Public Comments

February 11, 2026
at 11:10 PM

Stephen
37920

2-A-26-HPA
Stephen (37920), February 11, 2026 at 11:10 PM

I am the owner and 21 year resident of 3017; Walmar Drive. My north property line shares part of the east property line of the plot under consideration. I am writing to OPPOSE Blalock's request for additional exceptions to the fill site usage. The destruction of forest behind my property has already negatively affected the property value and quality of life of the whole neighborhood, especially my residence. No significant effort has been made to mitigate damage already caused by exceeding the legally allowed usage. I oppose any additional fill usage for this site. Thank you. Sincerely, Stephen W.

February 12, 2026
at 11:47 AM

Charrisse
37920

2-A-26-HPA
Charrisse (37920), February 12, 2026 at 11:47 AM

I reside at 6341 Gateway Ln. I am writing to OPPOSE Blalock's request for additional exceptions to the fill site usage. The deforestation behind my property has negatively affected the property value. There are existing infringements and exceeding of deforestation identified in 2024 recorded. No record of positive effort noted or actioned to rectify for the existing excess loss yet a request to clear more when the initual limit was exceeded, still exists, and not rectified. The area has stormwater drainage negatively impacted by the excess clearing that has already taken place. The area is only minutes of the river and a park which does impact the community surrounding the 3275 W Governor John Sevier Highway. Part of the area is wetland with the missing coverage from exceeded clearing has already adversely affected the properties and communities surrounding the cleared land. Addressing the current and present situation of Reforestation should take the presidence, forefront, and be completed with impactful enforcement of visual long term results for current and future restoration prior to any submission of requesting additional clearing. I oppose any additional fill usage for this site. Thank you. Sincerely, Charrisse

February 14, 2026
at 5:09 PM

Terry
37920

3-B-26-SU
Terry (37920), February 14, 2026 at 5:09 PM

As a 2nd generation, lifetime resident of Colonial Village, I am in opposition of this variance. The proposed lot is on a blind curve, just off of Chapman Highway, making it difficult for exiting a driveway for a single home, much less a duplex. Also, a duplex is only going to burden our neighborhood with another absentee landlord. Something we don't need. This is a single-family residential neighborhood that is roughly 75% owner occupied. I would urge this developer to be sensible and follow in the footsteps of the previous developer who attempted to build a duplex in Colonial Village. Build a single-family home instead and walk away with the profits. #NoDuplexes

February 14, 2026
at 8:01 PM

Susan
37920

3-B-26-SU
Susan (37920), February 14, 2026 at 8:01 PM

I am opposed to the proposal to change the current zoning to allow the construction of a duplex on the empty lot at 102 Brandau. My backyard is adjacent to the property. Colonial Village has traditionally been made up of single family dwellings. My concern of having a duplex next door is that it could lead to a revolving door of renters with no commitment to the property or the neighborhood.
Please vote no on Mr. Stinnetts request.

February 15, 2026
at 12:40 PM

Keara
37932

3-A-26-DP
Keara (37932), February 15, 2026 at 12:40 PM

As a homeowner in the Everett wood’s community that will be across from this development, I oppose this getting built. Everett road already deals with truckers trying to use it to bypass the weigh station as well as people avoiding the interstate when there is too much traffic. We already have issues leaving our neighborhood out of the Yarnell side and with more traffic being added due to the apartments, this will just only create more issues. Being that it’s wooded area animals will be displaced and start to wander to other overdeveloped areas and lose their homes. I don’t think Hardin valley schools can handle anymore students. This is just a few things that will be an issue if these get built.

February 15, 2026
at 2:20 PM

Russell
37932

3-A-26-DP
Russell (37932), February 15, 2026 at 2:20 PM

Hello, I am writing this to voice my concern for the proposed apartments being built on Everett Road. Everett road does not have the infrastructure to support more than 200 families traveling that road daily. Adding this daily traffic will cause MAJOR traffic issues with the current state of the surrounding roads.
Also, Everett Road is very heavily biked road due to the greenways nearby. Adding this traffic is an imminent safety issue to these bikers and the resulting influx in traffic will end in tragedy for a biker(s) It is already dangerous for them to ride their bike on this road, but adding an apartment complex is a major safety issue for them. Please do not build this complex without creating a safer road to accommodate an already overcrowded section of road. This complex will add traffic to an already dangerous road that is full of road bikers. Please don't create an environment that lends itself to getting these bikers hit by one of 100's of cars that will be considered new traffic in the area. DO NOT BUILD THIS APARTMENT COMPLEX.

February 15, 2026
at 3:47 PM

Joshua
37932

3-A-26-DP
Joshua (37932), February 15, 2026 at 3:47 PM

This complex would be an absolute disaster to the area. There is nowhere near enough infrastructure on the roadways to account for that many new residents traffic. An apartment complex in that area would be one of the worst things for the area.

February 15, 2026
at 3:48 PM

Michael
37932

3-A-26-DP
Michael (37932), February 15, 2026 at 3:48 PM

224 apartment units is going to be be devastating to Everett Road traffic. It is already a 20 minute endeavor to get to the highway in the mornings and evenings with the trucker amenities at the exit to Watt Road. Without extremely significant improvements to traffic management at Everett/Yarnell and Everett/Watt this development will cause a significant impact to home values at the Everett Woods subdivision, and a significant impact to home value growth. 224 units is obscene considering the location and traffic patterns. The location is also forest watershed for I-40, and should be considered with high concern for this,

February 17, 2026
at 7:22 AM

Andrew
37909

9-A-25-SU
Andrew (37909), February 17, 2026 at 7:22 AM

As a lifelong resident of West Hills and Knoxville I have grave concerns about the development that has been approved to be built on this site. It intrudes on the privacy of surrounding neighbors being only fifty feet away from the closest neighbors who's house value will certainly diminish if this goes through. It is also not consistent with area. There is a huge apartment complex just finished just down the street and another set of condos being built on Middlebrook at Broome. Why the need to stuff in 32 units on just a tight area when there are plenty of other options for housing. A much less dense development would more suited to the area and furthermore would cut down on what will be a further issue with traffic on Gallaher View Road which is becoming more and more dangerous and overcrowded. West Hills has presented much evidence that this is not the best use of this land site. We are happy to see it developed in some regard but please consider the impact on the neighbors and the traffic.
Sincerely,
Andrew Schmudde

February 17, 2026
at 11:55 AM

Andrew
37920

3-B-26-SU
Andrew (37920), February 17, 2026 at 11:55 AM

Please let them build this duplex. We need more housing. Do NOT let the NIMBY crowd in Colonial Village win...again.
If we want affordable housing, we need a greater supply. I am completely IN FAVOR of this duplex.

February 17, 2026
at 1:48 PM

Charles
37920

3-B-26-SU
Charles (37920), February 17, 2026 at 1:48 PM

This is a narrow street in a single family residual neighborhood and strongly opposed to this variation at 202 brandau.

February 17, 2026
at 2:18 PM

Janet
37920

3-B-26-SU
Janet (37920), February 17, 2026 at 2:18 PM

I would like to express my opposition to this variance. This neighborhood is comprised of single family dwellings and the addition of numerous rentals in the area would be out of compliance with the existing dwellings. In addition there are safety concerns with the numerous residents being able to enter and exit Chapman highway safely due to visibility concerns at this sharp curve.
Thank you for your consideration or maintaining our lovely neighborhood.

February 17, 2026
at 5:23 PM

Mark
37920

3-B-26-SU
Mark (37920), February 17, 2026 at 5:23 PM

I oppose the variance request. I am a board member of the Colonial Village Neighborhood Association, a licensed Realtor in the state of Tennessee and owner of MTG Properties LLC. The RN1 zoning is crucial to be upheld in our neighborhood in order to protect property values, the long-standing history, and overall character of our neighborhood. There have been only single-family homes allowed in Colonial Village since it was officially established in 1955. The last variance request for a duplex on Magazine Rd was also denied. There is no need to establish a new precedent by allowing this variance request, which would only open the floodgates for future developers. We would, however, gladly accept a new single-family home in our wonderful neighborhood!
Thank you

February 17, 2026
at 9:14 PM

Whitney
37920

3-B-26-SU
Whitney (37920), February 17, 2026 at 9:14 PM

As a 28 year resident of Colonial Village, I am asking the Planning commission to deny Mr. Stinnetts variance request. Colonial Village is a single family home neighborhood, that does not need a multi-family dwelling managed by an absentee landlord. Again, please deny this variance request.

February 18, 2026
at 7:40 AM

Kirk
37920

3-B-26-SU
Kirk (37920), February 18, 2026 at 7:40 AM

I am writing as a neighbor who cares about our community and supports thoughtful growth in a growing Knoxville. I support the duplex variance request at 102 Brandau.
Our city is evolving, and while its understandable that some would prefer to preserve a decades-old version of Knoxville, that simply isn't today's reality. We need practical, well-planned housing options if we want Knoxville to remain accessible and livable for families, young professionals, and longtime residents.
This proposal appears to be responsibly designed. The duplex is planned to sit off the road and be shielded by existing trees, minimizing visual impact. It is a small-scale project, not a large development, and represents reasonable infill rather than overbuilding.
Safety concerns should absolutely be reviewed, but driveway access and sight distance will be evaluated under established city standards. If those requirements are met, the project should not be dismissed based on assumption.
We can preserve the character of our neighborhood while still allowing balanced growth. Thoughtful additions like this help address rising housing costs without dramatically changing the fabric of the community.
I respectfully encourage approval of this request.

February 18, 2026
at 9:43 AM

Kathleen
37920

3-B-26-SU
Kathleen (37920), February 18, 2026 at 9:43 AM

Colonial Village is a wonderful place to live. I chose this neighborhood because I love that there are so many different styles of homes with varying plot sizes. I purchased here BECAUSE there were no condos or duplexes. I wanted a simple middle class neighborhood where people cared about their property and actually knew their neighbors.
Please DO NOT approve this duplex for 102 Brandau Drive. It does not coordinate with established homes. And it is in a very dangerous corner at Chapman Highway. Trying to turn left out of Brandau onto Chapman is a death wish.
I STRONGLY encourage you to vote NO on this duplex. What this neighborhood does not need is another absentee landlord. Please. The homeowners of Colonial Village should have their wishes granted over the financial gains of a developer.
Sincerely,
Kathleen M.[redacted]

February 18, 2026
at 9:54 AM

Cherie
37920

3-B-26-SU
Cherie (37920), February 18, 2026 at 9:54 AM

I support smart building growth in Knoxville and I do not think that a duplex would diminish property values or create any kind of safety hazard.
Knoxville is growing fast and smart affordable options need to be available for our community.
As a resident of this community I recommend granting this permit.

February 18, 2026
at 10:43 AM

Eli
37920

3-B-26-SU
Eli (37920), February 18, 2026 at 10:43 AM

I am writing in support of Special Use Permit 3-B-26-SU for Tyler Stinnett and his partners. I am not receiving any benefit or compensation for offering this support.
While I do know Tyler personally, my support is based on the quality of his work and his approach to development. The homes he and his partners have completed in the Colonial Village neighborhood are well-built, thoughtfully designed, and of high quality. I am confident he will bring the same level of care and professionalism to this project.
From my conversations with Tyler, I understand that his intent in building a duplex on this property is to contribute, in a responsible way, to addressing Knoxville's broader housing needs, including the need for more attainable housing options. I am also aware of concerns regarding absentee ownership. Based on my understanding, both Tyler and the property owner are local, and the property will not be managed by an absent landlord.
Finally, I know there are questions about how a duplex will fit within the existing character of the neighborhood. I have full confidence that the design of both the structure and the landscaping will complement and enhance the surrounding homes.
As a resident of Colonial Village, I respectfully support Tyler Stinnett's request and encourage the City of Knoxville to approve this Special Use Permit.

February 18, 2026
at 2:27 PM

Connie
37932

3-A-26-DP
Connie (37932), February 18, 2026 at 2:27 PM

My name is Connie M. I stand against anything being built on this land.
If you haven't visited this site in person, make it a priority. It's a TINY piece land right off of interstate 40, DIRECTLY across from an established neighborhood.
I'm mother to three boys and have made it an essential priority to get my children outside playing and to teach them about the value of nature. This includes how precious the "small piece of land across the street" is. This small piece of land is essential forestry to plants, animals, water flow, etc and I absolutely cannot imagine this being a successful venture to build on.
If you are concerned about the need for places to live, there is an apartment complex going in at Watt Rd (less than one mile away) and multiple offerings in Hardin Valley, including multiple apartment and townhome options- All which are going to stress the Hardin Valley school system even MORE. There are more than plenty living other spaces available- there is absolutely no need for this area to be developed.
Please do the RIGHT thing and don't approve this. PLEASE look at these details, the land, the people, the animals, the traffic, and other factors this development will negatively impact this community.
This isn't a welcomed build or a welcomed new neighbor

February 18, 2026
at 3:15 PM

Aricia
37920

3-B-26-SU
Aricia (37920), February 18, 2026 at 3:15 PM

This multi-family rental would be visible from my home. The area, already is not safe entering and exiting Chapman Hwy. In addition, this is a single dwelling neighborhood, and any multi- family dwelling would only harm our community, and lower our home values. We, are very much against this proposal. Thank you
Mike and Aricia W.

February 18, 2026
at 3:50 PM

Dalton
37920

3-B-26-SU
Dalton (37920), February 18, 2026 at 3:50 PM

My name is Dalton, I bought my first home on Brandau Drive 2 1/2 years ago and I have been working to restore it to its original 1940's character. I plan to live here for most (or the rest) of my life. I am writing to oppose this measure for a duplex at 102 Brandau Drive. Our neighborhood is composed of single family homes and the introduction of a duplex sets a troubling precedent to embolden future developers to continue to build other duplex and multi-plex housing in our neighborhood.
I support multi-family housing in new development areas to address the growing need for housing; however there are many new multi-family developments in Knoxville and many vacant lots in areas that are more aligned with this use. However, this neighborhood has developed a quaint charm, where neighbors know and lookout for each other. Rental units would mean short-term residents with little or no care or investment in the area around them; more traffic and lowered property values for the rest of us. I urge the City to deny this application so we may keep our neighborhood a community of long-term residents and the character of single family homes that we all love and hope to preserve.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.

February 18, 2026
at 6:10 PM

Chris
37932

3-A-26-DP
Chris (37932), February 18, 2026 at 6:10 PM

Regarding the proposed apartment development on Everett Rd opposite Everett Woods Subdivision.
1. Everett Road is a small 2 lane road that is already heavily traveled. Driving is difficult due to the curves and hills, and in wet, snowy or icy weather this road is almost impassable. The is no shoulder to the road, and one side has a steep drop-off. Vehicles use it as a short-cut to the Interstate and Turkey Creek shopping center. Two years ago, an OTR truck broke down and blocked this road for 3 days.
Yarnell Rd has heavy traffic, and this road is in terrible condition due to dump trucks and cement trucks frequently using it. We have had multiple accidents at the corner of Everett Rd and Yarnell Rd due to the narrow intersection. Construction will cause local roads to deteriorate faster.
2. Putting 2 entrances together will cause traffic backups with cars entering and exiting at the same spot. Everett Woods only has one full entrance and exit, as the back is only an exit. The back exit is a bus stop which causes impressive congestion multiple times a day. Adding 300 cars to this small area will cause gridlock.
3. If approved, support infrastructures are essential (sewer, water, drainage, turn lanes, blinking lights, etc.). Many developments do not provide adequate infrastructure support, so people who live in the area suffer from this lack of foresight.
Please reconsider the size and adverse effects this complex will create for this area.

February 18, 2026
at 8:29 PM

Amber
37920

3-B-26-SU
Amber (37920), February 18, 2026 at 8:29 PM

I highly object to this building request for the following reasons.
I have been a resident in Lake Forest since 1999 and the reason I settled here was single family homes established in the 40's. Comfortable neighborhood where many people feel comfortable walking their dogs or just walking for exercise without heavy traffic. Many of the older homes have been renovated and resold at a huge profit so it has added value to our community. The builder can build a single family home that fits in with this established neighborhood. Why crowd into a small neighborhood. Please do not approve this variance.

February 19, 2026
at 11:08 AM

Paige
37932

3-A-26-DP
Paige (37932), February 19, 2026 at 11:08 AM

I am a homeowner directly adjacent to this proposed development and strongly oppose its approval due to serious infrastructure and safety concerns.
Everett Road is already inadequate for existing traffic. Semi-trucks regularly become stuck near our neighborhood entrance because of roadway geometry, clearly demonstrating that the road is not designed to handle increased density. Adding a 224-unit apartment complex will significantly increase daily traffic, turning conflicts, and congestion on a roadway that is already functionally strained.
Our local schools are also overcrowded, and drop-off and pickup traffic currently creates dangerous gridlock. Approving high-density housing without funded, completed road and school improvements places existing residents at risk.
I urge the Commission to deny this proposal until infrastructure is truly equipped to support it.

February 19, 2026
at 11:21 AM

Cassandra
37932

3-A-26-DP
Cassandra (37932), February 19, 2026 at 11:21 AM

To whom it may concern;
Please hear us when we say this is not an area that is able to carry more homes and people. We lose power in Everett Woods multiple times a week, the grid cannot handle anything else. The roads are narrow and rough to start with and more truck and construction traffic is only going to make it worse. Many people drive off the sides of the road already causing accidents or near accidents, semi trucks get stuck, it's a heavy area for bicyclists and races for cyclists.
There are also many children in this neighborhood whose privacy would be threatened by having looming apartments overhead. We would not have the privacy to play in our backyards that we bought on purpose to let our kids play in without people peering over at us.
Please, please do not build these apartments. There is nothing that can hold it up to be a good investment.
Please!!
Cassandra S.

February 19, 2026
at 11:35 AM

Lindsey
37932

3-A-26-DP
Lindsey (37932), February 19, 2026 at 11:35 AM

These roads are not meant to handle the level of congestion this new development would bring. Adding almost 2k new vehicles is going to create pure chaos and extreme congestion. Additional concerns: Our public schools are full. Where are these kids going to go to school? We are already waiting on infrastructure improvements. Another large development is going to worsen already struggling conditions. Please, please reconsider this development.

February 19, 2026
at 11:44 AM

Nicole
37932

3-A-26-DP
Nicole (37932), February 19, 2026 at 11:44 AM

I strongly oppose the proposed apartment complex. This area already faces significant traffic congestion, and Hardin Valley Academy is overcrowded. Adding a large residential development will only worsen existing infrastructure and safety concerns. This area is already too congested to support additional high-density housing.

February 19, 2026
at 11:45 AM

Dusty
37932

3-A-26-DP
Dusty (37932), February 19, 2026 at 11:45 AM

Our community is already overwhelmed. Traffic in this area is a daily struggle, and Hardin Valley Academy is beyond capacity. Families sit in long car lines every morning and afternoon, and emergency access is already a concern. Adding a high-density apartment complex will only increase congestion, strain our schools, and reduce the quality of life for the families who already call this area home. This community is already stretched too thin, and this development pushes it beyond a breaking point.

February 21, 2026
at 12:51 PM

James
37931

3-B-26-DP
James (37931), February 21, 2026 at 12:51 PM

I live on this street. For the past few years the same person has been buying homes on the street and renting them out through Vrbo. They own these two lots and the Two townhouses across the street. THESE ARE NOT BEING USED AS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. The people renting them change constantly. I'm assuming this request is to build another home to rent out as a Vrbo. I am vehemently against this. Most weeks there is a multitude of cars parked in the driveway, street, yard and elsewhere. Multiple times we've had so many cars the street has been blocked where larger trucks can't get through. The area between the houses and Townhouses stays trashed and unmaintained. There are constantly trashcans turned over, trash everywhere including broken bottles and used condoms even. There have been lots of loud parties there also, especially this past Fall when there were KUB contactors there for about 8 weeks. Loud music and drunks walking in the street all hours of the day and night. We've complained to the county and sheriffs office about this and they have done nothing. One man in the neighborhood had to have a fence installed between him and the Townhouse because people kept hanging out in his yard and walking around his house.
I am completely opposed to any expansion of these properties and my neighbors are also.

3-F-26-SU

Matthew
37917

3-F-26-SU
Matthew (37917), February 21, 2026 at 8:05 PM

Hi there, I own a nearby home and this proposed project is right around the block. Just thought I'd offer my two cents on the matter. I am in favor of allowing this duplex to be built. Knoxville's housing market is in a terrible right now and we need more places for people to live. I really don't care whether it's a duplex or even an apartment complex for that matter. More units on the market is a step in the right direction, the demand certainly exists. So I see zero issue with permitting this project to move forward. Let people build.

February 21, 2026
at 8:05 PM

February 21, 2026
at 8:29 PM

Anne
37909

9-A-25-SU
Anne (37909), February 21, 2026 at 8:29 PM

Please consider this proposal so that the number of units to be constructed is limited to the smaller number of units. It is difficult to get out of this area onto Gallaher View Road and would be worse if the larger number of units were constructed. As a resident of the West Hills neighborhood, I am asking that you deny this proposal.
We have seen our area inundated with apartments and other types of housing. The volume of traffic has increased and it does not seem to be affordable housing for those who need housing the most.
Please consider this request in order to limit future development in case this project is not completed. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

February 21, 2026
at 9:02 PM

Megan
37931

3-B-26-DP
Megan (37931), February 21, 2026 at 9:02 PM

Leaving in the immediate area of where this house may be built; and I am concerned of the following:
1. Parking along Orkney Circle - with the houses in this cul-de-sac currently, there are already cars parking on both sides of the road and I am concerned that added another house in this tiny lot that it will make it even worse and make our quiet street busier.
2. Property lines/zoning - after recently having to revise a permit (for a carport) due to the 35' easement requirements (from the property lines) I do not feel that this potential house can fit in the lot that it is going (roughly .23 acres) without not abiding by those rules/restrictions. This is simply not fair. And I feel that this lot is far too small for another house without impeding on the 2 houses already there (1 on Barbury and 1 on Orkney).
3. Being in the construction industry - I am concerned with the noise and traffic (machines, vehicles) that will come with building a new house. In addition, with all the random people being around during the build (I have a 2yo).

February 22, 2026
at 12:03 AM

Dusti
3793

3-B-26-DP
Dusti ( 3793), February 22, 2026 at 12:03 AM

The neighboring property has become a serious nuisance due to ongoing disruptive activity and continuous traffic at all hours of the day and night. The steady flow of vehicles, frequent congestion, and repeated blockages have made it difficult, at times impossible, for us to access our own homes and driveways. This interference with our ability to come and go freely has caused significant inconvenience, frustration, and safety concerns. The excessive activity not only disrupts the peace and quiet of the neighborhood but also directly impacts our right to safely and reasonably use and enjoy our own property. The addition of more lots or homes in this area would only intensify these existing problems, increasing traffic volume, congestion, and disruption, and further diminishing the quality of life within our neighborhood.

February 22, 2026
at 12:09 PM

Brian
37920

3-B-26-SU
Brian (37920), February 22, 2026 at 12:09 PM

I wanted to write in support from a YIMBY rather than a NIMBY perspective. This sounds like a perfectly appropriate variance, and duplexes/multifamily housing are sorely needed in the Knoxville housing market.

February 22, 2026
at 3:35 PM

Steven
37931

3-B-26-DP
Steven (37931), February 22, 2026 at 3:35 PM

This will not be a family dwelling, it's going to be another air bnb . She already has 4 of them on the same block. This has resulted in neighbors calling the police and having OSHA come out to clean the drains after one of her hotel guests dumped 5 quarts of oil down them. They fill up the streets parking both ways on the road. I've been here for 34 years and since she has started these rentals, the quality of the neighborhood has gone down. This used to be a community where we didn't have to lock our cars, but that has all changed now. Someone needs to lobby against these air bnb's taking over neighborhoods.

November 25, 2025
at 3:47 PM

Daniel
37922

9-A-25-SU
Daniel (37922), November 25, 2025 at 3:47 PM

I propose that the entrance connects to (or otherwise combines with) nearby Mars Hill Rd instead of a direct connection to Gallaher View to minimize the number of intersections on Gallaher View with no real impact to residents' convenience. Fewer intersections increases both traffic safety by limiting conflict points and pedestrian safety by reducing the number of (non-signalized) crossings.

February 23, 2026
at 9:03 AM

Dave
37931

3-B-26-DP
Dave (37931), February 23, 2026 at 9:03 AM

I am writing this comment/letter in the regards of new construction being presented in my neighborhood. I would like to first off say this is a very bad idea, as we already have issues with traffic. Sheila Diane Proffitt Crum already has three Air bnb's in that location with limited parking. The police have been out several times to have her tenets move there vehicles, and putting another rental property on that block will cause even more issues. I could also speak on other issues we have had with her tenets but do not want to get off course, but we have had issues with her renters in the past. I would also like to make it clear that Sheila does not live here, and or in the neighborhood, we all feel like she does what she wants with no consequences. Over all we are all pretty upset with her and the way she treats the neighborhood, and putting another house on the block to where Shiela can rent out with out proper parking will just lead to more issues, so I would like to appose this other rental property in a all ready small neighborhood with limited parking.

February 23, 2026
at 11:11 AM

Ernie
37931

3-B-26-DP
Ernie (37931), February 23, 2026 at 11:11 AM

We do not want another house to be zoned and approved to build in the community. This lady is buy all the houses in the street and using them as an Airbnb. They are over crowding the homes they have already with at time 10-15 people staying in them. They drink and block the roadway with their many vehicles making it impossible for home owns to get by at times. Please do not allow anyone other homes to be built in the community.

3-H-26-DP

R
12345

3-H-26-DP
R (12345), February 23, 2026 at 1:14 PM

What an absolute waste of this beautiful land to turn it into a parking lot. Nobody is doing a good job.

February 23, 2026
at 1:14 PM

February 23, 2026
at 8:31 PM

Deborah
37924

3-K-26-DP
Deborah (37924), February 23, 2026 at 8:31 PM

My objection is the same as for the last lot --we lost our Greenway which was supposed to serve as our common area-- the homeowners were ignored and the constructio approved anyway. So this lot is even smaller than the one you approved...how can you approve such a small lot for building another equivalent house?

February 23, 2026
at 11:02 PM

Justin
37924

3-K-26-DP
Justin (37924), February 23, 2026 at 11:02 PM

Our neighborhood is called "the park at bablay." If this is rezoned, there will be no park.

February 23, 2026
at 11:19 PM

Jennifer
37920

3-B-26-SU
Jennifer (37920), February 23, 2026 at 11:19 PM

. This proposal in no way fits or belongs in a community of single-family homes and an approval of said proposal would only open up the opportunity for more such housing. The goal is to keep Colonial Village as it was always intended - a single-family residential neighborhood - the vision of my parents and others that were original landowners. Please help us to preserve the integrity of Colonial Village by voting against this variance proposal.

February 24, 2026
at 8:57 AM

Carol
37924

3-K-26-DP
Carol (37924), February 24, 2026 at 8:57 AM

As a homeowner in The Park at Babelay Road, I formally object to Case 3-K-26-DP regarding the replat of Lot 73. This parcel, originally designated as common area and previously denied building approval, now seeks to incorporate 2007 right-of-way to become buildable. I request a technical review to ensure compliance with all standards.
I do object to making either paved roadway narrower just so the small corner can be built upon. There has been no meeting or consultation with the homeowners regarding this request.

3-I-26-DP

Peggy
37920

3-I-26-DP
Peggy (37920), February 24, 2026 at 10:24 AM

Several questions.
Will any wooded area be left between existing homes and this proposed development to block the view of this unwanted "housing complex" from the homeowners in the existing well established and peaceful neighborhood?
How will the issue of road damage to existing neighborhood roads from heavy construction equipment be addressed?
How will the issue of safety be addressed with the extreme increase in traffic attempting to enter and exit the existing neighborhood road from and onto John Sevier highway?
The intersection with John Sevier highway is already tricky if you are attempting to go east onto John Sevier and turn into the neighborhood off of John Sevier when traveling west.

February 24, 2026
at 10:24 AM

3-L-26-DP

Kevin
37918

3-L-26-DP
Kevin (37918), February 24, 2026 at 2:07 PM

This parcel has road frontage on both Asheville Hwy and Strawberry Plains Pike. It'd be great if the parcel provided street and pedestrian connectivity to each of those streets, for resiliency in our transportation network and convenience. This directly supports Policy 11 and Policy 14 of the Knox County Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
It also helps allieve adding additional traffic onto the congested Brakebill Rd segment for residents interested in accessing I-40 at Strawberry Plains Pike.

February 24, 2026
at 2:07 PM

February 24, 2026
at 4:04 PM

Tylor
37920

3-B-26-SU
Tylor (37920), February 24, 2026 at 4:04 PM

I'm 21 years old and live just a few minutes away from this lot, in a double wide with my grandparents, mom and stepdad, and 5 brothers... because housing is too expensive for us to consider moving out. Rents and home prices are too high for the Knoxville population to keep growing like it is, and wages for many industries in our city don't allow someone like me to consider renting on my own, let alone even consider buying a house. We're a tight family, but I'd love some breathing room, in my home area of South Knoxville. From my viewpoint, the only way to help correct our expensive housing market is allowing some exceptions just like this. He's not asking for a hundred unit apartment building... and I'm sure this duplex will look nicer than most of the houses around it. I may not even be able to afford a unit like the one he is trying to build, but if it brings more housing, not in the way of a $700k new single family, someone like me may eventually have a chance to rent a decent place. Thanks for your time. I strongly urge approval of allowing this structure.

February 24, 2026
at 4:29 PM

Travis
37920

3-B-26-SU
Travis (37920), February 24, 2026 at 4:29 PM

I don't understand why anyone would be against a duplex going into a large vacant lot. I live in the house my dad left me a few minutes away, and thank the good Lord he did because I can't believe how high home prices have become, especially for even a 50-year old house that needs a lot of work. In my 37 year old view, we need less $800k single family homes and more reasonable options, especially in beautiful South Knoxville. Please approve this!

3-G-26-DP

Annette
37932

3-G-26-DP
Annette (37932), February 24, 2026 at 4:48 PM

I am concerned about sediment and pollution run off into the existing spring fed pond on the property. We own the agricultural land down stream from the pond. This creek feeds another pond past us and flows into Hickory Creek. The creek that flows from it is the sole water source for our horses. I request bioretention, higher water quality standards, a larger than 60 ft buffer, the buffer to be revegetated, the existing 60 ft buffer of vegetation around the pond not be disturbed. I want to be a good neighbor to the subdivision and not cause problems. The water quality is a huge concern for the welfare of all animals that use this creek. It includes our horses, migrating geese, ducks, fish, turtles, deer, fox, coyote, and many smaller animal species

February 24, 2026
at 4:48 PM

3-I-26-DP

Andrew
37920

3-I-26-DP
Andrew (37920), February 24, 2026 at 5:32 PM

There is a reason this property has not already been developed. Like much of South Knoxville, it is littered with sinkholes. The proposed development will require filling in existing sinkholes (in fact, they have already filled in several of them, which, from what I understand, is illegal).
The property will require extensive modifications in order to build this many units. This will cause all sorts of issues with run off and will severly impact the people that live along Gondola avenue. Not to mention the additional traffic that will occur and the number of people turning onto John Sevier Avenue at a rather dangerous point in the road where vehicles are traveling in excess of 50 mph.
At the end of the day, this property is just not suited for this many units.

February 24, 2026
at 5:32 PM

February 25, 2026
at 9:34 AM

Paul
37920

3-F-26-RZ
Paul (37920), February 25, 2026 at 9:34 AM

This development represents a logical expansion of an identical project right next door. The transportation infrastructure is immediately available and will not be adversely affected. Utilities are readily available and there is a level, graded lot next door already zoned for neighborhood commercial development. A majority of the members of Crosswalk Community Church voted in favor of selling this property for development. There is no logical reason for opposition to this rezoning.

3-E-26-DP

Julia
37931

3-E-26-DP
Julia (37931), February 25, 2026 at 3:32 PM

I'm very concerned and upset about this setback request for the 7 new homes being built on this lot. The homes are already planned to be more dense than all other homes on Jenkins Road, thus reducing property values for existing homes on and off Jenkins road. This request to reduce the setback for this project should be rejected. It's already too dense, too close and just too much. The developer showed us his plans a couple of years ago and got all the modifications he requested. Now what? Why is this change being requested? Super unhappy registered voters. We'll see you at the meeting on Thursday.

February 25, 2026
at 3:32 PM

3-A-26-RZ

Jerry
37924

3-A-26-RZ
Jerry (37924), February 25, 2026 at 6:09 PM

Why is the up for rezoning again? This was just approved for 2 hours per acre on 23 acres. What are they trying to put in here now?

February 25, 2026
at 6:09 PM

3-E-26-DP

Austin
37931

3-E-26-DP
Austin (37931), February 25, 2026 at 6:35 PM

The current setbacks exist for a reason. Allowing these homes to move closer to the already existing neighborhood and homes would not only be a nuisance but also extremely unsightly. The existing homes have been in places for over 3 decades and it is unfair to those home owners to adjust existing rules simply to accommodate a developer who wants to make the most out of a lot that already had/has a single family home in place. The entire area will be negatively impacted by setting a new standard saying maximizing lot infill takes priority over community aesthetic and feel. Simply put, this is not an apartment complex or mobile home park and the area should not be treated as such.

February 25, 2026
at 6:35 PM

3-F-26-SU

Paige
37917

3-F-26-SU
Paige (37917), February 27, 2026 at 11:05 AM

As a nearby neighbor, I'm excited to see this property being developed to house two families in the thriving, walkable Whittle Springs neighborhood.

February 27, 2026
at 11:05 AM

3-E-26-DP

Sheila
37931

3-E-26-DP
Sheila (37931), February 27, 2026 at 8:33 PM

I say no to this request. Our property has already been breached by digging, heavy equipment, damage to our water line, and replacing the exit from our asphalt driveway with gravel, which still remains torn up after 2 months. I think Mr. Cheban has had way more impact on our property line than is required.

February 27, 2026
at 8:33 PM

February 28, 2026
at 9:10 PM

Lori
37922

3-A-26-UR
Lori (37922), February 28, 2026 at 9:10 PM

I am in opposition of this! The proposal clearly states there is to be amplified sound. Having customers being loud watching a large screen outside is a disturbance of the peace! It states the outdoor activities will end at 6pm but patrons will be outside until 11pm! The sound from Don Gallos already travels up the hill and is a disturbance to our community. This will be unbearable. We have been members of this community for almost 17 years and I have watched you slowly and continuously rob us of our peace in this area. There is no doubt this will decrease the value of our home and our quality of life!

February 28, 2026
at 11:55 PM

Gloria
37931

3-B-26-DP
Gloria (37931), February 28, 2026 at 11:55 PM

This property will not end up as a single-family dwelling, but will end up being yet another rental property the owner will rent out on Vrbo and/or AirBnB. The property owner already owns four such rental properties on Barbury Lane (one duplex and two single-family homes) and the amount of vehicles already congesting the street is getting out of hand. There have been several altercations between the tenants and local law enforcement due to vehicles parked in such a way that normal residents have had issues entering and exiting their own driveways. If this proposal goes through, there will be yet another rental unit with even more vehicles taking up street space. Because of this and other unmentioned issues with this property owner, I vehemently oppose this proposition.

William
37920

3-F-26-RZ
William (37920), March 1, 2026 at 1:20 PM

We, the neighborhood , other than builder D R Horton home owners , that recently starting selling homes (approximately 10-15 homes sold of 145 homes being built) ,who are property owners within 1/4 mile of this development ask for the support of Knox planning commission to deny this density from 5 units per acre to 1 1/2-2 units per acre. A petition is now being signed from home owners and available to commission prior to meeting. Thank you for your support.

March 1, 2026
at 1:20 PM

Sharon
37920

3-F-26-RZ
Sharon (37920), March 1, 2026 at 6:11 PM

Please deny the density of 5 units per acre to no more than 2 units per acre. All of my family including 7 grand children are driving and pull out on French rd several times daily. I have already had an accident with one of my grand daughters and my car was totaled, this exit is within 50 feet directly across Governor John Sevier highway from French road. Just recently D R Horton started building 145 houses and neighborhood rejects density ,entrance placement on dangerous curve , and minimum view of sight.

March 1, 2026
at 6:11 PM

Bettina
37924

3-K-26-DP
Bettina (37924), March 2, 2026 at 4:42 PM

I object to the redone/building of a home on this lot. The lot is not large enough for the neighborhoods standard lot size. The developer is, therefore, looking to incorporate the right of way as part of the lot so that the square foot minimum is met. I find this highly unprofessional and inappropriate.

March 2, 2026
at 4:42 PM

Rebecca
37920

3-F-26-RZ
Rebecca (37920), March 2, 2026 at 9:41 PM

I, Rebecca D., am asking that you deny D.R. Horton from changing our community. Please deny this density of 5 units per acre to 1 1/2-2 units per acre! We have spent our livelihoods on building our homes here and do not want our property value to decline in any way. Also, more importantly, the traffic in this area is already at a maximum. The there is a curve on John Sevier Highway that is greater than 90 degrees and my child has been in an accident there. There have also been several deaths in this curve of the road. Please help us by protecting our neighbors and family! Thank you!

March 2, 2026
at 9:41 PM

Sara
37931

3-B-26-DP
Sara (37931), March 3, 2026 at 6:56 AM

As a resident directly affected by the properties in question, I am vehemently against the addition of yet another short term rental near a school childerns' bus stop. The piece of land in question is not reasonably large enough to add a home sized structure. It is also worth noting that this will not be adding a single family home to the neighborhood, it will be adding a 4th short term vrbo rental building to the end of the street. The 3 existing buildings have long been a nuisance of litter & parking issues.

March 3, 2026
at 6:56 AM

March 3, 2026
at 12:37 PM

John
37922

3-A-26-UR
John (37922), March 3, 2026 at 12:37 PM

I respectfully request that this proposal be denied. The noise and traffic related issues that close to residential property is unacceptable. Thank you for your consideration.

John
37922

3-A-26-UR
John (37922), March 3, 2026 at 1:21 PM

1. A 2 story commercial building/restaurant in this area is unacceptable as this location is surrounded by residential neighborhoods that sit at a lower elevation. The patrons of this establishment will be looking right into the backyards of surrounding homes and the bedrooms of many of these homes, with most of these bedrooms being those of children.
2. The hours of operation open until 11pm with amplified sound is not in keeping with the noise ordinance of 10pm. Again, many of the surrounding homes have young children who have school night bedtimes much earlier than even 10pm.
3. When the Weigel's location went in the area residents were promised there would be no further commercial development west of Choto. This is on the West side of Choto Circle.
4. It is my understanding that this lot is part of a residential subdivision and should be residential.

March 3, 2026
at 1:21 PM

3-A-26-OB

David
37914

3-A-26-OB
David (37914), March 3, 2026 at 2:10 PM

In no way does this design meet the goal of Middle Housing with its slot units that face adjacent properties and the intense building coverage for a small non-conforming lot of 3,425 sqft. Under base zoning, the impervious limit would be 30% or a 1,027 sqft single family residence. With the intensity of 3 units and no parking being provided, this does not make sense on this property. Please stop approving these appeals that are cramming out of scale structures with more intense uses than surrounding properties in Mechanicsville. There are so many Middle Housing designs that could work without pushing the envelope. I could understand a duplex maybe, but "slotted" triplex, come on - deny.

March 3, 2026
at 2:10 PM

Sharon
37922

3-A-26-UR
Sharon (37922), March 3, 2026 at 2:37 PM

I'm a resident of Choto Fields subdivision and I've just learned of the proposed restaurant to be built at the corner of Choto and Northshore. The plan to have music, games, and bright lights until 11pm is at best a nuisance and at worst offensive in such proximity to a family neighborhood. I urge you to NOT approve this proposal.

March 3, 2026
at 2:37 PM

Tyler
37920

3-F-26-RZ
Tyler (37920), March 3, 2026 at 2:54 PM

Dear Planning Commission,
This email is in reference to file #3-F-26-RZ. As a family living close to this proposed rezone, I would like to share some concerns regarding this potential development. First, I would like too strongly urge the commission to think about the traffic congestion and safety along this stretch of John Sevier Hwy. This proposed development sits withing a curve on John Sevier hwy. that has seen many accidents due to its location. In addition, this development sits directly across from the East Tennessee Veterans Cemetery. The East Tennessee Veterans Cemetery is a well-maintained site that honors those who have served in our armed forces. Having a neighborhood with 5 dwellings per acre would take away from the beauty of this sacred environment and could invite potential issues like vandalism and littering. My request is that you keep this development at 2 dwelling per acre to minimize the impact of stated concerns. Thank you for your time and consideration.

March 3, 2026
at 2:54 PM

3-SD-26-C

William
3792

3-SD-26-C
William ( 3792), March 3, 2026 at 3:28 PM

This is concerning 3-SD-26-C. The entrance to the proposed duplex subdivision should be from Sevierville Pk and not Gondola. We have small children that ride bikes and scooters in the street on Gondola. This is a great neighborhood that watches out for each other and I know the amount of traffic and speeders would greatly increase. I don't want any of our children to get hurt in any way due to the increased traffic. Thank you!

March 3, 2026
at 3:28 PM

Seth
37922

3-A-26-UR
Seth (37922), March 3, 2026 at 4:28 PM

We do not need or want an establishment that will cause even more traffic, more noise, more light in our back yard. Don gallo music is already a problem. This is a huge threat to our property value. Every other year some developer wants to put in a pill clinic or beer garden at this location and it's a terrible location for any business because it is so close in proximity to nice neighborhoods. We are opposed to this. People could look directly into my backyard and pool invading my privacy. What happens if the business fails? Who on earth would want a big ugly building sandwiched between a several nice neighborhoods?

March 3, 2026
at 4:28 PM

Lorin
37922

3-A-26-UR
Lorin (37922), March 3, 2026 at 7:05 PM

We are a community which is just down the road from this new business.
We are very concerned about the following issues related to this new business:
1) The noise that may occur after 10:00pm. Every other business in the area (except Weigel's) closes by 10:00pm
2) Parking issues
3) Traffic congestion

March 3, 2026
at 7:05 PM

Kal
37922

3-A-26-UR
Kal (37922), March 3, 2026 at 7:24 PM

I have concerns about the proposed expansion of the bar and grill at Choto Rd and Northshore Dr. Outdoor activities such as pickleball, horseshoes, and lawn games operating until 11 PM would likely create significant nighttime noise for nearby residential neighborhoods.
I am also concerned about traffic and safety. Northshore and Choto are already narrow roads with little or no shoulder, and the traffic circle at this intersection frequently experiences congestion. Additional traffic from expanded entertainment uses could worsen safety conditions.
Finally, expanded activity could create parking overflow and increased late-night vehicle noise and headlights affecting nearby homes.
Given the existing road limitations and proximity to residential neighborhoods, I encourage careful reconsideration of this proposal in its current form.

March 3, 2026
at 7:24 PM

James
37922

3-A-26-UR
James (37922), March 3, 2026 at 7:45 PM

The property proposed for this rezoning is within less than 100' to single family homes in the subdivisions of Montgomery Cove, Choto Mills, and Choto Fields. The planned activities, entertainment, and operating hours until 11:00p will create excessive noise and traffic degrading the quality of life and property values for the families in this neighborhood.

March 3, 2026
at 7:45 PM

Craig
37922

3-A-26-UR
Craig (37922), March 3, 2026 at 8:55 PM

This request should be rejected. This property is in close proximity to quiet neighborhoods in all directions, and the proposed facility is not in keeping with the surrounding area. The outdoor activities, amplified sound, and bar will lead to increased noise pollution that will resonate throughout the adjacent neighborhoods. No one wants to live within earshot of loud music, pickle ball, and rowdy patrons. No one moved into this area hoping that a Top Golf style facility would move in next door.

March 3, 2026
at 8:55 PM

Dale
37922

3-A-26-UR
Dale (37922), March 3, 2026 at 9:33 PM

Speaking for myself

March 3, 2026
at 9:33 PM

Jim & Debbie
37923

9-A-25-SU
Jim & Debbie (37923), March 3, 2026 at 9:40 PM

My husband and I are opposed to Special Use being permitted to build 32 townhomes at 932 N. Gallaher. We reside at 600 Mars Hill Road. We bought this property because it was a quiet residential area. It is our understanding that West Hills has been zoned as a low residential area. It is our wish that it remains so, primarily for the preservation and safety of this community.
North Gallaher View Road is not equipped to handle the volume of traffic these additional town homes would create and would create hazardous traffic conditions in our community. We are opposed to the exemption that has been made for Special Use, however, we are not opposed to homes being built on this property that comply with local ordinance of WHCA to keep this a low residential area.
Sincerely,
Jim and Debbie T.

March 3, 2026
at 9:40 PM

Jaime
37922

3-A-26-UR
Jaime (37922), March 4, 2026 at 1:04 AM

I am writing as a resident of the Choto Fields / Choto Mills community regarding the proposed rezoning of the property located at 1615 Choto Road.
While our community supports thoughtful development and local businesses, many residents have concerns about rezoning this parcel to allow additional commercial activity immediately adjacent to established residential neighborhoods.
Several homes appear to be located approximately 70-100 feet from portions of the proposed development area. The parcel also sits at approximately 884 feet elevation, while many surrounding homes sit significantly lower. When combined with the possibility of a two-story structure and outdoor activity areas, these factors may increase sound and lighting impacts on nearby homes.
Residents are particularly concerned about the possibility of outdoor amplified music and a pickleball court, which have generated noise disputes in other communities across the country.
The surrounding area already contains numerous businesses that serve the community, and additional commercial zoning at this location does not appear necessary.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Planning Commission maintain the current zoning designation for 1615 Choto Road.
Thank you for your service to Knox County and for considering the concerns of nearby residents.

March 4, 2026
at 1:04 AM

Melissa
37923

9-A-25-SU
Melissa (37923), March 4, 2026 at 6:18 AM

This is a very poor development plan for this neighborhood. I can say with certainty that no one wants these 32 town houses on this property. Access to the development off Gallaher View Road will be almost impossible during rush hour, and an entrance from Mars Hill Road will be difficult to make. The neighbors of this development are vehemently against this. This is a very poor use of this property. Magnificent old trees that house nesting hawks will be destroyed. Please do not approve this agenda item. Thank you.

March 4, 2026
at 6:18 AM

Drew
37922

3-A-26-UR
Drew (37922), March 4, 2026 at 7:07 AM

We will pass on the dink donk noise of the pickle ball while eating but I'm down for another food option here.
I approve this message.
D. Incognito

March 4, 2026
at 7:07 AM

James and Jenifer
37922

3-A-26-UR
James and Jenifer (37922), March 4, 2026 at 7:51 AM

As members of the Mill at Choto Subdivision, which abuts the subject property, we are quite concerned with the planned operating hours of 11:00 AM - 11:00 PM, seven days a week. The amount of noise from a business with outside areas, especially late at night, could prove to be a nuisance to families that have to get up early for work and school the next day. We would strongly prefer that the operating hours be more in line with the hours of neighboring businesses, which close no later than 9:30 - 10:00 each night. We are also concerned with the size of the property and the potential number of customers, which parking may not accommodate, forcing spillover parking on our narrow street, which is not designed for street parking and may present major safety concerns, especially late at night. We strongly urge you to require the business owners to reach out to our community (as good neighbors) to find mutually acceptable ways to address our concerns.

March 4, 2026
at 7:51 AM

Tom
37922

3-A-26-UR
Tom (37922), March 4, 2026 at 8:09 AM

Key issues for us is having an outside area for patrons staying open until 11pm when most other commercial businesses in the vicinity close at 10pm. More importantly is ingress and egress from this property! It is only feet away from the Choto Road roundabout. The entrance/exit from our street onto Choto Road which is only a few feet further away is already very dangerous as people coming out of the roundabout are slingshotting on to Choto! I can only imagine this establishment's traffic being closer to the roundabout being in significantly more danger!
We are not opposed to a restaurant on this property but these issues above need further consideration.
This is item 40 on the agenda. Restaurant at Choto and S Northshore Dr.

March 4, 2026
at 8:09 AM

Nick
37909

9-A-25-SU
Nick (37909), March 4, 2026 at 9:41 AM

Hello,
I am the president of Saint Andrews Homeowners Association. We find the variance very questionable and believe it sets a terrible precedent for existing single family homes and the future and of Knoxville's neighborhoods to the detriment of all nearby homeowners. Allowing min lot widths that small is an invitation to begin knocking down existing single family homes on lots in every neighborhood and one day waking up to realize you live in a completely different zone. The special use exemption was not intended for situations like these and appears that it may begin to be used as an end around for existing zoning rules, process of public involvement, and ignoring general sentiment of taxpaying citizens. We side with WHCA and oppose Special Use change.
Thank you for the consideration

March 4, 2026
at 9:41 AM

Mark
37922

3-A-26-UR
Mark (37922), March 4, 2026 at 9:47 AM

As a nearby resident in Montgomery Cove, I would like to add my concerns to the proposed grill and bar near the Choto roundabout.
In addition to the understated traffic volume now on North Shore, the proposed structure includes a minimum number of parking spaces for the facility.
It is an anticipated that any overflow of traffic during peak operating hours would spill over to some of the vacant parking spaces at the Markets at Choto. As a result, patrons would have to cross Choto Road on foot (possibly at dark) thereby affecting the number of parking spaces available for the businesses in Choto market.

March 4, 2026
at 9:47 AM

March 4, 2026
at 10:18 AM

Boyd
37909

9-A-25-SU
Boyd (37909), March 4, 2026 at 10:18 AM

I am asking you to meet the expectations of all West Hills residents and speak up for our neighbors and our community. I encourage you , the Planning Commission, to consider the facts Do Not grant a Special Use exemption for this part of West Hills.

March 4, 2026
at 10:42 AM

Marquetta
37922

3-A-26-UR
Marquetta (37922), March 4, 2026 at 10:42 AM

This appears to be a well designed proposed project.
As a homeowner residing directly behind the site, I would ask for consideration that the hours of operation to coincide with Don Gallos and and close by 10pm instead of the proposed time of 11pm.
This I feel would show consideration for the residential areas for noise and traffic.

March 4, 2026
at 10:46 AM

Susan
37909

9-A-25-SU
Susan (37909), March 4, 2026 at 10:46 AM

Please deny the Special Use application to build 32 townhouses at the Gallaher View/Middlebrook site. The density of this development and its proximity to other homes are not in compliance with the General Plan and the One-Year Plan. The General Plan states that, while encouraging growth, you must ensure that the context of new development, including scale and compatibility, does not impact existing neighborhoods and communities.
A smaller version of the development would be more compatible with the neighborhoods, and it would still encourage growth. Therefore, please vote against the Special Use Application for 32 townhouses.

March 4, 2026
at 10:57 AM

Eric
37922

3-A-26-UR
Eric (37922), March 4, 2026 at 10:57 AM

I am concerned if operating hours extend until 11:00 pm nightly. Neighborhoods surround this location. Operating hours limited to 10:00 pm nightly like surrounding businesses make a lot more sense for this location.

March 4, 2026
at 11:03 AM

Neil/Divina
37909

9-A-25-SU
Neil/Divina (37909), March 4, 2026 at 11:03 AM

I am writing in opposition to the proposed Special Use request under Article 16.2 Special Use Review of the City of Knoxville Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, Section F outlines the required standards that must be satisfied for approval. The applicant must meet all of these standards, and in my opinion, they have not done so.
Based on the information presented, the proposal does not adequately demonstrate compliance with the required criteria, including compatibility with surrounding properties and protection of public health, safety, and welfare.
Additionally, I have serious concerns regarding traffic safety, particularly for residents entering and exiting onto Gallaher View. Increased traffic, potential turning conflicts, and limited visibility could create hazardous conditions for neighbors and other motorists. The safety of existing residents should be a primary consideration in this review process.
For these reasons, I urge the decision-makers to carefully evaluate whether the required standards have truly been met before granting approval.
Thank you for your time and consideration.

March 4, 2026
at 11:18 AM

D P
37922

3-A-26-UR
D P (37922), March 4, 2026 at 11:18 AM

Please reconsider this project. This is a use on review, which means it is not automatically allowed by right. The zoning commission was established to look at each of these type situations on their individual merit.
1. A 2-story restaurant will at this location will sit taller than most surrounding properties making it a focal point. This will change the overall appearance of the area. The improvement should be no taller than 1 story.
2. The hours of operation are unacceptable next to residential areas.
3. Amplified sound is unacceptable next to residential areas.
Persons in this area are not against development, but the development should be thoughtful and balance with the harmony of the residential area that they are wanting to be associated with.

March 4, 2026
at 11:43 AM

Robert
37909

9-A-25-SU
Robert (37909), March 4, 2026 at 11:43 AM

Allowing a variance for 72 town houses is not compatible with that area. It seems as though you are surrounding our neighborhood with condensed housing. Gallaher View is becoming an overly congested and dangerous section of street to navigate between Kingston Pike an Middlebrook. One cannot turn on to Broome Road going south or other streets without meeting traffic going north in the turn lane. This street cannot support any more traffic.

Martha Jean

9-A-25-SU
Martha Jean ( ), March 4, 2026 at 1:16 PM

Dear Commissioner,
I am asking you to oppose the approval of construction of 32 Gallaher View townhouses adjacent to West Hills and other single family homes. I attended the meeting with the developer on the property and clearly these are too narrow and too many will be crowded into the property.
We have lived in West Hills since 1971. Both of our adult children have purchased homes in West Hills. We do not oppose construction, but adding 32 townhouses does not support the integrity of our neighborhood.
Thanking you in advance.
Martha Jean B.
[redacted]

March 4, 2026
at 1:16 PM

Julie
37922

3-A-26-UR
Julie (37922), March 4, 2026 at 1:28 PM

The corner of Choto Rd and Northshore Dr is already overcrowded with homes, neighborhoods, businesses, and restaurants, and the addition of yet another one, especially with such extensive outdoor plans, will be overly burdensome to the already-failing infrastructure of the area. Additionally, such extensive outdoor plans will negatively affect our neighborhood, which sits right across Northshore from the planned restaurant and activity center, with extensive noise and light pollution. I strongly oppose this project or any further development similar to it.

March 4, 2026
at 1:28 PM

Clarence
37909

9-A-25-SU
Clarence (37909), March 4, 2026 at 2:07 PM

I am asking that you vote to deny this Special Use request that far exceeds the number of townhouse units per lot allowable in Zone RN-4. The proposed development plan for 32 townhouse units per lot exceeds the allowable townhouse units per lot in a RN-4 zone by 28 units. This is more than 3 times the allowed townhouse units per lot in RN-4. The question before you regarding 962 N Gallaher View Rd is: "Does the proposed plan for construction of 32 townhouse units meet all the standards in Article 16.2.F.2? " The excessive number of townhouse units does not meet the 'compatible with character of the neighborhood' test found at 16.2.F.2.3. A less intense development would be better use of this lot and would be more compatible with the adjacent single family neighborhood located on three sides of the proposed development.
Please consider the above in your deliberations and vote to deny the requested Special Use.
Clarence
West Hills Community Association Zoning Chair

March 4, 2026
at 2:07 PM

Pat
37922

3-A-26-UR
Pat (37922), March 4, 2026 at 2:38 PM

I am one of two residents in Montgomery Cove who have a direct line of sight and sound of this property being proposed for a zoning change (my home is the first one down the Choto side of the circle). Years ago, we dealt with the buildout of the Choto Markets facility and Weigels, and we have patiently dealt with the visual and noise "pollution" involved in the aromas (not always bad!), noise, and lights of the facilities. Early morning trash pickups at Weigels usually involve pounding of the large dumpster at 6am, and quite a wake up call. Music from Don Gallo's is audible as well as patron noise - we can plainly hear conversations and an occasional kids' squeal or yell, which is a little much when entertaining friends on the deck. We realize that progress comes often at a price - what I'd ask is that the developers consider assisting with visual barriers for our property to the Choto road area - specifically, paying for shrubs, trees, and foliage that would create an audible dampener and a visual buffer. It might cost $25 - 30,000 (or more) to do it appropriately, but being a good neighbor also comes at a cost. We'd appreciate serious consideration in this request.

March 4, 2026
at 2:38 PM

Charles
37922

3-A-26-UR
Charles (37922), March 4, 2026 at 4:40 PM

Resident of Montgomery Cove... I know this is going against the grain (as most people have a knee jerk opposition to any development within 5 miles of home) but I think this sounds great! It would be nice to have more dining and (family friendly) entertainment options that don't require a 20 minute drive one way or the other. Let's build a more natural community and maybe even have some fun with your neighbors!

March 4, 2026
at 4:40 PM

Christina
37922

3-A-26-UR
Christina (37922), March 4, 2026 at 5:04 PM

I oppose the pickleball court so close to our homes in Choto Mill. There have been many studies outlining the adverse health effects of pickleball noise. A few of the many articles related to the studies are below, including one detailing pickleball noise at the park off McFee in Farragut.
https://pubs.aip.org/asa/poma/article/56/1/050001/3349852/Pickleball-noise-The-physiological-and?__cf_chl_tk=ckYo2uxpfM.XPb4KOqK.MbIClxW9PeQx4usAluCQKHA-1772660775-1.0.1.1-9WeVQk1qzq_B6l6OgcIpflL.jugftLUssqQsBvq9jaI
https://romitoresearch.org/
https://www.farragutpress.com/articles/2023/11/13371

March 4, 2026
at 5:04 PM

March 4, 2026
at 10:27 PM

john
37909

9-A-25-SU
john (37909), March 4, 2026 at 10:27 PM

In Rotary we have a test we use to help us make ethical decisions on whether it is for personal or professional use. It's call the 4-Way Test of the Things We Think Say and Do. My opinion this development does not meet any of the criteria.
First: Is it the Truth? No, this development is not compatible to the surrounding neighborhood nor was there any hardship for the developer that justifies reducing the set back from 20' to 9'.
Second: Is It Fair to All Concerned. Again No. We have tried to work with the developer on many occasions seeking a reasonable solution of a # of townhouses that both parties can live with.
Third: Will It Build Good Will & Better Friendships. We know the property will be developed but adding this many townhouses right up against the neighbors who purchased housing and planned to reside in an RN1 development long term doesn't feel like the way things are supposed to go.
Fourth: Will It Be Beneficial To All Concerned. Let's be honest here. This development really just benefits the developer.
Again, the community knows this property will be developed. No one is against that. The community is ok with a 24 or so Townhouses that have a reasonable set back from the surrounding neighbors. There is no doubt the developer will make a very nice profit here, the community can live with a reasonable development, and it will be fair to all concerned.

March 5, 2026
at 12:12 AM

John
37922

3-A-26-UR
John (37922), March 5, 2026 at 12:12 AM

1. A 2 story commercial building/restaurant in this area is unacceptable as this location is surrounded by residential neighborhoods that sit at a lower elevation. The patrons of this establishment will be looking right into the backyards of surrounding homes and the bedrooms of many of these homes, with most of these bedrooms being those of children.
2. The hours of operation open until 11pm with amplified sound is not in keeping with the noise ordinance of 10pm. Again, many of the surrounding homes have young children who have school night bedtimes much earlier than even 10pm.
3. When the Weigel's location went in the area residents were promised there would be no further commercial development west of Choto. This is on the West side of Choto Circle.
4. The traffic in this area is already a hazard, and this will add to it.

Lee
37909

9-A-25-SU
Lee (37909), March 5, 2026 at 7:32 AM

The West Hills Community Association and our neighbors both in the immediate vicinity of 932 N Gallaher property and neighbors across our community ask that you DENY Mainland's request for Special Use.
Because the developer chose to remove the Planned Residential District the property had and has moved forward under conditions of RN-4 Zoning, he has arrived at this point to ask that the specified limit of 8 units per lot be disregarded so he can build 32 units on the 4-acre site.
Larry Silverstein, a West Hills neighbor and attorney who is donating his legal expertise to help his neighbors, will speak on our behalf to address legitimate concerns within the context of the law as to why the Special Use should be DENIED.
We respectfully ask that you consider Mr. Silverstein's earlier correspondence to you detailing the conflicts with existing City Zoning Standards and today's oral presentation reemphasizing the legal conflicts the developer's petition raises.
After weighing the facts, understanding neighbors concerns about the gluttonous number of proposed units, lose of privacy and financial loss for two adjacent neighbors, and knowing that our neighborhood and those who travel Gallaher View Road will live with the hazardous conditions created by this development, we respectfully ask that you DENY the developer's petition.
Leland C Hume
President, West Hills Community Association

March 5, 2026
at 7:32 AM

Danni
37909

9-A-25-SU
Danni (37909), March 5, 2026 at 8:33 AM

Thank you for your work to keep Knoxville a beautiful thriving community for all residents. I am requesting that you vote to not allow Special Use to build 32 townhouses on the one lot at 932 N Gallaher View. In addition to the disruption to the adjacent neighbors, the current plan accesses the site via a 25' wide driveway onto already busy Gallaher View, there are steep slopes in the planned retention pond in the middle of the site, the plan includes the destruction of mature streets within the site, and it is incompatible with the existing neighborhood including Kempton Road homes. My husband, Tom Varlan and I have raised our family in West Hills where he was raised. Our children live here. We are a diverse and active community that loves our city. Please consider our concerns. Danni Varlanâs WHCA.

March 5, 2026
at 8:33 AM

Hurley
37909

9-A-25-SU
Hurley (37909), March 5, 2026 at 9:27 AM

Please consider keeping the townhome lot to 8 units and not 24. 24 new units would not match the current area and would cause much more driveway traffic. The number of additional students going to the local schools would make the overpopulation even worse.
Thank you for your attention and for considering the reputation of Knoxville as it grows.

March 5, 2026
at 9:27 AM

March 5, 2026
at 11:26 AM

Elizabeth
37909

9-A-25-SU
Elizabeth (37909), March 5, 2026 at 11:26 AM

I am opposed to the Special Use allowing this project to increase the numbers of units allowed. This area (Middlebrook and Gallaher View} is already a speedway with multiple wrecks a day (including my husband last fall). The apartments between Walker Springs and Gallaher view are adding to the problem. Where does this stop? The current allowed units should not be changed for this project. Please do the responsible thing and keep the current zoning!

March 5, 2026
at 11:35 AM

Karen
37909

9-A-25-SU
Karen (37909), March 5, 2026 at 11:35 AM

I absolutely oppose an exemption to current zonong for the construction of 32 Townhouses at N. Gallaher View. Among the many reasons is the issue of a sharp increase in traffic in that area which is already overloaded. That level of construction will degrade that neighborhood and there is potential for environmental damage. Please do not approve this.

March 5, 2026
at 12:05 PM

William (Bill)
37909

9-A-25-SU
William (Bill) (37909), March 5, 2026 at 12:05 PM

My wife and I are longtime residents of West Hills and without going into too much discussion, I'm asking you to please reconsider your yes vote for the Special Use to build 32 townhouses on the one lot at 932 N Gallaher View. Please do not approve this Special Use permit!
Thanks! And please remember that we both vote!
Bill M.

2-L-26-RZ

Sara
37922

2-L-26-RZ
Sara (37922), February 7, 2026 at 8:54 PM

I would like to oppose this rezoning proposal. I live on Fox Road, along with many other houses and neighborhoods. Our house was built in the 1960's, like many other houses that have been on this road just as long. We do not want this area to be turned into commercial businesses. There is plenty of room on Kingston Pike for businesses to reside. There is no need to cause additional traffic, noise, and to ruin the aesthetic of fox road that MANY people call home.

February 7, 2026
at 8:54 PM

February 9, 2026
at 9:06 AM

Mike
37923

9-A-25-SU
Mike (37923), February 9, 2026 at 9:06 AM

Please consider the nature of the surrounding neighborhood when you establish the allowable density of this development. The additional traffic created by this development will present issues as well. Has a traffic study been performed? The owners of this property have a right to develop it and profit from their endeavor. Serious deterioration of the nearby property owners' quality of life should not be collateral damage in their search for maximum profit, however.

February 10, 2026
at 9:03 AM

Jessica
37920

2-A-26-HPA
Jessica (37920), February 10, 2026 at 9:03 AM

Please see attached letter from the Tree Board.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260210090319.pdf

February 11, 2026
at 12:13 PM

Marianne
37920

2-A-26-HPA
Marianne (37920), February 11, 2026 at 12:13 PM

Date: February 11, 2026
Re: Opposition to File 2-A-26-HPA (3725 W Governor John Sevier Hwy)
From: Marianne Wilson, Homeowner (15 years) at 6316 Gateway Lane
I am writing to OPPOSE the Level II Certificate of Appropriateness for the property at 3725 W Governor John Sevier Hwy for the following reasons: Financial Impacts, Peace-of-Mind Impacts, Noise Pollution and Potential Damage to Home and Property.
Please refer to the attached PDF file.
Please OPPOSE the Level II Certificate of Appropriateness to protect my community.
Sincerely,
Marianne Wilson
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260211121322.pdf

February 15, 2026
at 1:39 PM

Andrew
37932

3-A-26-DP
Andrew (37932), February 15, 2026 at 1:39 PM

Please see attached PDF.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260215133922.pdf

February 15, 2026
at 2:39 PM

Jennifer
37932

3-A-26-DP
Jennifer (37932), February 15, 2026 at 2:39 PM

See attached
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260215143955.pdf

February 15, 2026
at 6:44 PM

Kailey
37932

3-A-26-DP
Kailey (37932), February 15, 2026 at 6:44 PM

See Attached: Formal Opposition to Proposed Vintage Knoxville West Development (Case: 3-A-26-DP)
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260215184443.pdf

February 18, 2026
at 2:37 PM

Terry
37920

3-B-26-SU
Terry (37920), February 18, 2026 at 2:37 PM

CVNA opposes this variance. This lot is on a sloped, blind curve. Its soil is a limestone-rock base that may require blasting. Removal of mature tree will increase stormwater runoff, erosion, and flooding near the Catlett/Brandau intersection. Duplexes reduce property values in single-family neighborhoods. There's also the issue of absentee landlords. Also, Mr. Stinnett has been stalking our members of social media, sending them unwanted PMs about his project. Full comments are attached.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260218143720.pdf

February 19, 2026
at 12:30 PM

Olivia
37932

3-A-26-DP
Olivia (37932), February 19, 2026 at 12:30 PM

I strongly oppose the proposed apartment complex planned across from our neighborhood. While growth and development are inevitable, this particular project raises serious concerns regarding safety, infrastructure, and environmental impact.
First, the surrounding roads were not designed to handle the significant increase in traffic that a high-density development would bring. Increased congestion will not only create daily inconvenience for residents but also raise safety risks for families, school buses, pedestrians, and emergency response vehicles that rely on safe and efficient road access.
Additionally, this area currently supports local wildlife and natural green space that would be disrupted by large-scale construction. The loss of habitat and increased human activity could displace wildlife, increase roadway animal incidents, and negatively impact the character and ecological balance of our community. We respectfully ask decision-makers to consider the long-term impact this development would have on traffic safety, environmental preservation, infrastructure capacity, and the overall quality of life for current residents. Thoughtful growth should prioritize compatibility with existing neighborhoods, proper infrastructure planning, and preservation of the natural environment that makes this community a desirable place to live.

View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260219123018.pdf

February 19, 2026
at 12:49 PM

Anthony
37932

3-A-26-DP
Anthony (37932), February 19, 2026 at 12:49 PM

Please see attached PDF
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260219124903.pdf

February 19, 2026
at 1:25 PM

Bailey
37932

3-A-26-DP
Bailey (37932), February 19, 2026 at 1:25 PM

Please see attached PDF.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260219132552.pdf

February 19, 2026
at 2:02 PM

Courtney
37912

3-A-26-DP
Courtney (37912), February 19, 2026 at 2:02 PM

Please see attached pdf.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260219140226.pdf

February 19, 2026
at 2:54 PM

William
37932

3-A-26-DP
William (37932), February 19, 2026 at 2:54 PM

See attachment for my concerns about this project
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260219145445.pdf

February 23, 2026
at 2:47 PM

Terry
37920

3-B-26-SU
Terry (37920), February 23, 2026 at 2:47 PM

See attached submitted by mail.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260223144718.pdf

February 23, 2026
at 7:12 PM

Rich
37924

3-K-26-DP
Rich (37924), February 23, 2026 at 7:12 PM

Dear Members of the Knox County Planning Commission, I am a homeowner in The Park at Babelay Road subdivision and respectfully submit this formal objection and request for careful technical review regarding Case 3-K-26-DP and the proposed replat affecting Lot 73. Please see the attached PDF for additional details. Thank you.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260223191235.pdf

February 27, 2026
at 12:10 PM

Chase
37932

3-A-26-DP
Chase (37932), February 27, 2026 at 12:10 PM

I want to voice my disapproval of this project: see attached.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260227121032.pdf

Terry
37920

3-B-26-SU
Terry (37920), March 1, 2026 at 9:56 AM

CVNA would like to add this addendum to our prior letter. It has come to our attention that he Commission has denied a prior variance request to build a duplex on this lot. Additionally, the site photo that shows a prior structure on this property appears to be without context. That was an illegally built accessory building that never was permitted nor inspected and approved by Codes. This lot has traded owners over the years, when the owners have discovered their inability to build on it. Furthermore, as indicated in our prior submission, the removal of trees that absorb as much as 20,000 gallons of water an hour will substantially increase flooding on the lower end of Brandau. Trees can add up to 15% to property values and provide shade which reduces temperatures. They also reduce urban noise by 15 decibels, which is vital for a property only 250 yards from the noise of Chapman Highway. Thank you. Our full comments are attached.

View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260301095643.pdf

March 1, 2026
at 9:56 AM

March 2, 2026
at 10:43 AM

Amy
37924

3-K-26-DP
Amy (37924), March 1, 2026 at 4:10 PM

Please see attachment.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260301161041.pdf

March 1, 2026
at 4:10 PM

2-L-26-RZ

Applicant

2-L-26-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
March 2, 2026 at 10:43 AM

Attached please find Applicant Correspondence relating to the subject Agenda Item.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260302104335.pdf

applicant

Cherie
37932

3-A-26-DP
Cherie (37932), March 3, 2026 at 7:47 AM

My husband and I are residents of the subdivision directly across from the proposed complex. Attached are our comments regarding our opposition to the construction of this complex at this time.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260303074757.pdf

March 3, 2026
at 7:47 AM

March 3, 2026
at 12:57 PM

Stacy
37922

3-A-26-UR
Stacy (37922), March 3, 2026 at 12:57 PM

I am writing to formally oppose the proposed two-story restaurant and outdoor recreation development planned for the property located along Choto Road. I have attached my opposition in an attached document.

View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260303125742.pdf

Amanda
37922

3-A-26-UR
Amanda (37922), March 3, 2026 at 1:10 PM

On behalf of the Choto Fields HOA community which is immediately adjacent to the proposed development site, I am submitting the attached comment to express our strong opposition to the current proposal as it is stated. Please view the attachment for our concerns. Thank you
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260303131041.pdf

March 3, 2026
at 1:10 PM

Dale
37920

3-F-26-RZ
Dale (37920), March 3, 2026 at 1:26 PM

See attached
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260303132649.pdf

March 3, 2026
at 1:26 PM

Lee
37909

9-A-25-SU
Lee (37909), March 3, 2026 at 5:06 PM

Members of the Planning Commission and Planning Staff:
Attached are two documents: Primary Interface Aspects and Secondary Interface Aspects
These documents are based on neighborhood input and discussion between West Hills Community Association leadership, representative neighbors closest to the site, and representatives of Mainland development company at the offices of Canon and Canon Engineering on January 15, 2026. The attachments were initially prepared to document and align neighborhood concerns and requests. They have been reviewed by affected neighbors.
These docs may need to be revised after our review of the following recent information:
1) Recently provided Mainland Plans, Rev 2,
2) Recently provided Planning Design Guidelines for Landscape Screening
3) Special Use Report, 9-A-25-SU issued February 27, 2026.
These documents have been provided to Mainland. We request that our concerns and requests be considered and integrated to the extent practical by Mainland during the landscape permitting process.
We also request the Planning Staff review and provide us any guidance necessary to help align content and details for a future Landscape Plan acceptable to the Planning Staff, our affected neighbors and Mainland.
Thank you for considering our ideas. We look forward to working with Mainland and all concerned parties in the future to arrive at a mutually beneficial solution.
Lee Hume
President, West Hills Community Association
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260303170642.pdf

March 3, 2026
at 5:06 PM

March 3, 2026
at 11:56 PM

Larry
37909

9-A-25-SU
Larry (37909), March 3, 2026 at 11:56 PM

Please see attached comments on Agenda Item # 10, March 5, 2026, meeting on behalf of the West Hills Community Assn
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260303235615.pdf

Jerry
37909

9-A-25-SU
Jerry (37909), March 4, 2026 at 1:16 AM

See Attached. Thank you for your consideration of my comments.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260304011638.pdf

March 4, 2026
at 1:16 AM

March 4, 2026
at 10:07 AM

Stephen
37922

3-A-26-UR
Stephen (37922), March 4, 2026 at 10:07 AM

Please see the attached Public Comment and Appeal of this project.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260304100759.pdf

March 4, 2026
at 11:12 AM

William
37923

9-A-25-SU
William (37923), March 4, 2026 at 11:12 AM

Please review the document attached below in request to deny the Special Use Application to build 32 Town Homes. Thank you
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260304111227.pdf

March 4, 2026
at 11:58 AM

Jaime
37922

3-A-26-UR
Jaime (37922), March 4, 2026 at 11:58 AM

Please see Attached PDF
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260304115833.pdf

Bruce
37920

2-A-26-HPA
Bruce (37920), March 4, 2026 at 1:42 PM

Twenty residents of Gateway Lane and Walmar Drive have signed a paper stating that they oppose the request to expand the project. Bruce.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260304134210.pdf

March 4, 2026
at 1:42 PM

Serjay
37923

9-A-25-SU
Serjay (37923), March 4, 2026 at 2:03 PM

Please see the attachment for planning Staff
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260304140306.pdf

March 4, 2026
at 2:03 PM

2-L-26-RZ

Andrew
37804

2-L-26-RZ
Andrew (37804), March 4, 2026 at 2:23 PM

Please see attached PDF showing latest conceptual layouts for the proposed project.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260304142325.pdf

March 4, 2026
at 2:23 PM

Christy
37922

3-A-26-UR
Christy (37922), March 4, 2026 at 4:56 PM

Please see my attached concerns. I appreciate your consideration.

View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260304165613.pdf

March 4, 2026
at 4:56 PM

March 4, 2026
at 11:27 PM

Elizabeth
37920

3-B-26-SU
Elizabeth (37920), March 4, 2026 at 11:27 PM

Thank you for taking the time to read my letter, I am one of many residents of Colonial Village that is strongly opposed to the rezoning of 102 Brandau Drive Knoxville, TN. 37920
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20260304232756.pdf