Public Comments

December 6, 2023
at 12:18 PM

Matthew
37932

12-G-23-DP
Matthew (37932), December 6, 2023 at 12:18 PM

PLEASE see the attached letter regarding this illegal development. There is ZERO path forward due to this developers complete disregard of State Law and local Rules & Regulations. Quit wasting taxpayer money defending a developer over Knox County Taxpayer's safety and concerns. This development was determined illegal by Knox County Chancery Court and this staff/commission has no authority to approve as-is. We request you to DENY this plan to avoid a fifth or more lawsuit - The first lawsuit clarifies the illegalities of this plan and the wrongdoings of the previous commission. The next three lawsuits involve the current staff and commission as you have aided this developer and Amy Brooks to, yet again, illegally approve this development against our advisement.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231206121818.pdf

December 12, 2023
at 6:59 PM

Mike
37932

12-SF-23-C
Mike (37932), December 12, 2023 at 6:59 PM

I place my trust in you to use the existing laws as the governing framework for making any decisions related to this and all development in Hardin Valley. The developers are fully aware of these laws and if they are allowed to circumvent them by exceptions just because of their relationships, with a wink and a nod that they can go ahead and build with the knowledge that their position will be supported by the planning commission; it sets a terrible precedent.

View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231212185946.pdf

December 12, 2023
at 9:52 PM

Michael
37932

12-SF-23-C
Michael (37932), December 12, 2023 at 9:52 PM

Please see the attached .pdf letter/document. A summary is below. I sadly have to write again about the same topic and agenda item - this time in a new form - as I have previously - The Lantern Park subdivision. This project, owned and developed by Scott Smith, continues to be illegally pushed upon you as Commissioners. The idea is that if they keep on asking, keep on attempting to circumvent - and in fact blatantly not follow - local rules and ordinances as well as the law of the State of Tennessee, they could wear down anyone who stands in their way. Their mantra is essentially "might makes right. Please know that we will continue to vigorously oppose what we know to be right, what the judge has already ruled to be illegal, as well as what you - if you are being honest - know to be wrong. We respectfully ask that you DENY this plan before you, in accordance with, among other things, staff recommendation. It is not your job to bail out developers who seek "end arounds" established law and common sense
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231212215250.pdf

December 13, 2023
at 11:07 PM

Michele
37932

12-SF-23-C
Michele (37932), December 13, 2023 at 11:07 PM

It is ridiculous that the developers are greedy and after 4 lawsuits still trying to get away with doing what they want. We just want to maintain our road/entrance the way it is. There is no need to disturb that.

January 28, 2024
at 3:19 PM

Heather
37932

12-SF-23-C
Heather (37932), January 28, 2024 at 3:19 PM

We vehemently oppose this entire subdivision and plan, as the entirety of it is illegal, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park, as this variance is illegal and was granted illegally. Itâs incredibly disappointing that the planning commission continues to approve development after development without consideration for the impact on the community surrounding this and all the developments. Greater infrastructure needs to be implemented. This development is a blatant disregard for proper planning processes and highlights how corrupt this entire commission and planning process truly is.

January 28, 2024
at 3:20 PM

Heather
37932

12-G-23-DP
Heather (37932), January 28, 2024 at 3:20 PM

We vehemently oppose this entire subdivision and plan, as the entirety of it is illegal, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park, as this variance is illegal and was granted illegally. Itâs incredibly disappointing that the planning commission continues to approve development after development without consideration for the impact on the community surrounding this and all the developments. Greater infrastructure needs to be implemented. This development is a blatant disregard for proper planning processes and highlights how corrupt this entire commission and planning process truly is.

January 28, 2024
at 3:30 PM

Kim
37932

12-SF-23-C
Kim (37932), January 28, 2024 at 3:30 PM

This development was determined illegal by Knox County Chancery Court and this staff/commission has no authority to approve as-is. We request you to DENY this plan to avoid a fifth or more lawsuit - The first lawsuit clarifies the illegalities of this plan and the wrongdoings of the previous commission.

January 28, 2024
at 4:22 PM

Fred
37932

12-G-23-DP
Fred (37932), January 28, 2024 at 4:22 PM

I oppose this entire subdivision and plan, as the entirety of it is illegal, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park, as this variance is illegal and was granted illegally. Please reject this plan. Please work to preserve and promote smart growth in the county.

January 30, 2024
at 11:04 AM

Jaime
37932

12-SF-23-C
Jaime (37932), January 30, 2024 at 11:04 AM

The proposed development continues to include request for variances that they have created in their proposal. You cannot create your own hardship. This builder was on the planning commission at the time the original proposal was considered. Instead of pushing the rules he should have been an example to the building expectations Knox county currently has. Through litigation, our homeowners association has proven this to be illegal yet the only change has been a one lot reduction that does not address the variance issues. They also continue to build 5 homes on an illegal road location. We ask that you deny this concept plan.

January 30, 2024
at 12:58 PM

Caroline
37932

12-SF-23-C
Caroline (37932), January 30, 2024 at 12:58 PM

I'm a homeowner in Massey Creek for 7 years, and been and oppose the subdivision and plan. This development was determined by Knox County Chancery Court as illegally approved by the previous commission and ordered to be heard through Planning once again if they want to proceed. This developer has not addressed the illegal issues. For example, the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park is illegal and was granted illegally. Please reject this plan and influence the developer to adhere to the laws.

January 30, 2024
at 3:04 PM

Vonna
37932

12-SF-23-C
Vonna (37932), January 30, 2024 at 3:04 PM

I am a homeowner in the Massey Creek subdivision for over 5 years and I once again am writing to oppose the entire subdivision and plan. The plan developed is illegal due to the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park. This plan was granted illegal and therefore should be deemed illegal moving forward. Shame on the developer for being money hungry and putting innocent lives at risk.

January 30, 2024
at 4:07 PM

Tom
37932

12-SF-23-C
Tom (37932), January 30, 2024 at 4:07 PM

If what is proceeding has been deemed illegal with a wink and a nod to a builder who clearly appears to have some sort of inside track with friends, where and when does the line get drawn on illegalities? Why do we have any laws? Or do we not follow laws only when someone of importance or connection is inconvenienced? In this case the judge clearly has deemed what is going on as illegal. Yet the ruling is ignored. There is no democratic process here being upheld by our elected officials. Why should any of us follow any laws in Knox County?

January 30, 2024
at 4:32 PM

Mackenzie
37932

12-SF-23-C
Mackenzie (37932), January 30, 2024 at 4:32 PM

I oppose this plan, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park. This was granted illegally and is an illegal variance. The planning for Hardin Valley needs to be smart and follow the rules and regulations set forth by the planning commission. I urge you to push for this property and plan to be halted and stopped. Let's preserve the safety and well being of the people of this county. Thank you for your consideration.

January 30, 2024
at 6:17 PM

Chris
37932

12-SF-23-C
Chris (37932), January 30, 2024 at 6:17 PM

It’s mind blowing that this issue is constantly resurfacing when the build is in clear violation and they keep pursuing their agenda with Knox County. Can we please stop the madness and wasting tax payers money.

January 30, 2024
at 8:49 PM

Tanya
37932

12-SF-23-C
Tanya (37932), January 30, 2024 at 8:49 PM

I’m a homeowner in Massey Creek subdivision, and I ask that you deny this plan. Through litigation with our HOA, this development plan was deemed illegal by Knox County Chancery Court, as a result, this plan should be denied. The developer should be required to adhere to the law.

January 31, 2024
at 2:01 PM

Brandon
37932

12-G-23-DP
Brandon (37932), January 31, 2024 at 2:01 PM

I'm a homeowner in Massey Creek for 3 years and have been and still oppose the subdivision and plan. This development was determined by Knox County Chancery Court as illegally approved by the previous commission and ordered to be heard through Planning once again if they want to proceed. This developer has not addressed the illegal issues. The Massey Creek HOA has sued and won against this developer for the illegal variances granted. For example, the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park is illegal and was granted illegally. Please reject this plan and influence the developer to adhere to the laws.

4-U-25-RZ

Christopher
37914

4-U-25-RZ
Christopher (37914), April 9, 2025 at 3:38 PM

Town Hall East and the local residents met with the developer regarding this property. It was a productive meeting, but at this time, we are requesting that the R-3 designation be declined. We will work with the developer to come up with a more appropriate use of the property that addresses traffic issues and the privacy of the neighboring residents.

April 9, 2025
at 3:38 PM

April 30, 2025
at 10:23 PM

Debra & Sterling
37932

6-A-25-UR
Debra & Sterling (37932), April 30, 2025 at 10:23 PM

We reside in the Forest Mills Subdivision and this planned kennel became known to us by our HOA. We are 100% against the planning for this. The constant barking dogs are already a nuisance. There are numerous people who work from home and this will be a significant issue for those who do as well as our quiet time in the evenings and on the weekends.
This will also have a significant impact on the value of our homes and for the homes around us. If any of us would go to sell, this would certainly devalue the price of the homes and property. Please vote no on this.

April 30, 2025
at 10:26 PM

Sterling
37932

6-A-25-UR
Sterling (37932), April 30, 2025 at 10:26 PM

There are already issues with barking dogs for people who work from home. This would devalue our property, ruin the charm and appeal of our community. Concerned about increased traffic as well.

Kristen
37932

6-A-25-UR
Kristen (37932), May 1, 2025 at 12:08 AM

See attachment
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250501000802.pdf

May 1, 2025
at 12:08 AM

Brianna
37932

6-A-25-UR
Brianna (37932), May 3, 2025 at 7:54 PM

Forest Mill is a quiet neighborhood. Allowing a dog kennel to operate so closely is a nuisance to its residents and will negatively impact property values. If the dog kennel is to be allowed, can the applicant be required to move it further away from the neighborhood homes? The applicant has 26 acres, why is it necessary to place the kennel so close to a neighborhood that was established first? Please consider how you would feel about a dog kennel next to your home.

May 3, 2025
at 7:54 PM

Lisa
37932

6-A-25-UR
Lisa (37932), May 5, 2025 at 1:52 PM

I have lived in the Forest Mill subdivision for 20 years. We chose this location due to the serene and quiet attributes while having the benefit of a subdivision. Since this kennel has come to exist, I can no longer take my dogs out in my backyard because they react negatively to the constant barking from this kennel. We can also no longer enjoy a quiet and relaxed atmosphere in our backyard. Note that we are well down the hill from our neighbors that sit on the hill. They did share a video of them sitting in their backyard and I was appalled that they were having to deal with this. I urge to you vote no for this and preserve the quality of life that we, as residents, chose in the selection of our homes. I urge you to make a statement that it is not ok for someone to create what they want, when they want, without having it analyzed nor approved. I'm sure with any analysis or perhaps a brief visit to our neighborhood, you would definitely not approve this request which has created havoc in our neighborhood.

May 5, 2025
at 1:52 PM