How Do We Build This City? Capitol Lofts Gets (Initial) Greenlight for Street Level Residential Zoning

What makes a vibrant downtown neighborhood? Lots of people, right? Well . . . imagine blocks of residential-only buildings. Lots of people in a dense area. But where do they get the goods and services they need? Either you build that into residential buildings, most helpfully along the street, or they all have to use cars to go elsewhere, meaning more garages and parking lots for all the cars. And if you build lots of entertainment spots, restaurants, and bars, you’ll need more spots for cars for all the people coming in. That’s not exactly the recipe for a functioning downtown community.

Only one of those models makes for a vibrant urban neighborhood and that’s a fact that is represented in almost every city’s zoning laws, including our own. Downtown has two kinds of zones: A Grid zone requiring commercial space on the ground and a Boulevard zone allowing big buildings to establish any use on the bottom floor and allowing them to sit further back from the roads. Think about the kinds of buildings you might expect along Union Avenue or Gay Street (Grid) vs what you might expect along Summit Hill or Henley Street (Boulevard). Not the same kind of vibe, right?

Developers don’t always want to have commercial spots along the bottom and often ask for their property to be rezoned. The argument generally runs either that the spot they are developing isn’t suited for commercial or the bank won’t finance unleased commercial space. Exceptions are often granted in Knoxville, such as for City Summit, currently being built, Marble Alley, Church+Henley, and the Langley Garage (which has one space even though it faces the street for two blocks), just to name a few I can remember off the top of my head. Sometimes this makes perfect sense, of course, but if we approve every request, we’ll have increasingly fewer spots to provide the commercial services necessary to build a downtown that can function as a vibrant organism. So, we have to decide when it does and doesn’t make sense.

So . . . What brought all this up?

You could be forgiven if the name “Capitol Lofts” escapes your memory. For those of you who have read this site for four years or less, you’ve probably never seen it mentioned. The proposed development in question would sit in a series of current parking lots along the ridge line on the north side of Vine Street across from the Immaculate Conception Catholic Church and the back side of the Crown Plaza Hotel. For the deep dive into the proposal read the original article I wrote in June 2021.

The short version is that the building would include two floors of parking with about 175 spaces underneath five stories of residences including about 120 to 130 homes, the overwhelming majority of which would be one bedroom units. That’s more homes than most recent projects have included and enough to have a significant impact on downtown. It brings with it objections to blocking the view of the church on top of the hill, as well as traffic issues on what is now a small one-way street. I was told five years ago that the street would have to be made two-way on and off Gay Street.

Like so many projects, this one went quiet for several years after the initial announcement. Some simply don’t work out and are never heard from again. This one has re-emerged due to the developer’s (Leigh Burch along with others) request to have the zoning changed from Downtown Grid to Downtown Boulevard, which would remove the requirement for commercial space and allow for a greater setback from the road. The developers point to the same rezoning given City Summit and contend this project, located on a steep street, simply isn’t an appropriate or practical space for retail, unlike Lone Tree Pass just down the hill which faces the much more pedestrian-friendly Gay Street.

As a first step, Knoxville/Knox County Planning staff reviewed the application for the zoning change and sent their recommendation to the Planning Board that the request be denied. Among other things, they pointed out that this project is not on a boulevard, but rather a small street. They also pointed out nearby commercial development, such as that at Lone Tree Pass, and the proposed commercial development along Jackson Avenue at the site of the former McClung Warehouses as evidence of commercial viability in the area. They noted, “The adopted Guidelines describe the Boulevard District as being intended for automobile-oriented thoroughfares with medians and street trees. This description does not align with the subject property’s access on a narrow, one-way street, set one block back from a true boulevard like W Summit Hill Drive.”

Taylor Forrester, the attorney representing the developers said the property should not have been zoned as it was from the beginning and pointed out that Gay Street is “300 feet away down a very steep hill.” He called Vine Street a “glorified alley,” and said the slope makes building commercial spots along the building impractical contending the context for this project is completely different from the nearby Lone Tree Pass.

Father Donahue from Immaculate Conception said the church would welcome new residents to the area, but that the congregation has concerns about traffic and parking. He said they would like to talk to the developer, but they had not been contacted. Two parishioners also spoke with Melissa Mancini expressing concern that the church will no longer be visible and saying that she felt if it was built, commercial space would be needed. Gerald O’Farrel expressed concern about the traffic and wondered if the safety of pedestrians had been considered.

Jack Coker of Yes! Knoxville said that while that organization supports mixed-use development, Vine has historically been residential. He added that increased residential density will make future commercial enterprises more likely to survive.

The board discussion included mostly comments in support of the developer’s request. Nancy Barger made a motion to override staff recommendations and approve, saying that commercial “doesn’t seem like a fit.” Katie Overton pointed to first floor residential buildings in adjacent developments and said that it would be better than having the property stay as it is. Chair John Huber added it seems the location should not have been coded as Grid from the beginning and pointed out that commercial could be added later if the developer saw fit. Matthew Anderson said that if business was viable, they would already be here, and we can’t force it to happen.

Board member Nick Gill made most of the argument for supporting the staff recommendation and denying the request, saying, “A neighborhood requires businesses for the people who live there.” He encouraged the board to think more about the future potential needs of downtown rather than only looking at what is in place now. “We are making long-term decisions, and the arguments are always short term . . . The footprint of a building set back from the street is permanent. We are committing long-term to non-pedestrian architecture.”

In the end, the staff recommendation was overturned, and the developer’s request was approved with the only dissenting votes coming from Amy Midis and Gill. Next up the issue moves to city Council, which must approve the request on a first (October 14) and second (October 28) reading for the zoning change to be finalized.

After the meeting I spoke briefly with Taylor Forrester, attorney for the developers who said he felt encouraged by the lopsided vote in their favor and is optimistic about their chances with the City Council. He indicated that should approval come in October, wheels would be put in motion leading to the advent of the project. Leigh Burch, reached for a comment, said “I think the Planning Board is comprised of mostly reasonable people and they made the right decision to keep Knoxville moving forward.”