Use On Review

5-K-05-UR

Recommended for approval
by the Planning Commission

APPROVE the plan for office development in the BP/TO zoning district, subject to 6 conditions:


See case notes below

Details

Request

Property Info

Case Notes

What's next?

Details of Action

+
1. Meeting all applicable requirements of the Knox County Zoning Ordinance.
2. Meeting all applicable requirements of the Knox County Department of Engineering and Public Works.
3. Connecting the development to sanitary sewer, as well as meeting other applicable requirements of the Knox County Health Department.
4. Installing all landscaping, as shown on the development plan, within six months of issuance of occupancy permits for the project, or posting a bond with the Knox County Department of Engineering and Public Works, to guarantee such installation.
5. Obtaining approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Tennessee Technology Corridor Development Authority (TTCDA) for this project, and meeting all of its requirements.
6. An administrative plat, combining the two subject parcels into one lot of record, must be submitted to MPC for review, certified and recorded prior to staff certification of plans.

Applicant Request

+

Property Information

+
Location
706 Mabry Hood Rd

East side Mabry Hood Rd., north of Webb School Ln.

Commission District 5
Census Tract 46.04


Size
13.22 acres

Sector
Northwest County

Land Use Designation? Low Density Residential


Currently on the Property
One professional office building

Growth Plan
Urban Growth Area (Outside City Limits)

Case Notes

+
Staff Recommendation
APPROVE the plan for office development in the BP/TO zoning district, subject to 6 conditions:
1. Meeting all applicable requirements of the Knox County Zoning Ordinance.
2. Meeting all applicable requirements of the Knox County Department of Engineering and Public Works.
3. Connecting the development to sanitary sewer, as well as meeting other applicable requirements of the Knox County Health Department.
4. Installing all landscaping, as shown on the development plan, within six months of issuance of occupancy permits for the project, or posting a bond with the Knox County Department of Engineering and Public Works, to guarantee such installation.
5. Obtaining approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Tennessee Technology Corridor Development Authority (TTCDA) for this project, and meeting all of its requirements.
6. An administrative plat, combining the two subject parcels into one lot of record, must be submitted to MPC for review, certified and recorded prior to staff certification of plans.

With the conditions noted above, this request meets the requirements for approval in the BP/TO zone, as well as other criteria for approval of a use on review.
Disposition Summary
APPROVE the plan for office development in the BP/TO zoning district, subject to 6 conditions:
Details of Action
1. Meeting all applicable requirements of the Knox County Zoning Ordinance.
2. Meeting all applicable requirements of the Knox County Department of Engineering and Public Works.
3. Connecting the development to sanitary sewer, as well as meeting other applicable requirements of the Knox County Health Department.
4. Installing all landscaping, as shown on the development plan, within six months of issuance of occupancy permits for the project, or posting a bond with the Knox County Department of Engineering and Public Works, to guarantee such installation.
5. Obtaining approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Tennessee Technology Corridor Development Authority (TTCDA) for this project, and meeting all of its requirements.
6. An administrative plat, combining the two subject parcels into one lot of record, must be submitted to MPC for review, certified and recorded prior to staff certification of plans.

What's next?

+
As a Use On Review case, the Planning Commission's decision is final, and it will not be heard by a legislative body unless it is appealed.

The appeal deadline - June 11, 2005 - has passed.

The Process
Applicant

NHS Development c/o Matthew B. Fentress


Case History