December 9, 2021
Planning Commission meeting
Planning Commission meeting
Public Comments
2520 Comments
9-A-20-SC
Cody August 26, 2020 at 11:02 AM
I received a notice of Planning Commission about a being built next door to me. I do not want this to happen. It will depreciate my property value. Please don't let this happen. This is a family subdivision. I have lived here for 20 years. This street can't handle the extra traffic.Cody August 26, 2020 at 11:02 AM
10-D-20-RZ
Lori September 2, 2020 at 4:12 PM
I am a longtime resident of Choto Fields Community. My property backs up to Northshore. Please vote NO to rezone the property at the Choto Northshore roundabout. We do not want a Beer Garden there, especially with live music! As it is now I can hear the music from Don Gallos into the evening and also the sanitation services dumping dumpsters either very early in the am or very late in the pm. Northshore can't handle the traffic we have now. This has been a slippery slope since Weigels was approved. We live our here for a reason and you are taking away our peaceful surroundings with every expansion since Weigels. IT'S ENOUGH! Lori September 2, 2020 at 4:12 PM
10-D-20-RZ
Sharon September 2, 2020 at 4:32 PM
I am a resident of Choto Fields subdivision. I have just learned that there is a proposal to place a Beer Garden on the vacant lot at Northshore and Choto. I consider this to be detrimental to our property values and to our family-oriented neighborhood. I urge you to vote against it.Sharon September 2, 2020 at 4:32 PM
10-D-20-RZ
James September 2, 2020 at 9:06 PM
I write to you all in reference to the proposed rezoning/use of a now vacant lot at the intersection of Choto Road and Northshore Drive in West Knox County.James September 2, 2020 at 9:06 PM
My home/property is located in the Choto Fields subdivision across Northshore Drive from this lot. 12625 Coral Reef Circle to be exact I have lived here for eleven years. I've seen the area grow quite a bit In that time with new businesses. I believe those businesses have had a mostly positive impact to our community, although traffic and noise do at times pose issues for nearby homes and neighborhoods. Especially those working and raising families with small school-age children like myself.
I cannot express strongly enough my desire to keep a "beer garden" out of my community. I work in a field where I see the carnage alcohol metes out in communities (I am a criminal defense attorney and have handled thousands of cases involving alcohol). Everyday people are killed and maimed as a result of drinking and driving. Sadly, it all too often victimizes those innocent people that never had the choice to drink and drive. They are the moms, dads, brothers, sisters, children, grandchildren, and grandparents going about their day, until someone makes the decision to get behind the wheel after drinking. By allowing this type of establishment to be placed there, the danger will be realized soon enough. Unfortunately, the planning commission and county commission won't be involved then. It will be left to the first responders, hospitals, funeral homes, and courtrooms.
It scares me to death to think that my children may have to grow up with a bar behind their home. Wondering when someone may plow through our backyard because they had a few too many at the beer joint next door. Or maybe we'd be in a position to try dodge a drunk driver coming home from school or karate that evening. This thing would be in an area where the roads are still on the smaller side. There is no where to go from any direction for miles on these roads should you meet head-on a drunk driver. Other than to a trauma center at the end of the ordeal. I hear it is a proposed that the establishment be operating on Sundays well into the evening. Someone may get the chance to take out whole families on their way to or from church. I also really look forward to the fact that these places really don't start to get good and loud until well into the night (and when school aged children are asleep). I can't wait wait to stay up until the early morning with live music blaring a couple hundred feet away from my house. Wondering when it will end or will my children be able to sleep through the night. Maybe that's the point of putting something like this in a community filled with homes: you create enough anxiety with its presence and some may seek refuge in the bottle it peddles.
This proposal paints quite the picture. I pray it is vivid enough to make the right decision. Do not allow his lot to be zoned for an establishment that's sole purpose is to sell alcoholic beverages for onsite consumption.
Greg
37922
37922
10-D-20-RZ
Greg (37922), September 3, 2020 at 8:33 AM
I am a resident at 12525 Coral Reef Circle. I am writing to express my opposition to the zoning request for the southwest corner of Choto and Northshore. I am opposing this for the following reasons:The type of business being considered presents a significant noise concern for the surrounding neighborhoods. The open air type environment of a beer garden with music into the late night hours will be a nuisance for all of those residents that choose to live in this area for the peace and quiet.The added traffic in the area is not well supported by the infrastructure. Traffic is already stretched to the limit in this area with too many developments being added with no improvements to the traffic flow.Greg (37922), September 3, 2020 at 8:33 AM
Jay
37919
37919
9-A-20-AC
Jay (37919), September 4, 2020 at 6:33 AM
I'm a resident at 3718 Cate Avenue and president of the Marble City Neighborhood Association. Along with several residents that I have spoken to, I am very concerned about 9-A-20-AC and 9-A-20-SC. The owner is trying to close an alley and a road with this request, but they indicate in the request that they are consolidating several properties, and, according to the person who was working on the property, the goal is to then turn it over to a developer to build apartments. The areas owned by the applicant are zoned RN-2 and RN-1. So, it really should not be allowed. I have several objections in addition to the fact that the zoning should not allow a consolidation of lots and building of apartments, namely: 1- A large development of apartments would radically transform the character of this neighborhood, and not for the better- 2- it introduces significantly more traffic and 3- typically transient people who are not as likely to be invested in this neighborhood and what we're trying to build as a neighborhood association. 4- The area floods regularly. I've lived in the neighborhood for over 12 years and have seen 3rd Creek flood several times in that time period, two of which times were very severe, one time a house in the area and the little church along Pilkay were severely flooded and the house had to be rebuilt, and the other time, a car was swept down Pilkay and slammed into a street sign on Pilkay and Dance Ave, adjacent to this development. 5- The roads are very narrow and people already drive way too fast along those roads, and at least one young person in the neighborhood has been struck by a car very near this proposed development. I would like to speak at the meeting when this is discussed and at least one other resident would like to as well. I'll be communicating details of this with folks in our neighborhood so several others will hopefully attend and/or speak on Sept 10th. I can be most easily reached at 865-200-7662. Or, I can be reached by email at marblecityneighborhood@gmail.com. Please don't let this project proceed as planned. When neighbors first talked to the owner, the plan was to build duplexes, but that has apparently changed radically, and the new development plans are very undesirable to this neighborhood. Thanks!Jay (37919), September 4, 2020 at 6:33 AM
10-D-20-RZ
Diana September 4, 2020 at 12:40 PM
I almost lack the words to say how much I oppose a beer garden with live music at the Choto roundabout.Diana September 4, 2020 at 12:40 PM
Please act in the interest of the families in the area and veto this. The idea of loud music and over-the-limit folks driving home chills my blood. Diana Joubert
10-D-20-RZ
Kim September 4, 2020 at 4:00 PM
I would like to ask you to please vote again the Rezoning of the lot at the end of Choto Road at the roundabout. We feel this would have a very negative impact on the current residents of area. This area is a very family friendly residential area. Thank you for your help in this matter.Kim September 4, 2020 at 4:00 PM
10-D-20-RZ
Anthony September 4, 2020 at 4:13 PM
I am opposed to the suggestion of a beer garden at choto.Anthony September 4, 2020 at 4:13 PM
I live in Lewisbrooke. Residential areas surround the empty lot at choto and I do not support the additional traffic, alcohol distribution business or late operating hours of such a business.
We occasionally walk from our home to don gallo to eat and the thoughts of a business so close that solely operated to sale alcohol has potential safety threats to my family.
Please vote NO to Rezone for a "beer garden"
10-D-20-RZ
Seth September 6, 2020 at 5:14 PM
I am writing to strongly oppose the rezoning of the area on concord road to allow for high density low income apartments. I am also strongly against the beer garden. We have young children in the house and we are very close to the intersection. Low income apartments and bars are a terrible idea for that area and would be a tremendous nuisance to say the least. This is a residential area and should remain that way.Seth September 6, 2020 at 5:14 PM
10-D-20-RZ
Charlotte September 7, 2020 at 10:42 AM
as a nearby resident of the area at choto & northshore, I am asking you please do not rezone this area for the bar being proposed. This area is a nice, residential, family homes area.Charlotte September 7, 2020 at 10:42 AM
There are three restaurants nearby that provide alcohol, plus convenience stores. There is no need to put a bar that will not only increase traffic but dangerous traffic and loud music in a normally quiet area.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
10-D-20-RZ
Jane September 7, 2020 at 11:14 AM
Our family would like to express opposition to the rezoning of said property in our community. Those who live in our community have paid thousands and millions of dollars to build or buy homes in this rural area. We did so because we wanted a rural setting to raise our families. If we had wanted a commercial life for convince we would have chosen property around the Kingston pike or Northshore/Pellissippi area.Jane September 7, 2020 at 11:14 AM
Currently we have 2 family restaurants within 100 yards of this property requesting rezoning that sells beer plus a market that sells beer. Then a mile further down Choto Rd.is a family restaurant that sells alcohol. About 3 miles down Northshore we have the beautiful Lakeside Grill and Bar. For the area we have plenty of opportunities to buy alcohol if desired. This property sits right on top of Choto Mills and several new small subdivisions.
Please consider our families and our investments we have made in our rural area. This is totally not a business we need in our community.
10-D-20-RZ
John September 10, 2020 at 10:00 AM
I respectfully ask that you vote against the rezoning of the lot located at the corner of Northshore Dr. and Choto Road. Below are several reasons for my request.John September 10, 2020 at 10:00 AM
As you know, this property still falls under the covenants of the adjacent neighborhood, Choto Mills, and is considered part of the neighborhood.
Given that there is an intent to build a beer garden, the location is within the 300ft restriction of being located too close to residential homes. A beer license would not likely be approved. This opens the property back up to other options. One would be the pain clinic that we were against in the past.
The traffic is very dense already in the area. Since this is a beer garden that will not be serving food, I would be concerned with impaired drivers in this residential area.
Thank you for your service. I do, again, ask that you vote against the proposed rezoning of this property.
Jacob
37912
37912
9-A-20-AC
Jacob (37912), September 12, 2020 at 10:21 AM
I'm a resident at 1204 Harmony Lane and noticed the knox planning sign at a vacant property on our street. After reviewing the special request and plan with the property, I am against this special request for a multi family home. There are multiple reasons for my choice; first: increased traffic down the street. I already have an issue with vehicles turning around in my driveway and degrading it. The increased traffic could lead to increased maintenance costs on my end.Jacob (37912), September 12, 2020 at 10:21 AM
Next, I worry about lacking background checks and vetting of tenants: our street had a large issue with the previous residents of 1218 Harmony Lane dealing drugs. Ever since they moved out over a year ago, we've had zero issues with crime or suspicious individuals snooping on properties.
Lastly, the request of two driveways, and the size of the planned building, will be an eyesore on the street. This would be a large two-story building, and every other house on the street is a single-floor house. I feel that this will impact the value of all the houses on the street negatively.
I've spoken to multiple neighbors on our street, and all are against this special use permit. I have encouraged them to email you before the next hearing on November 12th.
Thank you for your time.
10-D-20-RZ
Marc September 12, 2020 at 12:09 PM
I'm writing this email to let you know my opposition to the rezoning request for the roundabout at Northshore and Choto. I'm sure you've already heard all the reasons to vote against this request so I won't belabor the point or take up more of your time. Please vote No on this request. Marc September 12, 2020 at 12:09 PM
Donald
37922
37922
10-D-20-RZ
Donald (37922), September 22, 2020 at 2:19 PM
We live in the Shady Glen subdivision on S. Northshore Dr. We use S. Northshore Dr. and Choto Rd. and the roundabout every day.Donald (37922), September 22, 2020 at 2:19 PM
We are opposed to the rezoning of this property at the corner of S. Northshore Dr. and Choto Rd. for the Following reasons:
A beer garden is not an appropriate business for this residential area.
S. Northshore Dr. needs widened or expanded before there is any more development in this area. There is already too much traffic for the size of the roads in this area.
The Greenway needs extended from the Cove at Concord Park all the way to Harvey Road before there is any more development (residential or commercial) in this area to remove bicycles and pedestrians from the S. Northshore Dr. roadway.
A beer garden is not an appropriate business for this residential area.
Please vote no on this request.
10-D-20-RZ
Jill September 24, 2020 at 6:13 PM
I live in Lake Cove Subdivision very close to this property up for rezoning. I have some concerns about traffic, suitability, and noise. This parcel is adjacent to a family neighborhood and the proposed use does not fit in with a family friendly environment. Traffic backs up at the traffic circle on Choto and Northshore now and I believe that an influx of drivers will exacerbate the situation, especially if the drivers are all exiting an establishment at the same time, i.e., closing time. As there are many families in this area, outdoor music is not compatible to the welfare of residents who wish to sleep at a reasonable hour or even watch television or listen to their own choice of music without constant interference from an uninvited source. Jill September 24, 2020 at 6:13 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Alvin September 30, 2020 at 11:54 AM
can this be put off till next month ?, or leave this zone as is.SORRY I DO NOT DO virtual meeting.Alvin September 30, 2020 at 11:54 AM
signs was posted 9/28/2020, the community need to participate and have time to no water main is on Zion Lane Fire hydrant in over 1000 feet from this.
The community needs more time to be made aware of the proposed rezoning and to provide comments.
The Covid-19 concerns requiring online meetings make it difficult for the community to participate in the public hearings.
If a "group home" can be permitted as a "use on review" in the A (Agricultural) zone district this may have negative impacts on the surrounding community and adjacent property owners.
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Christopher October 4, 2020 at 6:26 PM
Our neighborhood, Huntcrest subdivision, was just made aware by a neighbor of the rezoning request for 3430 Zion Lane off of Ball Road. The last time this request was tabled because the neighbors and surrounding areas do not believe that this type of business should be set up with surrounding children, homes, bus stops for school, daycare?s. We understand second chances, we understand the need for a facility, but for safety sake this is not the place to have one. This is purely for a residential home owner to turn their lot into a business to make money. And in no way is safe.I was a correction officer, who worked with people just coming out of prison or we?re on their last chance before they went to prison. For many the transition was not easy and many ended up back in prison. This is not the place in our neighborhood for this.Christopher October 4, 2020 at 6:26 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Jennifer October 4, 2020 at 11:08 PM
On 2/9/2017 File # 2-A-17-SP Agenda Item #40 you, DENNIED the rezoning to OB (O?ce, Medical & Related Services), consistent with the denial recommendation for the associated sector plan amendment. Approval of OB zoning for this site would be a spot rezoning, giving the applicant development rights that neighboring property owners do not have. The residential zoning pa. ern is well established in this area and should be maintained. Also, the current PR zoning and density allows reasonable use of the property. There is no justi?cation for changing either the plan designation or zoning for this particular property.Jennifer October 4, 2020 at 11:08 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201004230855.pdf
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Christopher October 5, 2020 at 8:14 AM
I live at 3124 Champions Trail Lane off of Ball Road; Since this is a virtual meeting, do we have the ability to voice our concern at the 10/8th meeting?Our neighborhood, Huntcrest subdivision, was just made aware by a neighbor of the rezoning request for 3430 Zion Lane off of Ball Road. The last time this request was tabled because the neighbors and surrounding areas do not believe that this type of business should be set up with surrounding children, homes, bus stops for school, daycare?s. We understand second chances, we understand the need for a facility, but for safety sake this is not the place to have one. This is purely for a residential home owner to turn their lot into a business to make money. And in no way is safe.I was a correction officer, who worked with people just coming out of prison or we?re on their last chance before they went to prison. For many the transition was not easy and many ended up back in prison. This is not the place in our neighborhood for this.Christopher October 5, 2020 at 8:14 AM
10-D-20-RZ
Jack October 5, 2020 at 10:33 AM
This letter serves as our formal notice of objection to the proposed zoning and use submission for the property at the SE corner of the roundabout adjoining Northshore and Choto roads.Jack October 5, 2020 at 10:33 AM
It is our understanding that the proposed zoning and use for this property is for an establishment that will operate in similar fashion to the "Bearden Biergarten" on Kingston Pike. We strongly object to this use for several key reasons:
Access to the property would be a significant challenge, as roundabout traffic has increased dramatically due to major increases in housing development on all sides of the designated property. Traffic would have to slow significantly to turn into the property, as well as traffic that would be entering the roadway from the establishment. This would create potential hazards for pedestrian and vehicular traffic at high volume times of day.
Based on the size of the property, it is hard to envision how adequate parking for such a facility would be available. Overflow parking issues, ingress and egress (as stated above), and traffic flow would be heavily impacted due to the size of the property.
Consumers and residents who are seeking a location for alcohol consumption have viable options already, with the presence of Don Gallo's and Johnny Brusco's restaurants within easy walking distance of this site. Unlike the proposed site, both of these restaurants are housed within a broader strip center off of the main roads, with easy access and adequate parking capacity for both locations. It is not difficult to imagine that patrons of the new proposed property would seek to park in the strip center parking lot, creating immediate capacity issues for all businesses in the area.
Our neighborhood is immediately adjacent to this property, and would suffer further from establishments with later operating hours ? particular those with outdoor seating and alcohol consumption. With the current level of development (from Weigel's and Don Gallo's in particular), conversations and music are easily heard, as well as occasional noise from Weigel's such as shouting, delivery truck operations, and large trash dumpster servicing. This has a material impact on our neighbors and eventually, property values.
We strongly recommend a vote AGAINST approval of this application. Thank you for your consideration.
Jack Shafe, MCHOA Board President
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Stephanie October 5, 2020 at 6:05 PM
Is there a petition to sign to protest the rezoning of a men's home right across from our neighborhood on Zion Lane, off Ball Road.We were just made aware of the plans to put men straight out of prison, with substance abuse and/or mental illness right in the middle of a residential area with families & kids getting on & off the school bus every day.Why is this even a possibility or option in this area? Organizations & Homes such as this should be on private property, away from busy areas.My father actually ran a men's home just like this in Corpus Christi, Texas and in Pikeville, TN. Each time, they were on a gated property, not allowed to leave the property unless with a staff chaperone, and they had enough property to not be close or see any of their neighbors' homes.It's not a matter of being insensitive to what they're wanting to accomplish, and getting assistance to transition back into society. The issue is that they're so close to potential temptations to break into homes/cars, or worse. That's our fear as a community.Thank you for listening. Please consider finding a property elsewhere, away from residential areas where they really can find more peace & serenity in their environment.Stephanie October 5, 2020 at 6:05 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Pam October 5, 2020 at 11:15 PM
I?m requesting that you deny the rezoning application for 3430 Zion Lane, Knoxville, TN. The justification for the rezoning is not apparent today anymore than it was apparent in 2017.Thank you for any and all considerations of my request to deny the rezoning of 3430 Zion Lane.Pam October 5, 2020 at 11:15 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201005231500.pdf
10-D-20-RZ
Gary October 6, 2020 at 9:17 AM
As President of Choto Meadows Subdivision and resident at 1628 Choto Meadows Lane, I strongly echo your staff recommendations to deny amending the Southwest Count Sector Plan and to deny C-N rezoning of the 1-acre parcel southeast of the intersection of Choto Rd and S Northshore (the roundabout), which was filed by Daniel D. and Kimberly Overbey.Gary October 6, 2020 at 9:17 AM
I was told that the planned use was for a "beer garden" (i.e., craft beer), similar to one in Bearden. I oppose this amendment and rezoning on grounds that it would (1) degrade the quality of life of surrounding residents, (2) degrade property values due to excessive noise late into the evening, (3) increase traffic at and near the Choto-Northshore round-about, and (4) cause safety concerns regarding drunk driving.
The existing curb cut into the property is only 175 feet from the crosswalk at Choto and Northshore. This leaves inadequate space for traffic entering and leaving the property. The expectation of 419 daily vehicle trips would be a substantial increase to already greater than expected vehicle traffic at the round-about and down Choto Road, many of which may be under the influence of alcohol. Not only does this impact residents, it also impacts access by the Rural/Metro station in Choto Markets.
Furthermore, I would like to direct the Board's attention to: Ord. No. O-13-6-102, ? 1, 7-22-13 Sec. 4-13. - Distance rules for the sale of beer for consumption on premises.
No person shall sell beer for on-premises consumption within 300 feet of a residential dwelling, measured by the straight-line method from building to building?
While the planned location of the intended structure has not been disclosed, there appears to be approximately 25 homes within 300 ft of the property center. My estimate includes:
5-7 in Choto Fields 5-7 in Choto Mills1 in Montgomery Cove1 on the adjacent Goodman property
Clearly, it is inappropriate to amend the sector plan and rezone for commercial use. Please, deny amending the Southwest Count Sector Plan and deny C-N rezoning.
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Summer October 6, 2020 at 11:21 AM
It has been brought to my neighborhoods attention that a home for men is wanting to open near us. We are strongly against this. Although I agree that the men deserve help, we would prefer it not be so close to our homes and children. As a mother of two adopted children who have drug addict birth parents I know first hand how hard it can be for people to change. Please consider building the home for men else where.Summer October 6, 2020 at 11:21 AM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Curt October 6, 2020 at 5:34 PM
While there may indeed be a need for this facility, this is not the proper location. The safety of the surrounding schools and families must take precedent is a situation such as this.Curt October 6, 2020 at 5:34 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201006173427.pdf
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Rob October 6, 2020 at 9:30 PM
Please consider my and all other concerned citizen's opinions on this issue. We love our residences/community and would hate to have them affected by a poorly placed rehabilitation center. The residences/community, as well as the individuals that the rehab center is being proposed for, would be better off if the proposed center were planned and constructed at an alternate location.Rob October 6, 2020 at 9:30 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201006213034.pdf
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Megan October 7, 2020 at 8:32 AM
I strongly urge you to deny the plans for the addiction treatment facility on Zion Lane. This is a predominately residential area with a high volume of traffic as it is. The approval of this facility would result in even more traffic in such a congested area. (Zion Lane is located off Ball Road, which is home to six subdivisions.)While I am in no way against treatment facilities, I do believe that they do not belong in residential areas. Please take into consideration the large number of children who live in this area...children who play in their neighborhoods, children who play in their front yards, children who wait at bus stops for school each morning...please consider their safety.Megan October 7, 2020 at 8:32 AM
Deserie
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Deserie (37931), October 7, 2020 at 1:51 PM
Hello, I am a resident of Huntcrest Subdivision and I am writing to express my concern about the proposed rezoning of 3430 Zion Lane since it within close proximity of my residence at 3112 Champions Trail Lane. The proposed rezoning seems out of place for such area which is predominately zoned residential with 5 large residential subdivisions along Ball Rd. across from the property proposed for rezoning. The subdivisions include Foxfield, Huntcrest, Miller?s Plantation, Maple Valley, and Shadowbrook, which are home to hundreds of residents who bought homes in this area because it was predominately residential zoning which lends to a sense of security and privacy.Furthermore, the proposed home for those trying to get back on their feet does not appear appropriately placed in an area with no immediate work or transportation opportunity. This is worrisome to residents of the area, with concern for foot traffic and crime likely to increase with so many homes close as an immediate opportunity to theft.I appreciate your consideration to deny the request for rezoning on this case, or at a minimum to postpone approval to allow time for residents of the area to be notified to have an opportunity to speak their opinion. This decision will affect our personal home life, and it is fitting to give our community time to voice each opinion on this matter.Deserie (37931), October 7, 2020 at 1:51 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Brittany October 7, 2020 at 6:48 PM
hello, I am completely against this rezoning for home for men on zion lane off of ball road. This is absurd when there are small children and children in general living in this area and this area still being somewhat rural. I live on Ball road and I will not tolerate this type of person near me or my family. NO ONE WANTS TO LIVE NEXT TO A JUNKIE OR SOMEONE WHO JUST GOT OUT OF PRISION. This is something that could be done but not in a rural area! I am sorry but where I live there is plenty of land before you can see my house and if any type of male or unknown figure on my property will not be welcome and will be greeted with several types of security. I OPPOSE this 100000000%Brittany October 7, 2020 at 6:48 PM
10-D-20-RZ
Rob October 7, 2020 at 7:05 PM
Good Evening, it has been brought to our attention that a beer permit is being requested on 1615 Choto RD. I am not sure if you are aware that there are multiple residences with families less than 300 feet away.It is my understanding that 300 feet from family housing is the minimum distance that a business selling beer can operate. Seth Garfield is one of these affected home owners who opposes this Beer Permit owning a home less than 300 ft from this lot. If necessary Seth is motivated to be present at your board meeting to oppose this permit.Rob October 7, 2020 at 7:05 PM
Please reply to all with the location and time and Seth will make arrangements along with others who are available.
Sincerely, Choto Fields HOA President
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Amber October 7, 2020 at 8:44 PM
I am emailing you because I have concerns about the rezoning at Zions lane. I live on Ball rd right next to Zions lane the facility would be really close to my house. It would be right behind my house. I am a 20 year old and I live at home with my mom and my other 2 sisters. We live alone because my dad passed away. If the facility becomes a home for men that is not guarded/ secured and the men can just come and go as they please I would never feel safe out in my yard or in my home. I hope you consider what I am saying.Amber October 7, 2020 at 8:44 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Andrea October 7, 2020 at 9:49 PM
Since I am unable to be at the MPC meeting, I would like to voice my opinion on the rezoning. I feel that this is an unsafe location for this type of facility, and is more suited for a commercial area. If this facility is approved in this area, it will make my daughters and I feel unsafe not only outside but also inside our home. Also, since it is a residential area, I feel that other families have similar concerns of safety and property value.Andrea October 7, 2020 at 9:49 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Christopher October 16, 2020 at 7:11 PM
Angelic Ministries has initiated a petition for Zion Lane. How does the impact Knox County Rezoning? Since they asked to rezone to Vegetation how does that allow them to set up a men's home with staff? This is my message that I sent to our impacted neighborhood.Christopher October 16, 2020 at 7:11 PM
They push transparency but we had to dig to see who was asking for rezoning and for what. They then ask to postpone the rezoning until November so that they can be transparent and set up a meeting for neighbors to come listen to what they went to do next to our homes.
In the mean time they set up a petition for anyone to sign to support their build. Highly improbable that the people living here are the ones signing it. Please do not forget about 10/29.
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Christopher October 16, 2020 at 9:05 PM
This is the email that they are sending people who sent complaints to the commission. Very controlling and encouraging less presence. While they are trying to build a large support petition from people other than from the subdivisions that will be impactedChristopher October 16, 2020 at 9:05 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201016210500.pdf
Greg
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Greg (37931), October 22, 2020 at 7:01 AM
This email is concerning 9-A-20-RZ and 11-F-20-UR. There are 4 residents of voting age living at 3257 Red Meadow Rd, Knoxville, TN 37931 who OPPOSE this request. While we hope these men get the help they need, we are NOT in favor of these rezoning requests, because:1.) Primarily there are houses with young children playing, and catch the school bus, etc. in the area and the presence of this facility will be a direct threat to their safety and security, regardless of the efforts that may or may not be made to solve this problem.2.) There is currently no public transportation to/from the area and no safe means for the men to walk to/from any place where public transportation might be obtained.As someone who has ministered to such men in the past, I understand the need for these men to be reached and helped. However, with a county the size of Knox, there are for sure many better places for this type of facility. Please do NOT allow this rezoning. We will be watching this closely to see how this takes place and what the decisions are!Greg (37931), October 22, 2020 at 7:01 AM
Sonya
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Sonya (37931), October 26, 2020 at 7:45 AM
This email is concerning 9-A-20-RZ and 11-F-20-UR. There are 3 residents of voting age living at 6004 Star Ray, Knoxville, TN 37931 who OPPOSE this request. While we hope these men get the help they need, we are NOT in favor of these rezoning requests, because:Sonya (37931), October 26, 2020 at 7:45 AM
1.) Primarily there are houses with young children playing, and catch the school bus, etc. in the area and the presenceof this facility will be a direct threat to their safety and security, regardless of the efforts that may or may not be made to solve this problem.2.) There is currently no public transportation to/from the area and no safe means for the men to walk to/from any place where public transportation might be obtained.I understand the need for these men to be reached and helped. However, with a county the size of Knox, there are for sure many better places for this type of facility. Please do NOT allow this rezoning. We will be watching this closely to see how this takes place and what the decisions are!
Gregory
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Gregory (37931), October 26, 2020 at 10:03 AM
1.) Primarily there are houses with young children playing, and catch the school bus, etc. in the area and the presenceof this facility will be a direct threat to their safety and security, regardless of the efforts that may or may not be made to solve this problem.2.) There is currently no public transportation to/from the area and no safe means for the men to walk to/from any place where public transportation might be obtained.I understand the need for these men to be reached and helped. However, with a county the size of Knox, there are for sure many better places for this type of facility. Please do NOT allow this rezoning. We will be watching this closely to see how this takes place and what the decisions are!Gregory (37931), October 26, 2020 at 10:03 AM
Gregory
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Gregory (37931), October 26, 2020 at 10:04 AM
This email is concerning 9-A-20-RZ and 11-F-20-UR. There are 2 residents of voting age living at 3209 Red Meadow Rd, Knoxville, TN 37931 who OPPOSE this request. While we hope these men get the help they need, we are NOT in favor of these rezoning requests, because:1.) Primarily there are houses with young children playing, and catch the school bus, etc. in the area and the presenceof this facility will be a direct threat to their safety and security, regardless of the efforts that may or may not be made to solve this problem.2.) There is currently no public transportation to/from the area and no safe means for the men to walk to/from any place where public transportation might be obtained.Gregory (37931), October 26, 2020 at 10:04 AM
I understand the need for these men to be reached and helped. However, with a county the size of Knox, there are for sure many better places for this type of facility. Please do NOT allow this rezoning. We will be watching this closely to see how this takes place and what the decisions are!
Stevie
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Stevie (37931), October 28, 2020 at 2:50 AM
To Whom it May Concern:I am writing regarding case 9-A-20-RZ and 11-F-20-UR. There are currently 2 residents of age to vote at the current residence of 3310 Red Meadow Rd, Knoxville, TN 37931 who OPPOSE this request. As I do hope these men get the assistance they need, we are NOT in favor of these rezoning requests, due to the following reasons:The location of this facility will be surrounded by homes / subdivisions with families and young children. These young children play, catch the school bus, etc. in the area. This includes my children along with other families. This facility will be in the direct threat of these children's security and safety, regardless of the efforts to help this from happening.The location of this facility is poorly thought out due to the lack of public transportation for these individuals. The location of this property will not allow the men to walk to and from the area in a safe manor as there is a lack of sidewalks on Ball Rd.As someone who has family who has dealt with issue of domestic violence and drug abuse I do understand the need for those in these situations to be helped. I do believe with a location the size of Knoxville, there other locations which would benefit these men. Please do NOT allow this rezoning and jeopardize our children and families. As a homeowner I will be watching closely to see the results of this decision.Stevie (37931), October 28, 2020 at 2:50 AM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Tony October 28, 2020 at 1:30 PM
Mrs. Albertson, I wanted to make it a point of record for the rezoning meeting coming in November as well as the UOR in December that we have been working toward a meeting on the 29th as was announced at our last meeting. Since then, at the urging of community leaders we have been given a venue to meet by Grace Baptist Church which lies in that community for a meeting that will be held on November 2nd. At 6:00 p.m.At their request due to Covid-19, they are limiting us to attendance of 25. We wanted to notify any commissioners that may have been planning on attending the meeting at our facility on the 29th be notified of the change. Also is an electronic attachment sent to those who emailed any questions or concerned that we would like you to share as well. Thank you so much.Tony October 28, 2020 at 1:30 PM
11-C-20-RZ
Bob October 29, 2020 at 5:08 AM
A number of people in the neighborhood of this proposed development would like to know how the added traffic will be considered. In recent years the traffic on Campbell Station has increased a fair amount. We have followed the Hardin Valley Mobility Study and would like to know if this development will fit into this study.
Would you be able to send us any information about the ability of the infrastructure to support this development. The road's capability to handle this new addition is questionable and our foremost concern.
We plan to contact the County Commissioners and the road engineering department to add our point of view. We are in favor of sustainable development. As such, development should not overwhlhm the infrastructure. Agaain, in this case the road is our main concern. Reduction of the housing density and road development may help maintain a safe and sound road.
Bob October 29, 2020 at 5:08 AM
11-I-20-RZ
Magnolia Pointe HOA October 30, 2020 at 12:55 PM
Good Afternoon, I am Deborah Pettit and president of the Magnolia Pointe Homeowners' Association. I, also, represent many people and subdivisions on Coward Mill and Reagan Road. On November 12, the MPC will be considering the two agenda items listed above. Our group has been active in many of the current and proposed developments. Most people moved here for the serenity and sense of community. Some have been here for over forty years. One of the things we are most concerned about is the proposed 5du/ac on this property. With the current subdivision next to this property, the former commission agreed with us to limit it to 3.5du/ac. We know we can't stop progress, but this area has farms and other subdivisions with only 3.5du/ac. Therefore, to keep with the established precedent that all previous parties have agreed to, we want to keep this development at the 3.5du/ac. Also, we hope this subdivision will not be allowed to begin building homes until Cherohala is finished. Even with the proposed widening of Coward Mill and the extension, the road will be very busy and the people in this area need to get used to 2 new subdivisions and a new school. Thank you for your consideration on this matter.Magnolia Pointe HOA October 30, 2020 at 12:55 PM
Kevin
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Kevin (37931), October 30, 2020 at 11:26 PM
I strongly urge you not to allow rezoning for the purpose of establishing an Addiction Treatment Facility or similar Rehabilitation Facility in this residential family part of the Karns community. If you have any doubts about the validity of these reasons, and you haven't visited Ball Road and noticed the growing community, I urge you to do so before this item comes up for consideration. Allowing an Addiction Treatment Facility or Rehabilitation Facility in this area would be a mistake.Kevin (37931), October 30, 2020 at 11:26 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201030232600.pdf
11-A-20-SP
Austin October 31, 2020 at 7:49 AM
I am writing in opposition to the rezoning request 11-C-20-RZ and 11-a-20-sp. I am concerned this will make the dangerous traffic problem significantly worse especially at this particular location along north Campbell Station rd. The road improvement plan should be underway before approving a rezoning to such a large number of houses along this road. The 196 requested household's vehicles pulling on and off of Campbell Station Road at this Curve will lead to traffic accidents and injuries. Please deny this rezoning request to slow the rapid growth and traffic problems we are facing in Hardin Valley.Austin October 31, 2020 at 7:49 AM
Mark
37931
37931
11-SA-20-C
Mark (37931), October 31, 2020 at 10:29 AM
I am writing to request that the new subdivision being proposed for the Coward Mill area be required to maintain the 3.5du/ac limit currently in place for other developments in the area and not be permitted to move to 5du/ac. Coward Mill is not able to handle the current traffic and to add the additional burden is simply not reasonable. Thank you for your consideration. Mark & Peggy Mason 10355 Laurel Pointe Lane Knoxville, TN 37931Mark (37931), October 31, 2020 at 10:29 AM
11-A-20-SP
Ryan November 1, 2020 at 4:23 AM
My family lives on North Campbell station Rd in Hardin valley. I own 1811 N. Campbell station Rd, the adjacent property to this planned rezoning and I am writing to express opposition to this rezoning. There are many issues with this rezoning and the many neighbors I have spoken with have expressed similar concerns.Ryan November 1, 2020 at 4:23 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201102073017.pdf
11-H-20-UR
Kristin November 2, 2020 at 12:41 PM
I am a resident of the Halls community and have a child in second grade at Halls Elementary with two more children in line to attend as well. I am extremely concerned about the rehab facility that is trying to open across the street from the school. This is a danger to our children and presents other problems such as bringing drugs near our campus. The playground behind the school is open to the public when it is not school hours. I am very concerned that this will be used as a place for a last score for drugs before entering rehab. Also, since this is a voluntary program, I am concerned that addicts will check themselves out and be looking for an immediate fix and use our school as a location for that. What can we do to fight this coming into our community? Thank you so much for your consideration and help on this matter. We appreciate all that you do!Kristin November 2, 2020 at 12:41 PM
11-H-20-UR
Jennifer November 2, 2020 at 3:28 PM
My name is Jennifer Gibson and I am reaching out to our local government officials regarding the Planning Commission?s hearing, scheduled for November 12th, in reference to case number 11-H-20-UR. This is for a proposal by JourneyPure seeking approval for a recovery housing facility at 7447 Andersonville Pike, Knoxville, TN 37938. I have attached the case information in the link below for your reference.Jennifer November 2, 2020 at 3:28 PM
As you may be aware, in 2017 Angelic Ministries purchased the former Salem Baptist Church building with ideas to convert the location into a rehabilitation center or halfway house. That proposal was met with a great deal of controversy and animosity for the same reasons that community members, like myself, are now opposing the current measure to convert the former Tennova Healthcare Hospice building into a 44 bed recovery housing facility for outpatient substance abuse treatment. This building is located directly across the street, 0.3 miles, from Halls Elementary School, is 0.2 miles from the Elmcroft of Halls, and is 0.6 miles from Halls Middle School and Halls High School.
Halls Elementary School is a public elementary school that has a student body of 780 children between Pre-K and 5th grade. Elmcroft of Halls is an assisted living facility that currently provides care for 50 residents, 17 of which are cared for in the Memory Unit for Alzheimer?s and dementia. Halls Middle School and Halls High School are also public schools with approximately 1,054 and 1,275 students, respectively. Although my main concern is in regards to this particularly vulnerable population, I am also concerned about the property value of the homes in this area that will be affected by this proposal, should it pass. According to research, facilities such as drug treatment facilities cause a 3.4-4.6% decline in property values.My family, like so many others, is no stranger to addiction and neither is our community. I do believe the services of a facility are much needed. My concerns are strictly related to the location of this proposed center as I do not believe these types of facilities should be in residential areas. This center is limited to individuals seeking treatment voluntarily and is not compelled by court order. This means the individual can leave treatment at any time, without completing the program. It also means there is the possibility of more drugs being brought into to our community by those coming to or visiting the facility. School zones are zero tolerance when it comes to drugs, yet a recovery housing facility is being proposed 0.3 miles from this community?s elementary school. I do not believe this is in the best interest of our children or our community. I respectfully request that these concerns are considered and urge you to vote against this issue during the November 12th hearing. If you are copied on this email because you are an elected community leader, I urge you to assist your constituents in stopping this proposal.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Should you wish to contact me to discuss further, my contact information is listed below.
11-H-20-UR
Samantha November 2, 2020 at 3:34 PM
My name is Samantha Knowles and I am reaching out to our local government officials regarding the Planning Commission?s hearing, scheduled for November 12th, in reference to case number 11-H-20-UR. This is for a proposal by JourneyPure seeking approval for a recovery housing facility at 7447 Andersonville Pike, Knoxville, TN 37938. I have attached the case information in the link below for your reference.Samantha November 2, 2020 at 3:34 PM
As you may be aware, in 2017 Angelic Ministries purchased the former Salem Baptist Church building with ideas to convert the location into a rehabilitation center or halfway house. That proposal was met with a great deal of controversy and animosity for the same reasons that community members, like myself, are now opposing the current measure to convert the former Tennova Healthcare Hospice building into a 44 bed recovery housing facility for outpatient substance abuse treatment. This building is located directly across the street, 0.3 miles, from Halls Elementary School, is 0.2 miles from the Elmcroft of Halls, and is 0.6 miles from Halls Middle School and Halls High School.
Halls Elementary School is a public elementary school that has a student body of 780 children between Pre-K and 5th grade. Elmcroft of Halls is an assisted living facility that currently provides care for 50 residents, 17 of which are cared for in the Memory Unit for Alzheimer?s and dementia. Halls Middle School and Halls High School are also public schools with approximately 1,054 and 1,275 students, respectively. Although my main concern is in regards to this particularly vulnerable population, I am also concerned about the property value of the homes in this area that will be affected by this proposal, should it pass. According to research, facilities such as drug treatment facilities cause a 3.4-4.6% decline in property values.
My family, like so many others, is no stranger to addiction and neither is our community. I do believe the services of a facility are much needed. My concerns are strictly related to the location of this proposed center as I do not believe these types of facilities should be in residential areas. This center is limited to individuals seeking treatment voluntarily and is not compelled by court order. This means the individual can leave treatment at any time, without completing the program. It also means there is the possibility of more drugs being brought into to our community by those coming to or visiting the facility. School zones are zero tolerance when it comes to drugs, yet a recovery housing facility is being proposed 0.3 miles from this community?s elementary school. I do not believe this is in the best interest of our children or our community. I respectfully request that these concerns are considered and urge you to vote against this issue during the November 12th hearing. If you are copied on this email because you are an elected community leader, I urge you to assist your constitutes in preventing this proposal.
11-H-20-UR
Sydney November 2, 2020 at 3:46 PM
I am reaching out to our local government officials regarding the Planning Commission's hearing, scheduled for November 12th, in reference to case number 11-H-20-UR. This is for a proposal by JourneyPure seeking approval for a recovery housing facility at 7447 Andersonville Pike, Knoxville, TN 37938. I have attached the case information in the link below for your reference.Sydney November 2, 2020 at 3:46 PM
As you may be aware, in 2017 Angelic Ministries purchased the former Salem Baptist Church building with ideas to convert the location into a rehabilitation center or halfway house. That proposal was met with a great deal of controversy and animosity for the same reasons that community members, like myself, are now opposing the current measure to convert the former Tennova Healthcare Hospice building into a 44 bed recovery housing facility for outpatient substance abuse treatment. This building is located directly across the street, 0.3 miles, from Halls Elementary School, is 0.2 miles from the Elmcroft of Halls, and is 0.6 miles from Halls Middle School and Halls High School.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201105154600.pdf
Timothy
37918
37918
11-J-20-UR
Timothy (37918), November 2, 2020 at 4:08 PM
I am writing in regards to the subject case for a proposed development off of Fountain City Road. This road is very busy throughout the day taking traffic from the Dante Road/Dry Gap Pike area over to Rifle Range Road. Fountain City Road intersects Rifle Range Road at a nearly 45 degree angle and is just 0.08 mile from the intersection of Parkdale Road and Rifle Range Road which is an intersection also with an approximate 45 degree angle. Sight lines at these two intersections are difficult for motorists looking to make a left turn. The heavy traffic on Rifle Range is very dangerous with these two intersections being so close together. In addition there is a Knox County Greenway path that runs along Rifle Range Road crossing over Fountain City Road at this dangerous intersection. I am very concerned that the increased number of vehicles that this proposed development will bring will cause additional traffic problems at these intersections as well as potential pedestrian accidents with the proximity of the greenway. I urge the Knox County Planning Commission to reject this proposed concept plan due to the traffic concerns I have outlined here.Timothy (37918), November 2, 2020 at 4:08 PM
Rita
37932
37932
11-A-20-SP
Rita (37932), November 3, 2020 at 1:13 AM
I am a next door neighbor who lives at 1801 N. Campbell Station Rd. and am writing in opposition to the rezoning of the Long Farm Way portion of the 41 acre parcel of this property. The original plan was meant to be a low density area with no more than 15 or more acres per house and only 2 houses per easement. This plan has been a known restriction that was put in place when the Long Farm was subdivided to protect the land and surrounding neighbors from a high density development.Rita (37932), November 3, 2020 at 1:13 AM
The developers are trying to get around the restrictions by accessing it through the adjacent property and we think allowing this large development will set a dangerous precedent and be unfair to the other Long Farm lot owners. Also, the large curve would be even more dangerous with the new entrance/exit point there ,causing increased number of speed signage and increased traffic problems. Please consider our opposition to the rezoning of this development and keep the restriction of this large development.
Fredrik and Debra
37931
37931
11-I-20-RZ
Fredrik and Debra (37931), November 3, 2020 at 10:38 AM
It is our understanding that a developer has bought a tract of land next to the current subdivision (by the big Propane tanks) on Coward Mill Road. The developer is asking for your approval for a 5du/ac which means five (5) dwelling units per acre. That will make the homes very close to one another. There are twelve (12) acres of land. That means sixty (60) new homes, Most homeowners make an average of four (4) trips per day which is two hundred forty (240) more cars on a winding Coward Mill Road.This is in addition to the current subdivision of one hundred fifteen(115) homes currently under construction and a new elementary school that has already been approved. All of the other subdivisions, after we fought for it, are 3.5du/ac. The other former commissioners agreed that the 3.5du/ac should be rejected and accepted the 3.5dc/ac to preserve the existing community.Fredrik and Debra (37931), November 3, 2020 at 10:38 AM
I am asking you to support the 3.5du/ac for this property and propose that the subdivision should not be allowed to begin construction until Cherahala is finished and Coward Mill is widened.
11-H-20-UR
Whitney November 3, 2020 at 1:23 PM
To whom it may concern:My name is Whitney Howard and I am reaching out to our local government o?cials regarding thePlanning Commission?s hearing, scheduled for November 12th, in reference to case number 11-H-20-UR. This is for a proposal by JourneyPure seeking approval for a recovery housing facility at 7447 Andersonville Pike, Knoxville, TN 37938. I have attached the case information in the link below for your reference.As you may be aware, in 2017 Angelic Ministries purchased the former Salem Baptist Church building with ideas to convert the location into a rehabilitation center or halfway house. That proposal was met with a great deal of controversy and animosity for the same reasons that community members, like myself, are now opposing the current measure to convert the former Tennova Healthcare Hospice building into a 44 bed recovery housing facility for outpatient substance abuse treatment. This building is located directly across the street, 0.3 miles, from Halls Elementary School, is 0.2 miles from the Elmcroft of Halls, and is 0.6 miles from Halls Middle School and Halls High School.Halls Elementary School is a public elementary school that has a student body of 780 children between Pre-K and 5th grade. Elmcroft of Halls is an assisted living facility that currently provides care for 50 residents, 17 of which are cared for in the Memory Unit for Alzheimer?s and dementia. Halls Middle School and Halls High School are also public schools with approximately 1,054 and 1,275 students, respectively.Although my main concern is in regards to this particularly vulnerable population, I am also concerned about the property value of the homes in this area that will be a?ected by this proposal, should it pass. According to research, facilities such as drug treatment facilities cause a 3.4-4.6% decline in property values.My family, like so many others, is no stranger to addiction and neither is our community. I do believe the services of a facility are much needed. My concerns are strictly related to the location of this proposed center as I do not believe these types of facilities should be in residential areas. This center is limited to individuals seeking treatment voluntarily and is not compelled by court order. This means the individual can leave treatment at any time, without completing the program. It also means there is the possibility of more drugs being brought into to our community by those coming to or visiting the facility. School zones are zero tolerance when it comes to drugs, yet a recovery housing facility is being proposed0.3 miles from this community?s elementary school. I do not believe this is in the best interest of our children or our community. I respectfully request that these concerns are considered and urge you to vote against this issue during the November 12thhearing. If you are copied on this email because you are an elected community leader, I urge you to assist your constitutes in preventing this proposal.Whitney November 3, 2020 at 1:23 PM
Mark
37922
37922
10-D-20-RZ
Mark (37922), November 3, 2020 at 4:56 PM
Thank you for the opportunity to be heard and represented regarding the plans for this site. I write to you today as a member/neighbor of the Choto communities and as a small business owner. Our business interest, Bearden Beer Market, a landmark in the neighborhood, came within days of permanently closing its doors with the COVID lockdowns in March. With the assistance of PPP loans from our local bank we were able to survive, keep our staff gainfully employed and fight to get back on our feet to this point looking to open a second location. We worked closely with the Fire Marshall to review capacity, the Health Department to review social distancing seating plans and Phase 1 requirements, and MedeClean Technologies to ensure we reopened safely and responsibly. We are confident that our business model will be an enhancement to the Choto neighborhood.Mark (37922), November 3, 2020 at 4:56 PM
Upon first petitioning for rezoning we found ourselves unfortunately combating unsubstantiated rumors within the community and through the Nextdoor App while it was always our intention to meet with our neighbors proactively. Please allow me to address those again: we do not serve liquor, we are not open late (close Sun-Wed 10p, Thurs-Sat 12a), we do not host live music events or play loud music, we are not a dimly-lit smoke-filled "beer joint," we do not cater to a college crowd, we WILL have a full menu of food available. We have since met with our neighbors multiple times to address concerns head on as much as possible and have been met warmly. We are small business owners who seek to be embraced by the neighbors we intend to serve.Bearden Beer Market has been consistently recognized as a supporter of many charitable organizations and an ideal place to meet people in Knoxville, whether that be a planned gathering or a place to meet new people. It is our plan to carry those elements to the Choto location and draw the community together. It is a place for business professionals, friends, families, and even your dog. It has the comfortable feel of a backyard get-together. It is a place to collect for activities such as Pickleball, basketball, cornhole, disc golf, a trivia night or just gather around our firepit. A place to enjoy a glass of wine, a craft beer, and an affordable meal. Our vision is an elaborate community clubhouse built aesthetically conforming to local architecture. In these mid-COVID times, our atmosphere has giving folks a sense of normalcy by enjoying the outdoors in a public place with friends and neighbors.
As a neighbor I knowingly speak firsthand that this establishment will be a complement to existing restaurants and is not in direct or threatening competition to businesses that currently serve the area.
James
37938
37938
11-H-20-UR
James (37938), November 3, 2020 at 5:47 PM
I understand a need for a drug rehab facility. But why Halls? Why not West Knox County? Higher population and a greater need for the facility in that area.James (37938), November 3, 2020 at 5:47 PM
Natasha
37918
37918
11-H-20-UR
Natasha (37918), November 3, 2020 at 6:36 PM
This is a horrible idea across from an elementary school and an extremely busy, highly traveled road that doesn’t need extra opportunities for people under the influence on their way to rehab. We dont want this and we dont want the walking trails because they become homeless camps and places for people to jump out and expose themselves! Please stop bringing junk to our neighborhood! Send this to west knoxville or over by east town mall. Natasha (37918), November 3, 2020 at 6:36 PM
11-A-20-SP
Hunter November 5, 2020 at 8:16 AM
In response to MPC denial of the Low Density Residential, I find this to be inconsistent with the current zoning in Hardin Valley.Hunter November 5, 2020 at 8:16 AM
This parcel qualifies for LDR based on the following:
-land is served by water, sewer and gas (all located at the entrance along Campbell Station)
- slopes are less than 25%
- preliminary concept plan indicates cluster development with lots planned to very in width from 60', 75' and 90' width
-boulevard entrance satisfies egress / ingress requirements
-plan aligns with existing growth in the area
In the past all sector plan amendments in Hardin Valley have been approved. A portion of the Long Farm was previously approved for LDR zoning (10-C-06-SP)
Following cases were approved:
Solway Station (12-B-15-SP) Hayden Hills (6-C-04-SP) Laural RidgeBall Homes Seal property (10-E-19-SP) Vining Mill (7-E-16-sp)Brandywine @ Pepper Ridge (5-B-17-SP) Everett Station (12-A-13-SP)The Brook @ Hardin Valley (3-A-17-SP)
I respectfully request that 11-A-20-SP be approved LDR per the above mentioned reasons.
11-H-20-UR
Sydney November 5, 2020 at 10:10 AM
I am a community member of Halls located in north Knox County. Our neighborhood was recently made aware that there was a request for the potential of special use of a lot located within a mile radius of Halls Elementary School.Sydney November 5, 2020 at 10:10 AM
I am aware that the staff will make a recommendation prior to the meeting, but this is an injustice without consulting the local neighborhood, the people who call this quaint area home. Due to JourneyPure requesting a special use of the lot, I have listed neighborhood facts below stating why this area is an inappropriate location for a rehab housing facility. I believe this would help shed information on the area before the staff makes their recommendation at the public hearing.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201105101000.pdf
Kim
37932
37932
11-C-20-RZ
Kim (37932), November 5, 2020 at 12:15 PM
The developer reached out to me to discuss his vision for this project several weeks ago. We discussed at length the concerns that adjacent property owners and community members had regarding the safety of Campbell Station Rd, density according to topography, setbacks, amenities, adding value to the community, aligning his vision with the community's vision, the Growth Plan, the Sector Plan, the case file of this property, easement deeds, other offers on this property, preservation of vegetation, buffers, egress / ingress locations, site distances, zoning and densities of nearby properties, etc. Kim (37932), November 5, 2020 at 12:15 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201105131522.pdf
Kim
37932
37932
11-I-20-RZ
Kim (37932), November 5, 2020 at 12:16 PM
First a little history - nearly 7 years ago when our group was advocating for the addition of a middle school in the NW Sector, we also strongly encouraged our county to consider the growth in our area and plan ahead by including an additional elementary school in this sector of our county into the 5 year capital plan. The new proposed NW Elementary School is underway and planned for Coward Mill Rd. The site selection for the school was vetted after KCS secured a purchase agreement of the parcel. Therefore, major infrastructure improvement costs, including improvements to Coward Mill Rd and extending Cherahala Rd, were bumped up on the county's list of priorities. As you might conclude, the financial burden for these improvements is significant, but necessary, as plans for the school move forward. As a result, the existing residents of Coward Mill Rd (most of which are long time, second and third generation) land owners have concerns. Last week I met with a group of community members to hear those concerns: traffic congestion and safety, easements, density, long term planning and future growth. I have spoken to the applicant and relayed these concerns to which he is taking into consideration. The community would like to see a density of 3 or less, which aligns with other developments nearby who have densities at 3.5, 1-3,1-3, and 1-3.5. The applicant is awaiting a determination from his engineer and I am awaiting the staff recommendation to determine how to bring the applicant and community members together.Kim (37932), November 5, 2020 at 12:16 PM
Kim
37932
37932
11-B-20-UR
Kim (37932), November 5, 2020 at 12:17 PM
Upon meeting with another group of residents on Coward Mill Rd, it was determined that these resident were unaware that the zoning of this property was heard and determined at the October 8th planning meeting with a zoning of LDR 3.5 du/acre. Which supports the need to better the notification process as our group has stated multiple times - the current timeline for notification and methods are simply inadequate and place unrealistic time constraints directly on the community. After a lengthy discussion of the criteria used by the Planning Commission to conclude their decision, the residents were more understanding and willing to talk with the applicant on possible concept plan design conditions. Discussions are underway.Kim (37932), November 5, 2020 at 12:17 PM
Randy
37931
37931
11-I-20-RZ
Randy (37931), November 5, 2020 at 12:21 PM
I am writing to you in opposition of the proposed (slash & burn) development @ 10607 coward mill rd. I own and operate “Varmint Busters” at 10615 Coward Mill Rd. right next door. We are the oldest, most professional Wildlife Damage Management company in the state of Tennessee, licensed by TWRA since 1989. When I purchased this property the zoning was BPTO as was the surrounding property on both sides.Randy (37931), November 5, 2020 at 12:21 PM
I had to justify that my wildlife damage management company “fit” into this zoning. I searched long and hard for a good location because at certain times of the year we can be a little odiferous (skunk season). I felt obligated to find a location where I would not be a nuisance to surrounding neighbors. We have been at this location about 15 years now.
Recently the 30 acres between my property and Pellissippi was sold. This land has been tortured and hauled off like Mr. Peabody’s coal train did to Muhlenberg county Kentucky. All the timber has been removed and the ground scraped bare. Two small streams have been encapsulated in plastic pipe and buried underground. A bonified sinkhole approximately .3ac is now under about 30 ft. of fill dirt. My phone lines have been knocked out twice. A black cherry tree about 8inch DBH fell onto my property and power line and caught fire. Rural Metro saved the day! Since this 30 acres has been cleared the wind howls across my property like it never did before. I have an old steel door (standard exterior steel door about 50lbs) that leans against a shed post in the back of my property that blows over two or three times every week!!! I have had to replace both siding and roofing due to the constant wind that we never had before!
I think this is the same developer that now wants to develop 10607 Coward Mill Rd. The last planning meeting I went to at Hardin Valley School showed the Cherahala skyway/by-pass going through this property so what’s up with that?
One house / acre solves a lot of problems!!!
Matt & Jessica
37931
37931
11-I-20-RZ
Matt & Jessica (37931), November 5, 2020 at 12:27 PM
To all Knox County Planning Commissioners:Matt & Jessica (37931), November 5, 2020 at 12:27 PM
Subject: (CASE # 11-I-20-RZ, 11-D-20-SP) Proposed rezoning of 5.4 acres at 10607 Coward Mill Rd from BP (TO) to planned residential development (TO) up to 5 house/acre. Objectives: Keep traffic noise and congestion (bottleneck) to a minimum around and on Coward Mill Road and Phase 1 of Cherahala Extension.
Reasons for concern are as stated:
A. The PHASE 2 “Extension of Cherahala Blvd.” is to dissect this property and it seems inappropriate to be putting houses or anything on it at this time.
B. A New 900 student capacity elementary school is to be built adjacent to the East side of this property.
C. A subdivision with 118 homes (3.5/ acre) is going in adjacent to the West side of this property.
D. Increased congestion reduces the value and desirability of the existing homes in the area.
E. Any increase of number of houses of more than 3.5/acre would break the precedence already set for our area and would negatively change the housing plan in our community. We are aware that Coward Mill Road is to be upgraded for school bus safety, but it is to remain a two-lane road which will be required to carry all of this additional traffic.
We are not against responsible development. Please help us keep our housing and traffic congestion down, and our home values up. Thank you for your support and consideration.
Jessica
37931
37931
11-I-20-RZ
Jessica (37931), November 5, 2020 at 1:17 PM
Subject: (CASE # 11-I-20-RZ, 11-D-20-SP) Proposed rezoning of 5.4 acres at 10607 Coward Mill Rdfrom BP (TO) to planned residential development (TO) up to 5 house/acre.Jessica (37931), November 5, 2020 at 1:17 PM
Objectives: Keep traffic noise and congestion (bottleneck) to a minimum around and on Coward Mill Road and Phase 1 of Cherahala Extension.
Reasons for concern are as stated:A. The PHASE 2 ?Extension of Cherahala Blvd.? is to dissect this property and it seems inappropriate to be putting houses or anything on it at this time.B. A New 900 student capacity elementary school is to be built adjacent to the East side of this property.C. A subdivision with 118 homes (3.5/ acre) is going in adjacent to the West side of this property.
D. Increased congestion reduces the value and desirability of the existing homes in the area.E. Any increase of number of houses of more than 3.5/acre would break the precedence already set for our area and would negatively change the housing plan in our community.
We are aware that Coward Mill Road is to be upgraded for school bus safety, but it is to remain a two- lane road which will be required to carry all of this additional traffic.
We are not against responsible development. Please help us keep our housing and traffic congestion down, and our home values up. Thank you for your support and consideration.
Barbara
37938
37938
11-H-20-UR
Barbara (37938), November 5, 2020 at 2:04 PM
An alcohol and drug treatment facility should not be located across from a school or so close to residential neighborhoods. I am concerned that I was the only person in my neighborhood that received a postcard regarding this application.Barbara (37938), November 5, 2020 at 2:04 PM
James
37931
37931
11-D-20-SP
James (37931), November 5, 2020 at 2:23 PM
I have two concerns, 1) the “Phase 2 Extension of Cherahala Blvd” and 2) housing densities that exceed 3.5/acre. The Phase 2 Extension of Cherahala Blvd is planned to bisect the proposed development and once the houses are built, the road cannot be completed. This extension is critical to relieving traffic problems in the area, especially with the housing developments being built and the future 900-student elementary school. Can the county establish a right-of-way for the Phase 2 Extension of Cherahala Blvd? This will allow the reasonable development of the area without causing major traffic problems, especially given that the county is currently working to address this future problem.I realize that the zoning allows up to 5 houses per acre, but I want to emphasize that most of the houses in the area have lots greater than one acre. There is a subdivision being built that has 3.5 houses/acre and any development that exceeds this density would not fit into the current land use of the area.James (37931), November 5, 2020 at 2:23 PM
Greg and Susan
37931
37931
11-I-20-RZ
Greg and Susan (37931), November 6, 2020 at 9:30 AM
To all knox county planning commissioners:Greg and Susan (37931), November 6, 2020 at 9:30 AM
Subject: (CASE # 11-I-20-RZ, 11-D-20-SP) Purposed rezoning of 5.4 acres at 10607 Coward Mill Rd from BP (TO) to planned residential development (TO) up to 5 house/acre.
Objectives: Keep traffic noise and congestion(bottleneck) to a minimum around and on Coward Mill Road and Phase 1 of Cherahala Extension.
Reasons for concern are as stated:
A. The PHASE 2 “Extension of Cherahala Blvd.” is to dissect this property and it seems inappropriate to be putting houses or anything on it at this time. B. A New 900 student capacity elementary school is to be built adjacent to the East side of this property. C. A subdivision with 118 homes ( 3.5/ acre) is going in adjacent to the West side of this property. D. Increased congestion reduces the value and desirability of the existing homes in the area. E. Any increase of number of houses of more than 3.5/acre would break the precedence already set for our area and would negatively change the housing plan in our community. We are aware that Coward Mill Road is to be upgraded for school bus safety, but it is to remain a two lane road which will be required to carry all of this additional traffic.We are not against responsible development. Please help us keep our housing and traffic congestion down, and our home values up. Thank you for your support and consideration.These are some concerns about the development and rezoning of the property ( known to us as the Zimmerman property).These are a few of the concerns that we think are important to voice for our community. Remember, Commissioners are appointed to protect our community’s interest and not the financial interest of a single developer.
Mary Ann
37931
37931
11-I-20-RZ
Mary Ann (37931), November 6, 2020 at 10:30 AM
Please keep the the rezoning of this property to 3.5 houses per acre as is in keeping with other developments in this immediate area. Our concerns are the following: 1- Any change in the number of houses per acre would break the precedence and would negatively impact our area 2- Phase 2 of extension of Cherahala Blvd is to dissect this property and seems against County interests to put housing in at this time 3- A new elementary is to be built adjacent to this property. It would seem more practical for the county to wait for the school to be built to see how rezoning this property would affect the school traffic problems. 4- Increased congestion would reduce the desirability and thus property values of the existing homes in the area In closing - It seems against county interests to rezone this property until the road infrastructure has been built and the school is operational.Mary Ann (37931), November 6, 2020 at 10:30 AM
11-A-20-SP
Cecilia November 6, 2020 at 2:12 PM
We were notified that there is a proposed rezoning request near Catatoga Kennels on Campbell station rd (11-c-20-RZ and 11-a-20-sp). This portion of Campbell station road is already overturned and poorly maintained with proposed improvements still outstanding (thinking of updates to the intersection of Yarnell and Campbell Station in particular and the road closure on the other end of Yarnell for the bridge repair that already limits traffic). The traffic backup, particularly in the mornings, is awful. Please, please leave this land as agricultural. We are losing the charm that drew us to the area years ago as the growth far outpaces the preparation. Let's grow smarter, and reclaim the charm of Hardin valley!Cecilia November 6, 2020 at 2:12 PM
Kim
37932
37932
11-G-20-UR
Kim (37932), November 6, 2020 at 2:32 PM
I wanted to ask that the proposed impact of traffic congestion be considered when reviewing this application. Hardin Valley is excited that the applicant requested community input for the best and highest use of this land and responded favorably with the much needed addition of a childcare facility in our area. However, we do have concerns regarding the traffic patterns and or congestion that will directly correlate with high traffic count times of the day as indicated in the 2019 HV Traffic Mobility Study. We simply ask that you consider and suggest reasonable solutions to mediate this concern.Kim (37932), November 6, 2020 at 2:32 PM
Hardin Valley Planning Advocates
37932
37932
11-G-20-UR
Hardin Valley Planning Advocates (37932), November 6, 2020 at 2:50 PM
Dear Commissioners, I wanted to ask that the proposed impact of traffic congestion be considered when reviewing this application. Hardin Valley is excited that the applicant requested community input for the best and highest use of this land and responded favorably with the much needed addition of a childcare facility in our area. However, we do have concerns regarding the traffic patterns and or congestion that will directly correlate with high traffic count times of the day as indicated in the 2019 HV Traffic Mobility Study. We simply ask that you consider and suggest reasonable solutions to mediate this concern. Hardin Valley Planning Advocates (37932), November 6, 2020 at 2:50 PM
Angela & Kevin
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Angela & Kevin (37931), November 6, 2020 at 3:23 PM
I am writing with my firm OBJECTION to two current requests for rezoning. The first rezoning request is for vegetation (9-A-20-RZ) followed by a second request for Multi-family Residential rezoning (11-F-20-UR), both on the same property in the Karns area on Zion Lane, off Ball Rd.Angela & Kevin (37931), November 6, 2020 at 3:23 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201106164019.pdf
Ed and Laura
37932
37932
11-A-20-SP
Ed and Laura (37932), November 6, 2020 at 6:11 PM
This email is in regard to the proposed planned residential rezoning project proposed by Urban Development on Campbell Station rd at Catoga kennels.Ed and Laura (37932), November 6, 2020 at 6:11 PM
As a resident of this area (11707 Yarnell Rd) my husband and I strongly oppose any further development of this magnitude until Campbell station rd sees significant improvement.
Specifically the dangerous interaction of Yarnell and Campbell Sta and the increased traffic at Camp Sta and Hardin Valley. These intersections need a traffic circle or light before any future development occurs.
Megan
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Megan (37931), November 6, 2020 at 9:59 PM
This letter is in regards to 9-A-20-RZ, the rezoning of Zion Lane from planned residential to agricultural. Angelic Ministries is seeking to build a "men's home" on this property. I have several issues with this, as it is in close proximity to my neighborhood. Megan (37931), November 6, 2020 at 9:59 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201106215744.pdf
Arlie
37931
37931
11-C-20-UR
Arlie (37931), November 6, 2020 at 10:14 PM
I was of the understanding that the subdivision was a single family developmentwith single family dwelling. I am concerned that the propose building would cause a drainage problem to my property. By changing the drainage of the property by causing a faster runoff because of the asphalt. And that the proposed building would not add value to the surrounding properties. After speaking to some of neighbors they are not in favor of the proposal. Arlie (37931), November 6, 2020 at 10:14 PM
11-H-20-UR
Caitlyn November 6, 2020 at 11:01 PM
i think its a GREAT idea.( yes i think there a honestly probably better locations throughout halls for it ) but i think y'all should definitely continue no matter the petitions!!!! Caitlyn November 6, 2020 at 11:01 PM
Gary and Donna
37931
37931
11-I-20-RZ
Gary and Donna (37931), November 7, 2020 at 10:09 AM
Gary and Donna Paulson respectfully request that you reject the 5 du/ac Coward Mill subdivision proposal from a developer and, instead, approve it as a 3.5 du/ac subdivision.Gary and Donna (37931), November 7, 2020 at 10:09 AM
Development in this area will continue and we have no problem with that as long as the density is controlled. To us, 3.5 du/ac is reasonable and will help control future congestion on the area roads, will contribute to better air quality, and will help make the community a more desirable place to live.
11-H-20-UR
Delena November 7, 2020 at 10:11 AM
Please listen to the positive perspectives about this initiative. Take a moment to read the positive comments of the threads on the "What'sUpHalls" FaceBook group. The more this issue is shared the greater the positive influences are heard! My family and I are in full support of JourneyPure opening in the old hospice building. Don't leave it up to the judgmental public to make this decision?look at the stats of the men, women, AND CHILDREN who are addicts in our community and surrounding area. They need this and that alone should be enough ground to stand on to invite this facility into Halls.Delena November 7, 2020 at 10:11 AM
Thank you for your time and praying for this to go through. Let me know how I can help.
Cindy
37938
37938
11-H-20-UR
Cindy (37938), November 7, 2020 at 1:30 PM
In regards to a drug/alcohol recovery unit directly across from an elementary school: If we want to keep our children safe, if we do not allow alcohol sales within sight of a school, why would you permit a rehabilitation center near the elementary school. You cannot tell me that in a county as large as Knox, that there is not a more suitable piece of property. Please look at the current data of crime incidents at facilities such as these and for once put our children first!Cindy (37938), November 7, 2020 at 1:30 PM
11-A-20-SP
Susan November 7, 2020 at 1:32 PM
I am writing about 11-C-20-RZ and 11-A-20-SP involving the rezoning and building on Catatoga Kennels. The problem developing this land is two fold - North Campbell Station Road and the overcrowded schools.Susan November 7, 2020 at 1:32 PM
North Campbell Station Road is a busy two lane road with no shoulders. It needs shoulders, and if building continues, it needs to be widened as well as Yarnell and Sam Lee Road. Before we approve subdivisions, please look at the infrastructure. The property across the street to Catatoga is the prime example. You know Campbell station is narrow with lots of traffic. Why wasn't that developer required to give enough land to widen that road? Now, we are going to build another 196 houses to add traffic to a dangerous road. I would not want to make a left turn onto Campbell Station. I drove down Campbell Station around 8:00 in the morning. The road is so backed up to get onto Hardin Valley, and Hardin Valley Road can't take any more traffic at that time. Please do something about the roads or require these builders to set back their property to improve the road.
Our schools are overcrowded. How can we support more students with the current number of houses already approved to be built?
I understand the county wants more money. I understand that both the land owner and the develop want to make money. I would like to be ok with it, but Campbell Station Road and our schools can not support that number of houses. Fix the roads and the schools and I would not complain.
Please start thinking about road improvements including widening roads before you agree to new subdivisions.
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Kelsey November 8, 2020 at 12:33 PM
I am writing on behalf of my family due to our concerns for the upcoming planned development of the Angelic Ministries "Boarding House." My family and I live in Foxfield subdivision which is directly across from this planned rehabilitation center on Zion road. We are in strong disagreement and objection of the location of this facility. My previous work, and credentials in the mental health field have allowed me the opportunity to have experience working in facilities of this manner and been privy to the operations. While I am not against the center itself, I find the location of this facility highly inappropriate and not a proper placement in this community. This facility would find itself surrounded by multiple subdivisions in which there are a multitude of children in these environments. Placing a men's rehabilitation center, or boarding house is not only dangerous it is negligent. As you are aware, addiction is rarely a single diagnosis, and often has multiple comorbidities. While the "goal" is to not allow for any previous sexual or violent offenders" we are aware of how these offenses can quickly escalate and turn into not only violence but a decline into behaviors that are undesirable and illegal when addiction is involved. A men's home that has guidelines NOW, but having worked in these facilities, I understand the lack of enforceability in requiring these individuals to remain in the facility. The allowance of this facility would not only be placing the immediate community at risk, but as stated before is negligent. I strongly object to the placement of this facility and you do not have my family's support.Kelsey November 8, 2020 at 12:33 PM
11-A-20-SP
Claude November 8, 2020 at 12:41 PM
I understand that you want to accommodate everyone by approving all building permits requested. But you must look at the location of this request. For a more visual effect come down to Hardin Valley during the drop off of the school kids in the morning and you will get a good idea of what the traffic is like around here. The roads on Campbell Station and Hardin Valley are over populated now and the schools are so over crowded that even the new school on Coward Mill Rd. will be to capacity before it is even open and the Hardin Valley schools are so over crowded they are having to add out buildings for class rooms. So please do not pass this application. Ask yourself would you want to live in this over populated area?Claude November 8, 2020 at 12:41 PM
Annie
37924
37924
11-SB-20-C
Annie (37924), November 8, 2020 at 4:28 PM
I am a homeowner of an adjacent lot to this plan. Do you know if there are any plans for privacy fencing or any type of barrier between the proposed subdivision and the existing surrounding homes?Annie (37924), November 8, 2020 at 4:28 PM
Thomas
37931
37931
11-I-20-RZ
Thomas (37931), November 8, 2020 at 6:37 PM
I am writing regarding my growing concern about the potential for traffic congestion and noise around and on Coward Mill Road and Phase 1 of the Cherahala Extension that will only be further exacerbated by the above referenced rezoning and sector plan amendment at 10607 Coward Mill Road. Specifically, my concerns are as follows:Thomas (37931), November 8, 2020 at 6:37 PM
The PHASE 2 "Extension of Cherahala Blvd." is to bisect this property, and it seems inappropriate to authorize higher density home construction on this property at this time based on the current plans for the Phase 2 extension of Cherahala Blvd. through this property.
Knox County Schools is constructing a new 900 student elementary school directly adjacent to the east side of this property.
An 118 home (3.5 du/acre) subdivision is under construction directly adjacent to the west side of the above referenced property.
The potential increased congestion has a negative impact on the safety, seclusion, and value of the existing homes in this area.
Any increase in the density of homes above 3.5 du/acre would exceed the precedent already established by the planning commission for this area, resulting in a negative impact on the overall housing density of this area.While I am aware of Knox County's plans to widen Coward Mill Road for school bus traffic, it is still to remain a two-lane road which will be required to carry a large amount of additional traffic with the addition of the new school and subdivision noted above.
While I am not opposed to responsible development, I am concerned that the density of the proposed rezoning will have a negative impact on the traffic safety and quality of life that hopefully remain paramount in your planning goals for the future development of this property and the properties in this area.
11-A-20-SP
Stephen November 8, 2020 at 10:01 PM
I am writing to you today as a Hardin Valley resident for almost 39 years. While I know growth is inevitable and changeStephen November 8, 2020 at 10:01 PM
happens, our little community cannot handle the traffic. The road infrastructure is not sufficient. I used to be able to pull out of my driveway on Yarnell Rd amd never have to wait for traffic. Now it is not uncommon for me to wait for a dozen vehicles to pass and now I get stuck in bumper to bumper traffic at the stop sign at Yarnell and Campbell station. There are several large developments going in all around my area. We need to put a stop to the development until the infrastructure is in place. I hope you consider this in your decision to rezoning requests. My kids will be driving soon and I pray that the roads and intersections are much safer before they are driving with all this traffic. We need major improvements!
11-I-20-RZ
Jones and Betty November 9, 2020 at 2:01 AM
We have several concerns about this purposed development:Safety- There are natural gas storage tanks within a 150 yards South-West of this property.Safety at the purposed (900 student) elementary school adjacent to the North-West side of this property: the "Phase 2 Extension of Cherahala Blvd" is to bisect this property and could easily provide a second entrance and exit to the school for emergency equipment and for evacuation of the school if needed. This second school entrance would also reduce traffic on the two lane Coward Mill Road.Jones and Betty November 9, 2020 at 2:01 AM
There is also a 118 home subdivision (3.5/acre) being built adjacent to the West side of this property which will increase traffic along with the school( buses and cars) traffic.
Any increase in the number of houses of more than 3.5/acre would break the precedent already set for our area and would negatively change the housing plan in our community.
An Increased traffic congestion would reduce the value and desirability of the existing homes in the area.Keeping traffic noise and a bottleneck congestion to a minimum around and on Coward Mill Road and Phase 1 of Cherahala Extension, is essential for all who live and travel on Coward Mill Road.
We thank the Commissioners for protecting the safety and interest of existing home owners and for future responsible development in our community.
Joy
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Joy (37931), November 9, 2020 at 8:10 AM
I STRONGLY object to this kind of establishment being placed in my community. I didn't even get into how it would negatively affect home values or property tax revenue or any other economic subject you could think of. Because that wouldn't be right. I'm not saying what I'm saying for money. I'm saying it for my family, for the families around me and everyone else who wants to remain living in a safe community. DO NOT REZONE TO LET ANGELIC MINISTRIES RUN ROUGHSHOD IN OUR COMMUNITY! Joy (37931), November 9, 2020 at 8:10 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201109081002.pdf
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Kerry November 9, 2020 at 8:10 AM
While my husband and I appreciate the intent of Angelic Ministries and their mission, we strongly urge you not to allow rezoning for the purpose of establishing an Addiction Treatment Facility or similar Rehabilitation Facility in this residential family part of the Karns community. There are better placed within Knox County suited for a facility of this nature. If you have any doubts about the validity of these reasons, and you haven?t visited Ball Road and noticed the growing community, I urge you to do so before this item comes up for consideration. Allowing an Addiction Treatment Facility or Rehabilitation Facility in this area would be a mistake.Kerry November 9, 2020 at 8:10 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201109081010.pdf
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Megan November 9, 2020 at 8:10 AM
I strongly dislike how Angelic Ministries is trying to push themselves onto our community. They have not been transparent with anything. They have refused to provide any direct answers. I am deeply concerned with the safety and well being of my family and my neighbors if this "boarding house" (without properly trained staff) is allowed to open. I urge you to consider how you yourself would feel if this was being proposed in your own community. No one wants this in their backdoor. The lack of staff training and false labelling of a "boarding house" should constitute a rejection. Please deny their rezoning request.Megan November 9, 2020 at 8:10 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201109081015.pdf
Joe
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Joe (37931), November 9, 2020 at 8:10 AM
As a neighbor, Knox county resident, and voter I strongly believe such a facility does not belong near residential communities and Angelic Ministries mission is best served either growing their current facilities or finding other property well removed from the people of Knox county.Joe (37931), November 9, 2020 at 8:10 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201109081022.pdf
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Rob November 9, 2020 at 8:10 AM
Please consider my and all other concerned citizen's opinions on this issue. We love our residences/community and would hate to have them affected by a poorly placed "boarding house". The residences/community, as well as the individuals that the rehab center is being proposed for, would be better off if the proposed center were planned and constructed at an alternate location. Rob November 9, 2020 at 8:10 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201109081033.pdf
Kevin
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Kevin (37931), November 9, 2020 at 10:10 AM
Thank You for strongly considering my opposition to deny these rezoning requests when the commission meets on November 12th 2020 and any future dates when this may be on the planning commission’s agenda.Kevin (37931), November 9, 2020 at 10:10 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201109101041.pdf
11-A-20-SP
Nancy November 9, 2020 at 10:34 AM
Please, please make the developers slow down. West Knox county rural roads can't keep up with the traffic as is.Even worse, all this bulldozing of forests is contributing to global warming.Nancy November 9, 2020 at 10:34 AM
Why not make them put in quality homes on large lots (like Chestnut Grove where trees are protected and has commons area, pool, etc.) to attract higher income families. The higher priced homes can still bring in profit to the developer, higher taxes than the rural land, but will help keep the area beautiful. The bonus is traffic won't be increased as much.
Bottom line: please oppose this development plan and substantially reduce the number of houses in this acreage.
Martin and Mary Lou
37932
37932
11-A-20-SP
Martin and Mary Lou (37932), November 9, 2020 at 12:07 PM
We are very concerned about a proposal to allow building 196 new homes on 1737 N. Campbell Station. We understand the desire to build in Hardin Valley and are not opposed to all new building, but ask that it be thoughtful and proactive. Many homes in this area are already in the process of being built or have been built and not occupied. Our schools are already overcrowded. This area is experiencing traffic issues and congestion which would obviously get worse. Traffic would increase by 1,932 more trips a day according to the Traffic Impact Letter completed October 2020. Campbell Station and Yarnell are both 2 lane roads (often narrow) and cannot handle this amount of traffic. We simply do not have the infrastructure.Martin and Mary Lou (37932), November 9, 2020 at 12:07 PM
Your own staff has made a preliminary recommendation for 124 homes. What would be your rationale for going against this finding? We ask that you follow the guidelines for Hillside Protection. Please give thought to the impact on the environment, both trees and wildlife. We are at risk of diminishing both which are reasons why Hardin Valley is beautiful.
We regret that health issues and Covid 19 prohibit our attending this meeting in person.
PLEASE be thoughtful and proactive in your decisions regarding Hardin Valley. Please send confirmation that this email has been received-thanks.
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Anatoliy November 9, 2020 at 12:14 PM
I am a resident of the Foxfield subdivision in Karns. I have a family with two young children. I am writing you regarding possible plans to approve the project to build a boarding house across the road from where we live on Zion Lane. Rezoning 9-A-20-RZ, 11-F-20-UR.Anatoliy November 9, 2020 at 12:14 PM
I’d like to let you know that I’m opposed to having this project approved. My community is not an experiment for angelic ministries to build their boarding house. I don’t want to worry about my children being outside because it only takes one person to fail their efforts to help him before they can start roaming around close-by subdivisions.Its you Responsibility to make decisions to keep the community safe and desirable to live in. If the boarding house is built all our house values would drop. People that care about their community will move somewhere else with their families and people that don’t care will take their place. This one decision can change the surrounding communities significantly and not for the better.
Please do not approve this project.
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
John and Sharon November 9, 2020 at 12:19 PM
Knoxville-Knox Planning Commission,John and Sharon November 9, 2020 at 12:19 PM
I am writing this morning to voice my strong opposition to the two pending cases in relation to the Zion Road rezoning proposal that are currently in front of you. I am a resident of Foxfield subdivision in the Karns community of Knox County. While I do not have children living at home, most of my neighbors do and facility of this type, while warranted, is a major safety and economic concern for me and my neighbors. Allowing this type of “soft jail” facility to exist is a residential area is only inviting issues into the area. It is also my understanding that Angelic Ministries has never operated a facility as they are proposing and it does not have the qualified staff to take on a “project” such as this. If I understand the history of this proposed facility, it has previously been rejected by several communities in Knox County. I would request the Commission do the same here.
11-A-20-SP
Amy November 9, 2020 at 1:23 PM
I am writing today over my concern for the rezoning of areas 11-C-20-RZ and 11-A-20-SP. This is a beautiful piece of land along the Campbell Station area and I hate to see another neighborhood go in. Campbell Station is a very narrow road and can not handle the additional traffic that it will see with the new neighborhoods in the process of being built along with the potential one. The intersection at Yarnell and Campbell Station is a very dangerous one and this will just make the intersection more dangerous. The lack of infrastructure and deterioration is a concern as well.Amy November 9, 2020 at 1:23 PM
That area sees high water and the other side sees flooding and removing a hillside that helps with the water would be a concern to me. Plus the schools are WAY overcrowded as it is, this will only add to the number of students and over crowding the schools even more which will affect not only my children's education but others as well not to mention their safety.
My last concern is just taking away the beauty of country and trees and animals natural habitat. We decided on this area because of it's beauty and country feel and that is slowly being taken away with every tree cut down. I know all that is seen is $$$$ but I see nature and animal habitat and being safe when I take my kids to school on an already narrow, busy road.
I hope you will reconsider this re-zoning.
Lisa
37924
37924
11-C-20-RZ
Lisa (37924), November 9, 2020 at 6:35 PM
The surrounding neighbors are concerned about having another subdivision in an area already facing traffic problems, school overcrowding and flood potential. The site has a lot of slopes in the Hillside Protection area and neighbors are concern about the negative effects on their property of grading hillsides and potential for flooding. I know that road improvements are planned for the future, but that doesn't help the people who live there now. Lisa (37924), November 9, 2020 at 6:35 PM
Samuel
37932
37932
11-C-20-RZ
Samuel (37932), November 9, 2020 at 7:03 PM
I just wanted to voice my family's concern regarding rezoning this property. Having moved to Hardin Valley in 2012, we've witnessed first hand the growth the community has both enjoyed and is now having to learn to tolerate. Traffic along Campbell Station, and specifically at the Yarnell intersection, is a daily problem. It would be prudent to delay further land development so as to allow the surrounding roadways to catch up. I'm also concerned about the population density and home values. We moved to a rural part of Knoxville for a reason, because it was rural, and not with the hope that it would someday soon be further developed and over populated. When will enough be enough? Just look at the development that has already (and is currently) taking place. Let's postpone rezoning for more development until, at least, the infrastructure/roadways have a chance to catch up. Thanks for your time.Samuel (37932), November 9, 2020 at 7:03 PM
Ryan
37932
37932
11-C-20-RZ
Ryan (37932), November 9, 2020 at 7:10 PM
The fact that a portion of this property had previously been rezoned to low density residential should have no bearing on the current rezoning request. This was 14 years ago and obviously a lot has changed since then with regards to the growth and infrastructure and planning. All of the surrounding properties in this area are agricultural or rural residential with densities at one house per acre up to 1 house per 20 or more acres. Approving this rezoning would be inconsistent and significantly effect the adjoining properties, not only in terms of land use but property value. Also, with a large development, all who live in the area will have their safety at our homes and on the road irreversibly changed.please deny this rezoning, this is not a good location for a large development. Ryan (37932), November 9, 2020 at 7:10 PM
Marcie
37932
37932
11-D-20-RZ
Marcie (37932), November 10, 2020 at 10:44 AM
I am highly discouraged to see the potential of rezoning from agricultural to residential. I live at the intersection of yarnell and Campbell station and my son attends Hardin Valley Elementary. We moved to Hardin Valley to actually SEE some green and you are allowing the filling of homes for tax dollars without the consideration of WHY people moved here in the first place. Campbell Station road is a disaster already and the schools are over filled and having to use pods. I sincerely hope before you look at the simple dollar amount you will consider how this effects all of us who live here. I live at 1521 Misty Valley Way and frequent Campbell station- i am appalled it is even being considered to add 200 homes and traffic to this already disastrous road. The Yarnell intersection is scary as it is. You need to catch up with infrastructure (roads and schools) before you add one more home to this place- it’s getting ridiculous.Marcie (37932), November 10, 2020 at 10:44 AM
Samantha
37919
37919
11-H-20-UR
Samantha (37919), November 10, 2020 at 11:07 AM
Attached please find a letter with enclosure from Taylor D. Forrester in regards to the referenced matter.Samantha (37919), November 10, 2020 at 11:07 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201110110716.pdf
11-C-20-RZ
Craig November 10, 2020 at 11:14 AM
I read with great concern regarding the proposed rezoning to allow 196 new home sites along north Campbell Station road. We have been here for 10 years and have seen multiple new subdivisions added with NO real road improvements which are desperately needed. It is obvious that the Developers involved have no concern for anything but profit.The traffic along this stretch of Campbell station is already beyond safe and this addition would push the situation further. If you were to travel this stretch of road, you could see that first hand. In addition the planned development density is out of proportion to surrounding properties and will lead to a decrease in property values and further lead to eroding of the country charm that led us to move here in the first place.Craig November 10, 2020 at 11:14 AM
Please vote no on this proposal.
11-I-20-RZ
Lisa November 10, 2020 at 11:18 AM
The neighbors feel that 3 d/u per acre would be more suitable for this property. There are several concerns about the lack of road infrastructure, although supposedly some is planned for the future, but that does not help the neighborhood now. Further, sidewalks should be required for this development.Lisa November 10, 2020 at 11:18 AM
11-C-20-RZ
Lisa November 10, 2020 at 11:19 AM
Again, there is a lot of concern from the surrounding neighbors about building another subdivision in an area already facing traffic concerns, school overcrowding and flooding problems. A lot of this property is in the Hillside Protection area and the neighbors are concerning that grading will cause flooding problems on their property.Lisa November 10, 2020 at 11:19 AM
11-G-20-UR
Lisa November 10, 2020 at 11:20 AM
Concern about traffic patterns in an area that is highly congested is driving worries about this request. Please require special considerations for traffic for this Use on Review.Lisa November 10, 2020 at 11:20 AM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Lisa November 10, 2020 at 11:21 AM
Please consider the concerns of the surrounding neighborhood when considering this request. If you do approve it, require the applicant to work closely with the neighborhood to help alleviate concerns.Lisa November 10, 2020 at 11:21 AM
Mark
37920
37920
11-C-20-RZ
Mark (37920), November 10, 2020 at 11:25 AM
As I am sure the Commission is aware, the Hardin Valley area has become overwhelmed with new residents making the antiquated infrastructure a significant concern. Two new subdivisions within short distance on Campbell Station Road have just been constructed, this dumping more traffic on a two-lane winding road. The traffic through the Campell Station/Hardin Valley intersection has become quite congested as well as Campbell Station towards Farragut the ascends up a steep hill. Construction crews on these roads often funnel traffic into one lane causing longer delays. Emergency vehicles would be hindered at best and there are times these roads become impassible.Mark (37920), November 10, 2020 at 11:25 AM
Traffic congestion is a significant issue and the accident rate is rising. These roads can be dangerous with the large increase in traffic with no changes planned. I would like to voice my objection to this rezoning until infrastructure changes can be planned.
11-C-20-RZ
Julie November 10, 2020 at 11:31 AM
My family urges you to deny the application for Rezoning (case #11-C-20-RZ) the Northwest County Sector Plan Amendment (case #11-A-20-SP) from agricultural to planned residential. Julie November 10, 2020 at 11:31 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201110113146.pdf
11-C-20-RZ
Jessica November 10, 2020 at 11:33 AM
My husband and I own a home in Campbell Creek off Campbell Station. We are adamantly OPPOSED to these new homes/neighborhood. There is no way Campbell Station can handle all these new cars and traffic. The road is already crumbling away. It’s narrow and already too busy as it is. Also, the school cannot support another 400+ children in its school system. Please do not allow this neighborhood.Jessica November 10, 2020 at 11:33 AM
Karin
37924
37924
11-SF-20-C
Karin (37924), November 10, 2020 at 11:38 AM
I'm a homeowner on the affected side of Meadow Wells Drive, and I support the decision to eliminate sidewalks. Sidewalks on one side of the street are not that useful and are frequently blocked by parked vehicles anyway. They would cause considerable damage in construction. We're also participating with the City of Knoxville to have street trees installed in our easements, and eliminating sidewalks would allow us to get trees in on both sides of the street throughout the neighborhood, which will add much-needed shade and cooling--in my opinion, a far better solution to make our streets more pedestrian-friendly.
Thanks for your consideration.Karin (37924), November 10, 2020 at 11:38 AM
Kevin
37918
37918
10-D-20-RZ
Kevin (37918), November 10, 2020 at 12:36 PM
The issue is that in the county, there is not a low-impact Commercial zone where you would want to have businesses opening up right next to your house. Think about a limited use zone that allows neighborhood services like a bakery, restaurant, bar, produce shop, hair salon, etc. A zone that, if the couple of parcels right next to you rezoned to this zone, most people wouldn't object too much too.Kevin (37918), November 10, 2020 at 12:36 PM
I'm thinking of a few neighborhoods in Denver that I've visited, where you walked to a neighborhood restaurant for dinner, or walked down the street to get an ice cream or a sweet after dinner. Those type of commercial developments are assets.
CN allows too many uses, and really requires larger parcels with larger setbacks. It's not what you want to plop in the middle of a neighborhood of single family residential.
KCPA encourages Planning Commission to consider the uses allowed in CN, potentially remove some of those uses, and also to consider a new zone that would be appropriate for placing in the middle of a suburban neighborhood. This would also give you a nice use pattern that could be used in Planned Residential, instead of the existing "SC" uses allowed in PR if you have enough lots / space.
11-H-20-UR
Sue November 10, 2020 at 2:26 PM
I live in Halls off Emory Road. I heard there may be a substance abuse center going in the old Hospice building on Andersonville Pike. AMEN!! I am all for it! This community and city of Knoxville need this facility! I truly hope this project goes through!!Sue November 10, 2020 at 2:26 PM
11-C-20-RZ
Heather November 10, 2020 at 2:29 PM
I am sending this email with concerns regarding Rezoning case #11-C-20-RZ and Northwest County Sector Plan Amendment case #11-A-20-SP.Heather November 10, 2020 at 2:29 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201110142916.pdf
11-I-20-RZ
Kim November 10, 2020 at 2:41 PM
Just a quick note regarding existing development densities in this area. Please see original correspondence below:Kim November 10, 2020 at 2:41 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201110144156.pdf
11-C-20-RZ
John & Amelia November 10, 2020 at 2:43 PM
I am deeply concerned about the proposed rezoning of the above parcels. As a neighbor with a driveway next to 1737 N Campbell Station Rd, I am concerned by the increased traffic on N Campbell Station Rd, safety hazard created during our ingress and egress of the property by the increased traffic on the neighboring driveway, environmental impact of the proposed number of dwellings including contour and drainage impacts, impacts to trees and wildlife and other likely impacts. As such, I am opposed to this proposed rezoning. If the commission were to consider a rezoning plan, these parcels should only be rezoned at a minimum of 5 acres to each dwelling to minimize the significant impacts that would likely occur with the currently proposed number of dwellings.John & Amelia November 10, 2020 at 2:43 PM
Charles
37932
37932
11-D-20-RZ
Charles (37932), November 10, 2020 at 2:44 PM
The Commission should reject the rezoning for this Subdivision. The infrastructure in Hardin Valley can’t stand any more traffic. People are going to be killed at the intersection of Yarnell Road and Campbell Station Road and at the intersection of Campbell Station Road and Hardin Valley Road. Mud will gush down the ridge onto Yarnell Road. Please don’t be irresponsible and approve this subdivision rezoning.Charles (37932), November 10, 2020 at 2:44 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Marisela November 10, 2020 at 3:13 PM
Please accept this letter as my firm OBJECTION to two current requests for rezoning. The first rezoning request is for vegetation (9-A-20-RZ) followed by a second request for Multi-family Residential rezoning (11-F-20-UR), both on the same property in the Karns area on Zion Lane, off Ball Rd.Marisela November 10, 2020 at 3:13 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201110151314.pdf
Travis & Stacey
37932
37932
11-C-20-RZ
Travis & Stacey (37932), November 10, 2020 at 3:16 PM
I’m writing in regard to to another proposed subdivision in the Hardin Valley area. I’ve been growing more and more concerned with the density of homes in the newer subdivisions that have been springing up over the past few years and now they’ve started to encroach on our small, wooded property where we lived since 2015. In addition to the impacts on privacy and the natural beauty still largely present in the area, traffic on N. Campbell Station & Yarnell will become even more problematic as the number of residents goes up at break neck pace. Please consider pumping the brakes on this new development that sits right in the middle of some beautiful countryside.Travis & Stacey (37932), November 10, 2020 at 3:16 PM
11-C-20-RZ
Amy November 10, 2020 at 3:17 PM
NO NO NO ..I live on Misty Valley Way off Yarnell Rd. There are already 2 new large subdivisions going up off Campbell station and the road has not been improved at all! and you want to add 196 houses? It is so dangerous driving from our house to Harding Valley road as is…and all those kids filling up the schools when they are already at capacity.. This so so crazy…It can not happen… Do not just think about money please think about the children, the traffic, the dangerous road…Commission members please drive down Campbell station towards Hardin Valley Road you will see it is NOT a good idea…Amy November 10, 2020 at 3:17 PM
11-C-20-RZ
Garrett November 10, 2020 at 3:18 PM
I am writing regarding a rezoning request for property near our home (cases # 11-C-20-RZ and # 11-A-20-SP). In looking into this it seems that the group interested in developing these lots are requesting a unit density that is 50% more than what the rural and hillside characteristics say should be permitted. Please mark me down as in opposition to the rezoning plan being submitted to the county. Thank you!Garrett November 10, 2020 at 3:18 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Alvin November 10, 2020 at 3:20 PM
Please denied rezoningAlvin November 10, 2020 at 3:20 PM
Deborah
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Deborah (37931), November 10, 2020 at 7:26 PM
I live within about 300 ft from this site and have a 15 year old daughter who is at home by herself during school hours. I do not feel safe for my daughter to be here by herself with these men having close access to my house if they decide to get out. 12 men that are just out of prison or in drug rehab in this neighborhood is not very safe for us. I feel this will bring my property value down but I fear more for the safety of my daughter. I never received any information on this site I just happened to see what was happen on a Facebook page.Deborah (37931), November 10, 2020 at 7:26 PM
Shannon
37918
37918
11-H-20-UR
Shannon (37918), November 10, 2020 at 7:34 PM
My name is Shannon Welch and I am reaching out to you in reference to case number 11-H-20-UR. This is for a proposal by JourneyPure seeking approval for a recovery housing facility at 7447 Andersonville Pike, Knoxville, TN 37938. This building is located directly across the street from Halls Elementary School and is 0.6 miles from Halls Middle School and Halls High School. Attached is a comprehensive letter and support for why you should vote against this special use request.Shannon (37918), November 10, 2020 at 7:34 PM
I respectfully request that these concerns are considered and urge you to vote against this issue during the November 12th hearing. I have put together a petition on change.org to show you that the community does not agree with this proposed change of use and we have gathered over 200 signatures.
A link to the petition for your reference is: https://www.change.org/p/knox-county-planning-commission-support-drug-free-school-zones?recruiter=838710424&recruited_by_id=b3671c50-d5dc-11e7-9b67-07744718d7b3&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=petition_dashboard
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201110193418.pdf
11-C-20-UR
Trenton and Ashley November 10, 2020 at 11:09 PM
We are writing in regards to the referenced case concerning a potential duplex at 7009 Wright Rd. We live at 7004 Wright Rd directly across the street from the proposed property and have lived there for about 6 years. We have several concerns with this proposal which we will list in detail. See attached...Trenton and Ashley November 10, 2020 at 11:09 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201110230903.pdf
11-H-20-UR
Sydney November 11, 2020 at 7:11 AM
Please see the attached petition regarding the JourneyPure proposal for the property located at 7447 Andersonville Pike, Knoxville, TN 37938. The community is again asking that this proposal be denied as we believe that there should be consideration of a different location for a facility such as this. It does not belong in a residential area or directly across the street from Halls Elementary School.Sydney November 11, 2020 at 7:11 AM
As you will see, there are over 200 signatures that have been gathered over the last week. Several people in the community had no idea this proposal was even pending. As this is my third email regarding this issue and I have not received a response from any of you, with the exception of Mr. Biggs, I assume the MPC meeting is still set for this Thursday, November 12th. I am asking for a response confirming this information, along with how to virtually attend that meeting.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111071124.pdf
Misty
37932
37932
11-A-20-SP
Misty (37932), November 11, 2020 at 7:18 AM
Please do not approve 196 unit subdivision on Campbell Station. Campbell Station Rd cannot handle an increase in cars. Just the other day there was a really bad wreck in that curve where the entrance of that subdivision would be. The schools are already overcrowded. Misty (37932), November 11, 2020 at 7:18 AM
Emily November 11, 2020 at 7:43 AM
There's a proposal to add ANOTHER huge development of houses within 1.5 miles of the schools. These neighborhoods are too close for bus service, and of course there are no sidewalks connecting the schools to neighborhoods on Hardin Valley Road. This is going to add a huge amount of traffic to an already sickeningly overcrowded area. Please table this rezoning and development proposal and focus on getting infrastructure to support those of us already using the roads and schools. Fix & widen Campbell Station Road (2 lanes plus shoulders for its entirety) and widen Hardin Valley Road (5 lanes) through the school zones. Also focus on adding schools to the area. Hardin Valley and Farragut are having major overcrowding issues, and that's not fair to our children and their education. Please consider these major needs before letting more developments crowd us out or risk our lives!
If you need more income for the area, consider developing the commercial areas that are available. There's a prime location on the corner of Hardin Valley and Steele Rd for a Sonic or similar drive-through restaurant. It would have a great amount of morning, afternoon, and late night traffic, in addition to workers and high school traffic at lunchtime. The nearest restaurant is a drive for the local traffic, causing more wear and tear on the crowded roads.
Thank you for representing the needs of Knox County residents.
11-C-20-RZ
Whitney November 11, 2020 at 8:18 AM
It’s come to my attention of another growth/rezoning plan for the Hardin Valley area where precious areas will potentially add another nearly 200 homes near the Catoga Kennels off Campbell Station rd. I humbly and respectfully ask this rezoning effort to cease and deny this proposal! Hardin Valley traffic is already ridiculous with 2 lane roads, and in most cases no turn lanes for safety. The school system is heavily populated and there are also a number of open houses on the market to continue to infiltrate this school system without having additional housing. This area is also in a potential flood zone and should be heavily reviewed for the amount of civil engineering this woodland would require for housing to be done properly. I ask for our elected commission to please stop, if at least, slow the growth/rezoning of this venture and future ventures so that our Hardin Valley infrastructure can catch up. These houses being placed tightly onto lots, cheaply made by developers also dilutes our Hardin Valley housing market. Thank you for your consideration to our concerns, we appreciate your time and attention to this specific matter.Whitney November 11, 2020 at 8:18 AM
Chris
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Chris (37931), November 11, 2020 at 8:52 AM
Deny 9-A-20-RZ and 11-F-20-UR Due to Adverse Impact to the Surrounding CommunityChris (37931), November 11, 2020 at 8:52 AM
If the Knox County Planning Commission listens to the voices of the Karns’ Community that live near Zion Lane, they will soundly reject outside influences of Angelic Ministries and Realtors to create an environment that will be detrimental to the safety and well-being of our families and future financial value of our homes.
Many of us attended the meeting held by Angelic Ministries at Grace Baptist to listen to their proposal to build a fenced in 24/7 monitored transitional “boarding house” for men. Let it be known that the only people that supported this rezoning proposal were: Angelic Ministries, Two realtors (one who has been stuck with the property for years and threatened to sell it to a dog breeder if we were not caring enough to support this facility, and also accused the neighborhood children of vandalizing the current Zion property), and one commission member who stated she was neutral and then said she thought it would be nice to have nice property with new landscaping (note that we found out that she was the “community leader” that proposed the new location of the meeting. She was not speaking for us as a community leader).
See my attached PDF for all reasons to deny this request.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111085219.pdf
Benjamin
37933
37933
10-C-20-OB
Benjamin (37933), November 11, 2020 at 10:57 AM
Attached is my Letter of Opposition to the planned amendment to the Minimum Subdivision Regulations. Benjamin (37933), November 11, 2020 at 10:57 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111105713.pdf
Jennifer
37932
37932
11-A-20-SP
Jennifer (37932), November 11, 2020 at 11:20 AM
Attached please find our letter of opposition for case #11-A-20-SP and case #11-C-20-RZ. We have multiple concerns regarding this location and these specific parcels. Thank you for your consideration.Jennifer (37932), November 11, 2020 at 11:20 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111112005.pdf
11-C-20-RZ,11-A-20-RZ
Regina November 11, 2020 at 11:32 AM
I implore you to exercise great caution in approving the rezoning of this land and to also rethink further construction out this way until the planning commission can form a better plan of action to address concerns that are already out of control.Regina November 11, 2020 at 11:32 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111180825.pdf
John
37932
37932
11-C-20-RZ
John (37932), November 11, 2020 at 12:26 PM
I object to the further development of Campbell Station Rd in Knoxville at this time. This road is not designed to handle the additional traffic flow that it must for the current development. In addition, the surrounding roads cannot support the additional traffic without greatly impacting the current residents. Lastly, the Hardin Valley schools are already dealing with overcrowded situations. The addition of 100+ more families will only exacerbate this issue. I feel it is time for the county to deal with some of these outlying issues prior to allow these developers carte blanche to squeeze homes in where ever open land may be. They have no investment in the Hardin Valley environment after they've completed their builds and this is where we, the residents, need our local government officials to stand up for what's best for us.John (37932), November 11, 2020 at 12:26 PM
Jennifer
37932
37932
11-C-20-RZ
Jennifer (37932), November 11, 2020 at 12:28 PM
I object to the further development of Campbell Station Rd in Knoxville at this time. This road is not designed to handle the additional traffic flow that it must for the current development. In addition, the surrounding roads cannot support the additional traffic without greatly impacting the current residents. Lastly, the Hardin Valley schools are already dealing with overcrowded situations. The addition of 100+ more families will only exacerbate this issue. I feel it is time for the county to deal with some of these outlying issues prior to allow these developers carte blanche to squeeze homes in wherever open land may be. They have no investment in the Hardin Valley environment after they've completed their builds and this is where we, the residents, need our local government officials to stand up for what's best for us.Jennifer (37932), November 11, 2020 at 12:28 PM
Kristen November 11, 2020 at 12:45 PM
11-C-20-RZ,11-A-20-SP
Davin November 11, 2020 at 1:00 PM
I am writing in regards to the planned rezoning of the above property. Davin November 11, 2020 at 1:00 PM
First off, there is currently way to much traffic for Campbell Station Road, I have lived here for over 4 yrs and I see a wreck almost weekly on average, someone runs off the road or collides on Yarnel & Campbell intersection. Second, Part of the draw to the "Countryside" is quietness, traffic on Campbell station has already put that into peril, more traffic would just mean more noise. Third, The current school system is already overflowing, where would another 200 families think they are going to go? Fourth, the tree removal that will be required which does so much for our air filtering will be reduces, we will need more than mask to help us survive. Lastly, I enjoy turkeys, deer and other animals, and yes even coyotes roaming through my back yard, at the rate of growth, they will all be leaving.
The madness has to stop somewhere!
11-c-20-rz,11-a-20-sp
hjh514 November 11, 2020 at 1:26 PM
I have major concerns I am a neighbor on Yarnell road and hard and Valley school was meant to lift the overcrowded students at schools and it immediately was overcrowded. The morning traffic through there already is ridiculous and you're wanting to pile so many more kids into this school um why don't they build schools 1st before they start building up all these places.hjh514 November 11, 2020 at 1:26 PM
Daniel
37909
37909
11-C-20-RZ
Daniel (37909), November 11, 2020 at 1:56 PM
As a Yarnell Road area resident for the past twenty years I strongly urge you to decline these aforementioned rezoning requests.Daniel (37909), November 11, 2020 at 1:56 PM
The Yarnell corridor and North Campbell Station are already over built with new neighborhoods, many which are still being built out as evidenced by traffic levels that exceed safety and current infrastructure capacities. We have experienced numerous traffic accidents, including several fatalities on both roads, where sight distances for existing road entrances and blind curves exist.
The Hardin Valley School district was overcrowded the day it came into existence and there seems to be no corrective measure ahead for that issue. Due to the hill and valley topography water drainage,as severe puddling and hydroplaning already exist as I have experienced that first hand on many occasions, very dangerous conditions on to be amplified by new construction, heavy truck presence and increased traffic volumes.
This area, known to us as Hines Valley, is extremely overbuilt given current infrastructure capacities. I simply cannot imagine putting this corridor under more stress with new zoning and construction.
Kevin
37918
37918
11-E-20-RZ
Kevin (37918), November 11, 2020 at 2:32 PM
It's a shame to lose a park in an area that doesn't have many parks. Located where there are many employers nearby, including Cisco Networks, Discovery Networks, this area provides a valuable after-work sports league recreational opportunity for workers, as well as nearby residents.Kevin (37918), November 11, 2020 at 2:32 PM
Carol
37932
37932
11-A-20-SP
Carol (37932), November 11, 2020 at 2:36 PM
My husband and I are totally opposed to this proposal for Long Farm Way. Our valley continues to be over come by massive neighborhoods. The environmental impact to our creek, hills, and wildlife continues to be compromised, the schools are heavily overcrowded already. The roads continue to be carrying way too much traffic for the amount of homes being allowed to be built. We have lived here 18 years the traffic and creek have both been affected by building up excess homes and even homes being built on flood property built up higher to accommodate large amounts of housing to overrun our valley. The roads as they are are not safe for one more large housing development to come in this valley. We are sure you will take all these points and make the best decision for our County. Please consider not bringing in more money for peoples gain but, what is the right thing to do. Please Stop this from happening. We look forward to your reply as to the decision made. Carol (37932), November 11, 2020 at 2:36 PM
Kevin
37918
37918
11-F-20-RZ
Kevin (37918), November 11, 2020 at 2:50 PM
Dear Commissioners, A common refrain in the county is that we have a lack of industrial and business park land. The requested parcels are generally level, located close to a major highway, and surrounded by industrial and business park land. Is the best use of this property the requested quarry, which destroys this land for future use? Or would it be to maintain the existing light industrial zoning designation, which could turn this into uses that would benefit the community for the long term? Sincerely, --KevinKevin (37918), November 11, 2020 at 2:50 PM
Ashley
37931
37931
11-C-20-UR
Ashley (37931), November 11, 2020 at 3:06 PM
see attachedAshley (37931), November 11, 2020 at 3:06 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111150634.pdf
Kevin
37918
37918
11-E-20-SP
Kevin (37918), November 11, 2020 at 3:11 PM
See attachedKevin (37918), November 11, 2020 at 3:11 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111151134.pdf
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Gregory November 11, 2020 at 3:41 PM
Please hear the complaint from the family living at 5927 Ball Road as we strongly request denial of the rezoning for the property on Zion Lane (9-A-20-RZ). While we think the work of rehabilitating men is excellent work, it would be irresponsible to perform that kind of work in an area where there are so many children living within a short walking distance and where these children are out every day waiting for their school buses and being dropped off from school at regular times daily. It also is completely inequitable that someone could develop a less than five-acre property that would devalue the hundreds of acres of residential properties around it. The area is a growing residential area, not a growing agricultural area. It also appears there is deception in the true use of the land that it would be used for agriculture when the actual plan is to rehabilitate and be a transitional home for troubled men. I understand that there would need to be a fence, cameras, and 24/7 on-site monitoring of these men because of their struggles. If there is reason to keep these men from getting out of the property, then it must be because they present a danger to the outside world around them. Please honor the opposing taxpaying residents around this relatively small property. Why should this relatively small property be allowed to cause a huge negative impact on all the properties around it? Granting this rezoning request would cause this area of Knox County to be seen as unsafe and undesirable.Gregory November 11, 2020 at 3:41 PM
Rehabilitation has its place in a healthy society, and it should also have its place safely away from a healthy residential area.
Kevin
37918
37918
11-SF-20-C
Kevin (37918), November 11, 2020 at 3:54 PM
See attachedKevin (37918), November 11, 2020 at 3:54 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111155416.pdf
11-H-20-RZ
Ben November 11, 2020 at 4:30 PM
I was only retained this afternoon to assist Mr. Welch in his application for a Prior Zoning Equivalent for the Property located at 2613, 2615, and 2625 Greenway Dr. From my review of the application, the current zoning ordinance and map, the prior zoning ordinance and map, and staff’s recommendations, I would urge you to not follow staff’s recommendation in this instance and grant Mr. Welch the requested C-H-1 zone as it is the only comparable equivalent zone to what he had prior to the adoption of Recode.Ben November 11, 2020 at 4:30 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111163044.pdf
AARON
37938
37938
11-A-20-PD
AARON (37938), November 11, 2020 at 4:41 PM
How have the crime rates near the homes and businesses immediately surrounding these transitional housing facilities changed after development and use? Over a three or five year period before and after beginning of operations, is there a measurable increase in reportable crimes and police calls to areas within 5 blocks of these facilities?AARON (37938), November 11, 2020 at 4:41 PM
Aaron CadleKnox Office & Commercial, LLCProperty Manager, 1421-1425 E. Fifth Ave.
11-H-20-UR
Wayne November 11, 2020 at 5:36 PM
Please do all in your power to oppose the land use change from medicalfacility to recovery housing. Allowing a voluntary outpatient substanceabuse treatment center directly across the street from an elementary schoolis completely unacceptable. As a taxpayer, grandparent, community resident,and faithful voter I urge you prevent this.Wayne November 11, 2020 at 5:36 PM
9-a-20-rz,11-F-20-UR
Andrea November 11, 2020 at 5:57 PM
After attending the community meeting with Angelic Ministries, I am more concerned than ever about mine and my children's safety. Not to mention the safety of the children who attend the daycare down the street from the proposed boarding house. While I understand the property value of the land where the proposed boarding house will be located will increase, the surrounding property values will decrease due to no one wanting to live so close to this type of facility. I strongly urge you to consider the safety and the peace of mind of all the families that live in the area when considering approving the rezoning that will allow the boarding house to be approved. Also, the process taken to get the the living quarters for previous criminals approved has not been transparent to the community it is going to affect. Many families were not aware of the plans for the boarding house or the meetings for the chance for the concerned families to voice their opinions. There are still people who are just now finding out about the proposal, which makes this process feel even more like it is lacking transparency. With this in mind I also feel that the setup for the online meeting for the approval of the rezoning also does not allow enough opportunity for the voices of the community to be heard.Andrea November 11, 2020 at 5:57 PM
Jennifer
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Jennifer (37931), November 11, 2020 at 5:58 PM
Please deny this request.Jennifer (37931), November 11, 2020 at 5:58 PM
Thanks for the consideration.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111175846.pdf
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
BJ November 11, 2020 at 5:58 PM
I am writing with my firm OBJECTION to two current requests for rezoning.BJ November 11, 2020 at 5:58 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201112160019.pdf
Kyle
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Kyle (37931), November 11, 2020 at 6:03 PM
Please DenyKyle (37931), November 11, 2020 at 6:03 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111180336.pdf
Scotty
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Scotty (37931), November 11, 2020 at 6:11 PM
I ask that you please deny this request not only for myself but for my sister as we know first hand.Scotty (37931), November 11, 2020 at 6:11 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201111181137.pdf
9-a-20-rz,11-F-20-UR
Ashton November 11, 2020 at 6:17 PM
I attended the community meeting about the proposal for the living quarters for previous prisoners. While I feel the idea of having a boarding house is a good idea, I do not feel comfortable with it existing less than a thousand feet away from my home. This is because I will not feel safe being outside or even in my home with a facility where previous criminals are so close to me. I love being outside in my yard and I fear I will no longer feel secure to do so anymore. I also feel that there was not enough transparency concerning the proposal for the boarding house and the meetings for myself and the community to voice our concerns and questions. This is concerning to me because having the rezoning and then boarding house approved will have a significant impact on the community. It is my hope that other options can be considered for this boarding house so myself and other families can have peace of mind while at home.Ashton November 11, 2020 at 6:17 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Logan November 11, 2020 at 6:36 PM
I have heard about the proposal for the living quarters for previous prisoners to be put off of ball road. Although I do think a boarding home is a good idea, having it that close to a residential area does not sound like a safe idea. My girlfriend and her family live extremely close to where this proposed boarding house will be. I feel as though they will not feel safe with previous convicts that close to her house. There are also other households in the area that are affected by this as well. I’m sure there is a place for this boarding house that is not so close to a residential area. I hope that other options will be considered.Logan November 11, 2020 at 6:36 PM
9-a-20-rz,11-F-20-UR
Michelle November 11, 2020 at 6:45 PM
I am emailing about not wanting this property to be turned into a rehab facility for those getting out of jail. I don't think it is good for our community. I feel that the property values in the area especially for those on Ball Road will go down and it is not safe for anyone living in the area especially since they are free to go come and go as they please.Michelle November 11, 2020 at 6:45 PM
Please DO NOT consider this.
11-I-20-RZ
Joyce November 11, 2020 at 7:45 PM
I am writing in regards to the November 12 MPC meeting, agenda #20 11-D-20-SP and 11-l-20-RZ. I am asking that you deny Agenda Item #20 for 5 dwelling/acre and approve only 3 dwellings per acre. PLEASE set a precedence to builders for this area’s future development.Joyce November 11, 2020 at 7:45 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201112181459.pdf
11-I-20-RZ
Marilynn November 11, 2020 at 8:06 PM
dear commissionersour interest in this area w/minimum 3 acres per home, was to "get away". we decided moving to an area that is more expensive than where we were gives us some breathing room... "ahhhhhhhhhh".helps preserve our sanity... truly!Marilynn November 11, 2020 at 8:06 PM
it was un-nerving to be so close to neighbors & hear sneezing, phone conversations, lawn mowerson top of us. we paid more... and the taxes are higher. but, as long as we can maintain our values,YOU all reap the revenue from the higher taxation.
you are the "fiduciaries" of our *home sweet homes* please consider minimizing the congestion.we need a buffer ! h e l l l l p p p !!!
9-a-20-rz,11-F-20-UR
Amber November 11, 2020 at 8:30 PM
I am wanting to voice my concerns about case9-a-20-rz. First of all I donot feel that the community was properly addressed about the boardinghouse. Secondly I love spending time outside on my property and with theboarding house so close to my house I will not feel safe outside or even inmy house. However I feel that boarding houses are a good thing but it isjust not good for this location because it is too close to several peopleshome and not to mention the daycare. I feel that it is better suited for acommercial area.Amber November 11, 2020 at 8:30 PM
Timothy
37920
37920
11-A-20-SU
Timothy (37920), November 12, 2020 at 9:14 AM
I own the property directly behind 3336 Sevier Ave and I am excited to hear about marble city sweets coming in this building. I do want to express concern for the guttering system that is need of repair and hanging off the back of the building. When it rains the water pours into my basement. Hopefully repairs can be made by the current owner or be a priority for the new owners.Timothy (37920), November 12, 2020 at 9:14 AM
11-B-20-OB
Kim November 12, 2020 at 11:38 AM
I would like to state my support of the amendment proposed to Article III. Section 9.B to streamline discussion and debate on items, and to continue to allow consideration of all views, applicants will be required to provide comments first, followed by proponents, and then opponents. Commission may still grant time for rebuttal for anyone speaking on an item.Kim November 12, 2020 at 11:38 AM
Both Hardin Valley Planning Advocates and the Knox County Planning Alliance have advocated for this change for many years and we are grateful to see this amendment considered. This will also align with processes requirements set forth in the county commission bylaws.
11-B-20-OB
Lisa November 12, 2020 at 11:54 AM
I am writing to you in support of 11-B-20-OB, specifically, the language which states:Lisa November 12, 2020 at 11:54 AM
Section 9.B.To streamline discussion and debate on items, and to continue to allow consideration of all views, applicants will be required to provide comments first, followed by proponents, and then opponents. Commission may still grant time for rebuttal for anyone speaking on an item.
It makes sense that the applicant would go first and state their reasons for requesting a change so that everyone understands the reasons for the request before speaking to it. It is only fair that the applicant should present their case first and allow the opposition to respond.
This would prevent subsequent speakers from wasting time addressing issues that may be satisfactorily brought up by the applicant and would allow both proponents and opponents to make relevant comments.
The applicant could still reserve time to rebut any oppositional points and would ensure that comments by others are relevant and timely.
11-A-20-SU
Jackie November 12, 2020 at 12:07 PM
I am writing you concerning the property located at 3336 Sevier Ave, file number 11-A-20-SU. I was going to attend the meeting today but found out today that you had to request to speak in advance. Unfortunately I missed the deadline.Jackie November 12, 2020 at 12:07 PM
I live two houses down from this property. I do have a concern about parking at this location. If vehicles park Parallel in the spots next to the road it obstructs the view to pull out of my driveway. I have almost gotten hit because I can’t clear see the on coming traffic clearly when vehicles are parked in that location.
With the increase in bicycle traffic on sevier ave it is very important that we are able to see to pull out onto sevier ave. There is already an issue with people speeding down Sevier Ave.
Kevin
37918
37918
11-B-20-OB
Kevin (37918), November 12, 2020 at 12:35 PM
Knox County Planning Alliance supports the proposed bylaw amendments. We support procedures to streamline the hearing and adoption of the Consent Agenda. We are also very supportive of the updated item hearing procedure. In our view, an applicant is making a REQUEST or application for an item, and they should present their vision and justification for why the request is appropriate and beneficial first. When the applicant is given the opportunity to "defer to opposition", this places opposition at a significant disadvantage because they have not heard the applicants' justification and vision. Then often "opposition" provides irrelevant testimony because they are in the dark about the applicants plans. KCPA believes that the applicant should go first, and then that allows any neutral or opposition viewpoints to specifically address the vision and justification provided by the applicant. We think this will result in more relevant discussion for commissioners. Kevin (37918), November 12, 2020 at 12:35 PM
11-C-20-RZ
Bruce & Laura November 12, 2020 at 3:07 PM
As residents of El Rancho Trail we are very concerned about the impact that the proposed subdivision would have on increased traffic and road safety on North Campbell Station Road. The proposed rezoning would allow almost 200 homes to be built with the only entrance and exit onto Campbell Station Rd. This section of Campbell Station Road is narrow, curvy, and hilly. It is not a good road for increased traffic volume. Traffic volume has already increased dramatically due to other recently built subdivisions. Congestion at the intersection of Campbell Station Road and Hardin Valley Road is already a problem, particularly when students are arriving and leaving school. Traffic increase at Campbell Station Road and Yarnell Road would also be a concern. The road is just too twisty, narrow, and hilly. We have already noticed an increase in accidents on North Campbell Station Road and a large subdivision would only further aggravate this trend. We request that the zoning request to planned residential be rejected.Bruce & Laura November 12, 2020 at 3:07 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Brian November 12, 2020 at 3:12 PM
I am writing to you today to convey that I and my family of 6, including my disabled mother, spouse, and 3 children are greatly opposed to the rezoning of the Zion Lane property to allow Angelic Ministries to build a "Boarding House" for men. This is and has been a family community for as long as I can remember. This is not the type of community that should ever even be considered when looking to house troubled men. This is also a new development of housing, an untested arrangement of living by Angelic Ministries, an experiment. Angelic Ministries has never had a home like this, and I and my family as well as the families of our community do not need to be their test subjects. To allow Angelic Ministries to continue and build this "Boarding House" will have an extremely adverse impact on this community. Not only financially, as a loss to the value of our homes, but also physically and psychologically, as families will have increased concerns of their well-being and safety of their children. This will change the structure and appeal of the Karns community as families, including mine will leave as we reach our limits of concern. Building of subdivisions will slow down as future families will not be drawn to Karns for the strong family oriented community it is. With that said I plead you to deny Angelic Ministries, and or any other institution from placing any such establishment in the Karns community.Brian November 12, 2020 at 3:12 PM
11-C-20-RZ
Valerie November 12, 2020 at 3:15 PM
I am writing to address the upcoming rezoning for properties on Campbell Station road located at 1737 N. Campbell Station.Valerie November 12, 2020 at 3:15 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201112151551.pdf
11-C-20-RZ
Denise November 12, 2020 at 3:17 PM
I am a Hardin Valley resident and am very concerned with the development going up. My husband and I chose Hardin Valley to retire to from northern Ohio because of the small town community and beauty that frames the valley. In a short period of time, where we had a view of trees we now see roof tops. The smog that has become a concern due to increased traffic, is now more of concern because of the deforestation happening. The infrastructure failures are being felt and seen, such as road collapse ( ie. Hickory Rd) because of the constant heavy truck traffic as well as drainage issues. Not to mention over populated class room sizes at Hardin Valley schools where my grandson attends. The caliber of professional educators will be challenged if the classroom sizes continue to grow. My daughter is an educator and relocated from Ohio with us with a special needs child. She was very satisfied with the program they have experienced. But, the concern for the continual great education is a concern . Denise November 12, 2020 at 3:17 PM
STOP REZONING!!!!If we had known this area was going to become another “ city like an Ohio city” , we would have relocated elsewhere.
GROWTH IS GOING TO HAPPEN. We get that!But please, SLOW DOWN and get the infrastructure growth necessary for the growth FIRST!!!!
11-C-20-RZ
Laurie & Bob November 12, 2020 at 3:18 PM
We are opposed to the above proposed development for the following reasons:Laurie & Bob November 12, 2020 at 3:18 PM
+ As stated in the Hardin Valley Mobility Plan, N. Campbell Station Road has heavy traffic that is predicted to increase. Improving the road by adding a lane or two is not possible between Ridgeland Road and Hardin Valley Road. Therefore, there is a limit to the traffic the road can safely handle. The proposed development of 196 homes is too much new traffic and should not be allowed. There should be no new development along this section of the road until some way is found to safely increase the road’s capacity. It should be noted that the Mobility Plan suggests building two new roads off Campbell Station to handle increased traffic. One of these roads cuts through a portion of the proposed development.
+ The proposed development is requesting 3.13 du/ac. The Hillside and Ridgetop Protection Plan requires that 1.93 du/ac is the maximum allowed (which gives 124 homes). At the very least, 1.93 du/ac should be required for this development. At the most, the proposed development should not be allowed until the N. Campbell Station Road congestion is solved. It is time to act proactively about the infrastructure of Hardin Valley!
11-C-20-RZ
Natalie November 12, 2020 at 3:19 PM
Hi! thank you for taking the time to read my email about the proposed development off North Campbell station and future proposed developments within Hardin Valley in general. We moved to Hardin Valley a few years ago and chose to move to the area because of it's charm and small town feel. We are saddened to see that disappear and turn into developments and industries. Our quick trip to the grocery store is no longer quick because of the increased traffic. We have to leave +20 mins earlier for work now because of the school traffic, forget when schools start in August it's almost impossible to even drive own Hardin Valley Road. Residents in Hardin Valley do not want any more developments, it is not only ruining our beautiful city visually but also our roads, electrical, water, and schools cannot handle anymore. I already know of 5 people within the last year move because of this. Please stop the rezoning and keep Hardin Valley beautiful.Natalie November 12, 2020 at 3:19 PM
11-C-20-RZ
Rachel November 12, 2020 at 3:20 PM
I am writing in opposition to the rezoning request 11-C-20-RZ and 11-A-20-SP. This portion of Campbell Station Rd is already extremely dangerous; I experience it nearly everyday when I have to use the intersection at Yarnell Rd. In its current condition the road will not safely support this planned development. The density of the requested development is far to high for this area. The property is located in the heart of a section of large estate lots and would not be compatible with the neighboring properties. Rachel November 12, 2020 at 3:20 PM
11-C-20-RZ
Lisa November 12, 2020 at 3:21 PM
The above referenced request for rezoning should not be approved in Hardin Valley. Campbell Station is already over crowded and has no shoulders for driving. The road cannot handle the proposed request for a new neighborhood with more houses. The road is not safe as it is and has dangerous intersections. Adding more traffic will worsen the situation. This will also effect the already over crowded schools. Please do not approve and also respond that this email was received.Lisa November 12, 2020 at 3:21 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Lindsay November 12, 2020 at 3:22 PM
I am a resident of the Foxfield Neighborhood that is off Ball Road and is in close proximity to Zion Lane. I am concerned about the rezoning request for vegetation (9-A-20-RZ) followed by the request for Multi-Family Residential rezoning (11-F-20-UR).Lindsay November 12, 2020 at 3:22 PM
I am concerned that a boarding house/ facility that will be built so close to several neighborhoods could easily present a concern for the surrounding families. There are numerous kids of all ages that reside off of Ball Road.
When looking for a home, I took comfort in the fact that this area is a safe area. I am not confident that I would be able to feel the same comfort knowing that a boarding house that allows addicts to come and go as they please would be within walking distance of my neighborhood.
I am also concerned that this type of facility would decrease the property value of my home. For these reasons, I would kindly ask that you vote against the rezoning, ultimately preventing the boarding house/ rehabilitation facility to be built.
11-C-20-RZ
Mark November 12, 2020 at 3:29 PM
As a resident of Hardin Valley living on Yarnell Road, I am writing today to urge the planning commission against the rezoning of parcels 11-C-20-RZ & #11-A-20-SP from agricultural to planned residential.Mark November 12, 2020 at 3:29 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201112152900.pdf
11-C-20-RZ
Donald November 12, 2020 at 3:40 PM
See attached commentsDonald November 12, 2020 at 3:40 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201112154028.pdf
11-C-20-RZ
Robin November 12, 2020 at 3:43 PM
I currently live on N Campbell Station and yarnell. The fact that you want to allow a builder to purchase 64 acres of land and build 196 homes, which is close to 3 houses per acres is crazy. I watch wrecks and close to wrecks almost on a daily basis at the intersection of Campbell Station and Yarnell. Drivers honk and come to near misses and dart across the road when they no longer want to wait. With the schools and all the new subdivision already popping up on Campbell Station the road can no longer withstand the extra traffic safely and the fact that you want to rezone to allow even more houses. I have lived in my house most of my life and the valley once was a great place to live and now it is being eaten up for the profit for the builders.Robin November 12, 2020 at 3:43 PM
The schools which are new are already overcrowded. What is going to happen to relieve the pressure on the schools rezone and move people around again??
I also know I am a small person and dont have the money to dish out like the builders do. But I am wanting to at least be on the record that there is going to be a deadly accident at this intersection and I don't believe that anything outside of a red light will help this area at all.
I at least feel that I have spoken by mind and when the terrible happens I know I did what I could.
11-C-20-RZ
Mary November 12, 2020 at 3:55 PM
We obviously don’t have any capacity for that many more houses in the area without infrastructure improvements and the schools are already over capacity. With the 260 homes being built nearby on Marietta Church Rd., this is unbelievable what you are proposing. I take my life into my own hands just to cross the street and get my mail everyday!! Please!! Stop the overdevelopment!!Mary November 12, 2020 at 3:55 PM
11-C-20-RZ
Mistyn November 12, 2020 at 3:58 PM
This email is in regards to the continued growth of the Hardin valley area, particularly new subdivisions being proposed. I respectfully ask that this rezoning effort be stopped and the proposal be denied. The current traffic in Hardin Valley is heavy used and, being it is only 2 way roads, this poses safety concerns. The schools in Hardin valley are already busting at the seams and adding 200+ more families isn’t going to help in the short term. Also, having subdivisions that are cheaply made and so tightly compact does not add value, nor bolster the housing market of our beautiful community. Please let the infrastructure in Hardin valley catch up with the already overloaded systems. I would much rather see our community benefit from more public green spaces such as greenways connecting schools to neighborhoods, public pools and parks. Mistyn November 12, 2020 at 3:58 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Camara November 12, 2020 at 4:10 PM
I am writing you this email with my firm OBJECTION to two current requests for re-zoning in the Karns area on Zion Lane, off of Ball Rd.Camara November 12, 2020 at 4:10 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201112161055.pdf
11-C-20-RZ
Cheryl & Matt November 12, 2020 at 4:14 PM
My family and I recently moved to Hardin Valley after being out of state for ~2 years. I was shocked and surprised at the growth in the area but decided to move here because it is peaceful where we live. Cheryl & Matt November 12, 2020 at 4:14 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201112161401.pdf
11-C-20-RZ
Lynn November 12, 2020 at 4:15 PM
I am writing today to express my concerns and objection over the proposal of yet another new housing development in Hardin Valley. Lynn November 12, 2020 at 4:15 PM
Our once beautiful rural community is being eroded and transformed into a congested overpopulated municipality. The amount of homes crammed onto the tiniest of plots shows the greed of the builders. They are not concerned with the quality of life for the residents (new and current), but only the money lining their own pockets.
Our schools are already overflowing, medical appointments take weeks to schedule, grocery stores are crowded, traffic congestion is causing accidents, emergency services are being stretched. All this due to the crush of overpopulation in our area.
When do we start caring about the residents that are already here? Do we even matter anymore? I understand development is tied to progress, but when will it be enough? Is there not a compromise? Can development continue, but be slowed and limited? Please consider the long term impact another 196 homes will have on our already diminishing quality of life.
It is my hope that the concerns of the current Hardin Valley citizens are heard and are seriously considered in this decision.
Andrew
37931
37931
11-C-20-RZ
Andrew (37931), November 12, 2020 at 4:17 PM
I have been made aware of yet another plan for rezoning and development in the Hardin Valley area. As I understand it, the plan would bring nearly another 200 homes into the area. I would like to ask that you deny this proposal and deny any further requests for neighborhood development in this area. As a parent, I am painfully aware of how overcrowded the Hardin Valley schools are already and another neighborhood would only make it worse. For the last 2 years I have had a child in 1 of the portable buildings outside HVES. There are already more developments going in on Campbell Station Rd than that road should handle. Traffic in this area is already dangerous, aggravating, and dense. Please stop the development!Andrew (37931), November 12, 2020 at 4:17 PM
11-C-20-RZ
Nancy November 12, 2020 at 4:31 PM
Please say no to any future re-zoning in Hardin Valley for housing developments. The Solway/Hardin Valley community housing developments are outpacing the infrastructure in this area. Traffic congestion is outpacing the area that it was designed and intended for. Nancy November 12, 2020 at 4:31 PM
Nicole
37932
37932
11-C-20-RZ
Nicole (37932), November 12, 2020 at 4:33 PM
My family and I moved to Hardin Valley to get away from traffic and the over-development of the Western Avenue area. However, over the last three years, there has been non-stop construction in our part of Hardin Valley. I can honestly count six massive developments that have recently been built or are in the process of being built. All six of these are within a 1 to 4 mile radius from where I live.Nicole (37932), November 12, 2020 at 4:33 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201112163353.pdf
11-C-20-RZ
Lori November 12, 2020 at 4:34 PM
Please STOP rezoning this area and allowing builders to keep adding subdivisions. Our infrastructure cannot handle any more subdivisions... We already have WAY TOO MANY HOUSES which brings WAY TOO MANY CARS!!!Lori November 12, 2020 at 4:34 PM
Shannon
37938
37938
11-H-20-UR
Shannon (37938), November 12, 2020 at 5:35 PM
PLEASE allow this much needed facility to locate within the Halls Community. For the record, I DO have two grandchildren at Halls Elem. School; however, I fail to see how this facility will have ANY impact on being located across from the school. This facility is in line with several other commercial facilities around it. I don't think this facility will impact traffic because there will be minimal cars coming in/out of this facility. Patients of this facility are transported via a van and they are not allowed to have their own vehicles, so excess traffic should not be a consideration. I am familiar with JourneyPure (my late daughter worked there). They are just like any other business that we should welcome into our community. They are VERY community-conscience and will be an added benefit to our community. A few short years ago, the people that purchased the old Salem Baptist Church Building (which is my church) wanted to put a rehab facility there. The people that opposed this said it was a too RURAL, RESIDENTIAL setting. Now we have a rehab facility that wants to locate within a BUSINESS, COMMERCIAL setting and residents are opposed to that too. I humbly ask the commission to GRANT this request on behalf of JourneyPure.Shannon (37938), November 12, 2020 at 5:35 PM
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Leslie November 12, 2020 at 5:58 PM
I am writing with my firm OBJECTION to two current requests for rezoning.Leslie November 12, 2020 at 5:58 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201112155137.pdf
Marilynn
37931
37931
11-I-20-RZ
Marilynn (37931), November 12, 2020 at 6:16 PM
our interest in this area w/minimum 3 acres per home, was to "get away". we decided movingto an area that is more expensive than where we were gives us some breathing room... "ahhhhhhhhhh". helps preserve our sanity... truly!Marilynn (37931), November 12, 2020 at 6:16 PM
it was un-nerving to be so close to neighbors & hear sneezing, phone conversations, lawn mowerson top of us. we paid more... and the taxes are higher. but, as long as we can maintain our values,YOU all reap the revenue from the higher taxation.
you are the "fiduciaries" of our *home sweet homes* please consider minimizing the congestion.we need a buffer ! h e l l l l p p p !!!
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Chris November 13, 2020 at 12:19 PM
Today’s call on the Agricultural Rezoning of the lot on Zion Lane was nothing but smoke and mirrors. You had already decided in your agenda meeting that you were going to approve it per your YouTube video. Chris November 13, 2020 at 12:19 PM
This rezoning step was recommended by the commission to Angelic Ministries as a way to then go through the steps of use in review. The use in review was solely dependent on this agricultural review yet you treated the agricultural rezoning and independent decision with no reason to reject it.
If this were the case, why waste the time with the Oct postponement for AngelicMinistries to convince the neighbors of their use intent?
As you could see from the public comments that Angelic Ministries had zero luck in proving that the area would be safe for the community, no different than Halls.
I also would not call two subdivisions plus and additional 20 houses near Zion Lane low volume residency just because the hill behind is.
You have shown a conflict of interests when you do not put the community well being first.
The surrounding neighbors will continue to push against something that will degrade the sale value of our homes and the well-being of our families.
Chris Vallee865 567 0378Chris Vallee
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201113121931.pdf
Chris
37931
37931
9-A-20-RZ,11-F-20-UR
Chris (37931), November 13, 2020 at 6:41 PM
The decision to approve this agricultural rezoning independent of the review for use was not in the interest of the voice of the community.
Knowing that review for use was dependent on this rezoning and that the sole intent of the rezoning was to open the door for the “boarding house” request, and instructed by the commission to apply for, this act of saying there was no technical reason to deny it is a farce. Aside from the 2 members that attempted to reject it, the rest of the commission did not to their jobs and those that stated,”who knows what the use will be”, should be ashamed of themselves.
Everyone in the commission, at Angelic Ministries, and neighbors of Zion Lane know that this is not a boarding house. While it a drug rehab, there will be “boarders” that fall of the wagon, that will have emotional and behavior issues.... all being supervised by un certified glorified house parents. Chris (37931), November 13, 2020 at 6:41 PM
11-C-20-RZ,11-A-20-SP
Woody November 14, 2020 at 11:22 AM
The purpose of this email is to express my opposition to the rezoning of the reference partials of land listed above. Enough is enough when it comes to subdivisions in the Hardin Valley area. Traffic is now bad on Campbell Station Road and especially the intersection of Campbell Station and Yarnell Roads. We need a light or round-about there before any other residents move into this area. I live off Yarnell Road and have for 43 years. I have seen farm land taken over with subdivisions. This is okay in some incidents where the infrastructure can support it, but this is not the case in this incident.Woody November 14, 2020 at 11:22 AM
Please deny this rezoning request and confirm receipt of this email.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20220531T184844.pdf
11-C-20-RZ,11-A-20-SP
Patsy November 16, 2020 at 8:32 AM
Please consider STOPPING the planned Hardin Valley Rural Rezoning initiative in the referenced cases above for the following reasons:Patsy November 16, 2020 at 8:32 AM
1. There are currently nine large single family dwelling or apartment building initiatives in this area already. I'm all for progress, but this area has exploded without any increase in services or consideration for the current residents. These have already added to the congestion experienced in the Hardin Valley/Yarnell/Campbell Station area. The traffic has increased due to these large developments, not to mention having three school zones directly affected in this area.
a. Yarnell/Everett intersection
b. Campbell Station between Harden Valley & Yarnell
c. Four developments on Hardin Valley Road
d. Large apartment complex at Campbell Station and I-40
e. Yarnell between Campbell Station and Lovell
2. Road Congestion in the area already - It's impossible in the morning to cross Yarnell and Campbell Station. That intersection has been ignored for years, the current line painting project is abhorrent, and the roads don't even align, causing traffic issues. The discussions about making this a round-about have been largely ignored. The homeowner at this corner has tried to add a deterrent, but the road planners thwart his efforts, I guess they like having a mud pit instead of taking care of an issue. The road congestion on Hardin Valley is a disgrace. There was a large road project, at that time, it could have been made into 4 lanes, but instead, kept it at 2 lanes, when everyone knows this area is growing.
3. Services provided are strained or non-existent. It's rare to see these roads patrolled. The speeding on these roads are largely ignored, trucks are allowed to by- pass the weigh station and use these roads as a cut through. Now the roads are full of pot holes which aren't taken care of properly.
4. Negative Behavior increasing for drivers in this area
a. Speeding!!! The posted speed limit is ignored - sit a patrol car daily on Yarnell, the speeding needs to be controlled
b. Large trucks by-passing the scales on I-40, this is dangerous, they are speeding too, and this is destroying the roads. Again - if there are more developments approved, need to have Yarnell and Campbell Station patrolled DAILY!!
11-E-20-SP,11-M-20-RZ
Nelson November 16, 2020 at 12:06 PM
I have had an immediate interest in this property since I filed a complaint with Codes Enforcement, case# 20-Z01816, on august 24,2020 due to a large number of what appeared to be inoperable cars, trucks and a commercial tractor. It also appeared that some type vehicle repair operation was being conducted at this site that is zoned A. My complaint was investigated and a citation of violation was issued and the owner given 30 days to remove the vehicles, according to codes the owner was given an extension on 9/28 as progress was being made to remove the vehicles. On 10/27/2020 it was reported the owner had complied and the case was closed. This is not true as numerous vehicles are still on the property and no one lives at this address. This property has a long history of code violations going back to at least 2010 which you can review on Knox county codes website. Before I filed the complaint I checked with the Business license division and was informed that no business license has been issued to this address. There is some repair activity going on and when I mentioned this to Codes was told the business license was not their concern.Nelson November 16, 2020 at 12:06 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201116120650.pdf
Jacob
37912
37912
9-A-20-SU
Jacob (37912), November 20, 2020 at 1:00 AM
I'm a resident at 1204 Harmony Lane and noticed the knox planning sign at a vacant property on our street. After reviewing the special request and plan with the property, I am against this special request for a multi family home. There are multiple reasons for my choice; first: increased traffic down the street. I already have an issue with vehicles turning around in my driveway and degrading it. The increased traffic could lead to increased maintenance costs on my end. Next, I worry about lacking background checks and vetting of tenants: our street had a large issue with the previous residents of 1218 Harmony Lane dealing drugs. Ever since they moved out over a year ago, we've had zero issues with crime or suspicious individuals snooping on properties. Jacob (37912), November 20, 2020 at 1:00 AM
Lastly, the request of two driveways, and the size of the planned building, will be an eyesore on the street. This would be a large two-story building, and every other house on the street is a single-floor house. I feel that this will impact the value of all the houses on the street negatively. I've spoken to multiple neighbors on our street, and all are against this special use permit
Elizabeth
37922
37922
12-B-20-UR
Elizabeth (37922), November 21, 2020 at 8:51 AM
I am writing in response to an email I received titled "Preliminary Agenda Now Available." I read the MPC Agenda for 12/10/20, and 12-B-20-UR.Elizabeth (37922), November 21, 2020 at 8:51 AM
Where is the sign indicating the Use on Review hearing December 10, 2020, for 12-B-20-UR? I drive on Emory Church road almost daily and there's no posting!
If I understand correctly from what I could find online, 12-B-20-UR is a request for an increase in density previously approved for this property. Density negotiations for Westland Cove, Phase 1, are infamous! They started in 2013 and ended, after much controversy and litigation in 2016, with a huge increase from surrounding densities.
However, in 12-B-20-UR, I could not find a justification for requesting a further increase from the approved 72 units to the 96 units indicated in the drawings online.
If the justification is "need," it appears that, more than a year after completion, Phase 1 of this development is still less than 50% occupied. So need for additional housing at this location at this time is not applicable. Certainly, cramming a whole building with 24 ADDITIONAL units, and PARKING for those units, onto the HRPP buildable portion of this property is inappropriate.
I ask that the Knoxville/Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission deny Use on Review 12-B-20-UR.
Staff Reply:
The sign was posted on the property a little over a week ago.
The sign was posted on the property a little over a week ago.
12-B-20-UR
Wayne November 23, 2020 at 12:06 PM
Representing Westland West Homeowners AssociationWayne November 23, 2020 at 12:06 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201123120622.pdf
12-C-20-SU
Dee November 30, 2020 at 10:48 AM
I am hopeful for your consideration of our community on case 12-C-20-SU. When I decided to build my forever home in 2016 the decision was solely based on the community that was promised. I am now happy to be part of a neighborhood of friends who care for one another. Once again the structure of NTC is being challenged but this time the developer is asking that the PC (Planned Commercial) Zoning be removed with no details on what they propose. It is my understanding that the developer states this change is needed because the character of NTC has changed. Please know that the character of the residence at NTC, Bea Monde Subdivision, remains committed to the original plan as promised… a real community. We agreed to putting in Publix and a school as they would drive development allowing us to keep the core plan. They put in apartments to provide the density needed to support the core development. Dee November 30, 2020 at 10:48 AM
According to https://knoxmpc.org/commission/rezoning-process rezoning is justifiable when changes have occurred to conditions in the vicinity of the property which prevent the reasonable use of the property as currently zoned. Yes, the Covid-19 pandemic has affected many business owners, myself included. But the change in conditions isn’t just in the vicinity of NTC, it’s the entire country. Approving the removal of PC zoning with no future direction is not compliant with MPC rezoning requirements. The residents of this community are entitled to a promised future.
Chris
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Chris (37931), November 30, 2020 at 8:22 PM
This property is being petitioned for basically the same purpose as the last time it was brought before the commission and denied. Chris (37931), November 30, 2020 at 8:22 PM
Although many in the community would support use of it's prior use (Orphanage, Nursing Home), this property is not conducive to being a boarding house for adult men - recovering from substance addiction or otherwise that are trying to "get back on their feet".
There is no public transportation near this facility. There are no commercial enterprises within walking distance for employment opportunities. There are no grocery stores, pharmacy, or retail within walking distance. There is no pedestrian infrastructure on Ball Rd.
In summary, although I hope those in need are able to become productive citizens once again, I strongly feel the property in question is still ill suited for the proposed usage.
Please deny the request for this to become an adult male boarding house.
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Joe December 1, 2020 at 10:17 AM
It has come to my attention the Proposal 11-F-20-UR has been scheduled for review on 12/10. I am writing you to reiterate my strong objection to the approval of this proposal. The issues previously communicated to this body still stand as stark concerns of the community with a Boarding house being placed at Zion road. Please see attached.Joe December 1, 2020 at 10:17 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201201101732.pdf
Joseh
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Joseh (37931), December 1, 2020 at 10:24 AM
I am writing to voice serious concern with the notion of a boarding home facility being established at Zion roadMy concerns are documented more in-depth in the attached document, but high level they consist ofJoseh (37931), December 1, 2020 at 10:24 AM
1) No management or security plan has been given for public review and comment to establish that the safety of the surrounding communities will maintain their pre-facility levels
2) Safety is of paramount importance given the close proximity (less than a mile) of the proposed facility to schools and residences
3) Previously, the proposer indicated that such a facility is well served being in an inner city environment near major transit lines. How do they reconcile this with the facts that this location has neither
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201201102456.pdf
Stephanie
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Stephanie (37931), December 1, 2020 at 11:50 AM
I submitted a request to speak at the hearing. I wanted to clarify why I asked to speak, in hopes that it will clarify my request, and why I feel I have a unique position from my life experience. Stephanie (37931), December 1, 2020 at 11:50 AM
I've attached a PDF of my experience, and request to speak.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201201115033.pdf
Randall
37922
37922
12-C-20-SU
Randall (37922), December 1, 2020 at 12:27 PM
I object to the removal of the "planned development overlay" on this zoning project. I am an owner and resident of Northshore Town Center and made that decision several years ago specifically based upon the zoned plan in place at that time. Making this change now is significantly detrimental to the residents such as myself. Please re-consider. Randall (37922), December 1, 2020 at 12:27 PM
MaryJane
37931
37931
12-A-20-RZ
MaryJane (37931), December 1, 2020 at 12:37 PM
Please do not rezone this property. This is so beautiful for all families to enjoy this area with peaceful runs & walks for families, runners without over crowding. We need an area to continue to find some quiet peace & nature close to home & not over building. Please keep green for all people to enjoy. Thank you so much. MaryJane (37931), December 1, 2020 at 12:37 PM
12-F-20-UR
Bob December 1, 2020 at 3:51 PM
I am writing to make comment on a Use on Review evaluation for 28 Acres near Henderson Road and West Emory Road (12-F-20-UR). This preliminary plan for 112 dwellings on 28 acres will be discussed at the December Planning Commission meeting. Please see attached.Bob December 1, 2020 at 3:51 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201201155100.pdf
Rachel
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Rachel (37909), December 1, 2020 at 5:05 PM
As a resident of West Hills who lives very close to this proposed rezoning, I am very concerned about the potential impact of this rezoning on the greenway that passes through this area. This greenway is heavily used by the community and is a major asset to the existing neighborhood. This is used as a safe space for children to walk and ride bikes. My 7 year old son and I have used this green space nearly every day during the pandemic. If the road is extended and a new neighborhood is built, it will change the character of the greenway dramatically. Further, the trees between the existing St. Andrew's neighborhood and the interstate are vital for noise absorption and pollution reduction. Please dont remove our green space and tree buffer.Rachel (37909), December 1, 2020 at 5:05 PM
12-A-20-RZ
Diane December 1, 2020 at 7:52 PM
How sad to see that you are planning to take away another wooded area in west Knoxville! Between all the construction on Middlebrook Pike and a subdivision being built on Broome Road and other areas I’m not aware of, there is nowhere wildlife can live. Building apartments or homes along the Greenway between West Hills Baptist and West End Church of Christ is a terrible idea. Not only will wildlife be invaded, it is a well used quiet area to walk. There is seldom a time of the day that no one is walking, jogging, or biking. Please,please, please don’t invade another area with apartments or homes just to get tax money!Diane December 1, 2020 at 7:52 PM
Greg
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Greg (37931), December 2, 2020 at 6:27 AM
There are multiple reasons to deny the use request for this property. Primarily, the safety of scores of children which live (and play, wait for the school bus, etc) in the immediate surrounding neighborhood. Additionally, value (and associated property tax) of the many houses in the surrounding neighborhood will plummet, as I and others will be attempting to sell upon any approval of the approved use, and informed buyers will be reluctant to buy. In addition, the location is not near resources that the proposed residents of the property in question will need. We (myself and three additional residents at my address, of voting age) do not understand why the property could not be used for single family housing as is so very common in the surrounding area and is becoming even more prevelent, via the new house construction in the area. It is a high growth area right now. Please consider carefully this use request and deny it, as Knox County has many other locations that are far better suited for the proposed purpose.Greg (37931), December 2, 2020 at 6:27 AM
Kim
37931
37931
12-A-20-RZ
Kim (37931), December 2, 2020 at 7:44 AM
Please do not disrupt the greenway used by hundred of people. We have so many locations with unused buildings or underdeveloped property- we can surely be smarter about reusing underutilized space and not destroy our well loved greenways!Kim (37931), December 2, 2020 at 7:44 AM
Steven
37923
37923
12-A-20-RZ
Steven (37923), December 2, 2020 at 10:07 AM
My wife and I (and many others) use the greenway in this area. If the rezoning would result in the shrinking or elimination of that portion of the greenway, we'd be opposed to it. Greenways and greenspaces are a valuable part of any community and their loss would both diminish the appeal of the area and likely the property values of the nearby homes. Also, the schools in this area are at capacity. If new apartment buildings will be erected in this area, they will overcrowd the schools or necessitate another round of redistricting. Therefore, we are opposed to a zoning change in this area.Steven (37923), December 2, 2020 at 10:07 AM
Amanda
37923
37923
12-A-20-RZ
Amanda (37923), December 2, 2020 at 2:01 PM
Please do not rezone this land! I am a homeowner in the area and the apartments that are already here are not helping property values and are eyesores. The traffic through local residential neighborhoods continues to increase (crestwood hills and west hills) without regard for infrastructure or concern for residents. This is NOT a viable location for apartments! Amanda (37923), December 2, 2020 at 2:01 PM
Anna
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Anna (37909), December 2, 2020 at 2:41 PM
Please keep the green way. It is widely used by people. Anna (37909), December 2, 2020 at 2:41 PM
George
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
George (37909), December 2, 2020 at 2:46 PM
I am very opposed to this proposed development. It seems as if this will disrupt/destroy the greenway that runs through that area. This is a highly used greenway and it would be terrible to have it destroyed for an office park. This is especially true given the uncertain future of work once the current pandemic is behind us. More and more employers are realizing that physical office space represents an unnecessary cost. It is not certain whether Knoxville is in need of more commercial office space. If you glance at the Knoxville commercial realty landscape, there are ample vacancies in the current supply of office space. Why destroy an untouched space to build an office park that will largely sit vacant? In other areas of the city (e.g., South Knoxville), we are prioritizing untouched natural areas. Why is this not considered in West Knoxville, where these types of locations are becoming increasingly rare?George (37909), December 2, 2020 at 2:46 PM
Personally, I run on this greenway - and past this exact area - multiple times a week. The presence of this greenway and West Hills park were a huge consideration in purchasing my home. So this proposed development would have a huge impact on me and I do not want to see it come into fruition.
Tammy
3790
3790
12-A-20-RZ
Tammy ( 3790), December 2, 2020 at 3:49 PM
Please keep greenway green!!!! Please do not take it away!Tammy ( 3790), December 2, 2020 at 3:49 PM
Nance
37923
37923
12-A-20-RZ
Nance (37923), December 2, 2020 at 4:11 PM
Please keep this greenway GREEN & SERENE!My vote is to reject rezoning for an apartment complex.Nance (37923), December 2, 2020 at 4:11 PM
12-A-20-RZ
Walter December 2, 2020 at 4:46 PM
Saw that there was an upcoming vote about some rezoning near the greenway in West hills near the church of Christ . I would really hate to see that developed for condos or office buildings. After all , they are called greenways not sidewalks for condos . I actually saw two deer last week in the woods there. I would bet Wanda Moody , who it is named for , would not approve of a change that would allow development.Walter December 2, 2020 at 4:46 PM
Amy
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Amy (37909), December 2, 2020 at 4:52 PM
That area is heavily wooded and helps protect the neighborhood from the noise of the interstate. It also keeps down the traffic and the area proposed certainly doesn't need more traffic. The road infrastructure is not built to handle an increase in traffic and the area is already above TDOT noise ordinance standards without taking down trees and increasing traffic. While Knoxville certainly needs more housing, housing complexes out West are not in the price range of affordability for the population that needs housing the most.Amy (37909), December 2, 2020 at 4:52 PM
Elizabeth
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Elizabeth (37909), December 2, 2020 at 5:24 PM
Please keep the greenway green. No apartments. Stop Oliver Smith. Yes Elizabeth (37909), December 2, 2020 at 5:24 PM
Eileen
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Eileen (37909), December 2, 2020 at 10:59 PM
This community is lovingly settled around this greenway. We all enjoy it and get great use of it year round. There are plenty of residences here. We do not need less recreational space. Eileen (37909), December 2, 2020 at 10:59 PM
Cynthia
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Cynthia (37909), December 2, 2020 at 11:53 PM
One of the main reasons my husband and I bought out “empty nest” house in West Hills three years ago was to be near the greenway. The easy access to the greenway and West Hills Park is a huge benefit for residents of nearby neighborhoods. I ride my bike 4-5 times per week from my house on Sheffield to the Peters Rd terminus of the Greenway then back to Wesley Rd. I see many of the same families every day. I would certainly hope that this proposed development would not affect the existing greenway in any way. Losing any piece of this very popular segment of the greenway would a shame. Please consider this as you make your decisions. Cynthia (37909), December 2, 2020 at 11:53 PM
Ashley
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Ashley (37909), December 3, 2020 at 5:47 AM
Absolutely not in favor. Please leave alone the natural beauty of this area. These luxury apartments will do not favors to the crowded, heavily trafficked cut throughs we face on Marlboro, Cortland, Winston..... There are many of places that need rehabbed in this city. Go tear down the many dumps along Middle Brooke or KP and start there, not along a beautiful green space. Ashley (37909), December 3, 2020 at 5:47 AM
Bryan
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Bryan (37909), December 3, 2020 at 6:04 AM
The stretch of greenway that this would effect is some of the most scenic and beautiful areas in our entire city. To wipe out all of that to put another apartment complex in would be terrible for our city, our parks, and the people that live here. The current volume of apartments that are unoccupied in that area would dictate we won't need another apartment complex in this space.Bryan (37909), December 3, 2020 at 6:04 AM
Keep Knoxville Scruff!
Kathleen
d 379
d 379
12-A-20-RZ
Kathleen (d 379), December 3, 2020 at 6:18 AM
The greenway is a vital part of the West Hills neighborhood. My kiddos have learned to ride their bikes there, it is always full of neighbors finding a little peace in nature, and I really can’t imagine if it was destroyed in any way by the construction. Please, talk a walk or bike ride through that part and see how beautiful and calm it is. Apartments or office buildings butting right up to it would destroy a special part of our neighborhood. Kathleen (d 379), December 3, 2020 at 6:18 AM
Brooke
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Brooke (37909), December 3, 2020 at 7:11 AM
We want to keep this area a greenway and walking trail for our families. Leave our west hills neighborhood and park alone!Brooke (37909), December 3, 2020 at 7:11 AM
Adam
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Adam (37909), December 3, 2020 at 8:08 AM
Please consider keeping this property as is. It is a great stretch of peaceful greenway which many people utilize on a very regular basis. This particular stretch of greenway provides a great peaceful natural refuge from an otherwise busy stretch of Knoxville. Destroying this section of greenway for further development would only add to the traffic madness near that area of Walker Springs. Adam (37909), December 3, 2020 at 8:08 AM
Jeanne
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Jeanne (37909), December 3, 2020 at 9:53 AM
I grew up in West Hills and moved back to raise my family in West Hills 7 years ago. I remember being in elementary school at West Hills when they expanded the greenway so we could ride our bikes and venture even further on the paved trail. We were so thrilled! My 2 daughters, ages 3 and 7, both learned to ride their own bikes on the West Hills greenway 25 years later! As a family we walk, ride, scoot and stroll the greenway at least twice a week! Losing this space would be devastating to my family. The West Hills greenway and park has become a staple of our community and should remain unchanged! Thank you for your consideration in this matter.Jeanne (37909), December 3, 2020 at 9:53 AM
Jan
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Jan (37909), December 3, 2020 at 11:48 AM
I cannot imagine our lovely greenway being disrupted by adjacent apartment buildings. This greenway is a beautiful, peaceful respite from the pavement, parking lots, traffic all through west Knoxville. I urge you to reject approval for this construction and allow NATURE to have a small sanctuary in our neighborhood. We have already seen an increase of deer, Fox and coyotes in West Hills since the construction of the Tennova facility on Middlebrook Pike. Removing these trees and undergrowth will further limit their habitats. And, even more important, these stands of trees and vegetation provide a natural sound barrier between our neighborhood and the I-40/I-75 corridor. No concrete wall offers the esthetics of natural vegetation. Our lovely West Hills area has already lost more than was necessary to noisy, interstate traffic. Enough!Jan (37909), December 3, 2020 at 11:48 AM
Chelsea
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Chelsea (37909), December 3, 2020 at 12:48 PM
I am opposed to this development as a resident of West Hills and a regular user of the beautiful greenway. I think the greenway is a huge asset to our community and to mess with it and the nature around it will certainly devalue it. In addition traffic has already increased during my time living in this area I cannot imagine what adding even more will do. I think we should do a better job utilizing unused or underutilized apartments building/office spaces instead of developing greenspace that is well loved by those throughout the Knoxville community.Chelsea (37909), December 3, 2020 at 12:48 PM
Jennifer
37931
37931
12-A-20-RZ
Jennifer (37931), December 3, 2020 at 1:19 PM
I used to live in the apartment complex right next to this proposed site. It was such a nice getaway when I could use the amazing Knoxville greenway system to access green areas and some quiet spaces. It's disgusting that building another complex at the proposed sire would even be considered. Please allow area residents to continue to have a SMALL area of refugee in the midst of an already jam-packed West Knoxville.Jennifer (37931), December 3, 2020 at 1:19 PM
Sean
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Sean (37909), December 3, 2020 at 1:51 PM
Green spaces are just as important to the residents as businesses are important for tax revenue. In an ever expanding concrete city. We need to relish and enjoy the green ways that are in place. Currently this greenway is a link from the Bearden/west hills area to those areas I consider west. One can get all the way to Lovell rd on greenways, I’ve been told. I personally have not tried that. What ever development is to be developed should first off be aesthetically pleasing to the area it is in. Get away from the Walmart look of commercialism. Take in the beauty of East Tennessee, the small town feel and charm and incorporate the green way into the new development with native plants to attract birds and building with character, maybe a little mountain town type character for the valley. Keep the greenway. For the next generations. Sean (37909), December 3, 2020 at 1:51 PM
Kayla
37923
37923
12-A-20-RZ
Kayla (37923), December 3, 2020 at 5:40 PM
The connection of the greenway from West Hills church to West Hills park is very important to the preservation of the landscape, and is essential for so many people. By taking away the forest separating the greenway and the highway, you lose a piece of Knoxville for profit. The nature brings out the best of Knoxville; a steady hike while gaining a sense of community. The highlight of my day is taking an hour to get out of the house and stroll down that path, sometimes extending it into the park. It would be a shame to take away such an important part of this community to give it away to a company that is not concerned about preserving the habitat. Kayla (37923), December 3, 2020 at 5:40 PM
Jack
37922
37922
12-B-20-UR
Jack (37922), December 3, 2020 at 10:23 PM
In this request John Huber seeks a use on review in a PR zone for 96 apartment units on the west side of Emory Church Road. The PR zoning of Huber's property on both sides of Emory Church Road does not allow more than 72 additional units. See detailed comments and two attachments.Jack (37922), December 3, 2020 at 10:23 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201203222324.pdf
Jack
37922
37922
12-B-20-UR
Jack (37922), December 3, 2020 at 10:26 PM
Map showing location of two undeveloped properties sold by Huber from the PR zone in 2016Jack (37922), December 3, 2020 at 10:26 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201203222633.pdf
Jack
37922
37922
12-B-20-UR
Jack (37922), December 3, 2020 at 10:28 PM
Plat showing calculated acreage above the 820 contour of property in the PR zone sold by Huber in 2016Jack (37922), December 3, 2020 at 10:28 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201203222844.pdf
Barbara
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Barbara (37909), December 4, 2020 at 10:00 AM
The greenway upon which this backs up is one of West Knoxville's lovely attractions. It should not be allow to ruin this . This project will definitely detract from this wonderful asset.Barbara (37909), December 4, 2020 at 10:00 AM
Jack
37922
37922
12-B-20-UR
Jack (37922), December 4, 2020 at 10:30 AM
Attached is the Tennessee Court of Appeals decision, Benson v. Knox County (2016) discussed in the staff report.Jack (37922), December 4, 2020 at 10:30 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201204103012.pdf
Nick
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Nick (37909), December 4, 2020 at 1:24 PM
I live in Saint Andrews subdivision. Before you lies a proposal to rezone Parcel 120HC06, recorded as The Offices at Saint Andrews at 8300 East Walker Springs Ln on KGIS. This is a property that’s been zoned Office Park for over 3 decades and directly abuts our wonderful neighborhood. Nick (37909), December 4, 2020 at 1:24 PM
I, Nick Jackson, as well as the residents of Saint Andrews neighborhood ask you to do the right thing and vote NO to this rezoning. It’s the wrong decision, and would be done solely to benefit the developer at the expense of our entire neighborhood and hundreds of tax paying Knoxvillians. It is zoned office park for good reason, and is the only reasonable use of that land given the constraints around it. MPC should not and cannot allow developers to change zoning and eliminate all buffers to Saint Andrews (SA). This is a lovely area and has been here for 20+ years. The neighborhood is an asset to the City and is a veritable small 4th and Gill environment right off the West Town exit. These are the environments you should be cultivating and protecting. Make no mistake about it – a dense apartment complex will destroy Saint Andrews Subdivision as it exists today and adversely affect the entire area.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201204132407.pdf
Josh
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Josh (37909), December 4, 2020 at 1:52 PM
Please keep our greenways green! I live in West Hills and run/walk/bike this greenway several times per week, along with my family. This is one of the few 'green' places left in our area. There are actually deer who live in that area - you can see them most mornings grazing around West End Church of Christ. I love where I live -- we need less development, and more areas like this lot along our greenways. Building here will only take away from the appeal of this area, and make the traffic in an already-congested area worse. Please do not develop this green space.Josh (37909), December 4, 2020 at 1:52 PM
Will
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Will (37909), December 4, 2020 at 2:15 PM
Please do not rezone the land under review today. The greenway that goes through West Hills is beautiful and used by so many people right now. If the zoning is changed it would rob us of the nature we get to experience on the greenway. We have so many wonderful trees and great animal life through that section of the greenway. It also provides a buffer from the sound of the interstate and existing homes, not to mention the greenway. I understand that we need to provide enough adequate housing for folks in our city, but please do not change the zoning of the land in question. Will (37909), December 4, 2020 at 2:15 PM
Richard
37919
37919
12-A-20-RZ
Richard (37919), December 4, 2020 at 3:06 PM
Please do not rezone the land that is being reviewed. The West Hills greenway is beautiful and used by many many many people, including singles, families, adults, children, and their pets. For many it's the only green space left they can enjoy. Richard (37919), December 4, 2020 at 3:06 PM
The land and greenery also form a buffer that insulates residents and visitors from the sound of the traffic and residential life.
12-SA-20-C
Linda December 4, 2020 at 3:25 PM
I am writing in opposition to the Woodbury Crossing proposal by the Woda group in Edwards Place subdivision. On the surface this proposal appears to be exactly what what we asked for, but it is far from a fully fleshed out plan.Linda December 4, 2020 at 3:25 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201204152515.pdf
12-A-20-RZ
Hiram December 4, 2020 at 3:36 PM
I am opposed to the proposal File # 12-A-20-RZ to rezone the portion of West Hills from OP (Office Park) to RN-6 (Multi-Family Residential Neighborhood). The addition of 216 new apartments and 5300 average vehicle trips per day will be a burden on the West Hills neighborhood and a detriment to those living there now.Hiram December 4, 2020 at 3:36 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201204153607.pdf
Lynn
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Lynn (37909), December 4, 2020 at 4:47 PM
I am 100% against commercial construction within or close to this greenway zone. From a community perspective, this greenway provides nature within the city and county. It is important for the community to have easy access to nature on a daily basis. From a personal perspective, one year ago I purchased my home within walking distance of this greenway. I do not have the budget to purchase a secluded home surrounded by nature, but I do have the budget to purchase a home in the city close to this greenway. This angers me that a developer takes precedence over the desires of the community. I am tired of the rich getting richer while the middle class disappears. There are plenty of locations available within Knox County that do not disturb the community. PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE RN-5. Lynn (37909), December 4, 2020 at 4:47 PM
12-20-SA-C
Hannah December 4, 2020 at 7:56 PM
My name is Hannah Berry, and my family owns the home at 7709 Edwards place blvd. I would like to start this email with why we purchased our home. We purchased our 2698sqft home because we have 4 children.. 4 children who love everything about our neighborhood.. from what we as a neighborhood have collected this proposal is really no different than offered before but Single family RENTALS... in a neighborhood where we have all BOUGHT our homes. We have worked so hard to be able to provide for our families and now are getting all our hopes for our neighborhood taken away.Hannah December 4, 2020 at 7:56 PM
We sincerely ask for you to deny the proposal of Woodbury crossing in Edwards Place Subdivisions. We continue with the same request of purchasable homes being built to complete our neighborhood.
12-A-20-UR,12-SA-20-C
Misty December 4, 2020 at 11:54 PM
Thank you for the opportunity to contact you as a resident of Edwards Place in Corryton. We residents have many unanswered questions that we respectfully ask for you as commissioners to request answers to on our behalf, as we have been unsuccessful in obtaining answers from the developer.Misty December 4, 2020 at 11:54 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201204235446.pdf
12-A-20-UR
Katrina December 5, 2020 at 12:14 AM
Please see attachedKatrina December 5, 2020 at 12:14 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201205001442.pdf
12-A-20-UR
Chris December 5, 2020 at 7:49 AM
Thank you for this opportunity to reach out to you and address the development of our community. As we all emailed in the spring and early summer we are middle class families that work hard, take pride in our homes, and enjoy the small town feel of Corryton.Chris December 5, 2020 at 7:49 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201205074917.pdf
12-SA-20-C
Robert December 5, 2020 at 2:48 PM
Please see attachedRobert December 5, 2020 at 2:48 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201205144840.pdf
12-A-20-RZ
Cheryl December 5, 2020 at 3:40 PM
Please don’t build apartments at the 3600 Walker Springs. It will be too close to the green way walking area. My friends and I walk this area all the time. It will distract from the beauty of the area. Perhaps build offices or something less intrusive than apartments.Cheryl December 5, 2020 at 3:40 PM
Chris
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Chris (37931), December 5, 2020 at 4:24 PM
This is to be a “residential” home of up to 12 residents plus 2 staff members to provide “support for people getting back on their feet”. Note that this facility can physically hold more than the 14 listed above. If this property is approved to operate, this would open the door for men that have been unable to establish residence due to previous drug/alcohol dependency (with many just getting through detox and now self-medicating), required to be on under a 24/7 supervised program by the criminal system, currently on parole, current behavior and mental issues, and in all cases in need of structured supervision.These residents are often referred by criminal systems or other avenues to work on goals to assist in re-entering society. By Angelic Ministries’ own admission, this facility will provide an environment for men who are not currently able to rejoin the community on their own and not ready to live in Angelic Ministries own unsupervised homes.Chris (37931), December 5, 2020 at 4:24 PM
The residents will not be physically confined to the property. The requirement to stay in the 24/7 Angelic Ministries Self-Created Supervised Program is by agreement and contract only. While it will be fenced in and alarms set up, this will in no way ensure residents that could have a physical or mental breakdown during their stay will be confined and not end up in the surrounding Karns’ neighborhoods.
Ann
37923
37923
12-A-20-RZ
Ann (37923), December 5, 2020 at 5:57 PM
This land should not be re-zoned. Currently it holds a greenway and park areas that are used daily by hundreds of locals. My husband and I personally use the area to walk our dogs. Especially during this pandemic, being outdoors and having access to the area has been vital to our mental health and I’m sure to the mental health of many others in the area. Don’t take away our greenway!Ann (37923), December 5, 2020 at 5:57 PM
Jewl
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Jewl (37909), December 5, 2020 at 6:02 PM
To all whom it concerns,Jewl (37909), December 5, 2020 at 6:02 PM
It is of great concern that this area in West Hills which is zoned as corporate is now being considered for an apartment complex: West HIlls and specifically St. Andrews, a small church, and the greenway border this area which is enjoyed by all of the city. An apartment complex would greatly reduce safety, decrease property value, and greatly increase noise from I-40, all reducing the enjoyment of hundreds of people who currently use this area!
Also, West Hills people have not been properly informed!
Please consider turning down or at least postponing this proposition!
Ernest
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Ernest (37909), December 5, 2020 at 6:22 PM
The proposal is very new to several of the residents that would be affected. The decision should be postponed. Ernest (37909), December 5, 2020 at 6:22 PM
Pamela
37921
37921
12-A-20-RZ
Pamela (37921), December 5, 2020 at 6:32 PM
Keep the greenway GREEN AND SERENE!!Pamela (37921), December 5, 2020 at 6:32 PM
Erwin
37932
37932
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Erwin (37932), December 5, 2020 at 9:48 PM
See attached PDF for this message.Erwin (37932), December 5, 2020 at 9:48 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201205214837.pdf
12-SA-20-C,12-A-20-UR
Nick December 5, 2020 at 10:54 PM
Good evening. I am writing you this evening to voice my concerns and objections over this proposal. Nick December 5, 2020 at 10:54 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201205225409.pdf
Joshua December 6, 2020 at 8:53 AM
Katie
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Katie (37909), December 6, 2020 at 9:24 AM
The Greenway adjacent to this property is a valuable resource to the community. As a family, we walk this past frequently, it is close to the park and Y, and provides a much needed natural and physically active outlet for many members of the community in a centrally located space. Its lose would be detrimental to Knoxville, and as a result, I request that you reject the rezoning proposal. Katie (37909), December 6, 2020 at 9:24 AM
Lisa
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Lisa (37909), December 6, 2020 at 12:49 PM
I request that you vote NO to the File # 12-A-20-RZ to rezone the portion of West Hills from OP (Office Park) to RN-6 (Multi-Family Residential Neighborhood). I have checked the information provided for the Planning Commission meeting concerning this rezoning, and I do not see a storm water analysis for the proposed building area. My home and several homes in Saint Andrews have had some flooding issues this past year due to the overgrowth of the retention area between Saint Andrews and the proposed building site. I would like to see what the city/county recommends that the developer do prior to build/during build/after the build for storm water runoff. This is especially important to me because of our current issues with water flow during storms and stagnant water during the summer months (mosquitos). The developer does not have a good history of following through on his promises - including using this property for an office complex only. I am also concerned with destroying greenspace, the buffer for noise from I40, and the large volume of traffic that this RN-6 rezoning will add to the West Hills/North Gallaher View area.Lisa (37909), December 6, 2020 at 12:49 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201206124931.pdf
Janis
37923
37923
12-A-20-RZ
Janis (37923), December 6, 2020 at 1:16 PM
I am against this rezoning. I often walk the greenway path and appreciate the serenity it provides. In addition I feel it would cause major traffic problems due to the close proximity of the I40 exit ramp, Walbrook Drive, Sam’s entrance and East Walker Springs Lane. Please vote no. Janis (37923), December 6, 2020 at 1:16 PM
Kris
37919
37919
12-A-20-RZ
Kris (37919), December 6, 2020 at 2:31 PM
We love to walk at this trail because it is a central location, quiet & secluded & is safe. Please don't force us to find somewhere else to walk. We need this trail to remain as it is.Kris (37919), December 6, 2020 at 2:31 PM
Katherine
37923
37923
12-A-20-RZ
Katherine (37923), December 6, 2020 at 4:33 PM
Please do not rezone this area to add apartments. The development would encroach on the greenway that many residents in the area use. It has become clear, especially during this year, that the greenway sees a lot of use and folks take enjoyment from being able to walk safely through the area and enjoy a little bit of nature and peace close to home. The development will add too much to the noise and traffic that are not needed. Please do not allow this area to be rezoned or developed.Katherine (37923), December 6, 2020 at 4:33 PM
12-SA-20-C,12-A-20-UR
Tiffaney December 6, 2020 at 5:11 PM
I along with many other residents in Edwards Place Subdivision have reached out to Woda Cooper Companies and have yet to receive any information from them regarding their plans for the development in the back of our subdivision. If they are proposing single-dwelling rental homes we oppose these for multiple reasons. We are concerned about the property value of our homes due to the rental properties not being kept up as well as owner-occupied homes. We are concerned with the proposal of having the homes so packed in. As a mother, I am also extremely concerned about the amount of traffic we already have in our subdivision. Adding this many homes and not having a second entrance would be extremely dangerous for not only our children who want to play and be kids but also the residents who enjoy exercising in our neighborhood.Tiffaney December 6, 2020 at 5:11 PM
Please deny the proposal of Woodbury Crossing.
12-SA-20-C,12-A-20-UR
Matthew December 6, 2020 at 5:17 PM
I along with many other residents in Edwards Place Subdivision have reached out to Woda Cooper Companies and have yet to receive any information from them regarding their plans for the development in the back of our subdivision. If they are proposing single-dwelling rental homes we oppose these for multiple reasons. We are concerned about the property value of our homes due to the rental properties not being kept up as well as owner-occupied homes. We are concerned with the proposal of having the homes so packed in. As a father, I am also extremely concerned about the amount of traffic we already have in our subdivision. Adding this many homes and not having a second entrance would be extremely dangerous for not only our children who want to play and be kids but also the residents who enjoy exercising in our neighborhood.Matthew December 6, 2020 at 5:17 PM
Please deny the proposal of Woodbury Crossing.
Shauna
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Shauna (37931), December 6, 2020 at 7:40 PM
I oppose the approval of this facility! We have young children and live less than a mile away from the proposed location. I worked for the Department of Corrections in Virginia for many years and am fully aware of the high recidivism rate and potential impact on the surrounding community such a facility may present. Shauna (37931), December 6, 2020 at 7:40 PM
12-SA-20-C
Julie December 6, 2020 at 7:47 PM
I am a current homeowner and resident in Edward’s Place subdivision in Corryton. I have been informed that Woda Company have proposed rental homes to be built on the property next to our neighborhood. I oppose this development because when I purchased my home, I was informed that other single family homes like mine were to be developed on that property. Most of us in this neighborhood bought in this subdivision as an investment and this proposal affects it greatly.Julie December 6, 2020 at 7:47 PM
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Shauna December 6, 2020 at 7:49 PM
I have recently been made aware of of a proposed facility/boarding home that may be approved less than a mile from my home. I have young children and have very serious concerns with this type of residence being established so close to our home. I worked in Corrections for many years and while I understand many people are able to recover and overcome their past, many are not. It is inappropriate to put such a facility within walking distance of so many children and families. Please let me know what further actions I can take to prevent the passing of this proposal.Shauna December 6, 2020 at 7:49 PM
12-SA-20-C
John December 6, 2020 at 8:21 PM
I am writing you in concern over houses being built behind the houses on Forest Willow Lane in Corryton, TN. My name is John Scanlon and I live on 7142 Forest Willow Lane, and I have great concerns with the houses being built behind there. I am concerned with the 79 houses being built there. I fear this is a plan to put as many houses as possible there and get out for the quick buck. This is not what is best for that land. It designed for families to thrive and flourish. It will increase traffic to an already busy neighborhood. From the construction process to the houses being finished, it will cause great stress and frustration to the residents of our neighborhood. I would urge you to not approve this proposal, and look out for the residents of Edwards Place Subdivision.John December 6, 2020 at 8:21 PM
12-SA-20-C
Kaitlyn December 6, 2020 at 8:26 PM
I am a mother, resident and educator living in Edwards Place Subdivision. I would like to appeal to the commission to ask that you don't approve the current proposal for the remaining tract of our development. Once again, the developers have little concern for the safety of our children. They are proposing to add 79 lots to the back of the development without adding an additional exit or entryway. This is not safe for my boys, ages 6, 4 and 2 who play outside continously rain, shine, warm or cold. Kaitlyn December 6, 2020 at 8:26 PM
In addition, on one part of the plan there are 6 lots backing up to one lot in the Forest Willow Lane cul de sac. This informs us that the new lots will be small and will not continue the continuity of the development that we bought into. As owners, we really would like the rest of the develop to reflect similar single family homes that are consistent with the rest of the subdivision.
Lastly, I cannot stress enough that traffic in and around the Gibbs schools is already at its limit. Adding 79 lots is not feasible, nor is it fair to the community at so many levels. As an educator, I am concerned with school capacity as well when the dwellings are so compact and built to squeeze in as many families as possible instead of allowing for bigger yards and housing. As such my family appeals to you to continue to consider the bigger picture of the community at large and how developers who have little regard for the citizens affect us all.
We trust your discretion and wisdom in this matter.
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Richard December 6, 2020 at 8:31 PM
I encourage you and the Planning Commission to put a hold on this project until proper neighborhood meetings, including question and answer sessions, can be held. I ask this on behalf of my grandchildren who live near the facility.Richard December 6, 2020 at 8:31 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201206203138.pdf
Kim
37921
37921
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Kim (37921), December 6, 2020 at 8:31 PM
I’m a current volunteer at an organization called HAND UP FOR WOMEN and also have a son that was in the program at TRUE PURPOSE but unfortunately he didn’t complete the program. I know that programs like these can have make a wonderful difference for not only one person but generations down that family line. I understand the concerns of the people in the Karns community but I also feel if they could work together with the people that are going to be overseeing this program their fears might subside. Kim (37921), December 6, 2020 at 8:31 PM
People need a place to rest their hearts and minds when they are battling demons and a nice safe, secure environment is beneficial toward success. I’ve seen firsthand how much of a productive member of society they can be. They could contribute to the Karns community by keeping the trash picked up, maybe building a park in area, etc. In these programs they are taught to serve others and how to take their eyes off theirselves.
Please approve the Zion Men’s boardinghouse project. I would love and welcome something like this in the 37921 zip code.
Janet
37849
37849
12-E-20-UR
Janet (37849), December 6, 2020 at 9:12 PM
Due to the congestion and heavy traffic on W. Emory Road and Carpenter Road, as well as the dangerous curve located at the intersection of Blacksferry and Emory, it seems careless to allow this increased volume of traffic to be added in this location. I would strongly ask the zoning board to consider decreasing the number of houses built to 3 per acre unless there are plans to add a traffic light at Carpenter and Emory. Janet (37849), December 6, 2020 at 9:12 PM
And most importantly, please do not allow an entrance from the new development directly on to Emory road as that is a very dangerous curve with poor visibility. Thank you.
Bryan and Ashlee
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Bryan and Ashlee (37909), December 6, 2020 at 9:39 PM
Please see attached letter.Bryan and Ashlee (37909), December 6, 2020 at 9:39 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201206213942.pdf
12-SA-20-C
blake December 6, 2020 at 9:55 PM
The neighborhood has reached out to The Woda Cooper Companies for more information on their plans, but we have not heard back from them. I'm writing this under the assumption that their plan is for managed rental properties behind our subdivision, which as a resident of this neighborhood I am opposed to. My wife and I bought into this neighborhood three and half years ago with a vision of the subdivision being completed with similar homes to ours. I don't see how rental properties are going to fit in that vision, nor do I think having a subdivision inside another subdivision makes sense. I am not opposed to rental properties or even apartments in our area, but I don't think they belong in an existing subdivision whose residents didn't buy into that vision. I ask that you deny any development plans that would go against what the subdivision already has established, which are single family homes that are owned.blake December 6, 2020 at 9:55 PM
Summer
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Summer (37931), December 6, 2020 at 10:27 PM
I am against the men’s home going in. I am all for helping people but not when my children would be steps away! Summer (37931), December 6, 2020 at 10:27 PM
12-A-20-RZ
Jennifer December 7, 2020 at 12:29 AM
Thank you for your service to our community. I know you are busy and I will keep this short.Jennifer December 7, 2020 at 12:29 AM
I am writing regarding the hearing to rezone 8300 E. Walker Springs Lane / Parcel ID 120 H C 061. The week of Thanksgiving we received a postcard about rezoning. In case you have not had the opportunity to personally look at the land, I have included pictures that show the reality for my family if this rezoning is approved. It will mean apartments could be in my backyard (see proposed diagram below), nearly literally, and seen from my kitchen sink. We have lived in Saint Andrews since 2010 and always anxiously awaited when Mr. Smith would build office space, which also creates concerns, but apartments will have a much greater negative impact on our daily life. Apartments would not be appropriate here, they just do not fit in. The space has been zoned for offices since 2004 and there are no good reasons for a change now. I understand this is inconvenient for Mr. Smith with the pandemic hurting office space development but an apartment complex directly behind a beautifully established neighborhood is not right.
Please vote No. I greatly appreciate your thoughtful consideration.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201207002952.pdf
Darren
37919
37919
12-A-20-RZ
Darren (37919), December 7, 2020 at 8:53 AM
I run the greenway in this area every morning and it is so beautiful and serene, I would hate for anything to change.Darren (37919), December 7, 2020 at 8:53 AM
12-A-20-RZ
Leslie December 7, 2020 at 9:08 AM
I live in West Hills and I speak for at least a dozen families who all oppose rezoning. Please help protect our neighborhood.Thank you.Leslie December 7, 2020 at 9:08 AM
Staff
12-A-20-RZ
Staff Notes
December 7, 2020 at 9:19 AM
The applicant has applied for a rezoning for RN-6 zoning at this location. The differences between the residential zone districts can be reviewed here in the Knoxville Zoning Ordinance - https://library.municode.com/tn/knoxville/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=APXBZOCO_ART4RENEDIStaff Notes
December 7, 2020 at 9:19 AM
Staff is recommending RN-5, rather than RN-6 at this location because RN-5 has a 35' feet height limitation. The greenway is an easement across the property and will remain on the property for the community to use, a rezoning does not eliminate the greenway.
staff
11-B-20-OB
Mary December 7, 2020 at 9:22 AM
We are writing on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Knoxville/Knox County, which has more than 200 members from throughout the county. The League has long supported procedures that enable informed citizen participation in government decision-making. The change proposed in item 11-B-20-OB is an important improvement in this regard, and it also will contribute to efficient decision-making.Mary December 7, 2020 at 9:22 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201207092254.pdf
Nick
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Nick (37909), December 7, 2020 at 9:30 AM
Please find attached a summary of my talking points for Thu Dec 10 meeting. I ask that these be distributed to voting PC members before Tuesday's agenda review meeting. These cover the many issues with this proposal and why we feel MPC should vote no to the rezoning. They include the complete absence of any public input or review of all these obvious impacts, inconsistencies with MPC code and our disagreement with staff recommendation that there the amendment "shall not adversely affect any other part of the city or surrounding properties. In addition, please note the comment that during Mr Smith's 2004 rezoning of same property to Office he stated an Apartment Complex would not be in the best interest of Saint Andrews.Nick (37909), December 7, 2020 at 9:30 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201207093046.pdf
11-B-20-OB
Kim December 7, 2020 at 10:26 AM
I would like to state my support of the amendment proposed to Article III. Section 9.B to streamline discussion and debate on items, and to continue to allow consideration of all views. Applicants will be required to provide comments first, followed by proponents, and then opponents. Commission may still grant time for rebuttal for anyone speaking on an item.Kim December 7, 2020 at 10:26 AM
I have included the Metropolitan Planning Commission Rules and Procedures as stated by Nashville Gov. as a reference.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201207102636.pdf
12-A-20-RZ
Kim December 7, 2020 at 10:29 AM
What kind of buffer zone will remain and how deep will it be to maintain the integrity (visual and noise) and quiet wooded ambiance of the greenway?Kim December 7, 2020 at 10:29 AM
I'd venture this is one of the most-used and loved greenways in the city. Please keep in mind the greenways are one the few free, close-in, outdoor amenties this city has to offer to one of the unhealthiest populations in the country. Do we really need to ruin a greenway for another apartment complex? Of course not.
I do not agree with this property being developed in a dense manner close to the greenway. This city should buy up an approprate buffer zone and protect its precious greenspace.
Staff Reply:
The applicant has applied for a rezoning for RN-6 zoning at this location. The differences between the residential zone districts can be reviewed here in the Knoxville Zoning Ordinance - https://library.municode.com/tn/knoxville/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=APXBZOCO_ART4RENEDI
Staff is recommending RN-5, rather than RN-6 at this location because RN-5 has a 35' feet height limitation. The greenway is an easement across the property and will remain on the property for the community to use, a rezoning does not eliminate the greenway.
The applicant has applied for a rezoning for RN-6 zoning at this location. The differences between the residential zone districts can be reviewed here in the Knoxville Zoning Ordinance - https://library.municode.com/tn/knoxville/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=APXBZOCO_ART4RENEDI
Staff is recommending RN-5, rather than RN-6 at this location because RN-5 has a 35' feet height limitation. The greenway is an easement across the property and will remain on the property for the community to use, a rezoning does not eliminate the greenway.
12-C-20-UR,12-E-20-UR,12-F-20-UR
Kim December 7, 2020 at 10:35 AM
I would like to take just a quick moment to further advocate support of reviewing and revising the Planned Residential ordinance referencing District 6 agenda items #16, 17, & 18.Kim December 7, 2020 at 10:35 AM
Although the provided concept plans are within current requirements of PR, it should be noted that the plans lack creativity, greenspace, amenities, do not encourage walkability or connectivity, and other than the provision of additional housing to my district, do not add value nor increase value in my community.
Therefore, I am appreciative of this body's effort to look more closely at the Planned Residential ordinance and make impactful updates.
11-B-20-OB
Kevin December 7, 2020 at 11:45 AM
Dear Commissioners,Kevin December 7, 2020 at 11:45 AM
We heard Vice-Chair Smith's concerns that putting the opposition after the proponents would not allow the applicant to address anything brought up by the opposition. That is a valid concern. As a former chair of the Knox County BZA myself, I often felt that the applicant deserved an opportunity to rebut any testimony or evidence brought up by opposition.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201207114519.pdf
12-SA-20-C
Andrea December 7, 2020 at 11:57 AM
My family and I have concerns and questions for the proposed plan of Woodbury crossing. We bought into this subdivision with the promise of single family home environment and amenities. We as a subdivision have had very little notice of the proposed plans and when we have inquired from the developer of questions we have regarding the proposed development they HAVE NOT responded with any answers. This has been on very short notice. We have many questions as a neighborhood and would like answers to those questions to assess the future of our families well being. This will affect us financially. 2020 has already been so hard on many families this year it would be devastating to get hit with another disappointment and loss financially.Andrea December 7, 2020 at 11:57 AM
We implore you to please postpone any decisions until we have answers.
Lynn
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Lynn (37931), December 7, 2020 at 1:05 PM
DENY the request for a boarding home up to 12 residents with 2 staff because the use is incompatible with surrounding land uses and insufficient infrastructure exists to support the use. This is a family centered subdivision/area with a mix of family that include small children, adolescents, and retirees. This is completely unacceptable. There has to be other areas more conducive to the needs of these individuals that does not compromise the safety and security of our homeowners and children. There are school bus stops and children outside of their homes unsupervised that would be vulnerable to the potential actions of these individuals.Lynn (37931), December 7, 2020 at 1:05 PM
12-A-20-RZ
Christine December 7, 2020 at 1:14 PM
My family and I are residents of the Saint Andrews Residential Community which abuts the land parcel 12-A-20-RZ that is currently zoned as OP (Office Park). We moved here from South Florida, a place with very few green spaces and millions of people living nearly on top of one another, in the summer of 2019.Christine December 7, 2020 at 1:14 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201207131443.pdf
11-F-20-UR
Lynn December 7, 2020 at 1:15 PM
As a resident of Millers Plantation Subdivision, 3430 Miller Creek Road, 37931, I am submitting the following request for the stated reasons:Lynn December 7, 2020 at 1:15 PM
PLEASE DENY the request for a boarding home up to 12 residents with 2 staff because the use is incompatible with surrounding land uses and insufficient infrastructure exists to support the use. This is a family centered subdivision/area with a mix of families that include small children, adolescents, and retirees. This is completely unacceptable. There has to be other areas more conducive to the needs of these individuals that do not compromise the safety and security of our homeowners and children. There are school bus stops and children outside of their homes unsupervised that would be vulnerable to the potential actions of these individuals.
Alvin
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Alvin (37931), December 7, 2020 at 1:31 PM
Please deny this
do you know that a daycare is within 600 ft of this?
no water line for fire protection or sewer is on this roadAlvin (37931), December 7, 2020 at 1:31 PM
Fred
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Fred (37909), December 7, 2020 at 2:08 PM
Planing Commission MembersFred (37909), December 7, 2020 at 2:08 PM
I have a serious concern about the proposed 200 unit apartment complex adjacent to the Saint Andrews neighborhood.
My name is Fred Trainer Sr. and I have lived in Saint Andrews since 1998. We have always been concerned about the development of this piece of property because of already existing water drainage problems, excessive noise from the interstate traffic and the environmental detriment of the existing walking trail. In addition, all the homeowners on Glenrothes Blvd backing up to the project would have a serious problem with privacy in their backyard. All of this would result in a serious devaluation of property values in our neighborhood.
Of course we prefer not to have any project developed on this piece of property but the very worst type of development would be a large apartment complex.
We appeal to all members of the Planning Commission to protect us from the proposed apartment complex.
The Mackay Family December 7, 2020 at 2:09 PM
David
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
David (37909), December 7, 2020 at 2:41 PM
Dear planning board,
As a resident of West Hills, I strongly oppose the request to rezone this property. The greenway that will be affected runs next to my neighborhood and I want to keep it GREEN and SERENE (as per the slogan). Noise is already a serious problem from the interstate and a rezone will not help. While I realize that I cannot prevent the developer from building on the property within his already approved rights, I will not stand by to allow even higher density usage to occur (such as apartment buildings). I and my neighbors will be paying close attention to this vote and will be prepared to help elect new city officials if this rezone is approved.
Sincerely,
David JenkinsDavid (37909), December 7, 2020 at 2:41 PM
11-F-20-UR
Deanna December 7, 2020 at 2:58 PM
I Fully Support the transitional residential home proposal on Zion Road..Deanna December 7, 2020 at 2:58 PM
I live in Karns just off Ball Road and down the street from Zion Road.
Deanna
Creek
Creek
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Deanna (Creek), December 7, 2020 at 3:11 PM
I fully support Angelic Ministries right to establish their transitional residential home at 3430 Zion Lane. There is plenty of land and Angelic Ministries is an excellent partner to do this.Deanna (Creek), December 7, 2020 at 3:11 PM
Michelle
3
3
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Michelle ( 3), December 7, 2020 at 3:13 PM
Deny - Too close to our daughter’s school off of Dyestone Gap Rd!! Michelle ( 3), December 7, 2020 at 3:13 PM
Nick
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Nick (37909), December 7, 2020 at 3:14 PM
Please see attached letter as a PDFNick (37909), December 7, 2020 at 3:14 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201207151412.pdf
Dawn
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR,9-A-20-RZ
Dawn (37931), December 7, 2020 at 3:18 PM
I am totally opposed to the Angelic Ministries Men’s Home based in this area. This is a family residential area with many children and young people, as well as elderly. This is no place to bring such men into. I’m all for helping them but not at the expense of devaluing our property and putting our children and residents at risk. There has to be a more suitable place to house these men with far less risks to the community and without devaluing property for the surrounding residents. This is a relatively quiet community and it needs to remain this way. This is the reason people live here. We did not move into this area so that a home like this could open up and bring unwanted risks to our neighborhood. This must not move forward. Please look for a more suitable place away from local residents and neighborhoods. Our children and elderly are at stake here. Thank you. Dawn (37931), December 7, 2020 at 3:18 PM
Tonia
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Tonia (37909), December 7, 2020 at 3:42 PM
I am opposed to this plan. The Jean Teague Greenway was a large reason why we bought our home. It gave me a safe place to walk with my young daughter. Having an apartment complex running along an entire stretch of the Greenway will go a long way in destroying those feelings of security for many. Tonia (37909), December 7, 2020 at 3:42 PM
Also, no one in my community has been notified of this change that will obviously affect them. No one has had a chance to learn about this new development or ask questions. I don't feel that rezoning a part of our neighborhood during the holidays and during a pandemic is a professional way to go about this. The community deserves to have a voice on this.
12-A-20-RZ
Adrienne December 7, 2020 at 4:33 PM
Please vote no on the rezoning of the land behind St. Andrews Subdivision. An apartment complex adjacent to a single family neighborhood is not appropriate. It will have an adverse affect on my home life … noise, privacy, school crowding, etc.Adrienne December 7, 2020 at 4:33 PM
I am a senior citizen and most of my savings is invested in my home at 207 Kirkwall Lane, and I cannot afford to have it jeopardized.
Thanking you in advance …
Misty
37721
37721
12-A-20-UR
Misty (37721), December 7, 2020 at 4:38 PM
Commissioners,
On behalf of Edwards Place residents, I am submitting to you a petition signed by 91 residents. An update will be submitted when more signatures are obtained. The petition reads as follows:
Due to unanswered questions remaining, we the undersigned residents of Edwards Place subdivision in Corryton, Tennessee petition the Knox County Planning Commission to deny the Woodbury Crossing 12-SA-20-C / 12-A-20-UR proposed plan listed on the December 10, 2020 Meeting Agenda as agenda item #15 IF The Woda Group, Inc. and/or WC Woodbury Crossing Limited Partnership proposes any of the following:
- To own the 79 units/homes and manage the homes as rental properties.
- To sell these homes to another business/entity for the purpose of managing and/or renting the 79-home development
- To develop the land for the purpose of selling lots to another business/entity for the purpose of managing and/or renting the 79-home development.Misty (37721), December 7, 2020 at 4:38 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201207163842.pdf
David December 7, 2020 at 5:01 PM
12-A-20-RZ
Joy December 7, 2020 at 5:16 PM
Good Afternoon. I do not believe that to rezone this area is congruent for our West Hills neighborhood. I do not understand the rush to do this during a pandemic. Our school is already overcrowded as evidenced by the aging portable buildings. Our wildlife has been displaced. I saw a beautiful large buck on a small grassy area last week at the condominiums on Broome Rd. This is not an appropriate area for an apartment complex.Thank you. Joy December 7, 2020 at 5:16 PM
Mark
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Mark (37909), December 7, 2020 at 5:24 PM
re zoning from commecial to wouldn't be beneficial to St Andrews in many ways. first off flooding see photo from this spring. secondly the increased noise level of the interstate with the trees & vegitation cut down and also lights and traffic from an apartment complex will certainly be a negitive empact on the neighborhood ! Please vote NO to rezoning!Mark (37909), December 7, 2020 at 5:24 PM
Jewl
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Jewl (37909), December 7, 2020 at 6:09 PM
We have HUGE concerns about the possibility of putting an apartment complex in this area next to the Jean Teague greenway, West Hills Park, St. Andrews subdivision, 2 churches, and West Hills neighborhood in general for these reasons:Jewl (37909), December 7, 2020 at 6:09 PM
- Apartments are not compatible with 57 single family homes next door in the $400+k range- No real analysis has been taken into consideration for the project with the exception of a traffic study- We request…no, we DEMAND that a Stormwater study be done before ANY development or rezoning of that property- In 2004, when Oliver Smith himself requested that the MPC rezone that property to offices -- Oliver's own representative said he didn’t feel apartments were appropriate for that property.
Please DO NOT APPROVE!!
Rosemarie
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Rosemarie (37931), December 7, 2020 at 6:27 PM
I oppose this residential home for men in my neighborhood.Rosemarie (37931), December 7, 2020 at 6:27 PM
Rosemarie
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Rosemarie (37931), December 7, 2020 at 6:29 PM
I oppose this residence in my neighborhood.Rosemarie (37931), December 7, 2020 at 6:29 PM
12-A-20-RZ
Megan December 7, 2020 at 6:30 PM
I oppose the rezoning of Office Space to Apartment Complex at 8300 Walker Springs. I use the greenway every day and think if you rezone it, you will ruin the natural beauty that is present.Megan December 7, 2020 at 6:30 PM
12-A-20-RZ
Megan December 7, 2020 at 6:30 PM
I oppose the rezoning of Office Space to Apartment Complex at 8300 Walker Springs. I use the greenway every day and think if you rezone it, you will ruin the natural beauty that is present.Megan December 7, 2020 at 6:30 PM
Deborah
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Deborah (37931), December 7, 2020 at 6:46 PM
Please deny the 11-F-20-UR request. This area currently has multiple subdivisions, with several more being built. These all contain small children, as well as, teenagers, who are highly susceptible to any kind of deviant behavior. Other considerations for these individuals is the lack of security officers or trained specialists in the home should the need arise.Deborah (37931), December 7, 2020 at 6:46 PM
Mike
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Mike (37909), December 7, 2020 at 7:10 PM
My wife and I were married in 1999 and immediately built our dream home in St. Andrews subdivision. We particularly loved the location because of its access to so many great places, but particularly because of its access to the Greenway which runs Directly behind our home. The beauty of the trees and the people walking and riding bikes has been a joy to us since day one. We are asking that you do not take this away from so many people and particularly those of us that have grown to love this neighborhood and area. I do not think Knoxville needs any more office , space particularly in this time that where more and more people are now able to work from home. Rezoning of this property Just this does not make sense In the destruction of beautiful land and the destruction of so many property owners land and home value. Thank you for your time and attention on this matter.Mike (37909), December 7, 2020 at 7:10 PM
Connie
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Connie (37909), December 7, 2020 at 7:18 PM
We are opposed to the rezoning of the West Hills Greenway behind our homes on Glenrothes Blvd. the Greenway has been our favorite part of living in this community. It is life giving to our neighborhood and so many use this for exercise and meditation daily. It would be a tragic loss for many friends and neighbors in our area as well as many pets and animals. It is a sanctuary to those of us who have enjoyed it for many years and seasons.
Connie (37909), December 7, 2020 at 7:18 PM
Rosa
24201
24201
11-F-20-UR
Rosa (24201), December 7, 2020 at 7:19 PM
It's not the right place to have men walking around unsupervised and rehab from drugs.It is an area where overwhelmingly families with children small and big live.Rosa (24201), December 7, 2020 at 7:19 PM
11-F-20-UR
Rosa December 7, 2020 at 7:24 PM
This will be a catastrophe for our family friendly environment.Rosa December 7, 2020 at 7:24 PM
Please get this scrapped.
Rob
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Rob (37909), December 7, 2020 at 7:33 PM
This refining should be denied, or at the very least tabled/delayed until more information is gathered and analyzed. Storm water runoff has been historically an issue and how this property is developed will potentially further impact existing residential neighboring properties. More analysis is warranted before refining. Additionally, rezoning this parcel to large apartment complex will potentially adversely impact the neighborhood school with overcrowding. Noise from the highway is another detrimental impact rezoning this land could have on the surrounding land owners. Also, the owner of the parcel requesting the rezoning argued 15 years ago that the property was better suited for office space in lieu of apartments which were problematic to the neighboring residential subdivision. His present rezoning request flys in the face of his previous rezoning request 15 years ago. Lastly, the timing and nature of how this rezoning application appears suspicious in that sufficient notification did not seem to be provided that would allow the impacted neighbors to gather information regarding specific detrimental impacts. Based on the above you should deny the rezoning at this time. Rob (37909), December 7, 2020 at 7:33 PM
12-A-20-RZ
Hurley December 7, 2020 at 7:33 PM
I am opposed to the rezoning initiative. We chose to be patient and purchase in West Hills because of the maturity of the neighborhood and feeling comfortable about all it had available to the community. We knew there would not be any new roads or new gigantic projects to change West Hills. Hearing about trying to squeeze in an apartment complex sounds like there will be a high increase of traffic, noise and potentially more flooding. Please rethink this idea and allow this area to remain the same.Hurley December 7, 2020 at 7:33 PM
Ashley
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Ashley (37909), December 7, 2020 at 7:47 PM
As I was heading to drop my daughter off at WH Baptist Preschool, I noticed your rezoning poster. This is of concern for me for our West Hills Elementary where I am a teacher. We already have very large classroom numbers and have teachers teaching in very old portables. Portables are not an ideal learning environment and a large family apartment complex would only seem to add to this problem, as well as, crowding our classrooms more. Please consider a different location for your work efforts. Thank you for listening to the concerns of your community. Ashley (37909), December 7, 2020 at 7:47 PM
Kari
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Kari (37909), December 7, 2020 at 8:03 PM
Please vote no to the upcoming rezoning of this area, or at the very least postpone the decision until a proper meeting can take place between Mr. Smith and the residents of St. Andrew's neighborhood. I strongly believe the change of the zoning will have a negative impact on our neighborhood and the West Hills community. Kari (37909), December 7, 2020 at 8:03 PM
As a seventeen-year resident of St. Andrews neighborhood, I feel the change in zoning would have a negative impact on homes in the area, specifically the residents backing up to the property. Over the years, I have seen more than a dozen times when the flooding from the drain easement/catch basin cannot keep up with the demands. (Water comes from the proposed property, the park, and church property). The overflowing water has reached our homes, garages, and even Glenrothes Blvd numerous times bringing debris, damage, and displaced animals. In addition to flooding issues, the new zoning classification would lead to more noise, light pollution, and traffic congestion.
The change in zoning will have a negative impact on the zoned schools. As a current Knox County educator and former West Hills Elementary teacher, I know firsthand that our elementary, middle, and high schools are overcrowded and stretched thin for resources needed by children in our community. Currently, there are no plans to build any additional schools in this area. The addition 400-600 apartment homes would cause this problem to escalate.
Michelle
d Dr
d Dr
12-A-20-RZ
Michelle (d Dr), December 7, 2020 at 8:39 PM
I walk this area with my friend every Saturday. I do not see how an apartment complex is suitable directly beside a neighborhood.Michelle (d Dr), December 7, 2020 at 8:39 PM
Mahogany
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Mahogany (37909), December 7, 2020 at 8:53 PM
I oppose the rezoning request. The greenway abutting the St. Andrews subdivision is one of the few green spaces left in this part of town and is enjoyed by residents not only of the West Hills community, but of the city of Knoxville generally. Turning the requested area into apartments will increase traffic (pedestrian and automotive), noise (especially from the interstate, which currently has a small buffer from the trees and undeveloped zone), and further burden the drainage basin behind the St. Andrews subdivision, which floods regularly. I don't believe sufficient studies have been done on the effect the change of zoning would have on this area. Time is needed for proper evaluation of whether the rezoning and proposed development is appropriate or even desirable for this community. If the property must be rezoned residential, it should be rezoned for single family housing. Even if apartments are required, a smaller apartment complex, with proposed tree buffer separating the apartments from the residential homes would be an improvement over the proposed plan. As it stands, the proposed rezoning and development would be detrimental to the West Hills community.Mahogany (37909), December 7, 2020 at 8:53 PM
11-F-20-UR
CHARLIE December 7, 2020 at 9:00 PM
This is to express our total opposition against the Angelic Ministries Men’s Home planned at 3430 Zion Lane in the Karns Community. This area is a family residential area with many children and teens, as well as elderly. This is no place for such a home. This home would not only devalue our property, it will also make our once safe neighborhoods not so safe. None of us moved here so that such a home like this could move in and take away our sense of security and devalue our property. There has to be a more suitable place for this home farther away from residential areas where the habitants do not pose a potential threat to the community. Please deny the request for this home to be allowed to open and operate in our community.CHARLIE December 7, 2020 at 9:00 PM
Thank for for your sincere consideration. I hope you understand how we feel and how you would feel if this was moving into your community were your children played or where your elderly parents lived.
Venita
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Venita (37931), December 7, 2020 at 9:05 PM
My family and I are against having a Men's Recovery Group so close to family housing. Though people need the opportunity to start over, We fear that the distance of your proposed home for men is too close in proximality to children, women and families. Please seriously relocate to a more remote location.Venita (37931), December 7, 2020 at 9:05 PM
12-SA-20-C
Robin December 7, 2020 at 9:06 PM
I am writhing to you in concern and oposition of developing of Woodbury Crossing in Edwards Place subdivision. I believe this would have a negative impact on the value of our homes.Robin December 7, 2020 at 9:06 PM
Brian
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Brian (37909), December 7, 2020 at 9:46 PM
My family and I have been residents in Saint Andrews since 2004, and I can honestly say I cant imagine having any office or apts being zoned along the greenway facing our subdivision. We see so much flooding already due to heavy rains. My friend Mark has been flooded out about 10 times since we have lived here and I can not imagine what the water run off from any parking lot would do to the homes in our subdivision. One year I saw the water rise so high it wrapped around three houses , jumped the road, crossed over another empty lot and back into the waterway. Our property value would decline rapidly if more homes were flooded out by excessive water runoff. More studies really need to be done to move forward with any develpoment of Oliver Smiths land. Our homes and property values are at stake here. Please vote no for this new zoning.Brian (37909), December 7, 2020 at 9:46 PM
11-F-20-UR
Venita December 7, 2020 at 9:49 PM
On behalf of our family in the Millers Plantation in Karns, we are submitting to you our *NEGATIVE *vote in regards to opening a Men's Recovery home in the area. A half of a mile is too close to children, women and families in general who will be free to roam through the community. It's a vey frightening thought to have a place where there will be poor supervision and have a high risk for harm that may occur in our area which is a mere 1/2 mile away from the Group Home.Venita December 7, 2020 at 9:49 PM
John
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
John (37909), December 7, 2020 at 10:04 PM
We have serious concerns about the planned Re zoning from office complex to multiple apartment complexes. The latter would be far less compatible with the St. Andrews subdivision where homes are generally in the 400K+ range. This very sentiment was expressed by Oliver Smith’s representative when zoning for office space was obtained in 2004.Before any development occurs it would be imperative to have a well done stormwater study be done as many adjacent properties have been repeatedly flooded after intense storms. This is likely to be exacerbated by further deforestation and building. Updated traffic noise studies and the need for extension of the Interstate sound barrier wall should also be studied.. Finally it should be noted that it is a particularly beautiful portion of the West Hills Greenway that will be affected by construction of any sort on the property in question and very careful consideration should be given to preserving as much of this natural beauty as possible if any building is undertaken here. We respectfully request that the MPC vote NO in response to the application for rezoning of the property for apartment complex construction.John (37909), December 7, 2020 at 10:04 PM
Meredith
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Meredith (37909), December 7, 2020 at 10:20 PM
As a homeowner in Saint Andrews subdivision we are very concerned about the talk of apartments going in behind the Greenway just adjacent to our neighborhood. This will have an adverse affect on the value of our homes, not to mention traffic, noise, privacy, school crowding, destruction of the beautiful nature and animal habitats beside the greenway, etc. We would sincerely appreciate your voting against such a development to preserve the sanctity of our area.
Thank you!!
The Mackay FamilyMeredith (37909), December 7, 2020 at 10:20 PM
Sue
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Sue (37909), December 7, 2020 at 11:00 PM
Please do not destroy the greenway which runs behind several houses in the St. Andrews subdivision. That greenway is used by hundreds of people and pets everyday. To destroy it would be to seriously affect the well being of many people. In addition, rezoning/and or construction of apartments in the area adjacent to the greenway could seriously impact the value of the homes in the subdivision. Those homes are valued at 400+. The two are not compatible. There may also be some serious drainage issues that could be affected by the construction of a complex of any kind in that area. Sue (37909), December 7, 2020 at 11:00 PM
Please do not take away any part of our greenway!
Jennifer
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Jennifer (37909), December 7, 2020 at 11:06 PM
I’m very concerned about the proposal to rezone this area adjacent to my neighborhood. When the trees were first cut down between the greenway and the church behind my house the interstate noise increased significantly which we were very upset about. This proposal to rezone from proposed office space to apartments this would negatively affect the 57 single family homes, the flooding that already occurs in our backyard when it storms , the number of students in the area schools, the traffic in the area and the overall quality of life in our subdivision. Please vote no to this. Jennifer (37909), December 7, 2020 at 11:06 PM
Leland
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Leland (37909), December 7, 2020 at 11:11 PM
I am writing to you this evening to respectfully request that you grant a 30- to 60-day postponement of hearing this request to rezone the property abutting the south bounds of the St. Andrews subdivision in West Hills.Leland (37909), December 7, 2020 at 11:11 PM
Many residents are just learning about this proposed change from a planned office park to an apartment complex.
With the distractions of COVID-19 and the holidays, many St. Andrews homeowners are worried that the developer is taking advantage of the circumstances to rush this though approval with minimum response from the community. As a part of the West Hills community, the West Hills Community Association shares an interest in the development of this property and how it may impact our community in general and our neighbors in St. Andrews in particular.
Since the property has been on the market as a potential office park for more than two decades, it is hard to imagine what harm would come from granting a possible one- or two-month postponement of this hearing to allow the neighborhood to become better informed and to possibly host a community meeting with the developer via Zoom or other appropriate means.
Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration.
12-SA-20-C,12-A-20-UR
Misty December 8, 2020 at 12:34 AM
As I stated in my first email to you, I contacted the developer for the Woodbury Crossing plan on behalf of Edwards Place residents with a list of questions we compiled. To date, *the developer is still unresponsive to our questions*. You have previously heard from neighbors, including myself, of our poor experience with unresponsive developers for Edwards Place. *Huge red flags* are waving for us residents to *already* be facing another developer who appears to be unwilling to answer questions about their proposed plan. This is truly a worrisome situation to be in. Please do not approve a plan for a developer who already is unresponsive to the current residents. *On our behalf, please ask the questions we cannot get answers to from the developer. *Misty December 8, 2020 at 12:34 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201208003431.pdf
12-SA-20-C
Jolene December 8, 2020 at 12:56 AM
Hello. My name is Jolene Anderson and I am a resident and home owner at 7100 Lawgiver Circle in the Edwards Place Subdivision. Our neighborhood has reached out to Woda Cooper Companies and are not sure of the exact plan but if it is managed rental homes, I oppose because our subdivision was promised to be built out as single family homes that would be purchased. Our homes, for most of us, are our biggest investments and we want nothing more to protect that and the future of it.Jolene December 8, 2020 at 12:56 AM
Basil and Joni
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Basil and Joni (37909), December 8, 2020 at 6:19 AM
We oppose the rezoning of the proposed St Andrews flood zone area to any more residential uses due to its already hazardous flooding and the loss of trees.
Instead of removing more trees, we suggest adding trees to this buffer zone to improve the atmosphere for all citizens and visitors to this area.Basil and Joni (37909), December 8, 2020 at 6:19 AM
Ed
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Ed (37931), December 8, 2020 at 7:54 AM
In recent years I have personally worked with some of these individuals through the companion organizations A Hand Off for Men and A Hand Up for Women. Many of them are "rough"--subject to wild mood swings, unreliable and unpredictable. I wholeheartedly support any efforts to help them to return to society as lawful, peaceful, productive citizens. But I am NOT convinced that there is adequate supervision of them and protective measures in place for the many families close by.Ed (37931), December 8, 2020 at 7:54 AM
Lawrence
37922
37922
12-C-20-SU
Lawrence (37922), December 8, 2020 at 8:13 AM
I am opposed to the proposed removal of the planned development designation (PD) at Northshore Town Center. While the proposed rezoning is of minimal consequence, the PD is of significance. We, in the Beau Monde Subdivision live in a PD and have expectations that a greater review process, which we have always enjoyed, would be instrumental in maintaining the standard established for the Northshore Town Center (NTC). We live with streets that are narrower than standard streets, unevenly applied off street parking, a school that contributes to traffic congestion during peak times resulting in level of service of F, and noise and light pollution from the mixed-use nature of the development. We do so because we understood that the totality of the negatives would be balanced with positive aspects such as walkability, attractive lighting, pocket parks (some of which have not been developed and all of which are used by both Beau Monde and apartment residents) enhanced landscaping, traffic studies and rational planning application. Removal of planning commission review for the remaining property in NTC abrogates the trust that we entered into with the City and the developers that an entire community would be developed under a planned concept. We located in this development because we embraced a well-planned, thoughtful concept of new urbanism. I believe that concept will be lost without a rational review process that assures enhanced amenities such as those noted above. Lawrence (37922), December 8, 2020 at 8:13 AM
Megan December 8, 2020 at 8:35 AM
Robert
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Robert (37909), December 8, 2020 at 8:45 AM
I have lived in this house for around 15 years. We are longtime members of the neighborhood church behind our house. It would be terrible to have hundreds of cars driving beside our church and within a stones throw of my yard. We have always anticipated office space, three-story apartments are totally inappropriate.
We are completely opposed to rezoning.
Robert (37909), December 8, 2020 at 8:45 AM
12-SA-20-C
Misty December 8, 2020 at 8:55 AM
When my husband and I built a house in Edwards Place on Forest Willow Lane in December 2018 we were told DR Horton was going to continue building more homes behind the lot we bought, once again DR Horton drop the ball. We were not told it would be apartments, if so we would of never built there. How can there be apartments when there is only one way in and one way out? The road is not wide enough for two cars to pass, let alone emergency vehicles to come through while home owners are parked on the road. Please reconsider building in Edwards Place because we believe this will cause a bigger problem before anything good comes out of it.Misty December 8, 2020 at 8:55 AM
Jami
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Jami (37931), December 8, 2020 at 9:33 AM
I am OPPOSED to this proposal of establishing a "Boarding Home" on Zion Lane. The proposal sounded like a halfway house, or a weak detention facility where residents would be kept in, but not very securely.
I have three small children, and I moved to this area to start a family 13 years ago because it was a growing family-oriented community. It is the responsibility of the MPC to ensure uses of property are compatible with the local community, and this use is INCOMPATIBLE.Jami (37931), December 8, 2020 at 9:33 AM
Fannie
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Fannie (37909), December 8, 2020 at 9:49 AM
I am very opposed to apartments being built near the greenway at West Hills. This cannot happen! This was shut down several years ago and needs to happen again. Fannie (37909), December 8, 2020 at 9:49 AM
James
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
James (37909), December 8, 2020 at 10:47 AM
I have lived in this part of West Hills for over 30 years. The Jean Teague Greenway has very much improved the quality of life in this neighborhood. Please don't allow its beauty to be destroyed by, in effect, having it end up in the back yard or much worse, adjacent and visible to a housing complex parking lot! Please do not approve this rezoning application. Thank You.James (37909), December 8, 2020 at 10:47 AM
12-SA-20-C
Matthew December 8, 2020 at 11:12 AM
Approving this plan without more information from the developer provides them with an open ticket to do as they please with the 79 lots in Edwards Place subdivision. Why is this developer unwilling to answer our questions?Matthew December 8, 2020 at 11:12 AM
We need answers in order to ensure the preservation of the original vision for the Edwards Place development, the home investment value, and the development and continuation of long-term connection with neighbors.
This plan needs to be denied since there is no clear indication of what the developer will do with the 79 lots. If the developer will not answer questions before this is approved, how well do you think they will work with the Edwards Place neighborhood after it is approved?
Joe
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Joe (37931), December 8, 2020 at 11:21 AM
Resubmitting comments with updated information as I am unable to edit previous comments.
Serves as supplementary information to previous comments Joe (37931), December 8, 2020 at 11:21 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201208112119.pdf
12-A-20-RZ
Boyd December 8, 2020 at 11:24 AM
I am total opposed to this rezoning which is not appropriate for this neighborhood. It would have a severe impact of the quality of life for the residents of St Andrews and most of West Hills. Flooding is already a major problem and this would not help. Let’s keep things green as the greenway was planned for.Boyd December 8, 2020 at 11:24 AM
Applicant
12-A-20-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
December 8, 2020 at 11:30 AM
Please find attached correspondence on behalf of the applicant, Taylor D. Forrester o/b/o The Offices at St. Andrews, LLC Applicant Correspondence
December 8, 2020 at 11:30 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201208113024.pdf
applicant
Jeff
37922
37922
12-A-20-RZ
Jeff (37922), December 8, 2020 at 12:03 PM
I walk the green way every day during lunch it is beautiful please reserve a part of Knoxville that is so inviting to this neighborhood in to other communities into those who are considering making Knoxville their homeJeff (37922), December 8, 2020 at 12:03 PM
Bowe
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Bowe (37909), December 8, 2020 at 12:16 PM
My wife and I recently moved to the beautiful Saint Andrew’s Subdivision in October. One of the main reasons we chose this house was its access to the beautiful greenway. We use it almost every day! Adding any kind of apartment complex would undoubtedly lead to damage of the greenway from construction and trash. The people of West Hills deserve better. Why damage something so beautiful with unnecessary construction? West hills is a wonderful place to start our family and I look forward to someday playing with my children on that same beautiful greenway, a tiny oasis in the middle of a wonderful city! Bowe (37909), December 8, 2020 at 12:16 PM
James
37909
37909
11-D-20-RZ
James (37909), December 8, 2020 at 12:53 PM
The attached memo communication is from James Newburn, President of the Adell Ree Park HOA. We reside at the community directly adjacent, and to the West, of the area requested to be rezoned. Our mailing address is 1018 Ree Way. Access to our community is from Middlebrook Pike via Adell Ree Park LN.James (37909), December 8, 2020 at 12:53 PM
Please advise any other applicable requirements for addressing our request as part of the solution.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201208125326.pdf
Joyce
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Joyce (37931), December 8, 2020 at 1:14 PM
I am against having a "Men's B Home" at 3430 Zion Lane "11-F-20-UR". I do not think a place such as this is appropriate for our residential community, especially noting the fact the men to be housed therein are not ready to live in Ministries own unsupervised homes and will NOT have structured supervision.Joyce (37931), December 8, 2020 at 1:14 PM
Applicant
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
December 8, 2020 at 1:22 PM
Please see the attached PDF. It gives a little history on the phases of the development. I hope it brings some clarity to the application.Applicant Correspondence
December 8, 2020 at 1:22 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201208132238.pdf
applicant
Shannon
37923
37923
12-A-20-RZ
Shannon (37923), December 8, 2020 at 1:41 PM
I use this Greenway several times a week. Adding apartments there really ruins the concept of a Greenway. Hundreds of people walk this trail and we like that barrier of trees between us and the highway. It's a nice escape from the city in the city. Please don't knock down all those trees.Shannon (37923), December 8, 2020 at 1:41 PM
11-F-20-UR
Joyce December 8, 2020 at 1:45 PM
I am opposed to having a "Men's B Home" at 3430 Zion Lane. I do not believe it would be in the best interest of our small residential community consisting of mostly older people and young adults with school age children. Also, because this home would house men who are NOT ready to live in Angelic Ministries OWN unsupervised homes and would NOT be appropriately staffed to meet their needs, I believe this would be a detriment, not only to the men, but to our community as well.Joyce December 8, 2020 at 1:45 PM
I strongly support it be DENIED.
12-C-20-SU
Sharon December 8, 2020 at 1:50 PM
I am hopeful for your consideration of our community on case 12-C-20-SU. When my husband and I recently decided to purchase our home in Knoxville, we sought Northshore Town Center specifically for the opportunities for small shops and restaurants within walking distance. We are not in favor of removing the planned commercial zoning. Sharon December 8, 2020 at 1:50 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201208135030.pdf
Cynthia
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Cynthia (37909), December 8, 2020 at 1:50 PM
Please vote NO for the rezoning of this property. I am very concerned by storm water drainage because my yard has flooded many times during storms and it has been very close to entering my basement on several occasions. Has a storm water analysis been conducted? What has the developer documented that he will do about drainage from the many apartments and parking lots? I think the property is more suited for office buildings and that will not impact traffic as much and will add no additional students to the surrounding overcrowded schools. Also, apartments along the greenway generally bring more crime and more littering than greenspaces. Please vote NO on the rezoning!Cynthia (37909), December 8, 2020 at 1:50 PM
Linda
37721
37721
12-SA-20-C
Linda (37721), December 8, 2020 at 1:51 PM
As my previous communication stated, the developers still have not answered our questions. As a community we deserve to have a good working relationship with the builder who will be building in our community. This will impact the financial stability of our homes and neighborhood. Their silence is deafening.
One thing we do know is they plan to market these homes under the name Woodbury Crossing. Do they plan to have a community monument in the middle of our neighborhood? This would be an eyesore. If not, in essence they would still be Edwards Place and impacting our community, as outsiders will see no difference.
We have another builder who is waiting for your denial of this plan that we have identified as interested in completing our neighborhood per the original concept plan. This is what we want, with amenities. We do not trust the Woda Group as they are less than forthcoming. We would much rather work with a developer of our choosing.
Please after all our community has been through with previous developers, deny this plan, so we can move ahead with the developer of our choice.Linda (37721), December 8, 2020 at 1:51 PM
Melissa
37921
37921
11-F-20-UR
Melissa (37921), December 8, 2020 at 2:19 PM
Hello,Melissa (37921), December 8, 2020 at 2:19 PM
I am writing in to you today regarding the property on 3430 Zion Rd I was very upset when I heard a boarding home for men is wanting to be placed on this property merely a block away from my elderly disabled parents.There is no public transportation, nor jobs within walking distance of this property only established neighborhoods. There is no need for a facility of this kind in a residential area that has NO resources to help rehabilitate men. We do not want this in our area! How is this good for established neighborhoods, families, small children and elderly? There aren't even sidewalks in the area for them to take walks, they would have to walk onto someone's private property if trying to leave the home, because Ball Road has a very high traffic load. This is not for our community, Halls didn't want them in the middle of their neighborhood and we don't either. Please take this seriously, would you want this next door to your elderly parents, their property value to go down, to not feel safe in their home the habe owned for over 30 years? I doubt you would, and I don't want to see it next to mine either. Please deny them the rights to come to our neighborhood and community!Thank you.
Brandon
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Brandon (37931), December 8, 2020 at 2:42 PM
Do you have children of your own? Our community has LARGE amounts of children here and while I am in full support of a program like this, my wife has worked in this field long enough to know the dangers. Both in this country and helping people over seas. If she said its not something we want/need in our vicinity and could be better strategically placed somewhere else, then she is correct. Here is all I am saying. If one of my children is hurt or affected by this in any way, shape, or form I will hold these decision makers personally responsible. That's a word lost on this generation coming up but hopefully you know what this means. Evidently this has been batted down now multiple times already and when we are in a time of need and dealing with bad calls hurting small businesses and useless mask mandates, your going to try to sneak an already failed proposal through under the cover of a pandemic. Not only is this shameful, but just down right dirty. Stop and focus on stuff that truly matters and put this where it needs to be, far from anywhere close to a residential area where you know small children are. Brandon (37931), December 8, 2020 at 2:42 PM
12-SA-20-C
Katrina December 8, 2020 at 3:04 PM
I am a homeowner that lives in Edwards Place Subdivision and I oppose the proposal for Woodbury crossing. We have reached out to this developer in concern due to their proposal this summer. To date we have received a response. The only thing we have to go off of is their website. I have attached pictures to show some of the single Family homes they have built in the past. As you can see they are portrayed as apartments. Is this what they are proposing for Woodbury crossing? Thank you, Katrina ButlerKatrina December 8, 2020 at 3:04 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201208150428.pdf
Evalyn
37922
37922
12-C-20-SU
Evalyn (37922), December 8, 2020 at 3:12 PM
I would like to state that I am opposed to the removal of the planned development for this parcel of land. Having moved to the Beau Monde subdivision with the expectation that the surrounding area would develop in a planned and attractive manner, if the PD is removed there is not the opportunity for future review of the proposed apartments. While developers meet City requirements, they do not live in the area and therefore may not be sensitive to the local neighborhood’s needs and issues when it comes to development. Having additional input at the time of these developments would hold developers accountable for keeping this Knoxville neighborhood attractive and the overall City the great place that it is to live. Thank you.Evalyn (37922), December 8, 2020 at 3:12 PM
Applicant
11-B-20-OB
Applicant Correspondence
December 8, 2020 at 3:23 PM
Please See Attached Letter.Applicant Correspondence
December 8, 2020 at 3:23 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201208152333.pdf
applicant
Michael
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Michael (37909), December 8, 2020 at 3:42 PM
As someone who uses Knoxville's greenways quite frequently, I am greatly opposed to reducing the green around the greenways. These stretches of land need to be preserved whenever possible as they are relied upon by so many to get a break from the rest of the city. It will negatively affect many people from all over Knoxville who use these greenways.Michael (37909), December 8, 2020 at 3:42 PM
Rachael
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Rachael (37909), December 8, 2020 at 3:47 PM
As a west hills resident, I do not want the space along the greenway to be developed. Greenways should be green.Rachael (37909), December 8, 2020 at 3:47 PM
12-A-20-RZ
Debra December 8, 2020 at 3:56 PM
My concern is for traffic exiting onto Gallaher View Road. There have been multiple fatalities in that particular spot and with an additional 500 cars coming and going daily, its of concern. Drivers will also take a right and then a right onto Broome Road to use West Hills as a cut through. We are already experiencing an issue with speed, reckless driving, and littering. Would you please take the above under advisement when making a decision regarding the rezoning and/or approval. This may seem as though its not of major importance, but it is to the families living on Broome. How much more traffic can one neighborhood handle? Debra December 8, 2020 at 3:56 PM
My other concern is the same as the other emails you have been receiving, the integrity of neighborhoods, West Hills and St. Andrews. Noise, water run off, destruction of a greenway, decrease in home values etc.
Finally, I am respectfully requesting that you grant a 30- to 60-day postponement of hearing this request to rezone the property mentioned.
Brandon
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Brandon (37931), December 8, 2020 at 4:31 PM
Do you have children of your own? Our community has LARGE amounts of children here and while I am in full support of a program like this, my wife has worked in this field long enough to know the dangers. Both in this country and helping people overseas. If she said it's not something we want/need in our vicinity and could be better strategically placed somewhere else, then she is correct. Here is all I am saying. If one of my children is hurt or affected by this in any way, shape, or form I will hold these decision makers personally responsible. That's a word lost on this generation coming up but hopefully you know what this means. Evidently this has been batted down now multiple times already and when we are in a time of need and dealing with bad calls hurting small businesses and useless mask mandates, you're going to try to sneak an already failed proposal through under the cover of a pandemic. Not only is this shameful, but just down right dirty. Stop and focus on things that truly matter and put this where it needs to be... far from anywhere close to a residential area where you know small children are. Brandon (37931), December 8, 2020 at 4:31 PM
Applicant
12-B-20-RZ,12-C-20-SU
Applicant Correspondence
December 8, 2020 at 4:40 PM
Please find attached a correspondence on behalf of the applicant requesting a 30 day postponement.Applicant Correspondence
December 8, 2020 at 4:40 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201208164007.pdf
applicant
Frank
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Frank (37909), December 8, 2020 at 5:09 PM
We have been aware of this development since July 2020, but many community members are just now hearing about it. There are many questions and concerns, obviously. A 30-60 day postponement will give all parties time to get a clear understanding of this proposal, and hopefully work towards a mutually beneficial outcome for everyone involved. WHCA supports a postponement for this purpose.Frank (37909), December 8, 2020 at 5:09 PM
Kevin
37918
37918
12-A-20-UR
Kevin (37918), December 8, 2020 at 5:51 PM
See attachedKevin (37918), December 8, 2020 at 5:51 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201208175134.pdf
Kevin
37918
37918
12-SC-20-C
Kevin (37918), December 8, 2020 at 6:03 PM
Lot 70 (corner lot) appears to be pretty small in area after the two front setbacks are shown. Will that lot be large enough to be buildable? A developer who presents a concept plan should ensure that all of the lots created would not then request variances from the BZA. Builders who do that are responsible for creating their own hardship, and it is settled case law that you are not entitled for variance relief if you created your own hardship. Lot 65 also looks a little irregular and tight.Kevin (37918), December 8, 2020 at 6:03 PM
Also, Lot 18, the "Amenity & Common Area" is unhelpful to your deliberations. Is it large enough to be a playground, basketball court, or other significant asset to the neighborhood? Will you impose a condition requiring the developer to create a playground or active recreational area on that lot? Right now, if it's approved as-is, there is no requirement for the developer to complete a playground or anything, and if the developer just leaves an empty lot for the HOA, that'd be just fine....
Kevin
37918
37918
12-B-20-UR
Kevin (37918), December 8, 2020 at 6:23 PM
Knox County does not currently have a Transfer of Development Rights program, although it's certainly been discussed and requested (https://archive.knoxmpc.org/tdr/pdfs/mpc_tdr_feb17.pdf, https://archive.knoxmpc.org/tdr/pdfs/mar17_show.pdf, East County Community Plan, East County Sector Plan, etc). Such a plan and mechanisms would be useful for situations like this, where a developer obtains a density and then wishes to sell of lots but not the density. KCPA encourages Knox County to revisit the TDR concept in the near future. Also, you'll find the linked presentations above VERY good reading and very informative.Kevin (37918), December 8, 2020 at 6:23 PM
Carole
37922
37922
12-C-20-SU
Carole (37922), December 8, 2020 at 6:43 PM
We purchased our property under the understanding that this area was specially zoned (the only zoning of this type in Knoxville). We were told the land under zone request change was to be retail with business or apartments on the second level. Since that time we have constantly fought rezoning for apartments. Zoning has changed several times during the time we have lived here.
At the present time the residents from the apartments below us use our parks and walk their dogs often not picking up their waste. As a resident, we pay to maintain our parks and neighborhood. Continuing to increase density will place additional burdens on the school and our clean neighborhood. We have to pay city taxes that no neighbors surrounding us do and we feel due to this we should be protected as we were originally zoned.Carole (37922), December 8, 2020 at 6:43 PM
12-C-20-SU
Stephanie December 8, 2020 at 7:46 PM
I oppose the building of more apartments at Northshore Town Center. I oppose the zoning changes. Stephanie December 8, 2020 at 7:46 PM
Linda
37721
37721
12-SA-20-C
Linda (37721), December 8, 2020 at 8:08 PM
Please deny the plan propose by the Woda Group. This plan puts a separate development of houses in the Edwards Place Subdivision under a different name, Woodbury Crossing. However, they will still be using the streets of Edwards Place as there is not a second entrance available to them. Are they to put community monuments on our streets to signify their community? That would be odd and out of place. What about the separate HOA’s? In essence we would really be one neighorhood by virtue of the roads we share. The Woda Group could potentially be creating problems within the community by not taking the name of the original community, Edwards Place and making us one community.
Additionally, because they have clustered the 79 homes on one side of the creek, they have made it impossible for the residents of Edwards Place to have the amenities we were promised as part of the original concept plan and the plan that was later approved by subsequent builders. As a community, we had hoped that one day we would have a builder or the HOA build a pool , clubhouse, park, or some other such play area on the green space. The plan by Woda group will not make that possible as the 79 houses have used all the buildable space. No more improvements will be possible. Edwards Place will be the losers in this plan.
Please deny this plan. Please allow us to have another builder build on the land to get the single family homes we deserve and the amenities we’ve asked for.
Linda (37721), December 8, 2020 at 8:08 PM
Makan
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Makan (37931), December 8, 2020 at 8:31 PM
I am writing you this comments with my firm OBJECTION to the current requests for re-zoning in the Karns area on Zion Lane, off of Ball Rd: Multi-family residential re-zoning (11-F-20-UR)Makan (37931), December 8, 2020 at 8:31 PM
I have a huge concern regarding this project due to the potential unsafe environment that it can create around our neighborhood.
This type of establishment does not belong to high-capacity residential area because of the potential risk and outcome ahead.
12-A-20-RZ
KATHY December 8, 2020 at 8:44 PM
I an concerned about the rezoning planned near the Church of Christ. I am a West Hills resident and only just heard about this. Why no input from local homeowners? This should be studied furthe before rezoning.KATHY December 8, 2020 at 8:44 PM
12-A-20-UR,12-SA-20-C
Jamie December 8, 2020 at 10:20 PM
I oppose a rental home development within our neighborhood at Edwards Place.Jamie December 8, 2020 at 10:20 PM
Please consider the below points:
- The land in question is zoned Planned Residential. The zoning name itself implies that the residential area should be planned. Not a piecemeal of a subdivision within a subdivision, thus having two separate HOAs and different subdivision names but sharing the same street names.- According to Knox County’s Code of Ordinance, “Residential areas thus established would be characterized by a unified building and site development program.” How can the Planning Commission approve this plan without knowing if this development will fulfill this description?- Why will the developer not answer our questions? Where is the developer’s accountability?- If an amenity area was required by the Planning Commissioner for the original Edwards Place development plan but was never installed, why is this not still a requirement today?- Other developers have expressed interest in completing Edwards Place as it was originally intended. There are other options besides this current developer! - Two separate subdivisions within one creates division instead of one unified body of residents. - How does this plan improve Edwards Place or continue the original vision approved by the Planning Commission?
Kevin
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Kevin (37931), December 8, 2020 at 11:48 PM
I am OPPOSED to the “Boarding Home” being proposed on Zion Lane and request that you DENY the request. The proposal sounded more like an inadequately secured halfway house, and it therefore should not be allowed per Agricultural zoning.
This requested “Use on Review” is incompatible with surrounding land uses. There are no other facilities like this nearby. And it presents a hazard to the local community. There are HUNDREDS of single-family homes, most with children, four school bus stops, and a child daycare center all within a half mile of this property. Angelic Ministries stated the residents would be there because they are not yet ready to enter society. But Angelic Ministries will not be able to detain or restrain a resident if one becomes irate and wants to storm off into one of these homes or yards with children. SOUNDS DANGEROUS. This type of facility belongs away from residential areas.
Kevin (37931), December 8, 2020 at 11:48 PM
12-A-20-UR
ANDREA December 9, 2020 at 4:02 AM
After tonight’s meeting it appeared no one really cared about the following. Please consider the! This approval will drastically drop home values on our area if the properties are rentals which is all this company makes.ANDREA December 9, 2020 at 4:02 AM
The land in question is zoned Planned Residential. The zoning name itself implies that the residential area should be planned. Not a piecemeal of a subdivision within a subdivision, thus having two separate HOAs and different subdivision names but sharing the same street names.- According to Knox County’s Code of Ordinance, “Residential areas thus established would be characterized by a unified building and site development program.” How can the Planning Commission approve this plan without knowing if this development will fulfill this description?- Why will the developer not answer our questions? Where is the developer’s accountability?- If an amenity area was required by the Planning Commissioner for the original Edwards Place development plan but was never installed, why is this not still a requirement today?- Other developers have expressed interest in completing Edwards Place as it was originally intended. There are other options besides this current developer!- Two separate subdivisions within one creates division instead of one unified body of residents.- How does this plan improve Edwards Place or continue the original vision approved by the Planning Commission?
12-A-20-UR
Ruvim December 9, 2020 at 7:54 AM
As a resident of Edwards Place Subdivision I want to emphasise how strongly I disagree with this proposal and the manner in which the developer has handled our questions, as in they have refused to answer any of them! I live on Forest willow and my back yard meets up with the property in question so i will be affected more than most. We were told when buying our home that the lot behind our house would be the 3rd phase of the subdivision with the same type of single dwellings, THAT WOULD NOT BE RENTALS, nor apartments. This proposal and the way it has been handled is another slap in the face in regards to developers trying to build other types of dwellings on the property with no regards to the families living here. I have not been approached by them for any information and as i stated earlier, none of our questions have been answered! It is obvious that they do not care about our questions or our concerns with their plans. I have invested my life into my home and this proposal is detrimental to me. DO NOT APPROVE THIS PROPOSAL.Ruvim December 9, 2020 at 7:54 AM
Katrina
37721
37721
12-A-20-UR
Katrina (37721), December 9, 2020 at 8:26 AM
I am writing in opposition for Woodbury Crossing. We are opposing this proposal for many reasons, one being that when we bought our homes, we were told and had the vision our subdivision would be finished as one subdivision. If approved, Woodbury Crossing would only have access to main streets through our subdivision. What really doesn’t make sense to me is creating a subdivision within an existing subdivision. The plan for our subdivision years ago was for it to be completed as a whole. We were also promised amenities when we bought our home. It is very sad that our subdivision has been let down by many builders over the years. We have found a builder that wants to complete our subdivision as it was first proposed. This developer has not been transparent and is not wanting to just complete our subdivision. Please deny this proposal and let this builder come and finish our subdivision that we had all hoped for. Katrina (37721), December 9, 2020 at 8:26 AM
Riaan
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Riaan (37931), December 9, 2020 at 8:28 AM
Lots of families with small children in this area. Their safety and security should be paramount. Property values will also be negatively affected. Angelic Ministries should have reached out to the surrounding communities to work with them, instead of trying to “fly under the radar” and get this pushed through. I’ve not seen or heard anything from this group, unless I’ve missed it. Collaboration goes a long away. Riaan (37931), December 9, 2020 at 8:28 AM
11-F-20-UR
Kevin December 9, 2020 at 8:37 AM
I am attaching reference documents which I will refer to during my time to comment in opposition on Thursday. If you can, please make these available to the MPC on Thursday.Kevin December 9, 2020 at 8:37 AM
I am OPPOSED to the “Boarding Home” being proposed on Zion Lane and request that you DENY the request. The proposal sounded more like an inadequately secured halfway house, and it therefore should not be allowed per Agricultural zoning.
This requested “Use on Review” is incompatible with surrounding land uses. There are no other facilities like this nearby. And presents a hazard to the local community. There are HUNDREDS of single-family homes, most with children, four school bus stops, and a child daycare center all within a half mile of this property. Angelic Ministries stated the residents would be there because they are not yet ready to enter society. But Angelic Ministries will not be able to detain or restrain a resident if one becomes irate and wants to storm off into this one of these homes or yards with children. SOUNDS DANGEROUS.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209083715.pdf
11-F-20-UR
Kevin December 9, 2020 at 8:37 AM
I am attaching reference documents which I will refer to during my time to comment in opposition on Thursday. If you can, please make these available to the MPC on Thursday.Kevin December 9, 2020 at 8:37 AM
I am OPPOSED to the “Boarding Home” being proposed on Zion Lane and request that you DENY the request. The proposal sounded more like an inadequately secured halfway house, and it therefore should not be allowed per Agricultural zoning.
This requested “Use on Review” is incompatible with surrounding land uses. There are no other facilities like this nearby. And presents a hazard to the local community. There are HUNDREDS of single-family homes, most with children, four school bus stops, and a child daycare center all within a half mile of this property. Angelic Ministries stated the residents would be there because they are not yet ready to enter society. But Angelic Ministries will not be able to detain or restrain a resident if one becomes irate and wants to storm off into this one of these homes or yards with children. SOUNDS DANGEROUS.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209083715.pdf
Daniel
37918
37918
11-F-20-UR
Daniel (37918), December 9, 2020 at 8:54 AM
I am in favor of Angelic Boarding House.Daniel (37918), December 9, 2020 at 8:54 AM
Christie
37938
37938
11-F-20-UR
Christie (37938), December 9, 2020 at 9:36 AM
Angelic Ministries Boarding House on Zion Ln. WILL be a positive impact on the community. I've not only served at Angelic Ministries but have also seen first hand the transformation of lives that have been served by Angelic Ministries. I believe this boarding house will be the door to seeing men transformed into not only godly men but great honest citizens of our city that will make a difference in our community. It is my prayer that this boarding home be approved. Christie (37938), December 9, 2020 at 9:36 AM
Misty
37721
37721
12-A-20-UR
Misty (37721), December 9, 2020 at 10:25 AM
I listened to Tuesday's agenda review meeting. If you cannot consider whether the proposed development will be owner-occupied homes, then please consider the following in the attached message.Misty (37721), December 9, 2020 at 10:25 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209102521.pdf
Misty
37721
37721
12-A-20-UR
Misty (37721), December 9, 2020 at 11:05 AM
There are now 96 signatures from Edwards Place residents on the petition we previously submitted to you. The attachment is the updated petition file with all 96 signatures.Misty (37721), December 9, 2020 at 11:05 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209110537.pdf
Divina
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Divina (37909), December 9, 2020 at 12:03 PM
We have just recently learned about a proposal to change a planned office park near the St. Andrews subdivision to a 500-600 apartment complex.Divina (37909), December 9, 2020 at 12:03 PM
As a member of the West Hills Community, we share an interest in the outcome of this proposal, and residual affects to our neighborhood especially the St. Andrews subdivision, greenway. Additionally, potential impacts to traffic on East Walker Springs Road and Gallaher View Road could be detrimental. I have lived in the Cavet Station subdivision on Alexander Cavet Drive off Broome Road and Gallaher View Road for the past 16+ years. Many of you are aware of the tremendous increase in traffic volume on Broome Road. This has lead to numerous accidents some fatal. This development could potentially exacerbate an already dangerous situation on all surrounding roads.
I respectfully ask the members of the commission to please postpone the December 10th hearing for 30-90 days to become better informed, and gather all of information to conduct a community meeting with the developer.
David December 9, 2020 at 12:52 PM
Candace
ld Dr
ld Dr
12-A-20-RZ
Candace (ld Dr), December 9, 2020 at 1:08 PM
Please don’t build this apartment complex.!!! This peaceful greenway will never be the same! We have lived in west hills for 16 years and the nice, quiet community that this greenway provides will change it in a negative way! We use the greenway about 5 times a week and it is part of what drew us to this area. We like the quiet neighborhood feel and apartments will kill that!Candace (ld Dr), December 9, 2020 at 1:08 PM
Matthew
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Matthew (37909), December 9, 2020 at 1:52 PM
As a West Hills resident, and frequent user, I oppose development of any kind along the greenway, both for aesthetic and for environmental reasons. As some have already commented, drainage is an issue all along the greenway. Additionally, the removal of the trees will increase noise pollution from the roads as well as reducing the amount of habitat for wildlife. Matthew (37909), December 9, 2020 at 1:52 PM
Applicant
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:20 PM
Please see the attached letter regarding the history of the application and the density associated with it. I have also have uploaded the 6 attachments referenced in the letter separately.Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:20 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209152024.pdf
applicant
Applicant
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:22 PM
Please see attachment 1 regarding the original Use on Review for this property.Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:22 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209152213.pdf
applicant
Applicant
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:24 PM
Please see attachment 2 showing the original Development Plan for the original Use on Review in 2013.Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:24 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209152407.pdf
applicant
Applicant
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:25 PM
Please see attachment 3 regarding the Gambuzza Use on Review request in 2017.Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:25 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209152519.pdf
applicant
Applicant
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:33 PM
Please see attachment 4 regarding the changing of our request from marina parking to one single family lot on the "Hancock" parcel.Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:33 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209153359.pdf
applicant
Applicant
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:36 PM
Please see attachment 5 regarding the final survey containing 72.416 acres of property as requested by MPC.Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:36 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209153619.pdf
applicant
Daniel
37938
37938
11-F-20-UR
Daniel (37938), December 9, 2020 at 3:39 PM
I am 100% in favor of Angelic Ministry establishing a boarding house on 3430 Zion Lane, Knoxville to put all of the men that work for Angelic Ministry will be able to live under one roof while progressing through their job readiness program. Unclear why the infrastructure is not considered suitable for a boarding home since the original purpose of the property in 1969 was for a children's boarding home.Daniel (37938), December 9, 2020 at 3:39 PM
Wallace
37931
37931
12-F-20-UR
Wallace (37931), December 9, 2020 at 3:41 PM
PLEASE consider the attached presentation prior to voting. We are not opposed to responsible development of this parcel, but we are very concerned about the impact of 5 units/acre on water quality and flooding in Beaver Creek. For the Hatmaker parcel, the 5' side setback should carry the stipulation that, at a minimum, the combined setback for both sides of each unit shall be no less than 30'. This will be a VERY MINOR step in the right direction to help alleviate flooding problems in Knox County.Wallace (37931), December 9, 2020 at 3:41 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209154124.pdf
Applicant
12-A-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:46 PM
Letter to the CommissionersApplicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:46 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201210103909.pdf
applicant
Applicant
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:50 PM
Please see attachment 6 regarding the letter from homeowner John Hancock clarifying that when we sold him the lot we only gave him 1 dwelling unit with it and retained the balance of density for future development.Applicant Correspondence
December 9, 2020 at 3:50 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209155017.pdf
applicant
Gary
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Gary (37909), December 9, 2020 at 4:04 PM
I am highly opposed to this proposal (12-A-20-R2, 8300 E. Walker Springs LN). Based on first hand research, I am greatly concerned this proposal will have undoubtedly a substantial, negative affect on my property value and way of life here at my home and St. Andrews Subdivision/West Hills community. Gary (37909), December 9, 2020 at 4:04 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209160435.pdf
Jack
37922
37922
12-B-20-UR
Jack (37922), December 9, 2020 at 4:17 PM
The attachment responds to John Huber's December 8 document.John Huber may not use land sold from his PR zone to calculate density for this proposed 96 unit apartment development.Jack (37922), December 9, 2020 at 4:17 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209161727.pdf
Jack
37922
37922
12-B-20-UR
Jack (37922), December 9, 2020 at 4:20 PM
Warranty Deed from Huber-Clear Water Water Properties to John and Susan HancockJack (37922), December 9, 2020 at 4:20 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209162027.pdf
Jack
37922
37922
12-B-20-UR
Jack (37922), December 9, 2020 at 4:22 PM
Warranty Deed from Huber-Clear Water Water Properties to Frank and Belinda GambuzzaJack (37922), December 9, 2020 at 4:22 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209162219.pdf
Heath
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Heath (37931), December 9, 2020 at 6:05 PM
Hello, we live next door to the proposed boarding home and we do NOT want it. My wife and I care for my mother and now her dad. We live on this two acre property and is private. I fear for their safety when we are away at work during the day. I would not want either of them approved by so called tenants or "friends" that might be looking for them to "catch up on old times" like dealers or any others they ran with before they went to prison. We have lived here at 3426 Zion Lane since since March of 2005 with ZERO problems. We moved into the Karns community because it's a nice, quiet place with very little crime. I don't feel that I need to install a security system or have our cars and houses broke into looking for something. Please reconsider and not letting this pass. There are other issues like transportation, a day care close by and such. I will not like it if my property value goes down because of this home if we would ever want to move. We are in our early 50's and never planned on moving. Thank you for your time.Heath (37931), December 9, 2020 at 6:05 PM
12-F-20-UR
Kelly December 10, 2020 at 1:19 AM
PLEASE look at the attached presentation and if you don't do anything else look at the photos, text messages, and newspaper clippings therein. I have done the work for you. THIS AREA FLOODS.Kelly December 10, 2020 at 1:19 AM
The "townhomes" proposed for the east side of the Hatmaker Parcel are certain to flood unless they are built on stilts. The creek is at 1000' elevation (p. 2 of Concept Plan) where it flows underneath W Emory Rd and the creek already overtops the road during high flow events (see photos). The 984' elevation mark goes through the middle of these townhomes and the LOWEST elevation anywhere on this parcel is 980'! I can promise you this creek rises more than 4' now; where do you think the runoff from an additional 112 units and 7 new roads is going to go?
If approved, this will be a self-flooding subdivision not to mention the havoc it will wreak on the poor property owners who live downstream (look at the photos!). I have lived across the street from the Hatmaker parcel for 27 yrs and I know what I am talking about. Don't make the same mistake the Commission made when it approved Harrell Road Stormwater Park (now Roy Arthur Stormwater Park) for residential development (look at the newspaper article!).
It would be irresponsible for anyone to approve this development (as is) and a slap in the face to those Knox County taxpayers who live downstream and are already inundated during high rain events.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201209154124.pdf
Ryan
na
na
11-A-20-SP
Ryan (na), December 10, 2020 at 7:55 AM
I live at 1811 N Campbell station road and am the neighbor to this proposed development 11-A-20-SP & 11-C-20-RZ . The County Commissioners need to know why this proposed development is such a big concern for the community, and the number of public comments that were submitted against this development should get your attention. Ryan (na), December 10, 2020 at 7:55 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201210075505.pdf
Kerry
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Kerry (37931), December 10, 2020 at 9:11 AM
While the intent of this endeavor by Angelic Ministries is valiant, the location of this property does not seem to be conducive to meet the needs of the inhabitants.
The structure is likely inexpensive because it has been uninhabited for many years which makes the property appealing to the ministry.
Our family supports the efforts of Angelic Ministries but is this what is best for both the Karns Community and those Angelic Ministries desires to reach. Kerry (37931), December 10, 2020 at 9:11 AM
Anatoliy
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Anatoliy (37931), December 10, 2020 at 9:17 AM
Hi, I wanted to provide a comment regarding this project. I understand the cause of this project is noble but I dont think this is the best location for this establishment. I dont feel comfortable with having added risk of having this facility across our subdivision. I dont always want to have this in the back of my mind when I leave my garage door open or while my kids are playing outside. I would ask that the commission DENY this request. Anatoliy (37931), December 10, 2020 at 9:17 AM
Ang
3793
3793
11-F-20-UR
Ang ( 3793), December 10, 2020 at 9:23 AM
Deny! My family will be personally affected by this action. My fear is that these men will not be provided adequate transportation and opportunities in our little community. Ball Road is already treacherous and with only woods and homes nearby, this does not allow them any work opportunities, etc. My property value will definitely take a hit and so will our safety and security. I wish the best for these men, but do not feel this is the best place for this. Please find another site that will better fit their needs for a better outcome. I plead this on behalf of my family and neighbors. Ang ( 3793), December 10, 2020 at 9:23 AM
Leslie
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Leslie (37931), December 10, 2020 at 9:34 AM
I firmly am AGAINST this men’s home to be in a residential area around neighborhoods with small children. There is no access to transportation and this can pose a risk to our homes and our children. This is absurd to even consider in this area. Yes it may be needed, but not in a rural area that is surrounded by homes. Leslie (37931), December 10, 2020 at 9:34 AM
William
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
William (37931), December 10, 2020 at 9:37 AM
It is not a good idea to put this men’s home in a residential area. There is no means of adequate transportation, no security features for this home that could protect the families and their homes in all of the neighborhoods that surround. All it takes is for one person or child to be hurt and for one home to be broken into. It also affects the value of surrounding homes. This is a big NO! William (37931), December 10, 2020 at 9:37 AM
Marisela
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Marisela (37931), December 10, 2020 at 9:40 AM
The consideration of this facility near our subdivision would increase the anxiety for the safety of our children and families. There is no opportunity for public transportation in this area and if a patient want to leave the facility the would roam the road into our subdivision and potentially increasing crime in area. Please consider a more rural location for this.Marisela (37931), December 10, 2020 at 9:40 AM
Josh
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Josh (37931), December 10, 2020 at 10:21 AM
I'm opposed to the new facility at the proposed location. I live directly across from the area where this new facility is supposed to go. There are a lot of families with small children, including myself, who live in and around this area.Josh (37931), December 10, 2020 at 10:21 AM
I am not at all excited about the prospect of having revolving door of men with criminal backgrounds moving in and out within a few hundred yards of where my children play.
The only positive comments in this entire thread are from people who do not live in the area. It's very easy to support something when it doesn't personally affect you.
I appreciate the mission of Angelic Ministry, but they should also be respectful of the wishes of the hundreds of families living in this area who do not want this facility in their backyard.
Stevie
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Stevie (37931), December 10, 2020 at 10:46 AM
I oppose the location of the Men's Boarding home on Zion Rd. This is all around a poor location for this type of facility. I do understand these men need this type of facility to overcome the obstacles they are currently facing, but this is all around a poor location for this facility. This type of facility needs to be located in an area with accesss to public transportation, sidewalks, and access to jobs to help transistion these men back into society. The rural part of Karns does not have this type of access. This facility is to hold 12 men with 2 workers, it has been disputed that the workers will take the men to and from work locations with the ratio of 12/2 it seems to be overstating the possibility. I do understand this type of facility is needed, but I do believe that it would be better located near areas of downtown where there is access to public transportation, sidewalks for saftey to walk to and from locations, and locations to job opportunities. Stevie (37931), December 10, 2020 at 10:46 AM
Kevin
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Kevin (37931), December 10, 2020 at 10:54 AM
Please see my attached letter for comments concerning my opposition to the Angelic Ministries to operate a Men's Home on Zion Lane. I understand Angelic Ministries has a lot of support from individuals who are not even residents of the Karns community and would just like that to be considered in their argument to approve this home. Nothing in their stance fits with the zoning of this property and if approved will result in a high risk for this area. Kevin (37931), December 10, 2020 at 10:54 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201210105406.pdf
Taylor
37919
37919
11-B-20-OB
Taylor (37919), December 10, 2020 at 11:52 AM
Please see attached letter.Taylor (37919), December 10, 2020 at 11:52 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201210115205.pdf
Applicant
11-M-20-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
December 10, 2020 at 12:50 PM
Hello and good morning, I am emailing in reference to 1630 Osborne rd, we were under the impression that the meeting had been postponed until Dec 21st and Ms Nelson is out of town and can't be online today at the meeting, please let me know what needs to be done. After reading the complaint that is on the public comments the vehicles that are still at the property run and drive and are tagged which is why the codes closed the case. There is a business license registered to the address as well among other points. I know this is not where this needs to be said but I can't talk either at the meeting so thought I would pass along as much as possible for Ms Nelson.Applicant Correspondence
December 10, 2020 at 12:50 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201210125024.pdf
applicant
Corey
37919
37919
12-A-20-RZ
Corey (37919), December 10, 2020 at 2:09 PM
I am in opposition of rezoning plan 12-A-20-RZ. The proposed rezoning will impact a heavily trafficked stretch of the Jean Teague Greenway. This greenway is a fantastic public amenity that raises the quality of life for residents of the West Hills area by offering a relatively secluded area for recreation. It is a popular greenway, and its value to citizens has been proven undoubtable during the COVID pandemic. While I recognize that the proposed plan will not eliminate the greenway, it will have negative impacts both during the construction of housing and forever after rezoning has occurred. This plan appears to benefit very few people, while negatively impacting the many hundreds or thousands of people who use this greenway. Removing the greenery separating the greenway from I-40 and replacing it with apartments or housing will result in even fewer opportunities for people to have a semblance of outdoor serenity in an area that is already highly urbanized. Corey (37919), December 10, 2020 at 2:09 PM
Shauna
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Shauna (37931), December 10, 2020 at 6:23 PM
I strongly oppose the establishment of this facility less than one mile from my house and children. I am disappointed that this “religious” group has made no effort to connect with the community and is soliciting support from Individuals who do not live in this community. Shauna (37931), December 10, 2020 at 6:23 PM
Addy
37931
37931
11-F-20-UR
Addy (37931), December 10, 2020 at 7:23 PM
I firmly oppose this center due to the location too near a high number of neighborhoods with multitudes of families and children. There are various safety concerns due to the type of center. Addy (37931), December 10, 2020 at 7:23 PM
12-A-20-RZ
Alec December 11, 2020 at 9:06 AM
There are many other issues related to the zoning change of this 120HC06 zone: Alec December 11, 2020 at 9:06 AM
A high-pressure gas pipeline runs through this area, and for security reasons, no one can build any structures over this pipe. Who owns this gas pipeline and what does he think about it?
We’re in Panemic and more residents add more COVID-19 cases
I hope the PC and Knox City Council will reject this case because 99.9% of Green Route users and 100% of St. Andrews will support the rejection.
Thank you,
Please vote “NO”.
Duane
37921
37921
1-C-21-SU
Duane (37921), December 30, 2020 at 1:16 PM
We would like to see a berm, buffer, or barrier between our sub-division and this facility. There seems to be a cut-through and we would like to stop the foot traffic that transgresses through our sub-division. Duane (37921), December 30, 2020 at 1:16 PM
Michelle
37917
37917
1-E-21-RZ
Michelle (37917), December 30, 2020 at 3:40 PM
I was surprised to see that this developer is continuing to try to push this horrible development thru yet again...I guess he thinks that we have changed our minds??? It's ridiculous. This is a HORRIBLE plan that will not only negatively impact the surrounding area, but also MANY surrounding communities downstream. Please, do NOT allow this development to proceed. I am attaching 2 of the previous letters that have been sent opposing this project; it shouldn't be necessary to write another, however I'm willing to if it's deemed necessary. Hope all are doing well & staying safe & may 2021 be all you hope it to be!Michelle (37917), December 30, 2020 at 3:40 PM
1 of 2 (see attachment)
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201230154051.pdf
Michelle
37917
37917
1-E-21-RZ
Michelle (37917), December 30, 2020 at 3:41 PM
2 of 2 (see attachment)Michelle (37917), December 30, 2020 at 3:41 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20201230154128.pdf
Jill
37922
37922
1-G-21-UR
Jill (37922), December 30, 2020 at 5:41 PM
This seems to be a thoughtful and well-planned project. I think it's wonderful to have the recreation facilities as well as the restaurant. Perhaps the owners might include a workshop on how to navigate a traffic circle as one of their entertainments.Jill (37922), December 30, 2020 at 5:41 PM
1-E-21-RZ
Lindsay January 1, 2021 at 12:09 PM
I continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre- 61 units total. (excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density) Lindsay January 1, 2021 at 12:09 PM
Nothing has changed since March, 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
1-E-21-RZ
Lindsay January 1, 2021 at 12:09 PM
I continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre- 61 units total. (excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density) Lindsay January 1, 2021 at 12:09 PM
Nothing has changed since March, 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
1-E-21-RZ
Kim January 1, 2021 at 9:40 PM
I ask that you please oppose the increased density of housing for this subdivision. The schools nor the traffic patterns can manage the increase of people and automobiles. As you know the intersection of Tazewell Pike and Beverly Road is high risk for commuters and it will increase exponentially with triple the number of homes per acre on this tract of land. I Am convinced the safety of Knox County citizens would be adversely affected by the population increase to our traffic situation and the Knox Co schools in the area that are already busting at their seams with the growth in Fountain City in recent years. I beg you to stick to your original decision of one home per acre. Praying for good things to come in 2021 for all of my neighbors.Kim January 1, 2021 at 9:40 PM
Trina January 1, 2021 at 10:25 PM
Nothing has changed since March, 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
1-E-21-RZ
Ben January 2, 2021 at 2:41 PM
In March of 2018 MPC recommended one house per acre. Nothing has changed since that professional recommendation . Beverly Road cannot handle this traffic safely. Please follow the recommendations of those you pay for educated and informed opinions!Ben January 2, 2021 at 2:41 PM
1-E-21-RZ
Elizabeth and Dylan January 2, 2021 at 4:08 PM
We continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation (file # 1-E-21-RZ) for this property. Due to the sevier constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre - 61 total (excluding floodway and floodplain in determining the density).Elizabeth and Dylan January 2, 2021 at 4:08 PM
Nothing has changed since March, 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
1-E-21-RZ
Judy January 2, 2021 at 7:58 PM
We continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre---61 units total. (excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density). Nothing has changed since March, 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.Judy January 2, 2021 at 7:58 PM
12-E-19-Rz
Rachel January 3, 2021 at 9:00 AM
My name is Rachel Farmer, and I live at 1701 Emoriland Blvd in Knoxville (37917). I was dismayed to hear this week that a proposal has been submitted, yet again, to re-zone a parcel of property on Beverly Road (File 12-E-19-Rz). This petition has come before your commission twice before, and each time we have come to the commission meeting personally to show our disapproval. This time we can't because of covid restrictions, and it feels like the developer is trying to take advantage of the situation.Rachel January 3, 2021 at 9:00 AM
Nothing has changed in the situation since the proposal was first made. The MPC professional staff determined that the property can be developed but ONLY at a maximum density of 1 dwelling unit per acre, and only outside the floodway, flood plain, and Slope Protection area, all of which should not be disturbed.
The major concern is that over-development of this property is likely to cause extensive flooding in the areas downstream, including where I live on Emorliand Blvd. Just under three years ago, heavy rains falling on the saturated soil made the creek in my backyard rise enough that it reached a level of about 16 inches up the back wall of the house. We had sandbags across the doorways but we still got water in the house and garage. The flood washed away my husband's dual-axle work trailer and deposited it against some trees downstream. Since then the yard has flooded several times, though the water hasn't come all the way into our house. Our neighbors, however, weren't so fortunate and have had to deal with flooding in their basement several times.
The proposed rezoning would also have a negative effect on already congested traffic in the area.
I continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre-61 units total (excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density). Nothing has changed since March, 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
1-E-21-RZ
Margaret January 3, 2021 at 1:28 PM
We continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018, recommendation for this property.. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre - 61 units total (excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density).Margaret January 3, 2021 at 1:28 PM
Nothing has changed since March, 2018, that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
Steve January 3, 2021 at 1:32 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210103133218.pdf
1-E-21-RZ
Carlene January 3, 2021 at 5:56 PM
Please see attached memo sent on behalf of the Board of Fountain City Town Hall, Inc.Carlene January 3, 2021 at 5:56 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210103175654.pdf
1-E-21-RZ
Arthur January 3, 2021 at 6:22 PM
WE continue to support the professional MPC staff,s MARCH 8,2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints,the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre -61 unity total.{excluding the floodway an flood plain in determining the density} Nothing has changed since March ,2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation we have a lot of flooding at Beverly rd. an Oakland rd an this will impact more flooding down stream including the Broadway rd areaArthur January 3, 2021 at 6:22 PM
1-E-21-RZ
LeRae January 4, 2021 at 9:42 AM
As a neighbor, mom with children who attend local schools, and neighbor, I oppose increasing the density of the proposed Beverly Road project. I support the MPC’s staff recommendation from March 2020. Nothing has change to justify a change in recommendations. This area has severe constraints and increasing density would do a disservice to the community.LeRae January 4, 2021 at 9:42 AM
1-E-21-RZ
Arthur January 4, 2021 at 10:19 AM
see attachmentArthur January 4, 2021 at 10:19 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210104101930.pdf
Susan
37918
37918
1-E-21-RZ
Susan (37918), January 4, 2021 at 6:07 PM
My name is Susan Hines and I live on Shannondale Rd. My children attended neighborhood schools and I still live and shop and drive in this area of Fountain City. I feel this new higher density is too much for our roads and schools to handle. I continue to approve the original MPC's 2018 recommendation of one unit per acre. Nothing has come to my attention as a change that would warrant this new number. Susan (37918), January 4, 2021 at 6:07 PM
Thank you
1-E-21-RZ
Scott January 4, 2021 at 7:46 PM
I oppose any change to the prior review of this property as nothing has changed since the prior review.Scott January 4, 2021 at 7:46 PM
The 2018 prior review approved 1 house per acre for a total of 61 homes. The proposed increase to 197 is a really bad idea. The small section of road will struggle significantly to hold the additional traffic demands from just the 61 prior approved homes. This is a dangerous and very high traffic are in the early morning and pm commute times.
Again, I fully OPPOSE any increase to the potential density of homes or population in that specific area.
1-E-21-RZ
Jay and Lorna January 4, 2021 at 9:00 PM
My wife and I have lived at 5002 Beverly Rd in Fountain City for more than 25 years. We raised our children (now both 30+ years old) here, with them attending the Fountain City schools, graduating from Central High and then both graduates of UT. Over the years, we’ve seen the traffic increase dramatically as more residences have been added in surrounding areas. Many evenings, traffic at Tazewell Pike is backed up past our driveway, which is approximately 0.2 to 0.25 of a mile from the intersection. Calming humps were recently added to Beverly Place due to the traffic that uses it to bypass the Tazewell Pike-Beverly Rd exit. There are many times where vehicles travel at speeds way above 30 MPH and it has only gotten worse as traffic has increased and the increased residential areas out Tazewell Pike and the multi-family units that were approved and built between Anderson Rd and Washington Pk just west of Murphy Road.Jay and Lorna January 4, 2021 at 9:00 PM
There have been NO improvements to the road in the 2+ decades and increasing the density from the previously approved units (60+) to almost 200 (197) is grossly irresponsible and will further deteriorate the quality of life in this neighborhood. Further, during heavy rains, the flooding becomes impassible with the creek overflowing, covering the railroad tracks/bridge and up to 150’ of Beverly Rd on our side of the tracks and at least 75’ on the opposite side. This also floods onto Oakland Rd. This completely blocks travel between Tazewell Pike and the shops like Target and others.
We do not understand how more than tripling the number of available units even has made it to the agenda for the MPC but I respectfully request that this proposed change be rejected. The 60+ units will already add further burden to our roads and other resources in what is a very poor site for development in and of itself.
1-E-21-RZ
Charles and Betty January 5, 2021 at 8:24 AM
We support the Professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre or 61 units total. Nothing has changed since March 2018 that would cause a change in the recommendation. Thank you,Charles and Betty January 5, 2021 at 8:24 AM
James
37918
37918
1-E-21-RZ
James (37918), January 5, 2021 at 8:26 AM
I support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation for the Beverly Rd. property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre, excluding the floodplain.James (37918), January 5, 2021 at 8:26 AM
1-E-21-RZ
Michael and Alicia January 5, 2021 at 8:29 AM
We ( the Michael McMillan family) support the MPC's 2018 recommendation for the above property, to 1 dwelling per acre. Nothing has changed that would warrant a change in the recommendation. Michael and Alicia January 5, 2021 at 8:29 AM
1-E-21-RZ
Lee January 5, 2021 at 11:41 AM
It has come to my attention that there is again a proposal before you to increase the density of the 80 acre tract on Beverly Road. It simply cannot handle the traffic. If the land is to be developed at all, it cannot have an entrance on Beverly Road with a blind curve, narrow bridge, railroad crossing and trucks coming and going at Beverly Steel, there is no safe way to handle additional traffic unless a great amount of money is spent to manage the traffic.Lee January 5, 2021 at 11:41 AM
l am not against growth or progress. I am against greed being placed above a communities safety.
1-E-21-RZ
Barry January 5, 2021 at 12:48 PM
Thursday January 14 we will be watching the MPC online meetingBarry January 5, 2021 at 12:48 PM
We support, agree with the MPC staff's March 8th 2018 recommendation for the property zoning TO A MAXIMUM of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre, 61 units total - excluding floodway and floodplain to determine density.
Nothing has changed since March 8 2018 to warrant a change in the MPC's own recommendation.
"The North Sector Plan shows property as Agricultural, one unit per acre. When you talk about rough properties, this is about as rough as I’ve seen," said planner Mike Brusseau. "We do not have information to be able to recommend any more."
1-E-21-RZ
Lisa January 5, 2021 at 3:17 PM
This email is to oppose the rezoning request to increase the density on 80 acres on Beverly Road, File #1-E-21-RZ.Lisa January 5, 2021 at 3:17 PM
Changing the development density to more than 61 dwelling units per acre on this property is a terrible idea due to the property constraints, including the slope and severe flooding in the area, which greatly affects White's Creek and First Creek. Taxpayers have spent millions to mitigate flooding downstream of this property, and it would be foolish to allow more high-density development to negate that.
Nothing has changed since the March 2018 ruling that would warrant a change in this density. Please protect the homeowners and taxpayers in this area by refusing this request.
1-E-21-R
John and Andrea January 5, 2021 at 6:15 PM
My husband and I would like our voices heard in the upcoming meeting on Jan 21st in regards to 1-E-21-R2. We would like to issue the following statement:John and Andrea January 5, 2021 at 6:15 PM
We continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre - 61 units total. Nothing has changed since March 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
1-E-21-RZ
Deborah January 5, 2021 at 6:48 PM
I continue to support the professional MPC staff’s March 8, 2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre—61 units total (excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density.Deborah January 5, 2021 at 6:48 PM
Nothing has changed since March 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
Except for about 5 years, I have lived my entire life in Knoxville. My family has used this roadway (Greenway Dr/Beverly Rd) for decades. The bridge is so narrow. And every year it seems the flooding on White’s Creek gets worse. A housing development with 190+ houses will be a nightmare for those of us who travel that way on a regular basis.
Evalyn
37922
37922
12-C-20-SU
Evalyn (37922), January 5, 2021 at 9:45 PM
I would very much implore the commission not to remove the planned district designation in order to allow our neighborhood community the opportunity to hold the developer/builder accountable in developing the site in harmony with the surrounding existing structures. If this designation is removed there will be no accountability whatsoever and the outcome will more than likely be based solely profitability.Evalyn (37922), January 5, 2021 at 9:45 PM
1-E-21-RZ
Mark January 6, 2021 at 8:28 AM
I continue to support the professional MPC staff’s March 8,2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, theproperty should be rezoned to Planned Residential with maximum density of up to1 dwelling unit per acre – 61 units total (excluding the floodway andfloodplain in determining the density). Mark January 6, 2021 at 8:28 AM
Nothing has changed since March 2018 that would warrant achange in the recommendation.
1-E-21-RZ
GENE January 6, 2021 at 9:07 AM
I am joining the support of our fellow area neighborhood associations. They have continued to ask you for the following:GENE January 6, 2021 at 9:07 AM
We continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling per acre--61 units total--excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density. Nothing has changed since March, 2018, that would warrant a change in the recommendation. This density gives the developer reasonable use of his land.Thank you.
President, Buffat Trace Homeowners' Association
Gene
37914
37914
1-E-21-RZ
Gene (37914), January 6, 2021 at 1:59 PM
We continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018, recommendation for this property. Due to the servere constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling per acre--61 units total--excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density. Nothing has changed since March, 2018, that would warrant a change in the recommendation. This density gives the developer reasonable use of his land.Gene (37914), January 6, 2021 at 1:59 PM
Bill
37932
37932
1-G-21-SP
Bill (37932), January 7, 2021 at 9:41 AM
I would ask that dwellings per acre be approved at 3/acre to better fit with current and recent development activities. Bill (37932), January 7, 2021 at 9:41 AM
Chris
37932
37932
1-G-21-SP
Chris (37932), January 7, 2021 at 10:07 AM
The proposed density is too high. 4 homes per acre is not acceptable. Please keep ALL developments at 2.8 or less. Builders are already manipulating these densities by concentrating homes in a smaller area of their developments and calling the other area green space. The homes end up being built at a higher density than approved.Chris (37932), January 7, 2021 at 10:07 AM
Santosh
37932
37932
1-G-21-SP
Santosh (37932), January 7, 2021 at 10:54 AM
It is incredibly frustrating to see all these developments without proper infrastructure development. The hardin valley road in the mornings is already backed up all the way from Food City to few miles west in the mornings. It is a single lane each way narrow road with no side walks. We need wider and better roads We are developing new communities without any parks, recreational areas, bike lanes or infrastructure. There are 5-6 major developments coming up in this area. The traffic already is a nightmare. The road gets flooded with decent rain as we do not have proper drainage system.
I am not against development. I encourage it but we need infrastructure first. Road needs to widen, we need more space dedicated to parks and greenways. Is there a plan for school ? Santosh (37932), January 7, 2021 at 10:54 AM
Kim
37932
37932
1-G-21-RZ
Kim (37932), January 7, 2021 at 11:47 AM
Dear Commission,Kim (37932), January 7, 2021 at 11:47 AM
On behalf of the Hardin Valley community I would once again like to request consideration that the proposed density for this project be consistent with the character and surrounding densities of existing development. I would ask that both the recommended density for HP and average area density be considered when determining allowed density for this development.
Thank you for your consideration.
Kim FrazierHardin Valley Planning Advocates
Kim
37932
37932
12-SB-20-C
Kim (37932), January 7, 2021 at 12:04 PM
Dear Commission,Kim (37932), January 7, 2021 at 12:04 PM
I would simply like to bring attention to the lack of creativity and open space in this concept plan. As we navigate through reviewing and revising the PR ordinance to provide further definition and clarity for applicants, I ask that you, at a minimum, encourage ordinance defined open / green space.
Thank you for your consideration.
Kim FrazierHVPA
Kim
37932
37932
12-C-20-UR
Kim (37932), January 7, 2021 at 12:05 PM
Dear Commission,Kim (37932), January 7, 2021 at 12:05 PM
I would simply like to bring attention to the lack of creativity and open space in this concept plan. As we navigate through reviewing and revising the PR ordinance to provide further definition and clarity for applicants, I ask that you, at a minimum, encourage ordinance defined open / green space.
Thank you for your consideration.
Kim FrazierHVPA
Tina
37932
37932
1-G-21-RZ
Tina (37932), January 7, 2021 at 1:06 PM
I oppose this development in Hardin Valley. ENOUGH of the development in this area. The schools are already overcrowded and the infrastructure is not equipped to handle any more unwanted development. The roads are definitely not able to handle any more traffic. Why don’t you drive through this area during school/rush hour? As a long time citizen of this area, this is not why I moved here and greedy developers are ruining this community. Tina (37932), January 7, 2021 at 1:06 PM
Heather
37932
37932
1-G-21-RZ
Heather (37932), January 7, 2021 at 1:40 PM
Four homes per acre is ludacris. Hardin Valley is already over crowded as a community and our schools are already at max capacity.
Depending on the quality of homes constructed, (ie-not all brick homes) this construction could potentially devalue surrounding homes.
Environmentally, this potential construction will further reduce the natural beauty of Hardin Valley. Heather (37932), January 7, 2021 at 1:40 PM
Fred
37932
37932
1-G-21-SP
Fred (37932), January 7, 2021 at 2:27 PM
The proposed rezoning of this property off of Hardin Valley Road is inconsistent with the neighboring properties and developments. I ask that the Planning Commission mandate a density of less than 2 du/ac. This density insures to maintain property values within the area and minimizes impact to schools and roads. In addition, the Planning Commission should further stipulate requirements of the developer to include design elements for preserving the creek and natural hillsides of the areas and surrounding properties including easements to neighboring properties. Finally, I recommend the planning commission require any developments for this property and any others in the area to make appropriate adjustments to Hardin Valley Road for a dedicated turn off to avoid dangerous turning situations for future and existing developments. Thank you for this consideration and impact to this area.Fred (37932), January 7, 2021 at 2:27 PM
Paige
37932
37932
1-G-21-RZ
Paige (37932), January 7, 2021 at 2:30 PM
As a resident of Massey Creek, this affects not only our subdivision but Hardin Valley traffic, flow and safety. The overall infrastructure is not prepared for this. An outlet to Marietta Church needs to be created and a stop light needs to go there. In 2 years or less turning left out of our subdivision will be horrific. Also, a natural buffer between subdivisions should be required if another builder purchases the land.Paige (37932), January 7, 2021 at 2:30 PM
Paige
37932
37932
1-G-21-SP
Paige (37932), January 7, 2021 at 2:34 PM
As a resident of Massey Creek, this affects not only our subdivision but Hardin Valley traffic, flow and safety. The overall infrastructure is not prepared for this. An outlet to Marietta Church needs to be created and a stop light needs to go there. In 2 years or less turning left out of our subdivision will be horrific. Also, a natural buffer between subdivisions should be required if another builder purchases the land.Paige (37932), January 7, 2021 at 2:34 PM
susan
37932
37932
1-G-21-RZ
susan (37932), January 7, 2021 at 3:00 PM
Please! No more land development! Roads are already congested and this development would kill the Hardin Valley we have all fallen in love with in the first place.susan (37932), January 7, 2021 at 3:00 PM
Paul
37932
37932
1-G-21-RZ
Paul (37932), January 7, 2021 at 3:18 PM
To allow this project to move forward is irresponsible to the communities already built on the small stretch of Hardin Valley. There is a neighborhood on either side of the road of the proposed location and that much density will create another launching pad for an accident. It’s ok to leave some areas green in Hardin Valley and this is certainly one to leave untouched. Paul (37932), January 7, 2021 at 3:18 PM
1-E-21-RZ
Sherianne January 7, 2021 at 6:05 PM
We continue to support the professional MPC staff’s 3/8/2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to planned residential with a maximum density of up to one dwelling unit per acre -61 units total.Sherianne January 7, 2021 at 6:05 PM
Nothing has changed since 3/2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
1-E-21-RZ
Dan and Allison January 7, 2021 at 6:42 PM
I am writing with great concern over the potential rezoning of the property on Beverly Road, near the train tracks. On March 8, 2018, it was recommended that this property be rezoned to contain no more than one house per acre. We feel that this is the MAXIMUM number of homes that should even be considered for this piece of property. The proposition of a builder wanting to build 197 homes on this property is completely out of line. We are asking that the recommendation from March 2018 stands, and that the property be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to one dwelling unit per acre, with a maximum of 61 units total. Dan and Allison January 7, 2021 at 6:42 PM
The amount of Beverly Road traffic from Tazewell Pike is already at a dangerous level. People take their lives into their hands on a daily basis when trying to make a left-hand turn onto Tazewell Pike from Beverly Road. Equally dangerous is the fact that everyone tries to help others out in this intersection by letting them go, and signals are often miscommunicated. Beverly Road is a thoroughfare to the interstate already, and there needs to be a light at Beverly Road and Tazewell Pike. Adding 61 new homes should make this a priority. I can’t even imagine the traffic issues if 197 homes were added.
Please do not allow this to happen!
1-E-21-RZ
Sandi January 7, 2021 at 6:49 PM
I am writing in opposition to the density regarding file number 1-E-21-RZ. We continue to support the professional MPC staffs March 8, 2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre-61 units total (excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density).Sandi January 7, 2021 at 6:49 PM
Nothing has changed since March 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
Our family has lived at 4114 Oakland Drive since 1993. We have had severe flooding problems the entire time. Even after numerous complaints by us and surrounding neighbors nothing has changed. This development would have a horrendous impact, not only on our property but Oakland Drive, Beverly Road, and Greenway Drive.
The feeder schools are already at capacity, traffic will be dangerously put at risk on Beverly Road as well as Tazewell Pike.
Thank you for your gracious consideration in this matter.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210107184916.pdf
1-G-21-SP
Susan January 7, 2021 at 8:06 PM
The development of the land needs to be restricted to the LOWEST density / acre because of slope requirements of the land. Susan January 7, 2021 at 8:06 PM
Grant
37932
37932
1-G-21-RZ
Grant (37932), January 7, 2021 at 8:11 PM
Rezoning to 4 du/ac is entirely inconsistent with surrounding neighborhoods and will further exacerbate a growing problem of exceeding local road and school capacities in our area. As an immediate neighbor, Hardin Valley Road is already becoming a more difficult and dangerous road to enter from side roads. Property values are likely to drop as a result of this investment as well. There does not appear to be precedent for this level of change. Grant (37932), January 7, 2021 at 8:11 PM
1-G-21-RZ
Betsy January 8, 2021 at 3:56 AM
In regard to the planned homes at Hardin Valley Rd & Marietta Church Rd: The number of homes projected is not feasible. Our community is already over run by so many homes & traffic it is no longer able to hold this amount of people. New subdivisions have made it impossible to travel the roads safely. No Fresh air, pollution & the aggressive drivers are ruining our peaceful valley. All the trees that were protecting our environment, water & wildlife are being destroyed. Our community is being taken over by concrete & air pollution. The home builders are squeezing in more homes to pad their pockets. Please review this section & see if the number of homes per acre can be reduced.Betsy January 8, 2021 at 3:56 AM
Tim
37912
37912
1-E-21-SP
Tim (37912), January 8, 2021 at 3:18 PM
See AttachmentTim (37912), January 8, 2021 at 3:18 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210108151848.pdf
1-E-21-RZ
Courtney January 8, 2021 at 4:35 PM
I am opposed to planned density at any levelabove 1 unit per acre on the buildable acres (outside of the flood plain) forthe following reasons.Courtney January 8, 2021 at 4:35 PM
Looking at the map showing the StreamProtection Zone, I am concerned about how an access road for the proposedsubdivision will impact the creek and the flooding. The most level placefor access seems to be in the stream protection zone and would result in a hugeamount of runoff in the creek. That runoff will introduce a lot of sediment andother pollution into the creek as well as increasing flooding.
If the access point to the subdivision is movedout of the stream protection zone, would it be in the middle of the curve onGreenway? That would seem to be low visibility, would also have runoffproblems because of the steeper grade. It would make a big difference howmany cars tried to enter Greenway at this dangerous spot. The fewer thebetter.
I am very concerned that the amount of hardscapecreated by the proposed 3.22 residences per acre zoning would increase floodingand water pollution.
This area floods frequently and deeply—even ifthere are holding ponds for the development, the access road will add runoff toWhite’s Creek. This development willincrease the nuisance from flooding on the established downstream neighborhoods.
This is a dangerous section of road and adding anew intersection will increase the hazard to our entire community.
I love and use greenways, but a greenway on thisproperty would add more hardscape which would add to the problems with runofffrom the property, potentially impacting flooding and water pollution. I questionhow the greenway would be accessed without creating either pedestrian hazardsor additional traffic. There is no placefor pedestrians on Beverly Road at present. I know, I have to walk in the road if I want to from Beverly Place toAnderson Road and the road narrows in the vicinity of this property.
I may have additional comments if I get aresponse to some of my questions posed to the planners. Thank you for considering communityconcerns.
Jonette
37932
37932
1-G-21-SP
Jonette (37932), January 8, 2021 at 7:00 PM
As a Knox county citizen of less than 1/2 mile from this property I am requesting that you consider lowering the density per acre to no more than 3 homes per acre for this property. And make sure the material is 80% brick. You know we are experiencing heavy growth in this area and our schools are at capacity. This small rural road is not adequate for the traffic. Please let some of this valley remain rural. Jonette (37932), January 8, 2021 at 7:00 PM
Beverly
37932
37932
1-G-21-SP
Beverly (37932), January 8, 2021 at 7:55 PM
Really?? More homes and no less four on an acre!! That is crazy. It would be different if y'all had plans for widening Hardin Valley. Traffic is bad enough getting out of our subdivision, Hunters Way! And not to mention, the subdivision that is going in across the street from us, their entrance is right across from ours. Is our infrastructure even ready for this? Beverly (37932), January 8, 2021 at 7:55 PM
Heather
37931
37931
1-G-21-RZ
Heather (37931), January 9, 2021 at 10:10 AM
I concur with the planning staff recommendations (up to 2 dwelling units per acre) for this development. Please prioritize quality development in West Knox County. Please follow Hillside and Ridgetop Protection Plan guidance. Heather (37931), January 9, 2021 at 10:10 AM
11-F-20-UR
ANDREA January 10, 2021 at 1:53 PM
I am writing this email in opposition of the Men's Boarding Home and am asking for the request to be denied. A major concern I have is that I live very close to the property of the boarding house and my children and I could not feel safe in our home if this gets approved. I strongly feel that this type of facility is not right for this area that is surrounded by homes of families and many with children. There is also a daycare right down the road from where this boarding house and I am concerned with the safety of the children there as well.ANDREA January 10, 2021 at 1:53 PM
Another major concern is the types of men that will be living there with no security in place. Angelic ministries stated that the men living there are all previous criminals and men that are not ready to enter society on their own yet. However these men will not be guarded or restrained if there is a problem in the facility. This means men that are not ready to enter society alone will be allowed to come and go as the please in the middle of an extremely residential area. This seems incredibly dangerous and unsafe. Also, this boarding home is proposed as a "gated home" but the Angelic Ministries stated that this means there will only be a fence surrounding the property that has no ability to keep the residents in. This fact adds to my fears of having the boarding home so close to my house and yard.
Another reason the boarding home should not be approved is they do not have all the requirements in their plans. It was stated that Zions Lane would need to be 25 feet across for this type of facility, but road widening was not in their plans. I would also like to address the fact that Angelic Ministries is proposing this as a home for 12 residents and 2 caretakers, but as discussed in the December 10th meeting, the plans show room for more than 12 men. During the meeting, the Knox county codes representative stated that if the boarding home is approved for 12 residents and 2 staff, but has more than12 residents in their boarding home, it would be difficult to enforce after the fact. This is a problem because this facility could be approved due to several technicalities that will not be checked on after it is approved. A boarding house with 12 residents is what is required for the agricultural zoning ordinance, but if the plans are for more residents, the term boarding home and subsequent zone change are all just technicalities to get this facility in an area where it does not belong.
I am also extremely concerned with another statement that was made during the December 10th meeting. One of the commissioners stated that there had been a number of calls made to the fire department for the use of Narcan within a block to half a block of the current facility Angelic Ministries is using for their rehabilitation program. This is a problem because the boarding home has been brought to our community as a program that has had no violent or drug problems in the past and that it will not happen if it gets approved on Zion Lane. However this does not appear to be the case because there have been previous drug problems from residents that could harm our community.
I would also like to mention that in a news story with Tony Earl from Angelic Ministries, who is the head of this project, stated during the interview that he would not want his program for men to be placed in a community that does not want it. After the community meeting and talking with many neighbors, it is clear that our community does not want the men's home in their backyards.
When considering this information, I would like you to consider if you would be willing to expose your family and children to this type of risk. I hope you will take this information and serious concern into consideration when deciding on this proposed boarding home.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
11-F-20-UR
Ashton January 10, 2021 at 2:16 PM
I am asking that you deny the request by Angelic Ministries for a men's boarding home on Zions Lane. My main reason for this is the home will be only a thousand feet away from my home and yard. I will not feel safe in my own home where a facility full of men who are previous criminals and not ready to enter society alone is so close. I also believe that this type of facility is incompatible with the residential area and numerous members of the community share this same belief. One of the many reasons it is incompatible is the fact that there is a daycare and bus stops right down the road from this proposed boarding home. Also it was brought up that this type of facility would not be placed in the residential area if the building was not already there and should be instead placed in a commercial area. Ashton January 10, 2021 at 2:16 PM
Another problem is the plans by Angelic Ministries shows room for more than 12 residents and 2 staff which is the requirement of a boarding house per zoning ordinance. Since the plans show room for more than 12 plus 2 staff it appears that if it is approved there will be more previous criminals in the home and it would be difficult to enforce after the fact. This means the men's boarding home could be approved under a technicality that will not actually be met.
Another concern from myself and the community is the fact that the home will negatively impact surrounding neighbors' property values. Another main reason the home should be denied is there are many risks with a men's home for previous criminals being in the middle of a residential area. This is the main reason the community is opposing the home and was already opposed by the Hall's community.
Another reason the boarding house should not be approved is Angelic Ministries can not guarantee the integrity of every resident or that something bad will not happen. This project was brought to the community as a program to help men that would not otherwise get it and that do not currently have drug problems or are violent. However, one of the commissioners during the December 10th meeting brought up the fact that there had been many calls to the fire department within a block to half a block of Angelic's current homes for previous criminals for the use of Narcan. Narcan was reported as being administered 11 times at this location. This information supports the concerns the community and I have about the facility causing drug related problems as well as other problems.
The last problem with the boarding home if it is approved is it is not a secured facility and the residents can walk away at any time and subsequently be roaming the community that is home to many families and children. The home is proposed as a "gated community," but when questioned about this, Angelic ministries stated there will be a fence around the property. This is not sufficient security because it is not a fence with the intention of keeping the residents in,and is just there to appear like it is a secure facility.
Lastly, when you are considering the approval of the Men's boarding home on Zions Lane, I would like to ask you if you would be willing to expose your family and community to the risks the home presents.
I would like to thank you for your time and consideration
1-E-21-RZ
Doug January 10, 2021 at 4:11 PM
Good afternoon. I continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation for the 80 acres on Beverly Road. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre (61 units total). Besides the floodway and floodplain, the traffic back-up is already heavy at Tazewell and Beverly Roads. This will only add to the volume of traffic and cause further delays, frustration and most likely more accidents. Doug January 10, 2021 at 4:11 PM
Nothing has changed since March, 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
Michael and Jessica
37932
37932
1-G-21-RZ
Michael and Jessica (37932), January 10, 2021 at 5:13 PM
As a property owner in Massey Creek subdivision, we oppose allowing future adjacent subdivisions to build more than the usual 2-3 homes per acre. To maintain the value of the existing homes within Massey Creek and surrounding area, NO exceptions should be made for the subject property (1-G-21-RZ).Michael and Jessica (37932), January 10, 2021 at 5:13 PM
The Hardin Valley and Marietta Church Road's current infrastructure is not prepared to handle the existing approved future residential builds. Hardin Valley schools are currently operating close to or at capacity levels.
We ask that you maintain the high standard of the community and limit the density of future builds.
11-F-20-UR
Amber January 10, 2021 at 5:20 PM
I am writing this email in hopes that you will deny the request for the Men's Boarding Home on Zions Lane. If this facility is approved I will not feel safe in my home and yard. This is because the proposed boarding home is for men who are previous criminals and men that are not ready to enter society on their own yet. These men will not be guarded and there is no security. Angelic ministries mentioned that it will be a "gated community" but the only security in the plans is a fence around the property that is not designed to keep the residents in. This means that if there is a problem or the men want to leave, there is nothing stopping them from leaving and roaming free in my community. It seems dangerous and unsafe to have men that are unable to live by themselves able to roam the community in the middle of a residential area. Another reason I feel this boarding home should be denied is because the plans for the boarding home shows room for more than 12 residents and two staff. This is a problem because to be called a boarding home the requirement is 12 residents. The zoning was changed to agricultural so the home can be called a boarding home. However since the plans show room for more than the required residents to be called a boarding home means that approving it is just due to technicalities that will not be followed in the future. These technicalities further emphasize the fact that the "boarding home" is not right for the residential area at all and should not be approved. Another reason the men's home should be denied is the harm it can have on the community. During the December 10th meeting one of the commissioners stated that there had been many calls made to the fire department within a block of Angelic Ministries current mens home for the use of Narcan. This is a major problem because the men's boarding home has been brought to the community as a program that has had no previous drug or violent problems and that it will not happen when it gets approved on Zions Lane. However, this is completely disproven by the calls to the fire department and further confirms my fears and that of the community. With all this in mind, this home also does not seem like the ideal location for the residents because it will not be close to any public transportation or many jobs, which is the purpose of the program. All of these concerns show why the proposed men's boarding home by Angelic Ministries is not appropriate for the residential area and should not be approved. Amber January 10, 2021 at 5:20 PM
1-G-21-RZ
Cheryl and Talbott January 10, 2021 at 6:48 PM
As a property owner in Massey Creek subdivision, I oppose allowing future adjacent subdivisions to build more than the usual 2-3 homes per acre. To maintain the value of the existing homes within Massey Creek and surrounding area, NO exceptions should be made for the subject property (1-G-21-RZ).
The infrastructure along Hardin Valley and Marietta Church Roads are not prepared to handle the existing approved future residential builds much less additional subdivisions proposing high density. Hardin Valley schools are currently operating close to or at capacity levels.
I ask that you maintain a high standard for the Hardin Valley community and limit the density of future builds per acre to no more than 2 to 3 homes. The current residents should not suffer inconvenience and devaluation of property for the sake of increased wealth for a few developers. Thank you.Cheryl and Talbott January 10, 2021 at 6:48 PM
Applicant
1-G-21-SP
Applicant Correspondence
January 11, 2021 at 3:39 PM
Applicant Correspondence
January 11, 2021 at 3:39 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210111153955.pdf
applicant
Applicant
11-J-20-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
January 11, 2021 at 3:42 PM
Applicant Correspondence
January 11, 2021 at 3:42 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210111154202.pdf
applicant
Taylor
37919
37919
1-H-21-RZ
Taylor (37919), January 11, 2021 at 5:43 PM
Please find attached correspondence from the applicant. Taylor (37919), January 11, 2021 at 5:43 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210111174356.pdf
Kim
37932
37932
1-G-21-RZ
Kim (37932), January 12, 2021 at 9:26 AM
Upon review of Mr. Ben Mullin’s correspondence to Commission regarding the S&E application for rezoning and amendment to the NW Sector Plan, I offer the following response:Kim (37932), January 12, 2021 at 9:26 AM
See attached PDF
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210112092608.pdf
Kim
37932
37932
1-G-21-SP
Kim (37932), January 12, 2021 at 9:26 AM
See attached PDFKim (37932), January 12, 2021 at 9:26 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210112092658.pdf
Ronnie
37917
37917
1-E-21-RZ
Ronnie (37917), January 12, 2021 at 9:30 AM
Ronnie (37917), January 12, 2021 at 9:30 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210112093003.pdf
1-E-21-RZ
Rudy January 12, 2021 at 9:32 AM
I continue to support the MPC staff 2018 recommendation for this property. I travel that route to work every day and have seen the problems there over the years. Any development of the ridge top will be bad, but 197 units is ridiculous. Nothing has changed since 2018 to warrant changing the recommendation of 61 units per acre.Rudy January 12, 2021 at 9:32 AM
1-G-21-RZ
Kim January 12, 2021 at 10:15 AM
My name is Kim Frazier and I am the founder and director of Hardin Valley Planning Advocates and the Community Outreach Coordinator for Knox County Planning Alliance. We are an organized community group that advocates for intentional growth with coordinated infrastructure.Kim January 12, 2021 at 10:15 AM
We reach out to applicants in hopes of bettering communication and relations among citizens and the development community. Knoxville Knox County Planning encourages applicants to reach out to residents in the areas of proposed development projects. We have found that this rarely occurs, therefore, we take that step in hopes of sharing vision, concerns, and agreeable outcomes. I, nor the adjacent property owners of this parcel, have heard from you or your representation and so I am doing so now.
In regards to your filed zoning and sector plan amendment requests, the citizens in the Hardin Valley community are in support of the staff recommendations regarding this land use. You may not be aware that the NW Sector Plan was updated in 2016 as a result of a comprehensive review to determine the needs and desired character of this area by citizens, county departments, county officials and planning staff. In accordance with the vision of the citizens of Hardin Valley and the Northwest area, we do not support a sector plan amendment.
I would welcome the opportunity to discuss your proposal further and I am happy to facilitate a meeting between you and the concerned citizens.
Applicant
1-G-21-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
January 12, 2021 at 10:54 AM
Applicant Correspondence
January 12, 2021 at 10:54 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210112105443.pdf
applicant
Applicant
1-E-21-SP
Applicant Correspondence
January 12, 2021 at 11:09 AM
Postponement requestApplicant Correspondence
January 12, 2021 at 11:09 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210112110939.pdf
applicant
Applicant
1-D-21-UR
Applicant Correspondence
January 12, 2021 at 11:20 AM
My name is Clay McQuade, Marketing Company President for the U-Haul Company of Knoxville and I wanted to extend myself out to any and all concerning the 6909 Maynardville Pike former Kmart location and our meeting scheduled January 14th this week to answer any questions or concerns pertaining to allowing our uses at this location prior to the meeting. We are excited and looking forward to being a good neighbor and investing in our community both personally and financially.My personal cell phone number is 865-207-7800 and will be happy to receive any call or inquiry.Applicant Correspondence
January 12, 2021 at 11:20 AM
applicant
1-E-21-RZ
Cynthia January 12, 2021 at 4:01 PM
I am writing to you concerning File # 1-E-21-RZ, which is a request for the rezoning of acreage on Beverly Road. We have attended the previous two meetings where the developer presented this request to you, and each time he withdrew it quickly before a vote because he didn't want a final decision--he wanted to present it again in the future, hoping to do so at a time when the opposition of the residents could not influence the decision. We are adamantly opposed to any density of more than 1 per acre which is what the MPC staff has recommended. This was 61 units total, excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density.Now, because of the Covid-19 pandemic, we as citizens are not permitted to come to the meeting to protest the developer's plans for this property. I hope that the emails that you have received will carry the same weight at your meeting that our presence did during the previous ones. I fear that the developer sees this as his opportunity to push this through over our objections, since we cannot come and object in person.Cynthia January 12, 2021 at 4:01 PM
Nothing has changed since March of 2018 when the MPC staff recommended that the property be Planned Residential Zoning at a density of 1 per acre. This property is not suitable for dense development because of the floodway and flood plain as well as the areas that are steeply sloped.We already have flooding concerns in our neighborhood (Emoriland Blvd, along First Creek), with many neighbors having water in their basements. Our back yard has been completely covered by rushing water twice in the 4 years that we have lived here, and once it was so deep and forceful that we had to use shop-vacs to empty the water from inside the house, even though we had plywood, plastic, and sandbags stacked in front of all the doors.
Any large amount of roof and pavement in a development on this property cannot help but contribute to faster runoff, increasing the flooding of White's Creek and downstream on First Creek. It doesn't take a hydrologist to see that, although I believe that there is a report from a hydrologist in the files that have been submitted previously.
Please consider this letter the same as an in-person attendance of your meeting. Covid-19 has already done enough damage to our community without having this developer be able to push a change through simply because we cannot be present to protest.
1-E-21-RZ
Ken January 12, 2021 at 4:31 PM
My name is Kenneth Brady, and I live at 1701 Emoriland Blvd, Knoxville, TN 37917. Please add my letter to the others you have received about the rezoning of the property on Beverly Rd. (File # 1-E-21-RZ). I oppose the density proposed by the developer. I would like to support the recommendation of the Professional MPC staff from March 8, 2018 to rezone the property to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre, excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density.Ken January 12, 2021 at 4:31 PM
This planned development would have a terrible effect on flooding and traffic in the area, and also downstream where I live on the banks of First Creek. My entire back yard has been flooded twice in the past 4 years, with water coming into the house once, even through sandbags and plastic. We do not need additional hardscape upstream to increase the speed of runoff to the creeks that already cannot handle what they are getting now.
This developer is hoping that because we cannot come to the meeting, he will have a chance to get his proposal approved, simply because the community cannot attend to object. However, opposition to his proposal has not lessened in our community and we would be there if we could! Please consider this when you vote on his proposal.
Thank you for your service to the community. Please continue to protect us from those who try to develop properties that are not suitable for the uses that they intend, and which will negatively affect those of us who live nearby. They don't live here, so they don't care how their actions impact the community. They only care about how much money they can make. We have no problem with people making an honest dollar, but not when it is detrimental to whole neighborhoods and existing properties in the surrounding area.
Applicant
1-G-21-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
January 12, 2021 at 4:48 PM
Postponement requestApplicant Correspondence
January 12, 2021 at 4:48 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210112164843.pdf
applicant
12-A-20-RZ
Caroline January 13, 2021 at 9:10 AM
It would be a terrible loss for our community to lose this lovely , peaceful, appreciated, and well used green space. I walk or run there many times a week with my dog.
Enough is enough.
Please do not destroy. Caroline January 13, 2021 at 9:10 AM
Christina
37909
37909
12-A-20-RZ
Christina (37909), January 13, 2021 at 9:36 AM
I am writing to briefly share my support for the rezoning proposal (8300 East Walker Springs Lane). As a renter in Knoxville, finding affordable housing is difficult due to high demand and low supply. I live in West Hills and frequent this section of the greenway. The location is great for new housing development. I understand that it is easy for people with housing to say 'not in my backyard' to people who need housing. My only hope is that these new developments remain affordable to young professionals and families.Christina (37909), January 13, 2021 at 9:36 AM
Applicant
1-D-21-UR
Applicant Correspondence
January 13, 2021 at 10:53 AM
Postponement requestApplicant Correspondence
January 13, 2021 at 10:53 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210112100000.pdf
applicant
Clyde
37914
37914
11-E-20-SP
Clyde (37914), January 13, 2021 at 11:51 AM
I urge you to consider this request on 1/14/2021 meeting. It was postponed on 11/12/2020 and 12/10/2020. Since these are zoom meetings the owner can join from anywhere. There is an active business being operated in violation of the zoning laws which is not in compliance with Sector Plan and Zoning plan for this property. The business, East TN Automotive Performance, is evidently being operated by Mr. Jeremiah Pickle, as he has a business license for an Auto repair shop at 1630 Osborne Rd 37914. Mr. Pickle also has a license for a towing and recovery business, Tennessee Valley Recovery at 9917 Asheville Hwy,37917. Evidently these two business have been consolidated and both are operated at 1630 Osborne. Codes enforcement advised me they would take no further action until the zoning request is decided. In the meantime the auto repair shop and storage of vehicles (30-40 vehicles still on property), a Junk Yard, continues in violation of the zoning laws. The storage of the vehicles would not be allowed even if zoning was changed to General Business. I urge you to follow the recommendations of the MPC staff and deny this zoning request. Osborne Rd has been a low density residential area for more than 60 years. There is no need for commercial zoning. The use of this property is detrimental to use and enjoyment of my property, detrimental to the property values due to Junk yard. Clyde (37914), January 13, 2021 at 11:51 AM
Kevin
37918
37918
1-F-21-SP
Kevin (37918), January 13, 2021 at 2:27 PM
Kevin (37918), January 13, 2021 at 2:27 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210113142710.pdf
Applicant
1-D-21-SU
Applicant Correspondence
January 13, 2021 at 3:20 PM
Applicant Correspondence
January 13, 2021 at 3:20 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210113152016.pdf
applicant
Matthew
37932
37932
1-G-21-RZ
Matthew (37932), January 13, 2021 at 4:01 PM
This property, 12041 Hardin Valley Rd, that has been requested to be rezoned by S&E Properties (better known as the Vice Chair at MPC) should NOT be rezoned to 4du/ac. The Hillside Protection ordinance was implemented for a reason and this requested rezoning doubles the Hillside Protection maximum of 2du/ac. Without the Hillside Protection, surrounding developments would suggest 2.18du/ac. I urge you to deny this rezoning based on the Hillside Protection as well as surrounding approvals. I urge you to deny this rezoning based on severely lacking infrastructure in Hardin Valley. I urge you to deny this rezoning due the gross conflict of interest of an MPC board member as a developer. I urge you to deny any rezoning in Hardin Valley until substantial upgrades are made to the areas infrastructure. Thank youMatthew (37932), January 13, 2021 at 4:01 PM
Applicant
11-J-20-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
January 14, 2021 at 8:40 AM
Applicant Correspondence
January 14, 2021 at 8:40 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210114084044.pdf
applicant
James
37922
37922
1-G-21-UR
James (37922), January 14, 2021 at 2:59 PM
I object to the rezoning and approval for a beer garden at Northshore and Choto Road. My home is within a couple hundred feet of this proposed project. This is a terrible idea for our community.
File 1G21-URJames (37922), January 14, 2021 at 2:59 PM
josh
37931
37931
2-A-21-RZ
josh (37931), February 1, 2021 at 12:34 PM
This particular property had previously appeared before you in July 2020, and resulted in a positive recommendation to rezone the property up to 5 units per acre. For whatever reason, the applicant did not pursue the request any further and did not purchase the property. josh (37931), February 1, 2021 at 12:34 PM
Primos Land Company purchased the property in December of 2020 and has submitted a rezoning request of only 3 units per acre. Furthermore, we have designed/engineered the property for a subdivision of 28 lots which is a yield of less than 1.5 U/Ac. See attached. The concept attached will appear before you in March with a successful zoning result.
I am asking for the commission to approve recommendation of 3 units per acre. I am available anytime for discussion.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210201123401.pdf
William
37931
37931
2-A-21-RZ
William (37931), February 1, 2021 at 7:14 PM
At what point wil the county do some cleanup of Beaver Creek bed, silt removal or same to make the creek deeper, flow better and not as susceptible to flooding. Logically that seem like the appropriate move to protect current property owners before giving developers freedom to continually eliminate natural grounds. You are continually allowing HUGE development in this area at the expense of residents like me who are being impacted by all this residential development. I am not opposed to developing the area...responsibly. Think about and protect us first. I urge you!William (37931), February 1, 2021 at 7:14 PM
Patricia
37912
37912
1-C-21-RZ
Patricia (37912), February 4, 2021 at 8:12 AM
The land is very rocky with many huge and deeply embedded boulders. Extraction methods may involve ripping, jackhammering, and even blasting. Any of these will cause a tremendous amount of disturbance, and potential damage. There are numerous houses and buildings in the immediate area. People and property can/will be adversely affected.Before the property is approved for ANY kind of development, a comprehensive civil engineering report should be completed and made known to the public. The neighborhood should be informed as to what type of excavation will take place, and there should be written certification of the safety and environmental standards which will be followed.There are also numerous sinkholes (clearly visible) throughout the property which will need to be dealt with.Patricia (37912), February 4, 2021 at 8:12 AM
1-E-21-RZ
Elizabeth and Dylan February 4, 2021 at 9:43 AM
We continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation (file # 1-E-21-RZ) for this property. Due to the sevier constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a maximum density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre - 61 total (excluding floodway and floodplain in determining the density).Elizabeth and Dylan February 4, 2021 at 9:43 AM
Nothing has changed since March, 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
Brian
ry rd
ry rd
2-A-21-RZ
Brian (ry rd), February 4, 2021 at 11:27 AM
Please reconsider the amount of houses approved for this area.
Traffic in the proposed area is unreal. During a few hours of the day traffic is backed up for at least a mile towards Oak Ridge Highway. Residential speed limit signs are posted but travelers double the posted speed limits. The line of sight for exit of the proposed subdivision is restricted. This area of EmoryRoad is the narrowest of The line of sight for exit of the proposed subdivision is restricted. This area of EmoryRoad is the narrowest lanes on both east and west Emory road.
At one time Karns was known to have beautiful farmlands. Now I always say is congested look alike subdivisions. They propose three houses per acre is misleading Only a few lots of the subdivision plan is spread out in that ratio to Include the flood zone majority of the subdivisions are crammed packed as tight as they can get them and it is not appealing to the community
The contractor has a little regard for the health of Beaver Creek. The land is being cleared into the flood zone and all of the debris is piled in an area that when the floods come the material will destroy fences and clogged up the water way. The property has a huge asbestos material barn.
vote no for this plan.
Keep Karns beautiful and agriculture zones where it’s possibleBrian (ry rd), February 4, 2021 at 11:27 AM
1-E-21-RZ
Katie February 4, 2021 at 7:25 PM
I continue to support the professional MPC staff's March 8, 2018 recommendation for this property. Due to the severe constraints, the property should be rezoned to Planned Residential with a *maximum* density of up to 1 dwelling unit per acre- 61 units total. (excluding the floodway and floodplain in determining the density)Katie February 4, 2021 at 7:25 PM
Nothing has changed since March, 2018 that would warrant a change in the recommendation.
Allowing any more dwellings than this would have devastating effects on our community. A larger development would cause irreparable erosion, flooding and traffic issues. The ONLY person a change in previous recommendations would benefit is the developer and it would harm an entire community.
Please continue to fight for the good of the people who live, work and worship in this part of Knox county.
Liz
37849
37849
2-A-21-RZ
Liz (37849), February 5, 2021 at 11:44 AM
Knoxville and Knox county need NO MORE residential subdivisions. We need MORE agriculture, more locallly produced foods and goods, more LOW IMCOME, ACCESSIBLE housing options. We do NOT need more subdivisions, slapped up houses. We do NOT need to tear up more land and trees. Liz (37849), February 5, 2021 at 11:44 AM
Lee
37918
37918
1-E-21-RZ
Lee (37918), February 5, 2021 at 1:46 PM
It has been brought to my attention that there is a request for 196 houses on this property. On March 8, 2018the professional staff at the MPC recommended 61 units on this property. No changes to the property or roadimprovements by the County (or City) have been made since that date. To say that this can now handle more than3 times that many dwellings is a disservice to any future buyers of housing on the property and a disservice toFountain City residences.Lee (37918), February 5, 2021 at 1:46 PM
2-A-21-RZ
Linda February 5, 2021 at 2:54 PM
Pictures 1 - 10 as one big lake at 8520 EmoryLinda February 5, 2021 at 2:54 PM
Pictures 13 and 14 when this home was first flooded in 2019 and 2020. Prove that flooding is getting worse in Karns Community due to an increase of rain each year with 65 inches in 2020.
Picture 10 show where garages, out buildings and gardens were flooded.
*see attached for pictures of flooding issues
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210205145440.pdf
Linda
37931
37931
2-A-21-RZ
Linda (37931), February 5, 2021 at 3:19 PM
I oppose rezoning the property located at 8520 W. Emory Road/Parcel ID 77 098 from Current Zoning: A (Agricultural) & F (Floodway) to PR (Planned Residential) & F Floodway. A Floodway is Mother Nature's way of managing water during and after heavy rain events. If structures are located in a Floodway, its likely that they will experience flooding at some point. FEMA regulations restrict any development in red area shown on Knox County Map. Knox County regulations go a step further in protecting residents from potential flooding by restricting development in the light green hatched area on the map. During the 18 years, I have lived across from this property & I have seen flooding past the 100 year zone and the 500 year zone, especially given in 2003, 2017, 2019 and 2020. Some of my neighbors who have lived around this property since the year 1948 until now have direct knowledge of the increase in the flooding from the year 1948 till 2020. Flooding has become exponentially worse during this time period. Linda (37931), February 5, 2021 at 3:19 PM
Julie
37931
37931
2-A-21-RZ
Julie (37931), February 5, 2021 at 6:37 PM
This property is an absolute disaster & should not EVER be built on! FEMA maps show this property a floodplain, Zone AE with both the 100 & 500 yr. floods. This property was approved by the MPC in June 2020 with developer Scott Smith, MPC member. A group of residents met with him re. the property & provided current pics. of the flooding. Beaver Creek flooding is now an enormous issue to many residents in & around the creek. Several residents across Oak Ridge Hwy are now being flooded esp. from 2019 and 2020, respectively. Our infrastructure is in horrible condition with NO improvements being made PRIOR to continued approved development. This is & has been an issue I have argued every time. Unless you reside in Karns & have to sit in daily, bumper to bumper traffic, you have NO concept. Just driving thru does not do justice. If this is approved, & we have been told it was already is a, 'done deal', there will now be over 185 new home sites in less that 1/4 mile, again all new home that have been approved, 2 of them specifically from Smithbuilt. THIS COMMUNITY IS IN NEED OF DESPERATE REPAIR. I think I speak for many, stop talking the talk & start walking the walk. We have been extremely tolerant of this but we are exasperated with all the dangerous roads/intersections and not even being able to pull out from our neighborhoods, safely! This has become extremely dangerous & seen as an act of irresponsibility from our county appointed & elected officials & others.Julie (37931), February 5, 2021 at 6:37 PM
Sarah
37931
37931
2-A-21-RZ
Sarah (37931), February 6, 2021 at 10:11 AM
Oppose this project! The are is too crowded... Traffic in all directions are backed up several hours out of the day even the road is expanded In the future line of sight is restricted and not safe due to the speed of traffic even it's posted. The previous owners named their property, 'lake come and go'. Restricting the floodway will impact property surrounding this project and won't be realized until it's too late. Sarah (37931), February 6, 2021 at 10:11 AM
2-A-21-RZ
Margaret February 6, 2021 at 1:14 PM
Please pay attention to the flood zone and effect that filling it in will have on surrounding property. I am opposed to rezoning the Marshall’s property if it would allow more that 2 houses per acre on the higher ground only. Margaret February 6, 2021 at 1:14 PM
2-A-21-RZ
Vicky February 7, 2021 at 10:38 PM
I would like to see you consider reducing the numbers of houses allowed on this parcel for a few reasons. This proposed development will impact traffic patterns in the area which are already stressed. The proposed plan calls for homes to be dangerously close to the floodplain and could further impact Beaver Creek in a negative fashion. The Karns Community already has too many subdivisions that take away from its beloved agricultural setting. Please consider these concerns. Vicky February 7, 2021 at 10:38 PM
Jack
37922
37922
12-B-20-UR
Jack (37922), February 8, 2021 at 11:17 AM
Attached is a Reply to Staff Report. Applicant may not use land sold in 2016 to calculate density in 2021.Jack (37922), February 8, 2021 at 11:17 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210208111702.pdf
John
37933
37933
12-B-20-UR
John (37933), February 8, 2021 at 1:01 PM
Please see the attached request to postpone file # 12-B-20-UR until the March 2021 meeting.John (37933), February 8, 2021 at 1:01 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210208130114.pdf
2-A-21-RZ
Paula February 8, 2021 at 5:45 PM
Paula February 8, 2021 at 5:45 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210208174546.pdf
2-A-21-RZ
Paula February 8, 2021 at 5:51 PM
Paula February 8, 2021 at 5:51 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210208175103.pdf
Applicant
1-G-21-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 10:00 AM
See Attached Applicant CorrespondenceApplicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 10:00 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210209100019.pdf
applicant
Applicant
1-D-21-UR
Applicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 11:59 AM
Petition of support for U-Haul locating in the Black Oak Plaza shopping center.Applicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 11:59 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210209115917.pdf
applicant
Applicant
1-D-21-UR
Applicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 12:01 PM
Example of a U-Haul big-box conversion.Applicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 12:01 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210209120145.pdf
applicant
Applicant
1-G-21-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 1:31 PM
See Attached E-mail Correspondence with Knox County Engineering.Applicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 1:31 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210209133158.pdf
applicant
1-E-21-SP
Connie February 9, 2021 at 1:35 PM
please see attached commentsConnie February 9, 2021 at 1:35 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210209133508.pdf
Hetaher
37931
37931
2-A-21-RZ
Hetaher (37931), February 9, 2021 at 4:38 PM
This land does not need to be developed as it floods past the outdated 500 year mark almost yearly. Approximately 19 of the 19.5 acres flood. Besides the fact that this property floods, building there will cause worse flooding downstream. W. Emory traffic is already atrocious and our schools cannot handle any more students from large developments. In short, nothing about this neighborhood will benefit the community or the potential new homeowners. S&E Properties backed out of this property due to the flooding issues in 2020.Hetaher (37931), February 9, 2021 at 4:38 PM
Applicant
12-B-20-RZ,12-C-20-SU
Applicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 5:12 PM
Exhibit G - Density StudyApplicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 5:12 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210209171248.pdf
applicant
Applicant
12-B-20-RZ,12-C-20-SU
Applicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 5:13 PM
History of Development at Northshore Town CenterApplicant Correspondence
February 9, 2021 at 5:13 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210209171331.pdf
applicant
Todd
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Todd (37922), February 9, 2021 at 9:16 PM
I would like to express my strong belief that the MPC should not support any removal of the zoning overlay at Northshore Town Center. I am building a town home in NTC based on the concept that was/is promoted by CHM Development. See http://chmllc.com/portfolio_page/northshore-2/
The mixed use concept is at the very core of the concept, and simply building out high density apartments will certainly destroy the concept we've all be sold.
Please support a better Knoxville and do not allow developers to get rich building more multi-family housing at the expense of NTC homeowners.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Todd (37922), February 9, 2021 at 9:16 PM
Kevin and Amy
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Kevin and Amy (37922), February 9, 2021 at 10:28 PM
Please do not remove the zoning overlay originally established by the Knoxville MPC. Please see our attached letter.Kevin and Amy (37922), February 9, 2021 at 10:28 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210209222834.pdf
Stephanie
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Stephanie (37922), February 9, 2021 at 10:36 PM
I am writing to express my concerns about items 12-B-20-RZ and 12-C-20-SU. My husband and I built in Northshore Town Center in 2006. In fact, we were the first family to move in! We were early adopters of the town center concept and were excited to see new urbanism come to Knoxville. Since 2006, we have watched our neighborhood grow into what we believe is the best residential spot in town, so much so that we built a second home in the neighborhood in 2014. We just can't imagine living anywhere else.Stephanie (37922), February 9, 2021 at 10:36 PM
Unfortunately, over the years we have also seen parcel after parcel of the proposed town center be chipped away. Each time a change came up with MPC, we were told that if only we would allow Target, or Publix, or Aventine, or Chick-Fil-A, or ORNL Credit Union, that then the rest of the town center would be able to be completed as originally intended. And now here we are again, looking at another piece of the town center being taken away. It is frustrating, disappointing, and not what we signed up for when we built our homes here.
I still believe NTC can be a true town center, with mixed-use spaces, but allowing a second set of apartments to be built along the waterfront is NOT the solution. Please do not let the chance for Knoxville to have a truly unique mixed-use development slip away.
Frank
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Frank (37922), February 9, 2021 at 11:35 PM
I am writing to express my concerns about items 12-B-20-RZ and 12-C-20-SU. My wife and I were the first to build and move into the town center in 2006. We had witnessed the power of a town center and mixed used developments in other cities across the US such as Reston, VA, Cherry Hill, CO and were excited to see new urbanism come to Knoxville. Unfortunately, over the years we have also seen parcel after parcel of the proposed town center be chipped away. Each time there is a change it seems to make the motivation to create a mixed use development lessen. This rezoning just reinforces the perceptions and stereo type of Knoxville as a disappointing city with no vision of how to be greater than what it was 50 years ago. It is frustrating, disappointing, and not what we signed up for when we built our homes here. Allowing a second set of apartments to be built along the waterfront on Thunderhead is NOT the solution to achieve any goals that Knoxville desires. I am tired of explaining to my friends that have left Knoxville to believe this is a city to come back to as when they visit we have to explain there is still a vision and still a plan. We built twice in NTC under the assumption that the Town Center would be supported by the city of Knoxville to build a mixed-use town center. Another apartment complex is not what we signed up for and paid taxes to the city since 2006 to support. Please do not approve the development of more apartments.Frank (37922), February 9, 2021 at 11:35 PM
Debbie
37912
37912
1-C-21-RZ
Debbie (37912), February 10, 2021 at 12:25 AM
Please see attached letter. Thank you.Debbie (37912), February 10, 2021 at 12:25 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210002545.pdf
Debbie
37912
37912
1-C-21-RZ
Debbie (37912), February 10, 2021 at 1:33 AM
See attachedDebbie (37912), February 10, 2021 at 1:33 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210013344.pdf
Brandon
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Brandon (37922), February 10, 2021 at 8:46 AM
I'm writing in regard to the town center overlay at Northshore Town Center (12-B-20-RZ and 12-C-20-SU). We bought our home in the neighborhood 6 years ago because of the town center master plan. Per the master plan and town center overlay, we would like to see accessible mixed use (including restaurants, retail shops, public boardwalk, and water access) incorporated into the proposed development next to the lake on Thunderhead. Brandon (37922), February 10, 2021 at 8:46 AM
Jillian
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Jillian (37922), February 10, 2021 at 8:47 AM
I am writing in response to 12-B-20-RZ - the removal of the zoning overlay. I am opposed to this for multiple reasons. We build in the Northshore Town Center in 2017 under the assumption that the land around Thunderhead Road would eventually be mixed use property. We had seen the overlay, the plans for the future and were very excited about such a fun and unique area in Knoxville. We were hopeful for the expansion of office space, restaurants and single family homes. We also built here due to the proximity of the elementary school - Northshore Elementary. We have two young daughters who attend the school, one is in kindergarten. We are concerned about school zoning density. There are already apartments at the base of our neighborhood, we don't need to add more residential density to the area. We are also concerned about our property values. Retaining the mixed use overlay would add something special and unique to this area of Knoxville. Adding apartment buildings would not and surely our property values would suffer. I hope you consider our concerns and the fact that this truly was not what we signed up for when choosing to build in this area. Jillian (37922), February 10, 2021 at 8:47 AM
Paul
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Paul (37922), February 10, 2021 at 8:49 AM
As a residents of the Northshore Town Center, my wife and I respectfully ask the board to deny rezoning changes that would allow for additional multi family housing to be built in the Town Center. Adding additional multi family housing will certainly alter the intended plan for this property as a “Town Center” development (uncongested, walkable, attractive). We built in this area because of the appeal that is inherent in a Town Center. We currently have a large multi family complex. Additional units will only diminish the livability that current residents now enjoy and most like diminish our property values as well. Thank you for your consideration.Paul (37922), February 10, 2021 at 8:49 AM
Tammy
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Tammy (37922), February 10, 2021 at 8:59 AM
Our family is very concerned about the addition of apartments to the front of our beloved neighborhood. We bought and build our home in the NTC with the assumption that what we had seen in the first drawings would be what we would see in a proper Town Center. Adding apartments to the towncenter neighborhood will impact our investment; one we worked hard to establish. Our property value will decline if additional apartments are added and take away from the life style we are trying to establish for our Knoxville neighborhood. The additional school traffic and school zoning will be a nightmare to those of us who work and try and get in and out of our neighborhood at the same times school is in session. This is already an issue, but we work together to try and accommodate all parties. The environmental impact will be another issue, the lake and area around it should be made into what it was planned for, a place for all of us to enjoy not just those who these apartments will house.Tammy (37922), February 10, 2021 at 8:59 AM
This is in no way what we signed up for when we spent our money to buy and build in the Northshore Town Center; it will be very disappointing if the board choses to make this change. Please consider our concerns.
Randall
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Randall (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:00 AM
As an original lot owner and now homeowner in Northshore Towne Center, I wish to convey my deep concern regarding the MPC's recommendation to rezone the property on Thunderhead surrounding the pond. We already have plenty of population density at NTC due to the Aventine apartments. When my wife and I purchased this lot and decided to build, we did so based upon the promise of the mixed use, truly planned "village like" community concept. We have indulged the "double taxation" political gaming of annexation to the city and are one of only a few homeowners of the thousands in the city that have to pay city AND county taxes. And now, after buying and building in good faith, you want to support the developer in switching the rules to allow yet another apartment complex to surround us. This is fraudulent and blatantly unfair to us NTC homeowners. I can support a mixed-use residential area around the pond that allows for lower-density residences or lofts over businesses, etc. This NTC zoning has changed so many times over the years and the repeated changing of the rules is just not right. Has the developer truly attempted to attract customers with fair pricing based upon the earlier zoning? This appears to be simply "the quickest way to the biggest bucks" approach and is not in line with the original intent of this property plan. I respectfully ask the MPC to maintain the current mixed-use zoning for this project.Randall (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:00 AM
Applicant
2-A-21-UR
Applicant Correspondence
February 10, 2021 at 9:04 AM
withdrawal requestApplicant Correspondence
February 10, 2021 at 9:04 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210211090448.pdf
applicant
Jim
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Jim (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:05 AM
I am very concerned about the efforts to rezone the Northshore Town Center area around the lake. I researched and bought my property in this neighborhood to enjoy with my family. I bought in this neighborhood based on what we were told would be a proper town center area by the lake. My wife walks daily in the neighborhood and feels very safe; adding apartments will change that dynamic. The environmental impact will be an issue as well; let alone the additional school traffic that we already deal with on a daily basis. I am to say the least concerned about my property value as well, this change in plans will decrease the value of the homes we worked hard to build.Jim (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:05 AM
Please consider those of us in the Northshore Town Center who are in this neighborhood because of the previous plans that were in place. I don't oppose building us the area but do wish the board would consider changing the concept to more of what was promised previously.
Anderson
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Anderson (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:12 AM
My husband and I are a young couple building in the Northshore town center neighborhood. What drew us to this area were the amenities and restaurants the town center has offered and the potential for the town center to grow in this way. When we heard of more apartment complexes petitioning to be build, I was perplexed why this would not be more shopping and restaurant space. I think an additional apartment complex would overcrowd the already crowded town center. I think we can find a much better utilization of space for this area by the lake. Additional restaurants and retail would provide more jobs for the surrounding community. I would also love to see NTC as an environmentally friendly place. We need more greenery and less parking lots and apartment buildings. My dream for NTC would be to partner with companies like Target and the Elementary school to create greenhouses on the roof of these buildings to help reduce our carbon footprint. ( How cool would the elementary science classes be?! :) ) I think this could bring a lot of revenue and publicity to the town center if we adopted ideas and practices like this. Anderson (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:12 AM
Tawny
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Tawny (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:16 AM
My family recently purchased a home in Northshore Town Center from out of state, and I am writing in regard to the rezoning discussion (12-B-20-RZ and 12-C-20-SU). I am deeply concerned with the proposal at hand and the impact it will have on our community. We moved here under the assumption that the Town Center would retain its initial concept and remain a mixed-use space, and not consist solely of apartment complexes around our lake area. Such a development would not only be environmentally and visually unsound, it would negatively impact the property value of our home and create school density issues which trouble me as the mother of a child on track to attend Northshore Elementary (one of the primary reasons we moved here). The traffic impacts will also create new stressors and delays for the residents of this community. My family has been very excited about this beautiful place we have moved... please do not greenlight this development and diminish that.Tawny (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:16 AM
Dean
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Dean (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:29 AM
This is in reference to Case Nos. 12-B-20-RZ and 12-C-20-SU. Having purchased a million dollar home in Northshore Town Center not more than 3 months ago, I am shocked to learn of the developer's plans to reverse plans to develop mixed use space development in favor of simply multi-family apartments. This is clearly not what I anticipated when purchasing my home in this area. Nor it is it a plan consistent with the plans reviewed as part of my due diligence to relocate to the Northshore Town Center neighborhood. The decision to purchase was based in part on the beauty of the community as well as the future development of property consistent with and complementary to, the existing community. The Developer's intention to now jettison the previous cogent and complementary conceptual development in favor of apartment buildings raises numerous concerns. Depreciation of property values, diminution of aesthetics, density concern coupled with environmental impacts based on multi-family apartments in a small area, traffic, the added congestion and logjams to the neighboring school much less negative ingress and egress issues to our existing neighborhood, all make the Developer's current plan untenable.Dean (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:29 AM
Please see the attached letter uploaded here. We respectfully request the MPC reject the Developer's current site plan. Thank you
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210092939.pdf
Brittany
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Brittany (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:57 AM
When my husband and I chose the NTC as the spot for our dream home in 2019, we envisioned a unique blend of small community mixed with amenities and local business we could walk to with our children. The concept of a walkable town center right down the street from our home and the school our children would eventually attend sold us immediately. After learning that the investors/developers had petitioned the MPC for removal of the zoning overlay in order to build ANOTHER apartment complex in this tiny community, I felt two emotions: anger and sadness. Based on the way the developers petitioned the MPC (it seemed to be totally in secret and in no way involved the neighbors as allies in this project), it's clear that those who are involved in this project are in no way concerned with losing the environment of a walkable town center that we homeowners signed up for. This household, like many others, is wholly against a project on the Northshore Town Center Property consisting only of multi-family housing. My hope is that the developer will work with us, the neighbors, to reach a solution that works for everyone involved. Brittany (37922), February 10, 2021 at 9:57 AM
Sally
37922
37922
12-C-20-SU
Sally (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:20 AM
When we built our home here, we asked questions about how would this area be built and grow. What we were told and 'bought into' as a wonderful plan and ASSET to the Knoxville community at large was a new concept to our wonderful area.Now we are told that the land has been sold and the new owner wants to change its use. He knew what he was purchasing and the plans for its usage/development when he made his purchase...Sally (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:20 AM
I implore you folks to stay the course and keep the plan to develop a true town center as previously agreed upon.
The quality of family life should be of the highest importance.
A change in plans for the use of this property would impact not only NTC neighbors, but also the city.
Consider the impact additional apartment populations will have on city emergency medical, fire, and police personnel who are already pressed to care for those in their jurisdiction.
Consider the enrollment at Northshore Elementary school and student density.
Consider the environmental issues that have yet to be resolved in this area...The water retention area in the proposed area is what flooded and covered Northshore Drive for weeks in 2019. Is building 4 story apartment buildings in that area the environmentally right or smart thing to do?
Shops and single family homes in this area as originally planned protect the quality of life as shop owners and home owners are invested in working for the success of the community.
Louise
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Louise (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:30 AM
Louise (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:30 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210103001.pdf
Stephanie
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Stephanie (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:34 AM
RE: Case Nos. 12-B-20-RZ and 12-C-20-SUStephanie (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:34 AM
I write to express my vehement opposition to the proposed removal of the zoning overlay and subsequent building of additional apartment/high-density residential complexes in the Northshore Town Center. My husband and I purchased a home in the Northshore Town Center neighborhood this past summer, excited about the prospects of living in a mixed-use development – the only of one its kind in Knoxville outside of downtown. We specifically chose our home based on the concept of a town center and the opportunities and lifestyle that it provides. We researched the proposed plans for the continued development of the area and were excited for the mixed-use development it promised. Lifting the zoning overlay will essentially kill any future mixed-use development of this kind. In addition to the overall disappointment that our dreams for our neighborhood would so quickly be dashed (and our concern on how this will impact our future property value), we are worried, furthermore, about the additional traffic, environmental impacts, and the strain to the school and related resources. Removing the overlay and adding high-density apartments will completely void the possibility of making this area a true town center and make our neighborhood just another conglomeration of “make as much money as you can” developments that currently exist in Knoxville. I plead that you deny the request to lift the zoning overlay on this land.
Sharon
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Sharon (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:38 AM
We are hiring an attorney to represent us. We would like to postpone for 30 days so that our attorney has time to prepare. We purchased our home entirely based on the Town Center concept that MPC laid out several years ago (MPC 2033 Vision Report). We love the opportunity to walk to retail and restaurants as outlined in this plan. We would be open to mixed use development (combo retail, restaurant, single family use), but not apartments. The neighborhood is already dense enough. Adding more people could create environmental issues, overcrowded school, etc. We fear our property value would decline with so many apartments nearby. We have already accepted that we have one apartment complex onsite already. We do NOT need two!! Completely destroys the original concept and we vehemently oppose.Sharon (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:38 AM
julie
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
julie (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:41 AM
I am writing with my concerns about removing the overlay on the property adjacent to my home. This involves cases 12-C-20-SU and 12-B-20-RZ. I built my home with the understanding that this would be a Town Center with a blend of restaurants and shops with residential homes surrounding it. As a part of the NTC Neighbors, I have concerns about the traffic density, my home value, and overall quality of living space if this overlay is removed. This is not what I was promised when I signed up to live here!Please keep the beauty and quaintness of this neighborhood intact!!julie (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:41 AM
Susan
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ,12-C-20-SU
Susan (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:42 AM
Northshore Town Center was built upon the premise that we were living in a town center. The purpose of a town center is to recreate a piece of the city where one doesn’t exist. Whereas traditional suburbs keep home, work, and retail separate, town centers usually have a mix of shops, housing, and other spaces such as libraries or offices. I am 100% opposed to the development of the apartment complex which goes against what the original agreement was. This is not what the residents of this community signed up for. Homes in this community get a high amount per square footage which in part is due to the benefits associated with living in a town center. I am not, however, opposed to amended plans which include a combination of retail, restaurant, and single- family living spaces. If this is allowed it will have a direct impact on me personally. My house value will decrease which is not tolerable when was not what the plan was for the community. Secondly, this town center has grown and helped support local restaurants but if you start changing the concept you start changing the folks that live there. So, what happens then? Please do not allow this change to be granted for the sake of those living in the town center and for the local businesses who rely on our community as a large source of their patrons.Susan (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:42 AM
Piers
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ,12-C-20-SU
Piers (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:45 AM
I want to voice my concern over the proposed rezoning of the North Shore Town Center area around Thunderhead Road. Piers (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:45 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210104527.pdf
12-C-20-SU
Mary February 10, 2021 at 10:47 AM
I built a home in Beau Monde at the top of the Northshore town Center. This is to be my forever home. What drew me to build here was the Town Center design. Before buying my lot I learned about changes that had been made amending the plan, such as adding the School and one large complex of apartments. The proposed removal of the overlay completely changes the tenor of the neighborhood and should be denied.
That being said. I would support co
A mixed use with store fronts and loft living above.
One cannot unbuild a home. If this plan goes through, I will have lost the community I sighed up for. I believe this removes my right to quiet enjoyment of my home and neighborhood.
Other issues to consider are the impacts of the proposed high density apartments on Northshore School. Access to fire and emergency response. Already difficult. Roads and infrastructure not built for such a project and environmental issues.
Thank you for your consideration. Mary February 10, 2021 at 10:47 AM
12-C-20-SU
Dianne February 10, 2021 at 10:58 AM
I am a resident of the Northshore Town Center neighborhood and would like to add my voice to others in this area asking that the Town Center Neighborhood concept and the overlay that protects it, be maintained. This concept is an example of forward thinking with evidence of great success in areas both local and in popular cities such as Nashville, Asheville and Atlanta. I think it speaks highly of success when you see the Regas Market Place and the Farragut area striving for something that has already begun in Northshore Town Center. I was watching the popular ‘Ted Lasso’ series on Apple + last night, and lo and behold, there on the screen is exactly what Northshore Town Center has begun. A multi use mix of residential and retail, play grounds and sidewalks, with living spaces above shops and restaurants. I urge you to continue to protect the overlay and concept that we and others, in good faith, believed was the plan for this area.Dianne February 10, 2021 at 10:58 AM
Vernon
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Vernon (37922), February 10, 2021 at 11:07 AM
see attached PDFVernon (37922), February 10, 2021 at 11:07 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210110709.pdf
Jennifer
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Jennifer (37922), February 10, 2021 at 11:24 AM
This is in reference to cases 12-B-20-RZ or 12-C-20-SU and the development of Northshore Town center. I have attached a letter for your consideration prior to Thursday's hearing.Jennifer (37922), February 10, 2021 at 11:24 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210112452.pdf
Brad
37912
37912
1-C-21-RZ
Brad (37912), February 10, 2021 at 11:43 AM
Our association has met multiple times to hear concern/questions from neighbors and developer. Attached is a response for you from those meetings and conversations. I hope to get to read this during the meeting tomorrow but do not know how much time will be available. We appreciate MPC's attention. Brad (37912), February 10, 2021 at 11:43 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210114357.pdf
Cullum
37922
37922
12-C-20-SU
Cullum (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:07 PM
See attachedCullum (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:07 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210120705.pdf
Patrick
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Patrick (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:16 PM
See attached .pdfPatrick (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:16 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210121601.pdf
Cherie
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Cherie (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:41 PM
Please see attached documentCherie (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:41 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210124103.pdf
Charity
37912
37912
1-C-21-RZ
Charity (37912), February 10, 2021 at 12:52 PM
Thank you to the developers for the open and honest communication.Charity (37912), February 10, 2021 at 12:52 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210125226.pdf
Dal
37922
37922
12-C-20-SU
Dal (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:58 PM
Dal (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:58 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210125823.pdf
12-B-20-RZ
Larry February 10, 2021 at 12:59 PM
Larry February 10, 2021 at 12:59 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210125903.pdf
JP
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
JP (37922), February 10, 2021 at 1:14 PM
I would like to express my concern to the proposed apartment complex density at 2002 Thunderhead Rd. The amount of new individuals young and old seems high based of an already completed apartment complex across the street. Some of my concerns are listed below. I think a more mixed use (apartment/retail) design would be in favor based off the original plans we were sold on. This is what we were sold on happening over five years ago. I believe the town center concept is great for Knoxville and with a successful grow model it could happen in other Knoxville areas.JP (37922), February 10, 2021 at 1:14 PM
1. Environment - what happens to the pond/lake the apartments will be around. Paving/covering all that dirt will lead to greater run off2. Density - the area at time is already over crowded mainly based off traffic concerns3. School zoning - is the school able to handle the increase density? We built in the town center to walk our kids to school 4. Original approved planned - again we built, pay city and county taxes based of the original plan. If the original plan is changed can we change the annex of the neighborhood?5. City Fire/Police/Ambulance - since we are an annex of the city the closes fire department is at West Hills. When we called the fire department it took over 20 minutes for them to arrive. The increased density, traffic, etc cannot wait for over 20 minutes for these services.
Susan
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Susan (37922), February 10, 2021 at 1:31 PM
Susan (37922), February 10, 2021 at 1:31 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210133150.pdf
Ashley
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Ashley (37922), February 10, 2021 at 1:39 PM
Case 12-B-20-RZ/12-C-20-SUNorthshore Town Center was designed to be a town center and this is what the property owners bought into. It is not acceptable to change the plans after someone has invested their money in a home to create a lifestyle for themselves. The property value will no doubt decrease with the apartment complex and the ability for future growth of businesses and restaurants will be gone. The bottom line is simply that this neighborhood is unique for Knoxville and that is why it has been so popular. Personally, this affects my investment in my home and the reason that I decided to build a life at Northshore Town Center.Ashley (37922), February 10, 2021 at 1:39 PM
Applicant
1-C-21-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
February 10, 2021 at 1:56 PM
APPLICANT CORRESPONDENCE. See attached letter from the Applicant. Applicant Correspondence
February 10, 2021 at 1:56 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210135616.pdf
applicant
Dee
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Dee (37922), February 10, 2021 at 1:57 PM
I am writing to ask you to NOT approve the zoning request for Daniel Corp to the Northshore Town Center zoning overlay. Cases 12-B-20-RZ and 12-C-20-SUDee (37922), February 10, 2021 at 1:57 PM
When originally approved, the town center zoning overly created a community like no other. Over time, developers have continuously worked to dismantle this vision that we all invested in. What was once a community that was proposed to be single family homes, shopping, and restaurants, has been systematically dismantled by developers.
I ask you to vote NO on the proposed change and protect the original vision of Northshore Town Center that provided walkable community like no other in Knoxville!
12-C-20-SU
Richard February 10, 2021 at 2:17 PM
Please preserve the original town center concept l. We have one large department complex which is a good thing. Adding a second will certainly change the town center concept. I know that it has been difficult to get to the retail critical mass needed for the tow center. The land being go sidetracked for the apartments is do perfect for more retail. Please don’t allow the apartments and give the town center more time to become what we all want it to be.Richard February 10, 2021 at 2:17 PM
Debra
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Debra (37922), February 10, 2021 at 2:25 PM
Debra (37922), February 10, 2021 at 2:25 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210142517.pdf
12-B-20-RZ
Amy February 10, 2021 at 3:27 PM
I’m writing in regards to the rezoning of the Northshore Town center area (12-B-20-RZ and 12-C-20-SU). We bought our home in October of 2019 in large part due to the current and proposed development of this area. We are gravely concerned that the proposed development changes will devalue our home and cause strain on the school system. We ask that you leave the zoning of these two areas as they were intended. Amy February 10, 2021 at 3:27 PM
Applicant
12-C-20-SU
Applicant Correspondence
February 10, 2021 at 6:05 PM
Please find attached a postponement request on behalf of the Applicant.Applicant Correspondence
February 10, 2021 at 6:05 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210180547.pdf
applicant
Applicant
12-C-20-SU
Applicant Correspondence
February 10, 2021 at 6:06 PM
Please find attached a postponement request on behalf of the Applicant.Applicant Correspondence
February 10, 2021 at 6:06 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210210180622.pdf
applicant
Treven
37912
37912
1-C-21-RZ
Treven (37912), February 10, 2021 at 10:47 PM
I’m a homeowner in this area, and commute daily on a motorcycle, and adding
500-1000 vehicles traveling to and from, on an already overly congested Merchant drive (and at Wilkerson dr) is a nightmare to navigate. To get out at peak times and even just normally; It’s dangerous.
I also agree with the raised concerns regarding increased traffic on McClain Dr. used to bypass Merchant dr. Inevitably cars will take it to avoid the backup, and the residential speed limit is 25mph, which is roundly ignored by most. Why add to that?
The three-way intersection of Pleasant Ridge and Merchant Dr. is similarly a disaster in its current state, at peak times. Why add more traffic?
Geologically speaking, I am concerned with the impact that building on the mountainside will pose. Before the property is approved; I want to see the geotechnical report (that was conducted) about what effects this would have on the area, to include blasting the MASSIVE rocks out of there, addressing the numerous sinkholes, and accounting for runoff and how it’s dealt with. The carbon footprint has to be considered and made public to those directly affected in its wake.
This development is proposing nearly a 50% increase in apartment units to an already congested area of our neighborhood. It’s not what we need. We need outdoor space. If this won’t be considered as an un-manicured park, or at most an RN3, then keep it protected. Treven (37912), February 10, 2021 at 10:47 PM
Applicant
12-B-20-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
February 11, 2021 at 11:11 AM
postponement requestApplicant Correspondence
February 11, 2021 at 11:11 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210211111102.pdf
applicant
Krista
N/A
N/A
12-B-20-RZ,12-C-20-SU
Krista (N/A), February 11, 2021 at 11:20 AM
I hope you can understand our extreme concerns for this proposed layover. Our intentions are sound as we want the best for our neighborhood and community.Krista (N/A), February 11, 2021 at 11:20 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210211112019.pdf
Justin
37871
37871
3-SB-21-C
Justin (37871), February 12, 2021 at 1:37 PM
482 lots is WAY too many lots for that area. There is nothing that large in our entire community. This would create non stop traffic in my front yard around the clock. Justin (37871), February 12, 2021 at 1:37 PM
Courtney
37806
37806
3-SB-21-C
Courtney (37806), February 18, 2021 at 12:05 PM
Hello my name is Courtney Key and I live in Mascot, Tennessee. Originally from the Powell area which is closer to the city of Knoxville I could not wait to move out here and experience what living in the country was like. I know that I don’t live in straw plains but I am still apart of this community and this particular area wanting to build a mega subdivision is very close to my home. Since I live so close I travel this area quite often. My husband and I love our community because of the slower paced, quiet and rural lifestyle. You can’t experience these things living closer to Knoxville which is why we moved out here. I fear for the day this area becomes too built up and brings with it a ton of traffic killing our way of life out here. Bringing in all this new traffic would really take away from the peaceful, quiet slow paced lifestyle that we all know and love out here. Not only that but the massive size of this project takes away from the beautiful land. I hope you will consider how the massive size of this project would affect the life of this community and the reason everyone loves living out here. Lastly please consider making this a smaller project, thank you. Courtney (37806), February 18, 2021 at 12:05 PM
Evangelynn
37924
37924
3-SB-21-C
Evangelynn (37924), February 18, 2021 at 3:40 PM
I am very concerned about this proposed development, particularly the potential impacts to the neighborhood streets and traffic and the area utility services (water and sewer). I believe the density of this planned development is inappropriate for the surrounding area, and the fact that the entry points are both on Ruggles Ferry is a huge drawback. Traffic on this road is already a concern and this will worsen that situation. Water and sewer services are sometimes a problem in this area and I am concerned this many lots will overburden the system. Finally, I don't want to see my property values decrease due to the issues created by this subdivision. This is very unfair to the other property owners in the neighborhood.Evangelynn (37924), February 18, 2021 at 3:40 PM
Sarah
37871
37871
3-SB-21-C
Sarah (37871), February 19, 2021 at 9:51 AM
The massive size of this subdivision is absolutely ridiculous for this area. Ruggles Ferry Road cannot support this much daily traffic. Most people have lived on this road their whole lives and have seen the traffic increase in the past few years and no one living on this road wants to see this increase dramatically. This is a rural area and while growth is welcomed, 482 houses is not needed/wanted for this community. Please consider downsizing the number of homes. You can profit just as much from nicer homes on larger lots.Sarah (37871), February 19, 2021 at 9:51 AM
Carl
37924
37924
3-SB-21-C
Carl (37924), February 19, 2021 at 10:16 AM
Attached is my letter opposing concept plan 3-SB-21-C. Thank you.Carl (37924), February 19, 2021 at 10:16 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210219101600.pdf
Becca
37871
37871
3-SB-21-C
Becca (37871), February 22, 2021 at 10:30 AM
My house is directly across from the entrance to this MEGA-subdivision. This would create non-stop traffic on Ruggles Ferry and the connecting roads can not handle this traffic. The concept of this many houses does not fit with the current setting of this area. Becca (37871), February 22, 2021 at 10:30 AM
David
37924
37924
3-SB-21-C
David (37924), February 22, 2021 at 12:45 PM
I oppose this high intensity project due to the negative environmental impact it will have on the Holston River Basin area of the proposed site. Has the Environmental Impact Study been completed?David (37924), February 22, 2021 at 12:45 PM
Kathleen
37922
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Kathleen (37922), February 22, 2021 at 3:03 PM
Too many traffic hazards at the entrance to Bexhill subdivision, Bluegrass elementary school, heavy traffic from Northshore and Kingston Pike and Bluegrass Animal Hosp entrance directly adjacent to Bexhill entrance, " crossing islands" directly in front of the entrance to Bexhill, traffic seldom stops for. It's only a matter of time before someone is killed at the subdivision entrance.Kathleen (37922), February 22, 2021 at 3:03 PM
Locating commercial/retail shops at the entrance to this subdivision would not only bring more traffic to an area that is already a hazard to cars and pedestrians but it has the potential to bring down neighborhood property values. Most homeowners do not want the entrance to their subdivision to be made up of commercial/retail stores?
Having lived in Bexhill subdivision for 30+ years, retail/commercial stores at the entrance to the subdivision are certainly not something I am in favor of. Just ask yourselves, would you want them at the entrance to your subdivision? Then do the right thing and vote NO.
The last thing Bexhill residents need is "retail stores" at the entrance to their subdivision.
Derek
37924
37924
3-SB-21-C
Derek (37924), February 22, 2021 at 5:43 PM
Please see my attached letter regarding the above noted planned development. Thank you for your service and for your consideration of our concerns.Derek (37924), February 22, 2021 at 5:43 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210222174334.pdf
Kevin
37871
37871
3-SB-21-C
Kevin (37871), February 22, 2021 at 9:09 PM
I own and live on 12.5 acres adjoining this proposed dense subdivision. While I am not opposed to a subdivision that fits into the surrounding area, I am opposed to a subdivision that has almost 3 homes per acre. Most of the homes in this area are on 2 acres or more. One of the main reasons we moved from West Knoxville to this location 20 years ago is because it is more rural and has a country feel. A subdivision with this density would definitely take away from the attractiveness of this area. This proposed subdivision would not only dramatically increase traffic on Ruggles Ferry Road but would also decrease property values in the area. Kevin (37871), February 22, 2021 at 9:09 PM
Clayton
37918
37918
3-SA-21-C
Clayton (37918), February 22, 2021 at 9:47 PM
What are they planning to put on the property? My home butts right up to this property and I wanted to see what restrictions they have for building! Does it have to Comply with property values in the are. The homes in the surrounding area appraised for over 400k and under. In sending this notice what rights do we have as homeowners to keep this property from being used as low income housing or something of this nature!Clayton (37918), February 22, 2021 at 9:47 PM
Todd
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Todd (37922), February 23, 2021 at 11:17 AM
Though our case has been postponed, I would like to reiterate that my position against having the zoning overlay removed. Thank you for your consideration.
Todd SnyderTodd (37922), February 23, 2021 at 11:17 AM
Stephanie
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Stephanie (37932), February 23, 2021 at 5:40 PM
Hardin Valley road is becoming unsafe with the current surplus of homes and the school so closely together on a curvy, narrow, 2 lane road. I constantly see wrecks. I’ve even see a bicycle hit by a car. Adding 200+ homes is unsafe and irresponsible!Stephanie (37932), February 23, 2021 at 5:40 PM
Pamela
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Pamela (37932), February 23, 2021 at 5:43 PM
Please do not approve this request until Campbell Station road is widened and can accommodate the excessive increase in traffic that this will bring. People will die in traffic accidents as this is a very dangerous road as it is now. It would be irresponsible to put more homes in without the infrastructure to support such traffic. Thank you. Pamela (37932), February 23, 2021 at 5:43 PM
Amber
37931
37931
3-F-21-RZ
Amber (37931), February 23, 2021 at 5:47 PM
As a 7 year HV resident I’ve seen the growth in homes paralleled with traffic and it’s been overwhelming at peak travel times causing consistent auto accidents increasing travel times and frustration for drivers. There’s not really any “alternate” routes to go North on Pellissippi Pkwy to get on the interstate. More homes will cause HV to become a less desirable place to live and raise a family. It’s overcrowded. I’d rather see major retail to bring more jobs locally here like Starbucks or ChickFilA instead of more subdivisions, houses and cars. Or common areas that don’t have duck and goose poop all over the sidewalk, ie Pellissipi State College. Clear out land for a park or a dog park or a safe walking area and more vehicle lanes to pass/travel, NOT MORE HOUSES PLEASE! Amber (37931), February 23, 2021 at 5:47 PM
Teresa
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Teresa (37932), February 23, 2021 at 5:47 PM
I have lived in Knox County for 32 years and in Hardin Valley since 1997. We have seen exponential growth in the last five years. The traffic on Campbell Station and Yarnell Roads has increased dramatically and the schools have become more crowded. We don’t need another subdivision in the area. The infrastructure isn’t in place to support an additional 243 homes. Please vote to deny this application. Thank you!Teresa (37932), February 23, 2021 at 5:47 PM
Kris
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Kris (37932), February 23, 2021 at 5:53 PM
This is getting to be ridiculous land grab from the developers here in Hardin Valley. You are creating an unsustainable environment for residents at this community. The infrastructure cannot sustain what your doing let alone the school system. We have had so much construction and growth and you all need to draw a line in the sand. Kris (37932), February 23, 2021 at 5:53 PM
Moriah
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Moriah (37932), February 23, 2021 at 5:56 PM
MPV, please deny this application. Hardin Valley does not have the infrastructure to allow that many homes, that many families. Moriah (37932), February 23, 2021 at 5:56 PM
Amanda
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Amanda (37932), February 23, 2021 at 6:02 PM
I am at a loss to think what the [REDACTED] is going on at planning right now. Campbell Station Road is already maxed out with traffic. It’s showing subsidence in many parts and has been for several years now. Amanda (37932), February 23, 2021 at 6:02 PM
Schools are above capacity and the pressure being put onto the teachers. The traffic for the schools is already terrible leaving residents struggling to get around on mornings and evenings. New houses are not needed right now. Fixes to the already deteriorating roads and over subscribed school places should be considered before any new houses are built.
At present Hardin Valley does not have a good enough infrastructure for traffic or the schools.
Stop putting profit above everything else. Start looking at the bigger picture.
Suzanne
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Suzanne (37932), February 23, 2021 at 6:19 PM
Thus has to be denied. We the people of Hardin valley that have spent 30 plus years living here are tired of you allowing all this growth where they are coming in here excavating all the forestry to where the wildlife has nowhere to go to live and the runoff of the property that has been stripped is damaging other people’s property. Your allowing all these schools to be overcrowded and the zoning for the Hardin valley academy is ridiculous. Thus is all for the padding of your pockets and no consideration of the people. STOP THE DESTUCTION.Suzanne (37932), February 23, 2021 at 6:19 PM
Jessica
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Jessica (37932), February 23, 2021 at 6:43 PM
When is enough enough? Hardin Valley is already overpopulated for the schools that are in place. The amount of houses going up in the area is disgraceful. Is everything about the all mighty dollar? Hardin Valley used to be known for the country feel and open spaces, now it is just subdivision after subdivision. There has to be a stopping point and I believe we have reached that point. The roads are not equipped for all the traffic, the schools are not built for all the incoming kids and the feel of a small community is completely gone. I have lived in this area all my life and I am at the point of wanting out because of all this growth. Please deny the application for ANOTHER subdivision we are FULL!Jessica (37932), February 23, 2021 at 6:43 PM
Simmon
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Simmon (37932), February 23, 2021 at 6:46 PM
Traffic is already crazy with expansion at the intersection, schools already crowded , and yet we are still trying to add 243 homes?! Can we calm down and fix the issues at hand?Simmon (37932), February 23, 2021 at 6:46 PM
Ericka
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Ericka (37932), February 23, 2021 at 6:50 PM
I strongly discourage this approval by the planning committee. The schools are overcrowded, the traffic and roads and infrastructure must be addressed before Ball homes continues to ruin this area. They should also be forced to build a high end subdivision to help property values and maintain natural foliage and agriculture if approved. Ericka (37932), February 23, 2021 at 6:50 PM
Misty
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Misty (37932), February 23, 2021 at 7:31 PM
Please please make it stop! Campbell station rd can’t handle more subdivisions!! The school is already over crowded. The street is too narrow! Its not safe! Not that you care because you will approve it to pad your own pockets. Please consider the people who already live here and have to use these roads. Misty (37932), February 23, 2021 at 7:31 PM
Amanda
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Amanda (37932), February 23, 2021 at 7:40 PM
More homes near the intersection of Campbell Station and Hardin Valley Roads would be absolutely devastating for traffic in the area. The schools are already overcrowded and adding over 200 more homes would make that situation substantially worse. Amanda (37932), February 23, 2021 at 7:40 PM
Rachel
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Rachel (37932), February 23, 2021 at 7:49 PM
Hardin Valley schools are already over crowded. There have been 5 new subdivisions open on Campbell Station in the last 5 years. Another subdivision would be a detriment to our schools and to the ongoing traffic issues developing in Hardin Valley. Please do not approve this development Rachel (37932), February 23, 2021 at 7:49 PM
Debra
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Debra (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:13 PM
Hardin Valley schools are already over crowded. Our 2nd grader has to enter school just to exit to his classroom that is in a pod. There isn't any room for pod expansion nor should there be. A brand new school was built for the existing community not for an additional 240 plus families. Not to mention the amount of traffic and wear and tear on Campbell Station road. The roads and school systems need to be evaluated before this is approved for rezoning. Debra (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:13 PM
Kristen
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Kristen (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:19 PM
The infrastructure in Hardin Valley cannot support another subdivision. The roads and traffic issues need to be addressed first. There are still many subdivisions that have already been approved for hundreds of houses that are not yet built. The overcrowding in the schools need to be addressed as well. It does not make sense to keep approving subdivisions without addressing and fixing the infrastructure problems first. Kristen (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:19 PM
Sarah
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Sarah (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:26 PM
I do not support this. The LAST thing Hardin Valley needs is another 200+ houses Ball Home neighborhood. We do not have the infrastructure and school system to hold more people. We are overflowing as it stands. Please, let’s all use common sense and say no to more homes built just to make a dime. Sarah (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:26 PM
Katie
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Katie (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:28 PM
Hello, I am against the development of another subdivision on N Campbell Station Rd. With the additional neighborhoods and apartments being built in Hardin Valley the schools are already overcrowded. Campbell Station can not handle the additional traffic. Please keep these things in mind when making the decision. Thank you. Katie (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:28 PM
Cameron
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Cameron (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:29 PM
My family’s vote is no. Too crowded. Cameron (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:29 PM
Mark
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Mark (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:30 PM
No more subdivisions on North Campbell Station Road or Hardin Valley Road please. The area is already saturated. The school is full and traffic is unbearable. Mark (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:30 PM
Jayson
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Jayson (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:30 PM
Why are these subdivisions and apartments being approved and going up at an alarming rate when the schools are already overcrowded for the current population and no thought is being given to roads and green space. There are no public parks in Hardin valley that are upkept or improved. At what point is the blanket answer going to involve thought at consequences to rapid growth without planning. Change the direction this is going or the residents will start changing their votes. Jayson (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:30 PM
Lisa
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Lisa (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:36 PM
Campbell Station Road is not equipped to handle another subdivision in that area. It is too narrow and curvy. Lisa (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:36 PM
Seth
37832
37832
3-F-21-RZ
Seth (37832), February 23, 2021 at 9:05 PM
N. Campbell station road is narrow and gets incredibly congested every school day. With the addition of 160 homes in the sharp curve on N. Campbell station between Yarnell RD and Hardin Valley the additional of another 243 homes near the fire station will be terrible for the preservation of the beauty of the ridge lines and traffic. In addition there are over 600 houses platted for the Hardin Valley area that are unbuilt and most aren’t even sold. HVES is at 106% capacity, HVA is at 112% capacity. Any more massive subdivisions is going to force the building of a new elementary school and expansion of the high school as well. The numbers are so high redistricting the schools will not be adequate to reduce the overcrowding.Seth (37832), February 23, 2021 at 9:05 PM
Susan
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Susan (37932), February 23, 2021 at 9:18 PM
I implore the planning commission and county commission to stop the building of more homes on Campbell Station Rd and in Hardin Valley. I have lived here for 10 years and have seen the area absolutely explode with growth and homes, however the infrastructure has absolutely not been established to handle this much growth. Campbell Station Road is very Windee and dangerous as it is, I cannot imagine adding hundreds of more cars up and down that road every single day. Before allowing the homes that have already been added to that road, this road should have been widened and straightened with turn lanes etc. that has obviously not happened and this is going to become extremely dangerous. Hardin Valley Road cannot handle the traffic either as it is already a traffic nightmare and has hundreds of more homes already zoned and approved to be added to this road. Our schools are also obviously overcrowded at this point and the numbers clearly show that. To add hundreds more homes into our school zone is very negligent to all of these children who are going to be in overcrowded classrooms, buses, etc. However more and more homes keep getting approved to be built. Save green spaces. Put the infrastructure in and widen and add more roads before you allow more homes into this area. It literally is only common sense. Act as if you live in this area when you were making those decisions.Susan (37932), February 23, 2021 at 9:18 PM
Kristy
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Kristy (37932), February 23, 2021 at 10:29 PM
I am writing in regard to this proposed subdivision. I live off Hickory Creek and go through the heavy traffic on mornings through the school zone from my direction as well as the traffic and dangerous roads on Campbell Station. I cannot imagine adding another 200+ homes without proper road enhancements. My children attend Hardin Valley schools, which are already overcrowded. My son talks about the difficulty of navigating the middle school hallways due to overcrowding. This is with many students doing virtual school. I am a 2016 ball homes buyer, so I am not anti-Ball Homes. I am extremely concerned about the rapid growth in our community. Please consider denying or delaying this subdivision as well as other newly proposed ones in Hardin Valley. Kristy (37932), February 23, 2021 at 10:29 PM
Kristy
37932
37932
3-B-21-SP
Kristy (37932), February 23, 2021 at 10:34 PM
I am writing in regard to this proposed property. I live off Hickory Creek and go through the heavy traffic on mornings through the school zone from my direction as well as the traffic and dangerous roads on Campbell Station. I cannot imagine adding another 200+ homes without proper road enhancements. My children attend Hardin Valley schools, which are already overcrowded. My son talks about the difficulty of navigating the middle school hallways due to overcrowding. This is with many students doing virtual school. I am a 2016 ball homes buyer, so I am not anti-Ball Homes. I am extremely concerned about the rapid growth in our community. Please consider denying or delaying this subdivision as well as other newly proposed ones in Hardin Valley.Kristy (37932), February 23, 2021 at 10:34 PM
Tasha
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Tasha (37932), February 23, 2021 at 10:44 PM
I would like to ask you to please reconsider. Removing this large an agricultural/forest area to add more people is extremely harmful to what little empty land and wild life in this area. I see so many reports about the number of homes that will fit in an area but I don’t see how you plan to “rehome” the wildlife. I don’t see any reports regarding long term carbon footprint damage based on the number of tree being removed. I don’t see any reports regarding trash disposal that influx of people will bring. I don’t see any plans on improving infrastructure. I haven’t seen any plans on helping the fire department- especially since most new subdivisions are saving money by not adding fire hydrants. I don’t see any plans on adding a police station to take care of the of the increasing population. I could continue but hopefully you get the idea that this is ridiculous and too much. There are no plans to protect the valley part of “Hardin Valley” and every intention to sell even inch of land in order to “pave paradise and put up a parking lot.” Tasha (37932), February 23, 2021 at 10:44 PM
Cindy
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Cindy (37932), February 23, 2021 at 10:54 PM
The roads are barely good enough for the amount of people we have now. More homes built means more traffic. The roads in Hardin Valley are falling apart and more traffic is just going to make them worse. Also the schools are already overcrowded. Adding more homes is just going to make this worse. I know there is supposed to be a new elementary school built but how does that help the overcrowding in the middle school and high school?Cindy (37932), February 23, 2021 at 10:54 PM
Chris
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Chris (37932), February 23, 2021 at 11:22 PM
Please do not approve this rezoning request. Hardin Valley already has so many neighborhoods being built that the rural beauty of the area is disappearing. Please help us preserve what is left of Hardin Valley's rural beauty and quiet nature.Chris (37932), February 23, 2021 at 11:22 PM
This would be the 4th sub-division on N Campbell Station between Hardin Valley Road and Yarnell Road in less than 5 years1) The Highlands in 2016: 50 homes2) Brandywine at Pepper Ridge in 2017: 24 homes3) Unnamed sub-division recently rezoned at the end of 2020 where the kennel was located: approximately 120 homes already in the planning phase and possibly 160 homes if a third lot is purchased and rezoned4) Current application for 243 homes on agenda for March 11th meeting
Jennifer
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Jennifer (37932), February 23, 2021 at 11:38 PM
There is tons of other available land elsewhere to huild subdivisions. Campbell station, Lovell rd, Kingston Pike, and Hardin Valley traffic is already crazy enough. We do not want it to be like Sevierville with bumper to bumper traffic. Another good reason is there isn't enough schools. The schools we have is already over crowded and it took forever to build the Hardin Valley middle school. Especially the traffic in Hardin Valley there isn't any room to expand the roads not even turn lanes because someone decided to buils businesses 1st. So now Hardin Valley is like down town strip near UT campus. Traffic will be worse and kids will not get the best education because of thw amount of new students. ..not to mention the safety for our children and the teachers/staff. Jennifer (37932), February 23, 2021 at 11:38 PM
Go some where else and build where there is more room and more classroom space.
michelle
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
michelle (37932), February 24, 2021 at 8:29 AM
No more homes please the schools and land is way over full now and was never meant for this kind of growth. I vote nononono. Hardin valley is way over populated now and has made the roads very dangerous and schools over loaded. My family was one of the first families here and this is country not the suburb's. Think about the safety of our children and families here now ball homes lie and need to be dismissed from Hardin valley ,they say one thing and end of doing whatever they want and get away with it . Put a stop to this now.michelle (37932), February 24, 2021 at 8:29 AM
Marcia
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Marcia (37932), February 24, 2021 at 8:44 AM
I would like to voice my opposition to the new Ball home subdivision on Campbell Station. This area is already quite congested with traffic and children in the schools. I’m concerned about the additional stress on infrastructure, road traffic, classroom sizes as well as safety on Campbell Station Rd itself. At this time, I do not agree with any additional permits or contracts being given for neighborhoods in Hardin Valley. We need to allow the infrastructure, road sizes and schools to catch up prior to any additional building in our area. Marcia (37932), February 24, 2021 at 8:44 AM
Whitney
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Whitney (37932), February 24, 2021 at 9:14 AM
I strongly believe putting in another neighborhood on North Campbell Station is a poor decision. I have a lot of concerns regarding overcrowding of schools, safety concerns of traffic on an already busy road, and the roads are already in poor shape. Please reconsider this development. There are many discontent homeowners in this area who feel strongly this is not a good decision. Whitney (37932), February 24, 2021 at 9:14 AM
Timothy
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Timothy (37932), February 24, 2021 at 10:00 AM
Please consider turning down the application for another sub division here in Hardin Valley. The schools in this valley are already overcrowded and the crime rate has increased parallel with the higher population count. Actual farming and raising food for you and your families has become more difficult as trespassers have damaged fences which are required to keep the cattle and the people safe here. We already spend an inordinate amount of time now cleaning up after our new neighbors who have decided that it is okay to dump their trash, their yard debris and even some 200 pound stumps (a full truckload) on our farmland as a convenience to themselves. Adding more people will make this worse to the point that it will endanger the farming livlihoods in this area, which is probably what the Developers desire. I respectfully ask the Commisioners to deny this application in consideration of the ill effects it will produce.Timothy (37932), February 24, 2021 at 10:00 AM
Jessica
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Jessica (37932), February 24, 2021 at 10:11 AM
I’m strongly against this massive subdivision going in. My window over looks this beautiful space and we are destroying Hardin Valley.
Smaller local builders take these things to heart. Ball Homes does not care about our community, the aesthetics of the trees and rural areas or the over crowded schools. I have four children in the Hardin Valley School System and we adore it, but I’m afraid for the future of the school system. Jessica (37932), February 24, 2021 at 10:11 AM
Jeffrey
3793
3793
3-F-21-RZ
Jeffrey ( 3793), February 24, 2021 at 10:17 AM
The proposed 243 unit subdivision on North Campbell Station Road in the Hardin Valley area is simply too much for that road to handle traffic wise. The road is already dangerous at that area and to add more traffic to it would be a disaster.Jeffrey ( 3793), February 24, 2021 at 10:17 AM
Clint
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Clint (37932), February 24, 2021 at 10:23 AM
Please do not add that many houses without widening the road. This road is not meant for that much traffic without a major change. Clint (37932), February 24, 2021 at 10:23 AM
Joe
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Joe (37932), February 24, 2021 at 10:28 AM
This application should be rejected. North Campbell Station cannot support that increased level of traffic. Even if the road is widened its not sustainable. Our schools and emergency services cannot support this continued growth. When do we limit this expansion?Joe (37932), February 24, 2021 at 10:28 AM
Please do not approve this.
Melissa
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Melissa (37932), February 24, 2021 at 10:32 AM
I am STRONGLY apposed to another subdivision on Campbell Station across from the Highlands. School traffic from HV already backs up the road past the Highlands neighborhood in the mornings as it is. Congestion would be terrible, the schools are already over-booked and don't need more families in this small area, and the roads are already too narrow and dangerous to handle heavy traffic. Weather and inexperienced or distracted drivers already make this portion of the road dangerous to drive (there's no shoulder and no room for mistakes), adding more drivers and families, not to mention more people slowing to a stop to enter and exit another neighborhood would be disastrous. My family moved to HV for peace and nature, but builders seem hell-bent on just ripping all of the trees out and turning every inch into homes. Don't build another neighborhood here. Please! Melissa (37932), February 24, 2021 at 10:32 AM
Karen
37931
37931
3-F-21-RZ
Karen (37931), February 24, 2021 at 10:56 AM
The elementary school and high school are already over crowded. Our roads are not equipped as well as putting additional stress on utilities. These must all be addressed before adding more residents to area. Karen (37931), February 24, 2021 at 10:56 AM
Diane
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Diane (37932), February 24, 2021 at 11:24 AM
This is a terrible idea! The schools can’t even handle the current population! North Campbell Station Rd is a 2 lane road that is already terrible and yet, we are going to add over 200 new vehicles a day!Diane (37932), February 24, 2021 at 11:24 AM
Susan
3793
3793
3-F-21-RZ
Susan ( 3793), February 24, 2021 at 11:48 AM
I wanted to express my concern regarding the new Ball neighborhood With 243 homes planned. Campbell Station Road is already very narrow and busy I don’t think you can handle another 500 to 800 cars daily with the new neighborhood plans. Hardin Valley Schools cannot withstand that amount of new families as the schools are overcrowded. I feel it would be detrimental to both safety in the roads and taxing to the schools. Thank you for the opportunity to express my concerns.Susan ( 3793), February 24, 2021 at 11:48 AM
Janet
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Janet (37932), February 24, 2021 at 11:49 AM
I am against Ball home building more homes on North Campbell Station! That is ludicrous!Janet (37932), February 24, 2021 at 11:49 AM
Jeremy
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Jeremy (37932), February 24, 2021 at 12:09 PM
I'm not against rezoning or building necessarily, however building more subdivisions off Campbell Station at this time, before a major redevelopment of Campbell Station and/or Hardin Valley would be unwise. A bit like trying to fit 20 lbs of potatoes into a 10 lbs sack. Basic infrastructure is currently inadequate for this much stress.Jeremy (37932), February 24, 2021 at 12:09 PM
Kelsey
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Kelsey (37932), February 24, 2021 at 1:00 PM
Hi, I’m a resident who lives off of Campbell Station. I moved to the Hardin Valley area because of the more rural feel yet just a few minutes from Turkey Creek. I’m VERY upset about the potential of multiple neighborhoods popping up on this VERY busy road. Since I’ve lived here I’ve witnessed three wrecks of people running off of Campbell Station road.
I know they county only sees dollar signs for all these developments but I hope they can take a step back and see the bigger picture. The schools are overcrowded so much so that they are having to build a brand new elementary school. The roads are in disrepair and I don’t think it is possible to expand Campbell station to handle the influx of volume.
Why can’t we add parks, restaurants and shops to the area rather than more house farms? Or if the county is insistent on having more neighborhoods limit it to less than 50 homes in these neighborhoods? These Ball Homes mega neighborhoods are out of control and they have monopolized our beautiful area. This is out of control and needs to be stopped! Kelsey (37932), February 24, 2021 at 1:00 PM
Susie
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Susie (37932), February 24, 2021 at 1:20 PM
My proposal is to deny this request and save the wildlife. This has gotten way out of control. I’ve lived here for 39 years and this has turned into a nightmare. As I see it election time is coming soon. Someone will listen if you don’t. Save our land and wildlife.Susie (37932), February 24, 2021 at 1:20 PM
Jennifer
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Jennifer (37932), February 24, 2021 at 1:45 PM
Campbell station is falling apart as it is. The road needs help before you add more car trafficJennifer (37932), February 24, 2021 at 1:45 PM
Amanda
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Amanda (37932), February 24, 2021 at 2:33 PM
We do not have room in our schools as it is. Please don’t allow another subdivision in our small community. Amanda (37932), February 24, 2021 at 2:33 PM
Robyn
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Robyn (37932), February 24, 2021 at 6:41 PM
My family and I moved to the Hardin Valley area 8 years ago and the number of subdivisions that have been approved in that time period is beyond concerning!! The schools and roads alone will not accommodate this many residents. My request and desire is that this be rejected... you don't even know the negative impact of what has already been approved so PLEASE slow down the development.Robyn (37932), February 24, 2021 at 6:41 PM
Peggy
37871
37871
3-SB-21-C
Peggy (37871), February 25, 2021 at 7:57 AM
My family opposes this development. We moved here because of the rural nature of this community. North Ruggles Ferry Pike can not accommodate traffic from a subdivision of this magnitude. Please DO NOT approve this!Peggy (37871), February 25, 2021 at 7:57 AM
Joseph
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Joseph (37932), February 25, 2021 at 8:12 AM
With regards to the sub development rezoning on Campbell Station, I am commenting on behalf of a dissenting opinion towards the rezoning. Campbell Station is already overloaded with traffic and struggling to handle the existing housing. This 250+ home development would double capacity on what’s already a crowded and dangerous road. The proposed entrance to the community is located at a particularly dangerous curve. The infrastructure of Campbell Station wasn’t designed to accommodate a community of this size.Joseph (37932), February 25, 2021 at 8:12 AM
Kim
37932
37932
3-B-21-SP
Kim (37932), February 25, 2021 at 9:51 AM
On behalf of HVPA, I would like to respond in opposition of the proposed zoning and sector plan amendment request for development on Campbell Station Road by Ball Homes. Pls see attached PDF for full comments.Kim (37932), February 25, 2021 at 9:51 AM
We, as a community, can not argue for a pause in the development in our beautiful corner of the county, but we can argue for the presence of adequate infrastructure to support development.
We ask that you consider upholding the current AG / HP zoning and the Rural land use classification of the 2016 NW Sector Plan. I would like to remind you that the community, planning staff, county officials & departments were all implemental in the sector plan update. This Rural land use classification is fairly recent and should be upheld similarly to the recent decision by this body to uphold the Sector Plan in the Urban Engineering plan amendment request brought before you and County Commission just a few months ago.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210225095107.pdf
Jeremy
37931
37931
3-F-21-RZ
Jeremy (37931), February 25, 2021 at 3:07 PM
Dear Commissioners, please consider stopping the overdevelopment of our community until the infrastructure can be improved. Campbell Station road is a very narrow and rural two lane road with no shoulder and it should be widened before any more developments go in. Please also consider the burden that this development will put on our schools. When will someone finally say no more irresponsible developments? Thank you for considering. Jeremy (37931), February 25, 2021 at 3:07 PM
Laura
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Laura (37932), February 25, 2021 at 4:26 PM
I can't imagine I could add anything that hasn't already been added in regards to school and infrastructure. I will say, however, Ball homes are so unattractive. To be forced to live in one would be my nightmare, so it's very sad to drive by these homes everyday. But I want to add that there are no parks in Hardin Valley considering there are so many people. Melton Hill can have such an unsavory dangerous element to it. It's very kid UNfriendly. I still take my child and she has fun in the sandbox (volleyball area). For all the money the county is making off these lifeless cookie cutter homes, almost nothing has been done for the actual residents. Laura (37932), February 25, 2021 at 4:26 PM
Rachel
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Rachel (37932), February 25, 2021 at 7:35 PM
I am strongly against this proposal. The traffic on N Campbell Station Road is already horrible during school hours. What happens when we add another massive community? The infrastructure is just not there. Additionally, have we thought about the impact to our school system? Can HVA actually handle more students? To my knowledge, it cannot, so you also need to take into consideration the repercussions of having to build a new school, such as the location, cost, increase in taxes, etc. In my opinion, there would be no positives to Ball Homes being able to create this community. They already have plenty of communities in HV. They do not need another. Rachel (37932), February 25, 2021 at 7:35 PM
Please do not approve this!
Ben
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Ben (37932), February 25, 2021 at 9:35 PM
Please decline this application for the new neighborhood. Ben (37932), February 25, 2021 at 9:35 PM
KIMBERLIE
37932
37932
3-B-21-SP
KIMBERLIE (37932), February 26, 2021 at 2:53 PM
I have a few major concerns. 1. Entrance in and out of Campbell Station Road. Turning left out of highlands is already very dangerous. Adding another within a few feet will be even more dangerous. I have lived here less than 2 years and have experienced multiple car accidents at this very location. Consider entrance to that neighborhood closer to fire station. 2. Road Traffic on Campbell Station continues to grow and can it handle 250 new homes on top of what has already been approved within a small area already? Consider decreasing number of homes per acre? I believe 3-4 per acre is too many for several reasons. 3. What is being done to help with traffic? 4. Consider keeping a portion of the trees and aesthetics along Campbell Station Road and even higher up the hill. KIMBERLIE (37932), February 26, 2021 at 2:53 PM
Kathy and Kraig
37871
37871
3-SB-21-C
Kathy and Kraig (37871), February 27, 2021 at 8:55 AM
Please do not approve this development! As a family we live in East Knox County because of the quiet rural environment and the sense of belonging to a community that embraces nature, community and supports our farmers. We still have bald eagles flying in the skies and Otters, Beavers and Muskrates swimming in the Holsten River. The proposed development will have a significant impact on our environment, especially the Holsten River habitat. This development does not match the surrounding area, nor the intent of the community to maintain its rural heritage.Kathy and Kraig (37871), February 27, 2021 at 8:55 AM
The size of this development will have a significant impact on the infrastructure in our community. The impact on the feeder roads especially Burris Road, Pleasant Hill and Ruggles Ferry will create a level of traffic that will have dangerous results and a negative impact on noise levels, congestion and overall safety on our small rural roads.
Development is inevitable, however we ask that the County Commission represent the residence who live here presently and that you consideration the uniqueness of each part of our County and approve developments that enhance the East County community, not destroy it's very essence of rural living.
Meiyu
37922
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Meiyu (37922), February 27, 2021 at 12:06 PM
The rezoning of this field to Neighborhood Commercial is obviously in the best interest of the developer, and NOT the best interest of the community surrounding the field. Both residents and non-residents of Bexhill use this field for recreation, gathering, and even high school sports teams practice here. The majority of the community that surrounds this field DOES NOT WANT a strip mall in our neighborhood.
Ebenezer road is a highly congested thoroughfare from Northshore Drive to Kingston Pike. It is already dangerous for our children to walk to school. A strip mall would bring more vehicle and foot traffic to our neighborhood and endanger our children further.
We have many vacant storefronts up and down Ebenezer Road. Why take away a green space that has been heavily used by the community for decades? The Zoning committee needs to listen to the Knox County community members they serve, not the developers.
Meiyu (37922), February 27, 2021 at 12:06 PM
Rocky
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Rocky (37922), March 1, 2021 at 9:37 AM
The developer has poorly honored previous commitments as evidenced by this latest request. How many times must the disingenuous promises be broken before the MPC takes a stand. If the MPC does not vote no, it will prove to developers that the MPC is insignificant, it does not support the local community/residences and that any developer can get whatever they want by simply making hollow promises and proclamations without injury to their current or future requests.Rocky (37922), March 1, 2021 at 9:37 AM
Bobby and Abby
37871
37871
3-SB-21-C
Bobby and Abby (37871), March 1, 2021 at 4:15 PM
I do not agree with this new development as I am very concerned about the increase in traffic due to having small children and disruption of country side view. Bobby and Abby (37871), March 1, 2021 at 4:15 PM
Suzanne
37922
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Suzanne (37922), March 1, 2021 at 4:52 PM
I have been a Bexhill homeowner for over 30 years and know how important the field is to not only the families in Bexhill, but also families in the surrounding neighborhoods. The field is the only green space around for public use, it is used A LOT. It has heartwarming to see kids of all ages putting down their tech and enjoying the space to play sports, team activities, fly kites, throw Frisbies, play catch with their dogs, etc. Suzanne (37922), March 1, 2021 at 4:52 PM
The community does does not need more shops or eateries and there are numerous vacant properties within a short radius.
The field has promoted positive health and community. If the development occurs, there are traffic concerns, safety, impact to the community, Bluegrass School just about a mile away, etc. Can there be creative options considered or ways to greatly reduce the build and leave a large green space area. Maybe the county could purchase the property and make it an official green space/park.
Rick
37932
37932
3-B-21-SP
Rick (37932), March 1, 2021 at 5:11 PM
The Commission really needs to take a step back and look at what is best for the Hardin Valley Community in terms of the environment, schools, safety and security. I attended the Commission meeting concerning the 117 acres at the intersection of Hardin Valley and Hickory Creek, being developed by Ball Homes. Ball Homes seemed to have significant leverage and influence with the Commission toward approving their request., as opposed to the concerned residents. Since Ball Homes has stripped almost every single tree off of that 117 acres, I am not sure if they share in the concern with the effect on the environment and aesthetics of the area by what they are doing. I understand that the Commission is interested in increased tax revenue, as they probably should be but, what are all of these taxes being used for? They don't seem to be used for improving Hardin Valley Rd., Hickory Creek or N. Campbell Station Rd. or for putting in parks and walking/biking trails. These things should be done before more subdivisions are approved. Please consider your duty to your constituents. Do not approve this request.Rick (37932), March 1, 2021 at 5:11 PM
Andrea
37871
37871
3-SB-21-C
Andrea (37871), March 1, 2021 at 10:25 PM
I added my comments as a PDF. This development really needs to be evaluated to the impact of the community around it.Andrea (37871), March 1, 2021 at 10:25 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210301222522.pdf
David
37922
37922
3-D-21-RZ
David (37922), March 1, 2021 at 11:26 PM
A commercial business is not appropriate in the middle of our neighborhood. This land is not across the street; it is in the Bexhill subdivision. This shopping center is not compatible with the single-family dwellings that surround it. David (37922), March 1, 2021 at 11:26 PM
Rezoning this land would have adverse effects on our neighborhood and community. A commercial business will bring litter, noise, light pollution, increase traffic and danger in our neighborhood. Many people walk and exercise outside in the Blue Grass/Ebenezer area, including elementary-aged children walking to school.
This field has been vacant since the 1970s. Nothing has changed in our community to warrant the rezoning of this land. I oppose rezoning to Neighborhood Commercial. The entire piece of land should be Low-Density Residential as that's what surrounds it on all four sides.
Please vote against rezoning this piece of land.
David
37922
37922
3-A-21-SP
David (37922), March 1, 2021 at 11:36 PM
Do not change the zone of this land, please. The sector and zone are appropriate for the single-dwelling homes that surround it. Neighborhood Commercial is not appropriate in the middle of a neighborhood. David (37922), March 1, 2021 at 11:36 PM
This land has been vacant since the 1970s. There have been no significant changes to the neighborhood or community at that time. Leave the land zoned as Low-Density Residential.
Commercial businesses are not compatible in the middle of a neighborhood. It will have adverse effects on the neighborhood and surrounding community. Pedestrians, including elementary-aged children walking to Blue Grass, will be at greater risk of injury from increased traffic to the area. Additionally, commercial businesses such as drive-through establishments will bring noise, light pollution, litter, smell, and increased danger.
Please vote to maintain the Low-Density Residential zone in Bexhill Subdivision. Thank you.
GREG
37924
37924
3-SB-21-C
GREG (37924), March 2, 2021 at 8:13 AM
I have property on Burris Road and Graves Road. I travel Ruggles Ferry back and forth with farm equipment. The traffic is already bad now at times and there has been numerous times of almost an accident due to high speed vehicles. We certainly DO NOT NEED ALL the traffic that this would bring it pose many problems. The Carter schools are crowded now , they would have trouble handling all the many children that this would be having. I AM OPPOSED TO THIS BEING PUT IN> GREG (37924), March 2, 2021 at 8:13 AM
Jonathan
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Jonathan (37922), March 2, 2021 at 9:24 AM
My wife, son and I live in a neighboring subdivision to Northshore Town Center, Lakeridge/Tierra Verde. When the first apartment complex was approved, we opposed it and remain in opposition for approval of another apartment complex. The plan that was approved initially was to develop a "town center" and not multiple apartment complexes. We would support additional retail and restaurants as that doesn't cause permanent increase in residents. Please listen to the residents that this decision impacts and reject the request to amend the plan to include apartment complexes. Jonathan (37922), March 2, 2021 at 9:24 AM
JoAnne
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
JoAnne (37922), March 2, 2021 at 9:36 AM
Living in this area for the past 7 years much of the land here has been developed. I do not believe that we need more living space in this area. Restaurants and other business would be welcomed by the people that already live here. North shore is already congested enough. We need no more apartments in the Town Center area. Thank you JoAnne (37922), March 2, 2021 at 9:36 AM
Constance
37924
37924
3-SB-21-C
Constance (37924), March 2, 2021 at 10:01 AM
I disagree with the plan of building 400 new homes in an area that will need a lot of money to accommodate an increased number of people, traffic, and sewage.
Unless their are plans comparable of increased road space on Ruffles Ferry Road, water and sewage accommodation and traffic needs it will would be Unadvisable to do so. There are many lower income families that live in this area that own property and houses. Increased taxes could make it impossible to keep their property and homes.
Thank you for your time concerning this matter.Constance (37924), March 2, 2021 at 10:01 AM
Louis
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Louis (37922), March 2, 2021 at 12:44 PM
I cannot visualize the need for several hundred more apartment units around the pond. This would drastically increase the current traffic congestion in the mornings and afternoons because of the Northshore elementary buses and cars dropping kids in the morning and later picking them up after school. I also question the amount of traffic Thunderhead can readily handle especially the roundabout thereon. Additionally the traffic flow to the east towards the other roundabout will cause more congestion in the AM and PM. Further, other than profitability, I see no rationale for "dumping" the current zoning and concept plan that was sold to the community some years ago. Louis (37922), March 2, 2021 at 12:44 PM
Stephen
37932
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Stephen (37932), March 2, 2021 at 1:15 PM
Having built our home in Hardin Valley 17 years ago, my wife and I have watched the explosion of development in our community and particularly on our road. Yarnell road has had numerous subdivisions built within the last 2 years and the traffic and congestion is now part of daily life and now the onslaught continues on Campbell Station. We need to step back and take a breath! Traffic is ridiculous, the HV schools are past overcrowded, and our beautiful valley is turning into an eyesore of land stripped bare of green space with no apparent plan in place to support the growth, nor to keep the beauty of the area that makes it a desirable destination. I assume this will be yet another subdivision that has one entrance and one exit, further impacting the load on Campbell Station especially during key times during the day. Campbell Station Road is now unsafe at best with the current traffic flow and adding more traffic to the situation is irresponsible. Growth provides jobs and livelihoods for many Knoxville citizens but please don't forget the impact of that growth and how it affects thousands of citizens currently residing in the area. Please do not allow yet another subdivision in a community that simply cannot support it.Stephen (37932), March 2, 2021 at 1:15 PM
Theresa
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Theresa (37922), March 2, 2021 at 1:30 PM
We are opposed to the rezoning of this property. NO APPARTMENTS SHOULD BE BUILT HERE. Zoning should remain same as the original intent of providing restaurants, unique businesses, etc. NO MORE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL UNITS! TRAFFIC IS ALREADY A NIGHTMARE!Theresa (37922), March 2, 2021 at 1:30 PM
Patti
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Patti (37922), March 2, 2021 at 1:37 PM
Please deny the petition for the development of more apartments in Northshore Town Center. Traffic on Northshore Dr is already congested due to the existing apartments and elementary school. It's difficult to get into and out of the surrounding neighborhoods. The increased density will also cause adverse effects to community safety and home values. Keeping to the original (well, current) plan would benefit the community and help keep home values where they are, or even increase them. Which, in turn, could bring more tax revenue to the city. We are looking forward to the completion of the current plan, bringing more restaurants and unique retail stores. Yes, that will increase traffic some, but not as much as the proposed apartment complex would bring.Patti (37922), March 2, 2021 at 1:37 PM
Jason
37918
37918
3-B-21-UR
Jason (37918), March 2, 2021 at 4:05 PM
What will be done regarding the traffic from Washington Pike to Murphy Road? It is already congested during peak travel times.Jason (37918), March 2, 2021 at 4:05 PM
1-E-21-SP
Pat March 2, 2021 at 5:24 PM
I want to express my sincere appreciation to each of you who were participants in the February 11th meeting. You asked questions which reflected your concerns for this community, and the effect this proposed project would have on it. As you are aware, there are significant safety and environmental issues which have to be addressed.Pat March 2, 2021 at 5:24 PM
Your recommendation of R-3 instead of R-5 will help to control the number of new complexes added, but the road issue still remains. Safety is a primary concern. Merchant Drive at Wilkerson Road has been considered a dangerous area for many years. Ever increasing traffic at that intersection, along with a blind curve, is a problem that only worsens as the number of residents in the area continues to grow. In addition to the challenges to cars, students walking to and from Northwest Middle School have to cross Wilkerson Road as they follow the sidewalk. Additional traffic on Merchant Drive in front of Norwood Elementary at the drop off and pick up times is also a concern.
Your recommendation to set aside a sizeable portion of the property for conservation is a very good one. In one of our homeowner's zoom meetings, the developers acknowledged that "there are significant environmental challenges" with the project. Huge embedded boulders, sinkholes, and the slope will have to be dealt with, causing serious environmental disturbances and the potential for ongoing problems. The less land that is affected, the better. On a bigger scale, once it's gone, it's gone, and everywhere the plight of birds and wildlife trying to have sufficient habitat only grows more urgent each day.
The company wanting to build the apartments comes from another state. Building these complexes throughout the country is what they do; their interest is (understandably) profit, but not necessarily what is best for the neighborhoods. As Planning Commission members, your interest is not profit (you don't even get paid for your service!), but for what "promotes the good of the entire community." Thank you for your thoughtful deliberations and questions which reflected that.
Barbara
37922
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Barbara (37922), March 2, 2021 at 7:34 PM
I am very concerned about the development of this land for a number of reasons. I feel it will endanger students walking to and from school due to increased traffic in and out of the subdivision if several retail stores are put in this area. I am also concerned about the traffic flow in and out of the neighborhood since these are the only two entrances for an already large neighborhood. Another concern of mine is about drainage problems at the entrances, which have flooded recently during rainstorms. While I realize that development of the land is inevitable at some point, I think it should development should be approached carefully, taking into account the concerns of the residents of nearby neighborhoods who will be impacted by commercial development of the property.Barbara (37922), March 2, 2021 at 7:34 PM
Barbara
37922
37922
3-A-21-SP
Barbara (37922), March 2, 2021 at 7:36 PM
I am very concerned about the development of this land for a number of reasons. I feel it will endanger students walking to and from school due to increased traffic in and out of the subdivision if several retail stores are put in this area. I am also concerned about the traffic flow in and out of the neighborhood since these are the only two entrances for an already large neighborhood. Another concern of mine is about drainage problems at the entrances, which have flooded recently during rainstorms. While I realize that development of the land is inevitable at some point, I think it should development should be approached carefully, taking into account the concerns of the residents of nearby neighborhoods who will be impacted by commercial development of the property.Barbara (37922), March 2, 2021 at 7:36 PM
ashley
37922
37922
3-D-21-RZ
ashley (37922), March 2, 2021 at 9:51 PM
It's very inappropriate to rezone this property that surrounds family filled neighborhoods, school, and an area that has a high volume of walking (active) outdoor family activity. ashley (37922), March 2, 2021 at 9:51 PM
noel
37922
37922
3-D-21-RZ
noel (37922), March 2, 2021 at 9:55 PM
Neighborhood commercial rezoning is not compatible with the surrounding community. This land is an entrance to a family neighborhood, plus surrounding family neighborhoods. The community is active with walking, walking dogs, running, biking and zoning this land for commercial use is not practical. Rezoning the land would have negative effects on the surrounding neighborhood. (Increased danger for people and children walking to school, light pollution, noise, smell, litter, etc.).noel (37922), March 2, 2021 at 9:55 PM
ashley
37922
37922
3-A-21-SP
ashley (37922), March 2, 2021 at 10:00 PM
Rezoning the land would have negative effects on the surrounding neighborhood. (Increased danger for people and children walking to school, light pollution, noise, smell, litter, etc.). This is a family community and this green space is the entrance to a family filled neighborhood. This proposition for commercial build on that green space is inappropriate and the community is against it.ashley (37922), March 2, 2021 at 10:00 PM
3-D-21-RZ,3-A-21-SP
Melissa March 3, 2021 at 9:18 AM
There is no need for a small business / strip mall to be developed at Bexhill in West Knoxville. First, it is too close to Bluegrass Elementary and subdivisions. Second, lots of kids play there and my son's frisbee team and Bearden High School frisbee team have practiced there. It needs to be contracted by the county for a park or green space for kids and families to use, especially for the families who live in that subdivision. There are plenty of locations that can be revamped instead of laying waste before we build one more business establishment.Melissa March 3, 2021 at 9:18 AM
Dawn
37931
37931
3-F-21-RZ
Dawn (37931), March 3, 2021 at 10:11 AM
I request that the commission please refer to existing zoning, traffic impact studies (this is an already dangerous road), school impact, parcel topography, and blue line streams in regards to this case. We ask that you deny the applicant's request of 4 du/acre in favor of a lower density.Dawn (37931), March 3, 2021 at 10:11 AM
Kenzie
37871
37871
3-SB-21-C
Kenzie (37871), March 3, 2021 at 10:55 AM
see attachedKenzie (37871), March 3, 2021 at 10:55 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210303105556.pdf
Annie
37922
37922
3-A-21-SP
Annie (37922), March 3, 2021 at 2:06 PM
I am a resident and homeowner in the Bexhill subdivision. I oppose the re-zoning request before the commission. The land at issue is surrounded by single-family dwellings; many of which have been here for nearly 50 years. Little has changed in Bexhill in the past 50 years to warrant re-zoning this small, 2.5-acre plot of land. The proposal eliminates any buffer between businesses and single-family homes. The type of development and re-zoning proposed by the applicants would be better suited for a much larger plot of land that would allow for a reasonable buffer between these homes and the proposed commercial development. Instead, the current proposal invites unnecessary danger to Blue Grass students and the multitude of pedestrians who use Ebenezer Road daily. The zoning change and proposed commercial development would also negatively impact the quality of life of dozens of families who would see unnecessary increases in noise and light pollution, litter, traffic and other needless problems while offering no benefit to residents in return (an endless supply of businesses exists within two miles of that area). As it stands, the re-zoning request is inappropriate and incompatible with the community and neighborhood it surrounds.Annie (37922), March 3, 2021 at 2:06 PM
Greg
37871
37871
3-SB-21-C
Greg (37871), March 3, 2021 at 2:49 PM
Not a fan of this project, I live nearby- I already can not get some services like quality home internet (Bellsouth DSL) , the poor signal i get will now be divided between 482 other households which will cause the signal to be much worse per Bellsouth. Traffic on Ruggles Ferry which is a rural road will not be safe. Even worse are the connecting roads to get to Asheville Hwy such as Cash Rd, Pleasant Hill, and Wooddale Rd which are not even two lane roads and could not safely support this amount of traffic. Greg (37871), March 3, 2021 at 2:49 PM
Josh & Melissa
37924
37924
3-SB-21-C
Josh & Melissa (37924), March 4, 2021 at 8:11 AM
Hello I am a home owner on Ruggles Ferry Pike and would like to voice my opposition to this new neighborhood. I agree with the concerns that I am sure you have heard about traffic on our small roads. While I oppose I understand growth is inevitable. My ask is that the lot size be a mandatory ½ acre (would love to have 1 acre lots!) and also would ask that since this will be a burden on the existing members of the community that the builders give us something we can all enjoy such as a community boat launch on the river and a playground/picnic area for residents to enjoy. Sidewalks throughout the neighborhood would be great as well to ensure the residents new and existing have a safe place to walk considering the additional traffic that will be added. Thank you in advance for your consideration and help with ensuring the betterment of the community.Josh & Melissa (37924), March 4, 2021 at 8:11 AM
Carl
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Carl (37922), March 4, 2021 at 9:48 AM
The population density caused by more apartments is a dangerose trend. Our roads are very narrow and are already overcrowded at certain times. You will have to add fire houses and police in order to make the community safe and that is obviously not happening. The last item is schools. Our schools are not equipped to handle the additional requirements and expansion of existing schools needed if more apartment complexes are built.
You had better give some careful consideration to the impact on existing communities if more apartment complexes are allowed to be built. The neighborhoods will become overcrowded and with that crime will increase which will ultimately ruin neighborhoods and cause homeowner property value to decrease. Carl (37922), March 4, 2021 at 9:48 AM
Ritchie
37902
37902
3-SB-21-C
Ritchie (37902), March 4, 2021 at 11:04 AM
I could not agree more with your email. While 1 acre lots would certainly be wonderful, the 1/2 acre size is still well below the density that would be allowed in that zone, so anything close to that would be a great compromise. I also agree with the amenities you have suggested, as this is a very nice existing neighborhood - arguably the highest end neighborhood in the entire 8th District. Ritchie (37902), March 4, 2021 at 11:04 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210304110426.pdf
Jennifer
37922
37922
12-C-20-SU
Jennifer (37922), March 4, 2021 at 11:45 AM
Hello - I would like to reiterate my concerns on the removal of the Overlay zoning for Northshore Towncenter. Please see my concerns in the attached. Jennifer (37922), March 4, 2021 at 11:45 AM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210304114507.pdf
Amy
N/A
N/A
3-F-21-RZ
Amy (N/A), March 4, 2021 at 12:06 PM
I understand there are two areas of rezoning for subdivision development on Campbell Station. You were our school board rep for Hardin Valley.. those schools are WAY overcrowded as it is now.. add more homes and kids to school and I can't imagine we aren't above fire safety concerns! More kids in classes and more on teachers and staff. Amy (N/A), March 4, 2021 at 12:06 PM
Plus Campbell Station is a horrible road! It can not handle the amount of traffic it is getting now! Plus the areas at proposed location are already at some of the most dangerous curves along that road!
I have grown up in this area and it makes me sad to see so much of the beauty that once was country farmland being sold and developed.
I think more people need to think of the youth, the education, the safety and health of our young community.
Terry
37902
37902
3-F-21-RZ
Terry (37902), March 4, 2021 at 12:09 PM
see attachedTerry (37902), March 4, 2021 at 12:09 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210304120930.pdf
Vida
37923
37923
3-D-21-RZ
Vida (37923), March 4, 2021 at 12:31 PM
It is inappropriate to rezone this land as it is surrounded by low density residential and single-dwelling homes.Neighborhood commercial rezoning is not compatible with the surrounding community. Vida (37923), March 4, 2021 at 12:31 PM
Rezoning the land would have negative effects on the surrounding neighborhoods. (Increased danger for people and children walking to school, light pollution, noise, smell, litter, etc.).
Vida
37923
37923
3-A-21-SP
Vida (37923), March 4, 2021 at 12:32 PM
It is inappropriate to rezone this land as it is surrounded by low density residential and single-dwelling homes.Neighborhood commercial rezoning is not compatible with the surrounding community. Vida (37923), March 4, 2021 at 12:32 PM
Rezoning the land would have negative effects on the surrounding neighborhood. (Increased danger for people and children walking to school, light pollution, noise, smell, litter, etc.).
Matt
37922
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Matt (37922), March 4, 2021 at 1:09 PM
The realization is we as neighbors may not be able to stop it, but often through negotiations things can be a win/win. NTC was to have ample walking trails in the original plan, that never materialized. It could be this is the time we ask the developer for funding for a sidewalk connector heading west to Carl Cowan Park be added to the developer requirements, substantially increasing walking and trail alternatives. Its doable along Northshore drive and would give the exploding population in this area a natural walkway to that park which then also gets access not lonly Carl Cowen Park. to Admiral Farragut park. Matt (37922), March 4, 2021 at 1:09 PM
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20210304130909.pdf
Kathryn
37923
37923
3-D-21-RZ
Kathryn (37923), March 4, 2021 at 3:16 PM
Rezoning this land would have negative effects on the surrounding neighborhood. (Increased danger for people and children walking to school, light pollution, noise, smell, litter, etc.).Kathryn (37923), March 4, 2021 at 3:16 PM
Kathryn
37923
37923
3-A-21-SP
Kathryn (37923), March 4, 2021 at 3:16 PM
Rezoning this land would have negative effects on the surrounding neighborhood. (Increased danger for people and children walking to school, light pollution, noise, smell, litter, etc.).Kathryn (37923), March 4, 2021 at 3:16 PM