March 13, 2025
Planning Commission meeting

Public Comments

317 Comments for
Case Number
Name
Comment
Attachment
On Behalf Of
Date
8-B-23-OA
John
37931
8-B-23-OA
John (37931), July 25, 2023 at 5:38 PM
I am fully in support of these changes. Far too often variances are required to rebuild identically to the surrounding houses and neighborhood. The current zoning ordinance is designed for larger .25 acre lots and is not consistent with the fact that most older neighborhoods have 50' widths. There has been substantial investment and vetting of these changes through the "missing middle study", but unfortunately none of them have been implemented yet. Building more homes is the only solution to the housing crisis we face.
July 25, 2023
at 5:38 PM
8-B-23-OA
Finbarr
37919
8-B-23-OA
Finbarr (37919), July 31, 2023 at 11:17 AM
this recommendation seems reasonable.
July 31, 2023
at 11:17 AM
8-E-23-OA
Finbarr
37919
8-E-23-OA
Finbarr (37919), July 31, 2023 at 11:24 AM
this recommendation seems reasonable.
July 31, 2023
at 11:24 AM
8-B-23-OA
Christina
37921
8-B-23-OA
Christina (37921), August 2, 2023 at 8:15 PM
If I have a C-N lot next to RN and want to build a single family house (permissible in C-N), I’m subject to a residential abutment setback of 20’. A single family in RN only needs 5’ / 15’ combined. That is a pretty absurd discrepancy, especially problematic for an average city lot 50’ wide.
This application raises an important question: what is the purpose of residential abutment setbacks? Not just for C-N but for other zones too (I-MU, C-G, etc). If the setback is intended for larger developments, why are these rules broadly applied for all uses? And for medium density developments, if you can build townhouses in RN-7 with 15’ combined setback, why 20’ residential abutment setback for townhouses in C-N, I-MU, or anywhere?
Needless to say, I support this amendment and would actually support an expansion of the amendment to include consideration of other zones as well. Maybe address the use matrix while you’re at it (e.g. why is SF permissible in commercial districts?).
August 2, 2023
at 8:15 PM
8-E-23-OA
Christina
37921
8-E-23-OA
Christina (37921), August 2, 2023 at 8:24 PM
This application again reveals that the code was written with exclusive expectation for heavy development in these districts (not just C-N, but also I-MU, C-G, etc). Why are buffer yards required for low density housing developments in C-N (and others) but not for the same developments in any RN district? Obviously there is a discrepancy here that needs to be corrected.
August 2, 2023
at 8:24 PM
8-B-23-OA
Ron
37919
8-B-23-OA
Ron (37919), August 3, 2023 at 3:30 PM
We're dealing with 75 years of urban sprawl planning that no longer serves the needs of this city. In the midst of a terrible housing crisis that seems like he just keeps getting worse and worse and more and more expensive it's time to rethink how we use our small lots in the CN zoned property. With this revision as I understand it it would allow townhomes and condos and other medium density housing options to be built. This seems like a reasonable revision in the current zoning laws to address our crisis state of housing in Knoxville.
August 3, 2023
at 3:30 PM
8-E-23-OA
Ron
37919
8-E-23-OA
Ron (37919), August 3, 2023 at 3:43 PM
What sense does it make to require buffer zones between multifamily housing and traditional housing developments? Just because my quadruplex next door is owned a particular way does that somehow change its effective use as a house? The quadruplex has nothing more than a large house with four doors. Because of the affordability crisis in Knoxville right now people are renting out rooms people are renting out floors of their entire houses, or we've got multi-generational families where parents are living upstairs adult children in the basement This is far more common than people believe.
And yet I'm unaware of any large protest or complaints about these situations.
Let's move beyond the restrictive zoning that has made affordable housing almost unbuildable in Knoxville. I support this zoning amendment.

August 3, 2023
at 3:43 PM
8-B-23-OA
George
37932
8-B-23-OA
George (37932), August 7, 2023 at 12:08 PM
Agenda items (8A23OA,8B23OA,8C23OA,8D23OA,8E23OA)all relate to defining ADU's and relaxing set backs, buffers and the like. These requests can be construed to introduce ADU's to Knoxville. However, may also be construed as method to simply increase building density way tighter than current standards. They also can allow a rental property be added to nearly any lot/location.
I am against each of these agenda items.
And I think the County, the Planning Commission and residents need A LOT more conversations about introducing and controlling ADU's (like the ADU must be occupied by an immediate family member) prior to introduction of this concept.
Following this research, the concept should be trialed in one district to learn impact and control, and NOT just open the floodgates in all districts!
August 7, 2023
at 12:08 PM
8-E-23-OA
George
3
8-E-23-OA
George (3), August 7, 2023 at 12:15 PM
Agenda items (8A23OA,8B23OA,8C23OA,8D23OA,8E23OA)all relate to defining ADU's and relaxing set backs, buffers and the like. These requests can be construed to introduce ADU's to Knoxville. However, may also be construed as method to simply increase building density way tighter than current standards. They also can allow a rental property be added to nearly any lot/location.
I am against each of these agenda items.
And I think the County, the Planning Commission and residents need A LOT more conversations about introducing and controlling ADU's (like the ADU must be occupied by an immediate family member) prior to introduction of this concept.
Following this research, the concept should be trialed in one district to learn impact and control, and NOT just open the floodgates in all districts!
August 7, 2023
at 12:15 PM
8-B-23-OA
Aaron
37917
8-B-23-OA
Aaron (37917), August 8, 2023 at 9:14 PM
I support this amendment on grounds that historical "neighborhood commercial" buildings and nodes often often had minimal setback. Staff makes a point that resonates with me that if engineering has to set setbacks based on sightline distance in the permitting process, that will create delays. For something standard like this and other typical sightline considerations (like when there are existing nonconforming structures on adjacent lot), I think it would be ideal to add a sightline diagram to the zoning ordinance.
August 8, 2023
at 9:14 PM
8-B-23-OA
Dustin
37917
8-B-23-OA
Dustin (37917), August 8, 2023 at 10:05 PM
See attached for my full comments supporting Ordinance Amendment 8-B-23-OA.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20230808220538.pdf
August 8, 2023
at 10:05 PM
8-E-23-OA
Aaron
37917
8-E-23-OA
Aaron (37917), August 8, 2023 at 10:16 PM
I support this application with regard to the reduction in buffer yard width requirements, but I oppose removal of the landscape plan requirement to obtain a building permit. Landscape design is often overlooked and disrespected, but is as or more important for aesthetics and placemaking than building architecture. The ability to submit a landscape plan after a building permit has been issued will lead to disjointed site designs that do not take advantage of landscaping's ability to provide shade, clean and retain runoff, and contribute to ecosystems.
August 8, 2023
at 10:16 PM
8-B-23-OA
Drew
37917
8-B-23-OA
Drew (37917), August 9, 2023 at 12:17 PM
Please see attached PDF.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20230809121714.pdf
August 9, 2023
at 12:17 PM
8-E-23-OA
Drew
37917
8-E-23-OA
Drew (37917), August 9, 2023 at 12:20 PM
Please see attached PDF.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20230809122019.pdf
August 9, 2023
at 12:20 PM
8-B-23-OA
R. Bentley
37921
8-B-23-OA
R. Bentley (37921), August 10, 2023 at 12:17 PM
Please see attached...
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20230810121735.pdf
August 10, 2023
at 12:17 PM
8-E-23-OA
R. Bentley
37921
8-E-23-OA
R. Bentley (37921), August 10, 2023 at 12:19 PM
Please see attached...
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20230810121911.pdf
August 10, 2023
at 12:19 PM
8-E-23-OA
Kevin
37918
8-E-23-OA
Kevin (37918), September 11, 2023 at 1:30 PM
The Board of Directors for the Knox County Planning Alliance supports the staff recommendation to deny this proposed amendment to the zoning code. The proposal to reduce buffer yard depth (changes to 12.8.C) applies to all buffer yards across all zoning districts. As staff points out, reducing the width that much would make it difficult to install the required planting, and would have unintended consequences across all districts in the city.
September 11, 2023
at 1:30 PM
8-E-23-OA
Patricia
37920
8-E-23-OA
Patricia (37920), September 12, 2023 at 3:16 AM
I disapprove of 70% decrease in a buffer 30% and landscaping. I live in SW-1 which is low density (homes) and we had Hensons 12 units built where 3 homes had been. They stand out like a sore thumb to the existing cottages and bungalows. There are issues with storm water run-off because the development was allowed to be build higher that the original lots. They’re concrete, no landscaping so the businesses across the alley get flooded. The cottage next door has. 5 feet high clay hill so water runs down onto their yard causing water issues with only 5’ side yard (no Variance). Buffers are more for the home next door for privacy with trees and vegetation not a planter. There are 12 garage and recycle bins too. Parking ends up on Dixie and Phillips and the alley way so car can’t get though nor waste trucks. I also disapprove of removing the owner occupied living on site for ADUs which can end up as a short term rental. A duplex would have been more in line with the vision plan and low density and blending with the character on the neighborhood. This is one dev. That should have been denied and should not get a C of O until issues are taken care of for the sorrounding homes. Phase II could have been buil at 1 1/2 story which could have fit better. This is a case of speculator getting the good old boy pat on the back when you read his permit. Henson appears to be oblivious to the SW-1 FBC.
September 12, 2023
at 3:16 AM
8-E-23-OA
Dale
37909
8-E-23-OA
Dale (37909), September 13, 2023 at 9:33 PM
As chair of Trees Knoxville, a non-profit with a focus on tree canopy promotion and preservation, we oppose the amendment to this ordinance. The landscape buffer possess both an environmental and aesthetic importance. Decreasing this buffer requirement will lead to further canopy loss of valuable tree canopy and increased canopy fragmentation. These are two critical components for maintaining a healthy wildlife habitat and preventing further degradation of our urban tree canopy.
September 13, 2023
at 9:33 PM
8-E-23-OA
Sandra
37914
8-E-23-OA
Sandra (37914), September 13, 2023 at 10:59 PM
Do not reduce our landscape regulations. Landscape plants, especially trees, are important because they:
screen disaparate development
buffer concrete, asphalt, buildings, vehicles
reduce heat islands
aid wildlife
improve mental health
and make our community more attractive
Fences are not trees. Trees provide shade, beauty, and soften our surroundings. Fences are six feet tall. Trees are at least 20 feet tall (or more). Trees are as tall as buildings. Fences barely screen trucks. Please do not change our landscape regulations. Landscaping has no relationship with midrange housing.
September 13, 2023
at 10:59 PM
8-E-23-OA
Thomas
37917
8-E-23-OA
Thomas (37917), September 19, 2023 at 8:05 AM
I support the staff recommendation to deny this proposed amendment to the zoning code. The proposal to reduce buffer yard depth (changes to 12.8.C) applies to all buffer yards across all zoning districts. As staff points out, reducing the width would make it difficult to install the required planting, and would have unintended consequences across the city. Although I understand the need for more housing, I can’t support the amendment. Many other comments have indicated the public benefit of trees and shrubs provided to our community. Trees Knoxville has been conducting a master planning process and the majority of the public has recommended a review of existing ordinances to improve, tighten, and increase the requirements for trees to meet the changing environmental conditions that are causing public harm and issues. Landscaping requirements are a minor cost to the overall development cost and have not been documented to be prohibitive or costly. Studies in Knoxville have shown that the largest need for more trees is on private property and efforts being considered in the master plan will be made to increase canopy cover across the city on all properties. The people who would be living in these new homes would greatly benefit from the added landscaping by reduced heating and cooling as well as other public health benefits. The present requirements should be maintained.
September 19, 2023
at 8:05 AM
8-E-23-OA
Carlene
37918
8-E-23-OA
Carlene (37918), September 21, 2023 at 12:24 PM
Please deny this request. The professional staff recommendation provides convincing reasons why the presently existing, thoughtful standards and processes, are both appropriate and necessary. They are based on experience and the community is well-served by them.
September 21, 2023
at 12:24 PM
8-B-23-OA
Christopher
37932
8-B-23-OA
Christopher (37932), October 2, 2023 at 9:51 PM
I fully support the idea of reducing setbacks on properties. There is no reason why a property needs to maintain a lawn if it does not have to. Besides, a lot of the grass used is not native with the environment and it requires a decent amount of watering, fertilizer, and pesticides that would be best kept to a minimum. My complaint is not against people who want a wide expansive yard, because I can see why some people like the aesthetic. However, forcing everyone to have a big lawn does tend to restrict development. For instance, much of downtown would be impossible to be built today because all the downtown apartments have no setbacks. R. Bentley Marlow's application is a reasonable one, and I hope that you all pass it through.
October 2, 2023
at 9:51 PM
8-B-23-OA
Sandra
37914
8-B-23-OA
Sandra (37914), October 3, 2023 at 11:12 PM
Deny this proposed amendment. Setbacks create compatibility in a neighborhood and this proposal to alter setbacks has not been fully evaluated. Setbacks are important.
October 3, 2023
at 11:12 PM
8-E-23-OA
Gordon
37917
8-E-23-OA
Gordon (37917), October 5, 2023 at 10:04 AM
As a member of the City of Knoxville Tree Board, we were not informed of this possible change in the landscape ordinance. We strongly oppose this proposal.
October 5, 2023
at 10:04 AM
8-E-23-OA
Bob
37919
8-E-23-OA
Bob (37919), October 11, 2023 at 10:12 AM
I oppose this amendment. Article 12.2A - As a landscape architect I feel that it is important to include a landscape plan prior to issuing a building permit, not at the certificate of occupancy phase. Including a landscape plan prior to issuing a building permit ensures that the developer is considering the code implications as well as budgeting for an appropriate, compliant design. Landscaping is a vital part of a community infrastructure and often overlooked already. The use as a visual buffer is only part of the benefits, which include noise buffering, stormwater mitigation, heat island effect, providing wildlife habitat and beautification. Article 12.8 - Reducing landscaping buffers by using a fence or wall does not benefit anyone except the developer. As mentioned above, buffer yards ensure landscaping is provided for all of the aspects listed.
October 11, 2023
at 10:12 AM
8-E-23-OA
Jessica
37920
8-E-23-OA
Jessica (37920), October 17, 2023 at 5:54 PM
As a member of the City of Knoxville Tree Board and its subcommittee looking at the landscaping ordinance, I believe any changes to policy should be informed by the upcoming Urban Forestry Master Plan and the work our subcommittee is doing. This work is all slated to be completed in the upcoming few months, and while the problems Mr. Marlow is attempting to address are real and pressing, the process to make changes needs to be more inclusive and informed.
October 17, 2023
at 5:54 PM
8-E-23-OA
Jessica
37920
8-E-23-OA
Jessica (37920), October 23, 2023 at 5:54 PM
I would like to add this letter to the comments I previously submitted.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231023175428.pdf
October 23, 2023
at 5:54 PM
12-SF-23-C
Matthew
37932
12-SF-23-C
Matthew (37932), December 6, 2023 at 12:17 PM
PLEASE see the attached letter regarding this illegal development. There is ZERO path forward due to this developers complete disregard of State Law and local Rules & Regulations. Quit wasting taxpayer money defending a developer over Knox County Taxpayer's safety and concerns. This development was determined illegal by Knox County Chancery Court and this staff/commission has no authority to approve as-is. We request you to DENY this plan to avoid a fifth or more lawsuit - The first lawsuit clarifies the illegalities of this plan and the wrongdoings of the previous commission. The next three lawsuits involve the current staff and commission as you have aided this developer and Amy Brooks to, yet again, illegally approve this development against our advisement.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231206121707.pdf
December 6, 2023
at 12:17 PM
12-G-23-DP
Matthew
37932
12-G-23-DP
Matthew (37932), December 6, 2023 at 12:18 PM
PLEASE see the attached letter regarding this illegal development. There is ZERO path forward due to this developers complete disregard of State Law and local Rules & Regulations. Quit wasting taxpayer money defending a developer over Knox County Taxpayer's safety and concerns. This development was determined illegal by Knox County Chancery Court and this staff/commission has no authority to approve as-is. We request you to DENY this plan to avoid a fifth or more lawsuit - The first lawsuit clarifies the illegalities of this plan and the wrongdoings of the previous commission. The next three lawsuits involve the current staff and commission as you have aided this developer and Amy Brooks to, yet again, illegally approve this development against our advisement.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231206121818.pdf
December 6, 2023
at 12:18 PM
12-SF-23-C
Mike
37932
12-SF-23-C
Mike (37932), December 12, 2023 at 6:59 PM
I place my trust in you to use the existing laws as the governing framework for making any decisions related to this and all development in Hardin Valley. The developers are fully aware of these laws and if they are allowed to circumvent them by exceptions just because of their relationships, with a wink and a nod that they can go ahead and build with the knowledge that their position will be supported by the planning commission; it sets a terrible precedent.

View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231212185946.pdf
December 12, 2023
at 6:59 PM
12-SF-23-C
Michael
37932
12-SF-23-C
Michael (37932), December 12, 2023 at 9:52 PM
Please see the attached .pdf letter/document. A summary is below. I sadly have to write again about the same topic and agenda item - this time in a new form - as I have previously - The Lantern Park subdivision. This project, owned and developed by Scott Smith, continues to be illegally pushed upon you as Commissioners. The idea is that if they keep on asking, keep on attempting to circumvent - and in fact blatantly not follow - local rules and ordinances as well as the law of the State of Tennessee, they could wear down anyone who stands in their way. Their mantra is essentially "might makes right. Please know that we will continue to vigorously oppose what we know to be right, what the judge has already ruled to be illegal, as well as what you - if you are being honest - know to be wrong. We respectfully ask that you DENY this plan before you, in accordance with, among other things, staff recommendation. It is not your job to bail out developers who seek "end arounds" established law and common sense
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20231212215250.pdf
December 12, 2023
at 9:52 PM
12-SF-23-C
Michele
37932
12-SF-23-C
Michele (37932), December 13, 2023 at 11:07 PM
It is ridiculous that the developers are greedy and after 4 lawsuits still trying to get away with doing what they want. We just want to maintain our road/entrance the way it is. There is no need to disturb that.
December 13, 2023
at 11:07 PM
2-B-24-DP
Iris
37922
2-B-24-DP
Iris (37922), January 8, 2024 at 4:06 AM
This is a neighborhood that can't handle the additional traffic generated from 40 more units at that location. The buildings are also way too tall and would be an eyesore that looks out of place for this area. There are already drainage problems around that location and this project would make that even more untenable. Please squash this application.
January 8, 2024
at 4:06 AM
2-B-24-DP
Jack
37922
2-B-24-DP
Jack (37922), January 8, 2024 at 4:28 AM
I stand strongly opposing the condominium project. The overwhelming majority of residents in Gettysvue and surrounding neighborhoods also oppose the project. The majority of people affected by this construction should have a say in its outcome and they disapprove of its construction. Please deny the request to build this project.
January 8, 2024
at 4:28 AM
2-B-24-DP
Rebecca
37922
2-B-24-DP
Rebecca (37922), January 8, 2024 at 6:45 AM
I oppose the proposed building of two high density residential buildings in the middle of an established neighborhood.
- The amount of construction traffic will be a detriment and danger to the children of the neighborhood for years to come, as well as anyone wanting to walk
- The increased traffic along the streets after completion of the condos/apartments will make the streets unsafe for walking (there are no sidewalks in the neighborhood)
- The proposed structures are very large and imposing and do not look like they fit in the neighborhood
- The proposed buildings would disrupt rainwater flow at the bottom of a hill that historically floods
- There is a network of caves beneath the proposed site
- The school population at AL Lotts is strained already.
January 8, 2024
at 6:45 AM
2-B-24-DP
Melissa
37922
2-B-24-DP
Melissa (37922), January 8, 2024 at 7:11 AM
This proposal is not in line with the existing neighborhood. Changing the low density housing to medium density/office will negatively effect, traffic (already an issue) on major cross streets, overload club parking already an issue, create dangerous streets for the children and adults in the neighborhood and create negative effects in the drainage onto the golf course and streets. This should not be allowed to happen in a neighborhood like this. It doesn't fit and will create disastrous issues. That's why it has been turned down 3 times!
January 8, 2024
at 7:11 AM
2-B-24-DP
Samantha
37922
2-B-24-DP
Samantha (37922), January 8, 2024 at 7:13 AM
I strongly oppose this proposal (again)- it will take a beautiful, well-established and well-regarded neighborhood and make it over-run, cheapen it, and change the fabric of the neighborhood. I have parents in the neighborhood and visit every week- the neighborhood is already busy and parking is already flooding the streets every time there is an event, a swim-meet, and the clubhouse facilities are routinely overloaded already. It is questionable whether these would even sell (especially with so many and who they would appeal to), but if they do, it will only cheapen and overload the neighborhood. It will be an eyesore and the complete opposite of what many people likely expected when spending a million dollars or more on their homes (some of while did decades ago). Gettysvue has always been a dream neighborhood to me- the type of established, high-class neighborhood that you strive for- and putting in these condos will ruin that completely.
January 8, 2024
at 7:13 AM
2-B-24-DP
Kim
37922
2-B-24-DP
Kim (37922), January 8, 2024 at 8:12 AM
Please do not allow this project to move forward! This project does not meet the neighborhood requirements and affects all of the current homeowners property values. We have purchased in this neighborhood because of the community life there and for this to happen in the middle of the neighborhood is wrong. Thank you!
January 8, 2024
at 8:12 AM
2-B-24-DP
Dale
37922
2-B-24-DP
Dale (37922), January 8, 2024 at 8:39 AM
MY wife and I are totally opposed to the revised zoning request to build two high rise buildings of 20 condos per building in the middle of Gettysvue Country Club because: 1) it violates the covenants of the neighborhood which requires one single family residence per lot; 2) totally does not fit in the neighborhood design, form, fit, and function; 3) will likely cause issues with flooding and run-off due to slope of the land; 4) Gettysvue is a well established neighborhood with multi million dollar homes surrounding the proposed development and property values will be negatively affected.
January 8, 2024
at 8:39 AM
2-B-24-DP
Tim
37922
2-B-24-DP
Tim (37922), January 8, 2024 at 10:56 AM
I am opposed to this proposed project. The project does not fulfill promises of "fit and form" for a well established neighborhood, and does not serve to grow and preserve the beauty of the Gettysvue neighborhood. This project will serve only to devalue existing homes in the neighborhood, it will stress vital infrastructure such as utilities and drainage systems, and it will add to already unsafe and overpopulated road conditions both within the Gettysvue neighborhood and on surrounding Westland and Ebenezer roadways.
January 8, 2024
at 10:56 AM
2-B-24-DP
richard
37922
2-B-24-DP
richard (37922), January 8, 2024 at 11:45 AM
The proposed development in my view violates the HOA guidelines that currently exist. When I purchased my home in 2018 and reviewed the HOA agreement plus discussed with IMS staff at the time, no where in the documents provide any discussion of a possible 4 story building. I am not against the Individual who owns the land to build single family homes per the HOA guidelines. Understanding the developer owned the lots and then sold or legally transferred them to himself personally. This legal transfer makes him a lot owner subject to the rules and only allows him to build a single family home. Realizing the lot is 4+ acres it seems reasonable to build multiple single family homes on the land using an average lot size. Gettysvue is advertised as a luxury country club community and a 4 story condo building doesn’t fir both the image and the HOA guidelines in my personal opinion. Additionally, I would encourage the County to perform a water drainage study to assure the increased hardscape area doesn’t cause flooding or other water issues.
January 8, 2024
at 11:45 AM
2-B-24-DP
Mac
37922
2-B-24-DP
Mac (37922), January 8, 2024 at 1:28 PM
I am opposed to the planned high-rise development. Previous plans included 60 units for the 3.9 acres in 1999. A new plan was approved by the commission in 2003 for 19 single family homes which replaced the 1999 submittal according to the staff recommendation review in 2023. The plan for single family homes would have gone unopposed by the residents of Gettysvue primarily because this plan would have been harmonious to the adjacent homes and would closely adhere to the density of up to 3 du/ac versus the new proposal of 10.3 du/ac. The issue is primarily the height of the proposed 2 high-rise buildings. The renderings show the height 3 stories above ground with an additional 12 feet of exposed garage on the north side. This computes to more than twice the height of the existing contiguous homes. I respectfully request your denial of the proposed land use for the high-rises as submitted.
January 8, 2024
at 1:28 PM
2-B-24-DP
Rob
37919
2-B-24-DP
Rob (37919), January 8, 2024 at 7:36 PM
This is a horrible idea that completely ignores the needs and desires of property owners that have lived in the neighborhood for decades and paid an untold amount of property taxes to Knox Co. Simply listening to the constituents whose lives would be negatively impacted and not the minority of businessmen who would profit would make this an easy decision.
January 8, 2024
at 7:36 PM
2-B-24-DP
S
37922
2-B-24-DP
S (37922), January 8, 2024 at 10:19 PM
I emphatically oppose the construction of high-rise condo buildings in the middle of an established single-family community. The condo buildings are designed to rise nearly 70 feet above and tower over the adjoining well-developed single-family homes. It destroys the beauty of our community since it detracts from the integrity of architecture and appearance. It would certainly diminish our property values during and after the high-rise buildings are constructed. The streets of Gettysvue are already very unfriendly to pedestrians. As a daily walker, I need to walk with caution to avoid being hit. I need to share roads with cars simply because there are no sidewalks for pedestrians. More importantly, streets in Gettysvue have slopes and blind curves. I worry about the safety of myself and others of our neighbors, walking almost daily along the streets around our homes after additional 80 cars join the current already busy streets. I respectfully ask you to deny this high-rise condo building project.
January 8, 2024
at 10:19 PM
2-B-24-DP
Jong
37922
2-B-24-DP
Jong (37922), January 8, 2024 at 10:22 PM
I strongly oppose the construction of high-rise condo buildings in Gettysvue. These high-rise condo buildings just don't fit this well-established single-family community. High-rise condo buildings do not adhere to the architecture and beauty of our community. It would diminish our property values during and after the high-rise condo buildings are constructed. This project violates the Gettysvue covenants, no one should be allowed to build high-rise condo buildings on one lot with a density as high as 10 units per acre. Moreover, the Covenants only permit 1 single-family home per lot. Therefore, this project violates both the zoning ordinance and Gettyevue Covenants. The street at Gettysvue already has pretty significant slopes and blind curves. Worse, there are no sidewalks for pedestrians. We have to walk with caution with driving through vehicles. The situations are certainly expected to get worse after the high-rise buildings are finished with an additional 80 cars added. Also, the already congested traffic on Westland will be further exacerbated. Lastly, our community cannot handle the significant increase in the number of residents. Our access to amenities will be limited and our community cohesiveness will diminish. I hope that the Commission will protect current Gettysvue residents and we rely on you to make decisions to protect us. Thank you!
January 8, 2024
at 10:22 PM
2-B-24-DP
Jamshed
37922
2-B-24-DP
Jamshed (37922), January 9, 2024 at 1:01 PM
I am totally opposed to the revised plan for construction of multifamily units in the Gettysvue subdivision for following reasons:
1) The multifamily four-story buildings are out of character with the neighborhood
1) The infrastructure (sewer system, narrow roads and parking lot for the clubhouse) is insufficient to handle additional households. There is already. sewer back up when it there is heavy rain.
2) The Constuction of this magnitude will take 3-5 years and is very disruptive to the peace and tranquility of the current homeowners
3) The clubhouse and golf course cannot accommodate significant increase in the number of residents
4) The traffic on the Westland Drive would increase the chances of motor vehicle accidents
5) A L Lott elementary school would not be able to accommodate additional children
6) Risk of injury to the children who walk to the swimming pool in the summer due to increased traffic
6) Increased traffic on the Gettysvue Drive would pose risk of injury to children who walk to the swimming pool in the summer
January 9, 2024
at 1:01 PM
2-B-24-DP
Cheryl
37922
2-B-24-DP
Cheryl (37922), January 9, 2024 at 1:49 PM
I strongly oppose this rezoning request for new development in Gettysvue. Please read my full rationale for this objection in the submitted attachment.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240109134955.pdf
January 9, 2024
at 1:49 PM
2-B-24-DP
Sally
37922
2-B-24-DP
Sally (37922), January 9, 2024 at 2:27 PM
I strongly oppose the construction of high-rise condo buildings in Gettysvue. Every resident abides by Gettysvue restrictive Covenants that each lot is limited to 1 single-family residence. After lots were sold and the construction of single-family houses, adhering to restrictive guidelines, Gettysvue has become a well-established, beautiful single-family community. Then Mr. Watkins challenges and wants to violate the Covenants which every resident adheres to. He proposes such radical use of his paltry amount of property within the community to build 2 high-rise, 40-unit buildings on a 4-acre lot. This high-rise condo building project will certainly profit the minority of businessmen at the expense of lowering current residents' housing value, increasing traffic congestion, alleviating pedestrians' safety, creating more water issues and diminishing the usage of amenities. If Mt. Watkins can propose a single-family home project with 1-3 units per acre which all the residents obey, then such opposition will never occur. We ask you to make the right decision for residents in Gettysvue. Thank you
January 9, 2024
at 2:27 PM
2-B-24-DP
Dean
37922
2-B-24-DP
Dean (37922), January 10, 2024 at 9:57 AM
It is unfortunate that Mr. Watkins continues his effort to build multi-story, high-occupancy structures in the midst of fine single-family homes. A similar proposal was rejected by the Commission over a month ago. This is merely a thinly-veiled repeat of that proposal. Please reject this as well.
January 10, 2024
at 9:57 AM
2-B-24-DP
D
37922
2-B-24-DP
D (37922), January 10, 2024 at 11:02 AM
I am a concerned citizen who opposes the proposed high-rise condo development in the Gettysvue community, Clubhouse Villas, for the following reasons:
• Violation of the Gettysvue restrictive covenants – each lot is limited to 1 single-family residence not to exceed 2 ½ stories high.
• Fit and Form – high rise condo buildings do not adhere to the architecture and beauty of our community. It is for this reason that we all signed onto covenants that restrict us to single-family residences no more than 2 ½ stories high.
• Increased traffic - as many as 180 additional vehicles on our streets (two allowed per condo unit). It is currently difficult to exit/enter GV, and increased congestion can be expected on Ebeneezer Road and Westland Avenue thus affecting adjacent neighborhoods as well.
• Increased stormwater flow to areas already experiencing flooding.
• Density exceeds
• Decrease in property values
• Development will add strain on utilities public services, i.e.,
– Utilities strained, such as water, sewer, electric, gas, etc.
– Project will exasperate existing water drainage issues.
January 10, 2024
at 11:02 AM
2-B-24-DP
J
37922
2-B-24-DP
J (37922), January 10, 2024 at 11:36 AM
I am a concerned citizen who opposes the proposed high-rise condo development in the Gettysvue community, Clubhouse Villas, for the following reasons: • Violation of the Gettysvue restrictive covenants – each lot is limited to 1 single-family residence not to exceed 2 ½ stories high. • Fit and Form – high rise condo buildings do not adhere to the architecture and beauty of our community. It is for this reason that we all signed onto covenants that restrict us to single-family residences no more than 2 ½ stories high. • Increased traffic - as many as 180 additional vehicles on our streets (two allowed per condo unit). It is currently difficult to exit/enter GV, and increased congestion can be expected on Ebeneezer Road and Westland Avenue thus affecting adjacent neighborhoods as well. • Increased stormwater flow to areas already experiencing flooding. • Density exceeds • Decrease in property values • Development will add strain on utilities public services, i.e., – Utilities strained, such as water, sewer, electric, gas, etc. – Project will exasperate existing water drainage issues.
January 10, 2024
at 11:36 AM
2-B-24-DP
Sarah
37931
2-B-24-DP
Sarah (37931), January 11, 2024 at 12:59 PM
Hello, I am the daughter of a resident who lives in Gettysvue, and I wanted to show my support in standing against the condos attempting to be built. Not only is this completely unreasonable considering the amount of traffic it will bring to the neighborhood, it is outright dangerous. There are currently no sidewalks in Gettysvue, which is a problem in itself that will be heavily exacerbated by additional housing. There’s already too many cars parked in the street on the side of the road, and when this is coupled with cars not following the speed limit you have cars swerving out of their lanes almost hitting pedestrians. I fear if condos are built someone will get hurt. If these condos connected to a main road it would be one thing, but these condos are going INSIDE a neighborhood, adding additional traffic. Please don’t build these condos, the only reason I can think these are being built is pure greed and financial gain, obviously the people of this neighborhood don’t want them here.
January 11, 2024
at 12:59 PM
2-B-24-DP
Lindsey
37922
2-B-24-DP
Lindsey (37922), January 11, 2024 at 5:30 PM
I strongly oppose this development. Gettysvue cannot handle any more traffic or congestion. It will make it a nightmare for the current home owners that invested in this neighborhood. We all invested in our homes with the understanding it is for single family developments. It will negatively impact property values and our way of life. Please deny this zoning request to save the integrity of our neighborhood.
January 11, 2024
at 5:30 PM
2-B-24-DP
Ken
37922
2-B-24-DP
Ken (37922), January 11, 2024 at 8:06 PM
Please do not allow this project to proceed! This project does not meet the neighborhood requirements and affects all of the current homeowners property values.
January 11, 2024
at 8:06 PM
2-B-24-DP
James
37922
2-B-24-DP
James (37922), January 12, 2024 at 8:43 AM
I want to recommend that this proposal be denied as the planned project will still not fit in the character and overall design of this neighborhood. As a golf only member, I am not eager to try and shoehorn shots away from the planned condominiums. I also believe that even with only 40 planned units, the increase in traffic and congestion (not to mention the impact on other services) will be a detriment to this neighborhood, and ultimately the Club.
January 12, 2024
at 8:43 AM
2-B-24-DP
Madhu
37922
2-B-24-DP
Madhu (37922), January 12, 2024 at 2:50 PM
I am writing about the high-rise condominiums that are proposed to be built in Gettysvue subdivision. The Knox County Planning Commission on its November 9th, 2023, meeting denied such a request for building a 90-condominium unit. Thank you for that! We believed that the case was settled. But now they have come up with a similar request for building a 40-condominium unit in the middle of the neighborhood. I, together with many Gettysvue residents, vehemently oppose this construction for a variety of reasons. The main reason is that my house is very close to the proposed condominiums. Even without this construction, the traffic is already quite high. The roads are already unsafe for walking. In the last five years, my mailbox has been mauled three times by cars trying to avoid other cars. Forty more units (or 80 more cars) on the same street will make the situation even worse. In addition, there is a risk of increased stormwater flow to areas already experiencing flooding. I requesting that when you meet on February 8, please deny the application for this construction.
January 12, 2024
at 2:50 PM
2-B-24-DP
Ilene
37922
2-B-24-DP
Ilene (37922), January 12, 2024 at 3:51 PM
I strongly oppose the revised zoning request to build two high rise buildings of 20 condos per building in the middle of Gettysvue Country Club. This violates the Covenants and Restrictions of the neighborhood which require one single family residence per lot. Gettysvue is a well-established neighborhood and this plan does not fit the neighborhood design, form, fit, and function. Because of the slope of the land in this area, severe water run-off issues will be created for neighboring properties.
January 12, 2024
at 3:51 PM
2-B-24-DP
Frederick
37922
2-B-24-DP
Frederick (37922), January 12, 2024 at 10:50 PM
I’m against this proposal in every way. Rezoning our neighborhood would undoubtedly reduce our property values, increase traffic on very narrow streets, safety concerns are tantamount. The developers want to take our right to the enjoyment of the safety, peace and quiet that myself, and my neighbors have invested in their homes for years and years. If Knox County changes the zoning, they would be allowing the developers to monetize that investment and put it in their own pockets. Our investment our safety our peace and quiet enjoyment would be diminished to line their pockets. So on first principles this whole proposal is to legalize larceny. I’ve lived here twenty years while the various developments have taken place compliant with the established zoning and watched the big trucks, trailers backhoes and HEAVY DUTY excavation equipment the whole gamut turning around in our cul de sac.
January 12, 2024
at 10:50 PM
2-B-24-DP
Danny
7922
2-B-24-DP
Danny (7922), January 14, 2024 at 4:19 PM
I respectfully request that the Knox County Planning Commission vote to deny the proposed plan for the construction of two high-rise buildings with 40 condo units in our subdivision and vote “no” to rezoning. As a homeowner for 26 years in the Gettysvue subdivision, I am strongly opposed to the proposed plan based on the following:
1. The proposed plan violates Gettysvue’s restrictive covenants.
2. The proposed plan will result in overcrowding the community adversely impacting homeowners access to the already overcrowded facilities such as the pools, clubhouse and parking.
3. It will overload the capacity of the stormwater runoff structures causing more flooding during and after construction.
4. The motor vehicle traffic will increase on Gettysvue’s roads as well as an already congested Westland drive, and the school zones due to additional vehicles on those roads - This is a major safety concern that can’t be ignored.
5. It will cause the overloading of our utility services, specifically sewer lines.
6. The proposed plan would decrease our property values.
7. The construction of this project will only benefit a few at the expense of many homeowners who paid tens of thousands of dollars of dues over the years to live in a subdivision with the expectation that the restrictions of the subdivision would be enforced.
I urge our Public Officials and Community Leaders to deny the request for the rezoning and not allow this project to occur. Thanks.
January 14, 2024
at 4:19 PM
2-B-24-DP
Eric
37922
2-B-24-DP
Eric (37922), January 15, 2024 at 3:14 PM
I am strongly opposed to build the condos or apartmenrs in our neighborhood due to safety and traffic. Our community here is designed for.single home,.not a condo or apartment around here. This.project has to stop immediately and not moving forward. Furthermore, this project will devalue the houses in this community.
January 15, 2024
at 3:14 PM
2-B-24-DP
Ann
37922
2-B-24-DP
Ann (37922), January 16, 2024 at 3:27 PM
I am a resident of the Gettysvue community off of Westland. I remain concerned over the proposed development due to it not fitting with the rest of our neighborhood, increased traffic through the area and increased use of facilities. We currently have numerous runners, walkers and baby’s in strollers in the neighborhood. Increased traffic would be hazardous to these activities. Please consider denying this project.
January 16, 2024
at 3:27 PM
2-B-24-DP
Lindsey
37922
2-B-24-DP
Lindsey (37922), January 16, 2024 at 8:25 PM
I strongly oppose this development. It does not fit the neighborhood and will cause so many problems for the ones who have invested to live here. The traffic it will add will make it dangerous and congested. As is, there isn’t enough parking at the club and the proposed area is used for over flow. Currently, it is very dangerous to walk in our neighborhood without sidewalks and adding more traffic will make that worse. The C&Rs indicate single family dwellings and we all invested with that being the case, to change this now would be wrong to every single resident in GV. The only people that will benefit from this is Ron W and Synergy, everyone else will suffer.
January 16, 2024
at 8:25 PM
2-B-24-DP
Sha
37922
2-B-24-DP
Sha (37922), January 17, 2024 at 8:09 PM
I vehemently oppose this high-rise condominium project proposed by Mr. Watkins in our well-established, single-family community. Each resident adheres to the restrictive Gettysvue Covenants that Mr. Watkins himself adopted in the original development. Thus, roads in Gettysvue are constructed for single-family, not for multi-tenant, high-density condominium use. Furthermore, streets in Gettysvue have slopes and blind curves and no sidewalks for pedestrians.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240117200934.pdf
January 17, 2024
at 8:09 PM
2-B-24-DP
Colleen
37922
2-B-24-DP
Colleen (37922), January 19, 2024 at 10:17 AM
I oppose the Gettysvue Villas project because of many of the reasons others have posted including risk to neighborhood safety due to increased traffic, exasperation of existing drainage problems at my house downstream of the development site, increased demand on already stressed utilities, and form and fit of high rise apartment buildings in our neighborhood. Regarding form and fit, please see the attached rendition (paid for by the residents) which depicts a comparison of existing houses near the development site with the advertised dimensions of the buildings published by the developer. My request is that this rendition be presented at the MPC meeting on February 8th so that the impact of these buildings in our neighborhood can be shared with the decision makers. Lastly, a majority of home owners and HOA Board members oppose this project as presented. A letter from a majority of HOA Board members has been sent to the developer (attached) expressing their opposition and asking to be a part of the process to design a development project that meets form and fit. Isn't this a normal function of the HOA Board?
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240119101713.pdf
January 19, 2024
at 10:17 AM
2-B-24-DP
Andrew
37922
2-B-24-DP
Andrew (37922), January 19, 2024 at 2:03 PM
I am apposed to this proposed development (2-B-24-DP). I have been a resident in the Gettysvue Development for over 26 years. I love our Gettysvue development and was very glad I was able to raise my family in this setting. I am currently on and have been a Gettysvue board member (on and off) for over half of my time as a resident. When Mr. Watkins ask if I would serve on the board I was and am happy to do so and take much pride in what the board has done to represent our community. As a resident and a board member I have difficulty supporting this current proposal. This new proposal still does not meet the zoning requirement and is not harmonious with our community in it's current scope. I don't think anyone would welcome a structure of this height and size in their subdivision. as a board member and representing our community I feel this would not enhance our community and would truly diminish the boarding property values. At one point in time, Mr. Watkins discussed putting patio homes in that area. I think he would meet little to no opposition to such a proposal. A patio home development which falls under the current zoning would be harmonious to the current residents. I ask you to consider the current residents in opposing this proposal (2-B-24-DP).
January 19, 2024
at 2:03 PM
2-B-24-DP
Kevin
37922
2-B-24-DP
Kevin (37922), January 19, 2024 at 3:46 PM
I am strongly opposed to the proposed high-rise condo buildings tin Gettysvue I am a real estate attorney and did my due diligence prior to purchasing my home. Based upon the recorded plat, existing zoning, and Restrictive Covenants, I had no reason to believe that high-rise condo buildings could ever be constructed on one lot. The applicant is proposing a density of over 10 units per acre, which is over 3 times the maximum density. Moreover, the Restrictive Covenants for Gettysvue only permit 1 single-family home per lot. I would have never purchased my nearby home if I had any reason to believe it could be dwarfed by condos that would exceed 90 feet in height. These condos would dramatically harm our property value based upon the following:
-Construction of condo buildings would create a nuisance due to increased noise and construction traffic.
-The project would create safety concerns for my children as it will bring substantially more traffic down our street which already has a steep decline and blind curve.
-The buildings would exacerbate drainage problems which the County already had to pay to remediate.
-The buildings would be severely out of scale with the surrounding homes.
There is no other subdivision in Knox County where high-rise condos are built in the middle of single-family homes that have existed for decades. While I am not opposed to reasonable development of this lot, this proposed development is neither reasonable nor legal.
January 19, 2024
at 3:46 PM
2-B-24-DP
Carolyn
37922
2-B-24-DP
Carolyn (37922), January 19, 2024 at 3:56 PM

My husband and I are opposed to building high raise condos in the middle of our neighborhood adjacent to The Club at Gettysvue. This structure violates the covenants of the neighborhood and does not fit in the neighborhood design, form, fit, and function. There has been concern by neighbors in close proximity to this structure that if built will likely cause issues with flooding and run-off due to the slope of the land. Many home owners are also concerned that Gettysvue being a well established neighborhood with multi million dollar homes surrounding the proposed development that property values will be negatively affected. Please reject this project.
January 19, 2024
at 3:56 PM
2-B-24-DP
May
37922
2-B-24-DP
May (37922), January 19, 2024 at 9:47 PM
There is an overwhelming majority who feel very strongly about keeping the integrity of the single family neighborhood in place. Most of us have families and moved to the county and club to have green space, outdoor areas, and safety to drive on the roads as well as to and from schools. These units are much too large to be in the center of a calm neighborhood with already congested streets. As homeowners, we abide by the restrictions placed for the safety and integrity of the neighborhood and a few should not profit to the community’s expense. Please do not allow a huge complex in the middle of a neighborhood. Integrity must be maintained with growth.
January 19, 2024
at 9:47 PM
2-B-24-DP
David W
37922
2-B-24-DP
David W (37922), January 20, 2024 at 8:53 AM
I am against the proposed development. We purchased our home recently and carefully read the neighborhood restrictions, and multi family development was not included as an option. We request this proposal be rejected as it goes against these restrictions.
January 20, 2024
at 8:53 AM
2-B-24-DP
Michelle
37922
2-B-24-DP
Michelle (37922), January 20, 2024 at 10:18 AM
I am frustrated this submission just keeps coming back. For all of the reasons this established neighborhood cannot support 90 apartments, it cannot support 40 either. Please help us close this case once and for all. It’s exhausting to keep having the same conversation, the same battle.
January 20, 2024
at 10:18 AM
2-B-24-DP
Ann
37922
2-B-24-DP
Ann (37922), January 20, 2024 at 1:50 PM
Gettysvue is a neighborhood where people walk and children ride bikes and walk to school or to the swimming pool on our streets because we do no have sidewalks. The construction traffic and subsequent traffic from 40 units will endanger our residents. When we built our home we were assured by the Gettysvue neighborhood Covenant which dictates just one single-family residence per lot, and we agreed to abide by it. The proposed project violates that Covenant, and it size and height are certainly not harmonious with our neighborhood’s single-family homes. Please, please deny this high-rise condo project.
January 20, 2024
at 1:50 PM
2-B-24-DP
Moira
37922
2-B-24-DP
Moira (37922), January 20, 2024 at 2:16 PM
As a resident of Gettysvue, I am against the construction of 40 high-rise condos for the following reasons:
1. Traffic. Gettysvue Drive is already dangerous to pedestrians and vehicular traffic in both directions. We have cars, trucks and other commercial vehicles who drive carelessly around these corners and since there are no sidewalks, near misses with pedestrians and schoolchildren are the norm. It is hard to imagine the dangers of 80 additional vehicles on these roads each day.
2. Parking overflow. At large events at the Gettysvue Clubhouse, cars are forced to park on the streets in front of our homes – against the HOA covenants. If the condos are only allowed 1.5 parking spaces, the visitors to these 40 condos – visitors and commercial vehicles - could be forced to park on the street causing more danger to traffic in the neighborhood.
3. Water issues. Every time there is heavy rainfall, flooding occurs along the edge of the greens and overflows into our yards. Construction of 40 condos uphill from our house will have an additional impact on the flood plain.
4. Villas in original plans. Previously constructed villas in the community are 2-story individual villas and blend within the community. We oppose the proposed villas which are planned as high-rise condos. The villas on this lot should be 2 ½ story in line with those already constructed. We oppose the use of remaining density from other areas of the community to build high-rise buildings.
January 20, 2024
at 2:16 PM
2-B-24-DP
Joseph
37922
2-B-24-DP
Joseph (37922), January 21, 2024 at 12:51 PM
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed 40 unit high-rise development in Gettysvue. This project not only violates the restrictive covenants that limit lots to single family residences but also raises several significant concerns. Firstly, the development would lead to increased traffic in a neighborhood with no sidewalks, posing a risk to pedestrians and the overall safety of our community. Secondly, it could exacerbate the stormwater flow issues in the area, potentially leading to flooding and property damage. Lastly, the high-rise development could adversely affect property values, potentially causing a negative impact on homeowners like myself who have been part of this family-oriented neighborhood since 2006. Additionally, it is worth noting that several homes in the area have already suffered damage due to the cave systems present, and this development could further exacerbate these issues. I respectfully request the you consider the negative consequences this proposal may have on our community and take them into account when making your decision. Our neighborhood's unique character and the well-being of it's residents should be a top priority in any decision regarding this development.
January 21, 2024
at 12:51 PM
2-B-24-DP
Keith
37922
2-B-24-DP
Keith (37922), January 21, 2024 at 1:39 PM
Our family moved to Gettysvue roughly one year ago. We were unaware of the potential for high rise condominiums to be a part of our neighborhood. I feel that this development would alter the peace and tranquility of the neighborhood as it puts high density housing right in the middle of everything. This will drastically increase traffic flow, road noise etc. In addition this project does not seem to be in congruence with the current covenants and by laws we have all agreed to abide by. I ask that this project please be voted down as it is against the will of the community.
January 21, 2024
at 1:39 PM
2-B-24-DP
Raj
37922
2-B-24-DP
Raj (37922), January 21, 2024 at 2:28 PM
As a homeowner in the Gettysvue community, My wife and I strongly oppose the construction of multi-stories condominium complex to be located at 913 Gettysvue Drive. Gettysvue is a mature subdivision that was not built to current expectations. For example, the subdivision has no sidewalks. People walking or jogging put themselves at risk as they must share the roads that lack walkways, with existing busy traffic. The proposed huge condominium complex will only make our lives more dangerous by adding a huge number of people and vehicles. As mentioned here in other posts, it will also add huge burden on our community in many other ways by stretching our resources, including the resources of neighboring schools. Constructing a large condominium complex in place of individual houses will destroy the character of our subdivision and our community. If we all wanted to live by a high-rise, we would have purchased a home someplace else. We are all counting on your support to stop the building of this condominium complex. Thank you!
January 21, 2024
at 2:28 PM
2-B-24-DP
John
37922
2-B-24-DP
John (37922), January 21, 2024 at 4:13 PM
Please do not approve this project! This area cannot support any more traffic, nor I suspect, any more pressure on the A.L Lotts and other nearby schools. The traffic has gotten so bad now that westbound traffic is backed up every day for almost a mile from Pellissippi to past the entrance to Gettysvue. In addition, 40-60 more cars going in and out of the neighborhood just increases the chance of an accident or of a child getting hit by a car. Please see my complete comments attached.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240121161327.pdf
January 21, 2024
at 4:13 PM
2-B-24-DP
Michael
37922
2-B-24-DP
Michael (37922), January 21, 2024 at 4:24 PM
My wife and I purchased our home at 801 Gettysvue Drive less than two years ago because it was a neighborhood of large single family homes. I submitted comments last fall to MPC when this project was proposed with 90 multi-story, multi-family homes. My prior comments included issues regarding lack of sidewalks, narrow streets with numerous blind hills and curves, and an abundance of walkers, joggers, and families with children. Further, on most days it becomes a community of one lane streets due to numerous service and maintenance vehicles parked on the streets. Even in its scaled down proposal for 40 multi-story units, this project is inappropriate for Gettysvue for all of the same reasons. Please deny this proposal.
January 21, 2024
at 4:24 PM
2-B-24-DP
Cheridy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Cheridy (37922), January 21, 2024 at 4:40 PM
Our family is completely opposed to the proposed building. It is in violation of the building codes of the neighborhood. There are several reasons which have been previously stated including traffic concerns, flooding, congestion, and the list goes on. Please vote against this rezoning proposal.
January 21, 2024
at 4:40 PM
2-B-24-DP
Max
37922
2-B-24-DP
Max (37922), January 21, 2024 at 4:47 PM
I am opposed to this rezoning and building design. My house is directly across the street, and the buildings are not homes. This is a family neighborhood, not a condo development. This is my home. I did not expect to have a building that looks like apartments across the street when I moved in. Please do not let this happen!!
January 21, 2024
at 4:47 PM
2-B-24-DP
Michael
37922
2-B-24-DP
Michael (37922), January 21, 2024 at 4:52 PM
The proposed rezoning and construction is in direct violation of the neighborhood building codes. Mr. Watkins knows this is not the right thing to do. Greed is his motivation. Please consider and investigate the concerns of homeowner in this neighborhood as well as surrounding neighborhoods. I can assure you, no one is in favor of this. It is not the right thing to do. Please vote against this rezoning and building!
January 21, 2024
at 4:52 PM
2-B-24-DP
Peggy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Peggy (37922), January 22, 2024 at 10:44 AM
I am opposed to the building of condos/apartments in our very well established Gettysvue neighborhood. When we moved here a year ago, we were drawn to the peaceful neighborhood and similar styles of homes. My family was shocked to hear about this proposal and are opposed due to the increased traffic dumping on our main thoroughfare road, the size of the proposed buildings that would not be attractive with the existing homes, and the covenant restrictions that are not being upheld by this proposal. I sincerely request that this project be halted .
January 22, 2024
at 10:44 AM
2-B-24-DP
Margaret
y,379
2-B-24-DP
Margaret (y,379), January 22, 2024 at 5:28 PM
Understand that meeting scheduled 1/23 at Ebenezer Methodist Church has been canceled due to a flood in the church. Any rescheduling in the works before MPC meeting scheduled for 2:8.
January 22, 2024
at 5:28 PM
2-B-24-DP
William
37922
2-B-24-DP
William (37922), January 22, 2024 at 6:43 PM
See attached letter. Thank you.

View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240122184342.pdf
January 22, 2024
at 6:43 PM
2-B-24-DP
shaei
37922
2-B-24-DP
shaei (37922), January 22, 2024 at 8:05 PM
I strongly oppose the construction of high-rise condominiums in our well-established community. In Gettysvue, roads were constructed for low-density, single-family residential use, following the restrictive Gettysvue Covenants adopted by Mr. Watkins in the original development. -Please see attachment-
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240122200511.pdf
January 22, 2024
at 8:05 PM
2-B-24-DP
Patti and Tom
37934
2-B-24-DP
Patti and Tom (37934), January 22, 2024 at 8:06 PM
Continuation of my comments: the traffic on Westland Drive cannot handle additional cars during peak hours. With the Elementary school located with 1/2 mile there is already traffic blocked for a mile in both direction at the beginning and end of the school day. This is dangerous for the children and parents alike picking up their children. The builder already placed some townhomes at the entrance on ebnezer which possible could have handled this requested development without interruption and devaluation of the current multi million dollar homes. Blocking the view from the clubhouse, moving the 18th green etc as a 20 plus year member of Gettysvue, We stand with the Gettysvue residents…Do not build this complex.
January 22, 2024
at 8:06 PM
2-B-24-DP
Charles
37922
2-B-24-DP
Charles (37922), January 23, 2024 at 2:56 PM
I am opposed to this project due to: 1) the impact of additional traffic in the neighborhood and the entrances on Ebenezer and Westland - both of which are already difficult to access without a signal; 2) the negative impact on property values within the development; 3) the lack of fit of high rise condominiums in a single family residence neighborhood; and the mess that a large construction brings to the development.
January 23, 2024
at 2:56 PM
2-B-24-DP
Thilina
37922
2-B-24-DP
Thilina (37922), January 24, 2024 at 12:39 AM
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed high density condo development next door to my house. As the owner of a house right next to this development, I am concerned that this project will risk damage to my house, severely impact the value and livability of our house, negatively impact the character of our neighborhood and violate the covenants of our Homeowners Association. We encourage the developer to consider building single family housing instead.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240124003944.pdf
January 24, 2024
at 12:39 AM
2-B-24-DP
Mark
37922
2-B-24-DP
Mark (37922), January 24, 2024 at 2:54 PM
I am against these submission for the construction of 40 condo units in the Gettysvue Subdivision. If this is passed and allowed to be built that will add at least additional 80 cars to an entrance that already handles over 200 cars daily. This will lead to accidents and possible fatalities as many people walk on the streets since there is no sidewalks in the neighborhood. You will also add significant drainage to an already problematic area. Ther is also concern with the reduction of green space if these condo buildings and parking is allowed. And the main point is this is not zoned for muti-tenants homes. We purchased our home in Gettysvue in 220 and no matter what the developer says there was not approved plan to build this type of condo development. The developer may had talked about it to a few of his friends but there was not submitted plan so it would be against everyone in the neighborhood's understanding. If you approve this change, then you are setting up Knoxville for many lawsuits from homeowners which will waste the taxpayers' money to fight. This neighborhood has some deep pockets and will not go down lightly.
January 24, 2024
at 2:54 PM
2-B-24-DP
Bimalee
37922
2-B-24-DP
Bimalee (37922), January 25, 2024 at 10:30 AM
I strongly oppose the proposed high-density condo development next to my house, My concerns include the excessive size and height of the buildings, which are incompatible with the neighborhood's geography, risking damage to my property, impacting its value, and compromising privacy. I am also worried about potential construction-related issues such as land settling, drainage problems, noise, dirt, vibration, and traffic, posing risks to my family. Additionally, the development contradicts zoning information and violates Homeowners Association (HOA) covenants, of which I am a member committed to upholding for the neighborhood's safety and well-being.Our decision to settle in this mature neighborhood was based on the expectation of a tranquil environment free from disruptions associated with such large-scale construction. We believed the remaining lots in the neighborhood were designated for single-family housing. The proposed condo development threatens to undermine the essence of our neighborhood. Many neighbors share these concerns, seeking to preserve our community's unique character. I request your support in opposing this development to prioritize the safety and well-being of our community. Thank you for your attention, and I trust you will make the right decision for the betterment of our neighborhood.
January 25, 2024
at 10:30 AM
2-B-24-DP
Gary
37922
2-B-24-DP
Gary (37922), January 25, 2024 at 2:24 PM
I am again writing in opposition to the proposed rezoning request. Please see attachment.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240125142441.pdf
January 25, 2024
at 2:24 PM
2-B-24-DP
Debbie
7922
2-B-24-DP
Debbie (7922), January 26, 2024 at 2:29 PM
Please do not approve the High rise, high density condominium project proposed to be built in Gettysvue. The HOA board that ensures compliance with the neighborhood covenants is opposed to this project, in addition to the overwhelming majority of neighbors living in the Gettysvue community. This high-rise high density project does not fit the form and character of a single-family Community. The project also does not comply with the HOA covenants and zoning. Everyone I have spoken with in our neighborhood is adamantly opposed. In addition, there is already three separate high-rise, high density apartment complexes within a one minute drive of this neighborhood. Please do not approve this project. The intention of the original zoning, and the will of the majority of neighbors should not be overturned.
January 26, 2024
at 2:29 PM
2-B-24-DP
Jack
22
2-B-24-DP
Jack (22), January 27, 2024 at 12:55 PM
Please see attached image of size comparison between proposed high-rise, high density, condominium project, and typical single-family homes in Gettysvue. The condominium buildings clearly do not fit the forum and character of the neighborhood. Eight out of 10 current Gettysvue HOA board members oppose the condominium project as well as the majority of residents living in single-family homes in the neighborhood. The project does not comply with the Gettysvue neighborhood HOA covenants. The project does not comply with the county zoning.

View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240127125552.pdf
January 27, 2024
at 12:55 PM
2-B-24-DP
Kathy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Kathy (37922), January 27, 2024 at 3:59 PM
Please do not approve this request to build two four story apartment style buildings in the middle of Gettysvue. These type of buildings belong in a more commercial area but certainly not in a residential neighborhood. This development would not be appropriate for any neighborhood in Knoxville and we are depending on the wisdom of the MPC to not allow this to begin.
January 27, 2024
at 3:59 PM
2-B-24-DP
Brennan
37922
2-B-24-DP
Brennan (37922), January 27, 2024 at 10:40 PM
This proposed project absolutely does not fit within community guidelines. When I moved into Gettysvue, it was certainly not with an understanding that condominiums were even a remote possibility. This proposed project causes many concerns, including increased traffic, environmental impact, and does not fit within the community guidelines of lot usage. Please help us maintain the beauty of our community and deny this proposal.
January 27, 2024
at 10:40 PM
2-B-24-DP
Ed
37922
2-B-24-DP
Ed (37922), January 27, 2024 at 10:50 PM
I want to register my opposition to the revised building permit request for Gettysvue. The request is still proposing the Building of four-story condominium units that do not fit in to a neighborhood of single-family homes. This appears to be a matter of greed to maximize the number of units on a limited space. Therefore request that the planning commission again turned down the request for the proposed building permits.
January 27, 2024
at 10:50 PM
2-B-24-DP
Cathleen
37922
2-B-24-DP
Cathleen (37922), January 27, 2024 at 10:55 PM
I oppose the new proposal for an apartment complex in a residential area. The proposal of a 40-unit condo:/apartment does not fit into our community. We do not have the entrance and exits for 80 more cars. The four story buildings will change the landscape of our community.
January 27, 2024
at 10:55 PM
2-B-24-DP
Beth
37922
2-B-24-DP
Beth (37922), January 28, 2024 at 5:47 AM
I respectfully ask that the Knoxville MPC please deny this building application. I have full trust that the KMPC will again recognize that a high-rise, multi-dwelling development in the middle of a well-established neighborhood is unacceptable. I have lived in Gettysvue Subdivision for 14 years and our home is near this proposed development. The thought of high-rise apartments, which is what this would look like, towering above homes that have been established for 20-30 years is unconscionable. The residents of Gettysvue recognize that Mr. Watkins owns this property, and we do not oppose development that is congruent and respectful of the neighborhood. High-rise, multi-dwelling structures are simply not suitable for this space. I humbly ask for your support to save our neighborhood from this proposal.
January 28, 2024
at 5:47 AM
2-B-24-DP
l
37922
2-B-24-DP
l (37922), January 28, 2024 at 7:04 AM
The homeowners care about the community. Please vote no to maintain the integrity of a single home neighborhood. This huge building would be an eye sore solely to profit a few, degrade the appearance and integrity of an area that is supposed to be a community with outdoor space. There is too much traffic, water issues, limited parking, crowded pools, etc. These structures belong in the city, not a county outdoor single family home residence. Please vote no and help maintain integrity during knoxville's growth.
January 28, 2024
at 7:04 AM
2-B-24-DP
Steve
37922
2-B-24-DP
Steve (37922), January 28, 2024 at 7:37 AM
As a resident of Gettysvue, I strongly oppose this project. This project is trying to squeeze an apartment-style complex into a neighborhood of single-family homes. These apartment-style buildings will most certainly lower the value of the surrounding neighborhood properties. The builder doesn’t care about the final appeal of the neighborhood, if they did they would build single-family homes on the site that match the fit and function of the other neighborhood homes. This is an issue of an overzealous developer seeing this project coming to an end and now they are trying to screw over the neighbors who already own their properties. This is a well-established neighborhood and these buildings have no place here.
January 28, 2024
at 7:37 AM
2-B-24-DP
Brooke
37922
2-B-24-DP
Brooke (37922), January 28, 2024 at 7:48 AM
Please do not consider Ron’s proposal of allowing this many condos to be put in a low residence housing community. There are too many people that will be affected. Between traffic, where the water runoff will go with the grading. It is still too many condos he is wanting to put in our community! Thank you
January 28, 2024
at 7:48 AM
2-B-24-DP
Jan
37922
2-B-24-DP
Jan (37922), January 28, 2024 at 8:02 AM
As a 22 year resident of Gettysvue I am strongly opposed to Mr Watkins and his plans to build apartment-like dwelling in our community. Gettysvue is not zoned for multi-family usage. We are a quiet, beautiful neighborhood of single-family homes and the residents want to keep it that way. With “apartment-like” dwellings towering over the single-family homes, it takes away from the original fit and form of our neighborhood that was established many years ago. The community already has drainage issues as well as overcrowded streets that are very narrow. We do not need more cars in the community. We want residents and children to be safe. Please do not approve the request for this project. It will have a negative effect on our community. This project will have a negative impact on property values and neighborhood aesthetics as well as everyday living.
January 28, 2024
at 8:02 AM
2-B-24-DP
Kathleen
3792
2-B-24-DP
Kathleen ( 3792), January 28, 2024 at 8:59 AM
I again say that this project is not in keeping with our Gettsview neighborhood.It will lower property values to surrounding homes as well as increase the level of noise and traffic and overall enjoyment of otherwise peaceful environment. I ask you to please consider this wonderful area and not vote for such a large and disruptive plan.
January 28, 2024
at 8:59 AM
2-B-24-DP
Travis
37922
2-B-24-DP
Travis (37922), January 28, 2024 at 9:34 AM
The proposed use is too dense for the existing neighborhood and road infrastructure currently in place. Gettysvue Country Club proximity to the proposed development is also a concern regarding increased traffic, parking, and pedestrian traffic in the area. GCC hosts several events throughout the year which increase pedestrian traffic in and around the club. A development of this density will increase traffic by several multiples and will result in accidents.
January 28, 2024
at 9:34 AM
2-B-24-DP
Martin
37922
2-B-24-DP
Martin (37922), January 28, 2024 at 9:59 AM
This is a DANGEROUS undertaking by Ron Watkins! When this neighborhood was planned a decision was made (most likely a financial one) to not build sidewalks. When residents walk in the neighborhood they must walk on the roads. Everyday I see my neighbors out walking and enjoying the area. My wife walks along Gettysvue nearly every day. Additionally, and extremely concerning, I see kids walking home from the nearby school. The additional traffic generated by adding 40 condos and 80 vehicles will put us all at risk. Not to mention the construction traffic that will go on for years. Gettysvue is primarily single-family homes. These four-story condo buildings would be out of character with the neighborhood and would diminish the beauty of our community. The lots should be considered for additional single-family homes, not condos. The condo development violates the covenants of our neighborhood which require one single family residence per lot. This will likely cause additional problems with flooding and run-off due to slope of the land. I vehemently ask you to deny this zoning request! Please put the concerns of the residents over the greed of one individual.
January 28, 2024
at 9:59 AM
2-B-24-DP
GVHOA
37922
2-B-24-DP
GVHOA (37922), January 28, 2024 at 10:05 AM
See attached.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240128100509.pdf
January 28, 2024
at 10:05 AM
2-B-24-DP
Rhonda
37922
2-B-24-DP
Rhonda (37922), January 28, 2024 at 10:20 AM
On behalf of my husband and I, we oppose the proposed zoning request to build 2 high rise buildings of 20 condos per building in the Gettysvue neighborhood. We feel that Gettysvue will not be able to handle any more traffic. The buildings would be out of scale with the surrounding homes. Drainage and sewers will be affected, causing overload of the stormwater runoff structures. There are many residents who walk/jog daily and the increased traffic would make this dangerous area for all, especially for children, as there are no sidewalks and the streets have blind curves. We are concerned that this project will severely impact the value and livability of our home. We encourage the developer to build single family homes to keep the integrity of our neighborhood.
January 28, 2024
at 10:20 AM
2-B-24-DP
Michael
37922
2-B-24-DP
Michael (37922), January 28, 2024 at 10:32 AM
SUPPORT of the Gettysvue Villas Development
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240128103233.pdf
January 28, 2024
at 10:32 AM
2-B-24-DP
Julie
37803
2-B-24-DP
Julie (37803), January 28, 2024 at 11:06 AM
We are members of the country club. As we have driven through the Gettysvue neighborhood many times, we have noticed a lot of cars parking on the streets which creates a lot of congestion. Adding 40 more units to this established neighborhood in the form of condos or apartments will only create more congestion. Additionally, this makes it very unsafe for pedestrians. The condos / apartments are not fitting for the established neighborhood and will be an eyesore to all homeowners as well as members of the country club. Lastly, as all owners of homes in the neighborhood are required to be members of the country club, this will create a strain on the resources (buildings and facilities) of the club.
January 28, 2024
at 11:06 AM
2-B-24-DP
Brian
37922
2-B-24-DP
Brian (37922), January 28, 2024 at 11:21 AM
While this proposal is less impactful on traffic than the previous proposal, the design is still too tall and obtrusive to the neighborhood. It does not fit with the form or feel of the neighboring dwellings that have been developed over the past 25 years. I would love to see this area developed with single family homes or townhouses but it would be much better for it to blend with the surrounding area aesthetically.
January 28, 2024
at 11:21 AM
2-B-24-DP
Adam
37922
2-B-24-DP
Adam (37922), January 28, 2024 at 11:50 AM
This, much like the last plan, is poorly thought out and does not match the aesthetic of one of ‘s premier neighborhoods and clubs. This request and others like it should immediately be denied.
January 28, 2024
at 11:50 AM
2-B-24-DP
Ralph
37922
2-B-24-DP
Ralph (37922), January 28, 2024 at 12:07 PM
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed construction of high density housing in our community. Our zoning in this community does not allow for high density housing. As a homeowner near this location I do want to have to endure the additional traffic and noise this property would create.
January 28, 2024
at 12:07 PM
2-B-24-DP
James
37922
2-B-24-DP
James (37922), January 28, 2024 at 12:28 PM
PLEASE END THE MADNESS. After the planning commission so rightly denied the original application for three condo units, Mr. Watkins has resurfaced to apply for two condo units in our single-family home neighborhood. This proposal remains totally unacceptable, and is completely out of place in GettysVue. There are many reasons why this project must be stopped: Condo buildings out of character and incompatible with the neighborhood, storm water runoff problems, a dangerous increase in traffic on already congested roads near a school zone, decrease in existing home values, etc. THIS PROPOSAL MUST BE SOUNDLY REJECTED! Thank you for your support in defeating this egregious attempt for a few people to enrich themselves at the expense of hundreds of neighbors.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240128122843.pdf
January 28, 2024
at 12:28 PM
2-B-24-DP
C.
37922
2-B-24-DP
C. (37922), January 28, 2024 at 12:30 PM
PLEASE REJECT THIS APPLICATION! After the planning commission so rightly denied the original application for three condo units, Mr. Watkins has resurfaced to apply for two condo units in our single-family home neighborhood. This proposal remains totally unacceptable, and is completely out of place in GettysVue. There are many reasons why this project must be stopped: Condo buildings out of character and incompatible with the neighborhood, storm water runoff problems, a dangerous increase in traffic on already congested roads near a school zone, decrease in existing home values, etc. THIS PROPOSAL MUST BE SOUNDLY REJECTED! Thank you for your support in defeating this egregious attempt for a few people to enrich themselves at the expense of hundreds of neighbors.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240128123044.pdf
January 28, 2024
at 12:30 PM
2-B-24-DP
Christina
37922
2-B-24-DP
Christina (37922), January 28, 2024 at 12:40 PM
Here we go again! Why must this man have a multi family property in a neighborhood of single family dwellings…. GREED! This property will cause major hardships within the neighborhood! There is no more room for anymore traffic! We are built to the maximum here! There will be no more green space left in the neighborhood! Why can’t he do what everyone else has done? Build a single family home and sell it for a million dollars?!? Why…. Because he’s greedy! It will not bring anymore money into golf course because no one will buy them! It is visually unappealing area for condos what is there to look at but single family homes…. no views equals no condos sold! Then we are stuck with the eyesore in our beautiful neighborhood! It disgusts me that this property owner doesn’t seem to care about the havoc he is causing this neighborhood and causing to each and every homeowner have to fight him! It is costing us so much time and money to fight him and his buddies at the golf course! The golf course should understand the more they get involved the more they are alienating their neighbors! If they persist then I recommend we start canceling golf memberships immediately! Please deny this request to build this monstrosity in our beautiful neighborhood!
January 28, 2024
at 12:40 PM
2-B-24-DP
Todd
37922
2-B-24-DP
Todd (37922), January 28, 2024 at 1:02 PM
The proposed construction is not consistent with the area surrounding it or to similar condo/duplex developments that are part of Gettysvue. I request the commission deny this proposal and offer construction guidance that would be consistent with the existing neighborhood.

View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240128130250.pdf
January 28, 2024
at 1:02 PM
12-SF-23-C
Heather
37932
12-SF-23-C
Heather (37932), January 28, 2024 at 3:19 PM
We vehemently oppose this entire subdivision and plan, as the entirety of it is illegal, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park, as this variance is illegal and was granted illegally. It’s incredibly disappointing that the planning commission continues to approve development after development without consideration for the impact on the community surrounding this and all the developments. Greater infrastructure needs to be implemented. This development is a blatant disregard for proper planning processes and highlights how corrupt this entire commission and planning process truly is.
January 28, 2024
at 3:19 PM
12-G-23-DP
Heather
37932
12-G-23-DP
Heather (37932), January 28, 2024 at 3:20 PM
We vehemently oppose this entire subdivision and plan, as the entirety of it is illegal, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park, as this variance is illegal and was granted illegally. It’s incredibly disappointing that the planning commission continues to approve development after development without consideration for the impact on the community surrounding this and all the developments. Greater infrastructure needs to be implemented. This development is a blatant disregard for proper planning processes and highlights how corrupt this entire commission and planning process truly is.
January 28, 2024
at 3:20 PM
12-SF-23-C
Kim
37932
12-SF-23-C
Kim (37932), January 28, 2024 at 3:30 PM
This development was determined illegal by Knox County Chancery Court and this staff/commission has no authority to approve as-is. We request you to DENY this plan to avoid a fifth or more lawsuit - The first lawsuit clarifies the illegalities of this plan and the wrongdoings of the previous commission.
January 28, 2024
at 3:30 PM
2-B-24-DP
James
37922
2-B-24-DP
James (37922), January 28, 2024 at 4:03 PM
I object to the high rise development. Violates covenant and restrictions of HOA. Will worsen traffic on Westland and by the elementary school. Does not fit the community. Increase risk to residents due to traffic in the subdivision (inside walks, narrow roads. Please deny
January 28, 2024
at 4:03 PM
12-G-23-DP
Fred
37932
12-G-23-DP
Fred (37932), January 28, 2024 at 4:22 PM
I oppose this entire subdivision and plan, as the entirety of it is illegal, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park, as this variance is illegal and was granted illegally. Please reject this plan. Please work to preserve and promote smart growth in the county.
January 28, 2024
at 4:22 PM
2-B-24-DP
Kurt
37922
2-B-24-DP
Kurt (37922), January 28, 2024 at 5:00 PM
We are residents of Gettysvue living down the hill from this proposed project. For the reasons covered by many others in these comments, we strongly oppose this 40 unit high rise project which does not fit on this site or in this neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration.
January 28, 2024
at 5:00 PM
2-B-24-DP
Edward
37922
2-B-24-DP
Edward (37922), January 28, 2024 at 7:16 PM
Opposition. These comments by another resident are very succinct and valid--
- The amount of construction traffic will be a detriment and danger to the children of the neighborhood for years to come, as well as anyone wanting to walk
- The increased traffic along the streets after completion of the condos/apartments will make the streets unsafe for walking (there are no sidewalks in the neighborhood)
- The proposed structures are very large and imposing and do not look like they fit in the neighborhood
- The proposed buildings would disrupt rainwater flow at the bottom of a hill that historically floods
- There is a network of caves beneath the proposed site
- The school population at AL Lotts is strained already.
January 28, 2024
at 7:16 PM
2-B-24-DP
Brad
37922
2-B-24-DP
Brad (37922), January 28, 2024 at 8:14 PM
This project has been ill-conceived and re-constituted with no value to the county from the beginning. The serious downsides of this project far outweigh any kind of justification for its approval. It is a development overreach in density, design and construction accommodations that are laughable at best, and a gross disregard for the community at worst. I appreciate very much the work of the MPC. And I don’t envy the work of this Commission in deciding on projects of this kind. However this one contains no redemptive value to this community, and nothing but downside risk to the county’s future. Please do the right thing and deny this project once and for all.
January 28, 2024
at 8:14 PM
2-B-24-DP
Jean
37922
2-B-24-DP
Jean (37922), January 28, 2024 at 8:57 PM
Again, I write hoping to stop this development. This neighborhood cannot take on this number of new residents and maintain a safe traffic pattern. The streets are already crowded and difficult to navigate when cars are parked on the street, not to mention times when golf tournaments and major events happen at the club house. This will also affect nearby neighborhoods. I hope you will really give this serious consideration so that we can avoid these Traffic congestion and safety issues.
January 28, 2024
at 8:57 PM
2-B-24-DP
Catrina
37922
2-B-24-DP
Catrina (37922), January 28, 2024 at 11:06 PM
I am strongly opposed to the development of any condos in our neighborhood. We ready have issue with traffics flow on Ebenezer and Westland entrances, they are almost impossible to get out of. There is not enough parking at the club already. This increase in traffic would be almost fatal to anyone walking, riding bikes or jogging in the neighborhood as we don’t have sidewalks already. The value of our homes will decrease and the beauty of our established neighborhood and those around us will be compromised as well. In the summer the pools will be over crowed, the golf course will be impacted tremendously. We moved into this neighborhood because of its ease and amenities offered without having the over crowding. If we had wanted to live in a neighborhood with multiple condos we would have bought elsewhere. We really looked forward to raising our family here. Not in an overcrowded high rise half neighborhood half houses. Please consider the families with young child, older children and older couples who live here for the peacefulness.
January 28, 2024
at 11:06 PM
2-B-24-DP
Timothy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Timothy (37922), January 28, 2024 at 11:48 PM
As a resident of the Gettysvue community, I am adamantly opposed to the rezoning and development of the proposed high-rise condominiums and urge the Knox County Planning Commission vote to deny this project. I am aware of the need in Knox County for additional housing due to unprecedented growth and I am not averse to housing and community development. However, the proposed condominium complex in the center of the Gettysvue community will create more problems than it solves as highlighted below. While the condominiums proposed appear to meet population density standards when averaged with the surrounding community of single-family homes, the population density of the condominium property area itself exceeds the guidelines as established by the county for placement within the center of the neighborhood. Simply put, they would be out of place practically, functionally and aesthetically. See attached for additional comments.

View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240128234810.pdf
January 28, 2024
at 11:48 PM
2-B-24-DP
Mary
37922
2-B-24-DP
Mary (37922), January 28, 2024 at 11:51 PM
As a resident of the Gettysvue community, I am adamantly opposed to the rezoning and development of the proposed high-rise condominiums and urge the Knox County Planning Commission vote to deny this project. However, the proposed condominium complex in the center of the Gettysvue community will create more problems than it solves. See attachment for additional comments.

View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240128235132.pdf
January 28, 2024
at 11:51 PM
2-B-24-DP
Mac
37922
2-B-24-DP
Mac (37922), January 29, 2024 at 8:39 AM
See Attached
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240129083940.pdf
January 29, 2024
at 8:39 AM
2-B-24-DP
T
37922
2-B-24-DP
T (37922), January 29, 2024 at 8:41 AM
See Attached
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240129084128.pdf
January 29, 2024
at 8:41 AM
2-B-24-DP
Concerned Homeowner
37922
2-B-24-DP
Concerned Homeowner (37922), January 29, 2024 at 9:36 AM
I oppose the proposed high-rise condo buildings in Gettysvue. The applicant is proposing a density of more than 10 units per acre, more than 3 times the maximum density allowed by the CCR's. The condo's will no doubt harm the current residence's property values for the following reasons: Safety concerns for pedestrians and walkers (Gettysvue Drive is sole ingress/egress - no sidewalks; Increase in drainage issues which already exist; The proposed 2 buildings are severely out of scale to the surrounding homes; No other subdivisions in Knoxville have high rise buildings within the boundaries of the property; Construction would create increased noise and construction traffic; A clear majority of the Gettysvue residents including the HOA oppose the proposed development. I am not opposed to developing the 3.9 acres with a development plan that complements and is harmonious to the existing homes in Gettysvue. Please vote to deny this project on Feb. 8
January 29, 2024
at 9:36 AM
2-B-24-DP
Jimmy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Jimmy (37922), January 29, 2024 at 11:37 AM
I believe the construction of the two buildings would be a detriment to the lives of the current residents of Gettysvue. As Previously mentioned, the additional traffic-strain on the infrastructure would create a huge problem and expense. I believe the many homes around the area for the two buildings would lose value. I am 18-year resident of Gettysvue, I urge you to vote NO on this project. Thank you.
January 29, 2024
at 11:37 AM
2-B-24-DP
Robert
37922
2-B-24-DP
Robert (37922), January 29, 2024 at 11:56 AM
I would like to voice my opposition to this project. I own property in the Gettysvue community just houses down from where this high rise is proposed to be built. As stated in the Gettysvue restrictive covenants each lot is to be utilized as a single family residence not exceeding over 2 1/2 stories high. The proposed villas will stand well over 48 feet which is twice the size of a 2 story house. The maximum density zoning for the community originally 1 to 3 units per acre would also be exceeded if this project is approved. In the past I have attended meetings regarding new multi-unit structures in our area and have always been told by the builder that the new building/s won’t impact traffic, utilities, drain off, etc but each time that is not the case. This will not only effect traffic within the immediate Gettysvue community it will effect major roadways and surrounding neighborhoods. Each unit will have two vehicles allowed which will potentially add 80 vehicles that are residents and that doesn’t include their visitors. The added residents will put a strain on both golf and social memberships leading to a strain on facilities and spots available for member events. Lastly letting this project move forward will cause a decrease in property value as soon as the construction begins. As a retire my property value has a direct impact on my future. Thank you for reading this submission and vote no to deny this project.
January 29, 2024
at 11:56 AM
2-B-24-DP
Marygaye
37922
2-B-24-DP
Marygaye (37922), January 29, 2024 at 12:16 PM
As a resident of Gettysvue, I strongly oppose the proposed two large condominium building project. The project does not fit the design and function of the Gettysvue Community. The buildings in question are too large in relationship to the surrounding single-family homes. The buildings due to their size would decrease the value of the surrounding homes. The project would also add additional traffic to neighborhood roads causing safety concerns for children and residents who walk on the community roads. The projected buildings would also exacerbate drainage issues that already cause problems to the surrounding area. For the above reasons, I respectfully ask the commission turn down the zoning and building request.
January 29, 2024
at 12:16 PM
2-B-24-DP
Blake
37922
2-B-24-DP
Blake (37922), January 29, 2024 at 12:48 PM
My family is completely opposed to the revised zoning request to build two high rise buildings of 20 condos per building in the middle of Gettysvue Country Club because: 1) it violates the covenants of the neighborhood which requires one single family residence per lot; 2) totally does not fit in the neighborhood design, form, fit, and function; 3) will likely cause issues with flooding and run-off due to slope of the land; 4) Gettysvue is a well established neighborhood with multi million dollar homes surrounding the proposed development and property values will be negatively affected The school traffic is already terrible and A.L Lotts is absolutely over crowded due to the apartments that were built and this will only make things worse.
January 29, 2024
at 12:48 PM
2-B-24-DP
Alofa
37922
2-B-24-DP
Alofa (37922), January 29, 2024 at 1:05 PM
We live in the Gettysvue neighborhood and I am a concerned citizen who vehemently opposes the proposed multi-family development in the Gettysvue community, Clubhouse Villas. My home is located directly across from the proposed development. I have young children that still play outside with their friends and I am deeply concerned about years of construction, increased traffic volume and the overall impact to our neighborhood. I kindly ask that you stand with us in opposition to the proposed development. Reasons for opposition include, Violation of the Gettysvue restrictive covenants, violation of fit and form, Increased traffic and congestion, increased storm water flow to areas already experiencing flooding, density, decrease in property values is expected both during the construction period and after.
January 29, 2024
at 1:05 PM
2-B-24-DP
J
37922
2-B-24-DP
J (37922), January 29, 2024 at 3:30 PM
We sincerely ask you again not to approve this project which is to construct high-rise condominiums with a density of up to 10.3 du/ac in the middle of our low-density community.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240129153041.pdf
January 29, 2024
at 3:30 PM
2-B-24-DP
John
37922
2-B-24-DP
John (37922), January 29, 2024 at 4:53 PM
As a resident of the Gettysvue community and member of The Club at Gettysvue, I am opposed to the development of the proposed high rise condominium development. I urge the Planning Commission to vote to deny this project. From violation of restrictive covenants in its design and increased traffic in an already bustling neighborhood to exasperation of water drainage issues and undue strain on utilities, this project will create problems that can and should be avoided. I greatly appreciate and respect your attention to this matter.
January 29, 2024
at 4:53 PM
2-B-24-DP
Gavin
37922
2-B-24-DP
Gavin (37922), January 29, 2024 at 5:00 PM
I strongly oppose this building plan as it will directly affect my and my neighbors property values and way of life. I have 3 young children who will be put at risk every time they are outside as well with all the work trucks and heavy equipment that will be used in this type of project. The influx of people and traffic will also be a huge problem for safety in the neighborhood as there are no sidewalks in Gettysvue. This will probably lead to a mass exodus by many of the current residents which again will impact property values. Please take into consideration if this was your neighborhood and directly across the street from your house how it would negatively affect you and please vote no. There are many other places these could be built and not negatively affect Knoxville home owners. 
January 29, 2024
at 5:00 PM
2-B-24-DP
Michelle
37922
2-B-24-DP
Michelle (37922), January 29, 2024 at 5:06 PM
I am once again writing to voice my opposition to the building of any multi-level high density housing unit in Gettysvue. Despite their weak attempt to “tweak” their original plan, it appears to be only to deceive everyone into thinking it would resolve all the issues brought up by the majority of homeowners in the past - but it will have NO effect on the fact that it is against the covenant which stated single family dwelling homes only when we built in this community. Also it will NOT alleviate the far- reaching effects of increase traffic flow especially at the Westland entrance which will affect congestion at Lotts Elementary School , the increase use of utilities, clubhouse and facilities , obstruction of views from existing homes and the clubhouse , altering golf course and tennis court areas, and hurting current homeowners by decreasing our property values, mine being one of the first 3 original homes built . In fact it does NOT benefit anyone except Mr Watkins and his partners, and allows an entire neighborhood of over 200 homeowners( the majority of whom oppose this project ) to be controlled by 2 people who do not even live in the community. So I am asking you to deny approval of this entire project . 
January 29, 2024
at 5:06 PM
2-B-24-DP
Albert
37922
2-B-24-DP
Albert (37922), January 29, 2024 at 5:37 PM
"Second Verse Same as the First" is a tired refrain adopted by developer Ron Watkins. The zoning approval re-request by Ron Watkins for multi-family development in the Gettysvue community should be denied (the 11/9/2023 initial request was denied by the MPC). The core issues for the proposed development are unchanged.The multi-family dwellings are not in compliance with the Gettysvue restrictive covenants established in 5/1995. This development jeopardizes the safety of children engaged in nearby golf, tennis, or swimming, adds to the traffic congestion in/around Gettysvue, exacerbates current water drainage issues & flooding, further burdens the capacity of the Knox County school system, strains the capabilities of the Knox County public services/utilities, & disrupts the aesthetics of Gettysvue with a Watkins-themed Urban Blight. This is an ill-advised, poorly conceived proposal which should be soundly rejected.
January 29, 2024
at 5:37 PM
2-B-24-DP
Roy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Roy (37922), January 29, 2024 at 7:23 PM
I and my wife oppose the building project. The design and density are not in keeping with the neighborhood development and would have a negative impact on the existing residents. The revised plan does not address the density issues or the traffic concerns of my neighbors. Please reject the proposal.
January 29, 2024
at 7:23 PM
2-B-24-DP
Rebecca
37922
2-B-24-DP
Rebecca (37922), January 29, 2024 at 7:38 PM
- A substantially similar project previously rejected.
- The revised proposal is not substantially different from the original in terms of size of the building. The buildings are HUGE compared to the existing homes in the neighborhood. There are single/ double family homes that have been built out. Adding a high rise apartment building in the middle of an existing, mature neighborhood is not appropriate.
- The density of the newly proposed buildings is still significantly higher than the approved 1-3 units/ acre. Aggregating available acreage from surrounding areas (including the golf course!) is disingenuous.
- The drawings with this application are misleading. Please make sure to carefully inspect the civil engineering drawings. They show the true elevation of the finished building, parking garage, and retaining wall.
January 29, 2024
at 7:38 PM
2-B-24-DP
kimberly
37922
2-B-24-DP
kimberly (37922), January 29, 2024 at 7:46 PM
I am concerned and against the proposal for 40 condos being built and Gettysvue at the tennis court location. The current zoning is for 1 to 3 units per acre in that bar exceeds the current zoning. I am very concerned about the amount of traffic that will increase on Gettysvue Drive. Also, parking would be a huge deal with many people Likely parking along the street which is prohibited for an extended length of time. The height of the buildings is also concerned is that would be a visual distraction for those at the clubhouse. gettysvue is a completed neighborhood with established houses. No other neighborhood would like to entertain the idea of putting high-rise condos in the middle of an established neighborhood. Also, moving the tennis courts to the top of one of the golf range decreases the size and availability of the tennis courts itself as well as restricts some of the ease of use of the golf course. Please vote against this many condo units being built.
January 29, 2024
at 7:46 PM
2-B-24-DP
Melissa
37922
2-B-24-DP
Melissa (37922), January 29, 2024 at 9:51 PM
As a resident of Gettysvue whose home is directly below the proposed development, I strongly oppose its approval. Prior to purchasing our home, we reviewed all recorded plats, deeds, and Restrictions; which all clearly state that the subject property is zoned residential and subject to a 1:3 ratio restriction. There was absolutely nothing in the public record that would have alerted us that this land could ever be used to develop a multi-story condo complex smack in the middle of a well-established neighborhood. The sheer scope and size of the proposed development is baffling. The height of these proposed buildings will tower over the homes below and will create major water run off issues for the homes at the base of the development. The impact to this quiet neighborhood from construction noise and traffic will be years-long and devastating. We are talking about creating underground parking structures on multi-story condo buildings…within mere feet of existing homes! Please try and imagine how you would feel if someone attempted to build a 40 unit condo development directly on top of your home. A home that you invested heavily in and are raising your children in. How would you feel? I believe that you would be sitting right where we are, praying that the representatives of this Board would do the right thing and reject this proposal.
January 29, 2024
at 9:51 PM
2-B-24-DP
Rob
37922
2-B-24-DP
Rob (37922), January 29, 2024 at 10:06 PM
I oppose the planned high rise apartments proposed by Gettysvue Partners L P/Ron Watkins. Gettysvue Polo, Golf, & Country Club is a mature residential community with restrictive covenants drafted in 1994. Article II Section 2.1 Para (a) SubPara (i) states: "No structure shall be erected ... except for 1 single family residence [Unit] for the occupancy by one family ... not to exceed 2 1/2 stories in height". The proposed development by Gettysvue Partners L P/Ron Watkins has 10 units per acre with the structures consisting of a retaining wall of variable height, car garage, 3 stories, & a pitched roof. This is not in compliance with the Gettysvue Restrictive Covenants which have been in place & adhered to by the Gettysvue community for almost 30 years resulting in a mature community of 2 1/2 story (or less) buildings.This development should not be approved.
January 29, 2024
at 10:06 PM
2-B-24-DP
Albert
37922
2-B-24-DP
Albert (37922), January 29, 2024 at 10:44 PM
I oppose the proposed high rise apartment development by Gettysvue Partners L P/Ron Watkins. The planned development has a lack of form & fit in the mature Gettysvue community which has been constructed since ~1995. A typical Gettysvue 1-story home is ~27' in height; a typical 2-story Gettysvue home is ~39' in height. The proposed multi-dwelling apartments are up to ~80' in height & consist of a retaining wall of variable height, car garage,, 3 occupied stories, & a pitched roof. The architecture does not conform with the Gettysvue community. The retaining wall would be an unsightly eyesore of variable height (up to 20') due to the downward elevation of the lots at the proposed building site. The proposed structures would dwarf the single family homes & Club House in Gettysvue, destroy the aesthetics of Gettysvue, & become a disgraceful, conspicuous, urban blight. This is poorly conceived & ill-advised. Stop this proposal!!
January 29, 2024
at 10:44 PM
2-B-24-DP
Ramanujan
37922
2-B-24-DP
Ramanujan (37922), January 30, 2024 at 12:08 AM
As a long term resident of the Gettysvue Club community I strongly oppose this proposal because
1. The plan is for buildings which are much larger than the surrounding houses. This affects the beauty, tranquility and the values of these homes.
2. The additional condos will affect the drainage by overwhelming the infrastructure. My street was flooded a few years ago due to the storm drains maxed. This will aggravate the problems.
3. The increased traffic, pressure on neighborhood schools, it will affect the tranquility which brought us to the community 15y ago.
4. It will significantly affect our property values since it changes the character of our community.
For these reasons this proposal should be summarily denied.
January 30, 2024
at 12:08 AM
2-B-24-DP
Jan
37922
2-B-24-DP
Jan (37922), January 30, 2024 at 8:39 AM
Once again I am asking the planning commission to deny Mr Ron Watkins request to construct high-rise apartment-like dwellings in my well established neighborhood of single family homes. He is proposing development of monstrous buildings in a small area of a subdivision that is over twenty years old. These buildings will be twice as high as the single family homes as well as the clubhouse! Besides the actual buildings, retaining walls will also overpower the natural beauty of the surrounding area. Please deny this proposal in Gettysvue. Stop Mr Watkins and his disastrous project. The residents want to maintain our community the way it has been for over 20 years. A quiet, peaceful place to live without high-rise apartments overpowering our neighborhood,
January 30, 2024
at 8:39 AM
2-B-24-DP
Dale
37922
2-B-24-DP
Dale (37922), January 30, 2024 at 9:06 AM
See my previous message from Jan 8, 2024. I felt compelled to write another comment because there are rumors/fears that this latest zoning request might be approved, since he has scaled back his prior request from 90 condos to 40 condos. Yes, 40 is better, but it is still not acceptable to build multifamily units in a single family residential neighborhood. The condos just don't fit in the neighborhood, and will decrease property values for the surrounding homes. Gettysvue is one of the premiere subdivisions in Knoxville, so why would anyone want to do anything to reduce the values. The reason there is zoning in a community is so that there is consistency in the neighborhood planning and construction, and allowing this parcel to be rezoned after more than 25 years of the subdivision, just doesn't make any sense. Why have zoning in the first place, if a wealthy developer can come along and change the plans for no good reason. He could easily turn the acreage into single family homesites and they would be in big demand for building single family homes.
January 30, 2024
at 9:06 AM
2-B-24-DP
C
37922
2-B-24-DP
C (37922), January 30, 2024 at 9:18 AM
I strongly oppose construction of the so-called “GettysVue Villas.” Though called “Villas,” these buildings will resemble large apartment units, like the Crescent apartment development on the corner of Ebenezer Road and Westland Drive. Nowhere in Knox County can you find large apartment units in the heart of a neighborhood of single-family homes. At a maximum height of sixty-four feet above grade, these units will dwarf surrounding homes. Each residential lot in Gettysvue is limited to one single-family residence. High-rise condo buildings do not adhere to the architecture of our community’s homes! Besides the jarring visual violation of current building covenants, this development would have a negative impact on home values, the quality of life of current residents, and the quiet enjoyment of our homes. There are so many other reasons to reject this proposal: Increased traffic on already-heavily traveled roads, increased stormwater flow, and a lengthy and obstructive construction period are among those. This mammoth condo development is simply an attempt by a few greedy individuals to enrich themselves at the expense of hundreds of Knox County residents. Please join the GettysVue residents to oppose this ill-advised project.
January 30, 2024
at 9:18 AM
2-B-24-DP
J
37922
2-B-24-DP
J (37922), January 30, 2024 at 9:19 AM
I strongly oppose construction of the so-called “GettysVue Villas.” Though called “Villas,” these buildings will resemble large apartment units, like the Crescent apartment development on the corner of Ebenezer Road and Westland Drive. Nowhere in Knox County can you find large apartment units in the heart of a neighborhood of single-family homes. At a maximum height of sixty-four feet above grade, these units will dwarf surrounding homes. Each residential lot in Gettysvue is limited to one single-family residence. High-rise condo buildings do not adhere to the architecture of our community’s homes! Besides the jarring visual violation of current building covenants, this development would have a negative impact on home values, the quality of life of current residents, and the quiet enjoyment of our homes. There are so many other reasons to reject this proposal: Increased traffic on already-heavily traveled roads, increased stormwater flow, and a lengthy and obstructive construction period are among those. This mammoth condo development is simply an attempt by a few greedy individuals to enrich themselves at the expense of hundreds of Knox County residents. Please join the GettysVue residents to oppose this ill-advised project.
January 30, 2024
at 9:19 AM
2-B-24-DP
Margaret
Y, 37
2-B-24-DP
Margaret (Y, 37), January 30, 2024 at 9:59 AM
I strenuously object to any proposed structure(s) that is not in compliance w/ the existing surrounding community that makes up Gettysvue.
January 30, 2024
at 9:59 AM
2-B-24-DP
Mary
37922
2-B-24-DP
Mary (37922), January 30, 2024 at 10:44 AM
See PDF
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240130104432.pdf
January 30, 2024
at 10:44 AM
12-SF-23-C
Jaime
37932
12-SF-23-C
Jaime (37932), January 30, 2024 at 11:04 AM
The proposed development continues to include request for variances that they have created in their proposal. You cannot create your own hardship. This builder was on the planning commission at the time the original proposal was considered. Instead of pushing the rules he should have been an example to the building expectations Knox county currently has. Through litigation, our homeowners association has proven this to be illegal yet the only change has been a one lot reduction that does not address the variance issues. They also continue to build 5 homes on an illegal road location. We ask that you deny this concept plan.
January 30, 2024
at 11:04 AM
2-B-24-DP
George
37922
2-B-24-DP
George (37922), January 30, 2024 at 11:13 AM
I am writing to express my strong desire for the committee to reject this proposal. The revised plan is no better than the plan that was previously rejected by this committee. The proposed building is still over 90 feet tall and will tower over the existing houses in the neighborhood. In addition, the proposed use is completely inconsistent with current use and guidelines which if built will create a visual eyesore within the entire community. Again, I strongly admonish the committee to reject this proposal.
January 30, 2024
at 11:13 AM
2-B-24-DP
Melissa
37922
2-B-24-DP
Melissa (37922), January 30, 2024 at 11:27 AM
I strongly oppose the construction of high-rise condo buildings in Gettysvue. Every resident abides by Gettysvue restrictive Covenants that each lot is limited to 1 single-family residence. After lots were sold and the construction of single-family houses, adhering to restrictive guidelines, Gettysvue has become a well-established, beautiful single-family community. This challenge and request violates the Covenants which every resident adheres to. The proposal of such radical use of this paltry amount of property within the community to build 2 high-rise, 40-unit buildings on a 4-acre lot is absurd. This high-rise condo building project will certainly profit the minority of businessmen at the expense of lowering current residents' housing value, increasing traffic congestion, deminishing pedestrians' safety, creating more water issues and diminishing the usage of amenities. If a proposal of a single-family home project with 1-3 units per acre which all the residents obey, then such opposition will never occur. We ask you to make the right decision for residents in Gettysvue.
January 30, 2024
at 11:27 AM
2-B-24-DP
sally
37922
2-B-24-DP
sally (37922), January 30, 2024 at 11:40 AM
I am opposed to the plan to build these apartments for many reasons but especially because these structures violate the covenants of the neighborhood and they do not fit in the neighborhood design, form, fit, and function. We ask that you thoughtfully listen to our comments and make a decision based on the many different reasons presented and not based on money to be made by the developers or tax revenue that would be gained through dense housing structures. Might I add protecting the children who ride or walk to the pool in the summer. We have no sidewalks and the additional traffic would be detrimental to the children as well as those who exercise in the neighborhood. Please protect us all!
January 30, 2024
at 11:40 AM
2-B-24-DP
Rob
37922
2-B-24-DP
Rob (37922), January 30, 2024 at 11:44 AM
Can Vols basketball player Zakai Zeigler (5’9” 171 lbs) guard teammate Jonas Aidoo (6’11” 240 lbs)? Of course not. The size & height mismatch would be problematic. Should the proposed multi-level apartments co-exist with single story & two story homes in the Gettysvue community? Of course not. The size & height mismatch would be problematic. With a height of up to 80’, the multi-level apartments proposed by Gettysvue Partners LP/Ron Watkins would tower over the one & two story Gettysvue homes. In addition, the size of the proposed complexes (~63,500 Sq Ft) would dwarf any structure, including the Club House, in Gettysvue. The form & fit of the proposed development are not consistent with the aesthetics & character of the Gettysvue neighborhood, a mature community of ~30 years of age. This is an ill-conceived, poorly designed proposal which should be disapproved.
January 30, 2024
at 11:44 AM
2-B-24-DP
Laurence
37922
2-B-24-DP
Laurence (37922), January 30, 2024 at 12:20 PM
I am against the high rise project that Ron Watkins is proposing.
January 30, 2024
at 12:20 PM
2-B-24-DP
Sharon
37922
2-B-24-DP
Sharon (37922), January 30, 2024 at 12:49 PM
This project would not have been brought forward if there was a legally organized HOA in this very LARGE neighborhood.as it would not meet appropriate architectural standards. etc. The current HOA which is completely controlled by the developer with obvious conflicts of interest,etc There is considerable case law regarding when a development should be turned over by the developer to the property owners. This is an extreme example violating this law and the current litigation will likely result in a finding that the current HOA is not legally constituted and does not represent or protect the homeowners who pay large dues, THIS PROJECT SHOULD EITHER BE REJECTED OR DEFERRED UNTIL THE RULING FROM THE COURT. THE PROJECT WILL LIKELY BE FOUND TO BE NOT LEGALLY SUBMITTED AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD ASSURE ALL PROJECTS COMPLY WITH THE LAW .THE DEVELOPER HAS MADE NO EFFORTS TO WORK WITH THE MULTIPLE CONCERNED HOMEOWNERS ON THIS PROJECT INSTEAD RELYING ON THE HOA WHICH HE COMPLETELY CONTROLS. THE PLANNING COMMISSION CLEARLY HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THE COMMUNITY FROM ILLEGAL PROJECTS.
January 30, 2024
at 12:49 PM
12-SF-23-C
Caroline
37932
12-SF-23-C
Caroline (37932), January 30, 2024 at 12:58 PM
I'm a homeowner in Massey Creek for 7 years, and been and oppose the subdivision and plan. This development was determined by Knox County Chancery Court as illegally approved by the previous commission and ordered to be heard through Planning once again if they want to proceed. This developer has not addressed the illegal issues. For example, the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park is illegal and was granted illegally. Please reject this plan and influence the developer to adhere to the laws.
January 30, 2024
at 12:58 PM
2-B-24-DP
Anthony
37922
2-B-24-DP
Anthony (37922), January 30, 2024 at 1:20 PM
The proposed project should not be approved using 3 to 1 originally approved for this project as an excuse. If an entire development is nearly fully developed using a 2 to 1 ratio or less, then building a high rise with very high density on a very small tract is completely out of character and destructive to the other homeowners. Since this was not originally submitted that this would occur when the original density was approved, the developer should be required to show this meets the neighborhood standards. Since there is no independent architectural committee or independent HOA, the homeowners have no protection from an offensive and damaging project. The HOA is likely not legally constituted and is controlled by the developer. Further, the streets, drainage,sewers etc which were developed 20-30 years ago did not contemplate a project of this density and are completely inadequate to handle the demands this project will put on the infrastructure. My home is directly down grade from this project and already experiences flooding. Mr Snowden, the county engineer, placed an additional sewer in front of my home 7 years ago to try to deal with this situation. This project will likely have devastating consequences for homeowners. I see nothing in this plan that comes close to addressing this.
January 30, 2024
at 1:20 PM
2-B-24-DP
Becky
37922
2-B-24-DP
Becky (37922), January 30, 2024 at 1:45 PM
I strongly oppose the construction of high-rise condo buildings in Gettysvue. Trying to reduce the number of units in no way diminishes all the problems this proposed establishment would create for the residents. The overall obnoxious size and posture of these multi dwelling structures have never matched the fit and form of the neighborhood and what is stated in the Covenants. I am not aware of any neighborhood in this town that has had this done or would allow it. The only construction that should be considered for such a compact area of property are single family homes with 1-3 units per acre. I kindly ask you to DENY such a preposterous project.
January 30, 2024
at 1:45 PM
2-B-24-DP
Tim
37922
2-B-24-DP
Tim (37922), January 30, 2024 at 2:06 PM
I urge you to vote NO to the proposed high-rise condominium development within the Gettysvue residential community. That a similar structure was approved over twenty years ago is irrelevant to the current situation. At that time, Gettysvue was sparsely populated. Today, the community is fully built out with single family homes. The presences of high-rise condominiums in the center of Gettysvue will now dwarf neighboring single-family homes by 60 feet or more and does not match the fit and form of the community as it exists today. The population density of the proposed high-rise condominiums exceeds the maximum population density zoned for the neighborhood when the acreage of the condominiums is used as the basis. It is inappropriate to use the acreage of the entire community, including the golf course acreage, as the basis for calculating property density to justify a high-rise condominium within a single-home development. See additional comments in the attached memo.

View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240130140625.pdf
January 30, 2024
at 2:06 PM
2-B-24-DP
SY
37922
2-B-24-DP
SY (37922), January 30, 2024 at 2:23 PM
I respectfully ask our elected officials again to deny such a short-term personal benefit project for the long-term safety, viability and well-being of residents in Gettysvue. The high-rise, monstrous condo project proposed by Mr. Watkins directly violates the restrictive Gettysvue Covenants that one lot is limited to 1 single-family residence and not to exceed 21/2 stories high. The condo buildings are designed to rise nearly 70 feet above and tower over the adjoining well-developed single-family homes. The sheer scope and size of the proposed development is baffling. It destroys the beauty of our community since it distracts from the integrity of architecture and appearance. The condominium buildings do not fit the forum and character of the neighborhood. My home is located directly across from the proposed development, please see the attached image of the size comparison between the proposed high-rise, high-density, condominium project and typical single-family homes in Gettysvue. The density of the newly proposed buildings (10.3 units/acre) is significantly higher than the approved 1-3 units/ acre. It would certainly diminish the property values, subsequently lessening the tax collected from Gettysvue. There are so many other reasons to reject this proposal mentioned by other residents. We believe you will put the concerns of residents over the greed of one individual.
January 30, 2024
at 2:23 PM
2-B-24-DP
vicki
37922
2-B-24-DP
vicki (37922), January 30, 2024 at 2:41 PM
This proposed development would be a scar on the landscape. The whole development comprises of single dwelling homes and this ugly monstrosity would totally spoil the area. Two main points are the height, which totally dwarfs everything around it and secondly the ugliness of what's being proposed. I completely object to the planning application
January 30, 2024
at 2:41 PM
12-SF-23-C
Vonna
37932
12-SF-23-C
Vonna (37932), January 30, 2024 at 3:04 PM
I am a homeowner in the Massey Creek subdivision for over 5 years and I once again am writing to oppose the entire subdivision and plan. The plan developed is illegal due to the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park. This plan was granted illegal and therefore should be deemed illegal moving forward. Shame on the developer for being money hungry and putting innocent lives at risk.
January 30, 2024
at 3:04 PM
2-B-24-DP
Chelse
37922
2-B-24-DP
Chelse (37922), January 30, 2024 at 3:05 PM
As a Gettysvue homeowner I am strongly opposed to the high- rise condo development being proposed by Ron Watkins. This mature, fully developed golf community and neighborhood contains lovely high-end homes. There is absolutely no reason or need to build 90 foot high- rise multi-family dwelling buildings in the heart of this neighborhood. The height and sheer magnitude of these buildings will not fit or form with the existing aesthetics of the neighborhood. In fact, there are no neighborhoods in knoxville that contain high rise apartments in the middle of a subdivision. It will dramatically devalue the existing homes in Gettysvue. It will also exacerbate already existing drainage issues within the neighborhood.
January 30, 2024
at 3:05 PM
2-B-24-DP
Nathaniel
37922
2-B-24-DP
Nathaniel (37922), January 30, 2024 at 3:14 PM
This project is a selfish money making scheme of Mr. Watkins with very harmful impact on our Gettysvue neighborhood. The project should be soundly REJECTED by MPC.
January 30, 2024
at 3:14 PM
2-B-24-DP
Randy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Randy (37922), January 30, 2024 at 3:37 PM
I am opposed to the outrageous request by the developer. Please see attached.

View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240130153703.pdf
January 30, 2024
at 3:37 PM
2-B-24-DP
Andrew
37922
2-B-24-DP
Andrew (37922), January 30, 2024 at 4:07 PM
I am adamantly apposed to to this project. We as residents have had to follow guidelines and this proposed project does not follow the "Fit and Form" the every resident has had to follow. Mr. Watkins has not respected the wished of the community he has developed. I and most, if not all, residents had not idea that this type of project could be constructed in a completed developed. Total disrespect for residents in a community Mr. Watkins developed. Vote NO on this proposal.
January 30, 2024
at 4:07 PM
12-SF-23-C
Tom
37932
12-SF-23-C
Tom (37932), January 30, 2024 at 4:07 PM
If what is proceeding has been deemed illegal with a wink and a nod to a builder who clearly appears to have some sort of inside track with friends, where and when does the line get drawn on illegalities? Why do we have any laws? Or do we not follow laws only when someone of importance or connection is inconvenienced? In this case the judge clearly has deemed what is going on as illegal. Yet the ruling is ignored. There is no democratic process here being upheld by our elected officials. Why should any of us follow any laws in Knox County?
January 30, 2024
at 4:07 PM
2-B-24-DP
Christina
e 372
2-B-24-DP
Christina (e 372), January 30, 2024 at 4:27 PM
The high rise apartment/condo proposal will be an eyesore for the community. It will tower over individual home sites. This plan is against what the residents of Gettysvue want in the neighborhood. It is not something that Knoxville has approved in a community with bordering homes in the past and should not start now. Please vote NO!
January 30, 2024
at 4:27 PM
2-B-24-DP
Johnson
37922
2-B-24-DP
Johnson (37922), January 30, 2024 at 4:31 PM
As a resident of a bordering neighborhood, I wholeheartedly oppose this project. The buildings do not fit the neighborhood. Please vote NO!
January 30, 2024
at 4:31 PM
12-SF-23-C
Mackenzie
37932
12-SF-23-C
Mackenzie (37932), January 30, 2024 at 4:32 PM
I oppose this plan, especially the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park. This was granted illegally and is an illegal variance. The planning for Hardin Valley needs to be smart and follow the rules and regulations set forth by the planning commission. I urge you to push for this property and plan to be halted and stopped. Let's preserve the safety and well being of the people of this county. Thank you for your consideration.
January 30, 2024
at 4:32 PM
2-B-24-DP
Cheridy
37923
2-B-24-DP
Cheridy (37923), January 30, 2024 at 4:36 PM
Ask yourself if you would like a 100 ft wall of an apartment outside your front window while trying to enjoy a dinner with family. We do not! Please vote NO! This is a special neighborhood. Please help us keep it that way!
January 30, 2024
at 4:36 PM
2-B-24-DP
Mike
37923
2-B-24-DP
Mike (37923), January 30, 2024 at 4:39 PM
Homeowners were never informed about this development when we bought property. This is sheer greed on the part of the developer. Please vote NO to this eyesore of a towering building in a FAMILY neighborhood.
January 30, 2024
at 4:39 PM
2-B-24-DP
Becky
37922
2-B-24-DP
Becky (37922), January 30, 2024 at 4:40 PM
I strongly object to the proposal of high rise condominiums in Gettysvue. I am a homeowner whose residence will be directly affected by the construction that would take place. I live directly below the site where these enormous structures would be built which means that the elevation of these condos would tower over my roof. Not only would this encroach on my privacy but i would also have to deal with noice issues of construction for a possible 3-5 years, noice from residents of the proposed 40 unit buildings and construction traffic blocking roads to and from my home. Minimizing the units will not reduce the drainage issues these high rise condos would cause my property along with my neighbors. I have already spent a significant amount trying to prevent water issues from the golf course and roads. These multi resident condos would only cheapen the neighborhood if they even sell and devalue our beautiful homes which we have all worked so hard to purchase. The safety of the children in this neighborhood would be jeopardized and the traffic would be outrageous. This is a neighhood that was not constructed to handle what is trying to be passed. Please REJECT this proposal as it is only the greedy developer who will benefit from all of this.
January 30, 2024
at 4:40 PM
2-B-24-DP
Max
37922
2-B-24-DP
Max (37922), January 30, 2024 at 4:46 PM
One of the buildings will be directly across from my bedroom window. I don’t understand how an apartment can be built across the street from my house. This is a neighborhood with families who have houses. This does not make sense to me. Please vote no!
January 30, 2024
at 4:46 PM
2-B-24-DP
Tracy
Y 379
2-B-24-DP
Tracy (Y 379), January 30, 2024 at 5:38 PM
I am opposed to this apartment complex being considered for construction in Gettysvue. It is far too tall and out of scale with the single dwelling homes and town homes in Gettysvue. It is going to ruin property values. I am concerned about drainage ponds and run off too. Please do not let this project pass.
January 30, 2024
at 5:38 PM
2-B-24-DP
Michael
7922
2-B-24-DP
Michael (7922), January 30, 2024 at 6:01 PM
After reviewing the materials associated with the development of 60 "villas" in Gettysvue, I want to express my opposition. These two building are incongruent because they they are way too large and too tall, making them outsized for the overall community. I am not opposed to developing the land but feel this approach is inconsistent with what has become a very homogeneous community. I hope that you will respect the concerns of the many members of Gettysvue who agree.
January 30, 2024
at 6:01 PM
12-SF-23-C
Chris
37932
12-SF-23-C
Chris (37932), January 30, 2024 at 6:17 PM
It’s mind blowing that this issue is constantly resurfacing when the build is in clear violation and they keep pursuing their agenda with Knox County. Can we please stop the madness and wasting tax payers money.
January 30, 2024
at 6:17 PM
2-B-24-DP
Beth Anne
37922
2-B-24-DP
Beth Anne (37922), January 30, 2024 at 7:08 PM
I respectfully ask the MPC to vote "NO" to the current building proposal for Gettysvue Subdivision. We are again fighting a proposal that is completely against the zoning limit of 1-3 units per acre. It is unconscionable to build high rise apartment buildings (because these are not villas by definition) in the middle of a well-established neighborhood that would dwarf every surrounding home. It is beyond ridiculous. We have worked decades to pay for our homes and the thought of staring up at 90-foot structures is simply beyond comprehension. We are not opposed to homes being built on this property, but huge high-rise buildings is completely inappropriate and against the current zoning codes. Thank you for protecting our homes.
January 30, 2024
at 7:08 PM
2-B-24-DP
Barry
37922
2-B-24-DP
Barry (37922), January 30, 2024 at 7:09 PM
As a home owner in Gettysvue and residing in sight of the proposed high rise multi family apartments, I am strongly opposed to these buildings. All homes in this community are single dwelling and restricted to two stories above ground. These apartments will be 90 feet tall and dwarf all other structures. These are located in the middle of the community and will look like a monstrosity compared to all other structures. VERY UNSIGHTLY!!
January 30, 2024
at 7:09 PM
2-B-24-DP
Beth
37922
2-B-24-DP
Beth (37922), January 30, 2024 at 7:27 PM
The Tower of London in the United Kingdom, which was originally a prison is 90-feet tall. The monument, Our Lady of the Rockies, in Montana is 90-feet tall...the same as the height of the proposed building project for the middle of Gettysvue Subdivision. Can you imagine something of this size and scale being erected in the middle of a neighborhood that has been in existence for decades?? I humbly and respectfully ask that you vote "NO" to this absurd proposition. Thank you kindly, for your consideration.
January 30, 2024
at 7:27 PM
2-B-24-DP
Barry
37922
2-B-24-DP
Barry (37922), January 30, 2024 at 8:03 PM
As a homeowner residing below the proposed multi family apartment complex in the center of Gettysvue community I am strongly opposed to these buildings. As proposed the lower aspect of these apartments will be 80-90 feet tall not counting the roof. This does not follow the topography of the ground requiring large retaining walls. The 36 residences beyond these huge buildings have to drive uphill to exit only further exaggerating the height. No established single residence community has massive multi family apartments allowed in the middle of the community twenty plus years after the rest of the houses have been constructed. Please deny this!!
January 30, 2024
at 8:03 PM
12-SF-23-C
Tanya
37932
12-SF-23-C
Tanya (37932), January 30, 2024 at 8:49 PM
I’m a homeowner in Massey Creek subdivision, and I ask that you deny this plan. Through litigation with our HOA, this development plan was deemed illegal by Knox County Chancery Court, as a result, this plan should be denied. The developer should be required to adhere to the law.
January 30, 2024
at 8:49 PM
2-B-24-DP
Katie
37922
2-B-24-DP
Katie (37922), January 30, 2024 at 9:53 PM
I respectfully ask that the planning commission deny this request. The proposed condos are in violation of zoning and the restrictive covenants of Gettysvue. I can think of no other neighborhood in the area that has large condominium buildings in the middle of a well established neighborhood. These simply do not make sense for this neighborhood. Thank you,
January 30, 2024
at 9:53 PM
2-B-24-DP
Gary
37922
2-B-24-DP
Gary (37922), January 30, 2024 at 11:35 PM
I respectfully request for the planning commission and staff to review the Design Guidelines in place for Gettysvue and determine if this proposal aligns with the acceptable form and fit of the neighborhood including the requirement in the Restrictions that all residences have an attached two-car garage. I do not believe these apartments would meet the requirements. All of the residents of Gettysvue are counting on the planning commission to prevent actions that will "materially adversely affect the then existing planned residential nature of the developed phases of the subdivision." We clearly do not currently have this protection as promised in the Restrictions.
January 30, 2024
at 11:35 PM
2-B-24-DP
Caryl
37922
2-B-24-DP
Caryl (37922), January 30, 2024 at 11:50 PM
Please see attached letter.

View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240130235053.pdf
January 30, 2024
at 11:50 PM
2-B-24-DP
Joe
37922
2-B-24-DP
Joe (37922), January 31, 2024 at 10:42 AM
My wife and I have been residents of Gettysvue for almost 19 years now and are charter members of the Club. We were pleased that the MPC denied the request for building the 3 large multi-story buildings with 90 unit last year. I presume the denial was based on the fact that these buildings do not have the fit nor form of the established community. We are now dealing with a new but very similar proposal for 2 slightly smaller buildings. Given the similarities and the continued lack of form and fit we hope that a denial will be issued once again. The views from my home are not directly in the line of site of these proposed structures but I can’t help but empathize with my neighbors who would including those whose view would include staring at an 80 foot facade. Thank you for your careful consideration of this matter.
January 31, 2024
at 10:42 AM
2-B-24-DP
Sharon
37922
2-B-24-DP
Sharon (37922), January 31, 2024 at 12:00 PM
Dear Planning Commission, thank you for the work you do, ensuring that our communities enhance the current and future quality of life for residents. Clearly, this requires a balance between measured and desirable growth and the sometimes overly ambitious plans and interests of developers. As to the application submitted for new "Gettysvue Villas" in the middle of the existing neighborhood, like most of the current Gettysvue residents, I object to the proposal development. In my view, the density and structural design provide NO enhancement to the current environment and will only negatively impact traffic and noise, and diminish the beauty and value of Gettysvue. Please DENY the application.
January 31, 2024
at 12:00 PM
12-G-23-DP
Brandon
37932
12-G-23-DP
Brandon (37932), January 31, 2024 at 2:01 PM
I'm a homeowner in Massey Creek for 3 years and have been and still oppose the subdivision and plan. This development was determined by Knox County Chancery Court as illegally approved by the previous commission and ordered to be heard through Planning once again if they want to proceed. This developer has not addressed the illegal issues. The Massey Creek HOA has sued and won against this developer for the illegal variances granted. For example, the minimum distance between Mission Hill and the entrance to Lantern Park is illegal and was granted illegally. Please reject this plan and influence the developer to adhere to the laws.
January 31, 2024
at 2:01 PM
2-B-24-DP
John
37922
2-B-24-DP
John (37922), January 31, 2024 at 2:36 PM
My wife and I have lived in Gettysvue for 22 years. We are strongly opposed to this rezoning request and the proposed project. We encourage you to deny the request, based on the following rationale. 1) The proposed project will diminish our property values as well as our use and enjoyment of our homes. 2) The violation of the Gettysvue restrictive covenants-each lot is limited to 1 single-family residence. 3) Fit and form-high rise condo buildings do not adhere to the architecture and beauty of our community. It is for this reason that we all signed onto covenants that restrict us to single family residences. 4) Increased traffic during the construction period and after will create safety issues. It is currently difficult to exit/enter Gettysvue. 5) Density-exceeds maximum density zoning for community 1 to 3 units per one acre. 6) Increased stormwater flow to areas already experiencing flooding. Thank you for your consideration.
January 31, 2024
at 2:36 PM
2-B-24-DP
William
37922
2-B-24-DP
William (37922), January 31, 2024 at 2:41 PM
Please see attached, I strongly oppose this application as noted in my attachment.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240131144100.pdf
January 31, 2024
at 2:41 PM
2-B-24-DP
Sarah
37922
2-B-24-DP
Sarah (37922), January 31, 2024 at 2:46 PM
I strongly oppose this application. I write this as a homeowner with a shared property line to the subject property. Gettysvue is a community of single-family homes, 1 dwelling unit per lot, except for townhomes and attached structures in specific and planned areas. These units, along with the single-family homes were constructed in a way to naturally blend into the unique architecture of the neighborhood. Each home in Gettysvue is held to a standard outlined in the covenants established for the community and fall within the size and restrictions of the current zoning. Each home is unique and individual, but none stand out, rather they blend as a neighborhood. The planned development is exactly the opposite. They will certainly be the tallest structures in the development, the largest structures in the development, and will be nearly identical in architectural characteristics. They do not fit. Please see attached
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240131144617.pdf
January 31, 2024
at 2:46 PM
2-B-24-DP
Lucy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Lucy (37922), January 31, 2024 at 8:33 PM
I respectfully request that you deny this proposal again. The reasons for this are unchanged: does not conform to the fit and form of the neighborhood, is in direct conflict with the covenants, will further stress infrastructure of the community and will cause traffic issues. Please help us preserve this established west Knoxville neighborhood. Thank you.
January 31, 2024
at 8:33 PM
2-B-24-DP
Donna
37922
2-B-24-DP
Donna (37922), January 31, 2024 at 8:41 PM
I respectively request that you deny the zoning request to build these multi-family condo buildings in the Gettysvue neighborhood. We purchased our home in this neighborhood over 7 years ago and received the HOA rules and regulations for the neighborhood. Some find HOA's confining and difficult - I however find them to be important in maintaining neighborhood standards. These condos are in direct violation of those rules and regulations. This development would put undue strain on the neighborhood roads, utilities and infrastructure. We are already under water restrictions - what would the addition of 40 more residences do to that? The neighborhood does not have sidewalks so to walk through the neighborhood we walk on the streets - the additional traffic would make that very hazardous. The traffic on Westland is already very heavy and the addition of these homes would require that the road be widened. I am vehemently opposed to this development. Please vote to deny this zoning request.
January 31, 2024
at 8:41 PM
2-B-24-DP
Jack
37922
2-B-24-DP
Jack (37922), February 1, 2024 at 12:17 AM
I strongly request that the MPC Commission deny this application for the following reasons;
1. The size of the buildings do not fit the form and characteristics of existing single family houses that have been in the community for over 20 years.
2. Except for a very few remaining lots, the Gettysvue neighborhood is completed with single family houses in compliance with existing HOA guidelines of density.
Residents built or purchased their homes knowing the character of the neighborhood did not have high rise- high density 4 story, 80+ feet in height. The lots in question are among the last to be developed and should be finished consistent with the surrounding neighborhood density and character. I strongly urge you to deny approval of this construction.
February 1, 2024
at 12:17 AM
2-B-24-DP
Roger
37922
2-B-24-DP
Roger (37922), February 1, 2024 at 11:45 AM
My property has one of the finest views over the golf course in Gettysvue if you were sitting on me back porch. Should this abomination of a development plan go into effect, the view from my front porch and driveway that which is used by our 6 grandchildren on every visit, will be of the several dumpsters and a towering 4 story building looking over my roof. Had I known this plan in 2002 I would have gone elsewhere. But, the Realtors when asked what would the future development look like assured us that it would be lie Magnolia Villas, very tasteful and blah, blah, blah. Misleading information to make a sale or dutiful repetition of the developer’s instructions if someone asked the question? No one knows. I do know that it seems there are plenty of 4 story buildings (apartments) on every ridge going out Pillissippi Pkwy, and yet there are no high end homes surrounding the. They are built on scrub land. I urge you to deny this developers request for 4 stories and limit development to current restriction of 2 stories and a basement. Thank you!
February 1, 2024
at 11:45 AM
2-B-24-DP
Steven
37922
2-B-24-DP
Steven (37922), February 1, 2024 at 6:48 PM
I’m a homeowner that built a house in Gettysvue. Throughout the 18 mo. construction process, we had to ensure every decision about our new home conformed to the HOA convenants. I strongly oppose this rezoning request and urge the MPC to deny this proposed development for the same reasons it rightly denied the request in November. In addition to all the comments provided by the overwhelming majority of community members who oppose this multi-unit project, I urge the MPC to consider the recently published comprehensive study to develop a growth plan for Knox County. This report, Advance Knox, outlines the county’s research-based, data-driven approach for land use over the next several years. Notably, the proposed development in Gettysvue is completely out of alignment with the stated goals for development across Knox County (see Future Land Use Map and Preferred Scenario). It seems the Knox County formal position on the best disposition of this land would be strong evidence the planning commission should consider when making its decision. Please deny this request and make it clear that a single-family development in this property is the only acceptable outcome.
February 1, 2024
at 6:48 PM
2-B-24-DP
Megan
37922
2-B-24-DP
Megan (37922), February 2, 2024 at 9:19 AM
I have lived in Gettysvue for 14 years and 2 1/2 years in my current house. It is a beautiful neighborhood with sunsets and Mountain View’s. Lots of people out walking and tennis and golfers enjoying themselves. If these condos our places directly in our beautiful neighborhood this will not only destroy the beauty but wreak havoc on the traffic and the drainage system throughout. This is already a very trafficked neighborhood, we cannot withstand much more. Please consider Not building anymore condos in this neighborhood.
February 2, 2024
at 9:19 AM
2-B-24-DP
Debbie
37922
2-B-24-DP
Debbie (37922), February 2, 2024 at 9:41 PM
I am opposed to the plans to build Condo buildings that do not follow the guidelines of of our Gettysvue neighborhood
February 2, 2024
at 9:41 PM
2-B-24-DP
Diana
37922
2-B-24-DP
Diana (37922), February 2, 2024 at 10:10 PM
As homeowners in the Getty subdivision, we strongly oppose the proposed new development. The modern structures clash with our neighborhood's existing architectural style, threatening its charm. Increased density will worsen traffic and parking issues, with no plans for necessary infrastructure upgrades. Concerns also arise regarding strain on community resources such as schools and utilities. Moreover, the development may encroach on green spaces, harming local ecosystems and exacerbating environmental issues. We urge authorities to reconsider, prioritizing the preservation and enhancement of our community's character and livability.
February 2, 2024
at 10:10 PM
2-B-24-DP
D
37922
2-B-24-DP
D (37922), February 2, 2024 at 10:12 PM
As Getty subdivision homeowners, we vehemently reject the proposed development. Its modern structures starkly contrast our neighborhood's architectural style, threatening its essence. The added density will undoubtedly exacerbate traffic and parking chaos, with no sign of essential infrastructure upgrades. Our community's resources, from schools to utilities, face dire strain. Furthermore, the development's encroachment on green spaces threatens local ecosystems, intensifying environmental woes. We demand authorities to rethink their stance, prioritizing the preservation and enhancement of our community's character and livability, or face our relentless opposition.
February 2, 2024
at 10:12 PM
2-B-24-DP
Gregory
37922
2-B-24-DP
Gregory (37922), February 2, 2024 at 10:16 PM
As a member of the country club neighboring the Getty subdivision, I'm deeply troubled by the proposed development. The stark contrast in architectural styles threatens the charm that attracts members to our club. Increased density will undoubtedly compound traffic and parking woes, impacting club accessibility. Moreover, strain on community resources like schools and utilities could indirectly affect the club's operations. The encroachment on green spaces raises concerns for local ecosystems, which contribute to our club's ambiance. Authorities must reconsider, prioritizing the preservation of the neighborhood's character for the benefit of both residents and neighboring establishments like our country club.
February 2, 2024
at 10:16 PM
2-B-24-DP
HOA
37922
2-B-24-DP
HOA (37922), February 2, 2024 at 10:32 PM
As the HOA of Polo Club, we are reaching out to address the growing concerns regarding traffic congestion and the impact of ongoing construction in Gettysvue. We understand that these issues not only affect individual homeowners but also have broader implications for the quality of life in our neighborhood. We recognize the challenges posed by the current traffic situation, particularly in accessing appointments and essential services. Additionally, the increasing construction activity may be altering the character and integrity of Gettysvue. In response to these concerns, we are actively exploring strategies to address traffic management and mitigate the effects of construction in Gettysvue. We encourage all residents to share their experiences and suggestions for potential solutions. Your input is invaluable as we work to preserve the essence of Gettysvue and uphold a high quality of life for all residents. Together, we can collaborate on positive changes and secure the future of our community.
February 2, 2024
at 10:32 PM
2-B-24-DP
The Anthem
37922
2-B-24-DP
The Anthem (37922), February 2, 2024 at 10:43 PM
As the Anthem HOA, we are reaching out to address the growing concerns regarding traffic congestion, construction impact, and the overcrowded state of our school and infrastructure in our community. We understand that these issues not only affect individual homeowners but also have significant implications for the well-being and livability of Gettysvue. We recognize the challenges posed by the current traffic situation, particularly in accessing appointments and essential services. Furthermore, the increasing construction activity may exacerbate these challenges and alter the character and integrity of Gettysvue. Additionally, the overcrowded state of our school and infrastructure is a pressing issue that requires immediate attention. In response to these concerns, we are actively exploring strategies to address traffic management, mitigate the effects of construction, and advocate for improvements to our school and infrastructure in Gettysvue. We urge all residents to share their experiences and suggestions for potential solutions. Your input is invaluable as we work to preserve the essence of Gettysvue and uphold a high quality of life for all residents, including addressing overcrowded infrastructure. Together, we can collaborate on positive changes and secure the future of our community.
February 2, 2024
at 10:43 PM
2-B-24-DP
Clarissa
37922
2-B-24-DP
Clarissa (37922), February 3, 2024 at 2:49 PM
We morally should focus on benefiting the residents of a community. Building high rise apartments in Gettysvue does not benefit residents. To the contrary, it hurts: it diminishes quality of life, diminishes financial return to a huge investment and it is clearly unfair. Please keep in mind if most, if not all residents were never notified by anyone that there was a project of any construction other than single family homes in the middle of Gettysvue, much less apartment high rises. It came to our attention that perhaps even the prior approval of building ?20? units was not approved by the residents. Please reject any project that is not approved by the residents. High rises must not be built in the middle of a neighborhood of single family homes. Unfortunately I will not be able to be present at the meeting: please consider this comment as my presence against building of "villas".
February 3, 2024
at 2:49 PM
2-B-24-DP
jawed
37922
2-B-24-DP
jawed (37922), February 3, 2024 at 2:51 PM
The idea of having condos in the country style living in a golf view area is totally inconsistent with the current environment. This is a community where individual houses are enjoyed by the residents and putting condos will ruin the peaceful atmosphere that we all enjoy. We pay taxes for the environment we enjoy and I would not support building condos here.
February 3, 2024
at 2:51 PM
2-B-24-DP
Zakir
37922
2-B-24-DP
Zakir (37922), February 3, 2024 at 3:07 PM
This project is back stabbing to the home owners , devaluation their property value please do not approve .
February 3, 2024
at 3:07 PM
2-B-24-DP
Virginia
37922
2-B-24-DP
Virginia (37922), February 4, 2024 at 6:31 PM
We strongly oppose the proposed condo development within the Gettysvue neighborhood along the 18th fairway by Ron Watkins. Several concerns are - 1. Construction traffic along streets with no sidewalks 2. Increased traffic on already congested roads 3. Drainage issues within the subdivision 4. Does not even begin to meet the aesthetics of our neighborhood which were clearly designed for single family homes.
February 4, 2024
at 6:31 PM
2-B-24-DP
Jane
37923
2-B-24-DP
Jane (37923), February 4, 2024 at 7:41 PM
I am opposed to the building of two high rise condominium buildings in our residential community. It is against the restrictions of the subdivision. This proposed plan is producing the same issues and problems that the first plan did. I respectfully request that the Commission deny the rezoning and not allow our community to have to endure all the numerous already mentioned problems it would manifest. Thank you.
February 4, 2024
at 7:41 PM
2-B-24-DP
D
37922
2-B-24-DP
D (37922), February 5, 2024 at 7:36 AM
I strongly oppose the construction of high-rise condo buildings in Gettysvue. Every resident abides by Gettysvue restrictive Covenants that each lot is limited to 1 single-family residence. After lots were sold and the construction of single-family houses, adhering to restrictive guidelines, Gettysvue has become a well-established, beautiful single-family community. Then Mr. Watkins challenges and wants to violate the Covenants which every resident adheres to. He proposes such radical use of his paltry amount of property within the community to build 2 high-rise, 40-unit buildings on a 4-acre lot. This high-rise condo building project will certainly profit the minority of businessmen at the expense of lowering current residents' housing value, increasing traffic congestion, alleviating pedestrians' safety, creating more water issues and diminishing the usage of amenities. Also the cave system underground needs an environmental look . It is a cause for public concern. We ask you to please make the right decision for residents in Gettysvue and the surrounding communities this will effect. Thank You!
February 5, 2024
at 7:36 AM
2-B-24-DP
Wes
37922
2-B-24-DP
Wes (37922), February 5, 2024 at 6:05 PM
Attached PDF
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240205180555.pdf
February 5, 2024
at 6:05 PM
2-B-24-DP
Howard
37922
2-B-24-DP
Howard (37922), February 5, 2024 at 9:32 PM
Please DENY this request - The ongoing efforts to fundamentally alter the character of our neighborhood through unwanted construction is counter to the interests of residents. There are many factors outlined in great detail throughout the comments that are based on fact and logic. The renewed efforts of a slightly modified plan should not be seen as a positive but another opportunity for concerned homeowners to voice their concerns. Thank you for denying before and we hope the outcome is the same once again.
February 5, 2024
at 9:32 PM
2-B-24-DP
Jeffrey
37931
2-B-24-DP
Jeffrey (37931), February 6, 2024 at 8:18 AM
I have read the staff report that recommends denial for this case. I believe this denial recommendation to be arbitrary as there is sufficient density left on the overall development to allow this proposed development. This parcel was also noted to be developed as villas on the original approved plans. This plan is also not substantially different than the condos that are being built along Linksview Drive. In my opinion, there is not a legal reason to deny the development of this property and therefore should be approved.
February 6, 2024
at 8:18 AM
2-B-24-DP
Courtnay
37738
2-B-24-DP
Courtnay (37738), February 6, 2024 at 11:17 AM
I am writing in opposition of the proposed condominium project in Gettysvue. My parents have been homeowners in the neighborhood since 1997; my husband & I being the subsequent responsible party for their property, as they are aging, hence the interest in said project. I will not write an epistle here, but would like to make a few concerning points:
1. The aesthetic of this building does not fit the surrounding architecture of homes. Gettysvue is a neighborhood heralded with stunning homes and beautiful views. A building detracts from both, which brings me to point #2.
2. Property values will likely suffer. As in many housing markets, property values ebb and flow, thus adapt. With a permanent building comes the likelihood of a permanent decrease. I think of it in similarly to a home that gets the short end of imminent domain for a road expansion or cell tower installation. Those folks aren’t recovering.
3. I’ll lump my next concerns into 1 point, as they are likely to be perceived as emotional or unfounded: traffic management and stability of the ground. I’m sure you’re aware that a home adjacent to this proposed property actually did have a foundation issue due to the caves and caverns that sit below. How will a building or “complex” of this type affect the stability of the ground for existing properties?
February 6, 2024
at 11:17 AM
2-B-24-DP
T
37922
2-B-24-DP
T (37922), February 12, 2024 at 12:51 PM
Following the Staff Recommendation, the developer asked for a postponement of the subject use on review. Subsequently, minor changes were made to the renderings submitted to the Commission. Nothing in the updated renderings make the development conform to the staff recommendations. If anything, changing the entrance to the garage on the west side of building one further detracts to the existing homes neighboring the development. Any attempt to construct multi-story apartments in the middle of the neighborhood will continue to be opposed by the majority of Gettysvue. As stated, many times by Gettysvue residents and the Commission's staff, such development should be harmonious to the existing homes and conform to the density requirements of CCR's of 1 to 3 single family homes per acre. Using the total acreage of the total of Gettysvue which includes an 18 hole golf course is not an appropriate density calculation. Please vote to deny the request in the March meeting.
February 12, 2024
at 12:51 PM
2-B-24-DP
Brennan
37922
2-B-24-DP
Brennan (37922), February 12, 2024 at 6:58 PM
When I purchased a property in Gettysvue, it was not disclosed to me that this type of project would be a possibility. This project directly violates our community C&Rs. This is a project that will significantly increase traffic, which is already a concern living on Linksvue Dr considering that many drivers significantly exceed the speed limit. Additionally, there are certainly serious environmental and safety concerns considering the topography of Gettysvue. Please do not approve this project. This would be a truly monumental mistake that will negatively affect homeowners in Gettysvue and surrounding communities and cause even more traffic and environmental issues than are already present.
February 12, 2024
at 6:58 PM
2-B-24-DP
Clarissa
37922
2-B-24-DP
Clarissa (37922), February 12, 2024 at 7:24 PM
We would appreciate your support AGAINST the construction of high rise apartments in the middle of a single family home subdivision. This project does not benefit the Gettysvue residents: it benefits only the builder. The builder is welcome to build a luxury apartment complex someplace else in Knoxville, but not inside our community. Allowing this project to go through will lead to loss to the residents of our community: loss of quality of life and major loss of property value. Also, a simple moral principle: most, if not all, of our residents were never advised of any high rise project in Gettysvue prior to the purchase of lots and houses. In other words, this was not a project approved by residents. Thank you very much in advance for supporting WAHT IS RIGHT
February 12, 2024
at 7:24 PM
2-B-24-DP
Kim
37922
2-B-24-DP
Kim (37922), February 13, 2024 at 9:04 AM
The proposed plans, even the modified ones, changes the look and feel of the neighborhood radically. A neighborhood that all of us have invested our money, time and lives into. This does nothing for the betterment of our community!
February 13, 2024
at 9:04 AM
2-B-24-DP
Peggy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Peggy (37922), February 13, 2024 at 9:07 AM
Please deny this project. The planned development of apt/condo building and SIZE does not fit in such an established neighborhood. We purchased a home and read the restrictions beforehand and am shocked this is being considered. Please deny this project!
February 13, 2024
at 9:07 AM
2-B-24-DP
Dale
37922
2-B-24-DP
Dale (37922), February 13, 2024 at 10:45 AM
Not sure why the Developer postponed the hearing on his proposed changes, when he only made relatively minor changes to his plan. This revised plan doesn't change the fact that he is trying to build four story buildings for condos in a single family neighborhood, with covenants that restrict such construction. This is still a ridiculous request and plan. Please vote to deny approval of the rezoning.
February 13, 2024
at 10:45 AM
2-B-24-DP
Randy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Randy (37922), February 13, 2024 at 10:59 AM
I live on Gettysvue Drive just a couple of hundred yards from this proposed project and I strongly oppose the revised proposal and would like the planning commission to follow its recommendations and deny this project forever. My reasons are listed in the attachment to this message.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240213105925.pdf
February 13, 2024
at 10:59 AM
2-B-24-DP
richard
37922
2-B-24-DP
richard (37922), February 13, 2024 at 11:23 AM
After review of the most recent plans submitted by a developer, I remain against this project. Gettysvue Country Club does not support a 4 story complex inside a primary single family home development. The project is against the HOA rules for any individual to build an apartment to condo complex inside the development. This land is owned by an individual who now is leaving the impression with myself that he desires to take advantage of ordinary folks in the development. The developer also owns the management company and refuses to allow any home owners a say in what occurs in the development for 20 plus years. The developer transferred the property to himself or others and is not part of the development company. WHEN WE PURCHASED THIS WAS NOT A POSSIBILITY DUE TO THAT THE LAND WAS NOT OWNED BY A DEVELOPER. We are not against development of the lands with single family homes per the existing guidelines of there HOA. The 4 story 45-50 foot building proposed just doesn't fit, will create water runoff issues and a hazard to golfers or home owners. The developer can build single family high end homes on the existing land and make a great profit vs destroying the neighborhood
February 13, 2024
at 11:23 AM
2-B-24-DP
Cheridy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Cheridy (37922), February 13, 2024 at 1:21 PM
The modified structure placement will not solve the eyesore of the building being proposed. I strongly oppose! Please vote NO!
February 13, 2024
at 1:21 PM
2-B-24-DP
shaei
37922
2-B-24-DP
shaei (37922), February 15, 2024 at 10:54 AM
Mr. Watkins made little changes to his revised plan. This revised plan still does not conform to the staff recommendations and it is not consistent with the development policies of the Koxville-Knox County general Plan. The scale, height, design, density and site layout are incompatible with the neighboring residences. Purposely, Mr. Watkins ignores the existing community character which is a well-established single-family community, following the restrictive Gettysvue Covenants adopted by Mr. Watkins in the original development. He is desperate to maximize profit from his paltry amount of lots to build multi-story, multi-family high-rise, high-density condos in the middle of our community. This development does not fit the form and character of the neighborhood and distracts from the integrity of architecture and appearance. With the current infrastructure, it is unsustainable with an extra 40 units of families. Moreover, this project will put the safety of drivers, walkers, strollers, dogs and cars at risk due to high traffic flows on roads that have steep slopes, blind curves and no sidewalks in Gettysvue. The developer is so irresponsible in proposing such a project that ignores the safety of everyone and pursues personal profit. We sincerely ask our elected officials again to deny such a short-term personal benefit project for the long-term safety and well-being of residents in Gettysvue.
February 15, 2024
at 10:54 AM
2-B-24-DP
Ed
37922
2-B-24-DP
Ed (37922), February 16, 2024 at 9:46 AM
I want to repeat my opposition to the proposed multi unit development in the middle of Gettysvue. Gettysvue is a community of single-family homes on large lots. The proposal to put multifamily units in large buildings in the middle of the development does not benefit the community and detracts from the overall. Appearance and atmosphere of the community. I strongly urge the commission to deny the development permit.
February 16, 2024
at 9:46 AM
2-B-24-DP
Margaret
3792
2-B-24-DP
Margaret ( 3792), February 16, 2024 at 10:11 AM
My husband and I have lived in Gettysvue since ‘98. Each and every home built complimented those around it. I honestly felt it was a privilege to live in Gettysvue. If Ron Watkins is allowed to complete his construction projects, it will destroy what makes Gettysvue special. Home value will plummet and we will become just another high rise environment.
February 16, 2024
at 10:11 AM
2-B-24-DP
Brian
37922
2-B-24-DP
Brian (37922), February 16, 2024 at 10:53 AM
While the applicant has made very modest adjustments to reduce the overall height of the building, it is still standing at four stories tall on top of a hill. The density of the complex also remains much higher than any housing complex throughout the Gettysvue neighborhood. The concern remains that this complex will stick out like a sore thumb within a neighborhood that has been established for 20-25 years. While the applicant has had a presence in this neighborhood since its inception, the neighborhood has now grown and should dictate the fit and function of developments - especially those deep within the neighborhood and not on the periphery. The proposed development does not fit the form or function. I do promote the development of this property, but not with the proposed density or size. A townhome-type development similar to Gettysvue Villages or the townhomes currently being built on Linksvue near Ebenezer Rd would be much more favorable.
February 16, 2024
at 10:53 AM
2-B-24-DP
Jim
37922
2-B-24-DP
Jim (37922), February 16, 2024 at 2:01 PM
Thank you in advance for your time on this matter. I know the commission and staff have done their due diligence and we as neighbors in Gettysvue certainly appreciate it. Those that are against this project just want to maintain what Mr. Watkins developed a nice quite community of single family residents. Please deny this proposal. Thank you.
February 16, 2024
at 2:01 PM
2-B-24-DP
Iris
37922
2-B-24-DP
Iris (37922), February 16, 2024 at 2:04 PM
Please deny any use for this property other than single family dwellings in order to maintain the integrity of our neighborhood. Any other use will overload the roads and cause problems.
February 16, 2024
at 2:04 PM
2-B-24-DP
Rebecca
37922
2-B-24-DP
Rebecca (37922), February 16, 2024 at 2:12 PM
I strongly oppose this project for the following reasons:
- A substantially similar project previously rejected twice
- The revised proposal is not substantially different from the original in terms of size of the building. The buildings are HUGE compared to the existing homes in the neighborhood. There are single/ double family homes that have been built out. Adding a high rise apartment building in the middle of an existing, mature neighborhood is not appropriate.
- The density of the newly proposed buildings is still significantly higher than the approved 1-3 units/ acre. Aggregating available acreage from surrounding areas (including the golf course!) is disingenuous.
- The drawings with this application are misleading. Please make sure to carefully inspect the civil engineering drawings. They show the true elevation of the finished building, parking garage, and retaining wall.
February 16, 2024
at 2:12 PM
2-B-24-DP
Todd
37922
2-B-24-DP
Todd (37922), February 16, 2024 at 2:36 PM
Any proposal should be in the likeness of the current neighborhood whether its an individual home or condos similar to those already part of the Gettysvue community.
February 16, 2024
at 2:36 PM
2-B-24-DP
Mark
37922
2-B-24-DP
Mark (37922), February 16, 2024 at 4:07 PM
The issues remain the same as previously provided. I live in Gettysvue Subdivision and bought my house in December 2020 moving from Farragut. At no time was there ever discussion about this neighborhood building condos especially at this density. Anything over town homes would be against the covenants were set up by this developer when the neighborhood was originally developed. The additional traffic for the entrance would be more than the neighborhood was designed for and would cause multiple issues as our neighborhood feeds into Westland by AL Lotts School. A traffic study would need to be conducted on the additional traffic on Westland caused by the increase of cars leaving Gettysvue at school entry and dismissal times. Traffic already backs up and blocks our entrance in the morning and afternoons currently. The additional traffic will need to accidents and possible deaths because so many people walk in the streets because there aren't sidewalks. Drainage is already an issue along with sink holes in Gettysvue. Additional buildings will cause additional issue in those areas. There is already one lawsuit in the courts right now regarding this proposed development. It would not be in the County's best interest to be named in additional lawsuits that would come about if you approve any change in the current approved build out of homes.
February 16, 2024
at 4:07 PM
2-B-24-DP
Lindsey
37922
2-B-24-DP
Lindsey (37922), February 16, 2024 at 6:47 PM
This project is terrible for Gettysvue and the community. Having these high end homes next to a 4 story apartment type building does not “fit” the neighborhood. We all purchased and invested in our homes with the outlined bilaws of the subdivision being, single family homes only. This entire project will be harmful to our property values, the drainage of the neighborhood, and it will overwhelm the traffic in the neighborhood. Please decline this project and let us all live in peace.
February 16, 2024
at 6:47 PM
2-B-24-DP
Brody
37922
2-B-24-DP
Brody (37922), February 16, 2024 at 6:53 PM
I live across the street from this and if it’s approved, I won’t be able to ride my bike outside anymore. My brother and I play with our neighbor Max and this project will make it to where we can’t play. Please don’t approve this.
February 16, 2024
at 6:53 PM
2-B-24-DP
Corbin
37922
2-B-24-DP
Corbin (37922), February 16, 2024 at 6:55 PM
Please don’t approve this project. There will be too many cars for me and my brother to play outside safely.
February 16, 2024
at 6:55 PM
2-B-24-DP
Linda
37922
2-B-24-DP
Linda (37922), February 16, 2024 at 7:05 PM
My grandchild live directly across from the proposed condos that Ron Watkins wants to build. I am against this and do not want these condos built in any form or fashion. I fear for the safety of my grandchildren due to the increased amount of traffic as there are no sidewalks in the neighborhood. Please refuse his request to build these condos now and in the any future requests he may make.
February 16, 2024
at 7:05 PM
2-B-24-DP
Gavin
37922
2-B-24-DP
Gavin (37922), February 16, 2024 at 7:16 PM
I live directly across from the Ron Watkins proposed building project in Gettysvue and strongly opposed to it. This will increase traffic congestion and make it unsafe for residents and their kids and mine who use them because there are no sidewalks in the neighborhood. Please put yourself in our shoes and think if this was going to happen in your neighborhood to your family and friends by a builder that didn’t live in the neighborhood and all he cared about is the profit and not the wellbeing of the residents. Please vote NO and help your Knoxville neighbors keep Knoxville a great place to live. Thanks you for voting NO,
February 16, 2024
at 7:16 PM
2-B-24-DP
Chaochou
37922
2-B-24-DP
Chaochou (37922), February 17, 2024 at 4:25 AM
Please, No High rise Condo, it will look ugly in our nice community. Thanks!
February 17, 2024
at 4:25 AM
2-B-24-DP
Jane
37922
2-B-24-DP
Jane (37922), February 17, 2024 at 8:18 AM
I respectfully request denying this proposal to build high rise condominiums in our neighborhood. Our roads, amenities, drainage system, school system and overall safety of our community would be negatively impacted by this type of development. Thank you for your consideration.
February 17, 2024
at 8:18 AM
2-B-24-DP
tb
37922
2-B-24-DP
tb (37922), February 18, 2024 at 10:46 AM
See at
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240218104627.pdf
February 18, 2024
at 10:46 AM
2-B-24-DP
Rob
37922
2-B-24-DP
Rob (37922), February 19, 2024 at 8:08 AM
I oppose the Gettysvue Partners/Ron Watkins request for a Multi-dwelling development in Gettysvue. In 1999, a 60-unit multi-dwelling development was approved. In 2003, a new 19 attached house development was approved replacing the 1999 approval. In 2020, a 60-unit multi-dwelling development was proposed but the application was withdrawn. On 2/2/2024, the MPC Staff recommended denial of a proposed of a 40-unit multi-dwelling development in the middle of the Gettysvue development because it is not consistent with the developmental policies of the Knoxville-Knox County General Plan. As noted in the General Plan, the MPC Staff discourages abrupt, incompatible changes is the density, scale, & building appearance from one development to another. Each proposed structure of 4 stories (including the parking garage) is > 63,500 sq ft. This dwarfs the Gettysvue Club House of ~25,000 sq ft. The proposed structures are ~62-64' elevation which overshadows the maximum height of ~35' for the neighborhood homes. The form & fit of the proposed development are not consistent with the aesthetics & character of the neighborhood, a mature community of almost 30 years of age. Please deny this request.
February 19, 2024
at 8:08 AM
2-B-24-DP
Sue
37922
2-B-24-DP
Sue (37922), February 19, 2024 at 10:52 AM
See Attached
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240219105228.pdf
February 19, 2024
at 10:52 AM
2-B-24-DP
C
37922
2-B-24-DP
C (37922), February 19, 2024 at 12:34 PM
I am writing to strongly oppose construction of the so-called “GettysVue Villas.” Though called “Villas,” these buildings will resemble large apartment units, like the Crescent apartment development on the corner of Ebenezer Road and Westland Drive. Nowhere in Knox County can you find large apartment units in the heart of a neighborhood of single-family homes. At a maximum height of sixty-four feet above grade, these units will dwarf surrounding homes. Each residential lot in Gettysvue is limited to one single-family residence. High-rise condo buildings do not adhere to the architecture of our community’s homes! Besides the jarring visual violation of current building covenants, this development would have a negative impact on home values, the quality of life of current residents, and the quiet enjoyment of our homes. There are so many other reasons to reject this proposal: Increased traffic on already-heavily traveled roads, increased stormwater flow, and a lengthy and obstructive construction period are among those. This mammoth condo development is simply an attempt by a few greedy individuals to enrich themselves at the expense of hundreds of Knox County residents. Please join the GettysVue residents to oppose this ill-advised project.
February 19, 2024
at 12:34 PM
2-B-24-DP
J
37922
2-B-24-DP
J (37922), February 19, 2024 at 12:35 PM
I am writing to strongly oppose construction of the so-called “GettysVue Villas.” Though called “Villas,” these buildings will resemble large apartment units, like the Crescent apartment development on the corner of Ebenezer Road and Westland Drive. Nowhere in Knox County can you find large apartment units in the heart of a neighborhood of single-family homes. At a maximum height of sixty-four feet above grade, these units will dwarf surrounding homes. Each residential lot in Gettysvue is limited to one single-family residence. High-rise condo buildings do not adhere to the architecture of our community’s homes! Besides the jarring visual violation of current building covenants, this development would have a negative impact on home values, the quality of life of current residents, and the quiet enjoyment of our homes. There are so many other reasons to reject this proposal: Increased traffic on already-heavily traveled roads, increased stormwater flow, and a lengthy and obstructive construction period are among those. This mammoth condo development is simply an attempt by a few greedy individuals to enrich themselves at the expense of hundreds of Knox County residents. Please join the GettysVue residents to oppose this ill-advised project.
February 19, 2024
at 12:35 PM
2-B-24-DP
Daniel
37922
2-B-24-DP
Daniel (37922), February 19, 2024 at 12:49 PM
As a resident of Gettysvue, I am against the current proposed development plan. Once again, the proposed plan does not meet current zoning and or HOA covenants. The current zoning allows the owner of the property to develop several townhomes that would fit better in the neighborhood. The site nor neighborhood is conducive to the proposed plan.
February 19, 2024
at 12:49 PM
2-B-24-DP
Ann
Dr 37
2-B-24-DP
Ann (Dr 37), February 19, 2024 at 1:17 PM
The proposed high-rise condominium is incongruent with the residences of our Gettysvue community in size, design, and site layout. The PR Zone district approved for a maximum of 3du/ac; this project would be 10.25du/ac, and its 4 stories would tower above every other home in the neighborhood. We built in this neighborhood, trusting that the Gettysvue Covenants would be upheld. Please deny this incompatible project. Thank you for your attention.
February 19, 2024
at 1:17 PM
2-B-24-DP
L
37922
2-B-24-DP
L (37922), February 19, 2024 at 2:32 PM
Please deny the most recent request of the developer for this multi unit project. The new proposal is not compatible with the Gettysvue subdivision. These proposed buildings are not at all in scale with the current single family homes and would reduce home values significantly. The increase in residents would create too much traffic and make it dangerous for residents to walk in the neighborhood. This project is in the middle of the neighborhood, and the height of the buildings compared to the single family homes is exponential.
February 19, 2024
at 2:32 PM
2-B-24-DP
lora
37922
2-B-24-DP
lora (37922), February 19, 2024 at 6:59 PM
I am writing in opposition to the proposal. The huge development will temporarily line the pockets of a minimal few to the detriment to an entire neighborhood. This is 10 units as opposed to the 2-3 in the restrictions. The community built it bought homes to be part of a safe outdoor community, not an establishment that belongs in the city. Please do not allow overdevelopment to undermine a beautiful community that keeps people wanting to move here. Please help keep this beautiful!
February 19, 2024
at 6:59 PM
2-B-24-DP
Michael
37922
2-B-24-DP
Michael (37922), February 19, 2024 at 7:04 PM
I again provide that the planned development is not consistent with the community, will be burdensome to the environment and will not add the value ascribed by developer to either home values or the golf course. A smaller, less conspicuous development would and I view that as more appropriate. I wish the developer would offer a more prcatical solution, one the community can embrance.
February 19, 2024
at 7:04 PM
2-B-24-DP
Madhu
37922
2-B-24-DP
Madhu (37922), February 19, 2024 at 7:15 PM
First, thank you all for serving in the City Planning Commission. It is because of your vigilance and dedicated work that most of the neighborhoods of Knoxville have been safe and been able to maintain their character. Thank you, again. I am writing to express my opposition to the high-rise condominiums that are being proposed to be built in Gettysvue subdivision. I am requesting that you again vote “NO” to this construction in your upcoming March 7th meeting. Other than the safety issues related to the increased traffic in already saturated neighborhood, I present to you two points that should be included in your deliberations:
1. The proposed development is not compatible with neighboring homes in scale, design, and site layout. The sheer height of the two buildings surrounded by much lower height single family homes will be nothing but an eyesore and plummet the values of these homes.
2. The PR Zone district is approved for a maximum of 3 du/ac. The density of the proposed development is 10.25 for the subject property. The calculation for gross density to justify this construction is not appropriate for the subject property. The 125.8 acres of Gettysvue subdivision includes an 18-hole golf course where no homes are allowed nor even encroach on the golf course property.
I am hoping the MPC will put an end to this project once and for all.
February 19, 2024
at 7:15 PM
2-B-24-DP
Kevin
37922
2-B-24-DP
Kevin (37922), February 19, 2024 at 8:34 PM
With the minor changes to the design submitted recently, this proposal is still completely inappropriate for the Gettysvue neighborhood. The location of the site in the middle of Gettysvue which has only one main road and no sidewalks will create serious access, traffic, and safety issues. The proposed building design, size, density, and location are incompatible with the existing homes.
February 19, 2024
at 8:34 PM
2-B-24-DP
Kenneth
37922
2-B-24-DP
Kenneth (37922), February 19, 2024 at 9:01 PM
As a Gettysvue resident I oppose of this project primarly because it will negatively impact property values of existing single residences but also add an unsightly mismatched building which disturbs real estate tranquility. Also, Development Policy 11.7 relates to height and setback restrictions. The sheer height of the two buildings will block sunlight and cast shadows on contiguous homes. No homes existed in this phase of Gettysvue when the developer suggested such development in 1999. The developer is recommending minor changes from his original submittal, however, very minor. Furthermore, the changes do nothing for him to adhere to the staff’s recommendations.
February 19, 2024
at 9:01 PM
2-B-24-DP
Rhonda and John
7922
2-B-24-DP
Rhonda and John (7922), February 19, 2024 at 9:51 PM
We are opposed to the planned high-rise development for these reason. The proposed development policy 8.1 indicates that such development be compatible with neighboring homes in scale, design, and site layout. The proposed development fails to meet any of these criteria. The multifamily four-story buildings are out of character with the neighborhood The infrastructure (sewer system, narrow roads and parking lot for the clubhouse) is insufficient to handle additional households. There is already. sewer back up when it there is heavy rain.Development Policy 11.5 indicates such development discourages abrupt, incompatible changes in density, scale and building appearance from one development to another. Gettysvue is 95% built out with single family residences. The proposed development violates all the conditions of DP 11.5 The sheer height of the two buildings will block sunlight and cast shadows on contiguous homes. No homes existed in this phase of Gettysvue when the developer suggested such development in 1999.
February 19, 2024
at 9:51 PM
2-B-24-DP
Carolyn
37922
2-B-24-DP
Carolyn (37922), February 20, 2024 at 5:38 AM
We have lived in Gettysvue for the past 25 years. It’s a beautiful area and a wonderful place to live. We have enjoyed and appreciated all the amenities and benefits the community has offered. We don’t oppose the development of the area. We just ask that what is built be consistent with existing homes in the neighborhood. Residents have stated their reasons for opposition. We are especially concerned about the traffic and safety of residents. We respectfully request that the proposed villa development be denied. Thank you.
February 20, 2024
at 5:38 AM
2-B-24-DP
Samantha
37922
2-B-24-DP
Samantha (37922), February 20, 2024 at 7:42 AM
I strongly oppose this proposal- it will take a beautiful, well-established and well-regarded neighborhood and make it over-run, cheapen it, and change the fabric of the neighborhood. I have family in the neighborhood and visit all the time- the neighborhood is already busy and parking is already flooding the streets every time there is an event, a swim-meet, and the clubhouse facilities are routinely overloaded already. It is questionable whether these would even sell (especially with so many and who they would appeal to), but if they do, it will only cheapen and overload the neighborhood. Nothing in the developer’s plan changes fixes any of these things. It will be an eyesore and the complete opposite of what many people likely expected when spending a million dollars or more on their homes. Gettysvue has always been a dream neighborhood to me- the type of established, high-class neighborhood that you strive for- and putting in these condos will ruin that completely and the minor changes they proposed don’t fix any of this!
February 20, 2024
at 7:42 AM
2-B-24-DP
Kim
37922
2-B-24-DP
Kim (37922), February 20, 2024 at 8:33 AM
This proposed development does not meet the neighborhood scale and design. The neighborhood streets, exits and entrances will not easily accommodate the new owner traffic or construction traffic. Also, being built in the middle of the neighborhood is just an eyesore. Gettysvue owners have invested millions in their homes and we deserve to maintain the neighborhood we bought into.
February 20, 2024
at 8:33 AM
2-B-24-DP
J
37922
2-B-24-DP
J (37922), February 20, 2024 at 1:48 PM
The revised plan submitted by Mr. Watkins, in terms of scale, height, design, density and site layout is still incompatible with the neighboring residences and not consistent with the development policies of the Knoxville-Knox County General Plan as the staff recommended.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240220134805.pdf
February 20, 2024
at 1:48 PM
2-B-24-DP
A R
37922
2-B-24-DP
A R (37922), February 21, 2024 at 9:51 AM
I oppose the Proposed Multi-Dwelling structures in Gettysvue. Safety is a primary concern. Gettysvue has no sidewalks & children/residents walk through the development on the streets. The most intense vehicle traffic is located in/around the Club House. Children/residents have golf lessons/practice on the chipping green across the street from the proposed dwellings. Likewise, the tennis courts, adjacent to the proposed dwellings, are used for lessons/practice/tennis matches. The nearby swimming pool is a summer focal point for recreation/practice/swim meets. During swim meets, the available Gettysvue parking spaces are overwhelmed with vehicle parking overflowing to streets around the Club House. In this congested area, 40 multi-dwelling residences will jeopardize the safety of the neighborhood children/residents & exacerbate the vehicle traffic in the most congested & heavily utilized part of the development. Gettysvue is an almost 30 year old, mostly built-out development of predominately single family homes which have adhered to Restrictive Covenants drafted in 5/1995. The Restrictive Covenants are an important element of ensuring the safety of the neighborhood & mandate single family homes. Multi-dwelling residences in the middle of the neighborhood adjacent to recreational activities jeopardize the safety of Gettysvue. Please deny, once again, the Watkins/Gettysvue Partners proposal.
February 21, 2024
at 9:51 AM
2-B-24-DP
Mary
37922
2-B-24-DP
Mary (37922), February 21, 2024 at 12:18 PM
I would like to continue my support of the opposition of the above development. The proposed units are not compatible with the scale, design or layout of the existing 20–30-year-old neighborhood. Some individual zero-lot line houses or townhouses added to that area would be consistent with the design of the existing homes and would not impede sunlight, or views of the golf course or surrounding greenery. Thanks for your time and consideration in considering the homeowners concerns.
February 21, 2024
at 12:18 PM
2-B-24-DP
James
37922
2-B-24-DP
James (37922), February 21, 2024 at 7:37 PM
The following is a major point to deny the new highrise. Development Policy 11.5 indicates such development discourages abrupt, incompatible changes in density, scale and building appearance from one development to another. Gettysvue is 95% built out with single family residences. The proposed development violates all the conditions of DP 11.5.
February 21, 2024
at 7:37 PM
2-B-24-DP
M
37922
2-B-24-DP
M (37922), February 23, 2024 at 9:13 AM
I write in opposition to the project:General Plan Development PolicyA) The proposed development policy 8.1 indicates that such development be compatible with neighboring homes in scale, design, and site layout. The proposed development fails to meet any of these criteria.
B) The proposed development policy 8.3 indicates that such development be in line with existing neighborhood compatibility. Clearly the proposed development is not.
C) Development Policy 11.5 indicates such development discourages abrupt, incompatible changes in density, scale and building appearance from one development to another. Gettysvue is 95% built out with single family residences. The proposed development violates all the conditions of DP 11.5.
D) Development Policy 11.7 relates to height and setback restrictions. The sheer height of the two buildings will block sunlight and cast shadows on contiguous homes. No homes existed in this phase of Gettysvue when the developer suggested such development in 1999. The developer is recommending minor changes from his original submittal, however, very minor. Furthermore, the changes do nothing to adhere to the staff’s recommendations. In Section D, the staff comment, “usually located near the fringe of the development” supports our opposition. The proposed development is the middle of Gettysvue where sidewalks do not exist. And one street (Gettysvue Drive) serves as the point of ingress/egress.
February 23, 2024
at 9:13 AM
2-B-24-DP
John
37922
2-B-24-DP
John (37922), February 23, 2024 at 3:24 PM
My wife and I have owned a house in Gettysvue Subdivision for 22 years. We are strongly opposed to the subject proposal. Four story high rise condominiums do not belong in a subdivision of single family houses, they do not adhere to the architecture and beauty of our community. It is for this reason that we all signed onto covenants that restrict us to single-family residences. Density- exceeds maximum density zoning for community originally 1 to 3 units per acre. The proposal will dramatically increase traffic and storm water flow to areas already experiencing flooding. Please again recommend denial for this proposal. Thank you.
February 23, 2024
at 3:24 PM
2-B-24-DP
David W
37922
2-B-24-DP
David W (37922), February 24, 2024 at 4:55 PM
Proposal continues to not meet fit and form of original neighborhood. Proposal has only minor modifications since last rendering which was rejected. Please discourage this applicant as they hope to wear down the opposition in hopes you will eventually grant his request.
February 24, 2024
at 4:55 PM
2-B-24-DP
Teresa
37922
2-B-24-DP
Teresa (37922), February 24, 2024 at 10:35 PM
I have lived here in Gettysvue since 2015 and the building of the luxury apartments on Ebenezer and on Emory Church Rd the traffic has increased greatly. My grandkids attend A.L. Lotts and the traffic and congestion on Westland drive during drop off and pick up has become very dangerous for everyone. I often wonder why this has been overlooked. The infrastructure in this area needs to be addressed for the safety of all living here or traveling these roads. It has become near impossible to turn left out of the subdivision because of traffic. Adding a multi-unit complex in Gettysvue or anywhere else in this area is only going to make matters worse and more dangerous. As a concerned resident and realtor, I beg for this request to build a multi- unit complex in Gettysvue Subdivision be denied.
February 24, 2024
at 10:35 PM
2-B-24-DP
Beth
37922
2-B-24-DP
Beth (37922), February 25, 2024 at 7:39 PM
I respectfully and humbly ask the MPC to yet again vote "NO" to this planning proposal in Gettysvue Subdivision. This proposal violates many elements of the current zoning for this neighborhood. As you already are aware, this proposal is for large-scale, high-rise, multi-dwelling units that are of absurd size and scale. The continued efforts of this builder and his associates are wasting the MPC's time as it is in complete violation of code. Please vote "NO" to this proposal and please recognize that the changes proposed do not change the violations and, in fact, cause more offensive esthetics to the neighborhood rendering. Please help us stop this absurdity. The PR Zone district is approved for a maximum of 3 du/ac. The density of the proposed development is 10.25 for the subject property. The calculation for gross density is not appropriate for the subject property. The 125.8 acres includes an 18 hole golf course where no homes are allowed nor even encroach on the golf course property.
February 25, 2024
at 7:39 PM
2-B-24-DP
Beth
7922
2-B-24-DP
Beth (7922), February 25, 2024 at 7:55 PM
I respectfully ask that you vote "NO" to this proposed development based on the multiple violations to the current zoning code. This is a well-established neighborhood and has been for decades and the proposal to build 90-foot high multi-dwellings is simply ludicrous. The residents of Gettysvue would not oppose a rational proposal for single family residences that are congruent with the current neighborhood structure and zoning criteria, but this proposal is egregious, offensive, and disrespectful to all the residents who have worked and paid for Gettysvue to be a beautiful and successful neighborhood and golf community. This proposal would, effectively and undoubtedly, destroy it all. Development Policy 11.5 indicates such development discourages abrupt, incompatible changes in density, scale and building appearance from one development to another. Gettysvue is 95% built out with single family residences. The proposed development violates all the conditions of DP 11.5.
February 25, 2024
at 7:55 PM
2-B-24-DP
Beth
37922
2-B-24-DP
Beth (37922), February 25, 2024 at 7:59 PM
Development Policy 11.7 relates to height and setback restrictions. The sheer height of the two buildings will block sunlight and cast shadows on contiguous homes. No homes existed in this phase of Gettysvue when the developer suggested such development in 1999. The developer is recommending minor changes from his original submittal, however, very minor. Furthermore, the changes do nothing for him to adhere to the staff’s recommendations. In Section D, the staff comment, “usually located near the fringe of the development” supports our opposition. The proposed development is the middle of Gettysvue where sidewalks do not exist. And one street (Gettysvue Drive) serves as the point of ingress/egress. Finally, the developer has changed the orientation of Building One from his November submittal to rotate it 180 degrees. The view you will see is the west side of the monstrous building with the entrance and exit to the parking garage facing Gettysvue Drive. We respectfully ask that the MPC vote "NO" to this proposal.
February 25, 2024
at 7:59 PM
2-B-24-DP
Barry
37922
2-B-24-DP
Barry (37922), February 25, 2024 at 8:09 PM
As a resident of Gettysvue Community, I ask for your denial of the proposed high rise multi family residential structures. Our development consists of established single family dwellings. The PR zoning is approved for 3 units / acre. These multi family apartments would have a gross density of 10.25/acre and should not be appropriate for the rest of our homesteads. Please do not allow this monstrosity to diminish our home values! Our homes represent a large part of our net worth and this huge building complex in the middle of our community will have a strong negative impact. These would be the largest structures and overshadow our homes and even our beautiful Golf Clubhouse. These apartments are not compatible with the neighborhood.
February 25, 2024
at 8:09 PM
2-B-24-DP
Beth
37922
2-B-24-DP
Beth (37922), February 26, 2024 at 7:33 AM
I respectfully ask that you take just a moment to look up a picture of the Orford Castle in Orford, Suffolk in England. This 90-foot tall structure was built in a small village. One look at a picture of this old structure on the green rolling landscape will give you a nice visual of what this proposal will do its surroundings. Imagine being a year from paying off your home, the home you want to retire and enjoy grandchildren in, and seeing a behemoth like this being erected outside your window, blocking all views and even the morning sun. Please vote "NO" to this proposition. It not only violates zoning codes, but it is unconscionable to do this in the middle of an established neighborhood. This was never the plan, and for logical reasons.
February 26, 2024
at 7:33 AM
2-B-24-DP
Barry
37922
2-B-24-DP
Barry (37922), February 26, 2024 at 8:26 AM
I bought my home in Gettysvue in 2010. This was new construction in an affluent neighborhood. There existed restrictions and development policies which I assumed would protect my investment. The proposed “villas” are massive structures, multiple to times larger than any residences and the central feature of the community ( the clubhouse). “Villas” according to definition are one or two story elaborate houses with exquisite amenities ( private pool, fences, landscaped gardens). These massive multi family buildings overshadow all other construction in the neighborhood, creating an eyesore. There is only one road to access the complex and multiple families have to drive past this massive structure to ingress/egress their homes. These structures will totally block beautiful Mountain View’s from the clubhouse and replace the view with brick and shingles. Villas, 1-2 story individual, architectural masterpieces would be beautiful but the developers want 90-100 feet high buildings with massive retaining walls producing a mammoth eyesore for our beautiful neighborhood. PLEASE do not allow this!!
February 26, 2024
at 8:26 AM
2-B-24-DP
Alofa
37922
2-B-24-DP
Alofa (37922), February 26, 2024 at 10:13 AM
We respectfully ask that the MPC vote "NO" to this proposal. My husband and I strongly oppose this development, which would be located directly across the street from our home.
February 26, 2024
at 10:13 AM
2-B-24-DP
Kathy
37922
2-B-24-DP
Kathy (37922), February 26, 2024 at 10:44 AM
Please do not approve this huge apartment style building to be built in the middle of our neighborhood. It would literally be across the street or next to single family homes who have strictly abided by the restrictions of this neighborhood. This type of structure would not be in any way appropriate in any neighborhood in Knox County.
February 26, 2024
at 10:44 AM
2-B-24-DP
Roger
37922
2-B-24-DP
Roger (37922), February 26, 2024 at 11:25 AM
I wish to object to the developers request to increase the PR density from 3 units per acre to 10.25 for a total of 40 units on the property he owns. 3+ acres. This looks like an attempt to wear out opposition by repeated meetings with no real changes. Based on the staff recommendations. The project is still very unlike the surrounding home in design and height. The feverish located in the center of the subdivision, with no chance of gradual transition. There is no way being offered to disguise the necessary dumpsters at the front of the property as it connects to Gettysvue Dr. the main road. The added foot traffic, pet traffic and personal automobile and especially service vehicles will all use Gettysvue Dr since there are no sidewalks. This is poor plan as the staff has pointed out, and I think they got it right. Please deny the developers request and leave the density at 3/aces with buildings that will blend with those already in the subdivision.
February 26, 2024
at 11:25 AM
2-B-24-DP
Sa
37922
2-B-24-DP
Sa (37922), February 26, 2024 at 1:40 PM
The revised proposal does not conform to the staff recommendations. It is not consistent with the development policies of the Knoxville-Knox County General Plan since the scale, height, design, density and site layout are still incompatible with the neighboring residences. The developer attempts to wear out the opposition by repeated meetings with no real changes that should be compatible with the neighboring residences.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20240226134025.pdf
February 26, 2024
at 1:40 PM
2-B-24-DP
Jan
37922
2-B-24-DP
Jan (37922), February 26, 2024 at 4:10 PM
Please deny the request for the apartment-like dwelling in Gettysvue. Mr Watkins wants to construct two monstrous buildings in the heart of our subdivision that consists of mainly single-family homes. His proposal does not even come close to meeting the fit and form of existing homes; some of which have been here for over 25 years. Mr. Watkins has revised his original plan with only a few minor changes. Changing the entrance to the garage for one building means nothing! His project is still an eyesore to an already established community of single-family homes. Every homeowner in Gettysvue has to abide by the covenants and restrictions Mr Watkins established a long time ago. It’s only fair that Mr Watkins follow the same set of rules. Thank you for your consideration.
February 26, 2024
at 4:10 PM
2-B-24-DP
Yar
37922
2-B-24-DP
Yar (37922), February 27, 2024 at 7:58 PM
I strongly oppose this move to build apartments complex in a quiet residential neighborhood, it will not only increase unwanted traffic along with decrease the value of property.that is unfair. Gattysvue is such nice beautiful subdivision, it doesn’t need such kind of Punishment. Thanks for your time. SH
February 27, 2024
at 7:58 PM
2-B-24-DP
Dale
37922
2-B-24-DP
Dale (37922), February 28, 2024 at 1:53 PM
1 -PR Zone district is approved for maximum of 3 du/ac. Density of proposed development is 10.25 for subject property, not appropriate. The 125.8 acres includes 18 hole golf course where no homes are allowed 2 - General Plan Development A) policy 8.1 indicates such development be compatible with neighboring homes in scale, design, and site layout. Proposed development fails to meet any of these criteria. B) Policy 8.3 indicates development be in line with existing neighborhood compatibility. Clearly proposed development is not. C)Policy 11.5 indicates development discourages abrupt, incompatible changes in density, scale and building appearance from one development to another. Gettysvue is 95% built out with single family residences. Proposed development violates all conditions of DP 11.5. D) Development Policy 11.7 relates to height and setback restrictions. Sheer height of two buildings will block sunlight and cast shadows on contiguous homes. No homes existed in this phase of Gettysvue when the developer suggested such development in 1999. Developer is recommending minor changes from his original submittal. Changes do nothing to adhere to staff’s recommendations. In Section D, the staff comment, “usually located near the fringe of the development” supports our opposition. Proposed development is middle of Gettysvue
February 28, 2024
at 1:53 PM
8-B-23-OA
Tricia
37917
8-B-23-OA
Tricia (37917), March 4, 2024 at 9:46 AM
I support this amendment and I support an expansion of the amendment to include consideration of other zones as well. Emphasis on aspects of zoning revisions like this have a record of supporting pedestrian districts and walkable neighborhoods and should be considered crucial to the success of infill neighborhood housing that can rely on mobility and access to commercial needs without relying on single-occupancy vehicle transit alone.
March 4, 2024
at 9:46 AM
7-SE-24-C
Ryan
37931
7-SE-24-C
Ryan (37931), June 21, 2024 at 9:29 PM
Byington Beaver Ridge Rd is a narrow 2 lane State Route and last year saw an average daily traffic count of 9,630 cars. It's 35 mph posted limit is routinely disregarded substantially and has been the host of multiple fatal traffic accidents. You will show NO DUE REGARD to the safety of current residents if you shoehorn 21 additional lots into a backyard and call it a subdivision. There is no infrastructure to support such lunacy. The proposal should be laughed out of the room. The lot has VERY little road frontage (just barely 200'), and it would be an engineering marvel to add the required access road to feed a new subdivision of 21 additional lots where there is just barely room for one driveway. Because of old growth trees, typical to the original home construction, traffic visibility is poor and would be a recipe for disastrously bad crashes. The current utilities are NOT adequate, as there are constant outages and repairs on the water mains which are stressed by capacity and age. The developer has turned this formerly beautiful lot into an eyesore and a landfill, growing a bumper crop of old appliances, garbage, and construction debris for almost 2 years now. Please don't allow developer greed to rule this decision, please take into account the safety of the current residents on this road. Please make the right choice and deny this proposal.
June 21, 2024
at 9:29 PM
7-C-24-DP
Ryan
37931
7-C-24-DP
Ryan (37931), June 21, 2024 at 9:31 PM
Byington Beaver Ridge Rd is a narrow 2 lane State Route and last year saw an average daily traffic count of 9,630 cars. It's 35 mph posted limit is routinely disregarded substantially and has been the host of multiple fatal traffic accidents. You will show NO DUE REGARD to the safety of current residents if you shoehorn 21 additional lots into a backyard and call it a subdivision. There is no infrastructure to support such lunacy. The proposal should be laughed out of the room. The lot has VERY little road frontage (just barely 200'), and it would be an engineering marvel to add the required access road to feed a new subdivision of 21 additional lots where there is just barely room for one driveway. Because of old growth trees, typical to the original home construction, traffic visibility is poor and would be a recipe for disastrously bad crashes. The current utilities are NOT adequate, as there are constant outages and repairs on the water mains which are stressed by capacity and age. The developer has turned this formerly beautiful lot into an eyesore and a landfill, growing a bumper crop of old appliances, garbage, and construction debris for almost 2 years now. Please don't allow developer greed to rule this decision, please take into account the safety of the current residents on this road. Please make the right choice and deny this proposal.
June 21, 2024
at 9:31 PM
7-SE-24-C
John
37931
7-SE-24-C
John (37931), July 1, 2024 at 4:58 PM
To build anything on this poor road will be insane. Traffic behavior well exceeds the 35 mph speed zone.....cars and trucks are lined up at least a half mile from the RR tunnel in the afternoon time slot There have been multiple fatal accidents in the 14 years I have lived here. To enter or leave the intersection of Hodge Rd. is almost impossible in the early and evening drive time hours. To build an entrance for this subdivision on this property where there is already an existing home having the front next to the main road is the most ridiculous idea I have ever witnessed. Please for the sake of taxpayers and residents of this area that call it home, please deny this application and tell the developers to take their money elsewhere !
July 1, 2024
at 4:58 PM
2-B-24-DP
Ramanujan
37922
2-B-24-DP
Ramanujan (37922), July 21, 2024 at 5:15 PM
Mr. Benjamin Mullins on behalf of Mr. Ron Watkins is applying for development of a multi residential high rise condo in a single home residential community that we have called home for 15y. At the time of purchase our lot had restriction which forbade development of multi home residences. This was the attraction and reassurance to us that the neighborhood character will remain the same. Mr. Mullins and Watkins now want to change this and develop a high rise building which is not keeping with the appearance and ambience of the neighborhood. It will increase the traffic in Westland Drive, overcrowd the local schools, depress the value of the homes in the neighborhood and is not in keeping with the current county plans for land use in this area. It is opposed by the vast majority of residents of the Gettysvue Community and by the Home Owners Association. I strongly oppose this as a property owner and a member of the community. Mr. Mullins is submitting this for the third time, hoping a different board will approve it. It has been and still is a poor plan with very little benefit to the community and many downside to the members of the community, city and the county. I hope you will once again deny it, like the previous two times.
July 21, 2024
at 5:15 PM
7-SE-24-C
Cynthia
37931
7-SE-24-C
Cynthia (37931), August 9, 2024 at 8:08 PM
The posted speed limit on Byington Beaver Ridge Road is 35, but 45-50 is normal. Pulling out onto this road is dangerous enough for the existing residents on this section of road, but to add 18 homes (which according to the estimated daily traffic impact is 219 trips Mon-Fri only) using one entrance/exit to do it is reckless. There have been multiple deaths on this road, not to mention wrecks without fatal injury in recent years. Slowing down to pull into your driveway is dangerous, and you risk your life every time you pull out. People either speed and don't pay attention or sit in stand-still traffic due to the backup from the underpass. The water main has broken twice in the 4 years we have lived here, and the additional strain of 18 new homes? A recipe for disaster. With any heavy rain, there is standing water on the road directly in front of the property. Also, adding a road that crosses a natural drainage path behind the existing house (and multiple existing houses on that side of the street) poses a serious concern. They have conveniently tidied up the property before each of the hearings before the planning commission, but during the drawn out year and a half renovation to the existing home, the property has been an eyesore and a complete disaster. I cannot imagine how they will manage the construction of 18 new homes and the chaos that will bring for many years to come. The location of this project is a tremendously bad idea.
August 9, 2024
at 8:08 PM
8-E-23-OA
Kevin
37918
8-E-23-OA
Kevin (37918), November 11, 2024 at 7:41 AM
Regarding the buffer yard for non-residential use that abuts a residential district, this applies when let's say:

Condos are built in a C-1 district that abuts an R-1 district. Or an apartment complex is built next to a house. Note that if it's a multi-family dwelling, there's still a requirement to put in a Class A buffer for the multifamily parking lot if it's abutting RN-1/2/3 or EN residential districts (this is still part of 12-2.)

For example: when a 3 or 4 story apartment complex is built next to my single family residence, I'd really like there to be a buffer yard so the upper floor apartments don't look down into my yard. So maybe the suggestion is to make it:

Nonresidential use in a nonresidential district 3 or more stories in height abuts a residential district - Class B buffer required
November 11, 2024
at 7:41 AM
8-E-23-OA
Sandra
37914
8-E-23-OA
Sandra (37914), November 13, 2024 at 3:51 PM
The proposal to reduce landscape buffers threatens one of the most sacred benefits of single-family residential; PRIVACY.

Buffers do more than filter noise, provide ecological benefits, and soften appearance. Buffers provide privacy to the backyard of a homeowner who wishes to relax in their backyard, maybe some grilling, maybe a swimming pool, maybe just hanging out. Who is comfortable with the windows of an adjacent building looking down on them? Or balconies? How do you know if your every move is being watched?
November 13, 2024
at 3:51 PM
8-E-23-OA
Joyce
37919
8-E-23-OA
Joyce (37919), November 14, 2024 at 4:30 PM
Please see the attached statement.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20241114163045.pdf
November 14, 2024
at 4:30 PM
12-A-24-PD
Janice
37914
12-A-24-PD
Janice (37914), December 20, 2024 at 4:16 PM
I thought about telling you how bad the traffic is and lack of respect for the traffic laws are in this area, and the noise from it and what an additional 1500+ cars and trucks along with more construction vehicles would do to the already inadequate roads we have, by the building of 596 apartments and 77 town houses on Delrose Dr. I was in hopes the 15 members would care enough to come and observe the area from James White Parkway to Delrose Dr and down to Holston Hills and Boyds Bridge Pike intersection and talk with the residents here. Come at different times of the day and different days. This way you could make a truly informed decision and not rely on "experts" giving their opinions of surveys that don't tell everything. There is a lot to tell, if you care to ask.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20241220161606.pdf
December 20, 2024
at 4:16 PM
12-A-24-PD
Janice
37914
12-A-24-PD
Janice (37914), December 20, 2024 at 4:23 PM
I thought about telling you how bad the traffic is and lack of respect for the traffic laws are in this area, and the noise from it and what an additional 1500+ cars and trucks along with more construction vehicles would do to the already inadequate roads we have, by the building of 596 apartments and 77 town houses on Delrose Dr. I was in hopes the 15 members would care enough to come and observe the area from James White Parkway to Delrose Dr and down to Holston Hills and Boyds Bridge Pike intersection and talk with the residents here. Come at different times of the day and different days. This way you could make a truly informed decision and not rely on "experts" giving their opinions of surveys that don't tell everything. There is a lot to tell, if you care to ask. Thank you respectfully,
December 20, 2024
at 4:23 PM
12-A-24-PD
Tracy
37189
12-A-24-PD
Tracy (37189), January 8, 2025 at 6:22 PM
Please see attached statement. Thanks.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250108182209.pdf
January 8, 2025
at 6:22 PM
12-A-24-PD
Robert
37914
12-A-24-PD
Robert (37914), January 14, 2025 at 12:14 PM
An added issue regarding the proposed Delrose development and the growing traffic problem on Delrose Drive, which this development will present, is the existing new added development now being constructed on Holston Road across Holston River Park. The traffic from this large addition to an existing development will also dump on to Delrose Drive either from Boyd’s Bridge Road or from a very curvy River Side Drive along the Holston River. The access from this development will probably be mostly from the safer direction of Boyd’s Bridge Road on to Delrose Drive. This traffic will then merge into the traffic from the Delrose Development primary entrance making a very large problem for a two lane road. These types of developments now being proposed within residential areas and not more vacant commercial and industrial areas, as we see now being developed, are going to present a major change in these historically single family neighborhoods. Safety within these neighborhoods I believe is being greatly affected and will be an ongoing threat to many Knoxville families.
January 14, 2025
at 12:14 PM
12-A-24-PD
Christina
37914
12-A-24-PD
Christina (37914), January 15, 2025 at 7:21 PM
I live in Holston Hills Neighborhood. This development is going to pour too many people into our cherished historical community. From Delrose there are 2 ways to the interstate, one being through our neighborhood. There is 1 way to the nearest grocery store, through our neighborhood. The traffic we have now is more than enough. Has there been any consideration to creating a different way to access Asheville hwy? Has any research been done to see how this development affects the neighborhoods? As it stands now Delrose is too small and curvy to support the vehicles on it much less the bicyclers, walkers, and occasional stray pet or animal being dodged by people driving too fast or dump trucks that cannot see clearly. I drive this road to and from work downtown several times a week. It is NOT a high traffic road. I have heard that the developers think so many residents are going to be biking, which is funny, but is the city planning to put in a fully enforced bike lane? And if so where? Ditches and houses all around. Are stop signs and red lights going in? How are the parks on Riverside headed downtown going to be impacted? Foot and bike traffic safety is swim at your own risk currently. Thank you for your time with my concerns!
January 15, 2025
at 7:21 PM
12-A-24-PD
Robert
14
12-A-24-PD
Robert (14), January 16, 2025 at 10:01 AM
After further study of this proposed development, I now believe that the traffic issue is not the most critical issue regarding the successful approval of not just a variance, but the entire development. Within this proposal there is an alternative proposal shown which, in my opinion, serves to actually threaten an adverse affect that the neighborhood in which this development is located will experience if the variance they seek is not approved. This alternative proposal is a terrible “Military barracks” looking plan that would do a lot of harm to this neighborhood’s ability to continue as a livable environment and greatly affect the value of their properties. This threat now creates, I believe, a mistrust not only within the affected neighborhood, but also a mistrust of the overall process of any planning in this city. When a process is allowed to threaten the people it serves in order to achieve their goals rather than serving the citizenry, then it’s mission of service to the community becomes questionable.
January 16, 2025
at 10:01 AM
2-SA-25-C
Andy
37918
2-SA-25-C
Andy (37918), January 19, 2025 at 4:25 PM
As a resident of phase 2, I have no problem with this proposal if the housing covenants are equivalent to Phase 2. Any structures built need to have side entry garages. I've been a victim of bad drivers who back out of their driveways into oncoming traffic. You also need to consider maintaining a public access corridor so hikers and walkers don't lose access to beverly park.
January 19, 2025
at 4:25 PM
12-A-24-PD
Peggy
37914
12-A-24-PD
Peggy (37914), January 22, 2025 at 11:39 AM
Please see attached pdf
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250122113928.pdf
January 22, 2025
at 11:39 AM
2-SA-25-C
Joshua
37918
2-SA-25-C
Joshua (37918), January 27, 2025 at 10:14 AM
It’s a bad idea that is dangerous. I live in the 3rd house after the hill in the new phase and personally witness how fast folks drive up and down that hill between the phases. It’s a “double blind” hill and curve because not only is it so steep that you cannot see what’s ahead, but it also curves so you can’t see when cars are coming around. People have to accelerate to get up and drastically slow down when exiting so not a good area for driveways. If those houses are built there will be vehicles slowing down and stopping to pull into their driveways which is going to cause accidents. God forbid if someone wants to back into their driveway or try and back a boat, trailer or camper in and has to spend a little time on the road maneuvering. There is a reason that area has never been built on and it’s for safety. My job professionally is risk prevention which entails identifying and resolving so I see it from that standpoint as well and not just a neighbor. We have complained to the HOA numerous times about the speed in which folks come off that hill and dozens of others have complained in our neighborhood Facebook page also. Please reject this silly proposal and help us prevent accidents. Come look for yourself and imagine trying to back a trailer into one of those proposed properties.
January 27, 2025
at 10:14 AM
12-A-24-PD
Jennifer
37914
12-A-24-PD
Jennifer (37914), January 27, 2025 at 5:53 PM
I am really concerned about the project. Estimates about traffic indicate two times what we have now which I don’t believe. If true with two times the amount of traffic comes two times the amount of polluting emissions that come with the vehicles. Aside from the impact on the wonderful wildlife that comes through the area, it impacts our air quality. We already have to deal with Vulcan Materials’ cement dust especially since they moved their blasting area closer to the road but also the dump on the other end of Delrose that apparently cannot keep mud off the road. When that mud dries god knows what’s in the dust. Our natural filters ,the trees, will be cut down. East Knoxville has always been a dumping ground for whatever Knoxville does not want in other parts of the city/county. Please consider our quality of life in this project.
January 27, 2025
at 5:53 PM
2-SA-25-C
Sally
37918
2-SA-25-C
Sally (37918), January 28, 2025 at 2:45 PM
I have lived in the Mont Richer neighborhood for 22 years. The building has been going on before 2002 when we built our house and has continued all of these years. Mont Richer is full!! The subdivision has one entrance. All of the traffic must enter from and exit onto Tazewell Pike. Cars pulling into and out of driveways on the proposed area of Mont Richer Ave will create a hazard for that stretch of road. We have a lot of children, walkers, joggers, etc. who will be affected by the increased traffic in that short section of road. The developer and realtors have always said that there would never be building between phase one and phase two of Mont Richer. That wooded area in question is where wildlife lives and is aesthetically appreciated by the neighborhood. Please consider the quality of life of the residents of Mont Richer subdivision when you make your decision concerning this proposal. Thank you.
January 28, 2025
at 2:45 PM
12-A-24-PD
Mark
37914
12-A-24-PD
Mark (37914), January 28, 2025 at 6:02 PM
My wife and I attended the Delrose Drive community meeting last night at Williams Creek Golf Course with the developers of the large proposed apartment complex now being considered in this neighborhood. The message we heard from the Delrose community residents was that the proposed development was much too large for their environment. It seemed to us that the development team was not willing to offer any reduction of the project, and was absolutely resistant to any compromise that might make the residents more comfortable with their actions, The question that arises is....why is it that developers, especially out of town developers, can come into town and get what they want and refuse to offer any reasonable, and I mean reasonable, compromise that can fit into a local community? The planning Commission needs to encourage these developers to work with these communities in order to build positive projects in their environments. Why should the developer have any special privilege over Knoxville residents.
January 28, 2025
at 6:02 PM
12-A-24-PD
Stephen
37914
12-A-24-PD
Stephen (37914), February 4, 2025 at 4:18 PM
Please find attached PDF.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250204161844.pdf
February 4, 2025
at 4:18 PM
2-SB-25-C
Jeffrey & Myra
37938
2-SB-25-C
Jeffrey & Myra (37938), February 5, 2025 at 8:24 PM
We are concerned about the increase in traffic and noise on Willow Fork Ln if this is approved. If an additional 7-8 homes are approved and they are duplexes, that would be a minimum of 14-16 more vehicles accessing their property via Willow Fork Ln which is a very narrow road that 2 cars cannot occupy at the same time from opposite directions. How can homes be approved so close to East Emory Rd when there are plans to widen it to 5 lanes in the near future? We feel this development threatens our tranquil and peaceful property and will inhibit our access to our property on the north end of Willow Fork Ln. Our deed states we have access beyond the Fesyuk’s concrete driveway and it is currently blocked with their personal vehicles.
February 5, 2025
at 8:24 PM
3-B-25-DP
Mikhail
37924
3-B-25-DP
Mikhail (37924), February 6, 2025 at 4:36 PM
I live in the neighborhood where these lots are trying to be rezoned and used for houses. When I bought my house, my realtor told me the area was common use space for the neighborhood. I thought that was awesome, it was part of the reason I purchased the home. I have young kids and pets that like to use the area to play in. Please don’t allow the property to be rezoned and used for residential houses. It will take away from the neighborhood appeal. Thanks for your consideration.
February 6, 2025
at 4:36 PM
12-A-24-PD
Diane
37914
12-A-24-PD
Diane (37914), February 7, 2025 at 11:04 AM
This project seems to use exceptions in order to squeeze too many units onto this site and fail to meet Planned Development requirements to provide a well designed and livable environment not only for the population within the development but also for the surrounding community.
February 7, 2025
at 11:04 AM
2-SA-25-C
Jerry
37918
2-SA-25-C
Jerry (37918), February 7, 2025 at 8:30 PM
If this sign was intended to be "community engagement," it is a farce. Nobody in this neighborhood wants this. It is rather infuriating that this is even up for consideration. Many of us in this neighborhood made our decision about living here hinged on the nature of this exact strip of land. Specifically, we were promised that it would not ever be developed, and could not be developed, because of the nature of ownership. And now, we can see the suspiciously low sale price. Obviously this is not an above-board transaction, and the opposition in this community to this bad-faith building project is pretty much unanimous. But the feelings of our community is just the beginning for the problem. I am certain there are many, many problems that haven't even been considered by the builders, such as environmental impact or traffic impact studies. This nonsense should stop immediately. Furthermore: I am going to mention that there is a problem on this specific online form. Not all people are going to be able to submit their opposition. I had to use a "sandbox" browser in order to force submission. I suspect that this is deliberate tampering, because dishonest dealings have characterized this entire circus thus far.
February 7, 2025
at 8:30 PM
2-A-25-DP
Greg
37932
2-A-25-DP
Greg (37932), February 10, 2025 at 11:11 PM
see attached
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250210231117.pdf
February 10, 2025
at 11:11 PM
2-A-25-PA
Thomas
37931
2-A-25-PA
Thomas (37931), February 12, 2025 at 12:58 PM
I do not oppose the change in plan designation for both parcels to TN. However, I am against the proposed zoning change to RB for several reasons. First, the estimated traffic impact is likely too high, especially during weekday mornings and afternoons given the current access to Gray Hendrix Road. This road has a sharp downhill curve in one direction and a stop sign at Oak Ridge Highway only a short distance in the other direction, which raises safety concerns. Additionally, RB zoning would permit a density of dwelling units and potentially multistory/multifamily dwellings, which would not be compatible with the surrounding residential areas that are zoned Agricultural and RA. In my opinion, development under the existing Agricultural or RA zoning would be preferable and more compatible with the surrounding residential areas.
February 12, 2025
at 12:58 PM
2-SA-25-C
Greg
37918
2-SA-25-C
Greg (37918), February 12, 2025 at 7:34 PM
The area being considered for rezoning is a beautiful grove of mature trees currently zoned as protected ridgeline and park. It is a habitat for wildlife and provides a safe walking conduit from Mont Richer and adjoining neighborhoods to Beverly Park, especially for families with small children and pets. It is also located on a crest in the road between Mont Richer Phase 1 and Phase 2, such that a blind hill and curve will block the view of drivers from persons backing out of driveways of the proposed new residences. Based on the need to preserve parkland, provide safe passage for pedestrians, and the safety concerns presented by the topography, it is requested this rezoning application be denied.
February 12, 2025
at 7:34 PM
2-F-25-RZ
Katherine
37923
2-F-25-RZ
Katherine (37923), February 13, 2025 at 11:40 AM
We are the owners of this property and have been running our landscaping business at our property since 2006. We just want to make sure they know that there is a draining sink hole behind our properties. We used to have to file an injection well permit, but that has changed. They need to be aware this could prevent the full use of their property. Also, we start up around 7:30 am M-F, this includes trucks and equipment. They need to consider this as well. We don’t typically work Saturday or Sunday. We have not been contacted about this project. We don’t oppose, we just wanted them to be aware of the noise and the sink hole.
February 13, 2025
at 11:40 AM
2-SA-25-C
Jennifer
3791
2-SA-25-C
Jennifer ( 3791), February 13, 2025 at 12:15 PM


View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250213121503.pdf
February 13, 2025
at 12:15 PM
2-F-25-RZ
Chris
37923
2-F-25-RZ
Chris (37923), February 13, 2025 at 4:26 PM
Please See Attached Comment Letter.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250213162622.pdf
February 13, 2025
at 4:26 PM
3-A-25-OYP
Carlene
37918
3-A-25-OYP
Carlene (37918), February 18, 2025 at 10:21 AM
Please see attached comments originally submitted on 1-30-25. There is a need to have design standards for conversions from single-family to two-family.
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250218102123.pdf
February 18, 2025
at 10:21 AM
2-B-24-DP
Margaret
37922
2-B-24-DP
Margaret (37922), February 19, 2025 at 8:44 AM
Why is this insane proposal being discussed again. The development suggested goes against every condition that Gettysvue originally used to build our community known as Gettysvue. To allow this to happen will destroy the quiet atmosphere we now enjoy. I am especially concerned for the safety of pedestrians walking our streets to have to compete w/ the additional influx of traffic that will surely accompany this addition.
February 19, 2025
at 8:44 AM
2-A-25-DP
Cody
37902
2-A-25-DP
Cody (37902), Submitted during the meeting
See attached
View Attachment
https://agenda.knoxplanning.org/attachments/20250221142345.pdf
Submitted during the meeting