Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council removes legacy "C" plan designation for 962 N. Gallaher View Road after lengthy debate; developers and neighbors split
Summary
Council voted 7–2 to remove a previously approved planned-residential ("C") designation from a North Gallaher View Road parcel, clearing the way for the developer to pursue RN4-based townhome development; neighbors urged retaining the older plan district to preserve public review and stricter controls.
Knoxville City Council voted to remove a legacy planned-residential "C" designation on a parcel at 962 North Gallaher View Road after extended public testimony and council debate. The removal clears a procedural constraint that had been tied to an earlier development plan and gives the property owner a clearer path to pursue townhome development under current zoning (RN4), although opponents urged the council to preserve the "C" designation to ensure a planned-development review process and more public input.
Developer James Lennon and his team said the site was encumbered by a plan created when Memory Care of America intended to build a 64-bed memory-care facility; after that operator failed, the developer sought to return the lot to typical residential entitlements to deliver for-sale townhomes. Lennon described an approximate concept of townhomes in the $400,000 range and said utility constraints and market forces shaped his program.
Neighbors, led by the West Hills Community Association, urged retaining the "C" designation because the planned-residential overlay (as it existed under the former code) requires special-use review and wider public input. Larry Silverstein and other neighborhood speakers argued the overlay was intended for sensitive properties and that removing it would remove an important layer of review. Council discussed transition-rule interpretations: staff explained that previously approved plan districts remained subject to conditions of their original approval and that the planning department typically uses the sector plan in effect at the time of the plan’s original approval to guide recommendations.
After discussion about legal transition rules and whether the developer could reasonably proceed under the current RN4 pathway or seek a planned-residential amendment, council voted to remove the "C" designation by roll call, 7 in favor and 2 opposed. Supporters of removal said keeping the older designation could unduly penalize a property owner after an unrelated developer failure and would delay redevelopment.
