Knox County presents Module A for new zoning framework and cuts 400-plus code uses

Allison, the lead presenter, told county officials that Module A of the Unified Development Ordinance focuses on a new zoning district palette and a consolidated table of uses designed to implement the Knox County comprehensive plan. She said the work is organized into five modules, with Module A covering districts and the use table and later modules addressing dimensional standards, site design, environmental protections and administrative procedures.

The presentation explained the methodology behind the district palette: evaluate existing districts (names, purpose statements, allowed uses, and bulk and dimensional standards), align each new district with the comprehensive-plan place types, and produce a zoning equivalency map to translate existing zones into the new framework. "We've been hard at work since we last met in September," Allison said, and the team will provide a draft equivalency map for review before finalization.

Planners described a series of consolidations and renamings meant to simplify the code and improve predictability. Notable changes include: converting Rural Preservation into an Agricultural Preservation district that allows limited clustered residential development while creating an Agricultural Rural district intended to protect working farmland without the clustering option; consolidating exclusive residential and low-density residential into a Neighborhood Residential district with tiers; evolving General Residential into Mixed Residential to allow duplexes and townhomes; introducing a Traditional Neighborhood Development district to support walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods; folding some use-specific districts (shopping center, civic/institutional) into mixed-use or campus-style districts; and combining employment-focused zones into a single Employment Campus district. The technology overlay is being broadened into a Corridor Overlay District to improve design and pedestrian connectivity along major transportation routes. Floodway protections will remain but be handled through performance standards rather than as a separate mapped district.

Allison also described the use-consolidation work: the team reviewed "over 400 distinct uses" in the current code, identified redundancies and outdated terms, benchmarked against peer jurisdictions, and is drafting clearer, enforceable use definitions. "We've gone through a very detailed review of all of the existing uses," she said, inviting commissioners and the public to flag missing critical uses or concerns with consolidated items.

Commissioners raised several substantive concerns during the Q&A. Commissioner Thompson pressed on the difference between Agricultural Preservation and Agricultural Rural, noting many parcels currently zoned "ag" are functionally residential and asking for clearer distinctions so applicants and staff can apply the code consistently; he noted that rural-preservation parcels historically limited residential density (one unit per 15 acres) and warned that permitting clustering could increase residential pressure in agricultural areas. Allison acknowledged the ambiguity and said the naming and clustering distinctions were intentionally crafted to reflect current district intent and policy goals but that the team will continue to workshop definitions.

Other discussion items included: Mr. Larson asking how the project will avoid past mapping mismatches between zoning and adopted sector/plan maps; Allison said the equivalency map and a deliberate review process aim to preserve current property rights while improving alignment with the plan. Commissioner Frazier asked about hillside and ridgetop protections; Allison said environmental protections and landscaping rules will be part of Module D. Commissioners requested an editable or commentable format for suggested edits; Allison and staff said they will provide tools and that the team is asking for initial module feedback within roughly two weeks, with further iterations to follow. Allison also indicated the drafting timeline remains active and that the team does not anticipate timetable issues.

The presentation closed with practical next steps: staff will circulate the slide deck and a portal link for comments, provide tools for commissioners and the public to submit edits, and bring back the zoning equivalency map and subsequent module details (bulk and dimensional standards, site design) for review. The county will continue monthly touch points with the technical and community advisory committee and the planning commission as the UDO drafting proceeds.

The presenters did not propose or adopt any formal motions during the webinar; the session was an informational briefing and initial feedback opportunity ahead of future public-review drafts and formal hearings.