An effort by Lighthouse Enterprises to get the city of Chattanooga to annex its controversial Hunter Road development cleared its first hurdle Monday, squeezing past a zoning panel by a narrow margin.
At the same meeting, the Chattanooga Housing Authority’s latest attempt to get its Fairmount Avenue townhomes project approved was deferred for 30 days, despite changes in the developmental density of the project and an architectural redesign.
In the Hunter Road case, Chattanooga-Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission Chairman Dale Mabee twice cast the deciding vote to break consecutive 6-6 deadlocks on whether to approve the plan of services submitted by the applicant.
The zoning panel previously had denied project approval on the grounds that the proposed density exceeded allowances set forth in various planning documents.
“The area is directly contiguous to Chattanooga proper,” applicant Martin McNabb said to planners during his presentation, arguing in favor of annexation.
The Regional Planning Agency also recommended that panel members approve the annexation, which would shift responsibility for final project approval to the Chattanooga City Council. But more than 20 audience members, part of a neighborhood group that has opposed the project since its inception, opposed allowing the project to proceed.
FAIRMOUNT PLANConcerning the Fairmount Avenue project, panelists Don Moon and Mike Langley said the development would not fit in with the neighborhood around it.”I think this thing’s a little bit out of step with the neighborhood,” Mr. Moon said.”I would move to urge CHA to adopt something a little nicer,” Mr. Langley added.Panelist Beverly Johnson said Mr. Moon and Mr. Langley weren’t going far enough.”You guys are being nice. This thing is ugly,” she said.A motion was passed to defer the CHA project for 30 more days. No CHA representatives attended the hearing to defend their proposal.CHA plans to build two- or three-bedroom townhomes at the site after months of sometimes contentious discussion on the project involving Mayor Ron Littlefield and people in the neighborhood.
Panel member Mike Langley was curious about the reason for the applicant’s stated desire to be absorbed by the city.
“It seems odd. I’m curious why we would take a little sliver of land and do an annexation on that,” he said. “We heard this about two or three months ago and we voted to deny.”
Neighborhood opposition leader Roger Duckworth said that the site plan was not in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods.
“This piece of land is a poster child for spot zoning,” he said. “But today’s vote isn’t on the rezoning, it’s on this plan of services being adequate to go forward, so I have a lot of confidence in the commission. The battle is yet to come.”
Some planners were leery of allowing any proposal by developers, who are opposed by surrounding residents, to go forward,
“I don’t feel that we have adequate information for why this is going to be annexed,” Mr. Langley said.
However, the commission eventually voted to approve. The next public hearing for the project is set for April 20th.