Citizen Portal

Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Officials brief county on North Waterfront redevelopment plan and TIF proposal; staff cites about $85M cap

Knox County Commission (agenda review) · August 26, 2026

Summary

KCDC and University of Tennessee representatives described a North Waterfront redevelopment plan seeking county participation in tax-increment financing (TIF) to support public infrastructure connecting campus and downtown; county advisers estimated financing caps around $85 million and outlined next-step approvals and public outreach.

Officials from Knoxville's redevelopment authority and the University of Tennessee described a North Waterfront redevelopment plan and asked the county to consider participating in a tax‑increment financing (TIF) arrangement to support public infrastructure.

Mark Mamontov, who has worked on redevelopment plans, outlined how a TIF would support public infrastructure along 2nd Creek and Neyland Drive to enable an innovation campus that connects UT and downtown neighborhoods. "The goal of the plan would be to help with public infrastructure to support UT's redevelopment of the East Side Of 2nd Creek," Mamontov said.

Ben Bentley of KCDC described the public process, saying two hearings were held and that outreach included condo associations and affected property owners; he said changes were made in response to concerns about a specific parcel. Matthew Scoggins, chief of staff for Chancellor Plowman, framed the North Waterfront as campus' "front porch" and emphasized coordinating university plans with city and county infrastructure investments.

Mamontov estimated the plan's financing envelope at roughly $85,000,000 and said the county's maximum exposure would be capped in the plan documents and could not be exceeded without returning to the commission. He also noted that, in typical recent years, the city bears a larger share of TIF debt service (roughly a 2:1 ratio city:county) given differences in tax rate and debt service allocations.

Commissioners asked about costs to the county and asked staff to return with plan documents at the Nov. 31 meeting for a formal cap decision. No action was taken in the workshop; staff said they will continue public updates and will provide the plan with caps and clearer financial estimates for commissioners to review.

AI generated

The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.

AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.

Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.

Source