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-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-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?
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-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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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-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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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 !
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.
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?
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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-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.
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.
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.
Please see attached letter. A petition with 96 signatures of residents that this development would impact is attached in another comment. View Attachment
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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-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.