Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Denial Milton St topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council denies rezoning request near Sharps Ridge after split vote; staff had recommended denial
Summary
Council voted 5-4 to deny a request to rezone four small parcels near Sharps Ridge from RN4 to RN5 after an extended public hearing and a detailed planning-staff report recommending denial. Supporters said the change would enable duplex development; opponents and staff cited compatibility and process concerns.
Knoxville City Council on Tuesday voted to deny a rezoning request for parcels near Sharps Ridge after a lengthy public hearing and a staff recommendation against the change.
The applicant sought to rezone four parcels (item 12e) at 4011-4025 Milton Street from RN4 to RN5 to allow duplexes and other attached housing types without replatting. Supporters, including representatives of Yes Knoxville and the applicant's team, said small-scale attached housing at the site would add a few units and provide missing-middle housing opportunities close to transit and services.
Planning staff recommended denial after analyzing five statutory factors used for rezoning decisions, including whether the area had substantially changed, consistency with the zoning code and sector plan, and the potential for new development to be out of scale with existing neighborhoods. Amy Brooks, Knox County/City planning staff, told council the property is isolated by a railroad right-of-way and utility land that limits pedestrian connections; staff found the parcels did not meet the RN5 district intent and warned that RN5 could allow more intense development than RN4.
Neighbor Michelle Ivester, Oakwood Lincoln Park Neighborhood Association president, opposed the request and said the applicant could achieve his goals through replatting or other measures that preserve neighborhood context. Proponents from Yes Knoxville said the requested change would add only a small number of units (the RN5 vs RN4 difference would be three additional units in this case) and argued the site is an appropriate infill location.
After debate, Councilmember Thomas moved to deny and the motion passed on a roll-call vote: Councilmembers Thomas, McKenzie, Parker, Roberto and Singh voted to deny; Councilmembers Fugate, Hoesley, Ryder and Smith voted against denial. The tally recorded by the clerk was 5 in favor of denial, 4 opposed.
Councilmembers who voted to deny cited the staff analysis and concerns about holding to consistent rezoning standards; others said they supported more housing and noted the site's challenges and potential to add units if developed differently. The denial leaves the property zoned RN4 and preserves the current development review triggers for that district.
