Back in 2005, Joe McCord's dad, Keith McCord wanted to put a lot of condos in near a wetland at Crosscreek, there on Carpenters Grade Road and Sandy Springs.

The Maryville Board of Zoning Appeals turned it down.

Keith McCord sued them.

Meanwhile, Joe McCord puts in some legislation to de-list some 3,000 waterways and it seems a little obvious that this would benefit a development that would disturb a wetland, if a claim can be made that it is a wet-weather wetland.

But in today's paper, there's an article that Joe McCord's Legislation, which he had energetically defended before, has been "watered down" now to just cleaning up the Nolichucky River and another article that Chancellor Forgerty has "set aside" the BZA's decision in Keith McCord's favor for his condo complex. Strangely, this happened Feb. 1st and we are only now hearing about it.

If you want to go see how this series of coincidences play out, there's a meeting tonight:

The Board of Zoning Appeals will meet at 5 p.m. today for a briefing from attorneys about the ruling.

"Concerns raised by citizens relative to traffic is a matter that may be reviewed and considered by the Maryville Regional Planning Commission at the next requested approval phase of the property development ... if permitted by the applicable laws and regulations," the ruling states.

Just received this email from the secretary of the GMAC.

"The GMAC members are planning to have a public meeting at the Library on March 3rd at 6:30pm to present our findings to the public and would like to encourage each of you to attend for information prior to our reporting to you at your work session in March. We will cover things in much more detail at the Library because we will have more time." -J.C. Franklin, Secretary

Put on your calendars!

The Pellissippi Parkway Extension is a done deal. The heads of the five families (Blount Co. Mayor, Maryville Mayor, Maryville City Manager, Alcoa Mayor, and Alcoa City Manager) all support it. A massive Chamber of Commerce turnout arrived in Mercedes Benz and wool suits to support it. They are well organized, and shouted down the "antis" at several points.

I think the county's plan to choose my paint colors and window treatments for me is a violation of my private property rights: Link...

But just so long as they let me bulldoze the top of the mountaintop flat and take off all the trees so my view in all directions is not obstructed, as well as install security lights that burn all night, I'll go along with it.

It seems to me that they've run a similar poll before: (Link...)

Make sure to take the time to log your vote.

I'm also hearing that the Chamber passed out some sort of questionnaire regarding the extension to their membership this week. Anyone have any details on that?

Boy, Commissioner/Planning Commissioner Scott Helton doesn't miss a trick when it comes to helping out the Mayor's biggest contributors: (Link...)

This is like a big ole Christmas present to people who already received ill-advised RAC status. Note the key words "AND existing commercial development." (Emphasis mine.) There's a big difference between clustering commercial only at key intersections on 411S and at existing ad-hoc industrial parks/metal dumps all along the "scenic" highway.

The Planning Commission seemed to reach a consensus on language suggested by the Hunter Interests Growth Study to recommend clustering of commercial sites on U.S. 411 by zoning at key intersections and existing areas of commercial development.

County Commissioner Scott Helton didn’t want the language to just include key intersections.

“I just didn’t want us to be handcuffed down there,” Helton said.

The proposal had generated discussion about what direction was wanted for the development of U.S. 411 South.

“We have a desire not to have a strip mall all the way down the road to the county line,” Planning Commissioner Rick Brownlie said.

Yes, Heaven forbid we should limit ourselves to the recommendations we paid so much for.

No truer words were ever spoken, than by Bob Kidd re: the win of Jerry Cunningham in the primary for Mayor: (Link...)

"Tonight was a vote for pro-growth," said Kidd, who did not seek re-election. "Put that in your paper."

Our favorite bank hits the news again!

(Link...)

Better read it quickly before they retract it.

In all the bruhaha about Harmony Properties, we Blount Countians have largely overlooked a threat at least as great to our signature Chilhowee Mountain view: Look Rock Estates.

Here's a real estate article (I noted it was paid for by the developers, Tom White and Joe Mathis) in the Knoxville News Sentinel from November 7th: (Link...)

What they are selling are "crest view" lots. Meaning, in a Wear's Valley-esque manner, they clear off the very top of the ridge of the mountain so the homeowner can have a full view looking off each direction. And we get a full view of the homeowner throughout the rest of the valley, and most likely, all the way to town. (Link...)

And what are they using to put some urgency in their marketing?

“There are no other residential developments in this area with lots this big that have views from both sides of the mountain,” says White. “We’ve been seeing a trend toward regulations limiting mountaintop development, so with private mountain land drying up, this could be the last chance to build on something like this.”

You think?

In other words, hurry up folks, and help us ruin the mountain before Blount County comes to its senses!

Photos of the place: (Link...)
Another sales article about the place - very reassuring that all lots can be additionally subdivided: (Link...)

Planning Commissioner Rick Brownlie, a really terrific guy and one of the bright spots on our planning commission, has initiated a very neat search utilizing the Daily Times: Link...

They want to base their study on one conducted recently from Sevier County (shudder): Link...

“To begin protecting these important resources, one must first identify specific publicly accessible places from which the views of these hillside and ridges are enjoyed. Such places normally include scenic highways, walking trails, scenic lookouts, parks, historic sites and buildings, and canoe and kayak routes.”

So, what views are important to you? Take a few moments and e-mail your thoughts to editor@thedailytimes.com or mail them to Scenic Views, The Daily Times, P.O. Box 9740, Maryville, TN 37803. The suggestions will be provided to the Planning Commission for informational purposes. A top 10 list of most suggested views will be also be published in The Daily Times.

I guess they include these instructions to save "Overlook at Montvale" the ole Ruby Tuesday treatment:

If you have strong feelings about any individual developments in Blount County, feel free to write a letter to the editor.

Just reading the words "Sevier County" in the context of "conservation" makes my blood pressure shoot up:

A guiding principle of the Sevier County study, which can be found online at Link..., was that hillside development should not be completely prohibited. One of the most important recommendations is the principle that all development should be secondary to the surroundings.

I support what they are trying to accomplish. Let's have our own "contest" in parallel. Who wants to start?

This came across my email this morning: The Blount County Planning Commission will hold a called meeting on November 27, 2007 at 5:30 P.M. in the Blount County Courthouse Room 430. The purpose of the meeting is: continue revision of the Policies Plan and other plans for the County.

Copies of the Policies Plan and other plans and various analyses may be viewed at Link... under the Plans section.

Note: If you wanted to provide input, Chairman Scully said last time that if they allowed it, they'd be there all night. So, they didn't allow public input. Unless they do tonight's meeting differently, you'll have to think up a different way of giving your thoughts toward this important planning process.

Tomorrow's 5:30 meeting of the Planning Commission includes in its agenda a section on Long Range Planning. Three really important items stand out:

Here are the links to the supporting documents, the first being the agenda:

a - agenda for November 20, 2007
b - memo on amendments to subdivision regulations public h…
c - memo on rezoning public hearing for 11-20-07
d - memo on plat reviews for 11-20-07 _minus attachments_
e - memo on long range agenda items for 11-20-07 _minus en…

Might be a good meeting to attend, if you are interested in better understanding the process of how regulations are created. (And if your turkey is thawed.)

The county commission will vote on a measure to adopt design and lighting standards within the Zoning Regulations at their meeting tomorrow night at 7 p.m. You can find the proposed changes on the agenda here, starting on page 77: Link... I'll also paste them below.

What do you think of them? I'd especially like to hear the opinions of those of you who keep up with the Dark Skies Initiative and those of you who drive Hwy 411S. Are these regulations sufficient? Are they too much? Are they just right?

So often, development plays a negative part in our lives, in our news, and in our discussions. I would like to start a discussion of what good and desirable development can look like. I love a good "green" development, but there are many ways of judging that: green space preservation, placement within the community with respect to infrastructure, green or recycled material use, and well, you should feel free to name what you think of as "green." There probably isn't any one development that will be consistently green in every regard.

So, what do you like to see in a development?

Please name a development you particularly appreciate and tell us why.

I'll start. How about "Little Mountain"? A total of 100 acres was saved, mostly in one lump, as a natural common area. No bulldozing the whole forest down here. The lots tend to be a little smaller to accommodate the preserve. The original farmhouse was saved as a guesthouse for the community. The negative is the steepness of the slopes in some places and they get pretty close to the top of the ridge with the houses, which is overall not a great thing. But I love the catchy "100 acre woods" phrase; makes me think Winnie-the-Pooh everytime. I can't think of the developer's name, but he deserves some kudos.

Your turn.

The Daily Times reports Link... that 6 schools are now on the list of those that are "Intolerably Overcrowded." They began making this annual report several years back after a conversation with the Planning Commission about how planning for residential development should be coordinated with available infrastructure. At the time, the Planning Commission was willing to limit residential development in those school districts to minor subdivisions (those having under 5 houses per subdivision).

Of course, that went by the wayside shortly after last year's report came out and the Planning Commission disagreed with the school board's direction in solving the overcrowding problems. Link...

How do YOU think the Planning Commission should use the information from the schools? Should they just ignore it? Should they reinstitute the 4-lot limit in those districts until the school building program can catch up? If not that, then what should planning around school availability look like?

TDOT has scheduled a public meeting for Thursday, October 25, from 5-8pm in the Heritage High School Auditorium.

At this meeting TDOT will present the ‘Purpose and Need’ for the PPE as well as ‘initial alternatives.’ The public will have opportunities to comment on the Purpose and Need and the alternatives. Written comments can be sent to TDOT for 21 days after the Oct. 25 meeting.

Starting at 5:15 PM (EDT), TDOT will make a formal presentation on the status of the project. The presentation will describe the work completed since the Scoping Meetings in June 2006, the purpose and need statement for the project, and initial alternatives identified for the project.

Following the formal presentation, from 6:00 to 7:00 PM, citizens will be afforded an opportunity to work with TDOT officials in smaller groups and share their ideas on alternatives to be considered. Representatives of TDOT will be available to assist with the exchange of ideas and to provide information on the purpose and need of the project.

The workshop will conclude with a full group discussion and question and answer session between 7:00 and 8:00 PM.

Here's the link: (Link...)

If I were John Loope, I would find the report of the Louisville City Atty/Ethics officer very unsatisfactory. Here's the full text:(Link...) Page 8 of the pdf (numbered page 6 in the document) says basically that all the allegations were dismissed as untrue in the report just because the accuser didn't provide all the evidence. Could it be possible that accuser expected the person tasked with investigating the complaint to uncover and examine the evidence? I mean, when I think of an "investigator," I envision someone in a trenchcoat who can get to the bottom of a matter. Not some attorney who says he took it upon himself to write a report and then declares the conclusion at the beginning. The attorney further says something like: "That [meaning that the accuser didn't provide all the evidence], in and of itself, should end the investigation and result in a finding of no ethical violations. However, since the investigation has the further function of allowing the accused persons to have their say and exonerate their names if there are no facts, I am continuing with the investigation."

So he says right at the beginning of the report that the only purpose of the report is to give the accused their say and that the conclusion has already been made based on lack of evidence PROVIDED BY THE ACCUSER. Not that I'm saying the lack of evidence provided automatically means the accused are guilty, either. But if I were going to be exonnerated in something, I'd hope it was a more ringing endorsement than this.

I'm glad the police investigators don't operate that way.

AGENDA-BLOUNT COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS

September 13, 2007 meeting, 6pm at the Blount County
Courthouse in room 433.
Roll Call and Approval of Minutes:
Appeals:
1. None.
Special Exception:
1. Charlene Teffeteller’s special exception request for a multifamily development on Wildwood Road across from Mackenzie Place. Tax map 37, parcel 46.01
Variance:
1. David Creasman’s request for a 10 feet front setback variance for his property at 6519 Old Walland HWY. Tax map 83, parcel 30.08.

According to the Hunter Growth Strategy, Blount County's Zoning Regulations are "neither fish nor fowl, but a recipe for Urban Sprawl."

Hunter (whom we paid a boat load of money to come up with a "smart growth" plan for Blount County) recommended AGAINST commercializing along our highway corridors, yet you see more and more Rezoning Public Hearings for rezoning to Rural Arterial Commercial Zoning (RAC). Mind you, the RAC is greatly improved from its original form, but still: do we want Scenic Highway 411S to be commercialized beyond the Urban Growth Boundary with the city and straight to the county line? I have seen numerous quotes all over the place where officials state that it is a foregone conclusion.

Is this the welcome we wish to extend the tourists we sincerely hope we draw into our community? Did we learn nothing from the development of "Al- killya Highway"? Currently, the plan is to by-pass Alcoa Highway. Are we planning ahead to by-pass 411S by extending crappy metal building commercial down both sides of it??

And lo and behold, on next Tuesday's Intergovernmental Agenda, I see discussion and possible action to set up another hearing to AGAIN consider rezoning that place with the metal building that the owner built on the apparent pretense of using it as a private dwelling (4004 Hwy 411S, corner of Hitson and 411S). The fact that it had no windows was a major tip-off, of course. Even the TN Property Assessor's Databas calls it a "warehouse." The DT picked it up in this article back in May: (Link...) and here was the outcome; apparently the Planning Commission didn't care that it was an end-run around the law and they voted in favor of it: (Link...)

It was defeated 10-7 at the Commission Meeting (Link...), although the following Commissioners voted for it: Commissioners Farmer, Hargis, Harrison, Hasty, Helton, Lail, McCulley, Melton, Ramsey and Samples.

Roger Fields was quoted in that article as saying the property could not come up for another vote for 2 more years. Yet, here it is again. What's up with that? It is obvious that some in this administration never saw a commercialization on 411S that they didn't like.

According to an article in the Daily Times (Link...) by Rick Laney on Wednesday, 8/29, our local housing market was in a "free fall". But by Friday, there was some sort of weird cross between an advertisement and editorial right there on page 3 painting quite a different picture. It wasn't marked as an ad, but didn't look like the usual news article either. Very confusing. Did anyone else notice it?

With plunging real estate prices and sales being the top of the news nationally, you would expect Blount County's market to follow the trend at least somewhat.

So which is it? And what's up with the DT?? Can't make up their minds? Or maybe too much pressure from the local powerbase: realtors and developers. I guess realtors DO place a lot of ads in the course of business. I'd like to think the paper would print the facts, though, and that those facts wouldn't change with the winds of outside pressure.