Skip to content Skip to left sidebar Skip to footer

Kim Frazier

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 45 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Reminders #5147
    Kim Frazier
    Participant

      Thank you, Madam Chair.

      This is very helpful. In addition, if Commissioners do have questions for Department Staff, it is the responsibility of the Commissioner to reach out to the Staff member ahead of time and request that they be present at the Agenda Review to answer those questions. As you mentioned, the Agenda Review is when discussion regarding agenda items should occur so that Commissioners feel well informed and ready to vote at the regular business meeting.

      in reply to: Request for Comm. Fox re: Presentation #5098
      Kim Frazier
      Participant

        Commissioner Fox,

        Have you provided these sources to the Mayor’s staff and department heads and discussed?

        in reply to: Knox Community Dashboard on Homelessness #5097
        Kim Frazier
        Participant

          To clarify, the grant funding in question has already been appropriated. I encourage all Commissioners to have individual discussions with the Mayor’s staff and county departments to further discuss.

          in reply to: Agenda #5041
          Kim Frazier
          Participant

            Thank you, Madam Chair.

            in reply to: Knox Community Dashboard on Homelessness #5040
            Kim Frazier
            Participant

              This is very helpful information, Commissioner Rawls. CAC also has some insightful information, as well as, Director Caldwell. He has a very informative single audit report regarding all grants.

              in reply to: Zoning Meeting – Plan Amendment Review Cycle (FYI) #5031
              Kim Frazier
              Participant

                The plan amendment review cycle is for Planning Commission. County Commission hears plan amendment cases in the months following.

                in reply to: October General Meeting Agenda #4964
                Kim Frazier
                Participant

                  Commissioner Russell,

                  Will you kindly confirm / clarify the items that you would like pulled from consent for any questions or discussion, please?

                  Thank you.

                  Kim Frazier
                  Participant

                    Commissioner Fox,

                    Have you reached out to the property owner to notify them that their property will discussed by the legislative body of Knox County? After speaking with legal yesterday, it is my opinion that the County has a responsibility to the property owner to notify them. I would encourage using the Planning Office’s notification process as this is related to zoning.

                    Kim Frazier
                    Participant

                      Commissioner Fox,

                      Have you reached out to the property owner to notify them that their property will discussed by the legislative body of Knox County? After speaking with legal yesterday, it is my opinion that the County has a responsibility to the property owner to notify them. I would encourage using the Planning Office’s notification process as this is related to a land use classification.

                      Kim Frazier
                      Participant

                        Commissioner Fox,

                        Have you reached out to the property owner to notify them that their property will discussed by the legislative body of Knox County? After speaking with legal yesterday, it is my opinion that the County has a responsibility to the property owner to notify them. I would encourage using the Planning Office’s notification process as this is related to zoning.

                        Just my two cents.

                        in reply to: Invitation to Knox County Emergency Management Agency #4919
                        Kim Frazier
                        Participant

                          I prefer November 21 or December 5.

                          Thank you, Madam Chair.

                          in reply to: October General Meeting Agenda #4918
                          Kim Frazier
                          Participant

                            Thank you, Commissioner Russell.

                            As a standard of practice, I encourage you to reach out to the agenda item’s sponsor and have preliminary discussions regarding any comments or questions that you may have, and ask them to attend the agenda review meeting should you want to continue the dialogue before our voting meeting the following week.

                            Hope this is helpful.

                            in reply to: October Planning Agenda #4917
                            Kim Frazier
                            Participant

                              Thank you, Commissioner Russell.

                              All zoning agenda items are heard by County Commission. Unlike, Planning Commission’s Zoning Agenda and County Commission’s Regular Agenda, agenda items are not placed on consent or non consent. Therefore, all of the items that you listed can be discussed.

                              For specific questions regarding zoning agenda items, Director Amy Brooks and Director Jim Snowden are Commission’s points of contact.

                              I hope that this helps.

                              in reply to: Preliminary Zoning Agenda – Request for Information #4904
                              Kim Frazier
                              Participant

                                Commissioner Fox,

                                Have you been in communication with the property owners of the parcels referenced in your resolutions?

                                I had the opportunity to spend some time in the county archives to review the meeting minutes, related documents, and the VHS recording of the August 26, 2002 County Commission Meeting. The discussion answered many of my questions that were unanswered by the minutes and I am happy to share what I learned.

                                In 1979, the Schuberts submitted an application to rezone the property from Ag to I. The case was heard at MPC on July 12, 1979 and was denied with a vote of 9-0. The applicant and property owner appealed to County Commission and on August 20, 1980, after several postponements, the 19 member Commission approved the request and rezoned the property from A (Agricultural) to I (Industrial) [7-C-79-RZ]. The property owner had a tenant wishing to store dynamite powder. The tenant did not operate the business long and 7 small storage units were left onsite.

                                20 years later, Knox County adopted the 2000 Growth Policy Plan.

                                In 2002, community members reached out to County Commissioners inquiring about the property because the land had not been used for Industrial purposes for nearly 20 years. Some time prior to March, perhaps February of 2002, a request came from the intergovernmental committee in the form of a resolution (02-1-903). Sadly, this record could not be located, but from my research I am assuming that this resolution was a request from County Commission to Planning Commission to act on their behalf to initiate an application to governmentally rezone this parcel. The sponsor was Commissioner Howard Pinkston and the application type was “Governmental Rezoning”.

                                Planning Commission, at the direction of Director Norman Whitaker, filed an application on March 13, 2002 to rezone from Industrial to Ag and a case number was assigned 4-M-02-RZ. The staff recommended approval because the Industrial zone was out of character with surrounding and agricultural zoning and development. The site was no longer used for industrial purposes and did not align with the growth plan. The sector plan proposes low density and rural residential uses and slope protection for this site. Planning Commission met on April 11, 2002, but this item was postponed to May 09, 2002.

                                At the May 09, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, the Schuberts, as the property owners were represented by Imogene King with Franz, McConnel & Seymour opposing the governmental rezoning without their consent stating that as the property owners, they would like to continue to look at options for usage for the property to try to be creative. Infrastructure was not there to support Industrial and they asked that the case be postponed until June 13, 2002 or deny. Electricity was never connected and the property was taxed as Agriculture the entire period.
                                Mr. Bob Dykes with the Doyle Homeowners Association spoke on behalf of the community. A petition was submitted with over 300 signatures. 22 surrounding property owners signed. Mike Brown also spoke referencing the South County Sector Plan. The motion passed 9-0

                                On August 26, 2002, Knox County Commission considered the recommendation of Planning Commission for governmental rezoning case number 4-M-02-RZ. Director Whitaker presented on behalf of Planning Commission. Mike Moyers was the law director at the time. Arthur Seymour was the counsel representing the property owner, Mrs. Schubert. Mr. Seymour stated that his client had received a letter from Knox County notifying her that her property at 2814 Tipton Station was being rezoned from Industrial to Ag without her consent. Robust discussion followed stating that the request to rezone came out of the intergovernmental committee by resolution 02-1-903 – (missing from the archives). The conversation ranged from unprecedented to spot zoning to correcting an error in the growth plan to lack of use of current zoning for a long period of time. The property was rezoned from I (Industrial) and F (Floodway) to A (Agricultural) and F (Floodway) [4-M-02-RZ] without the consent of the property owner by a vote of 10-7-0-2.

                                Soon after, Seymour did file suit on behalf of the property owner against Knox County, but withdrew. I reached out to the law firm to verify that records exist.

                                Really interesting.

                                in reply to: Preliminary Zoning Agenda – Request for Information #4903
                                Kim Frazier
                                Participant

                                  Looking for some clarification:

                                  RE: RLA-16590
                                  Case Summary File # provided is for the Plan Amendment which is related, but not the zoning. Zoning Case File # is I-L-24-RZ

                                  Additionally, the resolution mentions a lease agreement. Can that be provided?

                                  Also, this resolution mentions an active lawsuit. Do any of the other parcels referenced have active lawsuits?
                                  148 049 – TDEC reviewing
                                  138 270
                                  138 274
                                  138 104 – mentions lawsuit

                                  RLA-16588
                                  The resolution mentions an ongoing review by attorneys for TDEC. When will they provide their findings?

                                  Lastly, is 7-W-24-RZ for parcels 138 270,104 at 8802 and 8744 Sevierville Pike also related to these resolutions?

                                Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 45 total)