"As for the cases you cite, I have read them. In fact, I studided them in planning school. Lucas, for example, says the state can't put restrictions on land that deprive the owner of ALL value of his property (not some, all). In that particular case the state of South Carolina had declared Lucas's coastal land totally off limits for development/use of any kind (to cut down on coastal erosion). The Hillside/Ridgetop Plan doesn't even come close to passing that test. It restricts HOW development can be done, not bans it."

Are you an attorney? I didn't think so. Why in the hell has the MPC attorney not filed an opinion on this? Don't shall or may this. This is serious litigation we have to pay for. Don't think there will not be a serious look at MPC if this for any reason passes in this form. This is a very bad plan that should not see the light of day in this form. There are multiple law suits that will be filed the moment a taking takes place.

TDC has said over and over that one of their criteria for property is that it be as level as possible - which makes sense. Why would commercial developers make their lives more difficult by trying to develop on steep slopes if they can help it? I don't think enough of Midway falls into the 15-25% slope range to impact it much, if at all.

You are exactly correct that TDC (and MPC) have said "over and over" that their criteria for selection of an industrial or business park site is a slope 6% or less (among other things) as you can see from TDC's presentation in January 2009 to the Carter Community (page 20). Even MPC has repeatedly said that the site is "mostly level" but if you actually visit the site, you have to wonder if they've ever even laid eyes on it.

But don't take my word for it - here's the actual skinny on Midway's slope situation from a KGIS analysis. As you can see, the majority of the site is hardly "mostly level" -- 75% of the site has a slope greater than 6%. About 20% of the property has a slope above 15%.

Red lines on this companion map from KGIS conveys the steeper slopes and sinkholes. How much of this property that will actually be developable irrespective of the Hillside plan is a very good question.

By the time they avoid the sinkholes and the steeper slopes, put in roads, the KUB substation, TVA's easement and power station, a 30 acre dripfield for each building, landscape buffers, and the promised "green" berms and stormwater controls, just how much land would actually be gained?

Is it really worth the financial and environmental sacrifices that Midway will take to wind up with some more 20 acre sites at best? It's not like we don't have plenty of those scattered around Knox County already.

If you look at TDC's concept drawing (page 25), it doesn't show many of the above items that they said will be included on the site and some of the buildings are laid out directly over sinkholes and ravines.

Remember, we paid approximately $10 million for this land and TDC has estimated they will spend another $17 million to develop Phase I. Just Phase I - no comment from them so far on how much the other phases will cost, although Mike Edwards has said in the past that it costs around $100,000 per acre to develop and that's without their sewer problem. Assuming that number is still valid, Midway could cost taxpayers $37,000,000 or more plus sewer by the time it's said and done. All other issues aside, it just doesn't make good business sense.

"I don't think enough of Midway falls into the 15-25% slope range to impact it much, if at all."

Do you all at MPC know what you are doing? Because it doesn't look like it. Stop blaming everything on MPC staff. If they are as bad as you allege fire them and get some competent people. The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is scratching. How you can at the same time present Midway and the Slope and Ridge plan shows a serious competency problem at MPC. MPC has become part Chamber/TDC lackey and activist anti-development wackos. What is wrong with you people? Midway is cost prohibitive. The Slope and Ridge is a job killer. Doing both of these at once shows the great problems at MPC.

"And in all of Knox County there are only 163 acres vacant and zoned commercial on slopes 15-25%."

I'd like to see proof of that statement. You know what a phony statement that is and you should be ashamed to play word games like that. How many acres are zoned AG that have slopes 15-25%? You don't want to answer that do you? Nothing is zoned commercial until it is time to zone it commercial.

That is a disingenuous trick. You know it is the amount of land in AG that matters.