At the meeting staff presented a slate of rezoning and concept-plan items ranging from a large 116-unit attached residential subdivision to smaller rezoning requests for commercial and residential conversions. Mike (Speaker 4) presented the 116-lot attached residential concept (phase 2), noting partial rezoning in June 2025 and staff's recommendation to approve with conditions focused on limited vehicle access, extended sidewalks and 15-foot vegetative buffers.

Staff also presented multiple rezoning cases:
- Samuel (Speaker 11) recommended approval of a rezoning request for a 6-acre parcel on Sevierville Pike at up to 4 du/acre (staff recommended 4 du/acre though the applicant requested 5 du/acre), noting proximity to schools and recent plan changes; public comments flagged Sevierville Pike's narrow (~18-foot) pavement width and capacity concerns.
- Jake (Speaker 12) presented a ~4-acre parcel off Asheville Highway proposed to be rezoned to CA (general business); staff recommended approval based on corridor mixed-use guidance in the comprehensive and East County Community plans.
- Staff (Speaker 8) recommended denial of a request to rezone 0.97 acres at 6260 Clinton Highway from CH to CG, arguing Clinton Highway's existing CH corridor character and dimensional expectations make CG inappropriate.
- A downtown pair of parcels (cases 11-E and 11-F25RZ) were described as conversions from no-zone/former railroad to DKW industrial/warehouse zoning.
- A contested Davenport Road case (rezoning from RN2 to RN3 and an amendment to allow South Waterfront Mixed Use District Type 2) was recommended for denial by staff because the lot was not studied in the South Waterfront vision plan and because RN3 could permit townhouses out of scale with the block; staff also cited sight-distance and steep slopes as traffic-safety concerns.

Jesse (Speaker 8) also presented a revised plan for two duplexes on Westland Drive; the applicant revised the plan to shift driveways and orient units toward the street after neighborhood opposition; staff recommended approval.

No formal votes or final outcomes were recorded in the transcript. Commissioners repeatedly asked about access and emergency services for large developments and about enforcement and inspection for hillside and tree-protection conditions.