8-E-23-OA Christina (37921), August 2, 2023 at 8:24 PM
This application again reveals that the code was written with exclusive expectation for heavy development in these districts (not just C-N, but also I-MU, C-G, etc). Why are buffer yards required for low density housing developments in C-N (and others) but not for the same developments in any RN district? Obviously there is a discrepancy here that needs to be corrected.
What sense does it make to require buffer zones between multifamily housing and traditional housing developments? Just because my quadruplex next door is owned a particular way does that somehow change its effective use as a house? The quadruplex has nothing more than a large house with four doors. Because of the affordability crisis in Knoxville right now people are renting out rooms people are renting out floors of their entire houses, or we've got multi-generational families where parents are living upstairs adult children in the basement This is far more common than people believe. And yet I'm unaware of any large protest or complaints about these situations. Let's move beyond the restrictive zoning that has made affordable housing almost unbuildable in Knoxville. I support this zoning amendment.
Agenda items (8A23OA,8B23OA,8C23OA,8D23OA,8E23OA)all relate to defining ADU's and relaxing set backs, buffers and the like. These requests can be construed to introduce ADU's to Knoxville. However, may also be construed as method to simply increase building density way tighter than current standards. They also can allow a rental property be added to nearly any lot/location. I am against each of these agenda items. And I think the County, the Planning Commission and residents need A LOT more conversations about introducing and controlling ADU's (like the ADU must be occupied by an immediate family member) prior to introduction of this concept. Following this research, the concept should be trialed in one district to learn impact and control, and NOT just open the floodgates in all districts!
8-E-23-OA Aaron (37917), August 8, 2023 at 10:16 PM
I support this application with regard to the reduction in buffer yard width requirements, but I oppose removal of the landscape plan requirement to obtain a building permit. Landscape design is often overlooked and disrespected, but is as or more important for aesthetics and placemaking than building architecture. The ability to submit a landscape plan after a building permit has been issued will lead to disjointed site designs that do not take advantage of landscaping's ability to provide shade, clean and retain runoff, and contribute to ecosystems.
8-E-23-OA Kevin (37918), September 11, 2023 at 1:30 PM
The Board of Directors for the Knox County Planning Alliance supports the staff recommendation to deny this proposed amendment to the zoning code. The proposal to reduce buffer yard depth (changes to 12.8.C) applies to all buffer yards across all zoning districts. As staff points out, reducing the width that much would make it difficult to install the required planting, and would have unintended consequences across all districts in the city.
8-E-23-OA Patricia (37920), September 12, 2023 at 3:16 AM
I disapprove of 70% decrease in a buffer 30% and landscaping. I live in SW-1 which is low density (homes) and we had Hensons 12 units built where 3 homes had been. They stand out like a sore thumb to the existing cottages and bungalows. There are issues with storm water run-off because the development was allowed to be build higher that the original lots. They’re concrete, no landscaping so the businesses across the alley get flooded. The cottage next door has. 5 feet high clay hill so water runs down onto their yard causing water issues with only 5’ side yard (no Variance). Buffers are more for the home next door for privacy with trees and vegetation not a planter. There are 12 garage and recycle bins too. Parking ends up on Dixie and Phillips and the alley way so car can’t get though nor waste trucks. I also disapprove of removing the owner occupied living on site for ADUs which can end up as a short term rental. A duplex would have been more in line with the vision plan and low density and blending with the character on the neighborhood. This is one dev. That should have been denied and should not get a C of O until issues are taken care of for the sorrounding homes. Phase II could have been buil at 1 1/2 story which could have fit better. This is a case of speculator getting the good old boy pat on the back when you read his permit. Henson appears to be oblivious to the SW-1 FBC.
8-E-23-OA Dale (37909), September 13, 2023 at 9:33 PM
As chair of Trees Knoxville, a non-profit with a focus on tree canopy promotion and preservation, we oppose the amendment to this ordinance. The landscape buffer possess both an environmental and aesthetic importance. Decreasing this buffer requirement will lead to further canopy loss of valuable tree canopy and increased canopy fragmentation. These are two critical components for maintaining a healthy wildlife habitat and preventing further degradation of our urban tree canopy.
8-E-23-OA Sandra (37914), September 13, 2023 at 10:59 PM
Do not reduce our landscape regulations. Landscape plants, especially trees, are important because they: screen disaparate development buffer concrete, asphalt, buildings, vehicles reduce heat islands aid wildlife improve mental health and make our community more attractive Fences are not trees. Trees provide shade, beauty, and soften our surroundings. Fences are six feet tall. Trees are at least 20 feet tall (or more). Trees are as tall as buildings. Fences barely screen trucks. Please do not change our landscape regulations. Landscaping has no relationship with midrange housing.
8-E-23-OA Thomas (37917), September 19, 2023 at 8:05 AM
I support the staff recommendation to deny this proposed amendment to the zoning code. The proposal to reduce buffer yard depth (changes to 12.8.C) applies to all buffer yards across all zoning districts. As staff points out, reducing the width would make it difficult to install the required planting, and would have unintended consequences across the city. Although I understand the need for more housing, I can’t support the amendment. Many other comments have indicated the public benefit of trees and shrubs provided to our community. Trees Knoxville has been conducting a master planning process and the majority of the public has recommended a review of existing ordinances to improve, tighten, and increase the requirements for trees to meet the changing environmental conditions that are causing public harm and issues. Landscaping requirements are a minor cost to the overall development cost and have not been documented to be prohibitive or costly. Studies in Knoxville have shown that the largest need for more trees is on private property and efforts being considered in the master plan will be made to increase canopy cover across the city on all properties. The people who would be living in these new homes would greatly benefit from the added landscaping by reduced heating and cooling as well as other public health benefits. The present requirements should be maintained.
8-E-23-OA Carlene (37918), September 21, 2023 at 12:24 PM
Please deny this request. The professional staff recommendation provides convincing reasons why the presently existing, thoughtful standards and processes, are both appropriate and necessary. They are based on experience and the community is well-served by them.
8-E-23-OA Gordon (37917), October 5, 2023 at 10:04 AM
As a member of the City of Knoxville Tree Board, we were not informed of this possible change in the landscape ordinance. We strongly oppose this proposal.
8-E-23-OA Bob (37919), October 11, 2023 at 10:12 AM
I oppose this amendment. Article 12.2A - As a landscape architect I feel that it is important to include a landscape plan prior to issuing a building permit, not at the certificate of occupancy phase. Including a landscape plan prior to issuing a building permit ensures that the developer is considering the code implications as well as budgeting for an appropriate, compliant design. Landscaping is a vital part of a community infrastructure and often overlooked already. The use as a visual buffer is only part of the benefits, which include noise buffering, stormwater mitigation, heat island effect, providing wildlife habitat and beautification. Article 12.8 - Reducing landscaping buffers by using a fence or wall does not benefit anyone except the developer. As mentioned above, buffer yards ensure landscaping is provided for all of the aspects listed.
8-E-23-OA Jessica (37920), October 17, 2023 at 5:54 PM
As a member of the City of Knoxville Tree Board and its subcommittee looking at the landscaping ordinance, I believe any changes to policy should be informed by the upcoming Urban Forestry Master Plan and the work our subcommittee is doing. This work is all slated to be completed in the upcoming few months, and while the problems Mr. Marlow is attempting to address are real and pressing, the process to make changes needs to be more inclusive and informed.
When considering the request to allow development on the Monterey Oaks property, please note the following : Since 2006 there have been six owners of this property. The last owner had planned to build two or three homes (for family), but three of the other previous owners had plans for larger developments, but were not successful in their attempts. In 2006 Camdun Realty LLC spent hundreds of thousands of dollars clearing the hardwoods and vegetation, grading extensively, and preparing 18 lots for sale. However, with heavy rain the problem of uncontrollable runoff became an issue , with water gullies created, and water collecting at the end of the cul-de-sac on Peppercorn Lane, at the foot of the hill. The problem persisted , even with plastic fencing, straw bales, and a retention pond at the lowest point of the property . Finally the property was auctioned off. Two other attempts to develop have also been unsuccessful, due to financial or environmental obstacles. There is a reason this property has not been developed for 18 years. Please do not let the neighborhood suffer the consequences of another attempt.
I have lived here for 25 years This has always been a good neighborhood for seniors to walk in and children to play in. the increased traffic from new project in not good for neighborhood. The new project should have its own entrance in and out instead of going 1 mile thru a subdivision with 10 connecting stop signs. Halfway up melstone there is a pool were many traffic accidents have occurred.
i am opposed to the project because of the increased traffic. this single residence was not designed for this amount of traffic going down melstone to merchants rd. there is a community pool half way down on melstone were is is always crowded on spring and summer months
Please see attached letter. A petition with 96 signatures of residents that this development would impact is attached in another comment. View Attachment
Byington Beaver Ridge Rd is a narrow 2 lane State Route and last year saw an average daily traffic count of 9,630 cars. It's 35 mph posted limit is routinely disregarded substantially and has been the host of multiple fatal traffic accidents. You will show NO DUE REGARD to the safety of current residents if you shoehorn 21 additional lots into a backyard and call it a subdivision. There is no infrastructure to support such lunacy. The proposal should be laughed out of the room. The lot has VERY little road frontage (just barely 200'), and it would be an engineering marvel to add the required access road to feed a new subdivision of 21 additional lots where there is just barely room for one driveway. Because of old growth trees, typical to the original home construction, traffic visibility is poor and would be a recipe for disastrously bad crashes. The current utilities are NOT adequate, as there are constant outages and repairs on the water mains which are stressed by capacity and age. The developer has turned this formerly beautiful lot into an eyesore and a landfill, growing a bumper crop of old appliances, garbage, and construction debris for almost 2 years now. Please don't allow developer greed to rule this decision, please take into account the safety of the current residents on this road. Please make the right choice and deny this proposal.
Byington Beaver Ridge Rd is a narrow 2 lane State Route and last year saw an average daily traffic count of 9,630 cars. It's 35 mph posted limit is routinely disregarded substantially and has been the host of multiple fatal traffic accidents. You will show NO DUE REGARD to the safety of current residents if you shoehorn 21 additional lots into a backyard and call it a subdivision. There is no infrastructure to support such lunacy. The proposal should be laughed out of the room. The lot has VERY little road frontage (just barely 200'), and it would be an engineering marvel to add the required access road to feed a new subdivision of 21 additional lots where there is just barely room for one driveway. Because of old growth trees, typical to the original home construction, traffic visibility is poor and would be a recipe for disastrously bad crashes. The current utilities are NOT adequate, as there are constant outages and repairs on the water mains which are stressed by capacity and age. The developer has turned this formerly beautiful lot into an eyesore and a landfill, growing a bumper crop of old appliances, garbage, and construction debris for almost 2 years now. Please don't allow developer greed to rule this decision, please take into account the safety of the current residents on this road. Please make the right choice and deny this proposal.
5-SC-24-C Patricia (37912), June 24, 2024 at 11:11 AM
In 2014 a developer submitted the use of Monterey Oaks 8.23 acres tract for 18 single-family detached lots, at a density of 2.19 du/ac. FILE #1-SB-14-C MPC stated that one of the (10) conditions for approval was: "Providing a geotechnical study prepared by a registered engineer for the proposed building sites for Lots 6-15, verifying that the subsurface is suitable for building construction. The geotechnical study must be submitted to the Knoxville Department of Engineering for review and approval prior to approval of a building permit for each lot." It was observed that the original developer (Camdun Realty LLC) dug out a large area within the now proposed duplex site as a dumping ground for dozens of large tree stumps, which were then buried. The decomposition of these stumps would make the ground unstable for the future of permanent buildings. It is critical for the safety and integrity of any structures that this area be deemed thoroughly safe. This major concern, as well as the previous runoff problems related to the slope of the acreage, must be given serious investigation before any building is permitted.
7-C-24-RZ Elisha (37912), June 26, 2024 at 7:03 PM
In Appendix B, Article 6, Section 1 of the city of Knoxville's Code of Ordinances, General Industrial Zoning Districts "allow for a range of general industrial uses", which may "[render] them incompatible with retail, service, or residential uses."
This lot is directly across Inskip Dr. from a single-family home, and literally adjacent to the Rand Sylvia apartment complex. I think that allowing this property to be rezoned from Neighborhood Commercial to General Industrial doesn't make any sense given the surrounding properties. The uses allowed by General Industrial zoning would absolutely affect the quality of life and the character of the surrounding community, and definitely impact the flow of traffic on Inskip Dr.
As a member of this community, I urge you to not approve this rezoning case.
To build anything on this poor road will be insane. Traffic behavior well exceeds the 35 mph speed zone.....cars and trucks are lined up at least a half mile from the RR tunnel in the afternoon time slot There have been multiple fatal accidents in the 14 years I have lived here. To enter or leave the intersection of Hodge Rd. is almost impossible in the early and evening drive time hours. To build an entrance for this subdivision on this property where there is already an existing home having the front next to the main road is the most ridiculous idea I have ever witnessed. Please for the sake of taxpayers and residents of this area that call it home, please deny this application and tell the developers to take their money elsewhere !
Chrenshaw is a very narrow road. The additional traffic will require better intersections at Chrenshaw and 33 and also Chrenshaw and 168. It is already very busy and those exiting onto Chrenshaw from 33 north exit much too fast and will be very dangerous for the residents of the complex entering Chrenshaw. I think a better plan is to enter and exit onto a third lane on John Sevier, like this do entering onto John Sevier from Chrenshaw.
8-A-24-DP Jennifer (37920), July 31, 2024 at 1:32 PM
Concerns of having so many addtional families trying to use such a small residential road in addtional to the current traffic. WhY can they not have a turn off from Maryville Pike?
7-A-24-PA Shannon (37912), August 7, 2024 at 5:07 PM
This is NOT an industrial area! Think of the community members that live here and please vote no. Central Avenue Pike is dangerous enough with people flying down the street and the heavy traffic associated with industrial businesses will only make it worse. We don't want something that could be noisy or harmful. This is a growing area and labeling it as industrial will only hurt our growth. Please vote no.
7-A-24-PA Elisha (37912), August 7, 2024 at 5:38 PM
Even though the applicant has changed their request to now just I-MU, approving this would still be ridiculous. Even just the permitted uses in I-MU would be utterly out of character for this location. The adjacent commercial properties are a hair salon, a veterinary clinic, a taqueria, and a small auto shop. The uses allowed under I-MU would make no sense in this location and greatly reduce the quality of life for all the people living nearby.
I'll reiterate from my last comment, this plot is directly across from a single-family home, and adjacent to an apartment complex. Allowing, say, a wholesale establishment at this property would be absurd, highly increase the rate of traffic (and Central Ave Pike is already an incredibly dangerous road, I see accidents happen all the time), and would cause lots of noise for the people living less than 100 feet away. There is no good reason to allow this rezoning to happen. Please deny this.
7-SE-24-C Cynthia (37931), August 9, 2024 at 8:08 PM
The posted speed limit on Byington Beaver Ridge Road is 35, but 45-50 is normal. Pulling out onto this road is dangerous enough for the existing residents on this section of road, but to add 18 homes (which according to the estimated daily traffic impact is 219 trips Mon-Fri only) using one entrance/exit to do it is reckless. There have been multiple deaths on this road, not to mention wrecks without fatal injury in recent years. Slowing down to pull into your driveway is dangerous, and you risk your life every time you pull out. People either speed and don't pay attention or sit in stand-still traffic due to the backup from the underpass. The water main has broken twice in the 4 years we have lived here, and the additional strain of 18 new homes? A recipe for disaster. With any heavy rain, there is standing water on the road directly in front of the property. Also, adding a road that crosses a natural drainage path behind the existing house (and multiple existing houses on that side of the street) poses a serious concern. They have conveniently tidied up the property before each of the hearings before the planning commission, but during the drawn out year and a half renovation to the existing home, the property has been an eyesore and a complete disaster. I cannot imagine how they will manage the construction of 18 new homes and the chaos that will bring for many years to come. The location of this project is a tremendously bad idea.
9-A-24-SU Kevin (37921), August 28, 2024 at 10:15 AM
I think it's a good idea to have a garage on this end of Chapman Hwy especially with all the shops run down to the other end of Chapman Hwy. I think it will be a great idea because people with car troubles on this end could stop by and get some help
9-A-24-SU Donovan (37920), August 28, 2024 at 6:00 PM
In my opinion we need more locally owned and operated shops here in knoxville who do good business with the community and help the little guy I would rather car conexxion expand than for another set of apartments spring up please help us help the little guys.
9-A-24-SU Shameika (37738), August 29, 2024 at 10:36 AM
The development of car connexions garage would be a great establishment at its location. I have been visiting this shop for several years and it has provided great and affordable services at a convenient location. It would be a great establishment for the surrounding community at large as this development would not just service current customers like myself but will attract people of the neighborhood and new customers and also provide employment opportunities for the people within the area of study and expertise.
9-E-24-RZ Brad (37912), August 29, 2024 at 12:10 PM
My name is Brad Dye and I live at 6211 Primus Road which is in relation to this proposed re-zoning. Please see my concerns below:
1. How would the traffic flow and infrastructure be routed to/from this proposed re-zoning area if they are planning on a multi-housing/family development? Currently, the infrastructure Northbound on Primus is not suited for a significant increase in traffic! Also, would they or do they intend to connect Northbound Primus to Wilbanks/Callahan Road making it a through road from Callahan to Murray Road? This would change everything with a huge increase in traffic and the flow especially when I-75 North or South is delayed due to accidents or construction! Do they plan an entry/exit from Keck Road also? That would be the more feasible entry/exit to a multi-family development.
2. What level of housing do they plan to put on this property? I am concerned with my property value and the potential for a decrease in value if not developed to help the property value in this area versus a lower income
development or HUD!
3. I am very concerned with an increased exposure to my property and the properties surrounding me which my neighbors are concerned also! Potentially, we could be looking at adding additional property security with gates/fencing to maintain our current level of privacy which will be costly!
Please respond accordingly!
Thank you, Brad Dye
9-A-24-SU Barry (37918), August 29, 2024 at 12:37 PM
This location would be ideal for a local automotive repair shop that will service the local community and provide affordable repairs and local jobs. I know the owners personally and their family and they bring value and culture to the area and should be allowed to expand their business.
9-A-24-SU Ashley (37920), August 29, 2024 at 5:00 PM
This is a great buisness that is great price espically intodays times. There are not alot of machanics in the area that are trustwortly. They add to this community and would onlly add more vaule and help to this south knox community.
8-A-24-DP Mark (37920), September 9, 2024 at 10:29 PM
I have notice several developers attempting to gain approval for developing along Gov. John Sevier Highway. This Scenic Highway should be considered, as an established area, where access and egress should be limited. Look at the numbers of applications being considered. There are about five parcels being considered for low and medium density units per acre currently. I want to keep the established low density, single family dwelling, character in this area. That being said, I am not for passing low density zoning just to have the developer request more DU/AC or use zoning features to transfer property for other purposes. Please do not pass more than 2 units per acre for this property to stay in character with the neighborhood.
8-A-24-DP Steve (37920), September 10, 2024 at 10:07 AM
While I understand that development is going to move forward I believe that there is some better options for all who live in the area. Currently the design is to have the only entrance and exit to the development on Crenshaw close to the intersection of Maryville Pike, with little work to address traffic. We (individuals in general) all tend to take the shortest distance between our destination points. For work and most consumer needs (groceries, dinning, hardware etc.) for this area you need to travel east towards Chapman Highway. The current design of Crenshaw and topography of the road and land will not be able to accommodate an increase of traffic from this development as planned. It would be better for ingress and egress to the development if the entrance, exit is on Gov. John Sevier or on Maryville Pike at Old Maryville Pike. Crenshaw is a small narrow road that struggles with current traffic during "rush hours" and vehicles larger than mid size passenger cars. Society now had a lot more home delivery I.E. amazon vehicles that makes it nearly impossible to pass on this road if one vehicle does not come to a stop or merge into someone's yard or driveway disrupting flow or damaging yards. Gov. John Sevier is planned to be widened in the near future to four lanes. This would allow a better design for ingress and egress to the planned development, and allow the surrounding area less burdened with a negative impact.
9-G-24-SU Rana (37920), September 13, 2024 at 12:09 PM
As a homeowner that lives very close to Calvary Chapel, I and other neighbors have been negatively impacted by the increased traffic we have seen as the church has expanded. The church is located just off of a busy highway ramp on an already congested road in a residential area. Particularly on Sundays and Wednesday evenings when church lets out, there is a pronounced increase in traffic to the point that I struggle to find an opening to pull out of my driveway (which is within sight of the church property) onto john Sevier Hwy. As a resident and homeowner that neighbors the church, I am opposed to further expansion of this property unless the city manages increased negative traffic impacts with reasonable mitigations. Thank you.
10-C-24-DP Victoria (37920), September 19, 2024 at 11:27 AM
I believe there are Munitions and Explosives of Concern at the old Atlas Powder Farm at 2814 Tipton Station Road which was zoned Heavy Industrial from 1970’s through early 2000’s. I have included some of the titles and deeds that had covenants conveyed which stated no houses would be built any closer to the powder magazines (which are still there and I have included photographs of these powder magazines taken recently) on the property than the house already on tract 3. They must have realized the hazardous materials on the site from Atlas Powder Farm. It was downzoned to Agriculture in the early 2000’s, and now being considered for Planned Residential. However, I believe the prior use of this 153.15 acres is very concerning for any repurposing. I believe a type of Hazard Assessment, site Investigation and Remediation for Munitions should be conducted before any repurposing of this land is approved. I am writing all Knox County Planning Commissioners and Knox County Commissioners so they have awareness to the historical use of this land that poses potential risk of hazardous material on this site for any future use of this property. View Attachment
10-A-24-UR Marie (37924), September 26, 2024 at 2:03 PM
Homeowner of 21 years has had first hand experience with Mr. Donald Epperly. My neighbor was subject to an illegal deutsch bank foreclosure. Mr. Donald Epperly bought the property for $91K when Nashville attorney's trustee was wanting $133K. The root cause of Mr. Epperly business dealings are unethical. In 2020 a licensed tennessee surveyor from Land Development Solutions was on my audio/video Ring camera saying ... are you sure you want me to do this. The surveyor put 12 feet rebar property pins drilled into my property, 5 feet south and 7 feet west. I had a 1988 survey, and recent survey. The 2nd commercial realtor had them removed. Mr. Donald Epperly knowingly sold a property which could not get clear title. The property has a seller owner financing lien and codes now is set for a $40,000 abatement of a property. I also had to experience illegal activity, homeless, prostitution, drugs next to my home due to lack of cleanup and maint. or concern. I would think twice about approval anything he is involved in. Commercial zoning is a must for this property. I have everything on cloud storage. Hundreds of cars/trucks/utility vehicles when Dr. Donald Epperly owned the property. The current owner is stuck with his mess.
10-C-24-DP Gayle (37920), September 27, 2024 at 9:20 AM
I'm a concerned citizen scared to death about the reckless development without proper support and safety concerns. Please prevent overcrowding and poisoning of our soil and water ways. You have a professional and moral obligation to stop this from occurring. I hope you wait until TDEC tests the site for public safety before zoning and residential housing.
8-A-24-DP Marcie (37920), September 29, 2024 at 12:04 PM
I have given my opinion on this forum before but because it has been delayed I need to voice my dread on this build. Crenshaw is way to small to carry this much traffic. You can not just widen a small part when they will be using the whole street. This is a busy road because the whole community uses it to get to John Sevier. It's not much more than a 1 lane road that has needed work for years. Please consider the road problem before advancing on an approval.
10-D-24-SNC Tommy (37931), September 30, 2024 at 11:52 AM
I have lived my entire 68 years at this address. Ball Camp Pike has been a segmented road since before I was born. Over the years emergency services have been called and always arrived quickly. I don't believe the change is to avoid confusion for EMS. With navigation, Google maps and WAZE apps available directions to any address are instantly available. I don't believe this change is necessary. Are you renaming all segments of BCP and other segmented roads in Knox County?
10-D-24-SNC Elizabeth (37931), October 1, 2024 at 12:14 PM
I am 82 years old and my family and I have lived at 8653 Ball Camp Pike since 1969. For 55 years, that has been my address and I have no intention of leaving it before I leave this earth. The road changes have already completely changed my driveway and currently the mail carrier cannot even get to my mailbox. According to the plans I have seen, once construction is completed you will have taken at least half of the road frontage of my property without any compensation - a move that most certainly will negatively impacts the value of my property long term. Now I understand that you even want to take my address by changing the road name completely without any reasonable explanation. I am obviously opposed to all of this and I am shocked at how little information you have shared with me as a property owner directly affected by these dramatic changes to my home. I am 100% opposed to this change and ask that you please consider leaving the name Ball Camp Pike alone!
10-D-24-SNC Elizabeth (37931), October 1, 2024 at 3:24 PM
In addition to my previous statement, I would like to add that I can provide independent appraisals of how my property value is negatively affected by the loss of street frontage that is being taken from me. Less road frontage means fewer options to subdivide the land or use it for another purpose. While I have no intention of selling it, nobody knows what the future holds for development in this area. The only brief conversation I have had with anyone speaking on behalf of this project dismissed me without explanation or consideration. How can the county rightfully take away value from someone's property for a county project without even compensating the individual for the loss incurred? I am appalled that this is happening in our community.
10-C-24-DP William (37920), October 2, 2024 at 9:54 AM
We have had several large developments on J Sevier, Tipton Sta, Maryville Pk, which have impacted our community, and already overcrowded schools. There does not seem to any control/restrictions for the sizes of the subdivisions. Horton has a reputation for cheap housing and Clayton builds modular homes. Oh, it's just South Knoxville, right? I feel as if we have been adding "trailer parks" to our once scenic highway and community as a whole, as well as loss of forests, and compromising watershed. The last quality subdivision was a few years ago with Gideon's Landing. There are persons who would buy better quality housing if it was offered. Please reconsider controlling the size of subdivisions, and the frequency of construction. This is a get rich quick for the developers, with no concern for community residents and environmental impact whatsoever.
10-D-24-SNC Donald (39731), October 2, 2024 at 11:21 AM
I wish to express my displeasure with the renaming of Ball Camp Pike to Hitching post. This is going to get expensive for the older folks such as myself, new license plates drivers license SS banking utilities doctors and pharmacy along with other things. Is the county going to pay these bills? Basically everyone around me and seniors citizens and on fixed income and unable to pay for this change.
9-E-24-RZ Chris (37912), October 10, 2024 at 11:04 PM
I think there should be a stipulation of having it rezoned that the owners put in place a plan for maintaining Parker Cemetery, which is at the SE corner of this property and currently in poor condition.
10-C-24-DP Victoria (37920), October 16, 2024 at 12:54 PM
Please contact Chrissy McNaughton about this property
Chrissy McNaughton, PhD | East Tennessee Regional Manager, Knoxville Field Office Division of Remediation 3711 Middlebrook Pike Knoxville, TN 37921 Cell: (865) 863-0270 Christina.McNaughton@tn.gov
Dr. McNaughton acknowledged reading the attachment, researching and now identified this property as one of concern, and gave this for TDEC's attorneys to review. It would behoove Knox County Planning Commission to not approve this rezoning at the upcoming meeting. I think the best move in the interest of all parties impacted (Schuberts, DR Horton, and the contiguous neighbors) would be deferment of this vote until TDEC does an investigation.
Review this DEED RESTRICTION that:
"no dwelling house or building of any description to be used as a dwelling house will be erected or located on the property to be hereinbelow described closer to the now existing powder magazines of the Atlas Powder Company than the dwellings that are presently located on the said property to be hereinbelow described. This covenant and restriction is to run with the following property in whomsoever the title may be vested."
Thank you kindly for your consideration to defer the vote on 10-C-24-DP Location 2814 Tipton Station Road.
11-B-24-DP Raymond (37922), October 19, 2024 at 1:55 PM
Was any consideration given to making the intersection of S Northshore and Falcon Point Dr a roundabout? I'm concerned that the number of turning vehicles will create too many conflicts. There will be many times vehicles will need to make left turns with traffic coming from the opposite direction also making left turns.
11-SK-24-C Lezlee (37922), October 21, 2024 at 4:50 PM
I live in this community and I oppose this rezoning. This will add to the traffic in this area. The roads around this piece of property are narrow, especially on Garland Road. Enough green space has already been taken in this area and I would rather see this area preserved as a park or other natural use area.
11-I-24-RZ Amy (37918), October 22, 2024 at 8:10 AM
Narrow entrance to this property for multi development along with already 3 large developments entrances within feet of this proposed development ? The entrance is in a blind spot for travelers coming down Tazewell Pike. There are no turning lanes on Tazewell Pike for any of these developments.
Also the bad curve coming from the East and proximity of other large entrances so close together.
11-B-24-UR John (37934), October 24, 2024 at 10:04 PM
The proposed EZ Stop project in Concord still needs to have a completed archeological survey. The adjoining cemetery may have burial plots under the proposed site. Also, people who drive north from the North shore roundabout, continue to turn onto Lakeridge or 2nd Street and cut through to Olive Road. They drive fast, ignore stop signs (personally observed), drive erratically towards pedestrians walking on Olive Road (personally observed), and it will be a hundred times worse if EZ Stop is allowed to build. Concord is an Historic and peaceful community. Let's keep it that way!
11-B-24-UR Stephanie (37934), October 24, 2024 at 10:55 PM
My family and fellow community members of historic old concord strongly oppose the requests of the EZStop developers/owners. As stated previously, the neighborhood is mostly one lane roads without room for traffic caused by the gas station. The suggested “right turn only” sign, is not enough to discourage drivers from entering our streets. I encourage you to observe the “right turn only” stop leaving starbucks at Campbell station. Within minutes, you would observe minimum three vehicles ignoring the signage and turning left onto Campbell station. The only solution is a right turn concrete median on the second st exit.
We would also request that there is a minimum amount of pumps as to keep the site smaller and less noise pollution (and vehicle pollution) to our attached neighborhood.
11-B-24-UR Rena (37922), October 24, 2024 at 10:56 PM
I grew up in Farragut and hate to see more unnecessary progress to the "Old Concord" area.
Also, there will be no easy way to turn left on 2nd Dr, only an exit onto Concord Rd; further the 200+ yr old Cemetery boundary intrusion at the Masonic Lodge will be negatively affected.
11-B-24-UR Tissie (37934), October 24, 2024 at 11:00 PM
Ruining our history and our community with UGLY, and intrusive development is not the way Farragut residents need or want.
The current submission of EZ Stop plans for a gas station, the large amount of gas pumps, the intrusion on the Masonic Cemetery, and preventing the ability for traffic to gain access to 2nd Drive as an exit or shortcut is unacceptable.
11-B-24-UR Cindy (37934), October 24, 2024 at 11:37 PM
Why would anybody want a convenience store at this location??? There is already so much traffic you can't get anywhere. The round-about already causes so much confusion and backed up traffic! Can't we just save a little natural earth for this once quaint little community?
11-B-24-UR Jennifer (37934), October 25, 2024 at 6:32 AM
Stop EZ Stop from building at 2nd Dr in historic Concord area! This area does not need a gas station in its location due to the following reasons:
* the amount of gas pumps be lessened in size & amts
* NO ability to turn left on 2nd Dr, only an exit onto Concord Rd
* Save the 200+ yr old Cemetery boundary intrusion at Masonic Lodge
ALSO-please think about strategic planning when allowing gas stations in areas due to traffic and accidents as well as does it make sense? In this case the traffic would increase accidents and people have multiple other options for gas within a short distance.
11-B-24-UR Gina (37922), October 25, 2024 at 8:12 AM
I don't understand why this gas station has to in such a historic area. That area is not capable of handling so much traffic added to what is already there. I grew up in this area and my Mother still lives off Hughlan Dr. There are plenty of gas stations and restaurants in the area while historic areas are being transformed into commercial areas. No good
11-B-24-UR Tina (37934), October 25, 2024 at 8:18 AM
I live very close to the proposed gas station on Concord Road. I am very concerned about the noise that it will bring to our residential area. While I would like for the gas station to not be allowed at all, I would like at the very least for it to be much smaller. The current businesses near us do not create traffic or noise. I am surprised that a developer does not want to build homes or condos in this location.
11-B-24-UR Robin (37934), October 25, 2024 at 12:23 PM
This is regarding the gas station petition. Over development is ruining out small town. The main objections are:
* they are requesting far too many pumps for the area. Not suitable or fitting of the surroundings.
* there is no ability to turn left on 2nd Dr, only an exit onto Concord Rd
* We have to protect the 200+ yr old Cemetery boundary intrusion at Masonic Lodge
11-B-24-UR michael (37772), October 25, 2024 at 12:46 PM
My family is buried next to this proposed gas station. This would be abysmal to anyone who has relatives buried there. Not to mention the traffic already sucks in this area when I go to Kroger to get groceries. Are you trying to drive people away from this area?
11-B-24-UR Cliff (37922), October 25, 2024 at 9:18 PM
I would like to express my concerns regarding the proposed EZ Stop on Concord Rd adjacent to the Concord Historic District.
The original proposal was eventually removed because the concept was not appropriate for this area. The size of the store has been reduced, but 14 pumps is not necessary. That many pumps would cause a chaotic situation on an already busy road with limited access. The residence of Concord requested right only turn-out onto Second Drive to prevent “cut through” traffic in a residential area with very narrow streets.
This location backs up to a historic cemetery and Masonic Lodge and should require an archaeological survey. This area was used as encampment during the Civil War. Further reason for the survey.
The residence of Concord and Knox County are very proud of this historic district. Please protect this piece of history.
11-B-24-UR Staci (37934), October 25, 2024 at 9:26 PM
That area is way way way to overpopulated by way of traffic already! It's always congested! Usually backed up beyond belief! Accidents constantly! We have enough retail in that area as well as gas pumps that we do not need another quick mart kind of place. Not only does that bring in additional crime. I don't care what you say. It does but unnecessary congestion that road cannot be widened at all due to the lake ! therefore, putting in the monstrosity that is being proposed and unwanted is going to do absolutely positively nothing but create more problems than can ever be rectified! We do not want that in Farragut/Concorde It was voted down once what makes anyone think we would want it just because it was re-filed Buy a bunch of money, hungry individuals that are not from here!! We've dealt with enough over development from a local named Bud Culllom and we do not need any outsiders, jumping on the same type of bandwagon!
11-B-24-UR Eve (37934), October 26, 2024 at 12:14 PM
I want to go on record warning about traffic problems already existing close to the northshore ttaffic circle. Ez stop stated tey wanted to "capture" traffic. Everyone i talk to at the davis ymca and at church- feel the traffic jam caused by this will end in someones death. The commuting is fast and can back up quickly. Now farragut will be installing utility updates along concord rd too. At what point do we destabilize an economy with too much development?? Think soberly about this responsibility. Sacrificing historic concord with excess gas pumps and excess traffic down a one lane rd is an abuse of residents and church goers no one ever used their private property rights to hurt people on purpose- like this How much money will ever be enough if you bring a facility too big and intrusive to be justified ! Quality of life is nothing to callously disregard
11-B-24-UR Charlene Hall (37934), October 26, 2024 at 9:46 PM
Allowing the EZ Stop to be built here will cause impingement to the historic former church site, as well as to the Cemetery. There are unmarked graves in the proposed construction area, and we already have limited road access to the Cemetery. We do not need additional obstructions. Further, placing a convenience store in this spot would promote vandalism to the Cemetery and create even more traffic snarls on heavily traveled Concord Road.
11-B-24-UR Mark (37934), October 28, 2024 at 5:36 PM
Thank you for considering my comments.
Once again I must take the time to submit my comments 11-B-24-UR, the Jason Voorhees of applications. This gas station is a business that is clearly not wanted by the families living in the adjacent neighborhood. This is not the appropriate type of business for this neighborhood. There are so may other businesses that would be welcomed. But we get stuck with a gas station. It will not generate new business or increase revenue. It will only take business from existing businesses. The only person to benefit will be the owner, and that will be at the expense of the rest of us.
So I must ask, why do we go through these processes when so many of these applications get approved regardless of the wishes of the people that will have to deal with it daily? What recourse do we have? Some in the neighborhood will inevitably hire a lawyer to try to stop it again. If that doesn't work, then it will probably get built. No one will be happy but the business owner and maybe some guy wanting a Honey Bun. If it does work, then the applicant will just reapply, and the process repeats.
So how about this time let's show a little courage here and reject this application for the people. What do you say?
11-B-24-UR Mary (37934), October 28, 2024 at 6:58 PM
I am writing on behalf of our community regarding concerns about the potential increase in traffic by vehicle coming in and out of Old Concord Village. Obviously we do not want the gas station restaurant due to increased noise, traffic and artificial light. If we cannot stop this awful structure that does not fit our community/Village at least install a concrete barrier to keep people from driving through our quiet village by placing a concrete barrier with a left turn only back to Concord Rd. so we do not have additional traffic driving through the neighborhood.
11-B-24-PD Christopher (37914), October 29, 2024 at 8:33 AM
This is a major development with the potential to add 600 units in an area that may not support that many. As far as we know, Town Hall East has not been contacted by the developer. Developer needs to meet with Town Hall East, Morningside Neighborhood Association and the Delrose Drive Neighborhood Watch before moving forward with any effort to develop the property.
The developer can reach out to Chris Osborn, Town Hall East Board president at osborn.christopher@gmail.com or email townhalleast@gmail.com.
11-I-24-RZ Terry (37918), October 29, 2024 at 8:07 PM
This property borders Bradford Place on Tazewell Pike. There is a spring and two creeks on this property that cause flooding across properties and on to Tazewell Pk. I addition to water / runoff concerns, traffic is also a huge concern. Tazewell Pk cannot take any increased traffic. It's bumper to bumper traffic now!
11-I-24-RZ Susan (37918), October 30, 2024 at 11:02 AM
As someone who has lived here a dozen years, I oppose this zoning change. My reasons are three fold. (1) There is already to much traffic on Tazewell Pike and this will further impede safe driving. There has already been one fatality in front of my subdivision Mont Richer' within the last year. (2) The property is known for water retention and sink holes. This is due to a natural spring that makes building that many units prohibitive. (3) The apartment complex across the street from this property would create a dangerous traffic situation on a two lane road. The proximity of that many units in a rural area increases the danger to an intolerable level.
11-B-24-UR Gary (37934), October 31, 2024 at 11:42 AM
Other items that need to be addressed in the plans are: 1. Post constructions contours should be addressed to show how the sink hole will be covered. Knox County does allow construction over sink holes., 2.Note on map C201 says "detention ponds will be allowed to discharge to TDOT system as long as peak flow rates are less than pre-developed peak flow." Since the proposed gas station lies within the sink hole area, this enclosed basin does not drain (by definition of a basin) consequently there is no (zero) peak flow off site. The TDOT and/or TDEC must address this discharge situation.
11-B-24-UR Nancy (37934), October 31, 2024 at 12:21 PM
There were 15 modifications that EZ-Stop was mandated to correct at the end of the first meeting of the Zoning Meeting. Those concerns need to be binding on the modifications for filing the second proposal. Those include, but are not limited to: 1. a Concrete Island at the exit to Second St that directs all traffic on Second Dr. to the right toward Concord Rd., 2. Archelogical report on the border with the Historical Cemetary to look for unmarked graves and border encroachment onto Cemetary property., 3. Geological report that Sinkholes exist under the proposed build., 4. The Building in keeping with zoning at 5000 sq ft or less., 5. Too many gas pumps in keeping with a residental surrounding (other gas stations in the area have 3-4 islands).
Other questions about the current drawing:
1. What is the purpose of the signage on Second Dr. on the SE corner? It is a 30'x30' sign that say "Local Deliveries Only" on the edge of Historic Concord Village?
EZ-Stop would profit from fitting in with the local environment instead of looking like an Interstate gas station.
11-L-24-RZ Jason (37921), October 31, 2024 at 2:04 PM
I am opposed to this change in zoning. My home is across the street from this location and I prefer that the neighborhood remain zoned RN1 to maintain traffic expectations, home values, and low density historical settings without exceptions for 2-dwelling units, available under RN2 zoning, in the neighborhood.
11-H-24-DP James (37920), October 31, 2024 at 4:11 PM
I've lived across from this property since 2000, this road is entirely way too busy now, this will put even more strain on the schools, roads, the convenience center. My neighbor and I are right before where they plan to put this entrance. We are already holding our breath when we pull out of our driveway cause of the blind turn. And now there is probably gonna be over 150 households coming out of there to add to the mix.. It is so sad what is happening in quite south knox, the reason we all live in the county is to be away from it all. Not to look out your front door into a sea of fast built rooftops crammed in tiny lots.
11-B-24-UR Gary (37934), October 31, 2024 at 9:54 PM
Other items that need to be addressed in the plans are: 1. Post constructions contours should be addressed to show how the sink hole will be covered. Knox County does not allow construction over sink holes., 2.Note on map C201 says "detention ponds will be allowed to discharge to TDOT system as long as peak flow rates are less than pre-developed peak flow." Since the proposed gas station lies within the sink hole area, this enclosed basin does not drain (by definition of a basin) consequently there is no (zero) peak flow off site. The TDOT and/or TDEC must address this discharge situation.
11-J-24-DP Matthew (37924), November 1, 2024 at 5:26 AM
Just want to say again i'm against this development. We have too much traffic on our roads as is. This is adding way too much more traffic to the area that our roads can't support. Also there are tons of wildlife that live in the woods and area you are destroying. Leaving them no where to go is a bit absurd. There still should be some sort of tree line and wildlife area these creatures can go. Bears, Rabbits, Deer, and much much more. Tearing this entire area up to cram 100's of houses in one area is quite absurd. I request this be re-considered and some housing areas be removed to keep a wildlife area for the wildlife around the area to go. Also it looks like you are putting property lines on an easement my family created so that the houses on the hill had access to their homes. This was put there so my cousins could access their home. I'm not sure it's legal to be building homes on this easement. This was suppose to be there for our family. Not for public use and most certainly not to build on. Part of my property was taken to build this easement.
Mike, I just wanted to let you know that although the building size has been reduced, we in the Historic Concord community still oppose this project. When we appealed their plan to the zoning board the board commented this project was not congruent with the neighborhood. This has not changed. We still feel it is too many gas pumps and the exit onto 2nd drive should built to not allow left turns at all. Also the study should still be made in regard to possible grave sites on the property before any approval is made. Please take these matters into consideration before approving a project of this nature.
11-B-24-UR Todd (37934), November 1, 2024 at 12:23 PM
Plan not in harmony with lighting zoning regulations 4.10.10 & 5.38.14
In conflict with the zoning regulations, the 14 elevated lights above pumps notated as "A" on the Lighting Proposal are configured with a "Forward Throw" which direct light into the historic village and residential zones.
Additionally, the color temperature of the exterior lighting is specified at 5,000 Kelvin. This color emits harsher and excess blue and green emissions from LEDs. This leads to increased light pollution, as these wavelengths scatter more within the eye and have detrimental environmental and glare effects. This conflicts with 4.10.10 and 5.38.14 of the Knox County Code of Ordinances.
Propose to limit the hours of operations & require light off by 10:30 PM due to the close proximity to residential lots.
11-M-24-RZ Tracy (37914), November 1, 2024 at 1:50 PM
[REDACTED] We have lived here since October 2016 and bought the home in June 2017. We have dealt with the building of the Fresenius Plant that devastated our community. Which that was a done deal before anyone in the community knew anything about it.
Now Mesana Investments wants to put 5 houses per acre (19 acres total) in the same area............. Hammer Road cannot handle that kind of traffic. The road is very narrow two cars have a hard time passing each other coming and going along this road. We know developers have more rights than we do. But this is our home, our community. How do we fight this madness...... The infrastructure along our road (water, electric, etc.) was not put in to handle that kind of development. Our property floods if we have a heavy rain, what will happen once 90 to 95 more houses are put on this road. How is it allowed to put 5 a total of 5 houses per acre.
The meeting that is scheduled for this is when almost everyone in the community works. I just wanted to go on the record that this is a disgrace. Someone can be allowed to put that many houses on one acre. Are there not any regulations to stop this from happening.
11-B-24-UR Mona I. (37772), November 1, 2024 at 5:23 PM
My comments and justifications for them are very lengthy and submitted via pdf file. The following is a summary:
-Clarification of encroachment on Concord Masonic Cemetery -Size of property to be encroached -Legal source used for the encroachment -Do not allow encroachment onto Concord Masonic Cemetery property -Require architectural survey of boundary between proposed development and Concord Masonic to ascertain if unmarked graves are present -Do not allow loud speaker communications at drive through or walk up window -Prohibit left turn egress from Second Drive by installing a physical barrier to prevent vehicles from entering in that direction -Clarify the intention to Widen Second Drive, i.e. development area only or the entirety of Second Drive -Do not widen Second Drive along Masonic Cemetery Property -Place a traffic light at Second Drive and Concord Road to allow left hand turns -Document the height of the building within the site plan -Determine if a variance would be necessary to allow for canopy of fuel pumps that would increase the size of the building -Verify signage for Monument Sign that is follows the visibility triangle measurement system -Verify that the Monument face size does not exceed 5 feet View Attachment
11-B-24-UR Jonathan (37934), November 2, 2024 at 4:28 AM
THE USE WILL DRAW ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC THROUGH RESIDENTIAL AREAS. The residents are asking for the proposed Second Drive exit to be a true right-out only exit with concrete curbing to prevent left turns as a condition to mitigate additional traffic through the residential area.
11-B-24-UR Mona (37772), November 2, 2024 at 11:05 AM
My prior comments inaccurately used the term architectural survey. I mean to type archeological survey. Thank you for considering my error. Comments have been resubmitted with correction. View Attachment
11-H-24-DP L (37920), November 2, 2024 at 12:45 PM
We're really disappointed with the lack of consideration to a honest traffic plan completion before rezoning and selling of this property was done. 80% increase in cars on this section of Pickens Gap on top of the 300% increase from previous years and that's okay for continuing down the path of putting a subdivision on this road? Just sad.
11-B-24-UR Gary (37934), November 2, 2024 at 4:42 PM
A raised concrete median with mountable curb as described on Map C101 should be constructed at drive way “B” exit onto 2nd drive. This would allow for only right hand turns to prevent unnecessary traffic into the Concord Historic District. Or the drive way should be totally eliminated mainly for safety issues and if not for the respect to the historic neighborhood.
As described in no. 2 of the side notes of Map L101, “the northern 1/3 of the parcel shall be developed by others in the future.” The current zoning is CN (neighborhood commercial). Does the current land use request affect this area? The northern 1/3 area should remain as CN since no development is proposed under this request.
11-B-24-UR Toby (29646), November 3, 2024 at 8:02 AM
This note pertains to the proposed EZ Stop development at Concord Road and Second Drive in west Knox County. I personally have strong feelings about maintaining the character of the Concord Masonic Lodge and Cemetery that are adjoining the proposed EZ Stop. I have many of my people buried there; and also own three burial plots that I will eventually use. Allowing vehicles to exit the EZ Stop onto Second Drive will desecrate the hallowed feel and history of the Masonic cemetery. Just as importantly, increased traffic on Second Drive will likely destroy the remaining blocks of Old Concord. That road is narrow and not constructed for many vehicles, or especially through trucks serving the store. Please don't allow this development to destroy what little remains of historic West Knoxvile.
11-B-24-UR David (37934), November 3, 2024 at 1:32 PM
1. As was discussed in the Planning Meeting and Use on Review, this project is not appropriate to the atmosphere and historic significance of Historic Concord. Concord is the only historic overlay in Knox County outside of the city limits.
2. Entering and exiting will be hazardous due to the speed and traffic on Concord Road.
3. There should be no left turn out of EZ Stop onto Second Drive. Point #2 above addresses the reason for concern. Drives will cut through Old Concord to avoid entering Concord Road. Traffic through the village is not in keeping with Point #1. Also, narrow streets with many walkers and kids on bikes make increased traffic very dangerous.
4. I am not in favor of the number of gas pumps EZ Stop is proposing. The whole scale is simply too large.
11-B-24-UR Carol (37934), November 3, 2024 at 2:20 PM
EZ Stop's 5,000 sq.ft. building complies with CN Zoning but the canopy and 14 pumps make the project too big for the location. Knox County does not seem to have clear regulations on pump limits, but that part of the property should compliment the building size., not over power it. Please abide by public sentiment by requiring them to decrease the canopy size and number of pumps.
Eliminate the outlet onto Second Drive. A situation exists at Weigel’s,1405 Lovell Rd, where planners approved a side exit onto Deerbrook so drivers can avoid heavy traffic on Lovell. It increases traffic on Deerbrook when cars and trucks cut through to Parkside. Planners will be encouraging fueling tankers and cars to cut through a residential community if you allow the outlet onto Second Drive. EZ Stop needs to present a better plan.
11-B-24-UR Laura (37934), November 3, 2024 at 6:26 PM
I would like to submit my comments opposing the EZ Stop development on Concord Road. While I appreciate EZ Stop finally submitting a smaller building size, the number of pumps and the canopy that covers them is still too large. The Board of Zoning Appeals initially denied this project because it did not fit the neighborhood and surrounding community, which is the purpose of the Neighborhood Commercial zoning put in place by the county. This project still does not fit the community, even with the smaller building.
11-B-24-UR Shirley (37934), November 4, 2024 at 9:02 AM
This proposed gas station/fast food development will result in the permanent desecration of the historic Concord Masonic Cemetery which is the sacred resting place of many area pioneer families and their descendants. The prospect of this inappropriate development is heartbreaking for those whose loved ones are buried there, some in unmarked graves which will certainly be encroached upon. Please have the courage to deny this devastating project. There are more appropriate uses for this property.
11-L-24-DP Richard (37923), November 4, 2024 at 11:03 AM
I have been a resident in Lennox Place Subdivision off Ebenezer Road for 31 years. Over this time, I have experienced the tremendous growth and some improvements to intersections and flood control. I feel this development would add a dangerous amount of traffic to the narrow and dangerous two lane portion of Ebenezer Road. Daily I encounter speeding cars and cars that cross over the center line due to phone use and the narrow lanes which are not equipped to handle additional traffic and construction vehicles this development would bring. The entrance to the subdivision is located in a curve and with the topography of the surrounding land, it will be hard to get in and out of the entrance. I would invite you to drive down Ebenezer Road in the day and at night. The lines are faded and not visible at night. The county has done a poor job keeping Ebenezer Road maintained and it needs to be widened with grooving on the sides and middle as Nubbins Ridge Road has.
11-I-24-RZ Brenda (918), November 4, 2024 at 1:44 PM
I am concerned about the amount of water that flows on this property and the properties that join it. Property is very low. Hard rain causes water to stand in the rear of this property and the land around it which are private residences. Also the traffic on Tazewell Pk. In this area is already very heavy. Tazewell Pk. Is two lanes and already has several roads in a very small distance turning onto it. There are no turn lanes and speeding is a problem.
11-K-24-DP Angelia (37924), November 4, 2024 at 2:15 PM
I do not support this man or his company. He and his development are not good for our community. Buying up all of these propeties and OVER developing them with poor craftsmanship is not the correct thing for our community. Putting a cut through on Asheville Hwy, is also dangerous for all of us that live here. Driving up our property taxes and making things harder for everyone who lives here.
11-L-24-DP James (37923), November 4, 2024 at 3:48 PM
Retention ponds are a feature in many developments. They uniformly have edge maintenance and aeration. My question is how will this be provided? Does the homeowner association provide these services? Does the county have regulations on maintenance and aeration? The one at the nearby Lowe's is a real eyesore.
11-I-24-RZ Rebecca (37918), November 4, 2024 at 5:37 PM
I am against this rezoning. This area consists of 11 acres. The requested rezoning is to place 10 du/ac per acre. That would result in up to 110 apartments on 11 acres. The traffic is obviously a major problem, but esthetic changes to our beautiful area will also not be positive. Single family property will decrease in value. In the quest for builders to profit and increase housing, this tract of property is not a best option for the proposed rezoning. I encourage those in leadership positions to consider the homeowners who reside in this area and say no.
11-B-24-PD Wesley (37709), November 4, 2024 at 6:20 PM
I am in full support of this development as this is the kind of dense developments we need to grapple with the housing crisis in Knoxville that is affecting us all. Single family homes alone will not solve the issue and will make it tough for many to afford to live here, not to mention that SFH developments contribute MORE to traffic than multifamily developments do. Additionally, Heyoh does great design work, especially in historic areas, and this firm’s contribution to this neighborhood will no doubt do the same.
11-B-24-DP Beth (37922), November 4, 2024 at 8:26 PM
Northshore Road can not take this kind of traffic. There are several different tracts of land for development right by or connected to each other being considered for development in this area. This is one of those. If all these pass, we are in big trouble in Choto. There are already common accidents and people regularly cross the center lane with nowhere for oncoming traffic to go when driving on Northshore. Because Northshore is the way for emergency vehicles it is a very dangerous situation for current and long term residents when blocked. If there is an accident on Northshore and a problem at the train tressel to Boyd Station (which emergency vehicles can't ever use), all the Choto traffic is diverted to Lenoir City via Martel. Please please manage all this development more effectively. I've lived here over 14 years and understand change, but you need to be more responsible about it. Please.
11-L-24-RZ Valerio (37921), November 4, 2024 at 8:58 PM
I've lived in the Knoxville area for over 15 years and I have seen a lot of development going on lately. Although development is necessary and convenient for cities around our country, I believe that there should be a stop on the unnecessary construction of subdivisions where our local flora and fauna are at risk. What attracted me and my family to this area was the beautiful landscapes and the friendly people of Knoxville as opposite to cities where many people live in small places and the increased traffic brings stress and sometimes unnecessary situations onto our every day lives. As a resident of the great city of Knoxville and a person who enjoys green spaces and the beautiful sound of birds, I opposed to this never ending and indiscriminate construction of communities in lots where there shouldn't be no more than three or four homes maximum. I believe we have the right to live in places where we feel safe and in peace. Thank you for your time.
11-K-24-DP Tessa (37871), November 4, 2024 at 10:43 PM
I'm writing to advise that the infrastructure in the area would not be able to accommodate this type of growth. There is extreme danger with this build request as the roadways cannot support more drivers in this area. In addition, there are extremely limited resources such as grocery stores, restaurants, and schools.
11-K-24-DP Teresa (37914), November 4, 2024 at 11:27 PM
As a resident of this small community, I object to the building of any townhouses. We have been in the dark about most of what is going on in our area. This is a small community, our schools don't have the room. They are over crowded as it is. Our Roads can't handle 360 plus more vehicles on our backroads. We already have had business on Strawberry Plains Pike snuck in on us. Most of us can't go to the meeting because they are during the day, while we ate working.
11-B-24-UR Jonathan (37934), November 5, 2024 at 3:32 AM
This Development should be sympathetic to the National Register Historic District of the Village of Concord which state: Pavement widths should be continued into any proposed development. The widening of Second Street should be as limited as possible. Narrow streets are a key part of the setting of the Historic Neighbor. Please see the attached document with our guidelines. While this property is not in the historic overlay, It is at the entrance of the Historic District and should be compatible with guidelines when it is possible. There is no usefulness in continuing the widening of second street past the proposed entrance and, therefore it should be avoided. View Attachment
11-K-24-DP Christina (37924), November 5, 2024 at 7:37 AM
Please don't allow this housing development. We have hundreds of homes built in our community. We don't have the infstructure to handle it. Our roads are narrow our school is filling up. This is not what we want for our community.
11-B-24-UR Jon (37934), November 5, 2024 at 8:26 AM
Please see the attached comments that show: While the convenience store is now scaled down to 4,975 sq. ft. the fueling area will be an additional 4,560 sq. ft. putting this establishment at 9,535 sq. ft. This is not in harmony with 5.38.04.B. No individual building or commercial establishment shall have a floor area exceeding five thousand (5,000) square feet.
11-K-24-DP Katie (37924), November 5, 2024 at 9:27 AM
Please do not put anymore housing in our community. We will end up with overcrowded schools and more traffic on asheville hwy than there already is. Please let us have our small community and not ruin it with this nonsense.
11-I-24-RZ Charles (37918), November 5, 2024 at 9:28 AM
I would oppose this development for numerous reasons, but the biggest is that the area simply lacks the infrastructure required. There is already excessive traffic on Tazewell Pike, and it makes it hard for current residents to get in and out of the existing neighborhoods safely. There are also numerous issues with sinkholes in the area and springs, causing hazardous conditions-the Cottages on Tazewell community had a large sinkhole form a few years after being built that required several trucks of concrete to be poured into the ground to stabilize the area. There is already a flooding issue in the area during rains and snow, and this would be worsened by a new property removing all the root systems that absorb the runoff. All in all, the area simply does not have the means to support an additional community without adding additional lanes to Tazewell Pike and adding drainage runoffs.
11-K-24-DP Julie (37924), November 5, 2024 at 11:02 AM
Myself and my family are AGAINST this. Our area is already overcrowded, at schools, the 1 grocery story and backroads. Adding this many houses and families is a high safety concern
11-K-24-DP Carmen (37914), November 5, 2024 at 1:04 PM
I moved to this area 10 yrs ago and have seen nothing but poor decisions by local government on developing the area. Infrastructure is a mess and this industrial residential cluster is at its brink. STOP
11-K-24-DP Angie (37924), November 5, 2024 at 2:57 PM
I oppose the building of the townhouses that are being proposed. There's not enough room to keep piling people in on top of one another, not to mention traffic is like an interstate now instead of a highway! If Id wanted to live in the city, I would've moved there, instead, y'all keep Taking our little part of the "country" we have left!! Go Away!!
11-I-24-RZ Richard (37918), November 5, 2024 at 3:40 PM
I have enclosed several photos taken in 2005 and 2013 from our back porch and in the 5027 Tazewell Pike Property showing the back of our house and Bradford Condos
Between my property and 4509 Simona Rd is 1 of 2 main drainage ditches for the runoff of Beverly Acres Subdivision. The rainwater starts at Mountain Crest
(Black Oak Ridge-South side) down Ridgemont to Santa Monica to Malibu to a underground culvert on Angeles to the South side of Simona border my property to 5027 Tazewell Pike creates a small pond backing into my yard and 4505 Simona several times a year with extreme rain. In addition, runoff from Gouffon,Stokely and Bellerive in Mont Richer Subdivisions.
All of these runoffs contribute to the flooding of Tazewell Pike at Fountain Gate Road
In addition, Shannondale School is at or close to capacity creating a backup of traffic on Shannondale Rd and Tazewell Pike. View Attachment
11-R-24-RZ John (37914), November 6, 2024 at 12:08 PM
Honestly, rezoning for M&W Drilling seems like a no-brainer. They've been around forever, and their place is always super clean and organized, no mess, no problems. It's rare to see a business that's been here this long and keeps such a good vibe with the community. Approving this rezoning just feels right; they're providing jobs and being a solid part of the neighborhood. We're lucky to have 'em!
11-R-24-RZ Michelle (37830), November 6, 2024 at 12:28 PM
Rezoning for M&W Drilling? It's a yes from me. I've lived here long enough to know that they're not just another business - they're a reliable community partner that's been here for decades. Their facility is always impressively clean and organized, showing real care for the surrounding neighborhood. They never cause any issues and respect the area's character. We should support this rezoning to let them keep doing what they do best: providing jobs and contributing positively without creating any disruptions.
11-B-24-UR Mona (37772), November 6, 2024 at 7:27 PM
For those who are not familiar with the layout of the Old Concord area, the attached map is illustrative of the various routes of traffic from proposed EZ Stop Development through Old Concord if exit onto Second Drive from development is allowed. One can see the effect of increased traffic throughout this residential area.
View Attachment
11-K-24-DP Hannah (39724), November 6, 2024 at 8:24 PM
I STRONGLY oppose to building more real estate on this particular property. This will affect my home that I rent in many ways. I will have to worry about individuals coming onto our property, having a backyard of townhomes, more dangerous traffic, and especially the well being of my daughter. There is already a high volume of irresponsible driving infront of my house which causes wrecks which I have witnessed and adding more people to a confided “field” will be irresponsible. Are my mornings going to consist of staring at buildings instead of the sunrise? Am I going to have to worry about my daughter playing outside when strangers have a perfect view of our home inside and out? This is absurd and completely unnecessary to our community.
11-I-24-RZ Barbara (37918), November 6, 2024 at 9:34 PM
In addition to the topographical issues mentioned above, the concerns about the current traffic flow, even without any additional development in this area, should be taken very seriously. Due to the multiple new developments that are further north in the county, traffic on Tazewell Pike has become dangerously heavy especially during morning and evening rush. Currently, several large developments exist in immediate proximity to the one being proposed in this rezoning request. It is a very common occurrence for us to sit at the entrance of Bradford Place condominiums, which is just below the proposed site, while streams of 20 - 30 cars at a time fly by, bumper to bumper, at 50 - 55 mph. When you can finally glimpse a small break in traffic, you literally take your life in your hands pulling on to this two lane road which has no turn lane and no shoulders. Seriously… there should at least be an official, unbiased, traffic study done before this rezoning is even considered.
11-B-24-UR Abby (37934), November 6, 2024 at 9:38 PM
At the last Planning Commission meeting it was brought up about an archaeological survey that should be performed. I think it is important that this survey be done by a third party group NOT the developer (Tommy Hunt/EZ Stop). This will allow for a thorough survey of the grounds to make sure graves are not disturbed.
11-A-24-SU Paul (37917), November 7, 2024 at 3:12 AM
Would like to discuss extending the easement or road to rear lot located at 2825 Mineral Springs Ave going to top of ridge. Would like ability to extend easement and road to access 2825 Mineral Springs Ave rear lot for future single family residence. Moreover, would the proposed builder allow or KUB allow shared public utilities to surrounding properties that tie into proposed work. 2825 Mineral Springs Ave 37917 would like to request proposed new zoning to be extended to rear lot of 2825 Mineral Springs Ave owner for future personal single family home.
11-B-24-UR Mark (37934), November 7, 2024 at 5:28 AM
The proposal to exit a high volume establishment onto a small road that leads through a quiet historic neighborhood is insane. No sign is going to prevent this as drivers and GPS will see the advantage in swerving through the small roads leading to Canton Hollow thereby avoiding the increasing traffic congestion in Farragut. I urge the Commission Members to drive these narrow roads through not only Old Concord but also through other communities leading to Canton Hollow. You will only need to do this once to understand. If the Commission is convinced that the community needs another high volume gas station/fast food store then there is ample commercial land to create an exit back onto the existing high volume Concord Road that at least was designed for this purpose! I suppose an exit back onto Concord might use up more commercial land but that is a price that should be paid to maintain the safety of our communities.
11-R-24-RZ James (37830), November 7, 2024 at 6:52 AM
I say go for the rezoning for M&W Drilling. They've been around forever, and you can always count on them to keep things clean and professional. Their site is so organized, you'd barely know they're there, and they don't cause any issues in the neighborhood. Plus, they've been providing solid jobs here for ages. Seems like a win-win to me - they're a real asset to the area
11-R-24-RZ Greg (37931), November 7, 2024 at 6:56 AM
M&W Drilling has been in the community for over 35 years. They keep their place super clean and organized, like they actually care about the area. No mess, just a well-run business that doesn't get in anyone's way. Rezoning for them makes total sense. They're good for the local economy, and honestly, they're the kind of business you want around. I think we should back them on this.
11-R-24-RZ Glenda (37737), November 7, 2024 at 11:31 AM
Totally for this rezoning. They've been part of our community forever, and they keep their place looking so clean and organized. They're super respectful of the neighborhood. Plus, they're providing jobs and all. I'd say this is an easy call - rezoning lets them keep doing good work for the area without causing any issues. Win-win!
11-R-24-RZ Amanda (37934), November 7, 2024 at 11:48 AM
I think rezoning is a good move. They've been around a long time and keep everything nice & tidy- never a mess, just a solid, well-run operation. They bring jobs and also respect the community, which is more than you can say for a lot of businesses. This rezoning just helps them keep doing what they do best. They're definitely a good neighbor to have around!
11-I-24-RZ Joe (37918), November 7, 2024 at 5:02 PM
This property has several problems with development. First, traffic. If allowed at the density requested 110 units could be built. This would cause increasing problems with accidents along this stretch of road. Secondly, and most importantly, is the water runoff problem. Two creeks, one of which appears to be spring fed, are on the property. During heavy and more frequent rainstorms that property has real runoff problems. This level of development would increase the water flowing into the Bradford Place property and cause problems with our culverts and would then flow to the Fountain Gate area and cause problems there.
11-I-24-RZ Charles and Dorothy (37918), November 7, 2024 at 7:01 PM
We are concerned about the spring fed Blue Water that comes from this property and passes through our property. we know that there are restrictions regarding the need to preserve the status of this water. We know that after heavy rains the water from the subdivision above us on the North side floods the field behind us on the property in question and have concerns about any building that might be planned for that area. We have noted standing water up to and including the property line for Bradford Place homeowners.
11-I-24-RZ Debby & Don (37918), November 8, 2024 at 9:04 AM
The additional housing proposed for the property between Bradford Place and Mont Richer will certainly cause flooding problems for Bradford Place. The additional water runoff will affect the two creeks which run through Bradford Place causing flooding and erosion of the hillside adjoining said property. With Bradford Place, the Cottages on Tazewell , Mont Richer and a possible new housing development all side by side the traffic on Tazewell Pike, which is a two-lane roadway would be congested and more dangerous than ever to travel on. I certainly hope these two areas of concern are presented to the Planning Commission during the public hearing.
11-SE-24-C Christiane (37920), November 8, 2024 at 11:13 AM
Please don't allow this many houses to be built on Pickens Gap. You each have the ability to mitigate this insanity. Either way, you will make a decision then leave it to go to your homes wherever you choose to live but we are left with the results of that decision that will effect us for decades to come. I am not against development when it is reasonable and makes sense. Look at the surrounding area and what that ecosystem can handle. Two houses per acre is excessive and benefits no one other than the developers. It may not seem like much on paper but look around the neighborhood, Please! I am sick to my core about this. We are at your mercy. Please help us.
11-I-24-RZ REBECCA (37918), November 8, 2024 at 12:25 PM
I am a resident of Bradford Place and I am concerned about the proposed zoning change for the property located at 5027 Tazewell Pike. If this property is developed to proposed capacity there would be an increased flooding events as any runoff will feed both creeks that come onto Bradford Place. Flooding is already an issue on Tazewell Pike at the Fountain Gate Entrance where the two creeks from Bradford converge with a third creek at Fountain Gate. Also, the existing property only has 50 feet of right of way. Tazewell Pike is already overburdened with traffic as a result of growth in the area. As a result there have been more serious accidents in the area. Thank you for concerning my concerns.
11-I-24-RZ Deborah (e way), November 8, 2024 at 12:49 PM
I am a homeowner in bradford place my concern is that flooding is a grave issue here. Also when learning about sinkholes on this property, that is also a great concern that they are not taking care of properly for the future and also my concern is that this land will be stripped of all vegetation and we have very large beautiful trees on this property that borders bradford place should all these trees be cut down then there will be no route system to prevent further flooding . thank you