We, as Keep the Urban Wilderness Peaceful, a grassroots citizens group, are writing to identify our concerns about a rezoning application for land on Nixon Road, John Norton Road and Sevierville Pike in South Knox County. The requests for a sector plan amendment and rezoning (2-A-19-SP/ 2-D-19-RZ) are in regards to the approximately 37 acres consisting of the following parcels: 124-185, 124-12704, 124-12705. The Sector Plan Amendment (2-A-19-SP) would change the parcels on the South County Sector Plan from Low Density Residential to General Commercial, while the zoning change would change the parcels from Agricultural to Planned Commercial. This position paper expresses our concerns the implications of this rezoning/amending will have on our community’s safety and quality of life. The character of the area in question currently aligns with the vision of South Knoxville’s Urban Wilderness, where both visitors and residents alike are able to benefit from the preservation of the area’s natural heritage, while enjoying the benefits of old growth forest and wildlife unrestrained by commercial enterprises.

According to the Planning Commission, a rezoning is justifiable if it is consistent with one of three circumstances: (1) when the requested rezoning is consistent with long-range land use plans adopted by the appropriate governing body, (2) when there was an error or oversight in the original zoning of the property, or (3) when changes have occurred to conditions in the vicinity of the property that prevent the reasonable use of the property as currently zoned.1 Based on the Planning Commission’s published plans for the area, we do not feel that the rezoning application for these parcels meets any of these criteria.

The parcels are part of the ridge of Brown Mountain, which stretches across South Knox County roughly parallel to Gov. John Sevier Highway to the south. The parcels, also bordering on Sevierville Pike, are located near the gap where Chapman Highway passes through the gap in Brown Mountain. This area is discussed in the Chapman Highway Corridor Study that was adopted in 2006. The study states that preservation of ridges and hillsides is important to the citizens involved in the study.2 That study specifically recommends that “commercial uses along this stretch of Chapman Highway (Brown Mountain area near Little Switzerland) should be discouraged in order to avoid the massive slope cuts that would be required to bring sites into compliance with development codes.”3 Finally, the study states that the “Little Switzerland and Brown Mountain area has several pockets of undeveloped wooded areas that should be left natural in order to protect the steep slopes.”4 It is likely that area in question at Nixon and Sevierville Pike were part of these referenced “undeveloped wooded areas.”

The Hillside and Ridgetop Protection Plan states that special circumstances can be considered for rezoning to commercial, but the type of ridge or hillside is to be considered, as is the site’s proximity to highways, freeways and transit, as well as the “carrying capacity of those roads and streets providing access to the site.”5 One of the roads in question, Nixon Road, is a narrow, essentially single-lane road. Sevierville Pike is a winding country road that is likely unable to handle an increase in traffic that a commercial zone would create. Chapman Highway, onto which Nixon empties, is notorious for its accident record. A rezone in this area has the potential to increase traffic congestion, accidents, and fatalities. According to the Knoxville Regional Traffic Count program, the average daily total of vehicle traffic on the section of Chapman Highway closest to the proposed rezone is 27,850.6

The current South County Sector Plan denotes these parcels as part of Hillside/Ridgetop Protection Areas (HP), which is used to identify hillsides, ridges and similar features that have a slope of 15% or more.”7 The plan states that in the range of 15-25 percent slopes two houses are allowed per acre in low-density residential areas, and one house per acre in agricultural and rural residential areas.8 The parcels in question, as part of the protection areas, thus cannot handle the proposed density of buildings (4.2 units per acre) described in the rezoning application.

Observation of the parcels requesting rezoning has shown that significant clearing and grading has already taken place. The Hillside and Ridgetop Protection Plan, adopted in 2012, states that “clearing and grading should not be permitted until a development or clearing and grading plan has been approved.”9 The concern for clearing and grading prior to the permit process is the risk of erosion. The plan mentions slope failures or sediment flows, the latter of which is often induced through the addition of water. They occur predominately in areas with steep slopes, such as slopes greater than 15 percent10, which is the minimum grade of the parcels in question.

The proposed amendment to the South County Sector plan is also misguided. In requesting a change from low density residential to general commercial – a category that includes previously developed strip commercial corridors11 – the parcels in question fail to meet the criteria of “existing commercial.” Also, the parcels are not adequately supplied with necessary infrastructure. The Sector plan notes that movement to the General Commercial category requires that parcels to be considered include, “previously developed strip commercial corridors providing a wide range of retail and service oriented uses. Such land use classification and related zoning should not be extended because of the adverse effects on traffic-carrying capacity, safety and environmental impacts.”12 The parcels in question are not previously developed, there are no sewer lines (the majority of the residential properties are on septic) there are no fire hydrants, and, as stated previously, the roads that offer access to the parcels are incompatible with increased traffic.

We would ask that you seriously consider the implications of rezoning these parcels to Planned/General Commercial status. The land in question appears to be unsuitable for development greater than the currently zoned Low-Density Residential / Agricultural. The area is in a protected zone, meant to preserve the hilltops and ridges that make up
Knox County’s natural heritage. This heritage is important, so much so that the Knoxville-Knox County Growth Policy Plan offered a rural area designation in order to conserve agricultural resources.13 Residents in the community cherish this natural heritage and many move to the area for the quality of life that the low-density region affords. The area is also home to regional wildlife including white-tailed deer, black bear, bobcat, coyote, wild turkey and black vultures, among others, which, while not currently endangered or threatened, will likely be displaced by high-density commercial
development. The area borders Knoxville’s Urban Wilderness, which has become a regional destination for those seeking outdoor activity in an area close to a major metropolitan area, a phenomenon that exists in few locations in the United States outside of the Rocky Mountains. The natural landscape of this area is essential to maintaining the
essence of the Urban Wilderness. The Urban Wilderness is an economic driver in South Knox County, as shown, for example, in the Baker Center’s economic report of the urban Wilderness that states that the “economic potential for a trail system near Knoxville will grow as the city’s population and household income increase.”14 Thus, commercial development within this area will have a negative impact on the quality of life of the current residents, likely displace animal populations, and limit the potential for economic growth in the region in the future. With this in mind, we request that you take the concerns of Keep The Urban Wilderness Peaceful into your consideration of the proposed rezoning of these parcels.

Sources:

  1. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, “The Rezoning Process.” – Accessed February 3, 2019.
  2. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, Chapman Highway Corridor Study, 2006, p. 11.
  3. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, Chapman Highway Corridor Study, 2006, p. 34.
  4. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, Chapman Highway Corridor Study, 2006, p. 56.
  5. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, Knoxville-Knox County Hillside and Ridgetop Protection Plan, 2012, p. 36.
  6. “Knoxville Region Traffic Count Program.” – Accessed February 3, 2019.
  7. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, South County Sector Plan, 2012, p. 27.
  8. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, South County Sector Plan, 2012, p. 27.
  9. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, Knoxville-Knox County Hillside and Ridgetop Protection Plan, 2012, p. 34.
  10. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, Knoxville-Knox County Hillside and Ridgetop Protection Plan, 2012, p. 9.
  11. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, South County Sector Plan, 2012, p. 54.
  12. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, South County Sector Plan, 2012, p. 54.
  13. Knoxville-Knox County Metropolitan Planning Commission, South County Sector Plan, 2012, p. 42.
  14. Sims, C., Davis, B., and Kim, B., Economic Potential of South Knoxville’s Urban Wilderness, June 2015, p. 4.