadways.

The Certificate of Appropriateness for this request has been denied because the sign plans do not meet the signage requirements of the TTCDA Design Guidelines.

---

The applicant has requested approval of an existing sign in a shopping center located on the southeast corner of Hardin Valley Road and Valley Vista Road. The sign was constructed without a permit and later went through the Tennessee Technology Corridor Development Authority (TTCDA) after the fact, where it was denied twice.

This application includes two waiver requests: 1) to increase the allowed signage height by 64% and 2) to increase the size of the sign's message area by 200%. The TTCDA Guidelines state that waivers may be granted when "strict application would be infeasible and the objectives of the Authority and the general public health, safety, and welfare would not be adversely affected." Review of applications in the TO zone was granted to staff when the TTCDA board was disbanded, including the issuance of waivers.

The history of this sign is detailed below.

HISTORY OF YARD SIGNAGE FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT:
1. In 2008, the TTCDA approved a yard sign for this property (case 08.024.0). It met the TCCDA Design Guidelines regarding sign size, materials, and message contents, but a waiver was granted to allow the sign to be located 15 ft from the right-of-way.
2. The previous sign remained on site until being replaced by the new, existing tenant directory sign, which Google Street View shows occurred between May 2018 and May 2021.
3. December 2022: The sign company applied for a sign permit to install address numbers and individual panels to a tenant directory sign. Upon reviewing the application, Planning discovered a new sign had been constructed without TTCDA approval and without a permit, and the application was revised to review the sign in its entirety. The application was postponed at the December 2022 TTCDA meeting to allow for additional review of the sign's size, history, and permitting. It was heard at the January 2023 TTCDA meeting (12-A-22-TOS), where it was denied due to the size of the sign.
4. March 2023: The applicant requested to appeal the TTCDA decision to the Knox County Commission, but the appeal deadline (30 days) had expired. At the time, the TTCDA Administrative Rules and Procedures did not stipulate a time limit before a new application could be made for the same request, so the applicant applied for approval of the same sign in June 2023 (6-A-23-TOS) with the intent of appealing the decision afterward. The request was again denied by the TTCDA. The applicant did not appeal at that time.
5. Fall 2024: The Knox County Codes Administration and Enforcement Department visited the site and informed the applicant that the sign must be removed. A Notice of Violation was issued in September 2024 and again in December 2024. The applicant did not remove the sign, and it remains standing today.
6. Fall 2025: The sign company reached out on behalf of the property owner to appeal the 2023 denial and were informed the appeal deadline had passed and that, to appeal, the applicant would need to reapply to have a new decision that could be appealed.
7. January 2026: We received an appeal application from the property owner, whom we also informed of the appeal deadline and the need to reapply.
8. January 2026: We received the application for the sign. The applicant has requested to apply for the same sign structure as the previous 2023 submittal with minor changes to the internal message area and panel materials. Upon our review, we asked for information that was missing. The TO zone requires an action within 60 days of consideration of an application (Knox County Zoning Ordinance, Article 5.90.09). The length of time taken in this review is due to the time it took to receive the requested information, so that we had a complete application to review.
9. April 2026: We received the last of the information needed and issued the denial.

PURSUANT TO ARTICLE V, SECTION 4 OF THE TTCDA ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AND PROCEDURES, THE DECISION OF THE TTCDA TO APPROVE A SIGN MUST BE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:

A. CONFORMITY OF THE SIGN PROPOSAL WITH THE DESIGN GUIDELINES.
1. Sign Location: The sign is located approximately 18 ft from the right-of-way line as measured on KGIS. The TTCDA Design Guidelines require signs to be a minimum of 20 ft from the right-of-way. However, the applicant was granted a waiver reducing the front setback to 15 ft in 2008 (08.024.0), so the existing yard sign can be located that same distance and also benefit from that waiver approval.
2. Sign Materials: The sign materials consist of stucco walls extending to a wooden supports system on the ground and is bounded by treated wood trim on the sides of the sign and capped with a wood roof.
3. Sign Size:
a. Per Section 4.2 of the TTCDA Guidelines, pertaining to Subdivision and Planned Development Signs: 1) these types of signs are to be computed using a sign's message area; 2) the overall structure of a sign is excluded from calculating its size, and 3) all sides of the sign shall be used in calculating the total sign area.
i. The existing tenant directory sign's message area comprises 215 square feet (11.01 ft W (or 133 in) x 19.4 ft H (or 233 in) on each side, for an overall area of 430 sq ft.
Ii. At 440 sq ft, the message area of the sign exceeds the 200 sq ft maximum and a waiver would be required to increase the sign message area by 200% over that allowed for a for a subdivision/planned development (which includes tenant directory signs).
4. Sign Height:
a. Subdivision and Planned Development Signs may be a maximum of 12 ft tall.
i. At 19.67 ft, the sign is taller than the 12 ft maximum allowed for a planned development sign. The applicant requires a waiver to increase the sign height maximum by 64% over that allowed for a planned development.
5. Sign Lighting: The sign would be illuminated with ground-mounted flood lights aimed directly at the sign.
6. Individual panels and address numbers:
a. The proposed individual panels are to be signabond panels with brown and white faces and a matte laminate connected to the sign structure via treated wood risers. The risers are 1.5" in depth and 3.5" in height. The panels would be 12" in height and 27" wide. Each slat would feature the business name of the tenants in this commercial strip center.
B. There are 9 names proposed for the tenants currently housed in this strip center. One vacant panel will need to have the sign for its tenant added to the directory sign in a separate application. The proposed panels offer a uniform font and color scheme that aligns with the architectural color palette.
C. The address numbers would be directly mounted to the wood frame at the top of the sign. The numbers would be plastic, formed letters measuring 7" H x 27" W in the same shade of brown as the proposed panels. The sign is large enough to obstruct the view of businesses from eastbound passing traffic on Hardin Valley Road.

While the individual panels, letters, and lighting are consistent with the TTCDA Design Guidelines, the sign's size exceeds the maximum allowed. The sign is roughly 7 ft taller than the maximum allowed and nearly double the maximum allowable message area. While the Guidelines offer a waiver option as outlined above, Planning does not believe the size of the sign warrants a waiver and is in agreement with the TTCDA's previous denials. It is not "strictly infeasible" to construct a sign that meets the Design Guidelines. A sign that did so was located at this location previously. Additionally, the size of the sign is not in alignment with the intent of the TTCDA Design Guidelines since the waiver would exceed the maximums allowance by such high percentages. Planning believes approval could set a precedent for waivers of such magnitude, as it does not meet the standards for issuing a waiver, and the waiver needed would be so great.

B. RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE TO SIGNAGE ON NEARBY PROPERTIES, IN TERMS OF SIZE, LOCATION, MATERIALS, AND COLOR.
1. The sign is much larger than other signs in the area. The surrounding monument and tenant directory signs in other locations along this section of Hardin Valley Road meet the design standards for yard signs.
2. The requested waivers have been denied as they would allow a sign that is out of character with the area and out of scale with the development it serves.