Commission postpones Scenic Drive circular-driveway request, asks for survey, materials and neighborhood input

On July 18, 2026, the Knoxville Historic Assembly Commission postponed a request from the owner of 720 Scenic Drive to install a circular driveway in the front yard, saying the commission needs an engineered survey, scaled site plans and clearer neighborhood input before it can grant an exception to design guidelines.

The commission’s staff told members the application had been postponed at the June meeting so the applicant could consult city engineering; staff noted subdivision regulations for collector streets require a turnaround so vehicles do not back onto the street and that the overlay’s design guidelines generally prohibit front-yard parking except in extraordinary, documented cases. Staff told the commission that, without additional documentation showing rear-yard options are infeasible, staff recommended denial or postponement.

Applicant Allison Geek, who identified herself at the podium as the property owner at 720 Scenic Drive, said she and city engineering had discussed the site and that “we are not seeking parking … we just need a safe way to be able to turn around.” Geek told the commission she and a city engineering contact had concluded the backyard lacked the space for a safe turnaround without removing the garage and that she was prepared to match the existing gravel-concrete driveway material and use landscaping to screen the pavement.

Neighborhood representatives and other commissioners pushed back on altering the front-yard character. A neighborhood participant argued the property is in a 100‑year‑old subdivision where front‑yard circular drives are not consistent with historic character and said the home has adequate garage and back‑of‑house room for short‑term loading. Staff and commissioners repeatedly asked the applicant to document that branch‑turnaround alternatives and rear‑yard options had been exhausted and to provide a topo or engineered survey showing existing dimensions.

Commissioners also discussed driveway width and impervious‑surface limits; the applicant told the commission the proposed width was 12 feet but said she could reduce it to 10 feet if required. Staff asked for a landscape plan and specific material callouts so inspectors can match completed work to the approved application.

A motion to deny the application without prejudice received no second and failed. Another motion—to postpone the application so the applicant could supply accurately scaled site plans with dimensions, photos, a landscape plan, and documentation that all other turnaround options had been exhausted—passed. The commission recorded the vote in the transcript as 4 yes and 1 no and discussed a 30‑day return window; commissioners instructed staff to advise which documents would be required for full review.

What happens next: The applicant was directed to return with an engineered survey or topo, a scaled site plan showing the proposed driveway and any branch‑turnaround alternatives, a materials and landscape plan, and any neighborhood letters or association input. The commission will revisit the application at the next scheduled meeting following receipt of those materials.