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