Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Open Space topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Blount County hearing draws divided public on proposal to lower cluster-development open-space requirement to 30%
Summary
At a July 10 zoning public hearing, residents and housing professionals split over a proposed amendment to Section 7.2(c) that supporters said would reduce required open space for cluster developments to 30% and opponents said would harm natural resources and contravene local planning goals.
The Board of County Commissioners of Blount County, Tennessee, held a zoning public hearing July 10 on a proposed amendment to Section 7.2(c) of the county zoning resolution to revise the open-space requirement for cluster developments. Supporters urged the change as a way to increase attainable housing; opponents warned it would worsen erosion, flooding and undermine the county’s comprehensive plan.
Supporters said the change would allow smaller, lower-cost homes. Austin Penton, a Maryville resident and member of the National Association of Realtors, said he supported “the motion to reduce the green space down to 30%,” and told commissioners that reduced open-space rules make homes financially accessible for local workers. “They purchased a home at under a $150 a foot through one of these tract homes,” Penton said, describing clients including a local police officer and a young couple who were able to buy homes at about $130 per square foot.
Pat McGill, a District 4 resident who said she works in the housing industry, also backed denser cluster development as a way to avoid sprawl. “If you get more homes on a smaller tract of land, then the farms remain,” McGill said, adding that smaller yards and higher density make housing attainable for younger residents and future generations.
Opponents warned of environmental and process concerns. Dr. Julie Konkle, president of the board of East Tennessee Quality Growth and an environmental science professor at Maryville College who also works with the Blount County Conservation District, said, “The objective assessment of this amendment to the resolution would be there would be a negative impact on natural resources.” Konkle told commissioners that existing issues with erosion and flooding would be compounded by reduced open-space requirements and urged that low-impact-development practices be used instead.
Resident Scott Gallison of District 6 raised procedural concerns about how the measure reached the commission. Gallison said the planning commission forwarded the amendment with five votes and questioned whether that represented a true majority for a 12-member body. “Five votes moved this forward,” he said, and said he was unable to obtain rules describing how the planning commission conducts votes. Gallison also disputed whether the kinds of houses described as “affordable” by supporters meet local affordability definitions, noting current sale prices on developments he referenced were above what his view of affordability would allow.
The public hearing drew four speakers during the formal comment period. No formal vote on the amendment was recorded at the hearing. The chair closed the hearing and adjourned the meeting, saying, “I will declare the public hearing to be closed. And without objection, this, hearing is adjourned.”
The proposal would alter county zoning standards for cluster developments outside city limits; speakers disagreed about whether the change would advance attainable housing goals or undercut long-standing local planning and environmental priorities. Commissioners did not announce a final decision at the close of the hearing.
