Skip to content
Article 18 Infrastructure and Public Improvements - Knox County UDO Community Review Survey
As part of the Knox County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) update, we are seeking feedback on development design standards pertaining to parking, signage, landscaping, open space, infrastructure, and resource protection. Your input will help us refine these regulations to better serve Knox County's needs. Please review the key concepts below and share your thoughts. Each article has its own survey component, allowing you to focus on content that is of most interest to you – take one survey or all as time and interest allows. The survey portal will be open for two weeks, beginning July 29th.
You can view the full
Article 18 Infrastructure and Public Improvements here!
1.
Context-Sensitive Street Design and Frontage Types
The approach to street design within the draft unified development ordinance emphasizes that design of streets must be “context-sensitive,” responding to the character of the surrounding area and balancing vehicular mobility with pedestrian safety. To implement this, the draft introduces new street and frontage types that tie street design directly to the road’s functional classification (e.g., Arterial, Collector, Local) and its context (Rural, Suburban, Urban). These street and frontage types establishe tailored standards for lane widths, sidewalk and bicycle facilities, building placement (build-to zones vs. deep setbacks), and stormwater management, moving away from a one-size-fits-all approach.
What feedback do you have on this proposed approach? Please tell us what you support, what concerns you have, and any changes you would recommend.
2.
Local Street Widths and Geometric Standards
Currently, the standard minimum driving surface width for a local street is 26 feet. The draft regulations suggest scaling local street widths based on the number of projected trips, potentially reducing the minimum width to 20 feet for lower-volume streets to naturally calm traffic and reduce impervious surfaces. Additionally, the draft proposes moving away from legacy geometric rules in favor of adopting AASHTO guidelines, where intersection radii match the actual operating speed of the roadway.
What feedback do you have on this proposed approach? Please tell us what you support, what concerns you have, and any changes you would recommend.
3.
Access Easement Limitations and Serial Flag Lots
To improve safety and reduce excessive curb cuts, the draft introduces new limitations on access easements. An access easement may serve a maximum of five lots (or up to 10 dwelling units for attached residential). Furthermore, the draft explicitly prohibits “serial flag lots” (where multiple flag stems are stacked side-by-side to provide access) and requires that any lot with public right-of-way frontage that is crossed by an access easement must use that easement as its sole means of access.
What feedback do you have on this proposed approach? Please tell us what you support, what concerns you have, and any changes you would recommend.
4.
Sidewalk Requirements and Connectivity
The proposed regulations refine pedestrian infrastructure requirements, triggering mandatory sidewalk construction in developments that connect two collector streets, on local streets designed for speeds greater than 25 mph, or along existing roadways if the development is within ¼ mile of public facilities, commercial centers, or established pedestrian networks.
What feedback do you have on this proposed approach? Please tell us what you support, what concerns you have, and any changes you would recommend.
5.
Administrative Approval of Alternative Design Standards
A major shift in the proposed Article 18 is the delegation of many infrastructure reviews and alternative design approvals from the Planning Commission down to the administrative level (specifically, the Knox County Department of Engineering and Public Works). For example, EPW is now authorized to administratively approve alternative access standards, the use of alleys as sole vehicular access, reductions in required street and right-of-way widths, increases in maximum street grades, and modifications to sidewalk requirements when physical hardships exist.
What feedback do you have on this proposed approach? Please tell us what you support, what concerns you have, and any changes you would recommend.
6.
Are there any additional comments you would like to share regarding Article 18?
Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey!
