Collegedale Commission denies rezoning Bell Farms, stops subdivision request in its tracks

This article was published in the Southern Accent on Feb. 20, 2024.

(Photo by Andrew Boggess)

The Collegedale Board of Commissioners denied a zoning change to Bell Farms property in a split decision earlier this month, voiding a subsequent request for a subdivision of 111 homes to be built on the land. 

Vice Mayor Tim Johnson, Commissioner Katie Lamb and Commissioner Tonya Sadler voted against rezoning the property, located along Lee Highway and surrounded by White Oak Valley Circle, overruling Mayor Morty Lloyd and Commissioner Debbie Baker, who voted for the rezoning.

Before the commissioners denied rezoning Bell Farms, they passed Resolution #542 to annex part of the property to Collegedale, as requested by the land’s acting agent, Brad Brackett of RaganSmith, and owner, Janice Bell. The property is divided into two parcels. The smaller parcel of about seven acres already resided in city limits and is zoned as Shopping-Center Commercial (C-1). The larger parcel of about 26 acres used to lie within unincorporated Hamilton County and was zoned as Urban Agricultural (A-1). Only Johnson voted against annexing the larger parcel.

According to Brackett’s official request for annexation, included in the Feb. 5 commission minutes, the owner and developers requested the larger parcel be incorporated into Collegedale “to create unifying jurisdiction for a proposed single subdivision development.” Although the commissioners approved annexation of the land, they stopped the request for a planned unit development (PUD) from being read at the meeting when they denied rezoning both parcels to Residential High Density Single-Family (R-1-H).

Several Collegedale and White Oak Valley Circle residents attended the commission meeting, as well as a Jan. 8 Collegedale Municipal Planning Commission meeting, to express their opposition to the PUD, which included 111 single-family homes, spaced 10 feet apart, at 3.5 units per acre, as well as a 25-foot tree buffer surrounding the subdivision, walking trails and a community park. Members of the public voiced concerns for wildlife, worsening traffic, rainwater runoff and damage to the city’s aesthetic. 

Brackett attended the Jan. 8 meeting to describe the PUD, and, when asked by Planning Commissioner Paul Friesen how the subdivision would improve the welfare of Collegedale residents, Brackett said the PUD would meet a need for housing. When pressed further, he said the subdivision would increase the city’s tax base, igniting a collective grumble in the audience and one member loudly expressing that the PUD would not improve traffic.

Commissioners’ Stances

In an email to the Accent, Johnson explained that Brackett’s response did not sit well with him considering the city’s revenue is derived from commercial developments, not residential. He learned more about the PUD’s benefits after the Jan. 8 meeting, Johnson wrote, and developers listed additional benefits of the PUD at the Feb. 5 meeting, namely how it would add a new neighborhood for residents and newcomers to move into and more rooftops that mid-sized quality restaurants look for to determine new locations. The developers also stressed that they were planning to exceed the minimum percentage of open space required for a PUD in Collegedale (20 percent) by providing 30 percent of open space.

Johnson still voted against annexation and rezoning because he did not feel that the PUD’s contribution was appropriate for the community. 

“I have been pushing for community parks near subdivisions,” Johnson wrote. “The developer did not provide me with a comfort level that the current park plans would be sufficient.”

For example, Johnson felt the proposed park was unsafe due to its vicinity to Lee Highway, and he wished to know more details about the park, including whether or not it would have lights and parking.

Lloyd felt differently. In an email to the Accent, he stated that had rezoning passed, he would have voted for the PUD as well.

“Regardless of how you feel about this development, the land will get developed at some point,” he wrote. “While I’m personally not an advocate of high density housing, many prefer the smaller lot sizes. That’s a personal choice that is dictated by the market.”

Baker told the Accent through email that by denying the zoning change, the commission has left other, less desirable options open to the land’s developers, including apartments, townhouses, businesses and a hog farm. However, she added that since the property is annexed to Collegedale, city leadership can ensure that whatever the developers build will meet Collegedale’s guidelines.

Johnson called the proposed homes “cookie cutter houses” and expressed that he would like to see more detail from developers in the future.

“I would like to see more pics of the front facade. I would like to see designs that are appealing to the eyes,” he wrote. “It would give me a better image of the project.”

Johnson partly attributed his vote against the changes to statements made by Collegedale business owners at the Feb. 5 meeting.

“The majority of those that spoke are not citizens of Collegedale,” Johnson wrote, referencing the group of White Oak Valley Circle residents who attended and spoke at the commission meeting. White Oak Valley Circle is located in McDonald.

“I listened to the Collegedale business owners across the street,” Johnson continued. “They share some valid concerns, such as beaver dams which back up water. The city needs to have TN Wildlife and Game evaluate and provide recommendations to the business owners and Collegedale.”

Community Concerns

One of the White Oak Valley Circle residents who spoke at both meetings was George Diamantis. At the Feb. 5 meeting, Diamantis complimented the commission for facilitating responsible growth in Collegedale, then spoke passionately against the subdivision, calling it “wall-to-wall houses and roofs” and asking the city leaders where children were supposed to play: “The computer or Lee Highway?”

“I don’t have a say so, but [the PUD] will affect me greatly,” Diamantis said at the Jan. 8 meeting.

Diamantis, who has lived on White Oak Valley Circle since 2001, explained in a detailed email to the Accent the threat the PUD would have presented to wildlife. By cutting down trees and vegetation in the area to prepare for the subdivision, developers would destroy insects, bees and birdlife, as well as drive out other animals, he wrote. 

“We have bears; coyotes; bobcats; spotted skunks (very rare in TN); deer, of course, by the dozen; turkeys; etc. We see them every day,” he wrote. “Expending Collegedale or Hamilton County only pushes wildlife further away.”

However, Diamantis clarified that he is not against expansion.

“I am not opposed to the area growing or people making money with their land. I am opposed to high density housing and cutting all the vegetation down so that they can build on one-fourth acre lots and charge $400,000-$600,000 per home,” he wrote, referencing the range of projected prices for homes in the PUD given by developers at the commission meeting.

“They claim that’s the going rate,” he continued. “I think the developers are raping the buyers and the land for an obscene profit.”

Courtney Shaw, a Collegedale resident who lives in the Misty Valley subdivision off Edgmon Road, communicated with the Accent by email about the commissioners’ vote to deny rezoning Bell Farms.

“Honestly, I was surprised,” she said, describing her reaction to the vote. “I feel like Collegedale is more interested in raising revenue and growth, but not responsible growth. Infrastructure is not in place for growth.”

Shaw provided an example of the city’s lack of infrastructure, stating that the section of Collegedale she lives in does not have sewer access. 

When describing her reaction to the commission’s vote against rezoning Bell Farms, she cited a controversial decision made by Collegedale commissioners in the fall of 2022 approving Empire Communities’ PUD on properties by Edgmon Road, including the land housing Hidden Hills Farm and Saddle Club.

“Another PUD will be built adjacent to Misty Valley. That was approved … despite complaints from myself, neighbors, and others that live nearby,” she wrote. “We were told, among other things, that ‘change is inevitable; get used to it.’”

Although Shaw agrees that Collegedale needs more housing, she believes expansion should be done responsibly.

“Yes, change and growth are inevitable, but responsible growth is key to making them positive and not negative features,” she wrote. “I really hope the commissioners will focus more on affordable housing for families and responsible growth and not townhomes/apartment complexes. In my opinion, what made Collegedale great is that it was away from the hustle and bustle of Chattanooga and had a small-town feel; now that it’s in our backyards, it’s lost some of that charm.”

When asked why he voted in favor of the PUD off Edgmon Road but against rezoning Bell Farms, Johnson stated that Empire listened to the community’s concerns and decreased the number of townhomes it was originally planning to build. According to Johnson, he asked the developer of the Bell Farms property if he was willing to reduce the number of planned homes, but he “basically said it would impact their revenue.”

“The Bell and Empire projects are very different,” he added. “We need to hold the developers to strict designs and standards. I’m open to looking at the Bell with additional information and very well-designed subdivision they can share with us. I support dense residential if done correctly.” 

Bell Farms’ Future

When asked about the future of the property, Johnson stated that city leadership is working on zoning options for the newly annexed parcel. The smaller parcel will remain Shopping-Center Commercial (C-1). 

The Accent emailed City Manager Wayon Hines with questions concerning the commissioners’ vote to deny rezoning and the future of Bell Farms. In his response, he called the situation complicated and stated that he’s been advised by the city attorney not to answer questions at this time.

The Accent emailed Brackett and tried to reach him by calling the RaganSmith offices but did not receive a response.

Baker, Johnson and Lloyd all agree that Collegedale needs housing. Johnson wrote that the city has received phone calls about housing availability. Baker wrote that the city is growing, and the commissioners are selective of the developments being built.

“I wish to keep the integrity of our city and secure the future of Collegedale’s residents,” she added.

Lloyd wrote: “My desire is to see quality homes being built that will enhance our property values. Development is difficult because no one likes change. While we don’t like change, it is necessary for any community to grow. Regardless of where you live in Collegedale, your house was likely part of someone’s farm at some point.”