Roads & TransPortation in that the high-density...
Transcript of Roads & TransPortation in that the high-density...
Roads & TransPortation
Even with future increased growth, i t appears that
addit ional driving lanes can be avoided, yet increased
t ra f f r c |eve l sw i l | r emarn re |a t r ve |ym in ima | 'Key roadswil l continue to nave a level of service (LOS) of "A'"
However, lmprovements will be needed relative to specific
rntersections, sight distances and safety considerations'
Sidewalks / Trai ls
As the concept plan map indicates on the prevlous page'
sidewalks are proposed for key segments of Lula Lake
Road, Red Riding Hood Trai l , and Mockingbird Lane /
Fleetwood Drive Trails that are separated from roads
are proposed for: '1) a relatively short eastwest segment
toconnect theFai ry |andSchool recreat ionfac i I i t ieswi ththe soccer f ield to the west, and 2) a much longer looping
segment in the southern half of the city that wil l traverse
Lula Lake Road and access the proposed new part<'
Utilities & I nfrastructure
Recommendat ionsfor th issubject inc lude:1) improv ingthe sewage treatment system to further combat odor
issues and to increase capacity for addit ional growth;
and 2) to require that new development place uti l i t ies
underground.
K e y r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s i n c l u d e : 1 ) t h e a d o p t i o n o f
environmentally-friend ly development standards to protect
slopes, streams/natural drainage, forested areas' and
other natural feaiures; 2) consider a tree preservat lon
corr idor overlay zoning; and 3) consider neighborhood
conservation zoning for areas in the north half of the city'
Al ternat ive Scenarios
With an understandtng of the main concepts that are
proposed under any scenario ' the al ternat ives can 0e
more easi ly comprehended The two key var iables in
considering al ternat ive growth scenarios for Lookout
Mountain relate to tne proposed high-density resident ial
areas in the north half of the ci ty and the low-density
resident ial areas in the south half of ihe ci ty These two
geographic areas / issues are independent of each other
in that the high-density residential alternatives in the north
do not hinge upon the low-density alternatives in the south
part of the citY.
Because of the current lack of choices for housing types'
there is strong concensus that a greater variety of housing
types is needed in Lookout Mountain' ln part icular '
housing for seniors is needed' ranging from "down-sizing"
oat io homes to assisted l iv ing An important pr inciple of
the Concept Plan is that higher density housrng should
be located in and near the Town Center ' The fol lowing
criteria were used in identifying specific properties targeted
for such develoPment '
. Lands with no (or minimal) exist ing development
. Larger parcels that wi l l accommodate land
assemblage relat ive to numerous smal ler parcels
. Lands best accesssed (direct ly or indirect ly) by Lula
Lake rather than McFarland
Twoa| te rna t iveshavebeensuggested forh igh-dens i ty
housing near the Town Center, and both are i l lustrated
and summarized at r ight ' Al ternatrve "A" features a
smal ler area direct ly adjacent to the north side of the
Town Center, and Alternative "B" features this same area'
as wel l as a larger cont iguous area to the immediate
north of Al ternattve "A " Al ternat ive "A" inc; ludes a 5+
acre component of mult i - family housing' which could
include assisted l iv ing (approximately 40+ beds) / f ls
cr i t ical toemphasizethatthetwoconceptt tals i teplans
designat ion?" Because there are pros and cons with
e i t h e r s c e n a r i o t h a t a r e r e | a t i v e l y e v e n | y w e i g h t e d t h e
dec is iononthesea| te rna t iveswi l l res tp r imar i Iyw i th thepreferences of the City The City's decision will be clarified
within " the plan" sect ion of this plan document '
1;;3*q": 54 L:f i id
Alternative A : High-DensitY
. 11 cottages
. 16 townhouses
Resident ial Near the Town Center
. 5+ acres of mult i - familY housing
A l t e r n a t i v e B : H i g h - D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a | N e a r t h e T o w n C e n t e r
Same program as Alternat ive A' plus:
. 34 single-familY houses
. 36 cottages (smal ler s ingle-family
houses). 16 townhouses
: ; L w q L e - F a ' M L L U
| | 0 t t s e s
)
J1 1 s t 1 1 y , " 7 9 w . _ . ( , 5
Co\: {a ges,
f . ! l
ln addition to the issue of where to locate high-density
housing in the north half of the community, the other key
alternative is the density of future residential growth tn
the south half of the city. The relatively undeveloped
southern half of the city has many environmental ly
sensitive features, as documented in this plan document's
background study of exist ing condit ions' The current
min imum lot s ize per zoning is 35 '000 square feet ( '8
acres) , whi le the two a l ternat ives tested out were
densit ies featuring minimum average lot sizes of 60'000
s0uare feet (1 .5 acres) and 3 acres, respect ive ly '
Regardless of the density decided upon by the City' i t
has been proposed that a clustering option be al lowed
thatwou|dpermi tsma| |er lo ts izes inreturnforprotectedcommon open space so long as the overal l site density
is not exceeded. This option wil l be i l lustrated and
described in greater detai l in "the plan" port ion of this
document.
The chart below compares the number of houstng units
and result ing population based upon: currentcondit ions'
a f u l l b u i l d - o u t s c e n a r i o w i t h t h e e x i s t i n g z o n i n g ' a f u l lbui ld-out scenario with a higher density approach' and a
full build-out scenarlo with a lower density approach The
"highest density scenario" includes the more expanslve
high-density residential area near the Town Center
(Alternative B illustrated on page 55), combined with the
60.000 square foot lot density in the south The "lowest
densi ty scenar io" inc ludes the less expansive h igh-
densityresidentialareaneartheTownCenter(AlternativeA i l lustrated on page 55), combined with the 3-acre lot
density in the south. l t must be emphasized that other
potential scenarios include combrning the higher density
scenario in the north near the Town Center with the lower
density scenario in the south' and vice-versa'
The results of the comparison are that the highest density
scenario would yield an addit ional population of 1'748
people, whi le the current zoning would y ie ld 1 '396
additronal people. On the other hand, the lowest density
scenario would yield an addit ional population of only 990
people. Thus, the current zoning's results fal l roughly in
the middle of the two scenarios tested here
A d d i t i o n a l P o p u l a t i o n C o m p a r i s o n s
2,0001 , 5 0 01 000
5000
iWw,iHighest LowestDensitY Densitv
GurrentPolicy
Comparison of Alternative Growth Scenarios
L a n d | J s e C a t e g o r y E x i s t i n g C o n d i t i o n s C t t r r e n t P o l i c y H i g h e s t D e n s i t y * L o w e s t D e n s i t y * *( t J n i t s / P o p u | a t i o r t ) ( l J t l i t s / P o p u l a t i o n ) ( I J n i t s / P o p u l a t i o n ) ( t J n i t s / P o p u l a t i o t . t )
Single-Family 565 | 1,440 423 | 1 '1OO 503 / 1 '308 224 | 582
Multi-Family 42 | 84 148 t2g6 220 t 440 204 | 408
T o t a r 6 0 7 | 1 , 5 2 4 5 7 1 1 1 ' 3 9 0 7 2 3 1 1 ' 7 4 8 4 2 8 1 9 9 0
. 60,000 sq ft lot density in south i most expansive high-density north of Town Center
** 3-acre lot density in south / least expansive high-density north of Town Center
F*6el {iS r:l f:4
This page is intentionally left blank'
FeEe $? *f 84
THE PLAN
$-sfr'{ffi q.}sff, e*h{AR&STHR ARffiAS PR-A$$
OverviewThis plan element addresses land use and character
areas. Unti l recent years, such plan elements were
typ ica l ly re ferred to s imply as " land use" e lements '
However, because it is now widely recognized that the
physical form, density, and character of a particular area
is as important as the land use, the concept and the
term have been expanded Thus' the descript ion below
of each "land use and character area" classif ication wil l
address the permitted land uses' densities (for residential
classif ications), and general physical form This plan
element shall serve as the basis for future zoning' As
with this plan, the subsequent zoning should also address
not only land uses, but densit ies, form and character'
Land Use & Gharacter Areas
The following land use and character areas are illustrated
on the map on the fol lowing page and described in detai l
on the fol lowing pages, but below is a summary of each:
Town Center (16 acres)
T h e T o w n C e n t e r s h a l l c o n s i s t o f a m i x t u r e o f
governmental, commercial and residential uses developed
in a pedestrian-fr iendly form and anchored by a small
town green, l t is located in the northern half of the city
where a more sunurban form of a town center has existed
for years, near the intersection of Lula Lake Road and
McFarland Road.
These areas are intended to accommodate a broad range
o f r e s i d e n t r a | u s e s t h a t a r e h i g h e r i n d e n s i t y r e l a t i v e t o
other areas of the ci ty. Appropriate uses include single-
family detached houses on smal l lo is ' at tached houses'
townhouses , condomin iumiapar tment bu i ld ings ' and
various forms of senior housing All higher-density housing
should be located within or near the Town Center
to the northern half of the city where most of the existing
housing already exists. l t supports and rernforces the
es tab l i shed dens i t y and cha rac te r o f ex i s t i ng
neighborhoods and their single-family detached houses'
which feature average lots sizes of approximately 15'000
square feet (.34 acres).
Low-Density Residential (948 acres)
The Low-Density Residential classification dominates the
undeveloped southern half of the city, which has many
env i ronmen ta | l ysens i t i ve fea tu res .Theapprop r ia temaximum density of this area should equate to an average
lot size of 60,000 square feet (1'4 acres)' However'
clustering should be an alternative in which smaller lots
are created in a concentrated arrangement ' but
compensating preserved open space shall insure that
the overal l permitted density is not exceeded'
This designation is applied primarily to properties already
in use as open space, recreation, or attractions' such
as the golf course, Fairyland Club, Rock City' the soccer
f ield, and the Fairyland School 's recreational faci l i t ies
While other port ions of this plan propose a new public
park on the southeast edge of the city' i t is not included
in this land use and character area plan element because
it is not recommenoed that the area be zoned simtlarly'
The implimentation of this idea should occur through land
acquisit ion by the City rather than through zoning'
lnsti tut ional (1 2 acres)
T h e l n s t i t u t i o n a I d e s i g n a t i o n r e c o g n i z e s e x i s t i n gins t i t u t i ons , such as the Ca tho l i c chu rch and the
elementary school' but not those that are part of the Town
Center, which has its own designation'
Exrst ing Uses Not Ref lected in the Plan
The property on McFarland Road immediately west of
the soccer field ts currently used for a business and zoned
as S ing le Fami ly / Ne ighborhood Commerc ia l D is t r i c t
B e c a u s e a c o m m e r c t a l u s e i n t h i s l o c a t i o n t s
inconsistent with the pr inciples of this plan' i t is not
designated for the exist ing use' However ' even i f the
zoning were changed to resident ial for compatibi l i ty
purposes, the use would be "grandfathered in" to continueMedium-Density Residential (404 acres)
This land use and character area designationis l imited
.B
Land Use & Character Areas Plan
$3*g* sS cf 84
Town Center (2008)
In 2007, the grocery store anchoring Lookout Mountain's
smal l commercial center burned down This unfortunate
event prompted citrzens to step back and take a broader
view of the area and its future. Choosing to turn a negatlve
into a posit ive, the community decided rt wanted to
transform the generic commercial center dominated by a
"str ipcommerical"character intoadist inct iveandwalkable
Town Center Consequent ly ' the City commissioned the
creat ion of a Town Center Plan. The study area included
16 5 acres anchored by the intersection of Lula Lake Road
and McFarland Road Astrong community input process
wias utilized to create the plan, including a project kick-off
meeting, a ser ies of stakeholder meetings, a charrette
workshop, and a concept plan presentat ion encouraglng
an open discussion with ci t izens The plan rs i l lustated
on the fol lowing Page
(ey Features of the Town Center Plan
The plan advocates a mixed use environment that is ur-
ban in form and pedestr ian fr iendly The fol lowing is a
summary of the some of the key components of the plan:
lown Green
I his smal l ceremonial park is the focal point for the area
It f ronts onto Lula Lake and is surrounded by a street wtth
etngled on-street ParKlng
t\/l u n icipal Bu ildi ngs- lhe plan provides for much-needed addit ional space for
City Hall, the police department and flre deparlment While
publ ic works might have off ice space here' tne maln op-
erations would relocate elsewhere given their space needs
Mrxed Use Buildrngs
Dep ic ted in o range on the p lan map a t r igh t ihese bu i ld -
ings would feature groundf loor commercial uses with up-
per floor housing and/or offices
Housing
H o u s i n g w o u | d b e i n t h e f o r m o f p e r i p h e r a | m u | t i . f a m i l y
bu i ld ings and townhouses , as we l l as some upper f loor
u n i t s a b o v e c o m m e r c i a | u s e s w i t h i n m i x e d u s e b u i | d t n g s
It is important to understand that the si te plan at r ight is
n]u=' l ,onu'-* |1": : : - : t ' " - : : : ] "wn
centel m 0ht
i t - " i 1
; l r :
develop, but i t is cr i t ical that the plan's urban design
principles be fol lowed. Also, specif ic uses/terrants wi l l
be determined by market condit ions.
Relat ionship to the Comprehensive Plan
The 2008 Town Center Plan is validated and realfirmed by
this Comprehensive Plan for three reasons:
1) The Town Center Plan was created relatively recently
2) The Town Center PIan st i l l has broad community sup-
Port3) The substance of the Town Center Plan is c;onsistent
with the goals and object ives of this Comprehenstve
Plan
Thus, the Town Center Plan can be treated as a supple-
ment of this ComPrehenstve Plan
f f iAreaBreal ldown
Sq. Ft. r99 ,00020,925 i4,2001 1 , 4 0 0
135,525
IIr.,.
f i Residential
gReta i l / Serv tce
HOffice
tl Civic
1,i l"
Land Use TYPeResident ialRetai l / ServiceOfficeCiv icTOTAL
Percont
1 53I
99
Key Plan GraPhics: 2008 Town Center
Fn;1* $'t *'i il':l
High-Density Resident ial
Exist ing Condit ions
The fol lowing cr i ter ia were used in ident i fy ing specif ic
propertres targeted for the High-Density Resident ial
designat ion based upon their exist ing condit ions:
. Lands adjacent to and/or near the Town Center
. Lands with no (or minimal) exist ing development to
make development economical ly viable
. Larger parcels that wi l l accommodate land
assemblage for development relative to the difficulty of
acquir ing numerous smal ler parcels
. Lands best accessed (direct ly or indirect ly) by Lula
Lake rather than McFarland, which has constraints for
vehicular and pedestrian safety caused by narrow widths
and t lght curves
. Lands with exist ing high-density resident ial develop-
ment and/or zon ing un less a l ready par t o f the des ig -
nated Town Center.
As the maps on the fol lowing page indicate, destgnated
lands are located direct ly north of the Town Center, as
wel l as to the south and west where exist ing simi lar de-
velopment and/or zoning already exist . l t totals 48 acres
Land Uses
This designat ion wi l l accommodate a broad range of
resident ial uses higher in density relat ive to other areas
of the ci ty, including: s ingle-family detached houses on
smal l lo ts ( inc lud ing "pa t io homes" ) , a t tached houses
( d u p l e x e s , t r i p l e x e s , q u a d s , e t c . ) t o w n h o u s e s ,
condominium/apartment bui ldings, and various forms of
sen io r hous ing (ass is ted l i v ing , e tc , )
Densitv
The max imum dens i ty fo r th is a rea shou ld be e igh t (B)
un i ts per acre Min imum lo t s izes fo r s ing le - fami ly
de ta tched houses shou ld be 5 ,500 square fee t and
min imum lo ts s izes fo r a t tached s ing le - fami ly lo ts
(townhouses) should be 1 '500 square feet A minimum
lot s ize for mult i - family bui ldings is not necessary No
bu i ld ings sho i r ld exceed th ree (3 )s to r ies in he igh t
lntentBecause of the current lack of choices forhousing, a greater variety of housing types isneeded. ln pafticular, housing forsenlors isneeded, ranging from "down-sizing" patiohomes fo asslsfed living. Higher densityhousing should be located in and near theTown Center to decrease traffic, increaseopp o rtu n itie s fo r w al ki n g, be nef it th e re side nts,and economically supportthe Town Center.
Proposed Character
Despite accommodating a variety of housing types, they
can all be visually compatible through strong urban design
standards. Character ist ics should include shal low front
s e t b a c k s , f r o n t p o r c h e s , a n d t h e a v o i d a n c e o f
"garagescape" through on-street parking and rear alleys
Other Considerat ions
Two alternative designs are provided on the following page
Alternat ive "A' ' features a smal ler area direct ly north of
the Town Center, and Alternat ive "8" includes this same
area, as well as a larger contiguous area to the immediate
north. Al ternat ive "A" includes a 5+ acre component of
mu l t i - fami ly hous ing , wh ich cou ld inc lude ass is ted l i v ing
(approximately 40+ beds). fhese two site plans are
purely conceptual and simply one of numerous ways
fhese sifes might be developed with this desiglrtation
Examples o fC o m p a t i b l e N e wRes ident ia lD e v e I o p m e n t
Photograplr above fronl the2008 Town Ce l r te r P lancourtesy of Tunnell SPanglerWalsh & Associates
Fxg* {$} *i $'t i
Concept A: High-Density Residential Near the Town Center
. 11 cottageso 16 townhouses, 5+ acres of mult i-family housing
Concept B: High-Density Residential
Same program as Alternative A, Plus:
. 34 singleJamily houses
. 36 cottages (smaller single-family
houses). 16 townhouses
Near the Town Center
s L w q L e - r a w t L t gI l ovs ,es ,
1 Dvt wh o vt -<, (, s'
C() t ta 2es
frng* #ii ;-i *"tl
Medium-Density Resident ial
This designat ion is l imited to the northern half of the ci ty
where most of the housrng already exists. l t contains
404 acres (see the map on the fol lowing page).
Ex is t ing Cond i t ions
This area consists of resident ial neighborhoods with
s ing le - fami ly houses tha t were deve loped pr imar i l y
bertween the '1930s and 1960s. The median age of
Lookout Mountain's houses is f i f ty (50) years.* Over
seventy-five (75) percent of the community's housing was
developed pr ior to 1969., and vir tual ly al l of i t exists within
the designated Medtum-Density Resident ial area
'Souce; Sperl ing's Llest Places
Land Uses
The only pr imary permit ted use for this designat ion should
b e s i n g l e - f a m r l y d e t a c h e d h o u s e s , w h i l e c e r t a i n
ins t i tu t iona l uses tha t do no t negat ive ly impact nearby
residents should be a special except ion use
DersXvl-LafszcMinimum permit ted lots sizes shal l be 14,520 square
feet ( 33 acres), which equals a maximum gross density
of three (3) uni ts per acre (43 560 square feet)
Qharacterl-he character sought for thrs designat ion is consistent
with the area's exrst ing character: narrow streets, gener-
lntentIt is the intent of the Medium-DensityResidential designation to protect and reinforcethe many positive qualities of the existingneighborhoods located in the northern half ofLookout Mountain
ous front and side setbacks, extensive mature vegetation,
and architecture compatible with exist ing fornts
Other Considerat ions
Key considerat ions for the future of this area include the
fol lowing:
Sfreefs
Streets should remain their current relatrvely narrow width,
and oppor tun i t ies fo r t ra f f i c ca lming shou ld be sought
where needed. Sidewalks should be added to segments
o f Red R id ing Hood Tra i l , Lu la Lake, and Mock ingb i rd
Lane (see the sec t ion on "Transpor ta t ion and In f ra -
structure" for more on this issue).
Front Yards
Front yards should exist as pr imari ly green lawns Wtth
the except ion of standard dr iveways (one vehicle width) '
vehicles, boats and simi lar objects should not be stored
rn front yards - even with surface paving
Lookout Motrntain's earliest 2)th-century housrngpltysicat characteristics shou/ci se/ve as lhe ba'sisdesiqnatiort
was developecl as paft of the Fairyland strbdivisionfor ftrtttre zoning regulations for the Medium-Density
i. r;i lil ,i
Its originalResident ia l
r - l
Property Maintenance
A minimum maintenance ordinance should be considered
to insure that all properties are adequately maintained.
This idea is particularly relevant to rental property in
Lookout Mountain.
Design SfandardsSpecial design standards should be considered for this
area. They might either be incorporated into the base
zoning or applied as part of a design overlay district (see
the section on "Natural Environment and Community
Character" for more on this issue).
$?age S5 of 84
Low-Density Residential
This designation dominates the relatively undeveloped
southern half of the city, consist ing of 948 acres.
Exrsting Condit ionsThis area has many environmental ly sensit ive features,
as documented in this plan document's background study
of existing conditions. Among those features are steep
slopes, soi ls with severe l imitations for development,
l imestone geology with caverns, dense vegetation, and
endangered plant and animal species.
Land UsesThe only primary permitted use forthis designation should
be s ing le - fam i l y de tached houses , wh i l e ce r ta in
insti tut ional uses that do not negatively impact nearby
residents should be a special exception use
Density / Lot Sizes
Minrmum permitted lots sizes shall be 60'000 square
feet (1.4 acres). However' a clustering option should be
allowed in which lots can be as small as 14,520 square
feet (.33 acres), but the balance of the site must be
preserved in perpetuity through a conservation easement'
CharacterThe character intended for this desrgnation is a rural
and natural looking landscape. Development should
h a v e a l i m i t e d v i s u a l i m p a c t a n d t h e m o s t
envi ronmenta l ly s ign i f icant lands, such as s teep
slopes (25 percent or more) and natural drainage
w a y s / s t r e a m s , s h o u l d b e p r o t e c t e d f r o m
development.
Other ConsideratlonsAs the concept plans at r ight i l lustrate, there are
two options suggested for this classif ication'
lntenttt is the intent of the Low-Density Residentialdesignation to provide housing in a form andcharacterthat is in harmony with theenvironmentatty rich fabric of the southernhalf of Lookout Mountain.
The conventional large lot approach (ConceptA)would
feature minimum 60,000 square foot lots. The clustering
option (Concept B) would al low lots as small as 14,520
square feet, but the total number of lotws would not to
exceed the 60,000 square foot lot overall gross density.
Rather than mandating either part icular approach, i t is
recommended that future zoning allow either optton'
An ex i s t i ng mode l i n Lookou t Moun ta in fo r t he
conventional large lot option is the Turn Berry Drive
development off of Lula Lake Road. While there are no
exist ing models in Lookout Mountain for the clustering
option, the proposed minimum 14,520 square foot lots
are comparable in size to those found in the north side of
the city (minus the preserved common open space).
With respect to the two concepts on the fol lowlng page'
i t is acknowledged that this part icular site has substantial
const ra in ts because of rock outcroppings, so the
feasibility cannot be confirmed. Also, fhese specific
deslgns are conceptttal and will not dictate rec1uirements
for future development on this particular site
, I Low-DensttYI Res ident ia l
F*xtl* *# *i [t'1
Goncept A: Gonventional Large Lot Option
. 39 lots e Minimum lot size: 60,000 square feet
ConcePt B: Glustering OPtion
. 39 lots . Minimum lot size: 15,000 square feet
. No preserved common open space
. Preserved common open space and trai ls
Open Space, Recreation & Attractions
This designation is applied primarily to properties already
in use as open space, recreation, or attractions. lt totals
211 acres of land area (see the map below for locations)'
Exist ing Condit ionsThese propert ies include the golf course, Fairyland Club,
Rock City, the soccer f ield, and recreational faci l i t ies
associated with the Fairyland School
Land UsesPerm i t t ed l and uses shou ld i nc lude open space '
recreational faci l i t ies, and tou rist attractions.
Density / Lot Sizes
Not applicable
lnstitutionalThe Insti tut ional designation recognizes two exist ing
institutions located outside of the Town Center, which
has i t s own land use and cha rac te r des igna t i on .
Combined, the propert ies comprise 12 acres
Exist ing Condit ionsThe two exist ing insti tut ion beyond the Town Center are
the Ca tho l i c chu rch on Scen ic H ighway and the
elementary schoolon Lula Lake Road.
Land UsesPermi t ted land uses should inc lude governmenta l ,
re l ig ious, educat ional , and s imi lar inst i tu t ional uses
Density / Lot SizesNot applicable
Character
Because each ProPertY for which
this designat ion has been aPPlied
is so dtf ferent, there ts no single
charac ter tha t i s be ing sought .
However, in general, the character
shou ld be comPat ib le w i th the
communitY's strong ident i tY with
the natural environment
Other Considerat ions
Whi le o ther Por t ions o f th is P lan
propose a new Publ ic Park on the
southeast edge of the ci tY (see
page 79) i t i s no t inc luded in th is
land use and character area Plan
e l e m e n t b e c a u s e i t i s n o t
recommended that the area be
z o n e d a s a P a r k T h e i m P l e -
m e n t a t i o n o f t h i s i d e a s h o u l d
occur through land acquisi t ion bY
the City ratherthan through zoning'
Fmp* $$ i: i t14
lntent/f is the intent of the lnstitutional designation toaccom modate exi sti n g re I ig io u s, gove rn me ntaland similaruses /ocafed otrtside of thed e si g n ate d Tow n C e n te r.
ChsealcrAs with the Open Space, Recreation and Attractionsd e s i g n a t i o n , t h e p r o p e r t i e s i n c l u d e d w i t h i n t h e
Institutional designation are diverse in their character and
sett ings. Thus, i t is not reasonable to attempt to apply a
single character for al l such propert ies. In fact, to help
underscore the unique and significant role that institutions
play within the community, and to help maintain important
visual landmarks that help geographical ly or ient people ,
i t is desirable that individual inst i tut ions each have an
individual character.
Other Considerat ions
Although Covenant Col lege is an important inst i tut ion for
Lookout Mountain, and the col lege owns some property
within the ci ty 's boundaries, the actual inst i tut ional land
use does no t occur w i th in the c i ty . As the aer ia l
photograph map on page 5 of this plan reveals, there are
no col lege-related physical improvements within the ci ty
J'herefore the col lege is not among the inst i tut ional uses
de l ineated in th is P lan .
Future Bu i ld -Out Under the P lan
The earl ier sect ion of this plan ent i t led "Exist ing Pol icy
Build-Out Scenario" (pages 42-45) documented existing
development with respect to the amounts of various land
uses, projected a ful l bui ld-out scenario based upon ex-
ist ing policies (zoning and plans), and then calculated
the totals for the future. Because nearly al l of the
community's exist ing commercial and insti tut ional uses
are located within the Town Center area, and because
the 2008 Town Center Plan projects a future build-out
scenario, those numbers are st i l l considered relevant.
ln summary, they are as fol low:
Town Center Non-Residential Build-Out Projections
Retail: 20,925 square feet
Offices: 4,200 square feet
Civic: '11 ,400 square feet
With respect to residential development, below is a chart
summarizing exist ing development, a bui ld-ot- t t scenario
based upon the City 's current pol ic ies, and a bui ld-out
scenario based upon this plan. Even though the mini-
mum oermit ted lot s ize in the southern half of the ci ty is
proposed to be nearly double of the exist ing permit ted
size, sample si te plans reveal that steep slopes prevent
the current permit ted density (minimum 35,000 sq f t .
lots) f rom actual ly being achieved, and the proposed
density is more real ist ic. On the other hand the hypo-
thet ical bui ld-out of the area proposed for High-Density
Res ident ia lwou ld y ie ld B '1 s ing le - fami ly houses and72
attached and mult i - familY units.
ResidentialGrowth comparisons: Exist ing, current Policy & Proposed
Land Use CategorY
Sing le -Fami lY
Mul t i -Fami lY
Total
Existing Conditions
(Units / Population)
565 | 1 ,440
4 2 t 8 4
607 | 1,524
Current Policy(Units / Population)
423 I 1 ,100
148 | 296
571 11 ,396
Proposed Plan
(Units / Population)
503 / 1 ,308
220 | 440
723 | 1 ,748
YRAhI$P*ffiTAT$ffiN
This plan sect ion wi l l not only address transportat ion
issues for motor ized vehrcles, but for other modes of
transportat ion as wel l , including walking and cycl ing'
Roads
Key Roads Overview
The C i ty i s and w i l l con t inue to be , w i th th is p lan '
accessible by vehicular travel mainly along rural two-lane
undivided roadways, On thewestside ofthe City, Scenic
H i g h w a y ( S R 1 B g ) , d e s i g n a t e d a s a m a j o r
ar te r ia l , p rov ides connect ions to the nor theas t v ia
Cummings H ighway and Broad St ree t to downtown
Chattanooga and lnterstate Highways 75 and 24. Scenic
H i g h w a y a l s o p r o v i d e s a c c e s s t o t h e s o u t h w e s t .
McFar land Road and Red R id ing Hood Tra i l (SR 157)
both major arterials, provide the east-west route through
the City from Scenic Highway in the west to cont inue as
Ochs H ighway in to Chat tanooga. Lu la Lake Road,
designated as a col lector, provides a north-south route
through the center of the City from Scenic Highway to
the north in Tennessee and to the south to end at SR 157'
See page 25 of this plan's Background Study for a map
highl ight ing these arter ials and col lectors.
Current Travel Volume9
Lula Lake Road to the north of Red Riding Hood Trat l is
the most heavi ly traveled road with approximately B'800
vehicles per day (GDOT 2008 AADT) Scenic Hlghway
to the north of the City carrted less than 1,000 vehicles
per day. The next highest traf f ic volumes were reported
on McFarland Road between Lula Lake Road and Scenic
Highway at 6,870 vehicles per day Scenic Highway to
the south of McFarland Road carr ied 3'360 vehicles per
day and Red Riding Hood Trai l to the east of the Town
Center area carr ied less than 2,500 vehicles per day
Town Center
The existing Town Center area roadway network forms a
g r i d o f r e s i d e n t i a l s t r e e t s c o n n e c t i n g t o t h e s e
thoroughfares, with the addit ion of Woodnymph Trai l
bordering the golf course The proposed Town Center
wi l l cont inue the gr id of streets and parking by running
oaral lel to ei ther Lula Lake Road or McFarland Road'
Plan's lmpact on Traffic
Based on this plan, approximately BB0 new tr ips during
the peak hours wi l l be added to the ci ty 's streets. This
represents 10% of the total dai ly tr ips and is the typical
percentage experienced in the peaks. Of these new trips,
the majority will go to and from the south and west of the
Town Center; about 175to and from the south and 535 to
and from the west dur ing peak hours. Approximately 85
wi l l come to and from the east and 87 to and from the
north of the Town Center during peak hours. This is based
on the existing distribution of traffic in the city, as well as
the proposed new locations of the future single and multi-
family resident ial uni ts. The current number of average
daily trips on Lula Lake Road just north of the intersection
with McFarland Road is 2,500, and this plan wi l lgenerate
approximately an addit ional 870 dai ly tr ips
In compar ison, the p lan proposed in th is document w i l l
add more traf f ic to the ci ty 's roads than the future bui ld-
out scenario with the ci ty 's current pol icy. However, the
exist ing roadways wi l l cont inue to operate at acceptable
Levels of Service (LOS). The Level of Service measure
is simi lar to a report card with A being the best and F
being unacceptable, In most communit ies the goal is
to have the roads operate at LOS D or better ' Current ly,
Lula Lake Road north of the Town Center is operat ing at
LOS B, and south of the Town Center at LOS A. With
this plan, the Levels of Service are expected to become
LOS C to the north and LOS B to the south. Red Riding
Hood Trai l at Rock City is current ly operat ing at LOS D
based on capacity. With the proposed plan, it is expected
to cont inue to operate at the same LOS. The segment
of this road between Rock City and Lula Lake is current ly
operat ing at a LOS of C and wi l l cont inue 1o with this
plan. McFarland current ly operates at LOS C. With the
proposed plan, it is expected to operate at a slightly lower
LOS. Overal l , the generated traf f ic f rom the proposed
plan wi l l not have a signi f icant impact on the roadway
Leve ls o f Serv ice . l t i s no tewor thy tha t th is p lan 's
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n w o u l d n o t r e q u i r e a n y t r a f f i c
improvements to increase capacity.
Recommended I morovements
Some improvements are suggested for the safety of the
residents and visi tors to the community. lmprovements
on Lula Lake Road McFadand Road, Red Riding Hood
f '*g* i i i r;f l ,, l
Trail, and other select roadways near the Town Center
should be made to encourage safe walking and bicycling.
In addit ion, crosswalks are recommended, especial ly
around the Town Center, for safer pedestrian crossing
locations anywhere a sidewalk meets a roadway. The
crosswalk and sidewalk design features must meet the
federal Americans with Disabi l i t ies Act (ADA).
The intersect ion of Red Riding Hood Trai l at Lula Lake
Road and McFarland Road could be improved to provide
a s a f e r a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e e x i s t i n g i n t e r s e c t i o n
conf igurat ion. Innovat ive geometr ic designs, such as a
r o u n d a b o u t , c o u l d b e c o n s i d e r e d t o a l l o w b e t t e r
pedestr ian movements and consol idat ion of the f low of
traf f ic. Innovat ive traf f ic control measures may also be
examined for the intersect ion of Red Riding Hood Trai l at
Mockingbird due to the volumes attracted by Rock City.
TransitTo create a thriving and prosperous Town Cen-
ter, the City can take advantage of the visi-
tors to the mountain in a way that does
not add signif icant traff ic to the road-
ways A small shutt le (similar to the ;
vans used bY Rental Car comPanies ;
at the airport) has the possibi l i ty to Il ink Rock City, the lncl ine Railway i ' '
and Ruby Fal ls to the Town
Center.
\
Visitors would be encouraged to park in areas already
designated for parking at the Incl ine Railway and Rock
City. They can then take the shuttle to and from the
Town Center to enjoy al l that Lookout Mountain's shops
and restaurants have to offerwithout having to drive theirpersonal cars through the city. This approach would helpprovrde a suff icient usage to maintain the businesses
and services that residents want to have available in the
Town Center.
RecommendedRoad lmprovements
* s,F
t$
Red Riding HoodTra i l& Mock ingb i rd
Lu la Lake & RedRiding Hood Trai l
. . . '" ' Lula Lake &
McFarland
S;rg* f { rif Srt
Sidewalks / Trai ls
As has been noted throughout this planning process, a
signif icant drawback to Lookout Mountain at present ts
i ts lack of s idewalks and formal trai ls. This is an issue
that has been part icular ly important to ci t izens providing
input in to th is p lan . In 2003, a "Pedest r ian Pathway"
marster planning report was prepared. l t tncluded a plan
for a pedestr ian path extending from the state l ine at the
north to the Lula Lake - Wood Nymph spl i t at the south.
A relat ively short segment connect ing Fairyland School
with the park across from the Town Center has been
developed, but the balance wi l l require addit ional funding
sL,iewaiKsFor the purposes o f th is p lan , s idewalks a re de f ined as
paved trai ls that are located adjacent to roads As the
map on the fo l low ing page ind ica tes , s idewalks a re
proposed for key segments of Lula Lake Road McFarland
Road, Red R id ing Hood Tra i l , and Mock ingb i rd Lane /
F lee twood Dr ive The recent ly comple ted sec t ion
connect ing the school with the ci ty park should serve as
the design model Below are some general pr inciples to
follow in the development of a sidewalk system for Lookout
Mounta in :
. Connect key act iv i ty nodes, such as the Town Center '
Fa i ry lanc l Schoo l soccer f ie ld , go l f course , Fa i ry land
Club, and Rock C i ty The map o f p roposed s idewalks
fo l lows th rs Pr inc tP le
. Whrle sidewalks within the Town Center should be wide
and provided on both sides of the street, i t is accept-
ab le fo r roac ls e lsewhere to have a s tdewalk on on ly
one s ide o f the road because o f space and fund ing
cons t ra in ts
. Sidewalks should be at least four (4) feet in width and
bu i l t o f a durab le sur face , such as concre te , aspha l t ,
b r ick , o r s im i la r pav ing mater ia ls The grade, w id th '
surface and other design features must meet the fed-
era lAmer icans w i th D isab i l i t ies Ac t (ADA)
Where space and funding are avai lable' a plant ing str ip
and street trees should be provtded between the streeV
curb edge and s idewalk , and human-sca led l igh t ing
should be provided in the highest traf f ic areas
The recent ly com-pleted pedestrian trailalong Lula Lake: Roadfeatures a concretesurface, Iandscaping,human-scaled lighting,and benches.
I rails
For the purposes o f th is p lan , t ra i l s a re d r ; f ined as
pedestrian routes that are located separately from roads
While they can be paved with a hard surfact: such as
concrete or asphalt , they can also feature less durable
mater ials such as wood chips, gravel or even grass/dir t
As i l l us t ra ted on the map on the fo l low ing page t ra t l s
are proposed for: 1) a relat ively short easlwest segment
to connect the Fairyland School recreat ion faci l i t ies with
the soccer f ie ld to the west; and 2) a much longer looping
segment in the southern half of the ci ty that wi l l t raverse
Lula Lake Road and access the proposed new park
Below are some general pr inciples to fol low for t rai ls:
. As with sidewalks connect key act iv i ty nodes, par-
t icular ly those not already connected with s; tdewalks
A lso , connect nodes w i th the s idewalk sys tem, as is
proposed with the proposed new park and thel proposed
s idewalk on Lu la Lake Road
. Tra i l s shou lc l avo id ex is t ing deve lopmentwhere pos-
s ib le and fo l low rear lo t l ines , u t i l i t y easenrents , and
streams/f loodplains ( less cost ly to acquire)
l h t s t r a t l I l l r oug t l awooded area conslslsof a gravel sur face.Relative to concrete oraspha l t , i f l s / essexpensive to develoPand i t i s Pe rmeab lefo r s to rmwate r ab -sorption However, ita l so requ t res moremaintenat lce.
l : ' ; ie. ' . i : Fir i ' ,
The plan map at lEft'is from the pedestrian pathway reportcomrnissioned by the City in 2003. While the p/an addressesa proposed segmenf extending from the city boundary at thenofth to the golf course at the south, the section illustrated at Ieflis the portion completed so far. Federal transportationenhancement funding helped pay for most of the proiect.
Fmg* TS *f ft4
$NFMA$TR{JSTL$Rffi & {"$Tfi fl-$Y!M$
The Background Study port ion of this plan addresses
existin g condittons for Lookout Mou ntai n's i nfrastructure
and uti l i t ies (see "Exist ing Buil t Condit ions"). As that
section reveals, there are no signif icant l imitations or
issues with respect to public water, electr icity, gas,
telecommunications, and similar utilities. However, a few
other uti l i ty issues were identif ied through the public
visioning process for this plan. Those issues relate to
deficiencies with the exist ing sewage treatment system
and the visual impact of ut i l i ty poles and overhead wires
Both subjects are addressed here.
Sewage Treatment SYstem
A "Feasib i l i ty Study Sewer Serv ice Extension" was
prepared by Consolidated Technologies, Inc. in June 2007.
The intent was to determine whether f ive potential new
developments to ta l ing 204 res ident ia l unt ts can be
supported by the current system' That report is the
primary source of information for this plan
Lookout Mountain owns and operates a low pressure
grinder pump (LPGP) collection system. Accordlng to
the report, wastewater is col lected by individual grinder
pump units and conveyed to a central ized pump station
on Chickamauga Trai l . From there i t is conveyed to
Lookout Mountain, Tennessee, and ult imate treatment
and d isposal occurs at the Moccasin Bend regional
wastewater treatment plant. Roughly 570 individual
grinder pump units are connected to the city's system,
and there are three larger commerc la l pump unl IS:
Covenan t Co l l ege , Rock C i t y and the F l i n t s tone
Subdiv is ion Covenant Col lege, the "s ing le largest
customer," abandoned its own wastewater treatment plant
and connected to the city's system. That old system is
considered to be obsolete, and it does not appear to be
feasible to redevelop it into a functioning system'
The study concluded that the best route for serving the
orooosed 150 units associated with a new retirement
vi l lage would be to connect at Lula Lake Road to the
east. A new fal lout l ine would eventually be needed,
; . " : l *+" T; i i r l ! . ' .1' - ' ; 1 ' " "
although the f irst phase of development might uti l ize an
existing system along Lula Lake Road to the north to
the McCall ie Lane area. Potential funding sources for
an expanded system might include the Special Purpose
Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) and the Georgia
Environmental Facilities Authority (GEFA).
Fl intstone Subdivision SystemThis residentialsubdivision is located south of Covenant
College and immediately west of the city's l irnits. The
system experiences infl ow/infiltration problems during wet
weather, which cause the pumps to operate almost
continuously. According to the reporl, "The Chickamauga
Trail pumps cannot keep up with the combined pumping
rate from Flintstone Subdivision and Covenant College
plus the routine domestic flow in the system." Repairing
fhis sysfem shottld be a high priority for improving the
ov e ral I sewage tre atm e n t sY ste m.
Chickamauga Trai l PumP Station
This faci l i ty is located in a residential neighborhood just
south of Rock City. l t has experienced overf lows during
extremely wet weather. There have also been odor
problems during dry weather and when Covenant College
is not in session (f lows are lower, which decreases the
amount of chemical odor treatment added to the college's
pump station). The City has made considerable efforts
to correct the odor problem to the extent that i t can with
odor control lrng chemicals. The study determined that,
for a vartety of reasons, this faci l i ty cannot be expanded
to accommoda te s ign i f i can t l y g rea te r vo lumes o f
wastewater. Continuing efforts to combat the odors
associafed with this pump station shottld be a high priority
for improving the overall sewage treatment sysfem'
SummaryThe top two priorities for the current sewag€) treatment
system should be to repair the inflow/infiltration problems
in the Flintstone Subdivision and to continue addressing
odor problems with the Chickamauga Trai l pump station'
It is also recommended that the work performed on the
2007 study of the system be expanded to provtde more
definit ive answers regarding the amount of development
that an improved system can handle and the best options
for expanding the sYstem if needed
Underground Utilities
The public input process for creating this plan revealed a
strong desire by many residents to eliminate utility poles
and aboveground electrical lines because of their negative
visual impacls. Consequently, two recommendations are
provided:
Underqround Utilities for Development
All new development (with the exception
of infill properties in existing developed
areas) should be required to bury utilities
underground. This requirement wil l be
particularly important for the redeveloped
Town Center, since the visual quality of
the streetscapes will be a key issue,
Consider Burying Existing Overhead Lines
Because of the cost associated with this idea, it should
not be considered a high priority, However, when thisplan's ideas for expanding the city's sidewalk system
are implemented, that might be an excellent opportunity
to bury lines as part of the construction project.
C,'v t'r, ttl. a'"w a'"'. c) a
t vt;.i,'t.
V u-v^:l #t;: Al::i r; v''
C* O"U Components of the Sewer System
(: ,0'v{^'^
\>tw;l '
y: i, i, u""i - !:, i- lt \a, {
$,,,t'l:at vl:;'it tt'
Fage ?S of B4
$dA-$'{-$RAL HNV$R#f\flffiffih$T & tain's system of natural streams and drainage ways and
ccMuw{.$f\Eflyv c${ARAfTffiffi discuss their importance, while the state requires aminimum stream buffer of only 25 feet (measured from
the bank edge), many communit ies in the region require
This topic turned out to be an important one for many of wider buffers, Fulton County, for example, requires 50
the city's residents. Background information on Lool<out foot and 75 foot buffer (depending upon what part of the
Mountain'snaturalenvironmentiscontainedinthisplans County) in which no disturbance may occur, and an
section entitled "Natural Resources" (pages 5-19), while additional 25 foot setback beyond that buffer prohibits
historic resources that also contribute towards community imoervious surfaces to be developed. This ordinance is
character are addressed in the section entitled "Historic considered to be a good model for the region and should
Resources" (pages 20'21). Below are recommendations be consrdered by Lookout Mountain.related to this subject, as follows:
Mature VegetationLookout Mountain is essential ly a community within a
Reguratory Approaches forest. pages 16 and 17 of this pran address forested
This plan,s land use and character area plan already takes areas and highlighttheir importance for both environmental
steps to better protect Lookout Mountain's natural and community character reasons. There are a varlety
envi ronment by suggest ing a decreased res ident ia l o f regulatory measures pract iced by many other
density within the southern half of the city - from minimum communit ies that should be considered for Lookout
lots sizes of 35,000 square feet to 60'000 square feet ' Mountain' as fol low:
and bV suggest tng a c luster ing opt ton to preserve . prohib i t , ,c lear cut t ing" of a s i te in which a l l or most o f
the vegetation is removed prior to site development
.Requ i r i ngap re .cons t ruc t i onSurveyo f t reesonas i te
to insure no net loss (replacement of lost trees)
. Requir ing a part icular density of t rees within a specif ic
depth (50 feet ' for example) of road frontage to main-
tain a "green corr idor "
A | l v e g e t a t i o n s t a n d a r d s m u s t c o n s i d e r t h e s p e c t e s a n d
slze of vegetation so that mature hardwoods' for example'
are not replaced by smal l and/or non-nat ive specles'
Oth e r E nv i ro n m e n tal /ssues
T h e r e a r e o t h e r s t a n d a r d s t h a t m i g h t b e c o n s i d e r e d
related to geology, groundwater and similar environmental
|ssues .Const ruc t ionmethodsshou|da |soberegu|a ted ,
sucn as providing si l t fencing around the perimeter of a
construct ion si te ' and fencing off the perimeter of t rees
to be saved (around the drip line)to avoid heavy equipment
from compact ing the dir t around their root systems ano
causing trees to eventual lY die'
?S irt {3'X
I mprove Standards for Neighborhoods
In addit ion to the natural environment, much of Lookout
Mountain's unique community character is der ived from
its exist ing older neighborhoods Some of these issues
were no ted prev ious ly on pages 64 and 65 , bu t the
fol lowing standards should be considered:
Front Yards
Front yards should exist as pr imari ly green lawns. With
the except ion of standard dr iveways (one vehicle width),
vehicles, boats and simi lar objects should not be stored
in front yards - even with surface paving.
Property Maintenance
A m i n i m u m m a i n t e n a n c e s t a n d a r d s s h o u l d b e
considered to insure that all properties are adequately
maintained This idea is part icular ly relevant to rental
property in Lookout Mountain
Sca/e & Fornt of Infil l Houses
While the "tear down" phenomenon is not overly
pronounced ye t in Lookout Mounta in , based upon
the experience of s imi lar ly desirable communit tes, i t
may not be far away. l t is important that new houses
avoid looking l ike they were "shoehorned" onto thetr
lo t , so bu i ld ing w id th - to - lo t w ld th ra t ios shou ld be
consrdered so that new houses f i t comfortably onto
ther r lo ts
Arc h ite ctu r al C h a ra cte r
One op t ion to insure tha t the charac ter and des tgn
q u a l i t y o f t h e e x i s t i n g o l d e r n e i g h b o r h o o d s r s
protected is to adopt ei ther local histor ic distr ict
designat ion or conservat ion distr ict designat ion The
two are simrlar in that they both apply a set of detai led
s tandards to a rch i tec tu ra l and s i te des ign , and the
demol i t ion o f s ign i f i can t o r "cont r ibu t ing" bu i ld ings is
d i s c o u r a g e d o r e v e n p r o h i b i t e d . H o w e v e r ,
conservat ion distr icts tend to be less str ingent than
h r s t o r i c d i s t r i c t s , m a k i n g t h e m a m o r e p o p u l a r
al ternat ive for many neighborhoods Regardless of
which opt ion might be considered, i t is recommended
that this type of special overlay zoning not be appl ied
unless a considerable major i ty of residents are in
supoort of i t
Lookout Mountain's older neighborhoods are rn needof protections to preserve their architectural integrityand overall cohesive character.
Non-Regulatory I ni t iat ives
Create a New Citv Park
While the creat ion of a new ci ty park would provide
substant ial environmental benef i ts, this idea is even more
re levant to the fo l low ing p lan sec t ion on "Parks and
Recreat ion " Detai ls are explained on the fol lotruing page
Encou rage Conservat ion Easements
Conservat ion easements are a pr ivate sector legaltool
fo r p ro tec t ing land A landowner and a qua l i f ied en t i t y
en ter a lega l agreement whereby the owner iagrees no t
to develop their land The specif ic provisions are up to
the two parties, but there are federal tax benefils available
for the perpetual preservat ion of the land The most
obv ious en t i t y to ho ld easements fo r Lookout Mounta in
is the Lookout Mountain Conservancy, al thouglh the Land
Trust for Tennessee is a state-wide al ternat ive
( i i i
FARKS & ffigSRffiATIGN
Exist ing Faci l i t ies
A s p r e v i o u s l y s u m m a r i z e d i n t h e " E x i s t i n g B u i l t
Condit ions" sect ion of this plan, the fol lowing parks and
recreation facilities presently exist in Lookout Mountain:
Parks & Greenways
. A smal l City Park was created in 1991 on the other
side of Lula Lake Road from City Hal l
. A short segment of greenway exists between the city
park and the Fairyland School
Recreat ion Faci l i t ies
. Lookout Mountain Golf Course: pr ivate 1B-hole course
. Fairyland Club: private club featurtn g a swimming pool
and six (6) /ennls courts
. Carter Field soccerfield
. Fairyland School recreat ion faci l i t ies: basebal l f ie ld,
multi-purpose field, and a paved trail
Covenant Col lege, which makes i ts recreat ional faci l i t ies
avai lable to the community, has the fol lowing faci l t ies:
Barnes Gym - basketbal l and vol leybal l cout ls, mult ip le
workout rooms, cl imbing wal l , aerobics room and weight
room)
Ashe Act iv i ty Center - cardio-f i tness room, three (3)
basketbal l courts, and an indoor track
Scot land Yard soccer f ie ld - for playing games
Shadowlands soccer f ie ld and an adjacent smal ler f ie ld
(both for t raining)
Other fac i l t ies inc lude a runn ing t ra i l sys tem' a newly -
constructed basebal l f ie ld and softbal l f ie ld an intramural
p lay ing f ie ld , and th ree (3 ) tenn is cour ts
ln addit ion to al l of these various recreat ion faci l i t ies, i t
must be kept in mind that neighboring Lookout Mountain,
Tennessee, which has a larger populat ion, also has many
recreat ional faci l i t ies that are avai lable to residents of
Lookout Mountain, Tennessee'
National Standards
The National Recreat ion and ParkAssociat ion (NRPA)
produces a set of standards for the provision of publ ic
parks based upon the populat ion being served. Whi le
these are on ly very genera l gu ide l ines and every
community is di f ferent, they provide broad direct ion
relative to the types of parks that might be appropriate
for Lookout Mountain. Given that these standards are
based upon the populations served, it is noteworthy that
Lookout Mountain's current populat ion is approximately
1,500 residents, i t potent ial added populat ion with a ful l
bu i ld -ou t o f th is p lan wou ld be another 1 ,750 peop le ,
result ing in a potent ial future populat ion of roughly 3,250.
Wi th those numbers in mind , be low are the NRPA
standards for parks:
Min i -Parks
Approximately one-acre in size, they are intended for
children's playgrounds and passive areas for others. They
serve a populat ion of 500 to 1 ,000 people. Wir i le neither
cur ren t ly o r p lans to inc lude ch i ld ren 's p lay equ ipment ,
the exist ing City Park and the planned smal l" town green"
tha t w i l l anchor the Town Center wou ld f i t in to th is
category
Neighborhood Parks
Intended to serve neighborhoods and often associated
with schools, these parks include recreat ional faci l i t ies
and shou ld inc lude a t leas t 2 .5 acres per 1 ,000 peop le
served They usual ly range between 5 and 10 acres in
s ize , and serve 1 ,000 to 2 ,500 peop le . Whi le bo th a re
smal ler in size, the Fairyland School faci l i t ies and Carter
Field (soccer) might fal l under this category of parks
Communi tv Parks
Community parks are intended to provide recreat ional
fac i l i t i es fo r a l l age groups and mul t ip le ne ighborhoods,
and they are most commonly accessed by automobi les,
bicycles and simi lar means. They cal l for approximately
5 acres per 1 ,000 peop le , and they typ ica l l y range in
size from 40 to 100 acres. That size range translates to
serving 8,000 to 20,000 people There is current ly no
such park in Lookout Mounta in .
tr.rg* ?$ *f [,4
Regiona lParks
Because this park type is typical ly 100 acres or more in
size and serves a populat ion of 5,000 to 7,500 people, i t
is i r relevant to Lookout Mountain.
Recommendations
ln l igh t o f Lookout Mounta in 's cur ren t and fu tu re
population, there is a wealth of recreational opportunities.
Whi le i t is acknowledged that many of these faci l i t ies
require a membership to pr ivate clubs, there are others
that are avai lable to al l c i t izens, including some of those
of nearby Covenant Co l lge and Lookout Mounta in ,
Tennessee Despite the community's relative abundance
of parks and recreat ional faci l i t ies, i t is recommended
that an expanded greenway system and a new ci ty park
be developed. Greenways - or " trai ls" - were addressed
previously (see pages 72-73), but the concept behtnd a
new park is Provided below.
Areate a New CitV Pa*
While Lookout Mountain benef i ts
from a nearby nat ional Park and a
very smal l c i ty park across from the
Town Center, there is no large Park
w i t h i n t h e c o m m u n i t Y C o n -
sequent ly, i t is ProPosed that a new
park be created in the southeast
edge of the ci tY (see maP at r ight) .- lh is park wou ld be Pr imar i lY fo r
p a s s i v e r e c r e a t i o n a l P u r P o s e s
(p icn ick ing , h ik ing , e tc . ) , bu t migh t
also have playgrounds for chi ldren.
I t would provide spectactular v iews
to the val leY below. Because this
land is pr ivatelY owned, the CitY
would need to Purchase i t , so the
t im ing wou ld be dePenoent upon
ava i lab le fund ing and negot ia t ions
with the current owner.
The pro-posed newpark couldi n c l u d eplaygroundfacil it ies fory o u n gchildren.
f taait1 J!1 -: f ; l11
h-\*#$tsl* sffi s # h$w {k't $ s m #.\1 w"N"ffipqflffi ft* "d"
Housing
Of Lookout Mountain's 607 exist ing resident ial uni ts, only
42 are mult i family units (apartments/condominiums)
This represents only 7 percent of the community 's total
h o u s i n g s t o c k B e c a u s e e v e r y c o m m u n i t y i s
demographically different, there are no absolute standards
for the opt imal mix of housing types. However, relat ive
to most other communit ies, this f igure is very low As a
general rule of thumb single-family detached housing
c o m p r i s e s 6 5 - 7 0 p e r c e n t o f h o u s i n g I n m a n y
communit ies with the balance of i t berng attached and
m u l t i f a m i l y h o u s i n g A c c o r d i n g t o t h e U S C e n s u s
Bureau 's March 2000 Popu la t ion survey , 33 percent o f
t l re na t ion 's hous ing s tock is ren ta lhous ing , o f wh ich 11
percent is s ingle-family detached rental housing
Lookot t t Mountarn 's t im i ted an tount o f ex is t i r tgmultifamity ltousing is located near tlte Town Center'
In the var io ius pub l i c inpu t sess ions conducted as par t
of this plan, two key housing concerns have surfaced
Frrst, people are concerned about the growing number of
single-family houses that are being rented, part icular ly
with respect to property matntenance Soluttons to thts
issue, in the fo rm o f min imum main tenance s tandards '
were previously addressed on page 7 7 The other tssue
is the lack o f hous ing op t ions in Lookout Mounta in In
par t i cu la r , sen io r hous ing is needed, inc luded ass is ted
l iv ing
"Eighty-six percent of older Americanssurveyecl prefer to remain in the familiarneighborhoods where they have been livingand age in place (65 percent of them havetived in the same community for more than20 years). Many find, however, that they nolonger need or can maintain the family hctme.Multifamily housing allows seniors to rernainin their neighborhoods through the diffe'rentsfages of their tives without the hassle ofm ai nta in i ng si ngl e-fa mily h o u si n 9. "
The Case for Mult i familY HousingUrban Land Inst i tute2003
Recommendations
In add i t ion to the adopt ion o f min imum mi l ln tenance
standards to address the issue of exist ing renlal housing'
i t is recommended that the amount of land zoned for
mult i family and attached housing be expandecj Thts idea
has a l ready been addressed in de ta i l on pages 62-63 in
t h e s e c t i o n e n t i t l e d " H i g h - D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l " l t
proposes that several properties immediately north of the
Town Center, as well as a few located south and west of
i t , be < ies ignated as h igh-dens i ty res ider r t ia l Th is
c lass i f i ca t ron wou ld a l low fo r a w ide range o f hous tng
t y p e s i n c l u d i n g s m a l l l o t s i n g l e - f a m i l y h o u s e s ,
town hou ses, apa rtments/conclomi n iu ms, and assisted
l iv ing Also, the Town Center area would acr:ommodate
at tached hous ing , inc lud ing mixed use bu i ld ings wt th
upper f loor hous ing un i ts
For any type o f a t tached or mu l t i fami ly hous ing , i t w i l l be
cr i t i ca l tha t desrgn s tandards be adopted by the C i ty to
insure a h igh leve l o f des ign and cons t ruc ; t ion qua l i t y
Doing so wi l l protect property values and help to lessen
any potent ial publ ic opposit ion to higher-derrsi ty housing
in Lookout Mounta in
Economic DeveloPment
As this plan's sect ion on "Socio-Economic" ref lect,
Lookout Mountain has a relatively affluent population For
example , the communi ty 's 2007 med ian househo ld
inr:ome was $71,252, compared with a state average of
$49,136. S imi la r ly , the most common pro fess iona l
occupat ions of residents include management ' business,
finance, sales and related occupation ("white collar" jobs)
For a var iety of reasons, including the desire to protect
the scenic beauty of Lookout Mountain and its convenient
proximity to a major employment center - Chattanooga,
the community has l i t t le interest in aggressive business
growth and job creation beyond that necessary to provide
convenient goods and services needed by residents
Consequently, economic development is not a particularly
hrgh pr io r i t y i ssue re la t i ve to o ther cons idera t ions ,
a l though r ts tax revenue po ten t ia l fo r the mun ic ipa l
government is clear ly understood and appreciated With
that overview, the fol lowing two types of businesses are
most relevant to Lookout Mountain: community serving
klusinesses and tour ist related businesses
(lommunitY Serving Businesses
With the exceptton of businesses such as the golf c lub
iand the Fa i ry land C lub , i t i s recommended tha t a l l
community servtng businesses be located in the Town
Center As exp la ined on pages 60-61, examples o f such
Because of its locatiort ' this coffee
Lookout Mountaitt 's few btrsinesseslocal residents and tourists visiting
house ls one ofthat targets bothRock City.
uses include groceries, special ty retai l , d ining, personal
and pro fess iona l serv ices , and o f f i ces Given the
avai labi l i ty of such uses in nearby Chattanooga they
would need to attract ive enough to local consumers to
draw them as an option to leaving the mountain. Because
of the importance of the Town Center for the future of the
community the City's support of these community serving
businesses should be an extremely high pr ior i ty
Tourist Related Businesses
The single major tour ist dest inat ion in Lookout Mountain
is undoubtedly Rock City, with attracts nearly a half million
visi tors annual ly. Because i t is located on the edge of
the community and accessed direct ly by one of the major
roads leading to the community, the potent ial negat ive
traffrc impacts to the broader community are minimal
b e c a u s e o f t h i s t r a f f i c " s i p h o n i n g " p h e n o m e n o n
Conversely, the tax revenue benef i ts are a rsubstant ial
benef i t to the City Rock City is also considered to be a
"good corporate ci t izen " For al l of these reasons' i t is
rmportant that the City work to maintain an elrvlronment
that al lows this business to prosper At the same t ime'
however, Rock City should be geographtcal lV contained
in a manner that avoicls i ts future encroachment into
nearby resident ial areas
While a coffee house and gi f t shop extst acror;s the street
from Rock City and clear ly benef i t f rom i ts proximity, t t ts
recommended that other area propert ies not be al tered
f rom res ident ia l to commerc ia l zon ing and/or uses
Lodging is another exist ing use that benef i ts from tourism'
and there are present ly two bed and breakfast (B&B)
bus tnesses in Lookout Mounta in Because B&Bs are
relat ively low-impact uses having a somewhat resident ial
character, especial ly when compared with c:onvent ional
hotels, i t may be acceptable for addit ional B&Bs to occur
i f str ict ly regulated through a B&B ordinanr;e Such an
ord inance wou lo need to cont ro l i ssues such as the i r
loca t ion , s ize (number o f rooms) , park ing loca t ion and
des ign , and s rmi la r concerns The on ly loca t ion in the
communi ty tha t migh t be appropr ra te fo r a smal l inn or
"bout ique" style hotelwould be the Town Center '
' , ' t^ i : i t : i l l ; i l i i
$$WF $-ffi trTH h$TAT$#N $YR&THffi Y
There are two prrmary means for implement ing a
community-wide comprehensive plan: regulations and
municipal inrt iat ives. Each is discussed below'
lmplementing Reg ulations
City regulations wil l be the primary implementation tool
for this comprehensive plan. As noted previously in this
p lan 's sect ion on "Exis t ing Zoning & Development
Regulations" (see page 40), the City's current regulations
have evolved over t ime in a very piecemeal fashion'
resu l t i ng i n a genera l l ack o f c lea r s t ruc tu re and
cohesiveness. Even without this comprehensive plan
prompting it , a new set of zoning and development
regulattons would be needed.
ZoningThis comprehensive plan features six different land use
classif ications, as summarized and i l lustrated on pages
58-59, and described in detai l on the subsequent pages'
It is the intent of this plan that the exist ing seven zoning
c lass i f i ca t i ons be rep laced by the s i x p roposed
classif ications. Below is a l ist, for comparative purposes,
of the exist ing and proposed zoning classif ications'
Exis t ing Zon ing D is t r i c ts Proposed Zon ing D is t r i c ts. CommunityConvenience ' Town Center Distr ict
Commercial Distr ict ' High Density Residential. Mult iple Family Dwell ing Distr ict
Distr ict ' Medium Density Residential. Single FamilY Distr ict Distr ict. S ing le Fami ly / Bus iness ' Low Dens i ty Res ident ia l
Conference Distr ict Distr ict. Single Family / Neighbor- ' Open Space, .Recreation
&
hoodCommerc ia lD is t r i c t A t t rac t ionsDis t r i c t. Tourist Oriented ' Inst i iut ional Distr ict
Commercial Distr ict. MuniciPal Distr ict
One reason tnere are sl ight ly fewer proposed distr icts
t h a n e x i s t i n g d i s t r i c t s i s t h a t t h e T o w n C e n t e r D i s t r i c t
al lows for a var iety of uses. There is a possibi l i ty that
the Open Space, Recreation and Attractions District might
need to be spl i t into two separate classi f icat ions' as the
standards for an attract ion (pr imari ly, Rock City)wi l l be
different from those of open space and recreational uses'
However, this classification could also be kept as a single
one and simply dist inguish between these uses as sub-
classifications.
Transitioning from Current to Proposed Zoning
The first step needed for the City to adopt the proposed
new zoning is to draft a new zoning ordinance and zoning
map. This comprehensive plan provides clear direction
for such zoning, but a great deal of detai l must be added.
Zoning should address not only the permitted land uses
and densit ies, but physical form and character as well.
There are mult iple options for how the City might adopt
the proposed new zoning distr icts and map:
. A single "btanket" rezoning in which al l zoning in the
City would convert to the new zoning on ar part icular
date. While some property owners may nave concerns
wi th the unknowns of th is approach, i t must be
emphasized that all properties would be "grandfathered
in" in that the current uses and physical development
could legally continue as is. The new zoninS; standards
wou ld no t become re levan t un t i l a new use o r
developmentwere proposed for a property'
, An increntental rezoning in which the new zonrng would
apply only when property owners applied for the new
zoning and/or sought a new use and/or development'
Although this approach may seem less threatening to
property owners, there are potential drawbacks, such
as the City having to maintain two sets of zoning
regulations.
. A hybricl approach to rezoning in which certain key
loca t i ons m igh t be au tomat i ca l l y rezoned on a
oar t icu lar date, whi le others would occur on an
incremental basis. ln this scenario, a l ikely area for
the automatic rezoning would be the Town Center, while
l ikely areas for the tncremental approach would be the
medim and low density residential areas
The Town Center
Regardless of what approach is taken c;i ty-wide for
insti tut ing the new zoning, the Town Center should be a
top priori ty. While a detai led plan for this area was
Fx6* #f r:f i l t l
completed a few years ago, the zoning and design
standards needed to implement it have yet to be drafted'
To insure that the Town Center is a true urban Town Center
- as depicted in the plan and supported by the community
'and not a suburban "strip center," very prescriptive zoning
and des ign s tandards w i l l be needed. l t must be
emphasized that Planned Unit Development (PUD)zoning,
which has been discussed by the City in the past, is an
inappropriate tool for the Town Center because it is too
f lexible to yield such a specif ic outcome'
There is one alternative approach to expediting the Town
Center 's development i f the City does not want to spend
the t ime and money needed to create the zoning and
des ign s tandards . l t cou ld u t i l i ze a qua l i f ied urban
designer to serve on behalf of the City to review all plans
and work with designers and developers to insure that
the intent, design pr inciples and spir i t of the plan are
real ized. However, even in this scenario, zoning and
design standards would need to be eventual ly adopted
for the Town Center (most l ikely as part of the overal l
new zoning), as regulations would be needed for any future
expansions or redevelopment within the Town Center
Development Standards
In addit ion to new zonlng' new development standards
are needed. The exist ing standards are insuff ic ient
because there are many lmportant development issues
that are present ly not addressed, and many that are
addressed are not done so adequately ln part icular,
standards wi l l need to address steep slopes, stormwater
management , p ro tec t ion o f na tura l d ra lnage areas '
r e m o v a l o f v e g e t a t i o n a n d g r a d i n g , a n d s i m i l a r
environmental issues Standards need to be much more
a g g r e s s i v e i n p r o v i d i n g p r o t e c t i o n s t o o n e o f t h e
community 's most treasured and important resources -
the natural environment. These issues are addressed in
detai l in the background study port ion of this plan
Other Regulat ions
Examples of other regulat ions that might be needed
inc lude ne ighborhood conserva t ion zon ing , min imum
property maintena n ce standard s, and bed-and-breakfast
regulat ions Each issue was addressed earl ier in detal l
City InitiativesThis category of plan implementation tools includes
physical improvements thatwould be initiated and funded
by the City, as opposed to merely adopting regulations
to shape the form of private sector initiatives. Below are
some of the key City initiatives associated with this plan:
Town Center DeveloPmentKey components of this development wil l include a new
City Hall , f ire house, police station, and town green.
Although the Town Center Plan was designed to respect
the properly boundaries between the City private owners,
i twil l st i l l require a partnership between al l part ies. The
City wil l need to controlthe design of new buildings and
rnfrastructure, as well as pay for them.
Street lmprovementsA variety of street improvements wil l be necessary to
accommodate substantial ly more growth, as described
in the plan section entit led "Transportation" (pages 70-
71). Many of those improvements wil l be at the Town
Center, where much of the future growth could occur'
Sidewalks & Trai ls
These recommended improvements are addressed on
pages 72-73. As with the City's recently instal led trai l ,
there is a strong chance that future expansions of the
sidewalk and trai l system might be f inanced by federal
transportation enhancement funds.
Sewage Treatment System I mprovements
The top priori t ies for the current system are repalr lng
inflow/inf i l trat ion problems in the Flintstone Subdivision
and continueing to addressing odor problems with the
Chickamauga Trai l pump station. Funding sources for
an expanded system might include the Special Purpose
Local Opt ion Sales Tax (SPLOST) and the Georg ia
Environmental Facil i t ies Authority (GEFA)'
New Citv ParkRelative to the Town Center's development and the
provision of sidewalks to some key stretches of road, a
new park should be a lower priority goal. At approximately
45 acres in size, acquisit ion costs wil l be substanttal '
tf'xr;i* #3 t:ii'ti;i
$ $\$P LHfiW ilNTAT$#N $JIATffi.gK
Responsible Part ies & Prior i t ies
Although some types of community plans involve mult iple
parl ies that are responsible for plan lmplementat ion, that
is not the case for most ci ty-wide comprehensive plans.
Accordingly, al l act ions summarized below wi l l be the
responsibi l i ty of the City of Lookout Mountain.
In l ight of the City 's l imited f inancial resources, proposed
act ions need to be pr ior i t ized. In the case of this plan,
the th ree pr io r i t y leve ls a lso cor respond w i th t ime
sequencing, Thus, "High" pr ior i ty act ions should occur
within the near future, whi le moderate and low pr ior i ty
act ions are less pressing.
Whi le this comprehensive plan features numerous ideas
and recommendations, the kev act ions are summarized
below.
lmplementation Matrix
.0"n""Regu la t ions Addressed
58"69, 82'83
76 -77 ,83
77 , 83
PagesAddressed
60 -61 , 83
70 -7 1 , B3
72-73, 83
7 4-7 5, 83
78-79, 83
:tPriorityi Level
;H igh
iH igh
:Moderate
rPr ior i tyI Level
High
Moderate
H igh
Hrgh
Lolv
New Zoning Ordinance & Map . to inrplement new classifications, including the Town Center
Ne',v DevelOpment Standards . focusitlg particularly on environmental Conservatl0n
Other Regulations - minimurrn maintenance standards, neighborhood conservation zoning. etc,
City Init iat ives
Town Center Development - new nrunicipal bLri ldings, town green. infrastructttre
s t ree t lmprovements - par t i cu la r ly near the Town Center and on Red R id ing Hood
sidewalks & Trai ls - sidewalks along exist ing key streets are the highest priori ty
Sewage Treatment System lmprovement - remedial work on the exist ing system is the priori ty
New City park - a targe passive park on the eastern edge of the city to provide vier,vs to the val ley
lF*11* i34 *l f',i