July 10, 2025
Planning Commission meeting
Planning Commission meeting
Public Comments
99 Comments for
LLoyd (Murray)
-4638
-4638
5-C-24-SU
LLoyd (Murray) (-4638), May 19, 2024 at 6:23 PM
I am against this proposal #5-SC-24-C and 5-A-24-SULLoyd (Murray) (-4638), May 19, 2024 at 6:23 PM
this proposal will strain Melstone, and Monterey with more traffic than it is designed I do not appreciate the secret nature of this proposal for the neighborhood it affects
Carrie
37922
37922
6-A-24-UR
Carrie (37922), May 20, 2024 at 6:35 PM
If this property is zoned for single family, then it should STAY single family. There are no duplexes in this area. Duplexes are not needed and they look trashy. It’s bad enough that townhouses are being built on this road. Carrie (37922), May 20, 2024 at 6:35 PM
Homeowners on Westland Bay Drive
37922
37922
6-A-24-UR
Homeowners on Westland Bay Drive (37922), May 30, 2024 at 6:53 AM
The proposed driveway is right next to Westland Bay Drive. Even now it is not easy to turn onto Westland, and with cars and SUVs parked on the proposed driveway, the view of the oncoming, speeding traffic will be seriously jeopardized and will create a ripe situation for accidents.Homeowners on Westland Bay Drive (37922), May 30, 2024 at 6:53 AM
Approving this project will cause economic harm to homeowners on Westland Bay. Most people don't wish to buy a single-family home on a street that also has duplexes, so selling a house will be near impossible. Even cutting the trees that edge that property next to Westland Bay (where the proposed driveway is located) will reduce the economic value of all the homes on our street.
We very much hope the Planning Commission will deny the request based on these serious safety and economic concerns.
If however the MPC disregards these valid concerns and approves the application, please at least require that the plan is turned around so that the driveway is not next to Westland Bay but on the opposite side where the previous driveway was located, to avoid the serious safety issues. Please also require that the trees along our road not be cut, to somewhat mitigate the economic concerns of the homeowners on the street.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240530065326.pdf
Wayne
37922
37922
6-A-24-UR
Wayne (37922), June 3, 2024 at 1:45 AM
For more than 80 years residents in the immediate vicinity have fostered and developed single family residences. Sector Plans reflected community desires to maintain the single family heritage of this neighborhood. During rezoning we requested single family residential be maintained. Now, duplexes are being allowed in this zone, but that doesn't account for the character and history of this neighborhood. Allowing duplexes on this property establishes an unwanted and devaluing standard for this area of Westland Drive that should not be allowed. The Planning process should accomodate the historical legacy of this area, as Planning is the last bastion available to preserve the single family residential character of this neighborhood. The Immediate neighbors oppose such a degradation of development and request the single family character of our neighborhood be maintained.Wayne (37922), June 3, 2024 at 1:45 AM
William C & Deborah J
37922
37922
6-A-24-UR
William C & Deborah J (37922), June 6, 2024 at 6:31 PM
See attached letter expressing our concerns regarding this proposed development. Hoping the commissioners will take these into consideration when the time comes to vote on this measure. William C. & Deborah J. HallWilliam C & Deborah J (37922), June 6, 2024 at 6:31 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240606183144.pdf
Chris
37922
37922
6-A-24-UR
Chris (37922), June 6, 2024 at 9:49 PM
We live on Westland Bay Drive, the private road immediately west of the proposed Dream Subdivision; and we would like to express two general concerns with the concept plan.Chris (37922), June 6, 2024 at 9:49 PM
First, as planned, the separation between Westland Bay Drive (serving 9 residences) and the proposed 25' access easement (serving 5 dwelling units) appears inadequate. For safety purposes, rather than abandoning the existing driveway on the eastern side of the proposed subdivision, it should be utilized as the shared driveway for all 5 of the units in the new subdivision.
Second, to help discourage use of our private road as access and parking for the proposed subdivision, a fence or other permanent barrier should be required along the entire boundary of the proposed Lots 1, 2 and 3 with Westland Bay Drive.
Jim and Cheryl
37922
37922
6-A-24-UR
Jim and Cheryl (37922), June 7, 2024 at 10:22 AM
Please see the attached letter which expresses our concerns with the proposed subdivision plan.Jim and Cheryl (37922), June 7, 2024 at 10:22 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240607102219.pdf
Homeowners Westland Bay
37922
37922
6-A-24-UR
Homeowners Westland Bay (37922), June 11, 2024 at 9:48 AM
We agree with previously expressed concerns and hope the MPC will deny the application. But if the MPC decides to approve the project, we ask that it be a conditional approval with the following requirements added to previous requests.Homeowners Westland Bay (37922), June 11, 2024 at 9:48 AM
The plan for the duplexes needs to be turned around (180 degrees, west to east) so that the 2 duplexes connect directly with the gravel driveway proposed for the third property. There is no need for a second, concrete driveway. This change will reduce the serious safety issues in turning onto Westland Drive from Westland Bay.
The garage for Lot 1 should be moved from its proposed location northwest of the house to southeast of the house to connect directly with the gravel driveway.
No trees along Westland Bay (bordering all three lots) should be cut.
The suggested wooden fence along Westland Bay should be about 6 feet tall and should not end at Westland Drive. To avoid people walking around the fence in either direction, the fence should turn at a right angle at Westland Drive, run along Westland Drive, and end at the gravel driveway.
Westland Bay Homeowners
37922
37922
6-A-24-UR
Westland Bay Homeowners (37922), June 11, 2024 at 9:52 AM
We request that the application (6-A-24-UR) be denied, not only for all the concerns expressed so far, but because of possible future development on Westland Bay by the applicant. It is likely that he is considering buying the large wooded tract on our street. He has already had it surveyed. It is also possible that he may buy the property at 1216 Westland Bay which the owner has tried selling many times. His plan may be to cram all this area with duplexes, which could result in about 20 duplexes at the small size he is planning. This may explain why he calls a plan for 2 duplexes and 1 ranch house a 'subdivision.' It would mean about 40 new families on a street where there have been only 9 single-family homes for 35 years. The homeowners on Westland Bay do not want a developer to encroach on our peaceful neighborhood with duplexes (possibly a string of them to come) and destroy the quiet character and the natural beauty of our single-family residential street. (Please read further details and concerns in the attachment.)Westland Bay Homeowners (37922), June 11, 2024 at 9:52 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240611095224.pdf
Homeowners on Westland Bay Drive
37922
37922
6-A-24-UR
Homeowners on Westland Bay Drive (37922), July 6, 2024 at 10:31 AM
Homeowners on Westland Bay Drive request the MPC to deny the application for all the reasons mentioned in the 8 prior comments. Homeowners on Westland Bay Drive (37922), July 6, 2024 at 10:31 AM
However, if the MPC supports the staff recommendation to approve with conditions, please add another condition that the staff overlooked.
A fence is needed along the west side of the duplexes to ensure that construction trucks do not park on our private street. If they do, they will block access to emergency vehicles, delivery trucks, trash pick-up, etc. because our street is unusually narrow.
Also, the fence needs to be designed to prevent parking on our private street later by guests or workers coming to the duplexes. In addition to impeding access to our street if they park near the end, the county needs to ensure that no one other than legitimate visitors to our private street be allowed to park on it.
The fence should continue at a right angle along the south side of the lot to discourage visitors to the duplexes from parking on our street and simply walking around the fence. It should be set back a bit so as not to obscure the view of the traffic on Westland from the end of our street. All this should be a critical requirement for the approval process.
Jennifer
37922
37922
6-A-24-UR
Jennifer (37922), July 7, 2024 at 11:12 PM
Duplexes are "Uses Permitted on Review" and NOT a guaranteed land use based on our Knox County zoning regulations, as I understand it. This portion of Westland Drive has NO multi-family residences and I strongly believe it should remain single family only! The presence of duplexes will lower adjacent housing values and that is not fair to the many people who have lived here a very long time. Just because we are in an overall planned growth area does not mean we need to jam in several multi-family units on lots designated for a single family home. Westland has already endured the addition of a significant number of multifamily units at the Pellissippi, Westland exchange. Being "consistent" with the comprehensive plan is vague and insufficient reasoning in the staff recommendation. In actuality it is entirely inconsistent with our neighborhood along Westland. I respectfully request denial of this proposed land use.Jennifer (37922), July 7, 2024 at 11:12 PM
Janice
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Janice (37914), December 20, 2024 at 4:16 PM
I thought about telling you how bad the traffic is and lack of respect for the traffic laws are in this area, and the noise from it and what an additional 1500+ cars and trucks along with more construction vehicles would do to the already inadequate roads we have, by the building of 596 apartments and 77 town houses on Delrose Dr. I was in hopes the 15 members would care enough to come and observe the area from James White Parkway to Delrose Dr and down to Holston Hills and Boyds Bridge Pike intersection and talk with the residents here. Come at different times of the day and different days. This way you could make a truly informed decision and not rely on "experts" giving their opinions of surveys that don't tell everything. There is a lot to tell, if you care to ask.
Janice (37914), December 20, 2024 at 4:16 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20241220161606.pdf
Janice
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Janice (37914), December 20, 2024 at 4:23 PM
I thought about telling you how bad the traffic is and lack of respect for the traffic laws are in this area, and the noise from it and what an additional 1500+ cars and trucks along with more construction vehicles would do to the already inadequate roads we have, by the building of 596 apartments and 77 town houses on Delrose Dr. I was in hopes the 15 members would care enough to come and observe the area from James White Parkway to Delrose Dr and down to Holston Hills and Boyds Bridge Pike intersection and talk with the residents here. Come at different times of the day and different days. This way you could make a truly informed decision and not rely on "experts" giving their opinions of surveys that don't tell everything. There is a lot to tell, if you care to ask.
Thank you respectfully, Janice (37914), December 20, 2024 at 4:23 PM
Tracy
37189
37189
12-A-24-PD
Tracy (37189), January 8, 2025 at 6:22 PM
Please see attached statement. Thanks. Tracy (37189), January 8, 2025 at 6:22 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250108182209.pdf
Robert
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Robert (37914), January 14, 2025 at 12:14 PM
An added issue regarding the proposed Delrose development and the growing traffic problem on Delrose Drive, which this development will present, is the existing new added development now being constructed on Holston Road across Holston River Park. The traffic from this large addition to an existing development will also dump on to Delrose Drive either from Boyd’s Bridge Road or from a very curvy River Side Drive along the Holston River. The access from this development will probably be mostly from the safer direction of Boyd’s Bridge Road on to Delrose Drive. This traffic will then merge into the traffic from the Delrose Development primary entrance making a very large problem for a two lane road. These types of developments now being proposed within residential areas and not more vacant commercial and industrial areas, as we see now being developed, are going to present a major change in these historically single family neighborhoods. Safety within these neighborhoods I believe is being greatly affected and will be an ongoing threat to many Knoxville families.Robert (37914), January 14, 2025 at 12:14 PM
Christina
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Christina (37914), January 15, 2025 at 7:21 PM
I live in Holston Hills Neighborhood. This development is going to pour too many people into our cherished historical community. From Delrose there are 2 ways to the interstate, one being through our neighborhood. There is 1 way to the nearest grocery store, through our neighborhood. The traffic we have now is more than enough. Has there been any consideration to creating a different way to access Asheville hwy? Has any research been done to see how this development affects the neighborhoods? As it stands now Delrose is too small and curvy to support the vehicles on it much less the bicyclers, walkers, and occasional stray pet or animal being dodged by people driving too fast or dump trucks that cannot see clearly. I drive this road to and from work downtown several times a week. It is NOT a high traffic road. I have heard that the developers think so many residents are going to be biking, which is funny, but is the city planning to put in a fully enforced bike lane? And if so where? Ditches and houses all around. Are stop signs and red lights going in? How are the parks on Riverside headed downtown going to be impacted? Foot and bike traffic safety is swim at your own risk currently. Thank you for your time with my concerns! Christina (37914), January 15, 2025 at 7:21 PM
Robert
14
14
12-A-24-PD
Robert (14), January 16, 2025 at 10:01 AM
After further study of this proposed development, I now believe that the traffic issue is not the most critical issue regarding the successful approval of not just a variance, but the entire development. Within this proposal there is an alternative proposal shown which, in my opinion, serves to actually threaten an adverse affect that the neighborhood in which this development is located will experience if the variance they seek is not approved. This alternative proposal is a terrible “Military barracks” looking plan that would do a lot of harm to this neighborhood’s ability to continue as a livable environment and greatly affect the value of their properties. This threat now creates, I believe, a mistrust not only within the affected neighborhood, but also a mistrust of the overall process of any planning in this city. When a process is allowed to threaten the people it serves in order to achieve their goals rather than serving the citizenry, then it’s mission of service to the community becomes questionable.Robert (14), January 16, 2025 at 10:01 AM
Peggy
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Peggy (37914), January 22, 2025 at 11:39 AM
Please see attached pdfPeggy (37914), January 22, 2025 at 11:39 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250122113928.pdf
Jennifer
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Jennifer (37914), January 27, 2025 at 5:53 PM
I am really concerned about the project. Estimates about traffic indicate two times what we have now which I don’t believe. If true with two times the amount of traffic comes two times the amount of polluting emissions that come with the vehicles. Aside from the impact on the wonderful wildlife that comes through the area, it impacts our air quality. We already have to deal with Vulcan Materials’ cement dust especially since they moved their blasting area closer to the road but also the dump on the other end of Delrose that apparently cannot keep mud off the road. When that mud dries god knows what’s in the dust. Our natural filters ,the trees, will be cut down. East Knoxville has always been a dumping ground for whatever Knoxville does not want in other parts of the city/county. Please consider our quality of life in this project.Jennifer (37914), January 27, 2025 at 5:53 PM
Mark
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Mark (37914), January 28, 2025 at 6:02 PM
My wife and I attended the Delrose Drive community meeting last night at Williams Creek Golf Course with the developers of the large proposed apartment complex now being considered in this neighborhood. The message we heard from the Delrose community residents was that the proposed development was much too large for their environment. It seemed to us that the development team was not willing to offer any reduction of the project, and was absolutely resistant to any compromise that might make the residents more comfortable with their actions, The question that arises is....why is it that developers, especially out of town developers, can come into town and get what they want and refuse to offer any reasonable, and I mean reasonable, compromise that can fit into a local community? The planning Commission needs to encourage these developers to work with these communities in order to build positive projects in their environments. Why should the developer have any special privilege over Knoxville residents. Mark (37914), January 28, 2025 at 6:02 PM
Stephen
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Stephen (37914), February 4, 2025 at 4:18 PM
Please find attached PDF.Stephen (37914), February 4, 2025 at 4:18 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250204161844.pdf
Diane
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Diane (37914), February 7, 2025 at 11:04 AM
This project seems to use exceptions in order to squeeze too many units onto this site and fail to meet Planned Development requirements to provide a well designed and livable environment not only for the population within the development but also for the surrounding community.Diane (37914), February 7, 2025 at 11:04 AM
Mark
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Mark (37914), February 22, 2025 at 9:03 AM
After reviewing the most recent plan for this project submitted I believe the Architects have done a decent job addressing the community amenities required by the Planning Commission. This said, this does not address the fact that the affected community has had very little, if any, voice in the development of this project. We have spent time with them in circulating a petition and found absolutely no support for the nature of what is happening in their environment. They overwhelmingly believe that this project could of had a positive affect by developing a neighborhood of small to medium size homes instead of the smothering density now being proposed. We now wonder, where were the representative voices that represented their concerns as the Rn1 zoning was replaced by the Rn4 zoning allowing the conflict we now see between the developer and the residents? We have several times tried to reach these people and had no success. What do they think their jobs as their constituents now sit at home trying to envision the elephant soon to be standing in their back yards?Mark (37914), February 22, 2025 at 9:03 AM
Mark
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Mark (37914), February 25, 2025 at 11:05 AM
At the risk of posting too many comments on this project, I believe there is now an issue within the most recent proposal submitted which will have a significant impact on the Delrose Drive users and needs to have serious dialogue. The Brooks Avenue traffic exit from this project has been removed and now forces the overwhelming traffic discharge from this project on to Delrose Drive. Delrose Drive is a 21 foot wide connector, not 24 foot as stated in the proposal, and Brooks Ave. ,within 300 to 400 ft, of the needed exit, is a 25 to 27 foot wide arterial road that leads directly into downtown Knoxville. Delrose Drive leads primarily either to James White Parkway or Neyland Drive which leads to Kingston Pike, now threatened by a huge increase in traffic moving out from Cumberland Drive. This doesn’t seem to be a very well thought out plan for traffic movement. We believe that Brooks Ave. should share in the traffic flow from this project giving the users the opportunity to access downtown more easily and ease the numbers exiting onto Delrose Drive, a narrower road that leads either to an overloaded interstate or an overloaded major road coming from West Town or the Cumberland canyon of apartments.Mark (37914), February 25, 2025 at 11:05 AM
Mark
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Mark (37914), February 26, 2025 at 11:38 PM
P.S. apparently Brooks Ave. is expected to be accessed by way of Riverside Road, a 16 foot wide strip of asphalt that two cars can barely pass each other, and who is it that will widen this road and move all of the utility pole that line each side so that it can accommodate possibly 500 to 600, or more, cars exiting or entering this project? Please step up and reveal yourself if you have this intent. The neighborhood deserves an answer.Mark (37914), February 26, 2025 at 11:38 PM
Mark
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Mark (37914), March 1, 2025 at 4:39 PM
Taking a closer look at the expected Riverside Road exit from this project , now that the direct Brooks Avenue exit has been eliminated. Everyone living in this project wanting to go downtown will now be taking the Riverside Road exit on to Brooks Avenue directly in front of Sarah Moore Green Elementary School. There could be hundreds of vehicles entering this school zone at any time creating very dangerous conditions. Conditions, we believe, much more dangerous than the direct Brooks Avenue exit which has at least 450 feet of visibility down the slope in question. The street at this point is 21 ft. Wide, but within 450 ft. of Brooks Drive becoming 25 to 27 ft. wide with houses set back being a more safe distance than on Delrose Drive.Mark (37914), March 1, 2025 at 4:39 PM
Lisa
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Lisa (37914), March 3, 2025 at 10:12 PM
Some of your data is incorrect. Riverside Drive & Delrose Drive are heavily used by cyclists. Also I saw no mention of the many dump trucks traveling on Delrose to and from the dump. Also, when I-40 backs up, travel apps lead travelers, including tractor trailers, down these same roads. A development of this size greatly needs a turning lane at its entrance to avoid accidents and a large paved cycling path is needed on all of Delrose and Riverside.Lisa (37914), March 3, 2025 at 10:12 PM
Please consider these additions to keep traffic moving and keep cyclists safe!
Mark
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Mark (37914), March 4, 2025 at 4:06 PM
There seems to be some opinion going around that in the second submittal of this project the developer has made some changes which allows more green space and less driveway area. I do not see this. I see very little change
In both green space and drive/parking area. The long 800 to 900 ft parking lot drives have very little greenery and most of the green spaces cannot be viewed from these areas. The green spaces are mostly either behind the buildings or in the middle of the quadrangle groups of buildings, with limited opportunity to experience these spaces, only the widely spaced trees along the long straight parking lot roads are part of the green space experience.
More open green space needs to be a part of the drive/parking areas. This I believe can only be accomplished with fewer units on this site. Please prove me wrong and make the automobile spaces more environmentally treated and more comfortably used by the residents and visitors.Mark (37914), March 4, 2025 at 4:06 PM
Tracy
37189
37189
12-A-24-PD
Tracy (37189), March 9, 2025 at 7:20 PM
After reviewing the agenda for this week's meeting, I realize that there is another property on Riverside Road being discussed. The property at 1524 is a development of 10 homes. The entry is on the road but not across from the Delrose development. This is another reason that an entrance should not be approved on Riverside Road. Tracy (37189), March 9, 2025 at 7:20 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250309192042.pdf
Kimberley
37909
37909
12-A-24-PD
Kimberley (37909), March 10, 2025 at 4:38 PM
I am writing to appeal to the commission to focus on the concerns of the East Knoxville community regarding this project. Kimberley (37909), March 10, 2025 at 4:38 PM
Please dont limit your impression of the number of oppositions to this project by the number of people present at the meeting, as most are unable to attend daytime meetings during a work week. You should look at this project taking into consideration the impact on public utilities, road access and community opinion.
Consider what your concerns would be if you lived in our neighborhood!
Maybe the developer could work with the community and consider single family homes to tie into the existing community?
In conclusion, I strongly urge you to reconsider this proposed housing development, I believe that this project is simply not the right fit for our neighborhood.
Thank you for your consideration, although the original rezoning protests of this project were previously ignored, I would hope you would give this the consideration deserved
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250310163800.pdf
Robert H.
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Robert H. (37914), March 13, 2025 at 10:52 AM
I am voicing my concerns about the proposed project that in my opinion will over tax the road with increased traffic and impact the surrounding area (neighborhood) in a negative manner.Robert H. (37914), March 13, 2025 at 10:52 AM
Matthew
37923
37923
5-E-25-RZ
Matthew (37923), April 26, 2025 at 12:26 PM
See attachment.Matthew (37923), April 26, 2025 at 12:26 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250426122618.pdf
Debra & Sterling
37932
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. Debra & Sterling (37932), April 30, 2025 at 10:23 PM
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.
Sterling
37932
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. Sterling (37932), April 30, 2025 at 10:26 PM
Kristen
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Kristen (37932), May 1, 2025 at 12:08 AM
See attachmentKristen (37932), May 1, 2025 at 12:08 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250501000802.pdf
Diane
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Diane (37914), May 1, 2025 at 6:13 PM
I represent a large group of people in the neighborhood that are opposed to this request for zoning exceptions. Attached is a petition signed by approximately 200 people. While housing options and density are needed, this property is surrounded by low density RN1, and we believe these exceptions would allow for an even larger multifamily development than is allowed under standard RN4. These exceptions would create a development dramatically out of scale with the neighborhood, overburden existing streets and utilities, and create a safety issue in the surrounding neighborhood. We respectfully request the staff, and the planning commission, turn down this request. Diane (37914), May 1, 2025 at 6:13 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250501181347.pdf
Brianna
37932
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. Brianna (37932), May 3, 2025 at 7:54 PM
Ronald
37931
37931
5-I-25-RZ
Ronald (37931), May 5, 2025 at 11:27 AM
We are residents of this neighborhood and our property boundaries this lot. We have lived here 50+ years and raised our children and grandchildren here. This lot is surrounded by residential housing and there is not a business within a mile at this time. We are afraid if it is rezoned commercial, it will damage the family atmosphere of the neighborhood and influence lower property values. We are asking you to deny this request and leave it residential for the betterment of the families located here. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.Ronald (37931), May 5, 2025 at 11:27 AM
Lisa
37932
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.Lisa (37932), May 5, 2025 at 1:52 PM
5-C-25-PA
E (37922), May 5, 2025 at 2:28 PM
I would like to strongly discourage the change in zoning to Corridor Commercial. I live nearby and in that decade there have been numerous vehicle accidents on that section of Northshore due to the blind hills on both sides. Very dangerous to turn in and out of with very little shoulder. There is no way to have a turning lane or light either because of Bluegrass Lake. Very dangerous! E (37922), May 5, 2025 at 2:28 PM
Adair
37922
37922
5-C-25-PA
Adair (37922), May 6, 2025 at 7:42 AM
When you read the language of the church's proposal you see that all they want is a new sign. The city should just give them the ability to do this without having to rezone. I agree that any business on this stretch of Northshore would be unhelpful, but that's not what the current owners want either. This seems more like an issue with FUD not replacing the sign in like manner as agreed upon. I live in the neighborhood next door and can attest to the fact that dealing with FUD was limiting at times and we're still dealing with issues with landscaping leftover from their work. So let the church replace their sign without all of the red tape and be done with it.Adair (37922), May 6, 2025 at 7:42 AM
Corina
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Corina (37914), May 6, 2025 at 10:18 AM
I have requested to speak, but would like to submit supporting documents for consideration. Corina (37914), May 6, 2025 at 10:18 AM
Thank you.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250506101822.pdf
Wendell
37924
37924
11-F-24-DP
Wendell (37924), May 6, 2025 at 3:08 PM
To whom it may concern. I want to bring to your attention AGAIN about the flooding that is happening at Neals Landing, and its a direct result of the continuing development of the property at Neals Landing. Sinking creek only overflowed into my property before the development approximately 20 feet. The development is causing the creek to overflow its banks approximately 100 feet now. It comes within 15 feet of my home. The property thats slated for development now floods, and no one from the planning commission seems to care. When lives are lost because of the flooding maybe someone will come and help us fix the problem. Staff has come out and basically said nothing can be done. Someone from the planning commission has to take notice and think about how all this development in the wrong places is affecting current residents of Knox county. I expect some to get in touch with me as soon as possible. This was supposed to happen several weeks ago but it seems it feel on deaf ears. Wendell (37924), May 6, 2025 at 3:08 PM
Shane
37931
37931
5-I-25-RZ
Shane (37931), May 6, 2025 at 4:05 PM
The parcel of land, 5240 Schaad Road is adjacent to 7223 Ball Camp Pike. I, respectfully object to the rezoning proposal from agricultural to commercial. There are deep concerns that it could negatively affect the value, the use or enjoyment of the property, and alter the character of the neighborhood community! Thank you.Shane (37931), May 6, 2025 at 4:05 PM
Neil
37917
37917
12-A-24-PD
Neil (37917), May 6, 2025 at 7:24 PM
I am writing in support of the proposed development. It seems like an excellent concept for a development and another good way to increase housing supply in Knoxville.Neil (37917), May 6, 2025 at 7:24 PM
Steven
37923
37923
12-A-24-PD
Steven (37923), May 6, 2025 at 8:45 PM
This offers crucial housing for the middle class and will build a flourishing community. Steven (37923), May 6, 2025 at 8:45 PM
Hector
37902
37902
12-A-24-PD
Hector (37902), May 6, 2025 at 9:33 PM
Knoxville is a beautiful city with huge potential, we have got to get in front of the curve and adapt before we become late adopters of mixed zoning housing and businesses. A great step forward is more dense residential like this. Hector (37902), May 6, 2025 at 9:33 PM
Tracy
37189
37189
12-A-24-PD
Tracy (37189), May 6, 2025 at 9:43 PM
Please see attached comments. Thanks. Tracy (37189), May 6, 2025 at 9:43 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250506214354.pdf
Lester
37931
37931
5-I-25-RZ
Lester (37931), May 6, 2025 at 9:51 PM
We have lived here for 54 years. This is a residential area and would Appreciate you denying this request for commercial. This property should only be residential, only has drainfield for 1 bedroom and no water. Please consider our request. It doesn't have a driveway either.Lester (37931), May 6, 2025 at 9:51 PM
Forrest
37922
37922
12-A-24-PD
Forrest (37922), May 6, 2025 at 9:55 PM
This looks like just a fine development. We need more housing of all types in Knoxville. The population base creates the tax base that enables the continued supply of public services. I am sure the developer has done their due diligence on the amenities needed to attract renters. That risk should be on them, not the planning commission to worry about. It looks reasonable.Forrest (37922), May 6, 2025 at 9:55 PM
Sam
37921
37921
12-A-24-PD
Sam (37921), May 6, 2025 at 10:23 PM
This looks like a really promising development with serious consideration for pedestrians. We love the tree cover and the park space! This project will be a great part of the solution to our housing shortage in Knoxville.Sam (37921), May 6, 2025 at 10:23 PM
Brianne
37912
37912
12-A-24-PD
Brianne (37912), May 7, 2025 at 12:35 AM
I am in support for more quality and affordable multi-family housing and apartment complexes such as this project. More attainable and quality housing for all!Brianne (37912), May 7, 2025 at 12:35 AM
Geoffrey
37902
37902
12-A-24-PD
Geoffrey (37902), May 7, 2025 at 8:33 AM
I am an architect in Knoxville and unfortunately not a home owner. We need more housing. The lack of housing has caused the price of homes and rent to be inflated, hurting anyone who doesn't own property. More supply will reduce demand and make the cost of living less daunting. The design seems attractive and appropriately dense. These look to be able to provide a friendly home for many people. My only concern is that this area could benefit from a grocery store or at least a local convenience store. 100% residential isn't ideal for a community.Geoffrey (37902), May 7, 2025 at 8:33 AM
Jake
37920
37920
12-A-24-PD
Jake (37920), May 7, 2025 at 9:57 AM
I'm writing in to advocate 'in part' for the Cardinal Place development, and to encourage the Planning Commission to suggest changes. I agree with the Staff assessment of the development's public benefits. Too many of the benefits listed appear to be inaccessible by the public, and I'm also skeptical of the number of parking spots that the development has proposed. I would like to see a portion of the development set aside for Section 8 housing. Jake (37920), May 7, 2025 at 9:57 AM
That said, I think we must always weigh the more intangible public benefits of higher density against the much more tangible benefits of community spaces. On balance, I think that Cardinal Place would be beneficial to Knoxville by increasing the amount of housing available to Knoxville residents, and by increasing the density of the city, and I encourage the Planning Commission to find a way to work with the developers to find a compromise.
Heather
37931
37931
5-I-25-RZ
Heather (37931), May 7, 2025 at 10:46 AM
I am writing as a resident of [address redacted] to formally express my opposition to the proposed rezoning of the property located at 5240 Schaad Rd from residential to commercial use.Heather (37931), May 7, 2025 at 10:46 AM
Our neighborhood is characterized by its peaceful residential nature, and introducing a commercial entity would disrupt this tranquility. The potential increase in traffic, noise, and activity associated with commercial operations raises significant concerns about safety, especially for children and pedestrians, and the overall quality of life for residents.
Furthermore, such a change could set a precedent for future commercial encroachments, potentially altering the character of our community irreversibly. I urge the Commission to consider the long-term implications of this rezoning and to prioritize the well-being and preferences of existing residents.
Chris
37919
37919
12-A-24-PD
Chris (37919), May 7, 2025 at 11:03 AM
I support this development. We need more affordable (and all) housing. This concept plan provides the kind housing we need and is compatible with the surrounding land uses. This reminds me of the apartment and townhouse developments in Sequoyah Hills, which are an asset to that neighborhood. More thoughtful density like this will increase walkability, transit viability, and neighborhood serving business opportunity. Please support/allow this development. Chris (37919), May 7, 2025 at 11:03 AM
Scott
37931
37931
5-I-25-RZ
Scott (37931), May 7, 2025 at 11:24 AM
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rezoning of the property located at 5240 Schaad Road. This property is entirely surrounded by single-family homes, and there are currently no other commercial or business establishments in the immediate vicinity. Introducing a business into this residential neighborhood would significantly disrupt the character and peacefulness of the area.Scott (37931), May 7, 2025 at 11:24 AM
As a homeowner of the adjacent property, I am deeply concerned about the potential impact. The proposed rezoning would likely result in an eyesore and a nuisance to the community. Additionally, the property lacks essential infrastructure for commercial use. It currently has:
No water connection
No access to public sewer services
Soil conditions that support only a single-bathroom sewage system
No existing entrance or driveway
These limitations further underscore the unsuitability of the site for business development.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the rezoning application be denied in order to preserve the integrity and residential nature of our neighborhood.
Jack
37917
37917
12-A-24-PD
Jack (37917), May 7, 2025 at 11:29 AM
The submitted plan is an excellent one. The inclusion of a street grid and a staggering approach to density will create a lovely area in East Knoxville. This plan should be approved. If the city is serious about wanting their "8,000 units," a plan as well thought out as this should have no issues finding support.Jack (37917), May 7, 2025 at 11:29 AM
Michelle
37931
37931
5-I-25-RZ
Michelle (37931), May 7, 2025 at 11:34 AM
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed rezoning of the residential land located at 5240 Schaad Rd, Knoxville, TN, from residential to commercial use. Michelle (37931), May 7, 2025 at 11:34 AM
First , our neighborhood has always been a peaceful residential area, and rezoning this land for commercial use would disrupt the quiet and close-knit nature of our community. Turning this land into a commercial zone would not only affect the character of the area but could also lead to additional commercial development in the future.
Additionally, traffic in our area has already increased significantly with the construction of the new road. Our neighborhood has sidewalks used daily by families, children, and elderly residents for walking and recreation. With increased traffic, many residents would no longer feel safe using these sidewalks which undermines the walkability of our community.
Lastly, a shift to commercial use could have negative consequences for nearby property values and diminish the residential appeal of our area. Noise, lighting, and increased activity from commercial operations could deter future families from settling in what has always been a peaceful residential zone.
For these reasons, I respectfully urge the commission to deny the rezoning request and preserve the residential nature of our neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration.
Chris
37931
37931
5-I-25-RZ
Chris (37931), May 7, 2025 at 11:43 AM
I am writing as a concerned neighbor to formally oppose the proposed rezoning of the parcel located at 5240 Schaad Rd from residential/agricultural to commercial use.Chris (37931), May 7, 2025 at 11:43 AM
This proposed change is concerning for several reasons:
1. The surrounding area is primarily residential and agricultural, fostering a peaceful and rural environment. A shift to commercial zoning would not only disrupt the character of the neighborhood but also contradict the original intent of land use in this area.
2. Commercial development typically brings a significant increase in vehicle traffic, including delivery trucks and customer vehicles. This rise in traffic would pose safety risks to local residents, particularly children and pedestrians.
3. Rezoning may lead to noise pollution, light pollution, and runoff that could affect local farmland, wildlife, and water supplies.
4. Commercialization could result in decreased property values and negatively affect our quality of life.
I respectfully urge the board to reject this rezoning request and preserve the integrity and intent of our communitys land use plan.
Ryan
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Ryan (37914), May 7, 2025 at 12:36 PM
I would ask the members of the Planning Commission to please consider the zip code of the commenter when taking these online comment submissions into account; there seem to be a lot of people without 37914 zip codes showing up to support this development in the last few days. They will not be affected by this and have likely been encouraged to comment because of some association with either the developer or the architect. Ryan (37914), May 7, 2025 at 12:36 PM
This development in its current form will be bad for the surrounding community. The public benefits they propose do not meet the criteria the city provides for the Planned Development process and are simply apartment complex amenities with no benefit to the wider community. The increased noise, traffic, and reduction in privacy that the rest of the community will experience as a result will reduce quality of life and enjoyment in the surrounding area.
Comments continued in attached PDF
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250507123608.pdf
Mark
37934
37934
12-A-24-PD
Mark (37934), May 7, 2025 at 12:54 PM
I oppose this project because it fails to directly address affordability and instead reinforces Knoxvilles growing dependence on rental housing dominated by profit-driven landlords. This model extracts wealth from residents without offering them long-term stability or equity. We need developments that empower our community through home ownership, not just expand a modern form of feudalism with no path to ownership. Without meaningful commitments to affordability and for-sale housing, this plan serves investors and not the people of Knoxville. Worse, neighbors who have voiced valid concerns are being steamrolled, which is yet another sign that this project prioritizes investor returns over genuine community respect or input.Mark (37934), May 7, 2025 at 12:54 PM
Justin
37919
37919
12-A-24-PD
Justin (37919), May 7, 2025 at 1:52 PM
We have had the privilege of teaching hundreds of our neighbors about the fundamentals of real estate investing over the last 4 years in free events every month. Between that and our work serving families as local real estate agents we are having discussions about housing and affordability every day with both the consumers and providers of housing. Justin (37919), May 7, 2025 at 1:52 PM
Given the attractiveness and popularity of Knoxville - the cost of living, the arts, the Urban Wilderness, culture, natural beauty and the people here that have made this a wonderful place to raise my family - we know that we will continue to see increased population growth. The only solution for growth is to provide more housing. We need only look to the challenges that Hardin Valley faces to see the consequences of only approving single family housing.
If we can create denser housing, especially close to our urban core, we can build for the future of Knoxville. The vision of this project, especially with the use of internal parking, green space and the mix of townhomes and apartments would ultimately benefit the community. We support denser housing in ALL of Knoxville as the only way out is to build for a better future.
Amy
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Amy (37932), May 7, 2025 at 2:01 PM
As you review the proposal submitted by this business owner, I implore you to consider the surrounding properties, because this property owner does not appear to care. The barking from this kennel has ruined what used to be the solitude of my back yard. The barking is so bad at times that it is channeled down my chimney and into my living room via my fireplace, so even if I have all my doors and windows closed I cant escape the noise. I have tried calling the kennel, sending a letter, and acting like a crazy person by banging on a pot to try to communicate my frustration with the property owner. I was told that it is was a farm, dogs would bark, they were exempt from noise ordinances because they are a business, I should be happy it wasnt a subdivision, and I should feel protected by the dogs. I never thought I would see the day when I wanted a subdivision instead of a farm bordering my property. The nearest parts of the kennel and its dog pens are approximately 200 feet from my back door. Sound is projected straight to the backside of my home. I have recorded many examples of how bad the barking can be. I welcome people to come to my home and see it first-hand. Please consider what is being proposed by this business in relation to the homes surrounding this business.Amy (37932), May 7, 2025 at 2:01 PM
Matthew
37923
37923
5-E-25-RZ
Matthew (37923), May 7, 2025 at 2:02 PM
Changing the place type and zoning will not affect the traffic flow in any way, as the church is making NO changes to the land parcel other than adding a sign (AND CANNOT MAKE ANY CHANGES IN THE FUTURE DUE TO DEED RESTRICTIONS). The property will always remain a church and can NEVER turn into a business of any kind. Traffic flow and patterns will not change because our property is rezoned for CA. This, in our opinion, is an irrelevant argument put forward by the Planning Staff, grasping at straws to prevent our requests from being realized.Matthew (37923), May 7, 2025 at 2:02 PM
One of the reasons the Planning Staff is arguing for denial is that there have been no recent utility changes that warrant rezoning. This is simply untrue, another attempt to grasp at straws. FUD recently ran a completely new sewer line along the front of the church's property that required the removal of the church sign. That is a major utility change that has put significant hardship on the church. This major utility change merits rezoning so that we can have the sign we were promised.
Sherry
37934
37934
5-E-25-RZ
Sherry (37934), May 7, 2025 at 2:04 PM
We respectfully request the Commission consider our request so we can replace the sign at our church that needed to be removed due to the First Utilities project on Northshore Drive. Sherry (37934), May 7, 2025 at 2:04 PM
Due to the layout of the land, it is difficult for a sign to be seen from vehicles passing by.
Granting our request would enable us to let the community know we are there and still open.
The sign we would like is not ostentatious, nor would it be an eyesore to our community. It would allow us to keep members and visitors informed of upcoming meetings and events without having to place large banners near the road.
I have had many people ask if our church was still open because we don't have a sign now.
May God bless you as you strive to make Knoxville an even better place to live.
jane
37931
37931
5-I-25-RZ
jane (37931), May 7, 2025 at 3:00 PM
My Parents bought 27 acres at [address redacted] when I was a very young girl. I have lived here for over 70 Years. My Husband & I now own that home. Our residential driveway is directly beside the proposed rezoning spot. We also own a home at [address redacted] directly across from the proposed rezoning spot. I am totally against rezoning that spot at 5240 Schaad. to anything except residential or agriculture This is a Family Friendly community of Homes residential & agriculture.This is not a good fit at all for that spot. There is already an approved development (which is actively developing) for an EZ Stop that was changed from AG to CM at the corner of Schaad & Johnson Rd which is only approx. 0.3 miles from this proposed rezoning Thank you and please deny this proposal.jane (37931), May 7, 2025 at 3:00 PM
Zachary
37771
37771
5-I-25-RZ
Zachary (37771), May 7, 2025 at 3:01 PM
Please see attachment. Character and attachments limit.Zachary (37771), May 7, 2025 at 3:01 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250507150155.pdf
Kathleen
37924
37924
5-B-25-PA
Kathleen (37924), May 7, 2025 at 3:43 PM
I do not believe the application for rezoning should be denied. The location is not designed for the use they have planned. It is also a very bad intersection already. Now you will have traffic coming off the 25/70 ramp to cross over at the last minute with trailer causing more wrecks. This will mean more people will lose their lives at this intersection. I am not happy that people from west Knoxville want to make a junk area in our front yard when they would not in their area. East Knoxville was once a place with small businesses we could be proud to support. Now everyone wants to put businesses in our area that they do not want in other areas. Please do not allow this to happen. Kathleen (37924), May 7, 2025 at 3:43 PM
David
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
David (37914), May 7, 2025 at 3:47 PM
The 'benefits' of this development appear to just be amenities for the residents that are generally built with these big development anyways. It seems they are trying to twist the PD process to put something where it shouldn't be, by calling amenities 'benefits' for the community. Even if the amenities are open to the public, there is almost no sidewalk connectivity for neighbors to get to this site. David (37914), May 7, 2025 at 3:47 PM
John
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
John (37914), May 7, 2025 at 9:30 PM
I am a resident on 2800 block of Brooks Avenue, directly behind this development - my partner and I do not support this proposal in its current form as it does not demonstrate true benefit to our community and brings numerous concerns along with it: environmental, infrastructure, traffic, etc. Please see attached letter.John (37914), May 7, 2025 at 9:30 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250507213046.pdf
Austen
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Austen (37914), May 8, 2025 at 8:30 AM
Staff got this completely right. This area is not suited for such high density housing, and the applicant is clearly intending to develop different than the zoning. The plans offer NO COMMUNITY BENEFITS. That is required for a planned development to be justified. This does nothing for East Knoxville. It only fills the pockets of rich people. Logan Higgins, one of the applicants, is on the Planning Commission, which raises serious ethical concerns. If the Planning Commission approves this, they are showing blatant disregard for the binding documents they are charged to enforce and are unleashing something that will harm the community and make it LESS affordable. Just because he got friends to submit comments saying wow cool affordable housing does not mean that the community supports this, and the plan has no requirement to make units affordable. Do not let developers get away with the buzz word for affordable housing while they try to abuse the system to prioritize profit over the local community. Staff knows what they are talking about. Listen to them. Austen (37914), May 8, 2025 at 8:30 AM
Austen
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Austen (37914), May 8, 2025 at 8:51 AM
See attached. Austen (37914), May 8, 2025 at 8:51 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250508085142.pdf
Jason
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Jason (37932), May 8, 2025 at 6:00 PM
The proposed land use change is a significant deviation from prior use. The current sitting of the kennel is causing a significant noise problem that impacts the existing properties in the area. Relocation of the kennel informed by an appropriate noise impact study should be required by the commission prior to approval by the commission.Jason (37932), May 8, 2025 at 6:00 PM
Kristi
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Kristi (37932), May 9, 2025 at 10:40 AM
Hello, I live in the Forest Mill subdivision that is next to this property. The kennel has brought noise pollution to our once quiet area. I ask that if this change is approved, Mr. Cottle will be a good neighbor and place a barrier to quieten the barking associated with his business. Kristi (37932), May 9, 2025 at 10:40 AM
Sincerely,
Kristi P.
Jimmie
37914
37914
12-A-24-PD
Jimmie (37914), May 9, 2025 at 11:26 AM
12-A-24-PD / 2802 Delrose DriveJimmie (37914), May 9, 2025 at 11:26 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250509112622.pdf
Neighborhood
37902
37902
12-A-24-PD
Neighborhood (37902), Submitted during the meeting
See attachedNeighborhood (37902), Submitted during the meeting
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250513123334.pdf
Submitted during the meeting
Robert
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Robert (37932), May 14, 2025 at 8:39 AM
The barking has got to stop! We can't enjoy our back porch and cookout area anymore! My wife wears hearing aids and the additional amplification is driving her insane while outside. Please consider relocation or a enclosed facility to stop the excessive barking and howling. We have concerns about our property value if this continues. Robert (37932), May 14, 2025 at 8:39 AM
Kim
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Kim (37932), May 14, 2025 at 8:55 AM
I wear hearing aids and the amplified barking and howling has taken a toll on my outside enjoyment. I am a gun advocate, but have an issue with the number of rounds being shot on the same property close to the dog kennel as well. The poor dogs scatter when the shots start, and they bark and howl excessively after they stop. This madness has to stop! Please consider a nuisance/noise impact study. Our property values are declining due to this boarding facility.Kim (37932), May 14, 2025 at 8:55 AM
Patricia
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Patricia (37932), May 14, 2025 at 9:51 AM
I have two issues with the dog kennel on the property behind us. Patricia (37932), May 14, 2025 at 9:51 AM
First, the kennel is located so close to our subdivision that it prevents me from enjoying our back yard due to their relentless barking. This problem is unrelenting and sounds to me that the dogs are constantly upset (see below). I am 75 years old and use hearing aids, but this is a problem without them as well.
Second, I am an animal lover and am concerned about why the dogs bark all the time without stopping, dawn to dusk. The sounds of the gun range that is used on the property are loud and scare me, so it makes sense that it would terrify the dogs as well. It seems to me that a shooting range and a dog kennel business near each other are incompatible with the welfare of those dogs in care.
I urge the planning commission to consider resolving these issues and their impact on a suburban neighborhood. One example of such mitigation would be to move the kennel to another location on the property and construct a sound mitigating structure of some kind that a) reduces the noise of the dogs barking on the kennel's subdivision neighbors and b) protects the dogs hearing from the gun range use.
Mark
7914
7914
12-A-24-PD
Mark (7914), May 14, 2025 at 7:35 PM
Every project has its own set of problems and benefits. This project appears to be determined to emulate other dense projects and ignore the fact that most of these projects have built-in amenities such as large riverside open space, or access to shopping, entertainment, and dining opportunities, or parks and this project has nothing to offer other than smothering density without relief and access roads with constant large dump truck traffic which on some days can number over 100 trips to two different facilities or traveling through a large elementary school zone with hundreds of families dropping of or picking up their children and 100 plus staff attempting to get to work. The creators of this project need to rethink their approach to these problems and realize that often quality is greater than quantity. If they can adjust their approach then and only then will this project be able to compete for clients.Mark (7914), May 14, 2025 at 7:35 PM
Jeremiah
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Jeremiah (37932), May 15, 2025 at 3:47 PM
My name is Jeremiah Cottle - I am the owner of the property in question. I have taken the time to read and address each of the above complaints, slanders and outright lies in the attached…. All video documentation is uploaded on my personal IG for public access. I also encourage everyone that if there is any issue with noise to contact me immediately and we will address it.
I am for the approval of the permit Jeremiah (37932), May 15, 2025 at 3:47 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250515154743.pdf
Vaughn
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Vaughn (37932), May 16, 2025 at 11:22 AM
Id like to see more people support a veteran owned business. There is a huge need in our community for boarding dogs and having a trusted place to fulfill this need. Vaughn (37932), May 16, 2025 at 11:22 AM
I do not like how some neighbors and people are probing the dogs & doing things to get a rise or reaction out of them. It makes it hard to know who the real problem is; people or animals? I say its people. These are not wild animals. They are animals who are loved and have a home, they are being watched and cared for.
We need to support this business, the owner is the nicest and most accommodating, he takes time to listen, acknowledge and has a solution to any concern.
Trey
77616
77616
6-A-25-UR
Trey (77616), May 16, 2025 at 12:50 PM
See attached.Trey (77616), May 16, 2025 at 12:50 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250516125035.pdf
Joseph
37763
37763
6-A-25-UR
Joseph (37763), May 16, 2025 at 4:49 PM
Jeremiah has a unique farm in Hardin Valley that i reminiscent of what Hardin Valley used to be. He not only has a working agricultural farm on land zoned for such things he also provides a needed resource for the community. A community in which almost everyone owns a dog.Joseph (37763), May 16, 2025 at 4:49 PM
Christine
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Christine (37932), May 19, 2025 at 3:21 PM
Jeremiah is dedicated to animal welfare and his proactive approach to addressing community concerns. His commitment to providing for his and othersanimals is commendable. The kennel provides valuable services to the community which is essential for pet owners seeking quality care for their dogs. Christine (37932), May 19, 2025 at 3:21 PM
Furthermore, the site offers ample space for kennel operations, reducing the risk of overcrowding for the neighborhood and for the dogs. The facility's design and management mitigates concerns related to noise and ensures that the business operates in harmony with the surrounding residential area. However, there are local residents that are harassing Jeremiah and the dogs by banging pots and pans in order to induce barking.
While it's important to address the concerns raised by some residents, it's equally vital to remember that they have been caused by harassing neighbors banging pans and recognize the potential benefits this kennel could bring to the community. The kennel has the opportunity to become a valued asset to the area.
Robert
37924
37924
5-B-25-PA
Robert (37924), May 21, 2025 at 9:07 AM
To whom it may concern. Robert (37924), May 21, 2025 at 9:07 AM
My name is Robert H. I live in the four-way Inn community. I use this intersection every day and have since 2009. The amount of traffic has increased so much on Ashville hwy in these years is unbelievable. I am not opposed of this business coming into our area but this is not the location for it. That intersection is very dangerous especially for vehicles pulling trailers for parts. There are other properties around that are better suited for this type of business. The buyer should have checked the codes and considered the traffic before purchasing. Many people loved Cardins drive in and came from all around but no one can say that it wasn't a dangerous place to get in and out of. This was 200 yards past this intersection. Now imagine how dangerous it is right in the middle of this intersection. In short if this is allowed to happen the deaths that will occur from this action and it will happen, will ultimately be on those who made it possible.
Lisa
37924
37924
5-D-25-RZ
Lisa (37924), May 22, 2025 at 11:47 AM
This request for rezoning should be denied. This property should be preserved for retail/town center uses and not destroyed by industrial zoning. This would have an extremely detrimental effect on surrounding properties and has a lot of potential for mixed use and town center future development. Thank you for your consideration.Lisa (37924), May 22, 2025 at 11:47 AM
Lauren
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Lauren (37932), May 25, 2025 at 8:33 PM
There are barking dogs that are at times barking constantly. I walk the neighborhood frequently and the dogs are very loud at the Daisywood cul-de-sac. If I lived in this cul-de-sac it would be impossible to sit outside without hearing the constant barking. Lauren (37932), May 25, 2025 at 8:33 PM
David
37924
37924
5-B-25-PA
David (37924), May 27, 2025 at 9:18 AM
-If granted, will the property be required to adhere to State/County Chapter 1680 2-4, Rules and Regulations for Junkyard Control? If not, why?David (37924), May 27, 2025 at 9:18 AM
-What is the plan for removal of hazardous materials to include petroleum products and otherwise that in eventuality will leak from the vehicles? Has an environmental impact study been completed? If not, when can the public expect it and the results to be published?
-What will be the main ingress and egress routes for the property? This is already a busy and dangerous intersection (4-Way). If Asheville Hwy, what traffic studies have been completed to inform of impact? Further, if ingress and egress are to be accomplished via Strawberry Plains Pike, how will Carter Elementary School traffic be affected for both students and parents?
To add to concern and credibility in opposition, there was a recent traffic accident across the Hwy at the 4-Way Food Court that resulted in a fatality. Consequently, there does not appear to be any future plans for the 4-Way Food Court to open. It currently appears to be another "inactive" piece of property in our neighborhood.
-A junkyard at this location is not good fit for our neighborhood. It is already unsightly and will bring down property values in nearby residential areas.
Gabe
84401
84401
5-D-25-RZ
Gabe (84401), May 27, 2025 at 12:44 PM
Please see attached PDF. I recently moved away from Knoxville, but I still deeply care about my previous neighborhood and surrounding community.Gabe (84401), May 27, 2025 at 12:44 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250527124413.pdf
Norm
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Norm (37932), May 27, 2025 at 10:43 PM
Please see attachment.Norm (37932), May 27, 2025 at 10:43 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250527224311.pdf
Brennan
37922
37922
6-A-25-UR
Brennan (37922), May 31, 2025 at 11:09 AM
While some may have concerns about the Veteran Kennel, i believe it's important to recognize the positive contributions they make to our community. Their dedication to providing a safe haven for dogs is commendable, and their support for veterans helps foster a sense of purpose and belonging for those who have served. Instead of focusing on the negatives, we should appreciate how they uplift both animals and veterans, creating a better community for everyone. The atmosphere is filled with love and compassion, as each dog receives the care and attention they deserve. The staff is dedicated to ensuring that every dog feels safe and loved, which is evident in their playful interactions and wagging tails. The facility itself is well-maintained and designed to provide a comfortable environment for the dogs, with plenty of space for them to play and socialize. Spending time at a safe haven kennel is not just about supporting a great cause but also about connecting with the animals and witnessing the joy they bring to our lives.Brennan (37922), May 31, 2025 at 11:09 AM
Pam
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Pam (37932), June 1, 2025 at 9:24 PM
I am writing to express my concern regarding the persistent barking from the dog kennel located behind my subdivision. Pam (37932), June 1, 2025 at 9:24 PM
The kennel is situated at the farthest distance from the owner's residence, but directly connected to multiple homes in our subdivision.
The extremely loud barking continues throughout the day, into the night, and early morning hours. The barking is quite loud and involves a large number of dogs, causing disruption to my family and me, as well as multiple other homeowners.
While I acknowledge that dogs can bark, the frequency and duration of the barking have become a significant issue. I hope we can find a solution to this problem, as the constant noise is highly disruptive, annoying, and disrespectful to the homeowners in our subdivision.
Establishing a more controlled environment or relocating the kennel to the other side of the owner's property would be beneficial.
Additionally, we have experienced instances of dogs escaping from the kennel and entering our subdivision, where our children play, posing a significant danger.
We are seeking assistance and support in addressing this issue, as communication with the owner has been unsuccessful.
Psm
37932
37932
6-A-25-UR
Psm (37932), June 1, 2025 at 9:46 PM
I am writing to express my concern regarding the persistent barking from the dog kennel located behind my subdivision. Psm (37932), June 1, 2025 at 9:46 PM
The kennel is situated at the farthest distance from the owner's residence, but directly connected to multiple homes in our subdivision.
The extremely loud barking continues throughout the day, into the night, and early morning hours. The barking is quite loud and involves a large number of dogs, causing disruption to my family and me, as well as multiple other homeowners.
While I acknowledge that dogs can bark, the frequency and duration of the barking have become a significant issue. I hope we can find a solution to this problem, as the constant noise is highly disruptive, annoying, and disrespectful to the homeowners in our subdivision.
Establishing a more controlled environment or relocating the kennel to the other side of the owner's property would be beneficial.
Additionally, we have experienced instances of dogs escaping from the kennel and entering our subdivision, where our children play, posing a significant danger.
We are seeking assistance and support in addressing this issue, as communication with the owner has been unsuccessful.
Please vote no!
Danny
37924
37924
5-D-25-RZ
Danny (37924), June 4, 2025 at 2:28 PM
We are against this proposed zoning proposal as it is now an eyesore to our community, and if the way it looks now is an example of what it is to be, we would request that the commission deny this rezoning proposal.Danny (37924), June 4, 2025 at 2:28 PM
Charlene
37914
37914
5-B-25-PA
Charlene (37914), June 14, 2025 at 5:26 PM
Iâve lived my entire life in East Knox County. This is my home, and I care deeply about its future. Thatâs why I strongly oppose this rezoning request. East Knox County is already experiencing rapid growth â nearly 18% in the last 15 years â but we are still severely underserved. While we have Food City and Priceless Foods, much of our retail growth has been replaced by Dollar Generals. We have no Walmart, no Loweâs, limited shopping, and very limited healthcare options. Our residents already drive long distances for basic services. Rezoning this land to Mining and Heavy Industrial does nothing to serve the people who live here now or in the future. Instead, it brings traffic, noise, environmental risk, and permanently sets a tone that is nearly impossible to reverse. This is not the kind of growth our community needs. We deserve responsible growth â healthcare, retail, small businesses, and services that support families â not heavy industry in the middle of our growing neighborhoods. I urge you: please deny this rezoning and protect the future of East Knox County.Charlene (37914), June 14, 2025 at 5:26 PM
Diana
37931
37931
7-Q-25-RZ
Diana (37931), June 17, 2025 at 8:14 AM
I am a lifelong, third generation Knox County resident. I am deeply concerned about this proposed rezoning and redevelopment of the property on Ball Road close to my home. Case 7-Q-25-R2. Please see the attached letter explaining my opposition to additional residential development on Ball Road due to dangerous traffic already in existence. Thanks for your attention to this request. I will ask to speak at the hearing to oppose any new residential development on Ball Road as it is already grossly over traveled and dangerous.Diana (37931), June 17, 2025 at 8:14 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250617081452.pdf
Robert
7914
7914
12-A-24-PD
Robert (7914), June 17, 2025 at 6:41 PM
My wife and I have spent many hours attending meetings about this project and walked the streets getting a petition signed by mostly people who live in the neighborhoods affected by this project. We have discovered that there is practically no support for this project in these neighborhoods. We believe the primary reason for this lack of support is the lack of consideration by the developer of how the lives of these people will drastically change for the worse. The small amount of amenities offered as of this time are very insulting and dismissive to them in their lives. Unless the developer can show that they have the sensitivity to care about how they affect living environments then the people who live in these environments will every day live with resentment and anger and the developer will be home, wherever that is, enjoying the spoils of their actions. This just doesnt seem right! Give them a park to enjoy and not a pickle ball court that they would never use.Robert (7914), June 17, 2025 at 6:41 PM