March 11, 2021
Planning Commission meeting

Public Comments

250 Comments
Frances
37914
3-SB-21-C
Frances (37914), March 5, 2021 at 7:31 PM
Being a Realtor in the community I do need more homes to sell, but small lots are not what I hear customers are looking to purchase! The locals and all the out of town buyers that are moving to East Tennessee are asking me to find them homes on 1 acre++ I sold 14 homes in this neighborhood in 2020 and all were on 1 acre ++ There is a way to honor the community and the ancestors of this farm land community. Have you all considered an agrihood? What about a Liveonafarm agrihood community with a pavilion for a CSA Farmers Market and a community garden? The new model of living that is popping up across the country taps into the local food movement.
Justin
37914
3-SB-21-C
Justin (37914), March 5, 2021 at 7:28 PM
Knox County has set aside East Knoxville for the preservation of farmland and protection of wildlife. What is the EPA and TVA response to the impact of mass development to the natural resources of the area?
Jody
37871
3-SB-21-C
Jody (37871), March 5, 2021 at 7:27 PM
I am very concerned about the amount of traffic and the affect this project will have on our schools
Natalie
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Natalie (37922), March 5, 2021 at 4:18 PM
My name is Natalie McNutt, a resident of Bexhill, and I oppose the development of Bexhill field. The character and quality of life in the neighborhood that I have lived in for 30 years will decline with this development. Cars going in and out of the shopping area will create congestion at the neighborhood entrance. The people living next to the shops will be disturbed by lighting, crowd noise and loitering. There are plenty of businesses to serve the community (and vacant commercial space without adding more shops so close to where people live. Traffic along ebenezer will be worse.
Lisa
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Lisa (37922), March 5, 2021 at 4:06 PM
This development is incompatible with the single family homes in the neighborhood. There are around 313 homes with 2 entrances to exit or enter the neighborhood. The proposed development is a strip mall and 2 drive through restaurants with entrances connecting onto the 2 entrances into the subdivision. The distance between the entrances into the subdivision and the entrance into the proposed development is extremely short. The turning distances between these areas is very concerning with the volume of traffic of the 313 homes in the Bexhill neighborhood. Also children walk to and from Bluegrass elementary school from our neighborhood . I’m concerned about the safety of the children and parents walking around these entrances with the volume of traffic that will be created with the proposed development as well. This development is too much for such a small area with the amount of homes located in the subdivision.
Holly
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Holly (37922), March 5, 2021 at 3:51 PM
Neighborhood commercial rezoning is not compatible with the surrounding residential area.
Wayne
37901
12-B-20-RZ
Wayne (37901), March 5, 2021 at 3:08 PM
Please see attached correspondence and supporting documents for your review from Mr. Kline regarding the above-referenced matters scheduled for the March 11, 2021, Planning Commission meeting. Thank you.
View Attachment
travis
37871
3-SB-21-C
travis (37871), March 5, 2021 at 2:56 PM
Please see attached. Thank you
View Attachment
Jason
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Jason (37922), March 5, 2021 at 2:20 PM
As a homeowner in the Bexhill neighborhood this land sits at the entryway to I oppose the re-zoning request before the commission. This re-zoning request is inappropriate for the community and neighborhood. It is incompatible due to the small size of the land and the planned development that is proposed. The close proximity of the planned development would have a negative impact on the immediately surrounding homes that have been there for years. Furthermore, the proposed plan to turn our neighborhood entrances into the entrances and exits of the new development is also inappropriate due to the already congested morning and afternoons there with school traffic and pedestrians. The planned development adds no benefit to the surrounding neighborhood... it will only detract and negatively impact it. I am not completely against development there, but the current plans and need to rezone are out of place for that small plot of land.
Jason
37922
3-A-21-SP
Jason (37922), March 5, 2021 at 2:18 PM
As a homeowner in the Bexhill neighborhood this land sits at the entryway to I oppose the re-zoning request before the commission. This re-zoning request is inappropriate for the community and neighborhood. It is incompatible due to the small size of the land and the planned development that is proposed. The close proximity of the planned development would have a negative impact on the immediately surrounding homes that have been there for years. Furthermore, the proposed plan to turn our neighborhood entrances into the entrances and exits of the new development is also inappropriate due to the already congested morning and afternoons there with school traffic and pedestrians. The planned development adds no benefit to the surrounding neighborhood... it will only detract and negatively impact it. I am not completely against development there, but the current plans and need to rezone are out of place for that small plot of land.
Kerstin
37922
3-SD-21-C
Kerstin (37922), March 5, 2021 at 1:39 PM
To Whom It May Concern: Please rename “Bluegrass Subdivision.” We, in the Bluegrass community, when asked where we live, often reply, “in Bluegrass.” It will be confusing to many, unless the applicant is more specific with nomenclature, as in Bluegrass Valley, Glen, Ridge, Vale, etc. In particular, it will be confused with Blue Grass Elementary School, which we all just call “Blue Grass.” It would be like a neighborhood called “Farragut Subdivision.”

Presently the neighborhoods in Knoxville (according to KGIS) with the word Bluegrass in them are:• Bluegrass Bend• Bluegrass Courts• Bluegrass Heights• Bluegrass Landing• Bluegrass Meadows• The Woods at Bluegrass Thank you.
Sandra
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Sandra (37922), March 5, 2021 at 1:32 PM
I oppose this development! It is right in the middle of our homes on all sides along Ebenezer Rd. This would be such a terrible disturbance to our privacy for our homes and our daily lives. This would be totally inappropriate for this area!
Whitney
N/A
3-SB-21-C
Whitney (N/A), March 5, 2021 at 1:24 PM
I live off Ruggles Ferry Road and I am very troubled about nearly 500 houses being built in our neighborhood.

My immediate neighbors and I all own at least 5 acres of pristine east Tennessee land.

The houses closer to the proposed subdivision are beautiful, golf course homes with an acre or more between each on.

It's the type of neighborhood where kids feel safe, neighbors visit on porches and people feel safe walking along the road soaking up the sunshine and enjoying the fresh air.

We love land, trees, peace, quiet and space between ourselves to stretch out and breathe deep in east Knoxville.
View Attachment
Ann Marie
N/A
3-SB-21-C
Ann Marie (N/A), March 5, 2021 at 1:21 PM
First of all, that you for taking your time to read my email. Please don’t allow this huge development to happen! There would be tremendous traffic congestion on our two lane rural road. I have lived on Graves Road for 50 of my 57 years and our community does not want such a huge development! How would the Carter schools even accommodate all of the potential children? All of the roads that feed into Asheville Highway are extremely narrow, so how would traffic be for those roads? Please, please let our community stay a small rural community!
Chad
37871
3-SB-21-C
Chad (37871), March 5, 2021 at 1:10 PM
I oppose this development
Brad
37871
3-SB-21-C
Brad (37871), March 5, 2021 at 12:55 PM
I am a member of the community and live less than a mile from the proposed site. I am writing to oppose the development. The landscape will not support the amount of homes projected on the development. Secondly, it will add an unacceptable and unsafe amount of traffic for Ruggles Ferry Pike and the surrounding roads. There are no roads in the area, other than Ruggles Ferry, to accommodate the amount of traffic the subdivision will bring. 428 homes times two cars (at least) each. That's close to 1000 vehicles on small country roads. I strongly support the denial of this development going forward and would hope the commission listens to the people it will effect the most. I urge the commission to vote against the development.
Brad
37871
3-SB-21-C
Brad (37871), March 5, 2021 at 12:55 PM
I am a member of the community and live less than a mile from the proposed site. I am writing to oppose the development. The landscape will not support the amount of homes projected on the development. Secondly, it will add an unacceptable and unsafe amount of traffic for Ruggles Ferry Pike and the surrounding roads. There are no roads in the area, other than Ruggles Ferry, to accommodate the amount of traffic the subdivision will bring. 428 homes times two cars (at least) each. That's close to 1000 vehicles on small country roads. I strongly support the denial of this development going forward and would hope the commission listens to the people it will effect the most. I urge the commission to vote against the development.
Kristen
37721
3-SB-21-C
Kristen (37721), March 5, 2021 at 12:46 PM
This road cannot support this type of development nor can Carter Elem.
Brittany
37871
3-SB-21-C
Brittany (37871), March 5, 2021 at 12:34 PM
I think this is a terrible idea... It will crowed the Carter school community make the roads so busy
Christopher
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Christopher (37922), March 5, 2021 at 12:32 PM
My name is Chris Foell and I am a 30 year resident of Bexhill Neighborhood. I am writing to express my firm opposition to the zoning change to allow neighborhood commercial development of Bexhill field. Such development is not in keeping with the character and integrity of the neighborhood because 1) The property is surrounded on three sides by single family homes in close proximity, thus exposing these residents to the disturbances generated by night lighting, crowd noise, and loitering 2)Ingress and egress via both neighborhood street entrances, especially with potential drive-thru businesses, with place a burden on residential traffic flow, as well as school traffic. 3) Increased potential water runoff and flooding at the neighborhood entrance during periods of sustained rainfall. 4)Diminished safely of school children walking to and from school by having to navigate vehicular congestion. I fully support the staff recommendation to deny the zoning change.
Janet
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Janet (37922), March 5, 2021 at 11:59 AM
We have lived in Bexhill neighborhood for more than 40 years. We strongly oppose the rezoning of 1401 Bexhill Drive to “zoned neighborhood commercial.” This lot is surrounded on three sides by single-family homes. On two sides, our neighbors’ homes and driveways directly face what would become entrances to businesses. Traffic, especially during school hours, is already problematic at both entrances. These entrances on either side of this lot are the only way in and out of our neighborhood, from Bexhill onto and off Ebenezer Rd. The increased traffic would endanger school children walking or being driven to Bluegrass Elementary School, which is extremely near this location. I urge you to deny this rezoning, which would clearly damage the character and integrity of a beloved neighborhood. Janet Tortorelli.
3-SB-21-C
Pam (37871), March 5, 2021 at 11:26 AM
Too many houses for this small area. Too much traffic for small roads
Suzannah
37871
3-SB-21-C
Suzannah (37871), March 5, 2021 at 11:23 AM
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed development of 482 lots off Ruggles Ferry Pike. I am a home owner less than a mile from this development. I do not feel the current landscape of the community will support this number of homes, families or vehicles on Ruggles Ferry. I hope you will reconsider the desires of the community and reject this proposal.
Brent
37871
3-SB-21-C
Brent (37871), March 5, 2021 at 11:19 AM
I oppose the development of 482 homes.
Leslie
37924
3-SB-21-C
Leslie (37924), March 5, 2021 at 11:12 AM
This proposed subdivision would have terrible repercussions for the community. There would be too much traffic for the county roads affected to handle. Excessive speed on Ruggles Ferry Pk is already a problem and the added traffic would be a hazard. The schools in the community could also become overcrowded. A subdivision of this size should not be built in this area.
Melissa
37919
3-D-21-RZ
Melissa (37919), March 5, 2021 at 10:45 AM
PLEASE DO NOT REZONE the Bexhill Field to Commercial. Anything other than a green space would disrupt the integrity of the neighborhood. There is currently a vacant shopping center, within walking distance, in a prominent neighborhood that could be utilized. Do the right thing Commission and Save the Field!
Valerie
37871
3-SB-21-C
Valerie (37871), March 5, 2021 at 10:34 AM
I am in opposition of the 485 house development being planned for Blake Lane. There is not adequate demand or infrastructure in that area for that many new homes. It should also be considered that less than a mile away Neals Landing is also being expanded to add hundreds of houses. Our current schools (especially Carter Elementary and Middle) do not have the space for students for a new build of this size. Those issues need to be addressed BEFORE a new subdivision of this size should even be considered. In addition, the land to house ratio of this proposed subdivision is WAY too low. If this passes I would hope it is at least for a lower number of houses on that amount of acreage to provide for a larger yard and maintain the standards set by the homes that have been built in that area in the last 20 years. And also requiring greenways and such like are being required in areas such as Hardin Valley will new subdivision development. The people of east Knox county deserve the same!
Becca
37871
3-SB-21-C
Becca (37871), March 5, 2021 at 10:09 AM
Good morning. I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed development, "Innsbruck Farms" planned for N Ruggles Ferry Pike at Blake Road, case file number 3-SB-21-C. I live directly across from the proposed entrance into this subdivision. 482 houses, I feel, does not fit the current setting of this area. There is nothing in our community that dense. The closest subdivision that could even compare is Shannon Valley Farms with 2.1 DU/Acre with 91 units on 154.7 acres. Innsbruck Farms is proposing 482 units on 171.88 acres. This is so misplaced for our community. Also the roads connecting Ruggles Ferry to main highways can't not support the amount of traffic that 482 houses will add. Cash Road, Burris Road, Arms Road and Pleasant HIll Road are all connecting roads that now can't handle the traffic. None of these roads are lined and most aren't wide enough for 2 cars while passing.

I'm not against development in our community, but I feel like this development does not have the community at heart.
Brad
37871
3-SB-21-C
Brad (37871), March 5, 2021 at 9:52 AM
I’m opposed to this project!
Justin
37871
3-SB-21-C
Justin (37871), March 5, 2021 at 8:53 AM
I’m against the construction plan to build 482 on Blake Lane.
Betty
37871
3-SB-21-C
Betty (37871), March 5, 2021 at 8:46 AM
I oppose the development of 482 lots on Ruggles Ferry RD
Scott
N/A
3-SB-21-C
Scott (N/A), March 5, 2021 at 7:59 AM
This project will be a disaster for our area. I oppose this completely. We already have enough trouble with the golfers racing down the road we don’t need another 1000 cars a day on this road.
Ashley
37871
3-SB-21-C
Ashley (37871), March 5, 2021 at 7:03 AM
This is going to negatively affect my community. The traffic, the beauty of the farm land will be destroyed by this. That is the main reason we live here. Our community will be destroyed. If this is something that goes through, The plan needs to be rethought. Take a look at the Hardin Valley community less houses bigger lots. Greenways, parks etc. This in someway should benefit the community if it goes in. We need a park for kids, an area families can gather, greenways for walking. That’s what this community needs.
Anne
37871
3-SB-21-C
Anne (37871), March 4, 2021 at 7:08 PM
I have lived in this community for over 50 years. I have seen a lot of changes, some good, some not so good. While I am open to the concept of a subdivision being built in our area I am strongly opposed to the density of this proposal. I would like to see it reduced to a maximum of 1 house per acre or preferably 2 acres. We are a rural farming community. My house is 1.5 miles from the end of my driveway to the main entrance of the proposed subdivision. In this 1.5 miles there are 6 operating farms (and 2 on the other side of the entrance) that have slow moving farm equipment traveling all hours of the day and night. With the added growth in the last few years Ruggles Ferry has become a Nascar speedway. It has no shoulders or sidewalks and in some places steep drop offs that could cause serious injury if your wheel slipped off the edge of the road. It will be a disaster going to happen when an additional 800 to 1000 cars are added. Ruggles Ferry and the smaller side roads that carry traffic to Asheville Highway cannot handle this additional load.

This is a rural farming community and we would like for it to retain that atmosphere. We do not want it to become a West Knoxville. That is why we live HERE and not THERE.
Steve
37709
3-SB-21-C
Steve (37709), March 4, 2021 at 6:51 PM
The number of vehicles this high density subdivision will bring to the immediate and surrounding areas is totally unacceptable. The infrastructure simply cannot handle it and widening of the current roads will have a bad effect on property values. In addition, the noise and light pollution this subdivision will bring will destroy the quietness of the area. Please vote against this construction of this subdivision.
Vasily
37923
3-D-21-RZ
Vasily (37923), March 4, 2021 at 6:41 PM
Such a commercial development is not appropriate for the middle of several neighborhoods and residential areas.
Jacob
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Jacob (37922), March 4, 2021 at 6:39 PM
The Bex Hill field is a staple of the neighborhood and a locus of community activity. To do away with such a great space for communal outdoor activity to develop yet another strip mall (something Knoxville absolutely does not need more of) would be an extreme disappointment to put it lightly. In my opinion, the Bex Hill field is a major part of the Bex Hill charm, and offers an invaluable space for children to play, youth to gather and participate in informal athletic activities, and people of all ages to enjoy the sunshine. The Bex Hill field was an absolute mainstay of my own childhood. I remember playing all sorts of games with the other children my age throughout the neighbotho of. It was truly a center of communal bonding. The field also offers a space for people in the Bex Hill community to meet and socialize with those from outside the neighborhood. As I current resident, the development of a strip mall in place of the field would honestly highly upset me to the point that I would seriously consider navigating away from the neighborhood permanently.
Caroline
37871
3-SB-21-C
Caroline (37871), March 4, 2021 at 6:36 PM
I am opposed to the size and density of this development being nearly 3 homes per acre. I am concerned about the infrastructure needed to support a development of this size, as well as the impact that it will have on the school system, roads, environment, etc. I urge you to reconsider this development, or at the very least, to dramatically reduce the amount of homes reflected in the current plan.
Jessie
37871
3-SB-21-C
Jessie (37871), March 4, 2021 at 6:09 PM
I am writing for concern and opposing the large development in our rural area. You can drive down Ruggles Ferry almost any sunny day and see people walking, running, walking their dogs and riding bikes. Not only does a development this size and number of houses not match the rural area, but it is dangerous to our community with the increase of traffic for our pedestrians. A development with reasonable and respectful homes is considerable. The one in question is greedy and not appropriate for the area.
Lysette
37922
3-A-21-SP
Lysette (37922), March 4, 2021 at 6:06 PM
I have been a long time resident of the Bexhill subdivision. Since the 1970s, the field at Bexhill Subdivision's entrance (1401 Bexhill Drive) has been a place for residents and non-residents to gather, for kids to play, and families to enjoy the outdoors. In February 2021, developers proposed a development/strip mall that would have 2 fast food establishments (with drive thru’s) as well as 2 retail buildings. This land SHOULD NOT be rezoned because: - It is inappropriate to rezone this land as it is surrounded by low density residential and single-dwelling homes. - We sit among other great neighborhoods like Farrington, Brentmoor, Farmington, Bennigton, Foxfire and the Woods at Ebenezer making neighborhood commercial rezoning not compatible with our surrounding community. -Rezoning the land would have devastating effects on our neighborhood. Bluegrass Elementary is only a block away and falls within the Parental Responsibility Zone. Thus, many children walk to and from school every day. The additional traffic would put our children that walk to school at a much greater risk of injury. -Also, the entrances to the proposed development (Bexhill Drive and Gatwick Drive) are the same entrances that all 348 households in Bexhill already use. The additional traffic would make pulling in and out of neighborhoods more difficult and increase the possibility of car accidents. Please DENY the rezoning of 1401 Bexhill Drive.
Lysette
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Lysette (37922), March 4, 2021 at 6:03 PM
I have been a long time resident of the Bexhill subdivision. Since the 1970s, the field at Bexhill Subdivision's entrance (1401 Bexhill Drive) has been a place for residents and non-residents to gather, for kids to play, and families to enjoy the outdoors. This land SHOULD NOT be rezoned because: - It is inappropriate to rezone this land as it is surrounded by low density residential and single-dwelling homes. - We sit among other great neighborhoods like Farrington, Brentmoor, Farmington, Bennigton, Foxfire and the Woods at Ebenezer making neighborhood commercial rezoning not compatible with our surrounding community. -Rezoning the land would have devastating effects on our neighborhood. Bluegrass Elementary is only a block away and falls within the Parental Responsibility Zone. Thus, many children walk to and from school every day. The additional traffic would put our children that walk to school at a much greater risk of injury. -Also, the entrances to the proposed development (Bexhill Drive and Gatwick Drive) are the same entrances that all 348 households in Bexhill already use. The additional traffic would make pulling in and out of neighborhoods more difficult and increase the possibility of car accidents,. For the reasons stated above, I'd like to ask that you DENY the rezoning of 1401 Bexhill Drive.
Sally
37923
3-D-21-RZ
Sally (37923), March 4, 2021 at 5:53 PM
I do not like the idea of this green space near residential properties turn into shopping. It would be dangerous to children.
Ann Marie
37871
3-SB-21-C
Ann Marie (37871), March 4, 2021 at 5:36 PM
Please don’t allow this huge development to happen! There would be tremendous traffic congestion on our two lane rural road. I have lived on Graves Road for 50 of my 57 years and our community does not want such a huge development! How would the Carter schools even accommodate all of the potential children? All of the roads that feed into Asheville Highway are extremely narrow, so how would traffic be for those roads? Please, please let our community stay a small rural community!
Greg
37922
3-D-21-RZ
Greg (37922), March 4, 2021 at 4:30 PM
We have lived in this area since 1996. We were under the impression that the Green Area at the entrance to Bexhill was in the covenants protected this area from commercial development. In the 20+ years we have lived in this area the Green Space at Bexhill we have observed the children of Bexhill, Foxfire and other neighborhoods in this area utilizing the area as a gathering place. Their has been various types of games played on the green area. These games have provided the young people a place to meet and play with others giving them the opportunity to develop lasting friendships over the years. I feel without this area these young people were able to channel their energy in a Very Positive way!! Please consider future generations needs for a wonderful way to release their energies in very positive ways! If this commercial development is allowed to become a reality I fear it will destroy this neighborhood. The unfortunate reality is that the development would bring the potential for rodents in and around the dumpsters that will come with this commercial development. Additionally, it may reduce the sale ability of the homes that will surround these businesses. Please consider the impact on the residents and Children of the Bexhill Community in your decision process.
Travis
37871
3-SB-21-C
Travis (37871), March 4, 2021 at 4:23 PM
I oppose the development of 482 lots off of Ruggles Ferry Pike. This would be one of the largest and most dense developments in all of Knox County. Lessen the density.
Brandi
37871
3-SB-21-C
Brandi (37871), March 4, 2021 at 4:22 PM
Ruggles Ferry cannot handle the traffic, the schools cannot handle that many more students. The beauty in Straw Plains is all the open land. Why does it have to be almost 500 homes stacked on top of each other, instead space them out and have and better quality built home especially in the area.
Donna
s Fer
3-SB-21-C
Donna (s Fer), March 4, 2021 at 4:16 PM
I am extremely opposed to this proposed development. With 482 homes it will add close to 1,000 cars to an already well traveled 2 lane Ruggles Ferry Pike. I can only go across the road to my mailbox at certain times due to the traffic already here. We moved here from Nashville and chose the area due to the rural atmosphere with sparse development. This may be the most densely populated development in Knox County which I feel is unacceptable for this area. Thank you
Patrick
37918
3-B-21-UR
Patrick (37918), March 4, 2021 at 4:07 PM
Turning left onto Murphy Rd from Horsestall Dr between 7-9am each day (or frankly any other time of day) is already complicated enough. Adding the proposed road directly across from Horsestall to access the new development is only going to compound things even further.

The county needs to provide a specific solution to this issue. Adding another road at that spot without significant changes/improvements will be disastrous for every resident in SVF and also those in the new development.
Whitney
37924
3-SB-21-C
Whitney (37924), March 4, 2021 at 4:06 PM
Please take the time on a lovely Sunday afternoon to walk, bike or drive around our relaxed, east Knox County neighborhood and enjoy our Holston River views towards House Mountain.

Please vote to reduce the houses to 1 per acre (or ideally 1 per 2 acres lol).

We would welcome 100 new neighbors but 482 is insane.

We do not want to become Turkey Creek East.
View Attachment
Kylie
37871
3-SB-21-C
Kylie (37871), March 4, 2021 at 4:05 PM
I oppose the development of this high density development. Please consider a development plan that aligns to the current standards of the surrounding neighborhood.
Johnnie
37806
3-SB-21-C
Johnnie (37806), March 4, 2021 at 4:01 PM
482 new houses on Ruggles Ferry Rd would put way to much traffic on a already busy road. People built new houses in this community because of its scenic beauty and this housing development would destroy it. Please VOTE no on this request.
Sherry
37871
3-SB-21-C
Sherry (37871), March 4, 2021 at 3:55 PM
This plan has way too many houses. The roads can not handle this much traffic. Secondary roads are very narrow. I am very concerned about this development.
April
37871
3-SB-21-C
April (37871), March 4, 2021 at 3:46 PM
The development of 482 lots on Ruggles Ferry Pike is not only going to be an eyesore for the area, but a logistical nightmare for the community. Traffic is already a problem early in the morning and later in the afternoons as people commute to school and work, and adding an additional 482 families is only going to make the experience worse. Additionally, Carter schools do not have the capacity to handle even half that amount of potential enrollees, and since Carter Elementary was recently renovated I can’t imagine it would be renovated once more to accommodate even more students any time soon. The homes currently on and around Ruggles Ferry are generally large, expensive family homes, and to add almost 500 lower-end homes will not only add the problems mentioned above, but will greatly impact the property value of any homes in this area. This is a project no one in the Carter community supports aside from those who are receiving the financial gain from it. It must be stopped to preserve our community.
Brad
37871
3-SB-21-C
Brad (37871), March 4, 2021 at 3:37 PM
This project will be terrible for the community and will turn people off to our area. It does not fit what the people of Carter want and needs to be dropped.
JUSTIN
37871
3-SB-21-C
JUSTIN (37871), March 4, 2021 at 3:33 PM
See attached pdf
View Attachment
Kathryn
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
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.).
Matt
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.
View Attachment
Vida
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.

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.).
Vida
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.

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.).
Terry
37902
3-F-21-RZ
Terry (37902), March 4, 2021 at 12:09 PM
see attached
View Attachment
Amy
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.

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.
Jennifer
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.
View Attachment
Ritchie
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.
View Attachment
Carl
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.
Josh & Melissa
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.
Greg
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.
Annie
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.
Kenzie
37871
3-SB-21-C
Kenzie (37871), March 3, 2021 at 10:55 AM
see attached
View Attachment
Dawn
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.
Melissa
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.
ashley
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.
noel
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.).
ashley
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.
Barbara
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
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.
Pat
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.

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.

Jason
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.
Patti
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.
Theresa
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!
Stephen
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.
Louis
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.
Constance
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.
JoAnne
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
Jonathan
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.
GREG
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>
David
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.

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.
David
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.

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.
Andrea
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.
View Attachment
Rick
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.
Suzanne
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.

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.
Bobby and Abby
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.
Rocky
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.
Meiyu
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.
Kathy and Kraig
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.

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.
KIMBERLIE
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.
3-F-21-RZ
Ben (37932), February 25, 2021 at 9:35 PM
Please decline this application for the new neighborhood.
Rachel
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.

Please do not approve this!
Laura
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.
Jeremy
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.
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.

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
Joseph
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.
Peggy
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!
Robyn
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.
Amanda
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.
Jennifer
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 traffic
Susie
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.
Kelsey
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!
Jeremy
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.
Janet
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!
Susan
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.
Diane
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!
Karen
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.
Melissa
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!
Joe
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?

Please do not approve this.
Clint
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.
Jeffrey
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.
Jessica
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.
Timothy
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.
Whitney
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.
Marcia
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.
michelle
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.
Jennifer
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.

Go some where else and build where there is more room and more classroom space.
Chris
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.

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
Cindy
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?
Tasha
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.”
Kristy
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
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.
Susan
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.
Seth
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.
Lisa
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.
Jayson
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.
Mark
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.
Cameron
37932
3-F-21-RZ
Cameron (37932), February 23, 2021 at 8:29 PM
My family’s vote is no. Too crowded.
Katie
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.
Sarah
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.
Kristen
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.
Debra
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.
Rachel
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
Amanda
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.
Misty
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.
Ericka
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.
Simmon
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?
Jessica
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!
Suzanne
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.
Amanda
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.

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.
Moriah
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.
Kris
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.
Teresa
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!
Amber
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!
Pamela
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.
Stephanie
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!
Todd
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 Snyder
Clayton
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!
Kevin
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.
Derek
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.
View Attachment
Kathleen
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.

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.
David
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?
Becca
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.
Carl
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.
View Attachment
Sarah
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.
Evangelynn
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.
Courtney
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.
Justin
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.
Krista
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.
View Attachment
Taylor
na
12-B-20-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
Taylor (na), February 11, 2021 at 11:11 AM
postponement request
View Attachment
Treven
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.
Taylor
37919
12-C-20-SU
Applicant Correspondence
Taylor (37919), February 10, 2021 at 6:06 PM
Please find attached a postponement request on behalf of the Applicant.
View Attachment
Taylor
37919
12-C-20-SU
Applicant Correspondence
Taylor (37919), February 10, 2021 at 6:05 PM
Please find attached a postponement request on behalf of the Applicant.
View Attachment
Amy
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.
Debra
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Debra (37922), February 10, 2021 at 2:25 PM

View Attachment
Richard
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.
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-SU

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!
Benjamin
37902
1-C-21-RZ
Applicant Correspondence
Benjamin (37902), February 10, 2021 at 1:56 PM
APPLICANT CORRESPONDENCE. See attached letter from the Applicant.
View Attachment
Ashley
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.
Susan
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Susan (37922), February 10, 2021 at 1:31 PM

View Attachment
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.

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.
Larry
12-B-20-RZ
Larry February 10, 2021 at 12:59 PM

View Attachment
12-C-20-SU
Dal (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:58 PM

View Attachment
Charity
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.
View Attachment
Cherie
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Cherie (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:41 PM
Please see attached document
View Attachment
Patrick
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Patrick (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:16 PM
See attached .pdf
View Attachment
Cullum
37922
12-C-20-SU
Cullum (37922), February 10, 2021 at 12:07 PM
See attached
View Attachment
Brad
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.
View Attachment
Jennifer
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.
View Attachment
Vernon
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Vernon (37922), February 10, 2021 at 11:07 AM
see attached PDF
View Attachment
Dianne
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.
Mary
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.
Piers
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.
View Attachment
Susan
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.
julie
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!!
Sharon
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.
Stephanie
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-SU

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.
Louise
37922
12-B-20-RZ
Louise (37922), February 10, 2021 at 10:30 AM

View Attachment
Sally
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...

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.
Brittany
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.
Dean
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.

Please see the attached letter uploaded here. We respectfully request the MPC reject the Developer's current site plan. Thank you
View Attachment
Tawny
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.
Anderson
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.
Jim
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.

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.
Randall
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.
Tammy
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.

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.
Paul
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.
Jillian
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.
Brandon
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.
Debbie
37912
1-C-21-RZ
Debbie (37912), February 10, 2021 at 1:33 AM
See attached
View Attachment
Debbie
37912
1-C-21-RZ
Debbie (37912), February 10, 2021 at 12:25 AM
Please see attached letter. Thank you.
View Attachment
Frank
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.
Stephanie
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.

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.
Kevin and Amy
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.
View Attachment
Todd
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.
Taylor
na
12-B-20-RZ,12-C-20-SU
Applicant Correspondence
Taylor (na), February 9, 2021 at 5:13 PM
History of Development at Northshore Town Center
View Attachment
Taylor
na
12-B-20-RZ,12-C-20-SU
Applicant Correspondence
Taylor (na), February 9, 2021 at 5:12 PM
Exhibit G - Density Study
View Attachment
Connie
1-E-21-SP
Connie February 9, 2021 at 1:35 PM
please see attached comments
View Attachment
John
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.
View Attachment
Jack
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.
View Attachment
Patricia
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.
Benjamin
37902
1-D-21-SU
Applicant Correspondence
Benjamin (37902), January 13, 2021 at 3:20 PM

View Attachment
Ben
1-E-21-SP
Applicant Correspondence
Ben January 12, 2021 at 11:09 AM
Postponement request
View Attachment
1-E-21-SP
Tim (37912), January 8, 2021 at 3:18 PM
See Attachment
View Attachment
Evalyn
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.
Jack
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 Gambuzza
View Attachment
Jack
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 Hancock
View Attachment
Jack
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.
View Attachment
John
37933
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
John (37933), 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.
View Attachment
John
37933
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
John (37933), 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.
View Attachment
John
37933
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
John (37933), 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.
View Attachment
John
37933
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
John (37933), December 9, 2020 at 3:25 PM
Please see attachment 3 regarding the Gambuzza Use on Review request in 2017.
View Attachment
John
37933
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
John (37933), December 9, 2020 at 3:24 PM
Please see attachment 2 showing the original Development Plan for the original Use on Review in 2013.
View Attachment
John
37933
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
John (37933), December 9, 2020 at 3:22 PM
Please see attachment 1 regarding the original Use on Review for this property.
View Attachment
John
37933
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
John (37933), 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.
View Attachment
Stephanie
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.
Carole
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.
Kevin
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.
Taylor
37919
12-B-20-RZ,12-C-20-SU
Applicant Correspondence
Taylor (37919), December 8, 2020 at 4:40 PM
Please find attached a correspondence on behalf of the applicant requesting a 30 day postponement.
View Attachment
Evalyn
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.
Sharon
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.
View Attachment
John
37933
12-B-20-UR
Applicant Correspondence
John (37933), 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.
View Attachment
Lawrence
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.
Jack
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.
View Attachment
Jack
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 2016
View Attachment
Jack
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 2016
View Attachment
Jack
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.
View Attachment
Randall
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.
Dee
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.

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.
Wayne
12-B-20-UR
Wayne November 23, 2020 at 12:06 PM
Representing Westland West Homeowners Association
View Attachment
Elizabeth
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.

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.
Jacob
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.

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.
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!
Cody
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.