Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BZA tables 524‑unit US‑411 multifamily proposal after residents and traffic engineer flag near‑capacity intersections
Summary
The Blount County Board of Zoning Appeals tabled action on a proposed 524‑unit multifamily development on US‑411 after public safety and traffic capacity concerns and questions about sewer alignment; the applicant said the project would preserve buffers, provide 52% green space and work with TDOT.
The Blount County Board of Zoning Appeals also tabled a second special‑exception request — a proposed multifamily development totaling roughly 524 units across about 41.1 acres at US‑411 south of Marville — after residents, staff, and the applicant discussed traffic, sewer, and site design concerns.
Thomas Lloyd of Blount County Development Services told the board the mixed‑zoning parcel (commercial and suburbanizing) is eligible for a high‑density multifamily special exception and that staff submitted a report finding the proposal meets the zoning resolution’s required standards if the board makes the necessary findings and the developer obtains all external permits.
Richard Porter, the architect and director of development for Gross Residential, described cluster design that preserves perimeter buffers, exceeds recreational area requirements (stating 52% green space), keeps buildings under the 35‑foot maximum, and employs local utility will‑serve letters. He said the project would be accessed from US‑411 and that the developer had worked with TDOT on ingress and egress points.
Residents testified about traffic safety and congestion on the US‑411/129 corridor. Tony Satty, who lives near the intersection, said daily travel times are already long and that adding several hundred new residents could make congestion and safety worse; another commenter described witnessing a recent fatal crash nearby. The board questioned whether the corridor and nearby intersections could safely absorb the additional trips.
John D., the CDM Smith traffic engineer who prepared the traffic‑impact study, said background growth puts the key intersection near 90% of capacity and that the proposed development would add about 212 peak‑hour trips. He told the board that the development itself had minimal direct impact on delay but that longer‑term planning and TDOT involvement would be necessary because the corridor is close to capacity.
A motion to approve the special exception (with a recommendation that TDOT prioritize capacity enhancements) failed to pass. The board then moved to table the item to the July 2 meeting to ensure fuller membership and additional documentation; the table motion passed.
Next steps: the applicant said it would continue coordination with TDOT and provide additional engineering materials for the board’s July meeting, and staff noted that final approval would be contingent on platting, permitting, and any required county/state permits.
