Tue
Feb 13 2007
11:00 pm
South Waterfront at City Council
By: Rachel

City Council approved the form-based code tonight 9-0. That was after aproving an amendment 9-0 to go back to the 70' river buffer, the 60' max building height in the SW7, and the 70' building height in the SW4 recommended by the Oversight Committee.

This was first reading. Second and final reading is Feb. 27, and they will probably have a workshop at 5 p.m. on Feb. 22.

So it's not a done deal, but it was a damn good start.

I'm going to go have some wine now.....

P.S. And Mamaw got an amendment specifically allowing gardens.

Topics:
Leslie's picture

Saw it on TV

Submitted by Leslie on Tue, 2007/02/13 - 11:39pm.

Good job and congratulations. Here's looking forward to the second reading.

bizgrrl's picture

Now, that's exciting.

Submitted by bizgrrl on Wed, 2007/02/14 - 7:52am.

Now, that's exciting. Congratulations!
Keep up the good work.

KTB's picture

Fire Fallout

Submitted by KTB on Wed, 2007/02/14 - 10:29am.

Did you catch at the end of the meeting, a guy waited 3 hours to ask about fallout from the fire? He lives downtown and was concerned about toxins or harmful pollutants that residents might be exposed to while the material is being removed from the site.

I thought he raised a couple good points neither of which the mayor or anyone else at the meeting could answer. I'll be curious to hear if they have done any testing.

What do you think? Is this guy trying to raise a valid concern or is he looking for fuel to start an unneeded lawsuit against the city/county?

KTB

knoxnative's picture

Ginger Speaks?

Submitted by knoxnative on Wed, 2007/02/14 - 11:06am.

Gemini, whazzup with Ginger Baxter's comment in today's KNS that the council's vote "ensures we'll be there for a long time operating as we are now."

Is she implying that the Holston Gases eyesore won't go away if they don't get what they want?

R. Neal's picture

the council's vote "ensures

Submitted by R. Neal on Wed, 2007/02/14 - 11:08am.

the council's vote "ensures we'll be there for a long time operating as we are now."

Property rights! Property rights!

Rachel's picture

Is she implying that the

Submitted by Rachel on Wed, 2007/02/14 - 12:43pm.

Is she implying that the Holston Gases eyesore won't go away if they don't get what they want?

Yup. The trouble is that no one's buying it. If it becomes economically more attractive to develop the land than to keep it, they'll develop it. None of those property owners are going to sit on something that could make them a pile of money just to spite the City.

BTW, Mrs. Baxter has said numerous times that they have no plans to sell, or to develop anytime soon, code or no code. Makes her threat that much more hollow.

Leslie's picture

Threats?

Submitted by Leslie on Wed, 2007/02/14 - 5:30pm.

I liked this one too, to paraphrase slightly, this utterance from the illustrious Mr. Seymour, "If you want to see changes on the waterfront in the next 10-15 years, you need these businesses to move...."

None of those property owners are going to sit on something that could make them a pile of money just to spite the City.

No, I don't think so. And really, spite the city? I think more like just trying to strike fear in the average citizens of South Knox that have supported and are excited by, the project.

Shoot, Holston's been there forever. I'm kinda used to those tanks... ;)

So much for fear.

Rachel's picture

I think more like just

Submitted by Rachel on Wed, 2007/02/14 - 7:24pm.

I think more like just trying to strike fear in the average citizens of South Knox that have supported and are excited by, the project.

Maybe, but I think they've given up on us as hopeless. Most of us understand the code a lot better than they do.

It's primarily directed at Council. But Marilyn Roddy said last night that if she had any doubt that any of these property owners couldn't develop profitably (and I'm paraphrasing Ms. Roddy here) under the code as written, she'd be raising that concern. Most of Council, like Ms. Roddy, seem unmoved by their argument.

It will be interesting to see if Arthur Seymour has new ones up his sleeve. Stay tuned for the workshop and second reading.

P.S. Those changes that Arthur thinks we need to see in the next 10-15 years? In addition to Cityview, which is under construction, there are two large private projects far along in the site planning stage. And the City has put $$$ in the budget to start work on some of the infrastructure improvements. The City is also getting ready to put out an RFQ for engineering design, fieldwork, and permitting on some of those efforts.

We're gonna see plenty of changes over here - and it's not gonna take 10 years.

Leslie's picture

what can I say?

Submitted by Leslie on Wed, 2007/02/14 - 7:44pm.

I'm a conspiracty theorist...

Maybe, but I think they've given up on us as hopeless. Most of us understand the code a lot better than they do.

I am deeply heartened that Council was unanimous on first reading. They obviously understood it, too.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

    State News

    Wire Reports

    Lost Medicaid Funding

    To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

    Search and Archives