Public Feedback

Please advise if recode Knoxville, Article 1 will be the only article discussed on May 14, 2019?  Will all 18 Rezone Articles be discussed at a later date for review of public opinion?  Please forward the dates and Articles to be discussed for each future meeting for the 2019 Rezone Articles? Thank you for your prompt response!

Members Recode Team,

I want to encourage those who have worked so hard on this and I hope that your work is not in vain. Please no not let a small but loud section of the population bring down progress. People who have watched this grueling process know that pushing it down the road or starting from scratch won't help. I just hope that there is flexibility in this code to evolve and adapt to a growing city and that we are not subject to the groanings of a few small minded citizens.

I've noticed all of this fuss over ADU's and I am tired of it. I am appalled at the close-minded thinking that an extra unit will have a catastrophic affect on the community. In fact, it is that very thinking that will hold Knoxville back as we try to grow. 

Does it not seem strange that in a time where we have the means to support safe and clean density, we are scared of a density level that our city was built? Is it also not telling that the most beautiful and well-liked areas of Knoxville are the most dense? 

DENSITY IS GOOD. As a designer who has studied architecture and urban planning in depth and in many cities, it irks me that people who have no bases of study for which to make an educated decision are restricting something that will be good for communities and home owners. 

Please, do not let misguided fear hurt this city's future. 

As for the current draft, I believe it is in the best interest of the city to change the following: 

10.3.B.1 : "When there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of the building codes, the building official may grant modifications for individual cases." This was omitted and although I don't see a reason why someone might need to diverge from the building code, there should always be room for special circumstances.. Why omit this?

10.3.B.2 : This entire point should be omitted. 1. An owner of a duplex may have a good reason to add an ADU and this should not be restricted. 2. My goodness, "Must be owner occupied" What good does that do to the community? Are there not countless individuals in this city who survive off income from rentals? Much of this city's revitalization has been a result of enterprising folks who flipped houses not for themselves but for others. Knoxville owes the quality of it's urban neighborhoods to these folks. Who's right is it to base the urban growth of a city off of whether a property is owner occupied? Please don't incapacitate future growth by restricting things like this. 

10.3.B.4 : Lot size restrictions. There are countless historic lots of record in Knoxville that are smaller than 5,000 sf but have a small house on them that would support an ADU plus be true to historic and appropriate for future density. 

10.3.B.8 : Again, we should not be controlling the square footage of a dwelling unit. What if it has a basement or upstairs that are appropriately scaled to the main house? This is a foolish blanket statement that does not take into consideration the high number of smaller (historical) lots in the city. 

If ADU's are an issue of different parts of the city wanting different things, I see no issue with dividing the regulation into districts, if the western population is afraid of density, let them keep their malls, and parking lots and live with the raising obesity, depression, and un-satisfaction that has been proven to come from being disconnected from a tight community. As for the neighborhoods around downtown, please don't restrict their growth. 

There is at typo on the submission page, "Use can this form to submit a comment or question for the project staff or send an email directly to recode@knoxplanning.org."

They apparently deleted completely the non-conforming paragraphs about manufactured homes in Article 17, but they left in THIS:

'On Page 9-10, it refers to Nonconforming Manufactured homes being found in Article 16, when it was in Article 17.

"... 3. Nonconforming Manufactured Homes See Article 16 for regulations regarding nonconforming manufactured homes, including single-wide manufactured homes. ..." '

NOW, NON-CONFORMING MANUFACTURED HOMES ARE NOT FOUND IN EITHER ARTICLE! Neither 16 nor 17.

PLEASE DELETE number 3 on page 9-10.

They also left in the "skirting" type required on manufactured homes.... EVEN THOUGH IT DOES NOT APPLY DOWN HERE. (Page 9-10, 2b)

Okaaaaaay! But trust me, mobile home communities are REQUIRING many owners to replace their skirting this year! Good luck fielding all of THOSE requests to be allowed to replace vinyl skirting with just vinyl skirting again instead! Bwahahaha

On page 9-10, it says:

" H.  Dwelling - Manufactured Home 

Multi-sectional manufactured homes may be used as single-family detached dwellings provided the following development criteria are met:..."

What about SINGLE wide manufactured homes? Are they addressed somewhere else?

Does Camiros realize that Tennessee TAXES ALL mobile homes, even those on LEASED land (such as in mobile home parks), as IF they were single family dwellings on permanent foundations? They are NOT licensed.

That might help. I would THINK that zoning regs and codes would need to conform seamlessly with taxing regs, especially property taxing regs.

Hello: I represent the Brick Industry Association, and just wanted to inquire what next steps are for the zoning ordinance update, and when it would go before the City Council for vote.

Btw....I READ in the MEDIA that Recode was not going to allow any more mobile home parks in the city, BUT I couldn't find any such wording in the new Code. Did I miss it? There is a STRONG argument for whatever is OMITTED in the Code is ALLOWED. Just fyi! Please dot your i's and cross your t's about intent. Put it in writing. All of it. 

Thanks!

Hmmmmm ...other than LAW dictated (before landlords can tow IMMEDIATELY), maybe THIS is another good reason for instituting an actual parking policy? And PASSES?

Can't catch em if you don't MONITOR. LOL

Having to report cars to the office for passes can expose a lot!

Police PATROL (per the annexed Plan of Services Agreement) periodically might help, too. Nothing like being SEEN.

Thanks!

I sincerely request....PLEASE VOTE NO ON RECODE.

Not because an update of Zoning codes might not be needed, but because Camiros (and the city) has done a CRAPPY job!

I read it....if nothing else, it is shoddily written, has too many errors and omissions, and contains some things that just don't apply to down here.

A northern company was a bad choice. The South is just WAY too far behind. You can't jump that far like that.

And besides....first, why not try ENFORCING the codes we DO have? Might not even NEED to change too much!

Plus....more conflicts between laws/regs/codes is the LAST thing this place needs. There are enough! Sheesh.

Thank you.

What is the definition of this statement: "Limited nonresidential uses that are compatible with the character of the district may also be permitted.". This is under every single residential neighborhood district listed. Is this how the City is going to get around the roll-out of 5G small cell antennas in all the neighborhoods. Is it a coincidence that the City has decided to recode all of Knoxville right at the same time that 5G is being deployed?

THOUSANDS OF MINI CELL TOWERS TO BE BUILT IN FRONT OF HOMES
5G will require the buildout of literally hundreds of thousands of new wireless antennas in neighborhoods, cities and towns. A cellular small cell or other transmitter will be placed every two to ten homes according to estimates. The purpose of this massive infrastructure build out of small cells, distributed antennae systems and microcells is to increase range and capacity in populated urban areas and prepare for the future 5G rollout. 5G frequencies will utilize higher frequencies that do not travel as far as the lower frequencies.
US state and federal governments are moving forth regulations which would make the right of way in front of homes as available sites for 5G transmitters - without consent of the property owners. In response, communities are protesting en mass as they do not want these transmitters built in front of their homes and communities want to be able to regulate the placement on right of ways.  Some municipalities are taking the case to the courts with litigation.
5G WILL USE HIGHER ELECTROMAGNETIC FREQUENCIES
5G will utilize multiple frequencies from those currently in use for cell phones and wireless to higher millimeter frequencies.
Today's cellular and Wi-Fi networks rely on microwaves - a type of electromagnetic radiation utilizing frequencies up to 6 gigahertz (GHz) in order to wirelessly transmit voice or data. However, 5G applications will require unlocking of new spectrum bands in higher frequency ranges above 6 GHz to 100 GHz and beyond, utilizing submillimeter and millimeter waves - to allow ultra-high rates of data to be transmitted in the same amount of time as compared with previous deployments of microwave radiation. Each carrier will use a different set of frequencies.  
This will be worse than living next to a cell phone tower!

MPC made changes to Recode at their June 13, 2019 meeting before approving it and passing it on to City Council. When can the public expect the current version to be post?

What is the definition of this statement: "Limited nonresidential uses that are compatible with the character of the district may also be permitted.". This is under every single residential neighborhood district listed. Is this how the City is going to get around the roll-out of 5G small cell antennas in all the neighborhoods. Is it a coincidence that the City has decided to recode all of Knoxville right at the same time that 5G is being deployed? 

THOUSANDS OF MINI CELL TOWERS TO BE BUILT IN FRONT OF HOMES
5G will require the buildout of literally hundreds of thousands of new wireless antennas in neighborhoods, cities and towns. A cellular small cell or other transmitter will be placed every two to ten homes according to estimates. The purpose of this massive infrastructure build out of small cells, distributed antennae systems and microcells is to increase range and capacity in populated urban areas and prepare for the future 5G rollout. 5G frequencies will utilize higher frequencies that do not travel as far as the lower frequencies.
US state and federal governments are moving forth regulations which would make the right of way in front of homes as available sites for 5G transmitters – without consent of the property owners. In response, communities are protesting en mass as they do not want these transmitters built in front of their homes and communities want to be able to regulate the placement on right of ways. Some municipalities are taking the case to the courts with litigation.
5G WILL USE HIGHER ELECTROMAGNETIC FREQUENCIES
5G will utilize multiple frequencies from those currently in use for cell phones and wireless to higher millimeter frequencies.
Today’s cellular and Wi-Fi networks rely on microwaves – a type of electromagnetic radiation utilizing frequencies up to 6 gigahertz (GHz) in order to wirelessly transmit voice or data. However, 5G applications will require unlocking of new spectrum bands in higher frequency ranges above 6 GHz to 100 GHz and beyond, utilizing submillimeter and millimeter waves – to allow ultra-high rates of data to be transmitted in the same amount of time as compared with previous deployments of microwave radiation. Each carrier will use a different set of frequencies.
This will be worse than living next to a cell phone tower!

I support keeping the Accessory Dwelling Unit and Hillside Protection regulations in the new zoning ordinance. 

This is a one BR duplex I own . How will recode affest it

Protect Hillside and Ridgetop protection in ALL zones. Don't let developers run roughshod over this,  where they will clear and grade property that will impose risks of flooding, eroding, and the destruction of our topography. The Planning Commission got this one wrong, caving to developers instead of protecting the environment. Please reject the Planning Commission's recommendation on Hillside Protection in Recode.

I am writing in regards to the recent motion by the planning commission to remove the Hillside and Ridgetop protection ordinance from office and commercial zoned property. ALL property no matter the zoning should remain protected. There is absolutely no reason that only residential should be subjected to this ordinance, while developers flatten ridges and scar our hills. We must protect our areas natural features. Knox County does not need to follow in the footsteps of Sevier County and absolutely destroy the natural beauty that we are so fortunate to have. Mudslides, rockslides and flooding continue to get worse with these poor decisions made for greed. There are miles and miles of property already within zoning that can be used for more 1/2 empty commercial and office space if you need to build so badly. 

Is there no longer a provision for Small Lots of Record in ReCode? If I want to build on a nonconforming lot (i.e. RN-4 with <50' lot width) would I need to seek a variance?

Hi, I’m interested in reading the following article: 

ARTICLE 6
    Increase rear setback for industrial uses when adjacent to residential zones to 50
But it shows the page as not found on the website. Do you know how I might be able to read it?

What's going on with the Lonsdale neighborhood area? yall moving people out of the area to take over property? Y'all need to pay those with houses.. and not just come in a steal their land and houses...

I would like to suggest making the entire street from 804-840 N 4th Ave, Knoxville, TN 37917 to have C-N zoning, considering this seems the designation most of the street is being recoded to. With the current mixed zoning of industrial, commercial, and office all on the same street from the highway being put in beside the street, several buildings that are being recoded as residential are currently used commercially. For example, 820 N 4th has for some time been a bar/club/restaurant with a parking lot next door. Also, 817 N 4th is a parts business, whose building would be very difficult to use residentially. In fact, there are actually only two houses on the street that are being used purely as a residential home. Switching some of the street to residential will benefit far fewer houses considering the past allowable uses of the street. By making all C-N, it allows the mixed commercial use that has been established and would greatly help continue the improvements the street has been under in recent months. Thanks

Hey guys- just wanted to make sure you were aware that the Current Draft's map shows that CU Form-Based code as having unlimited height (on the building height tab). Since this is not the case, and it varies based on the CU zone - you might be best off just not noting heights on that.

Mr. Green,

The proposed zoning for a warehouse located at 3914 Papermill Drive is I-MU. The properties on each side of it have the proposed zoning of I-G and we back up to I-40/75. This stretch of Papermill has multiple properties with proposed zoning of I-G and think 3914 should have the same zoning to conform with adjacent parcels and business that could occupy the building/lot. The highest and best use for this existing industrial property would fall into the zoning of I-G.  Please consider updating this property with an I-G zoning. Thank you

Hello All,

I want to express thanks to the City of Knoxville and Knoxville-Knox County Planning, as well as Camiros and the Stakeholder Advisory Committee, for undertaking the long and complicated process of updating our zoning code. I believe leadership on the process has operated in good faith and with transparency, reaching out to the public and gaining as much public input as is possible over the past 27 (?) months. I have attended several of the meetings. I have witnessed the City Council, City staff, and Planning staff take and respond to many citizen questions and concerns. That we have just completed reviewing the 5th ordinance draft and are currently reviewing the 4th map draft is a testament to the process and the effort that leaders are making to get this right, while at the same time acknowledging that it will be a living document. The revisions to drafts and maps result from community feedback and many people have engaged in the process. While it must be true that not every parcel owner in the City is aware of the Recode process, it is also likely true that many of the parcel owners have never paid attention to their zoning at all and will continue not to. That doesn&#39;t mean the process has been any less valuable and effective.

I hope that the ordinance will be approved before our City elections are held. I support the increased allowance of ADUs and appreciate that, in general, different neighborhoods have not been provided differing rights or privileges. I support the application of the Hillside and Ridgetop Protection Plan being widely applied across zones, and not only applying to residential zones. This is necessary to help control the effects of severe weather events. I support the greater diversity of development this zoning update would allow and encourage, particularly relating to transportation corridors where greater density and mixed-use structures are desirable.

Thank you for your efforts and for listening to our comments.

Hello All,

I am writing to express my support of the Recode Knoxville process and to urge you to adopt the recommendations.&nbsp;

This has been a fully transparent and public process. Citizens have been given multiple opportunities to participate. I believe leadership on the process has operated in good faith and with transparency, reaching out to the public and gaining as much public input as is possible over almost three years. I have attended several of the meetings myself.&nbsp;

I support the increased allowance of ADUs. I support the application of the Hillside and Ridgetop Protection Plan being widely applied across zones, and not only applying to residential zones. This is necessary to help control the effects of severe weather events. I support the greater diversity of development this zoning update would allow and encourage, particularly relating to transportation corridors where greater density and mixed-use structures are desirable.

I urge you to move forward with the Recode process on Monday. I am so sick of the fear mongering from those who claim to have had no public process for this vote. It feels like a coordinated campaign, most likely funded by those who have the most to lose from the new code, namely developers. Don’t let those who fear change deter you. 

I am vehemently opposed to "Recode Knoxville." There is nothing about this proposal that will help the citizenry. As a matter of fact, I will be hurt by these changes. I own almost 20 acres that I have depended upon to support my retirement. The changes will destroy the value of my property. As usual, the things that would actually help Knoxville to thriive are ignored in favor political gain and control. Somewhere this foolishness has to stop. After discussions with others in my area, we would like to know which counsel members support Recode Knoxville and why. As of now, it appears that Knoxville has fallen in line with those who crush the backs of the citizenry for personal gain. I am truly discouraged with the leadership in the communiity in which I have grown up, lived and supported for so many years. Is there anything you people can do to actually help the people?

I noticed that the park land on E Fifth at Myrtle was rezoned from OS to RN-3 in the transition between Draft 3 and Draft 4. In accordance with Article IV 2.4.2 and 2.4.3, it would seem to me that OS is a permanent desgination designed to protect park land from development. I believe it was passed in 2010 to protect park land in the Lakeshore area from a high density homeless facility. Ironically, that seems to be the plans for the park land on E Fifth. Can you please explain why and how this occurred, in light of the current City of Knoxville Ordinances?

Single wide mobile homes are also still allowed down here on some land. Please take that into consideration.

I saw this acronym in the latest revision and wondered what it stood for (if not mother-in-law apartment...???)?

Dear Knoxville Planners,

Several people have asked me about RV issues in the proposed changes.  If you have a pop-up camper or other vehicle that fits the RV definition, could you still park it in your personal driveway under the proposed changes?  The people who have asked me (two different households) currently park their RVs in their driveways and have steeply sloped yards that would preclude them from parking them any other place.  

They say that the proposed changes are a solution looking for a problem, that if their RV is not bothering anyone, why should it be prohibited? A screen is pricey, etc.  

Can you help me understand this issue better?

I have attempted several times to post publications from the STATE OF TENNESSEE's official website concerning FireWise Landscaping, but someone keeps removing the attachments. Recode Draft Five's landscaping requirements conflicts with FireWise standards recommended by State of Tennessee Fire Marshall, TN Department of Forestry, University of Tennessee Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Forestry, and National Fire Protection Association. Landscaping is good, but should be well planned to ensure Knoxville is not the next billion dollar wildfire. Please do not remove this link to BurnSafeTN, and official site of the State Of Tennessee. http://burnsafetn.org/firewise_land.html

I originally submitted this comment on 5/9, but never received a confirmation e-mail and it is not showing up on the website so I'll try again. 

My comment is in regard to trailers/RV's. The current code, Article V, Section 8 C, states that:

"On each lot, a total of two (2) (one (1) from any two (2) of the subsections listed below) of the following vehicles may be parked or stored per household living on the premises, and said trailer, or recreational vehicle, shall not exceed forty-five (45) feet in length or nine (9) feet in width; and further provided that said trailer, or recreational vehicle, shall not be parked or stored for more than forty-eight (48) hours unless it is located behind the front yard building line:

1.Recreational vehicle.

2.Hauling trailer.

3.Boat trailer."
In the proposed code 11.12 B

"Recreational vehicles must be located within the interior side yard behind the front building line or in the rear yard. If stored in the interior side or rear yard, the recreational vehicle must be located at least ten feet from any lot line and screened from view from any public right-of-way by a solid fence or wall. If the recreational vehicle is screened by an existing structure or landscape so that it is not visible from the public right-of-way, it is considered to meet these requirements. Temporary storage tents and tarps for recreational vehicles are not considered screening and do not meet these requirements."

I have a few concerns about the new code:

1. There appears to be no limit to the number, or size, of RV permitted, as long as it/they are properly screened from the public ROW. 

2. What about trailers that do not meet the Recode definition of a RV? Cargo trailers, utility trailers, etc.

3. Why is parking behind the front building line no longer considered adequate, the new screening requirements seem excessively restrictive?

Part Deux:

I agree that RV's should be located in the interior side yard behind the front building line or rear yard, but why ten feet from a lot line? A shed can be built five feet from the lot line, but a boat has to be ten feet from it? Why the ten feet requirement?

The screening requirement is overly restrictive for the entire city. There are many lots in the city that due to many factors (lot size, topography, access, etc.) it is impossible to locate the RV somewhere that is screened from view from a right of way. To comply with the new zoning code many property owners would have to pay to store their RV somewhere else, leave it as is and risk fines, or move somewhere that does not have such restrictions. The screening requirement should be removed from Recode and be left up to HOA's and the like.

Drive through most any neighborhood in Knoxville and you will see homes with boats and campers parked next to them, West Hills, Lincoln Park, Parkridge, Marble City, Sequoyah Hills. Across the entire city you will find examples of people storing their RV's on their property without screening. 99% of those are not any more of an "eyesore" than the cars and trucks in the driveway. A full size Sprinter type van with commercial logos all over is permitted without screening, but a boat is not? There are other examples like cargo and utility trailers that would not fit in the definition of Recreational Vehicle that would also be permitted.

Becky Wade, in a memo to the Knoxville City Council last night (May 7, 2019), stated that the erroneous designation regarding the East 5th/Myrtle Street land parcels would be restored to the original "Open Space" designation by this morning. I checked the website and cannot see that this was handled as stated. Can you please provide an update as to the restoration of the correct zoning designation for these parcels or show me the proper place to find that the correction has been made?

Several of the drafts I have looked at point to my property as the property to my left, a much small property. My home is 5212 Holston Dr Knoxville,Tn 37914, which is 8.78 acres, house/barn etc. This needs to be corrected. Thank you.

Just wanted to be up-front with you that I'm not sure how I feel about the change allowing RN-5 to allow Residential Care facilities, even if it's a special use. Can you elaborate on why this change was made? The unfortunate reality is that much of North Knoxville had larger parcels redeveloped into Multi-Family developments in the 60's-70's (including right across from my house) and my fear is that given the profitability of Residential Care facilities, that this change could create incentive for owners to redevelop these buildings/complexes into Residential Care. 

My original hope was the opposite, that the RN-5 in allowing townhouse-type developments, that these properties would become less suburban and more urban. If we have to keep Residential Care facilities as a permitted special use, could we down-zone many of these apartment buildings to RN-4? My specific concern is 1722 Coker Ave, however that concern extends to all these property types in the middle of predominantly single-family neighborhoods.

Well, with all these changes to the zoning and coding, this should make it easier for the City to put up those ugly, radiation-inducing, "cell" towers that they plan to roll out for 5G. Be prepared citizens of Knoxville, they will be everywhere and there will be no escaping them. We - humans, animals, insects, and plant life will be fried. People will be getting sick from the electromagnetic radiation EVERYWHERE. With all these changes, I'm sure somewhere in all the wording, it will be legal for them to put one in your yard. I see a class action lawsuit in the future!

Please add the following amendment to Article 12. Thank you.

12.11 LANDSCAPE BOND
In order to ensure correct installation and maintenance of landscaping, a landscape bond will be required.
No certificate of occupancy will be approved before the developer or owner has posted a landscape maintenance bond guaranteeing all landscaping materials and work for a period of two years after approval or acceptance thereof by the City in a sum established by the Knoxville-Knox County Planning Commission. The bond will be in the amount of 110% of the estimated cost of replacing and maintaining the landscaping required by these specifications, unless otherwise specified by the Knoxville-Knox County Planning Commission. 
A. Performance
The developer or owner will be allowed six (6) months after a certificate of occupancy has been issued to install landscaping material according to the approved plan. This will enable planting to occur during optimal weather conditions and to ensure the availability of the approved materials. At the end of six months, the Zoning Administrator will inspect all required landscaping and certify that it has been properly installed and is in good health. If corrections are to be made the Zoning Administrator will notify the owner or developer. All unhealthy, defective or dead plant material will be replaced within three (3) months, at the end of which the Zoning Administrator will again inspect the landscaping. The bond shall be called if the required landscaping has not been installed or corrected by the end of this period, and the funds shall be applied to complete the landscaping work. Prior to release of a performance bond, a maintenance bond must be received by the City.
B. Maintenance 
Two years after a certificate of occupancy has been issued the Zoning Administrator will inspect all required landscaping and certify that it has been properly maintained. If no maintenance is required, the City will release the landscape bond. If corrections are to be made, the Zoning Administrator will notify the owner or developer and the bond company of any corrections. All unhealthy, defective or dead plant material shall be replaced within three (3) months. The Zoning Administrator will conduct a final inspection and if no further maintenance is required, the City will release the landscape bond. If deficiencies in the landscaping still exist, the bond shall be called and the funds shall be applied to complete the landscaping work.

Prepared by:
Scenic Knoxville
Trees Knoxville
The City of Knoxville Tree Board
The Knoxville Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects
Sierra Club, Harvey Broome Group

Also endorsed by:
Town Hall East
Forest Heights Neighborhood Association
Community Forum
The Bearden Village Council
The Riverside 1 Condos
Historic Fourth and Gill Neighborhood Organization
Kingston Pike Sequoyah Hills Neighborhood Association
Alice Bell Spring Hill Neighborhood Association
League of Women Voters of Knoxville and Knox County
RiverHill Gateway Neighborhood Association

Community Forum’s May 26, 2019, comprehensive Response to Draft 5 of Recode is attached. Our response follows Recode’s page order.

Many issues raised in this Document cover Articles 1-8 which were discussed at the City Council Special Meeting on May 14, 2019.&nbsp; However, some items were either not discussed at all, or were not resolved during the Special Meeting.&nbsp; City Council requested that the planning staff and/or city departments report back after further consideration and review of some issues.

Community Forum&rsquo;s Response to Draft 5 addresses some issues that have been included in our previous responses to Drafts 1-4, but still need attention.&nbsp; However, there are many issues regarding material appearing for the first time in Draft 5.&nbsp; We look forward to discussing these issues at the May 30, 2019, Special Meeting.

Community Forum has members from many different neighborhoods in the City of Knoxville. Our members have attended many public meetings, City Council and Knox Planning meetings and workshops.&nbsp; Our Community Forum members have participated in numerous meetings of our own neighborhood associations, and have often talked to residents of other neighborhoods about Recode.

One theme has arisen regarding single-family residential neighborhoods since the release of Draft 1 in March, 2018, and has persisted through Draft 5, May, 2019.

Many Knoxvillians like where they live.&nbsp; They like their neighborhood and its character.&nbsp; Many report having worked hard to support, strengthen, stabilize and improve their neighborhood. They are both financially and emotionally invested in where they live.&nbsp; They want to keep what they presently have.&nbsp; They do not think they should have to work hard,&nbsp;again,&nbsp;to keep, or get, what they have already worked to achieve. They believe they have upheld their part of the bargain as citizens of Knoxville.

They do not understand why there are proposed changes that neither they, their neighborhoods, nor their City Council members requested.&nbsp; They are very frustrated because they have not heard a rationale or explanation for why these proposed changes are being made.&nbsp; They do not know what problem is trying to be fixed in their own neighborhood.

They do not believe that Recode adequately addresses or acknowledges the differences among single-family residential neighborhoods or that it adequately distinguishes the urban from the suburban development pattern.&nbsp; They note that Recode does, however, acknowledge and address differences among other development types.&nbsp; They cite the amount of attention to detail and the increase in the number of zoning districts, sub-districts or intensity levels, for primarily non-single family residential development districts, downtown, and the commercial zoning districts.&nbsp;

In contrast, Recode squeezes the majority of Knoxville&#39;s existing single-family neighborhoods, most of which are presently zoned R-1, R-1A, R-1E, into two zoning districts, RN-1 and RN-2.&nbsp; To make matters worse, the proposed minimum lot area is 10,000 square feet for RN-1 and 5,000 square feet for RN-2.&nbsp; That means that every single-family lot below 10,000 square feet in area suddenly falls under the new minimum lot area requirement of 5,000 square feet.&nbsp; This proposed change will have a substantial negative impact on many of our neighborhoods that were developed under the decades-long minimum lot area standard of 7,500 square feet for single-family dwellings.&nbsp; The minimum lot area change incentivizes the demolition of existing modest homes, the subdivision and reconfiguration of lots, and the introduction of development out of character with the remainder of the existing neighborhood development.&nbsp; Replacement construction will provide less affordable housing than existing housing.

They find the Recode proposals for the residential zoning districts to be inconsistent with&nbsp;Camiros&#39; July 2016,&nbsp;Response to the City&#39;s Request for Proposals, which states on page 11:&nbsp;&nbsp;&quot;In addition, distinctions will need to be made for urban versus suburban residential neighborhoods, as well as regulations for rural residential development.&quot;, and on page 14:&nbsp;&nbsp;&quot;Use should respond to established community values and habits.&nbsp; Some neighborhoods are built around exclusive land use districts, while in other neighborhoods these relationships are more intermixed.&nbsp; These differing characteristics should be integrated into the ordinance to assure desired patterns of livability and provide relative ease of review and approval.&quot;&nbsp;

Many find the Recode proposals for the residential zoning districts to be inconsistent with the&nbsp;Recode&nbsp;Knoxville Technical Review &amp; Approaches Report, which states on page 11:&nbsp;&nbsp;&quot;Residential districts should be refined to ensure that the character of Knoxville&#39;s neighborhoods is reflected in its residential district structure.&quot;

With that in mind, we request that you consider the following:

1.&nbsp; Add additional single-family residential zoning districts.

2.&nbsp; Add a single-family zoning district with a minimum lot size around 7,500 square feet.&nbsp;

3.&nbsp; Align the uses in the proposed single-family residential districts with the uses presently allowed in the existing zoning districts.

4.&nbsp; Retain the existing Planned Residential Zoning District (RP-1, 2, 3) proposed for deletion in Recode.&nbsp; Planned Residential zoning allows a variety of housing types and densities and is frequently requested.&nbsp; Government can request RP zoning.&nbsp; Only the owner can request the proposed Planned Development.

5.&nbsp; Adopt zoning neutral maps.&nbsp; Zone properties the zone closest to their existing zoning.&nbsp; Use the adopted, long-standing, codified, participatory, comprehensive planning process to change the Sector Plan and One Year Plan and Zoning.

We urge you to take whatever time is necessary to end up with a Zoning Ordinance that will have the least negative impact possible on our neighborhoods throughout the City of Knoxville.

We would be happy to discuss the issues raised in our Response to Draft 5 at any time.

Sincerely,

Larry Silverstein, Chairperson, Community Forum
 

I object to the use of the ReCode process by city employees to attempt to rezone city-owned land without due process. I support Marshall Stair's proposal to postpone a vote on this. The public has not had adequate time between the last update and the vote.

Good Afternoon,

We've looked through the recent revision. The following comments are respectfully submitted for your consideration.

Article 2 should include a definition of the term "mixed use".

Article 2 should include a definition of the term "interlock" as used in table 11-6.

Article 6.3 - Industrial zone setbacks: Has the rear setback exemption for sites with railroads been eliminated? Many forms of industrial buildings need to have direct access to rail service.

Article 11.1 - Off street parking applicability is rather confusing.

Article 17: Nonconformities: These transition rules are difficult to understand. I suspect consistent enforcement will be onerous.

Community Forum has previously submitted comprehensive Responses to Recode Drafts 1-4.  Community Forum is currently preparing comments on Draft 5. 

However, the comments will not be submitted by the May 10, 2019, deadline.&nbsp; Draft 5 was made available to the public, on line, on May 1, 2019.&nbsp; It is impossible to provide meaningful comments in 10 days to over 400 pages of law, as well as to the new maps which only more recently became available.

As was stated in Community Forum&rsquo;s letter to City Council on April 29, 2019, we urge that consideration of Recode at the Special Meeting, called for May 14, 2019, be postponed to allow more time for City Council and the public to analyze and offer comments to Draft 5 and the latest maps.

Community Forum requests that there be future City Council workshops to discuss Draft 5, with its many changes made since Draft 4 came out in late December 2018.

It should be up to City Council to determine the future timetable for workshops, the date of a Special Meeting to consider Recode, and any amendments that may be offered to Draft 5.

Sincerely,

Larry Silverstein, Chairperson, Community Forum

Hello, I have been following the recode very closely, workshop and stakeholder meeting. This draft 4 of the map is very concerning, it is alllllll over the place. Lots in our neighborhood that are duplexes or converter duplexes have been rezoned as multi family R3 and R4, duplexes are in the R2 zoning. I was told part of the reason that recode was needed was to make what is on the ground match the maps, but there are lots of apartment building along Kingston Pk, they are all zoned as R1. The block across the street from me has been rezoned to R4, most of the block is taken up by a school, should it not be zoned for school (institutional) like all other schools? I checked the zoning for churches, its is all over the place from R1, R2, O, OS, Agr, which is it? Then part of Caswell Park was to be rezoned as R4, sense when did park land become up for grabs for multi family housing, if so there is alot of park land on Cherokee Blvd. I dont think this recode is now where near ready to be voted on. I have heard some say that it came be amended after its past, thats like building a house and the builder says that he will go back and fix all the structural issues AFTER the house is completed....totally asinine!

To whom it may concern: 

I live in the Beau Monde subdivision within the greater confines of the Northshore Town Center (NTC). I have recently learned that it is proposed under the Recode Knoxville plan that the property just south of our subdivision boundary is to be changed, as part of the plan, to C-R-2 from its current designation of TC-1. While the impact of such a change may not seem to be significant, there are substantive changes that would negatively impact the "transition" areas currently enjoyed that buffer the heavy commercial areas that Publix, Target, the credit union building and a medical facility currently under construction from the less intense use of a residential area. Specifically, I have concerns that more intense commercial facilities could be built much closer to residences than under the current zoning designation and that such facilities could be built to a maximum height of 65 feet. Such development would make a mockery of the the transition area and would be deleterious to the current residents and potentially negatively impact property values.
We currently enjoy the environment of NTC's mixed use, new urbanism development and would hope that it continues to develop in a manner sympathetic to it's master plan. We would be very disappointed in our planning and political leaders if the zoning changes up for consideration resulted in new urbanism replicating the mistakes of old urbanism.
Thank you for you consideration of my concerns and for all that you do to make Knoxville such a great place to live. 

We think it's important that Knoxville's zoning code includes a provision for a Tree Mitigation Bank. This Bank would garner additional funds for the COK to use for landscaping on public property. It would also level the playing field by insuring that all developers were responsible for the same costs for equivalent development. We propose the following amendment be added to Article 12. LANDSCAPE

12.10 TREE MITIGATION BANK

The Tree Mitigation Bank is established as an alternative to maintaining or planting required trees and landscaping as specified in the Tree Protection Ordinance and in Article 12 of the zoning ordinance. Costs will accrue to the applicant to the degree it is not possible to maintain, replace or plant required trees and landscaping. The Tree Mitigation Bank provides a method of compliance in circumstances when the on-site maintenance and planting of required trees and landscaping is not possible due to site constraints, or for the mitigation of violations.

Funds paid into the Tree Mitigation Bank will be used for the sole purpose of planting trees and landscaping on public grounds and rights-of-way. The City of Knoxville urban forester will administer the account and determine when and where trees and landscaping are to be planted.

A.  When a strict application of the landscaping requirements or the use of an Alternative Landscape Design would require unreasonable compliance, an applicant may request  permission to contribute to the Tree Mitigation Bank instead. Such situations could include water features, topography, lot configurations, utility maintenance zones, or unusual site conditions.

B.  To use the Tree Mitigation Bank, the applicant must submit a Tree Mitigation Bank request that includes a list of landscaping requirements unable to be met and the specific reasons why they cannot be met. The request must be submitted to and approved by the Administrative Review Committee. The Administrative Review Committee will determine the extent to which requirements cannot be met and contributions to the Tree Mitigation Bank can be substituted.

C.  Final permission to contribute to the Tree Mitigation Bank requires the Zoning Administrator's approval concurrent with the application process for the development.
 
D.  Required contributions are based on current economics and can be determined by referring to.... on the City of Knoxville website.

Prepared by:
Scenic Knoxville
Trees Knoxville
The City of Knoxville Tree Board
The Knoxville Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects
Sierra Club, Harvey Broome Group

Also endorsed by:
Town Hall East
Forest Heights Neighborhood Association
Community Forum
The Bearden Village Council
The Riverside 1 Condos
Historic Fourth and Gill Neighborhood Organization
Kingston Pike Sequoyah Hills Neighborhood Association
Alice Bell Spring Hill Neighborhood Association
League of Women Voters of Knoxville and Knox County
RiverHill Gateway Neighborhood Association

ReCode has fallen short of its promise. Parkridge / Park City and all of East Knoxville should be talking about the inequitable distribution of benefits under ReCode Map draft 4 (final version before vote).

As one example, I asked repeatedly for "open space" or similar land use designation on Chestnut Ridge / Adams Ave to maintain a forested buffer for Parkridge from Interstate 40 (a best practice in zoning, as "freeway" and "residences" are incompatible land uses and a buffer should separate them). While Parkridge did not get any such open space / forested buffer, multiple parcels along Interstate 140 (Pellissippi Parkway) in West Knoxville did.

As another example, churches in West Knoxville got zoned "Ag" while not a single church in East Knoxville was zoned "Ag." Not even the historic "Underground Railroad" site on Fuller Ave (which I specifically asked be protected with "Open Space" zoning), or Tabernacle Baptist Church on MLK that actually has a community garden. That means if a congregation "goes away" in West Knoxville, neighbors are left with Ag / Open Space. If a church "goes away" in East Knoxville, it's a free-for-all for private developers. 

Why the disparity?

Generally, the Recode process has been responsive to much of the public's concerns.  However, there are enough changes, and enough items not changed that we thought would be, to warrant a slight delay in the Council's final decision process.  Government is held to a high standard.  It must not only be fair; it must also appear to be fair.  Please consider holding a public work session May 14th with the understanding that the First and Second Readings will be completed before the end of June.   This alleviates concern over the brevity of review time provided between the final document and City Council action while guaranteeing that it will indeed be finished in the near future.

Please consider these few remaining questions/comments I have:

1.     Clarify how building grade is determined when measuring building height as described in 2.4.E.1:    is it finished grade or original grade (I have seen grades intentionally raised)?  To measure height do you take the average of the grade along the base of the building's front or at various points along the buildings front?  Note that grade is defined for signs in the Sign Chapter.  Why not for development?

2.    Article 8.9.B has removed hillside overlay protection for nonresidential, stating that this complies with vesting provisions.  However, I cannot find a reason when reviewing Article 15.3.  And why have maximum land disturbance regulations been removed?

3.     An application for a wireless tower in Burlington was successfully defeated because it was required to have a public hearing and through that public hearing process Town Hall East Neighborhood Assoc. was notified.  Research discovered the tower was not necessary to provide coverage; it would have only improved existing coverage.  Town Hall East opposed the application and worked closely with the provider, resulting in a withdrawn application.  Draft regulations in Article 9.3.FF remove the public hearing process, allowing a tower to be permitted with no negotiation.  This is not good. 

4.    Effective public notice is the foundation of our public involvement process. Add a method to notice Zoning Code Interpretations in Table 15.1   How the Zoning Code is interpreted is important and should be shared with the public 16.9.      Include the registered neighborhood association in mailed notice referenced in 15.2.
  
5.    Require 15.2.D posted notice (aka signs) to be unobstructed, clearly visible from all traffic lanes and individually fronting each adjacent right of way.  There has been past documentation of signs posted behind telephone poles or mixed in with campaign signs.

6.    The Variance standards 16.3 have been reworded to fully support the premise that variances should be the exception.  Please add the additional criteria that the Applicant did not cause the reason a variance is now deemed necessary.    

Thank you very much for your patience and continued concern for the public process while also balancing the need to get things done.

STOP this stupidity! Leave the single family neighborhoods alone! The students/temporary residents have much of the urban area of Knoxville so leave working families alone in the neighborhoods they have made stable, safe, thriving, productive areas! Don't run the people, that have worked hard to make their communities better, out! We purchased in single-family, leave it the freak alone. Transient and multi-family residents usually do not have the same desire to maintain and improve upon and invest in (emotionally and financially) their neighborhoods. The area I am in is the Belle Morris area. We all know this BS wouldn't fly in a more affluent area such as Sequoya Hills and Farragut! So STOP messing with the more urban areas! These urban areas are now the safest, most stable, and valuable in modern history! How can you change the zoning of people's homes?!!. How is that fair and equitable?? They have purchased and invested in single-family areas and it is very unfair to change the nature of their neighborhoods by fundamentally changing the environment by re-zoning it ! I am from the Atlanta area where unbridled growth has ruined many established (safe, solid, stable) neighborhoods. Smart growth and planning is needed but the changes noted in Re-Code are not that. For goodness sakes, LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE! DO NOT RE-ZONE SINGLE FAMILY URBAN AREAS! Knoxville used to be a GREAT and AWESOME place to live. However, our government seems to think bigger, better, faster is better and we all know it isn't. Monkeying around with zoning by changing single family areas to multi family or multi residential will be the death-nail of this area. HOMEOWNERS are the key. The students don't stay, renters usually move on,. Market-square, downtown will slowly die. The revitalization of the Central Corridor will slow and eventually stop. Past is prologue. 20 years ago this area was the pits. Abandoned homes, high crime, etc. It's stabilized and thriving. Crime and traffic will increase and good quality caring residents will flee. Not being smart about growth and fundamentally changing the Knoxville Downtown urban neighborhoods will drive this place into the ground and drive good quality citizens to the nether regions. Stop it!

NO.THIS IS NOT NEEDED. STOP TGIS GRABAGE.

NO. LEAVE THE CITY ALONE.

I received months ago a mailer about this re-coding effort. I responded to that mailer either by phone or email making clear that I wanted more information about what was going on and how it would affect my neighborhood. To date I have received no return phone calls or email from this project. I suspect that there has been very little participation from people in my neighborhood or general area of the city. Now I see on Facebook that this project is moving forward two final maps of re-coding. I must say to you that I resent an object to this strenuously. I wished to participate in this I contacted you but you never contacted me back. I had intended to try and find out what was going on so that I I could communicate to my neighbors. It seems now that my opportunity to do that and to involves larger numbers of people is past and there is nothing I can do about it. As far as I'm concerned, this is typical of the pool the way in which Knoxville government conducts its business. I would like a halt to activities moving this project forward and an effort on your parts to reach out again to communities to allow them to comment on what has been done thus far.This kind of thing makes me terribly angry. The city of Knoxville under takes this very far reaching projects and there really is very little ground level effort put toward them even very little ground level knowledge of what is happening that affect our daily lives. For example, my neighborhood evidently was Selected for the rollout of these new LED streetlights. Many of these lights are literally blinding and the lights are of a blue white spectrum, thus they induce a Waking phenomenon in people physiologically speaking because they are more of the blue white spectrum which causes a reduction in melatonin release in the body and causes people to be more awake. In the evening it is extremely important to have light in the red spectrum without blue wave link waking phenomenon in people physiologically speaking because they are of the blue white spectrum which causes a reduction in melatonin release in the body and causes people to be more awake. In the evening it is extremely important to use lighting in the red spectrum with out blue wave lengths present.Blue spectrum light interrupts peoples natural release of melatonin in their bodies thus disrupting The body's natural physiology that helps people go to sleep. This is all scientifically supported information. And it is also well known that Americans are particularly sleep deprived. Yet the city of Knoxville has launch this new lighting without so much as a notification to the people such that they could comment. In my neighborhood many of these lights are at such an angle to the pavement that they are literally blinding as one approaches. As the moth to the flame the eye is drawn to these piercing lights. Most people don't realize that it is possible to call the city and have these lights shielded. Anyway, this is just one of the latest examples of how Knoxville shows major initiatives down the throats of its citizens without a care in the world about what it will do to their lives going forward. I resent this I resent you the people who make this kind of thing happened and I wish you would stop.

Numerous changes have been made to Draft 5. With so many changes why is it not titled Draft 6 since that is what it is? Changing the format on how you report the last minute changes is too difficult to understand. Stay with the previous style of changes so citizens can review only the changes as they apply to the specific Article.

The following should be added to Article 12. LANDSCAPE

12.11 LANDSCAPE BOND
In order to ensure correct installation and maintenance of landscaping, a landscape bond will be required.

No certificate of occupancy will be approved before the developer or owner has posted a landscape maintenance bond guaranteeing all landscaping materials and work for a period of two years after approval or acceptance thereof by the City in a sum established by the Knoxville-Knox County Planning Commission. The bond will be in the amount of 110% of the estimated cost of replacing and maintaining the landscaping required by these specifications, unless otherwise specified by the Knoxville-Knox County Planning Commission. 

A. Inspections

1. Installation
The developer or owner will be allowed six (6) months after a certificate of occupancy has been issued to install landscaping material according to the approved plan. This will enable planting to occur during optimal weather conditions and to ensure the availability of the approved materials. At the end of six months, the Zoning Administrator will inspect all required landscaping and certify that it has been properly installed and is in good health. If corrections are to be made the Zoning Administrator will notify the owner or developer. All unhealthy, defective or dead plant material will be replaced within three (3) months, at the end of which the Zoning Administrator will again inspect the landscaping. The bond shall be called if the required landscaping has not been installed or corrected by the end of this period, and the funds shall be applied to complete the landscaping work.

2. Maintenance 
Two years after a certificate of occupancy has been issued the Zoning Administrator will inspect all required landscaping and certify that it has been properly maintained. If no maintenance is required, the City will release the landscape bond. If corrections are to be made, the Zoning Administrator will notify the owner or developer and the bond company of any corrections. All unhealthy, defective or dead plant material shall be replaced within three (3) months. The Zoning Administrator will conduct a final inspection and if no further maintenance is required, the City will release the landscape bond. If deficiencies in the landscaping still exist, the bond shall be called and the funds shall be applied to complete the landscaping work.

Scenic Knoxville
Trees Knoxville
The City of Knoxville Tree Board

We have lost the requirement that surface lots in the SW must be in the rear.  This was missing in the July draft.  I commented about it and it was included in the October draft.  Now it's gone again - compare page 11-4 in the Oct. and Dec. drafts.

This, as you know, is a major deal.

Honestly, I wasn't reviewing the current draft to see if corrections made had been unmade.  However, it looks like that kind of review is necessary.

I hope the input to remove the educational facility from SW1 at the north neighborhood meeting was addressed in this last draft to MPC. Each SW 1 area has a school near or just outside of the areas. SW 1 only protection is to solely be residential as in the vision plan.

Community Forum requests that the deadline for comments to Recode Draft 4 and Maps Draft 3 be extended from January 4, 2019, to at least February 1 or February 15, 2019.  Furthermore, we request that any decision regarding an extension be made quickly so that interested citizens can plan their holiday schedules.

Draft 4 to Recode and Draft 3 of the Maps went on line on Monday afternoon, December 17, 2018.  The document is 287 pages long, and hard copies are not yet available.

We are concerned that the stated deadline for submitting comments for Draft 4 is January 4, 2019.  There are two holidays and only 18 days between the December 17, online release of Draft 4 and the January 4, 2019, deadline.   This timetable is not practical and makes it very difficult, if not impossible, for the public to review Draft 4 of Recode and Draft 3 of the Maps, and to submit comprehensive responses.

Community Forum, to date, has submitted timely and comprehensive responses to each Draft of Recode, totaling 55 topics, plus updated responses on the 14 original topics identified in Draft 1.  We have made important contributions to this entire process.  This is particularly true since March 21, 2018, when the first draft became available. Our Responses and extensive participation at public meetings and workshops have brought attention to many issues, both small and large, and have resulted in positive changes.

Most recently, we submitted a Response to Draft 3 on October 31, 2018, the original deadline for responses to be considered in preparation of Draft 4.  Our response covered 23 topics, but was produced in a very rushed manner to meet the deadline, which was less than two weeks after we had a hard copy to work with.

The deadline was then extended to November 16, and we continued our review of Draft 3.  We submitted a Supplemental Response on three additional topics on November 16.  Continued review resulted in a second Supplemental Response on three more topics on December 5.

Our very quick on line review of Draft 4 shows an incredible amount of additions, deletions, and modifications from Draft 3.  There is red and blue ink on many pages.  It will take considerable time just to note the differences from Draft 3, not to mention the time required to compare changes from previous drafts and changes from the existing Ordinance and other documents.  We need to determine whether our previously submitted topics have been adequately addressed in Draft 4.  To produce a comprehensive written response on many new topics, similar to what we have done previously, will take considerably more time.

A January 4, 2019, deadline for comments to Draft 4, is just not realistic, if the objective is to allow adequate time for meaningful input.   We urge that a more reasonable date of no sooner than February 1, 2019, be set to receive comments from the public.  The Stakeholder Advisory Committee is scheduled to meet on January 3, 2019.  There are no other workshops or public meetings currently scheduled, to the best of my knowledge, to discuss what is in Draft 4 before the January 4, 2019, deadline.

The Community Design Center’s workshop is tentatively scheduled for February 1, 2019, with a snow date of February 5, 2019.   I would expect that there will be many very important comments submitted on Draft 4 after that workshop.  That alone would be a strong reason to set a comments deadline of February 15, 2019.  It would seem prudent for City Council to delay holding its workshops until after revisions are made to Draft 4.  The content of Recode continues to be a moving target with substantial changes appearing in each succeeding Draft.

Community Forum wrote to City Council on October 9, 2018, to share our concerns about the existing timetable that had Recode going to MPC in November for their recommendation, and to City Council in December for their consideration of adoption.  See attached.  That letter followed remarks that I made at the September 20, 2018, City Council workshop.  At that time, the public had not even seen Draft 3.  Thankfully, a consensus was quickly reached to change that timetable.  Since that time, two more drafts to Recode and the Maps have been made public.  There has been much public discussion and input since then, and that must continue.

It is clear that there is still much more work to be done by all who are involved with this massive undertaking to replace the Zoning Ordinance.  An orderly process is required and cannot be rushed if we are to avoid total chaos going forward.  The current timetable needs to be changed immediately.

Community Forum looks forward to working with City Council members and others, as we work together to produce a Zoning Ordinance that will have the support of the citizens of Knoxville.  To achieve that objective, there must be meaningful community input and extensive discussion and debate on very specific topics.

Thank you for your consideration of this urgent request to extend the deadline for submitting comments to Recode Draft 4 and Maps Draft 3, and so that we can all have more time to observe and celebrate the upcoming holidays.

We look forward to a timely response to our request.

Sincerely,

Larry Silverstein, Chairperson, Community Forum

On behalf of the Knox County Democratic Party (KCDP) Progressive Action Committee (PAC), we would like to submit the attached comments on ReCode Knoxville Map Draft 3 and ReCode Text Draft 4.

We would especially like to point out our recommendation that the Planning staff seek out&nbsp;more&nbsp;lots to designate as RN-3 or RN-4, focusing on lots within a quarter-mile of core and local bus route stops that have no structures and/or that&nbsp;have non-historic structures that were built more recently, for example since 1980. We would be happy to partner with you and neighborhood groups to find such lots suitable for RN-3 or RN-4, and we look forward to following up with you about this.

Below is the list of PAC members that ratified this comment submission:

Emily Gregg - KCDP Chair & TNDP Executive Committee Member

Allie Cohn - PAC Co-Chair & KCDP Secretary and Executive Committee Member

Michael Davis - PAC Co-Chair & KCDP Executive Committee Member

Sylvia Woods -PAC Steering Team Member, KCDP Executive Committee Member; Tennessee Democratic Party Executive Committee Member

LaKenya Middlebrook - PAC Steering Team Member
Elizabeth Rowland - PAC Steering Team Member

Moira Connelly - PAC Steering Team Member

Matt Sterling - PAC Member

Please let us know if you or your team members have any questions on our submission.

Please see the attached letter addressed to Gerald Green for our comments on Recode Draft 4.

Over the past days I was reviewing the 4th version on Recode and would like to ask why Materials are excluding from being used in zones?  I strongly disagree with any exclusion of materials.  Having just worked on a project in Muscle Shoals, AL recently there was a material exclusion and it was going to cost the owner 40% more for his typical building by changing material.  We went in front of City Council and they understood our issue and allowed the material. 

How do you think Sequatchie Concrete Services on Sutherland Avenue in Knoxville would feel if CMU is exclude as a material in the city they do business in? Or what about other companies located in Knoxville that makes a forbidden material are you wanting them to leave the area? That doesn’t make planning since.  If you want better design this isn’t the way to go about it. 

I ask that you exclude any building material references in the new zoning ordinance.

Attached are the comments from the City.

Attached, is Community Forum's Supplemental Response to Draft 3, which contains Comments on three additional topics numbered 3.24, 3.25. and 3.26. These topics involve Accessory Structures and Uses, Outdoor Storage of Commercial Vehicles, and Outdoor Storage of Recreational Vehicles.We would be happy to discuss these additional Draft 3 topics, along with any of our previously raised topics, at any time.Sincerely,Larry Silverstein, Chairperson

https://www.knoxtntoday.com/making-the-case-for-recode-knoxville/

Attached is a document with my comments regarding recode.

• Nashville allows ADUs only where duplexes are permitted.
• Atlanta allows them only in duplex and multi-family zones with 750 sq. ft. max.
• Decatur, Georgia, limits ADUs to 300 to 800 sq. ft., and to no more than two occupants.
• Franklin, Tennessee, limits ADUs to 800 sq. ft., under the same roof as the house, and two occupants, with off-street parking; detached units only on 2+ acre lots with special use permit.
• Memphis/Shelby County allows only 700 sq. ft. ADUs on lots from 10,000 sq. ft. to 1.5 acres; larger acreage can have bigger ADUs; must supply parking space.
• Salt Lake City requires an affidavit that home and/or ADU is owner-occupied and prohibits them where there is an existing home occupation or business use.
• Leadville, CO - ADU are allowed, but if they are as rentals, must rental duration must last at least 30 days.
• Philadelphia, PA - Allows ADU's limited to 800 square feet, and requires owner occupancy.
• Santa Cruz, CA - ADUs are allowed in designated residential zones as long as the property owner inhabits either the main house or the ADU.
• Austin, TX - Allows ADU's. Austin requires two spaces for a detached ADU, in addition to the two spaces required for a primary dwelling.
• Denver, CO - Allows internal or attached ADUs, as well as detached ADUs, Owner occupancy of either the ADU or the primary dwelling is required.

Attached is Supplement 2 to Community Forum's comments on Recode Draft 3

• The entire first section on prohibited uses has been deleted. Granted, we wanted a form-based rather than a use-base code, with maximum mixed usage. But we need to keep the few prohibitions listed in this section, such as heavy industrial.
• The prohibition on gated communities has been deleted. Gated communities are not urban, they are not pedestrian friendly, they don't create a sense of community, they negatively impact connectivity, and depending on where they are located they may diminish access to the river. This prohibition was strongly supported by the south Knoxville community and needs to remain in the code.
• The entire section on off-street parking has been deleted and replaced with a reference to the general parking section in the Recode document. Unless that section includes a prohibition on parking lots in the front, which I doubt, this prohibition needs to remain in the code. Front parking lots are not urban and they are not pedestrian-friendly. Also, the original code has different parking max/mins for each of the seven SW districts. Deleting all the parking-related code presumably deletes these differing standards as well. We need those in the SW code because since it's form-based, parking min/max requirements can't be determined by use.
• The provision setting the maximum block size perimeter at 1400 feet has been deleted. This provision was included to prevent superblocks, which are absolutely not what the Vision Plan envisions. Again, superblocks are not urban, they're not pedestrian friendly, they have a negative impact on connectivity, and depending on their location could diminish access to the river. This provison needs to stay in the code.
• The 70 foot river buffer (measured from the riverbank) has been deleted. This was thoroughly debated before the code was adopted and needs to remain.
• The entire streetscapes section has been deleted, with a note that it should be moved to the subdivision ROW standards. What if any plans have been made to do this? I acknowledge that this section has problems, but a better solution would be to leave it in Recode and then come back and rework it as needed rather than to just delete it with a vague promise that it will go elsewhere.
• The SW5 and SW7 front setbacks have been changed. I personally am okay with this change but it's one the community should be aware of.
• The entire signage section has been deleted. Perhaps most of this is covered adequately in the new sign ordinance which was adopted after the SW code. But again, the community should be aware of this and there should be a point by point comparison to make sure that nothing crucial has been deleted

• The prohibition on gated communities has been deleted. Gated communities go against the intent of the South Waterfront Form-based Code's goals of an urban, pedestrian friendly, community with a sense of place. Gated communities negatively impact connectivity, and can diminish access to the river. This prohibition was strongly supported by the South Knoxville community and needs to remain in the code.
• The off-street parking section has been deleted and replaced with a reference to the general parking section in the Recode document. Unless that section includes a prohibition on parking lots in the front, which I doubt, this prohibition needs to remain in the code. Front parking lots are not part of an urban, pedestrian-friendly community. Also, the original code has different parking max/mins for each of the seven SW districts. Deleting all the parking-related code deletes the different parking max/mins for each of the seven South Waterfront districts. We need those in the South Waterfront code because parking min/max requirements can't be determined by use in a form-based code.
• The provision setting the maximum block size perimeter has been deleted. This provision was included to prevent superblocks, which are not what the South Waterfront code intended to build an urban, pedestrian-friendly community. Superblocks have a negative impact on connectivity, and can diminish access to the river. This provison needs to stay in the code.
• The 70 foot river buffer has been deleted. This was strongly supported by the community and well-vetted before the code was adopted and needs to remain.
• The entire streetscapes section has been deleted. If we are treating the South Waterfront streetscapes like all other streetscapes in Knoxville, then the South Waterfront will lose it's opportunity to be a unique district with it's own pull and character to help strengthen and diversify Knoxville. This section need to remain.

Don't we have a choice? Why Recode, Knoxville never did enforce the codes.

Attached is a compilation of comments regarding administration and process of the Zoning Code which had been submitted in response to previous drafts. 

Thank you reading this and addressing it during the upcoming work session.

As you may know, I have had a 37-year career as a City Planner and currently live in East Knoxville.

I have participated in the rewriting of two zoning codes and am familiar with policy as well as development review and code enforcement.

Thank you for your time on this matter.

Very best

Sandra Korbelik, AICP

In preparation for the ReCode workshop this evening, please see the attached PDF signed letter. 

If there is no house # on lot, what does that mean?

I received a letter about this, but the instructions to check resining for a specific address do not work. There is no "map feedback" link that I see. I want to know what changes are proposed around me. It would be nice if your instructions matched the choices on the web page or were clearer if I'm missing something. This is what makes people hate government.

As a new condo unit owner in the Southside Waterfront Neighborhood, I would like to express my interest in the Recode Knox project.  Gerald was a speaker today at the TNSA Development Symposium conference.  Very interesting.   With regards to the form-based codes I offer the following basic concerns from an owner's perspective and fellow planner:

• 1. Form Based Codes - are they clear and predictable for the developer and landowner to understand what is and is not permitted?  Are they easy and flexible to developer while still maintaining basic zoning principles?
• 2. How will the SW4 zoning district change or will it remain the same?
• 3. How is homeowner/unit owner parking determined, guest parking, overflow parking on site and on street determined?  I ask because CityView has a parking problem.  The side streets are technically owned by the city and thus not our designated overflow parking areas controlled by HOA.  West Blount Avenue is also crowded.  If the undeveloped parcels on either side are developed then we will really have an issue, especially during football season.  Again, there is no guest parking on site.  When the riverwalk is completed and more used by the public, will there be a parking area or trailhead with parking for the public or will they also use the side streets currently used by CityView?  
• 4. Sidewalks are fantastic, and we thank you.  However, still a need for at least 2 on site spaces per unit plus guest parking.  
• Thank you for all that the city is doing to reinvest in South Knox and riverfront areas.  It is becoming more walkable, connected, safer and revitalized - one project at a time.

To whom it may concern, There is a lot about this recode Knoxville that I am unaware of. I would like to gain more insight as to what this entails and how my household will be affected. Thank you. 

Please consider these suggestions for the new codes in Knoxville. Thank you. Addressing affordable housing/tiny houses Property owners can put a tiny house on their property if they are going to occupy the house. This code must exclude/forbid major developments of "trailer parks" or track housing by large developers, that is, limit the number of units per acre. Affordable housing must be encouraged and maintained. Developments of over 5 housing units must include one affordable unit per 5 units that is a significant proportion of all developments must be affordable housing. Wording must exclude a developer setting up multiple licenses for developments of 4 units, that is write the code so that the obvious ways around the requirement are addressed. The affordable unit must be within one mile of the other units so as to spread affordable housing through the county and reduce the building of slum developments. The affordable unit must be deeded in such a way that it is owner occupied for a long time, 20 years or more, before it can put put on the open market. The affordable unit will only be available to buyers/families who are near the poverty line. Sidewalks must be required in all new developments/construction and any substantial redevelopment projects. All new developments must site houses/buildings so that solar collectors can easily be fitted. Developments must include a certain number of trees per acre, the more the better. See above for solar siting. All new developments must provide storm water abatement for all impermeable surfaces, roofs, driveways, streets, patio/porches etc. New developments must offer ground source loops for heatpumps. Up to 6 female chickens should be allowed as pets. Get rid of the present City code/ordinance regarding chickens and model it on the language used to address pot bellied pigs. Short term rentals owner occupied houses must be allowed to do short term rentals that follow common sense noise and nuisance norms. Absentee landlords must be discouraged from short term rentals in residential neighborhoods, that is they cannot own/operate more than 1 in any given neighborhood. New developments must maintain wildlife corridors. New developments must set aside right of way for greenways, walking biking trails. Ideally these would be off street and connect to the right of way in adjoining neighborhoods/developments.

Recode is the most unprofessional thing I've ever seen in Knoxville. It is ridiculous to end comments before we can read Draft Five. Unless there are huge changes I will work to recall any City Council member who votes to approve this mess. It is so arrogant to think in two years you could redo fifty years of zoning. The vast majority of people do not want the ADU's. The Mixed Use design is not ADA compliant. The changes to commercial property are idiotic. Your idea to restrict home business is a civil rights violation. When you are in court with the many lawsuits that will come ask yourself, "why did we rush this"? Expect a lot of staff time to be tied up in court. Your arrogance earned that. Fix this mess before it is voted on. City Council has no planning experience. Why did you pass on such an incomplete incomprehensible product?

I would hope that Draft 5 has significant changes to the Mixed Use design. If not, I have no choice but to report you to the Federal Government. https://www.ada.gov In your madcap rush to get this done you have done a great disservice to all handicapped people who live in and travel to Knoxville. I wish each of you would understand the difficulty of being handicapped. I am very disappointed in what you have done. You should be too.

You need to know there have been private meetings to oppose Recode in court. While I was pretty keen on Recode even I have issues now. People do not want the ADU. Take them out. They aren't worth the bother. I liked the Mixed Use. Not now. You need to find a better design. It is clear you have ADA problems. Ignoring this will hurt everything. Why changed all the zoning? You could have just done Mixed Use and not have to have all this protest. It is unfair to end comments when no one has seen Draft 5. Why would you do that? You are begging for problems. Your PR is pathetic. So you want to make it worse? Why would you do that? It's clear all of you are sick of this project. Think how you will feel with multiple court cases. Send Recode back to the Planning Commission and get it fixed. You have no idea how much opposition there is. I attended a protest meeting in North Knoxville. There were statements that were quite severe. Like suing City Council members for ouster. I don't think you have a handle on how the public sees Recode. Good luck.

I own the building at 908 Tyson Street and note the zoning code is CG2. What does that mean? I couldn't find an explanation anywhere for the codes.

I believe RN-5 is the appropriate zoning for this property - given existing surrounding land use and conditions within proximity. 

I have looked at the City's master plan of the South Knoxville Waterfront and specifically at the Bell Tower Walk which is on axis with Atchley. My concern is that with the I-G zoning following the old rail tracks, the Bell Tower Walk will be limited in the future and the residential district above will be disconnected from the pedestrian friendly area below. As a designer myself, and stakeholder in the neighborhood, I think the SW-3 zoning should continue up Atchley Street at least to Yarnell Ave to reinforce the power of that axis and be in place for future development. Regardless of whether Atchley remains predominantly residential or the Bell Tower Walk eventually moves up the hill, having SW-3 would prevent an industrial development from cutting off the neighborhood from the riverfront or the Tower Walk from being visually terminated by industrial buildings. I think this will be especially important once the Rails to Trails path is installed and large groups of people are going to it right at that point. Finally, the river is visible up to Yarnell and there is a clear connection to what is the SW zone, I think the pattern already in the plan that has SW-3 on the North end of Atchley, should continue up the hill. Thank you very much! 

As a citizen of Knox County who will be affected by this vote who represents my voice? As a former Knox County Commissioner, I took my oath of office a a representative of not only my district but as a representative for everyone in our community. In doing so, I tried to vote to have a positive impact while at the same time diminishing unintended consequences as best as I could. With this massive rezoning of City parcels, there are more unintended consequences to this vote than benefits. In my opinion, there are serious questions that need to be answered; such as, if home businesses are not allowed, how does that impact home daycares, homeschools, and home churches? If higher density rates are the goal, has the school system, law enforcement, fire and other emergent service agencies been invited for input? If parking is recommended for behind the building in new mixed-use developments, how do Americans with Disabilities requirements impact this recommendation? Have property owners been properly noticed? How will these new codes be enforced? What will be the consequences-fines and/or liens? What are those amounts? What are the steps or processes in place for a property owner to object or oppose any enforcement? Where or how does one address their grievances? As a former Commissioner, I took zoning votes very seriously. Any zoning issue on the agenda, I would personally go and review the site, review the recommendations from MPC, and ensure that I was aware of neighbors/neighborhood viewpoints and impact. My vote was predicated on whether the zoning change would fit the community. I cannot square how any elected official could vote for such a massive rezoning without taking into consideration the impact could have on individual property owners. In closing, I will quote one of your fellow former council members, who in my opinion was a tireless voice for neighborhoods: "...What is broke?"-Barbara Pelot https://www.knoxtntoday.com/26429-2/ Barbara Pelot Thank you for this review of not only their workshop, but the disturbing consequences of the re-code movement. What is broke?? Knoxville's handling of zoning/re-zoning issues have been handled with tranparency and without out-of-town interference. We do NOT need or desire this manner of government over-ride of voter/taxpayer involvement. Listen to the "people". Workshops are worthless if they are merely for "show". 

Why in the world did MPC pass Recode when it is not complete? City Council can't fix this mess. Bring it back to MPC and fix it. My brother is an Architect in Atlanta. He told me we are much better off with our current zoning. He also said you will be sued by HUD if you build Mixed Use with the Recode design. How do you not know that? Very disappointed in MPC. You are not doing your job.

Many cities have adopted FireWise landscaping codes to protect lives and property from wildfires. Well planned landscaping that conforms to FireWise guidelines will enhance properties and ensure a safe environment for citizens. FireWise standards are endorsed by the Tennessee State Fire Marshall. 

Recode Knoxville’s proposed landscaping codes conflicts with FireWise guidelines which will create a fire hazard across the city. The proposed codes should adopt FireWise and BurnSafe Tennessee guidelines. Attached are several brochures from the State of Tennessee highlighting some of advantages of FireWise Communities.

We received a first notice by mail last week of ReCode. Being a multiple property owner in the City of Knox, this has not been adequately communicated to us. This is wrong and unjust to change our property rights without proper individual notice in a timely manner. I am spending hours searching a website and other avenues trying to find out what this really means. This is being poorly implemented and needs to slow down and make proper individual notifications to each homeowner as to what this could mean. We do not understand what is happening and we are feeling betrayed.

Your amendment stating that proper and adequate notification in the two Knox News Sentinel articles is ridiculous! NO ONE READS THE PAPER!

We are at 8701 Unicorn Dr. Right now we are zoned commercial. The current proposal has us going to mixed use. Will that make the taxes for this property go up?

the old Bob Cawrse land on Rennoc rd and Tillary rd and Crawford is a big concern to the area that we life in. it was multifamily apartments.[ since torn down ] we are afraid of the owner putting in small houses for rental that will further deteriorate the area we live in. is there any protections in place for us homeowners to prevent futher deteration from future unwanted developement

To whom it may concern,
There is a lot about this recode Knoxville that I am unaware of. I would like to gain more insight as to what this entails and how my household will be affected.

Thank you.

where can I read exactly what all the different designations on the map legend mean? For example, R-2, infill housing, R-5, ridgetop, historic overlay , etc…

On March 25, 2019 I sent you the following.  I am resending it to make sure that you received it.

Recently I communicated with you about the zoning on the west side of Sherrod Road, north of Mimosa. I need to make some corrections. The east side of Sherrod Road is zoned R-3. The five feet on the west side of should be zoned R-2. I quote from a rezoning ordinance passed by the Knoxville City Council at a meeting on July 6, 1985 entitled &quot;An Ordinance to rezone property of Kern&#39;s Inc from R-2 . . .to I-3, east of Chapman Highway, west side of Sherrod Street . . . - MPC approved I-3 General Industrial District with a 5&#39; buffer strip at eastern portion to property (west of Sherrod St) to be eft in the R-2, General Residential District) (11-3) (5-U-82-RZ).&nbsp;

Below is my original posting on March 6, 2019

There is a five-foot buffer strip on the west side of Sherrod Road, south of Mimosa that was left in the R-2 zoning when the eastern portion of the Kerns property was rezoned in 1982. The current zoning map very clearly shows that the R-2 zoning extends to the west side of Sherrod Road. The recode map does not show this. This was done at City Council, July 6, 1982. This was done to prevent increased traffic on Sherrod should access to the Kerns property be allowed from Sherrod Road. Sherrod road is a narrow, winding road that cannot take anymore traffic than that of the residents.

Staff Reply:

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I will pass this on to our GIS staff so that the map can be corrected. The change will be shown on the next draft of the proposed zoning map, which will be released in mid to late April
 

I support Recodeknoxville wholeheartedly. Please let us do what is right for our city by planning this way. We have the opportunity as our city grows and develops to improve even the air we breathe. Please support these changes for the benefit of all.

I realize that Recode Knoxville does not address noise, but with the purpose of Recode Knoxville to create a more dense population in certain areas, are the appropriate groups working to better enforce current noise laws/regulations and/ or create new legislation for noise? 

I live on Kingston Pike and cannot believe how the noise level has increased over the last 5 years with the increase in population  due to the development of downtown. I'm not opposed to the multi-purpose development but I think for everyone to live together in close quarters noise is a major factor. 

In addition, vehicles without mufflers are harming our environment as well as our ears! 
If there is one thing our city can do is provide protection for the environment and its citizens.

I notice that a portion of my property, that includes about half of my house, falls within an area designated HP. I can't find any definitive resource regarding HP online, except references back to 2008-2011. I'm interested in what restrictions the HP designation will place, both on me as an established homeowner and on the newly developed apartment complex abutting my property. Can you point to a resource so we may understand what's about to happen to us?

Please protect our orange zone properties R1-R3. We need this in time of ever growing development, we are losing our communities, neighborhoods, inner-city schools to big business and developers. We need to know and care about our neighbors, our neighborhood children and schools. If we loose this we have lost out on a lot. I was born and raised in East Knoxville. I once lived in a house in Parkridge, when we moved to Burlington I thought we had moved to a mansion. We had an upstairs, downstairs, basement, lots of yard with fruit trees. I could walk to Fair Garden Elementary, stores on McCalla, Asheville Hwy and the Holston Shopping Center were plentiful. We could ride our bikes safely to the ballfield on Wilson Ave or Winona Ave. I have had the privilege and blessing of owning three homes in Northeast and East Knoxville, I worked several years in downtown Knoxville. This area has always been a special part of who I am and very dear part of my existence. I hear stories now of how hard it is for young adults to find affordable housing, buy a home to raise their children, families having to move in together to share expenses. I see how blessed I was and how difficult it would be if I was trying to raise children and buy a home.

Currently own a newly built, 2015, single family home at 6012 Blossom Rd. Zoned as Low Density residential. New Zoning turns it into Hillside & ridgetop protection. How do I get that changed to Low density residential once again?

For the past year, our community has been updated on RECODE by a handful of dedicated professionals/homeowners who work tirelessly attending meetings, and workshops to supply our community with the readers digest form of updates which has been a mammoth task to say the least. We thank and appreciate their dedication immensely because this whole process has been way too confusing for the average homeowner to comprehend. It's been stated that there has been 80 public meetings and workshops, most of us cannot attend due to a timeframe that interferes with work obligations. Why not communicate via US Mail earlier? Why not mail a survey on public opinion?? Finally homeowners get a vague letter mailed to their homes in February advising on the upcoming vote? Wow!

I need a copy of a certified address (or whatever I need for building permit) for 204 kingwood dr 37918. thanks

I support Recodeknoxville wholeheartedly. Please let us do what is right for our city by planning this way. We have the opportunity as our city grows and develops to improve even the air we breathe. Please support these changes for the benefit of all.

I support recode knoxville...hope you will too as my representative

How does Rezone Knoxville affect residents who reside within the 37921 Empowerment Zone. Please do NOT reply with a host of terms which will require a Thesaurus to comprehend the nature of your response. Thank you in advance for your applied effort.

hi,
our property in the subject line is currently under C-6 zoning which is just a commercial zoning.

what would the new zoning mean for this property? (C-G-3?)
any changes  
i can find something that describes the new coding....pls send if that's easier

A new neighbor moved in to the house next to my daughter. He proceeded to build a shed on that ends right on their property line. Is this legal-thought there had to be a certain space between buildings.

I visited the MPC in January and they showed me the zoning plans for this area and how it would provide the opportunity for higher density use on these 50' lots. Now, reviewing what is allowed and the requirements within that zoning and their limitations, nothing but single family houses can be built on these lots. I own 1425 Woodbine Avenue, at the meeting we discussed building a smaller multi unit (condos) / townhouse development, but per the minimum requirements in the new zoning that will not be allowed. I am confused, does the City of Knoxville want people to redevelop its urban core or not? Unless I am missing something, which is very possible, it looks like it does not based on these zoning requirements. If I could get some insight into this, that would be beneficial as I have held this lot for potential development and now it looks to be worthless to me.

Recently I communicated with you about the zoning on the west side of Sherrod Road, north of Mimosa. I need to make some corrections. The east side of Sherrod Road is zoned R-3. The five feet on the west side of should be zoned R-2. I quote from a rezoning ordinance passed by the Knoxville City Council at a meeting on July 6, 1985 entitled "An Ordinance to rezone property of Kern's Inc from R-2 . . .to I-3, east of Chapman Highway, west side of Sherrod Street . . . - MPC approved I-3 General Industrial District with a 5' buffer strip at eastern portion to property (west of Sherrod St) to be eft in the R-2, General Residential District) (11-3) (5-U-82-RZ).

Your map does not explain what the codes mean what is a RN2? I know the R is residential, but what is the significance of the N or the number 2?

Where can I find detail information about the recode codes. The map only provides single word de-coding,

Yesterday I submitted a comment which mentioned Sherrod Road north of Mimosa. It should have referred to Sherrod Road South of Mimosa. My apologizes for my mistake.

I hope your week is off to a great start. Fourth & Gill Neighborhood Organization sent a letter to the Mayor and Council last week on the subject of Recode and for some reason I did not copy you guys. My bad—you will find the letter which was officially approved by our board attached. Please enter it into the record and consider it’s request. 

Please see the attached comments from Knoxville Transportation Authority regarding Recode Knoxville. Thank you!

The map doesn't work. It just "spins" without loading.