Residents near proposed Shooting Sports Park pushing to have facility moved from Albert Frye Rd.

Even though the Crossville city council had completed the scheduled agenda, a number of people remained in the meeting room and Mayor James Mayberry recognized council member Pamala Harris “to deal with some old business.”

Harris talked about the Shooting Sports Park, a topic the council has discussed several times over the last 18 months and said there were some property owners and residents around the old city land fill property proposed for the location of the facility who had some comments. Harris said she had gotten a number of calls about the proposed project and several had concerns about how the facility would affect their homes and property near it. For the next 30 minutes, property owners and representatives of the shooting sports park organization discussed the proposed operation, possible noise issues and other concerns.

City engineer Tim Begley, standing left, shows council and others a map

of the property for the Shooting Sports Park.  

Residents in the area expressed concern about the noise level from the operation of a shooting facility and concern about the fact that none of them had been contacted by either the city, the county or the organization that is proposing the facility.

The city council first heard about the proposed facility some 18 months ago in June 2015 when Cumberland Co. Mayor Kenneth Carey shared the possibility of the facility at a council work session. Carey told council that the majority of the funding would come from the TWRA and could be a draw for tourists and visitors to the community as well as hosting possible tournaments.

After a year, the topic came back to the council and more details were shared including a firm request for use of property between I-40 and Albert Frye Rd. that the city once used a portion of as a landfill. Final plans became clearer late last year when the topic was against raised at council meetings and the council approved the transfer of a portion of the city's 217 acres to the not for profit corporation that will operate the park during their regular meeting in February.

The blue area is the city's property where the shooting park will be located.

The red circles indicate where the closest houses are.

During all these discussions a few objections to the project were brought up, mainly about competition with private businesses. Former councilman Pete Souza had suggested a public hearing on the project be held but none took place. The city's involvement in the program is through the donation of the property and a small supporting grant applied for from the state.

The group opposing the project said they had some 40 signatures on a petition seeking a new location for the project. Their concerns include noise that would not allow them to use their porches or yards and the effect it could have on their property values. There was discussion about the possible number of shots that might be fired in a day and James Wattenbarger said that the numbers being shared were far above what was expected though he did say any tournaments would include a high number of shots.

At one point, mayor James Mayberry pointed out that zoning in the community would possibly solve some of the kinds of problems being discussed. Those opposed felt the facility should be located in the Catoosa Wildlife area but were told that TWRA had turned down that option.

City attorney Will Ridley said that the city had signed a binding contract on the land transfer but the property had not yet been conveyed. Ridley added that if both sides agreed it could possibly be delayed.

Councilman J. H. Graham asked when the next meeting of the non-profit board would be held saying he felt people needed information on the noise level and number of shots to be fired as the numbers from both sides were substantially different.

Mr. Wattenbarger, who identified himself as a member of the non-profit's board said he had been to the Carroll Co. facility and their shooting park was in the industrial park but there were “hundreds of homes within one mile of the facility.”

Questions about the organization to receive the property were raised and Mr. Ridley said he had received a copy of the organizations state charter and other documents before the agreement was signed.

A statement from the group opposing is expected to be made at the public comment time during the March 14 council meeting along with the presentation of their petition.

Story on Shooting Sports Park from June 2015