March 7, 2024
Planning Commission meeting

Public Comments

58 Comments
X ZIP Code
Jim and Rebecca
37932
2-B-24-SP
Jim and Rebecca (37932), February 8, 2024 at 5:56 PM
We live on a narrow winding mountain road, which at our end is only lane. We cannot absorb the additional heavy traffic that rezoning will eventuate. We did not know the time or location of the meeting today; otherwise we would have attended. Although that lack of information is entirely our fault, in the town from which I came rezoning meetings were usually held in the evenings. Please be so kind as to register our opposition to the above-listed rezoning request.
2-E-24-RZ
Jon (37932), January 30, 2024 at 8:39 AM
The rezoning request for 2600 W Gallaher Ferry is completely out of line with what our little road and community can support. W Gallaher Ferry currently has 88 total homes. Adding 224 houses would increase the traffic by 2.5X what the current traffic load is. Our road is so narrow in places that my truck does not fit in the lane. Also, the rezoning application states there is WKUD sewer to the property, that is not the case. Sewer and an upgraded water line would have to be brought a mile down our road to support the rezoning request, or use of septic systems. Unfortunately, about a third of the property is too steep to get approval from Knox County Enviromental Health for septic and the remaining land would only get approval for 1 house per acre. Finally, with a third of the land being so steep it is absurd to think that someone could fit 2 houses per acre on such a steep hillside.
Jaime
37932
12-SF-23-C
Jaime (37932), January 30, 2024 at 11:04 AM
The proposed development continues to include request for variances that they have created in their proposal. You cannot create your own hardship. This builder was on the planning commission at the time the original proposal was considered. Instead of pushing the rules he should have been an example to the building expectations Knox county currently has. Through litigation, our homeowners association has proven this to be illegal yet the only change has been a one lot reduction that does not address the variance issues. They also continue to build 5 homes on an illegal road location. We ask that you deny this concept plan.
Leane
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Leane (37932), January 30, 2024 at 12:04 PM
I adamantly opposed the proposed development of possibly more than 100 homes on West Gallaher Ferry Road on so many levels...but I will point out only one issue right now: the development company and associated parties' LIABILITY in the event of a car accident. I own a passenger van that will fit in one lane on the very slim roadway West Gallaher Ferry is. But I have been run off the road TWICE by construction vehicles too wide for the lane or that cross over the line due to reckless driving. My damages were reimbursed but that's not the point. The road needs to be improved and widened for the current residents of the 80 properties on West Gallaher Ferry...any additional development will strain our road beyond comprehension.
Jennifer
37932
2-F-24-RZ
Jennifer (37932), February 16, 2024 at 10:41 AM
We are very much against any development in the field behind our house on High Springs Rd. We purchased this house nearly 2 years ago, primarily BECAUSE of the field, because it’s an established neighborhood where we are tucked away from “busy”, but still close. We can see beautiful sunsets and stars from our home. The noise of construction, and then multiple families is too much to bear, frankly. Furthermore, should we ever decide to sell, the selling point of the field behind us is gone. Not every square inch of Knox county has to be developed. This will drastically change our way of life. Please deny any development here.
Caroline
37932
12-SF-23-C
Caroline (37932), January 30, 2024 at 12:58 PM
I'm a homeowner in Massey Creek for 7 years, and been and oppose the subdivision and plan. This development was determined by Knox County Chancery Court as illegally approved by the previous commission and ordered to be heard through Planning once again if they want to proceed. This developer has not addressed the illegal issues. For example, the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park is illegal and was granted illegally. Please reject this plan and influence the developer to adhere to the laws.
Robert
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Robert (37932), January 30, 2024 at 1:18 PM
I wish to respectfully voice my concerns regarding the proposed new zoning at this location and the extremely negative ramifications of the property development that might ensue. My wife and I have lived here for 24 years. We are now seeing incredibly rampant, unbridled development of Hardin Valley. The current infrastructure (roads, schools, etc.) can not and does not support the impact of these changes. The proposed zoning changes and subsequent housing developments on West Gallaher Ferry Road (WGF) are especially egregious. WGF is a circuitous, hilly, narrow old country road that is poorly striped, has numerous hidden driveways and no shoulders (in fact, it has steep drop-offs and treacherous ditches where shoulders should be). The proposed development (and current developments) would create horrific traffic loads and EXTREMELY hazardous driving conditions on a road already plagued with safety issues. Additionally, the environmental impacts would be considerable. We rely on a septic system and unless massive construction is planned, 2600 WGF would also. Numerous septic fields (IF they could be put in place) would be disaster to Melton Hill Lake and groundwater. I do not wish to live in a cesspool environment. Please be aware that rampant and unbridled development billed as "progress:" is often tomorrow's blight.
Vonna
37932
12-SF-23-C
Vonna (37932), January 30, 2024 at 3:04 PM
I am a homeowner in the Massey Creek subdivision for over 5 years and I once again am writing to oppose the entire subdivision and plan. The plan developed is illegal due to the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park. This plan was granted illegal and therefore should be deemed illegal moving forward. Shame on the developer for being money hungry and putting innocent lives at risk.
James
37932
2-E-24-RZ
James (37932), January 30, 2024 at 3:09 PM
I do not support this proposal. Hardin Valley’s infrastructure cannot accommodate this amount of homes. Also, the location is not suitable for the development. Finally, residents are disgruntled about the current growth. It needs to stop.
12-SF-23-C
Tom (37932), January 30, 2024 at 4:07 PM
If what is proceeding has been deemed illegal with a wink and a nod to a builder who clearly appears to have some sort of inside track with friends, where and when does the line get drawn on illegalities? Why do we have any laws? Or do we not follow laws only when someone of importance or connection is inconvenienced? In this case the judge clearly has deemed what is going on as illegal. Yet the ruling is ignored. There is no democratic process here being upheld by our elected officials. Why should any of us follow any laws in Knox County?
Mackenzie
37932
12-SF-23-C
Mackenzie (37932), January 30, 2024 at 4:32 PM
I oppose this plan, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park. This was granted illegally and is an illegal variance. The planning for Hardin Valley needs to be smart and follow the rules and regulations set forth by the planning commission. I urge you to push for this property and plan to be halted and stopped. Let's preserve the safety and well being of the people of this county. Thank you for your consideration.
Chris
37932
12-SF-23-C
Chris (37932), January 30, 2024 at 6:17 PM
It’s mind blowing that this issue is constantly resurfacing when the build is in clear violation and they keep pursuing their agenda with Knox County. Can we please stop the madness and wasting tax payers money.
Tanya
37932
12-SF-23-C
Tanya (37932), January 30, 2024 at 8:49 PM
I’m a homeowner in Massey Creek subdivision, and I ask that you deny this plan. Through litigation with our HOA, this development plan was deemed illegal by Knox County Chancery Court, as a result, this plan should be denied. The developer should be required to adhere to the law.
Leane
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Leane (37932), January 31, 2024 at 1:30 PM
School buses make their way down the narrow West Gallaher Ferry Road every day, multiple times a day. The road is too narrow for a school bus and sedan, much less a dump truck or other type of construction vehicle. If this proposed development passes the environmental regulations with respect to proper sewage drainage on the hillside, how does the county expect to remain free from LIABILITY if a construction vehicle runs a school bus off this very narrow road with no shoulder??
Brandon
37932
12-G-23-DP
Brandon (37932), January 31, 2024 at 2:01 PM
I'm a homeowner in Massey Creek for 3 years and have been and still oppose the subdivision and plan. This development was determined by Knox County Chancery Court as illegally approved by the previous commission and ordered to be heard through Planning once again if they want to proceed. This developer has not addressed the illegal issues. The Massey Creek HOA has sued and won against this developer for the illegal variances granted. For example, the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park is illegal and was granted illegally. Please reject this plan and influence the developer to adhere to the laws.
JANICE
37932
2-E-24-RZ
JANICE (37932), January 31, 2024 at 5:53 PM
See Attached letter
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240131175341.pdf
Janice
37932
2-B-24-SP
Janice (37932), January 31, 2024 at 5:55 PM
SEE ATTACHED
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240131175517.pdf
Janice and Eddie
37932
2-B-24-SP
Janice and Eddie (37932), January 31, 2024 at 6:23 PM
corrected names/pdf
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240131182304.pdf
Herb
37932
2-B-24-SP
Herb (37932), January 31, 2024 at 6:49 PM
1. CHILD SAFETY - Currently school buses pick up children at the road in front of each property. The road frontage in front of this proposed development is on a curve that slopes downward which makes it a blind curve. During this time of year, children going to elementary school are picked up before sunrise which makes it more difficult to see a stationary vehicle.
2. ROAD DAMAGE - I have lived on this undulating road for more 35 years and have seen damage done to it by construction vehicles on numerous occasions but the volume of heavy traffic required by this project far exceeds anything that has been experienced in the past. Who will pay for the damage? The taxpayers?
3. ACCESS BY EMERGENCY VEHICLES - Has the Karns Fire Department been asked to comment on possible road blockage during the site development?
AILEEN
37932
2-E-24-RZ
AILEEN (37932), February 1, 2024 at 3:36 AM
I think it is a big mistake to put approximately 252 homes on W. Gallaher Ferry Rd. It is a very narrow, windy, hilly 1 lane in each direction road bordered by a steep embankment. I have to partially pull off the road if anything larger than a car passes me. Usually, I drive over the dividing line (if no car coming) because it is a scary, steep embankment that would be easy to go over. I attribute the lack of accidents to its being fairly unpopulated. Drunk driving, speeding, reckless drivers would be a nightmare. Adding to the problem is that there are lots and lots of wildlife here. Deer like to jump in front of oncoming traffic. The road is already unsuitable for the amount of traffic on it. All the water run off would easily flow into Melton Hill Lake, affecting lake ecology. As it's being zoned for 2 homes per acre, it would be an almost impossible task to tie into the public sewer lines on the Covered Bridge development. 2 homes per acre makes it ineligible for septic. Before approving, please come out here and take a look at our road, West Gallaher Ferry and see how perilous it is. Then imagine connecting a city sewer line to Covered Bridge (a long ways away). It doesn't seem possible to me. Just come check it out. Not all land is suitable for a large development.
Rebecca
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Rebecca (37932), February 1, 2024 at 9:06 AM
The roads on Gallaher Ferry do not have the infrastructure to support this development. It will definitely lead to accidents and damage to the existing tiny curvy road, not to mention the nightmare traffic situation it would cause. I am devastated by the thought of this large development in such a rural area that was meant for preservation. We moved here from Memphis and purchased the land on Gallaher Ferry as an escape from this scenario. We are currently growing our acreage into farmland, which we believe that rural community was meant for, not to be saddled by greedy developers who don't care about the environmental damage they are causing. In the two years since we purchased this land, we've seen Hardin Valley turning into exactly what we were attempting to escape. The city and developers are ruining what was beautiful, rural, countryside that should be protected all in the name of what they are masking as "progress"
George
37932
2-E-24-RZ
George (37932), February 1, 2024 at 9:15 AM
We are vehemently opposed to zoning changes at 2600 West Gallaher Ferry. For many reason our narrow road cannot support an additional 200+ homes. The damage from construction water runoff could be catastrophic to Melton Hill Lake. 
Tonya
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Tonya (37932), February 1, 2024 at 9:53 AM
Please see attached statement.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240201095305.pdf
Tonya
37932
2-B-24-SP
Tonya (37932), February 1, 2024 at 9:54 AM
Please see attached statement
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240201095441.pdf
Jenna
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Jenna (37932), February 1, 2024 at 11:33 AM
I am very concerned about the possibility of a neighborhood coming to our small road. There is too enough space to put more houses on the road than total houses already on the entire road. Hardin Valley is already being over developed, and not being done right. We have no parks, no side walks, just development after development. The lake is also a river turned lake, that is small and narrow and not build for neighborhoods to be built and add 200 more boats to it.
Christopher
37932
8-B-23-OA
Christopher (37932), October 2, 2023 at 9:51 PM
I fully support the idea of reducing setbacks on properties. There is no reason why a property needs to maintain a lawn if it does not have to. Besides, a lot of the grass used is not native with the environment and it requires a decent amount of watering, fertilizer, and pesticides that would be best kept to a minimum. My complaint is not against people who want a wide expansive yard, because I can see why some people like the aesthetic. However, forcing everyone to have a big lawn does tend to restrict development. For instance, much of downtown would be impossible to be built today because all the downtown apartments have no setbacks. R. Bentley Marlow's application is a reasonable one, and I hope that you all pass it through.
Jenna
37932
2-B-24-SP
Jenna (37932), February 1, 2024 at 11:37 AM
I am writing very concerned about the possibility of a neighborhood on our small road. We have a very narrow road with 80 something houses and now this rezoning wants to add 224 more, more than is even on the entirety of the road already. Not to mention the small river that was turned into a lake, there is not room for 224 boats/watercrafts. This is a huge concern for safety, driving and on the lake.
James
37932
2-E-24-RZ
James (37932), February 1, 2024 at 12:49 PM
I would like to voice my objection to case 2-E-24-RZ. The land in question is under Hillside Protection and acts as a watershed. Disruption of this area would have drastic damaging effects to the landscape and Melton Hill lake.
Denise
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Denise (37932), February 1, 2024 at 2:54 PM
I'm a home owner on W. Gallaher Ferry Rd. We do not want this property developed into a neighborhood!! We have lived here for 18+ years, and moved to this area to get away from what Hardin Valley is now becoming. Most all the homes on W. Gallaher are on 5 acres or more and we would certainly like to keep it that way. Not to mention all the wildlife that just continues to be pushed out. Our small twisty road can't handle all that extra traffic either.
David
37932
2-E-24-RZ
David (37932), February 1, 2024 at 10:07 PM
I strongly oppose this development plan. The proposed plan in no way fits the footprint of the community. The potential problems it will create with this massive increase in dwellings, traffic, etc. is not warranted or very well thought out.
Leslie
37932
2-B-24-SP
Leslie (37932), February 2, 2024 at 10:26 AM
I am adamantly opposed to the rezoning of this property for several reasons. West Gallaher Ferry Road is a narrowing, winding, hilly dead-end road of about 3 miles. The property in question is about half down the road on a curve and a steep part of the road. The property itself is also very steep. There are at present 88 houses on WGF, each on large lots. Adding over 200 houses to this area as is proposed would make driving here more treacherous than it is. Schools in Hardin Valley are overcrowded and traffic is horrendous. I speak as a 40-year-long resident myself, and for my family who were living here in the late 1700s. Please do not approve this rezoning.
Laura
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Laura (37932), February 2, 2024 at 11:57 AM
Please see the attached PDF.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240202115709.pdf
Robert
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Robert (37932), February 2, 2024 at 4:40 PM
I am requesting a zoning change to this area and for new residential developments not to connect to Covered Bridge Neighborhood for water and sewage runoff and disposal. The rapid advancement of building in this area without proper infrastructure is destroying wetlands, parks, and the excessive run has to be having harm in the Milton Hill Lake and surrounding areas. We need a pause to hear what the plans are in place to address these many issues facing long-standing residents of the area and the environment.
Jeanne
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Jeanne (37932), February 2, 2024 at 7:49 PM
I am totaly against adding more homes to West Gallagher Ferry. The road is windy and very narrow. This would also add more cars to Hardin Valley Rd where this road already needs widening to accommodate the cars already here in Hardin Valley.
John
37932
2-E-24-RZ
John (37932), February 2, 2024 at 7:58 PM
I am very against more homes being built on 2600 West Gallagher Ferry. That road is very narrow and windy and we don't need an additional 500 cars on the already crowded Hardin Valley Road.
Matthew
37932
12-SF-23-C
Matthew (37932), December 6, 2023 at 12:17 PM
PLEASE see the attached letter regarding this illegal development. There is ZERO path forward due to this developers complete disregard of State Law and local Rules & Regulations. Quit wasting taxpayer money defending a developer over Knox County Taxpayer's safety and concerns. This development was determined illegal by Knox County Chancery Court and this staff/commission has no authority to approve as-is. We request you to DENY this plan to avoid a fifth or more lawsuit - The first lawsuit clarifies the illegalities of this plan and the wrongdoings of the previous commission. The next three lawsuits involve the current staff and commission as you have aided this developer and Amy Brooks to, yet again, illegally approve this development against our advisement.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231206121707.pdf
Matthew
37932
12-G-23-DP
Matthew (37932), December 6, 2023 at 12:18 PM
PLEASE see the attached letter regarding this illegal development. There is ZERO path forward due to this developers complete disregard of State Law and local Rules & Regulations. Quit wasting taxpayer money defending a developer over Knox County Taxpayer's safety and concerns. This development was determined illegal by Knox County Chancery Court and this staff/commission has no authority to approve as-is. We request you to DENY this plan to avoid a fifth or more lawsuit - The first lawsuit clarifies the illegalities of this plan and the wrongdoings of the previous commission. The next three lawsuits involve the current staff and commission as you have aided this developer and Amy Brooks to, yet again, illegally approve this development against our advisement.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231206121818.pdf
Suzanne
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Suzanne (37932), February 3, 2024 at 7:05 AM
I am writing to you to voice my strong opposition to the potential rezoning and development of this property on West Gallaher Ferry Rd. This road is a safety hazard. It is cut into the side of a hill with severe drops offs, has multiple blind curves and no white lines to aid drivers at night. In case you have never been on this road, between Hickory Creek and this property there are 13 curves, four of which are blind curves. Exiting this property on WGF will likely be a left turn onto an uphill with a blind curve, limiting reaction time, not to mention school bus issues. Secondly, this road has had numerous documented incidents where residents/contractors /lawn service/school buses such as excessive speeding and driving in the middle of the road outside of their lane particularly trucks with trailers. We have lost 3 mail boxes due to drivers nicking it as they failed to navigate the sharp curve (#5) at our address (2420). One of our mailbox’s was solid brick, it was totally shattered and totaled the car that hit it. This road is not built to handle the additional traffic and congestion of this development project. In reviewing the 20-year Knox County Growth plan I saw no funding for road or infrastructure upgrades on West Gallaher Ferry Rd. In light of this obsolete road with its abundant safety hazards and no county budget for upgrades, you cannot in good faith, approve this rezoning and development request, it would be dangerous and unconscionable.
Daniel
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Daniel (37932), February 3, 2024 at 2:04 PM
Rezoning of this property for residential would create major traffic issues. First, East Gallaher Ferry Road is currently not much more than a pig trail. Fortunately, it is not heavily traveled, but this rezoning would change that. Since the construction of the traffic circle Further, this would add to the already overcrowding issues in Hardin Valley. Hardin Valley Road needs to be widened to either include a turning lane or into a four lane road before major developments are approved.
Mike
37932
12-SF-23-C
Mike (37932), December 12, 2023 at 6:59 PM
I place my trust in you to use the existing laws as the governing framework for making any decisions related to this and all development in Hardin Valley. The developers are fully aware of these laws and if they are allowed to circumvent them by exceptions just because of their relationships, with a wink and a nod that they can go ahead and build with the knowledge that their position will be supported by the planning commission; it sets a terrible precedent.

View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231212185946.pdf
Michael
37932
12-SF-23-C
Michael (37932), December 12, 2023 at 9:52 PM
Please see the attached .pdf letter/document. A summary is below. I sadly have to write again about the same topic and agenda item - this time in a new form - as I have previously - The Lantern Park subdivision. This project, owned and developed by Scott Smith, continues to be illegally pushed upon you as Commissioners. The idea is that if they keep on asking, keep on attempting to circumvent - and in fact blatantly not follow - local rules and ordinances as well as the law of the State of Tennessee, they could wear down anyone who stands in their way. Their mantra is essentially "might makes right. Please know that we will continue to vigorously oppose what we know to be right, what the judge has already ruled to be illegal, as well as what you - if you are being honest - know to be wrong. We respectfully ask that you DENY this plan before you, in accordance with, among other things, staff recommendation. It is not your job to bail out developers who seek "end arounds" established law and common sense
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231212215250.pdf
George
37932
8-B-23-OA
George (37932), August 7, 2023 at 12:08 PM
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!
Michele
37932
12-SF-23-C
Michele (37932), December 13, 2023 at 11:07 PM
It is ridiculous that the developers are greedy and after 4 lawsuits still trying to get away with doing what they want. We just want to maintain our road/entrance the way it is. There is no need to disturb that.
2-B-24-SP
Bob (37932), January 25, 2024 at 9:33 PM
This 112-acre tract is heavily wooded and very steep from W. Gallaher Ferry Road down to Melton Hill Reservoir. There is no sewer service within a mile of the tract and water service is minimal since most of the tracts on W. Gallaher Ferry Road are served by groundwater/wells. The road is very narrow with no shoulders and just last summer a garbage truck was totally destroyed when it rolled off the road trying to pass an oncoming vehicle. Increased traffic on this narrow winding dead-end road will just magnify the hazards to all the users. Developers these days cut every tree to maximize profits and even with two units per acre this particular site will become a runoff nightmare right into Melton Hill Reservoir. Approval of this request would allow 220+ new homes in an area designated as "Rural" with "Hillside Protection" and "Stream Protection". As an engineer, I have developed land throughout the southeast and in my experience this particular tract of land cannot reasonably support this level of intense development. The poor road access, minimal utilities, steep topography, and environmental damage to the community are the key reasons to deny this request.
2-E-24-RZ
Bob (37932), January 25, 2024 at 9:35 PM
This 112-acre tract is heavily wooded and very steep from W. Gallaher Ferry Road down to Melton Hill Reservoir. There is no sewer service within a mile of the tract and water service is minimal since most of the tracts on W. Gallaher Ferry Road are served by groundwater/wells. The road is very narrow with no shoulders and just last summer a garbage truck was totally destroyed when it rolled off the road trying to pass an oncoming vehicle. Increased traffic on this narrow winding dead-end road will just magnify the hazards to all the users. Developers these days cut every tree to maximize profits and even with two units per acre this particular site will become a runoff nightmare right into Melton Hill Reservoir. Approval of this request would allow 220+ new homes in an area designated as "Rural" with "Hillside Protection" and "Stream Protection". As an engineer, I have developed land throughout the southeast and in my experience this particular tract of land cannot reasonably support this level of intense development. The poor road access, minimal utilities, steep topography, and environmental damage to the community are the key reasons to deny this request.
Heather
37932
12-SF-23-C
Heather (37932), January 28, 2024 at 3:19 PM
We vehemently oppose this entire subdivision and plan, as the entirety of it is illegal, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park, as this variance is illegal and was granted illegally. It’s incredibly disappointing that the planning commission continues to approve development after development without consideration for the impact on the community surrounding this and all the developments. Greater infrastructure needs to be implemented. This development is a blatant disregard for proper planning processes and highlights how corrupt this entire commission and planning process truly is.
Heather
37932
12-G-23-DP
Heather (37932), January 28, 2024 at 3:20 PM
We vehemently oppose this entire subdivision and plan, as the entirety of it is illegal, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park, as this variance is illegal and was granted illegally. It’s incredibly disappointing that the planning commission continues to approve development after development without consideration for the impact on the community surrounding this and all the developments. Greater infrastructure needs to be implemented. This development is a blatant disregard for proper planning processes and highlights how corrupt this entire commission and planning process truly is.
Teresa
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Teresa (37932), February 6, 2024 at 10:14 PM
I do not support this proposed action as it will harm the Covered Bridge property. Please stop over developing Hardin Valley
12-SF-23-C
Kim (37932), January 28, 2024 at 3:30 PM
This development was determined illegal by Knox County Chancery Court and this staff/commission has no authority to approve as-is. We request you to DENY this plan to avoid a fifth or more lawsuit - The first lawsuit clarifies the illegalities of this plan and the wrongdoings of the previous commission.
Fred
37932
12-G-23-DP
Fred (37932), January 28, 2024 at 4:22 PM
I oppose this entire subdivision and plan, as the entirety of it is illegal, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park, as this variance is illegal and was granted illegally. Please reject this plan. Please work to preserve and promote smart growth in the county.
Emily
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Emily (37932), January 28, 2024 at 5:01 PM
This development would not meet the Rural Living Zoning in the Advance Knox Proposal. The current roads are narrow with no shoulder, this area has no sewer service, and this area has Hilltop and Stream Protections. This area is not suited for this type of development. Please do not allow this area to be developed and destroy what little rural, protected area there is left.
Jerome
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Jerome (37932), January 28, 2024 at 5:02 PM
I agree with others that this rezoning request is a blatant disregard for the upcoming Advance Knox planning. This development would not meet the Rural Living Zoning in the Advance Knox Proposal that this property is obviously meant for. Hardin Valley can't handle the growth we have experienced over the last several years, how can you intelligently approve more and continue to rezone areas that only benefit big money developers and ignore the wishes of the community residents? We need to prioritize conservation of green areas rather than continue to destroy them for cheaply built, overpriced homes.
John
37932
2-E-24-RZ
John (37932), January 28, 2024 at 7:37 PM
This property is slated as rural and should remain as such. This area cannot handle anymore development the infrastructure is not there. There is no sewage access to the property. Most of it is unusable without extreme restructuring of the land. These decisions are being made unjustly and without investigation we need no more developments in this area until you as a committee implement proper infrastructure and support for the development you wish to build. Or approve to build. We don’t need more traffic circles and subdivision entrances. We need proper infrastructure BEFORE you approach building
Debra
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Debra (37932), January 28, 2024 at 8:17 PM
I concur with everything Bob has mentioned. As an unwilling recipient of runoff from a “reasonable” development (by whose standards?), the long lasting impact of this can never be undone. This area is NOT Farragut, but it’s exactly what developers and planning commissions are turning it into. This area cannot handle any further development and population growth! Enough!
Rebecca
37932
2-A-24-CP
Rebecca (37932), February 7, 2024 at 5:48 AM
Do not move this destructive agenda forward. Traffic is already horrific and services (hospitals, etc) are overrun with more than they can handle. We moved to Knox County so we wouldn't have to live in a densely populated area with poor services. Without the appropriate infrastructure, this expansion will ruin the quality of life for current residents who have built their lives here. There is no need to put the cart before the horse and encourage an influx of people that county services can't handle--you will ruin quality of life for the current taxpayers/residents. The only ones benefitting from this plan are the ones being paid off by developers and whoever else seeks to destroy everything around them--you'll be able to afford to move when the consequences are felt. For once listen to your constituents--I've yet to speak to a single resident in favor of any part of this. Vote against this plan for all the important reasons others have so eloquently described.
2-E-24-RZ
Rob (37932), January 29, 2024 at 2:23 PM
steep from W. Gallaher Ferry Road down to Melton Hill Reservoir. There is no sewer service within a mile of the tract and water service is minimal since most of the tracts on W. Gallaher Ferry Road are served by groundwater/wells. The road is very narrow with no shoulders and just last summer a garbage truck was totally destroyed when it rolled off the road trying to pass an oncoming vehicle. Increased traffic on this narrow winding dead-end road will just magnify the hazards to all the users. Developers these days cut every tree to maximize profits and even with two units per acre this particular site will become a runoff nightmare right into Melton Hill Reservoir. Approval of this request would allow 220+ new homes in an area designated as "Rural" with "Hillside Protection" and "Stream Protection". As an engineer, I have developed land throughout the southeast and in my experience this particular tract of land cannot reasonably support this level of intense development. The poor road access, minimal utilities, steep topography, and environmental damage to the community are the key reasons to deny this request.
Kristen
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Kristen (37932), January 29, 2024 at 8:56 PM
West Gallaher Ferry is a very small windey road where in some place my husband's truck is too big for the lane. This road was not meant to withstand this much traffic. The property in question should remain as part of the hillside and stream protection act. This property is very steep. There have been other developments that have poured red clay into the lake. The lake is one of the few things left we have to enjoy in Hardin Valley. The last thing Hardin Valley needs is another development of cheaply built houses. We need parks and land to enjoy. There is not sewer on the road either which is another major reason not to approve this.
Jenny
37932
2-E-24-RZ
Jenny (37932), January 29, 2024 at 9:48 PM
Hardin Valley has been a beautiful, rural community with rolling green hills, horse and cattle farms, wild deer, foxes, coyotes, raccoons, owls, and hawks in abundance. The exponential growth of the last 5 years have resulted in the decline of—if not the near loss of— all of these. I understand progress will happen, and that is understandable and good. What is not good is when progress impedes protection. Most people living in Hardin Valley no longer feel protected or prioritized as citizens. We feel that our voices are not heard due to the greed of commissioners and developers who continue to eradicate the natural beauty and resources of our lovely community. Overcrowded schools, dangerously narrow roadways, excessive traffic, still no greenways, community parks or library, and inadequate power grid, sewage, and common infrastructure all contribute to the downfall of Hardin Valley. Please consider delaying future development until our community can support the growth.