August 14, 2025
Planning Commission meeting

Public Comments

41 Comments for

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!

May 5, 2025
at 2:28 PM

5-C-25-PA

Adair
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.

May 6, 2025
at 7:42 AM

5-E-25-RZ

Matthew
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.
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.

May 7, 2025
at 2:02 PM

5-E-25-RZ

Sherry
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.
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.

May 7, 2025
at 2:04 PM

5-E-25-RZ

Matthew
37923

5-E-25-RZ
Matthew (37923), April 26, 2025 at 12:26 PM

See attachment.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250426122618.pdf

April 26, 2025
at 12:26 PM

6-A-24-UR

Sarah
37932

6-A-24-UR
Sarah (37932), July 7, 2025 at 11:34 PM

Im writing to express my strong support for the proposal.
Single-family zoning has been the default for decades, but we now know that gentle density can help address housing shortages, reduce sprawl, and create more walkable, vibrant neighborhoods. This project wont disrupt the character of the community; instead, it will allow another household (perhaps a young family, retirees, or essential workers) to live in a neighborhood they otherwise couldnt afford.
Critics often fear change, but duplexes arent overdevelopment they are a modest, sensible way to add housing without drastically altering the area. Many thriving communities mix single-family homes with duplexes and small apartments seamlessly. This project is an opportunity to move beyond outdated zoning norms that exclude people and drive up costs.
I urge the Commission to approve this project. Lets welcome housing options that make our community more accessible, resilient, and dynamic.

July 7, 2025
at 11:34 PM

6-A-24-UR

Emily
37777

6-A-24-UR
Emily (37777), July 10, 2025 at 2:41 PM

The proposed development is in a planned growth area. Per Knox County's own policies, "The purposes of the Planned Growth Area designation are to encourage a reasonably compact pattern of development, promote expansion of the Knox County economy, offer a wide range of housing choices, and coordinate the action of the public and private sectors, particularly with regard to provision of adequate roads, utilities, schools, drainage and other public facilities and services." The proposed development will house a total of four families on 1.30 acres. This development is not going to change the overall character of the neighborhood. The plan is modest and comports with the county's policies and vision for future housing choices. I strongly support this plan.

July 10, 2025
at 2:41 PM

6-A-24-UR

Homeowners, Westland Bay
37922

6-A-24-UR
Homeowners, Westland Bay (37922), July 12, 2025 at 12:26 PM

Comment 11 is from someone who lives in 37932, not even in our neighborhood, and yet wants to comment on something that will not affect her personally. She callously disregards the valid concerns of people who do live here.
Despite the MPC staffs claim to the contrary, property values on our street will fall significantly if 4 townhomes (2 duplexes) are crowded on one small lot at the entrance of our street.
Just because the MPCs future land use plans envision different types of housing in new subdivisions, it does not justify crowding duplex townhomes on a street that has had only widely spaced out single-family houses for 37 years.
Also, planting trees along the curb will not prevent people from parking on our narrow street to get to these townhomes, creating difficulties for emergency vehicles, making it difficult for us to turn onto our street, and obscuring clear sight of Westland before turning onto this busy street. If approved, a fence is a must.
We request the application be denied. Approving it will drastically alter the long-established character of the street, in addition to creating the critical problems mentioned above and in the first 10 comments. Thank you.

July 12, 2025
at 12:26 PM

6-A-24-UR

Ryan
37922

6-A-24-UR
Ryan (37922), July 18, 2025 at 8:48 AM

As a nearby resident of the Westland community, we are opposed to this rezoning proposal. Properties in the area are all single family homes and should remain so. The location of this parcel is also one where higher density housing would lead to potential safety concerns on to Westland Drive, a very busy 2 lane road. We urge the planning commission to reconsider and to deny this request.

July 18, 2025
at 8:48 AM

6-A-24-UR

Carrie
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.

May 20, 2024
at 6:35 PM

6-A-24-UR

Homeowners on Westland Bay Drive
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.
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

May 30, 2024
at 6:53 AM

6-A-24-UR

Homeowners on Westland Bay Drive
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.

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.

July 6, 2024
at 10:31 AM

6-A-24-UR

Wayne
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.

June 3, 2024
at 1:45 AM

6-A-24-UR

Jennifer
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.

July 7, 2024
at 11:12 PM

6-A-24-UR

William C & Deborah J
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. Hall
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240606183144.pdf

June 6, 2024
at 6:31 PM

6-A-24-UR

Chris
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.
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.

June 6, 2024
at 9:49 PM

6-A-24-UR

Jim and Cheryl
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.
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240607102219.pdf

June 7, 2024
at 10:22 AM

6-A-24-UR

Homeowners Westland Bay
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.
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.

June 11, 2024
at 9:48 AM

6-A-24-UR

Westland Bay Homeowners
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.)
View Attachment

https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240611095224.pdf