Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting - July 1, 2026
Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting - July 1, 2026
This meeting of the Chattanooga Board of Zoning Appeals was held on July 1, 2026. The board considered a variance request for a setback reduction and a special exception for a drive-thru facility. The meeting also included the approval of minutes, a chairman election, and an ethics training session.
Consent Calendar
- The June meeting minutes were approved unanimously on a motion by Mr. Manual, seconded by Ms. Rashid.
Discussion Items
- BZA Case 2636 - 225 Peak Street (Variance for Accessory Structure): Applicant Dale Schmick requested a variance to reduce the side and rear yard setbacks for a proposed metal pergola from 5 feet to 2 feet (later amended to 1 foot) to cover an outdoor kitchen. The property is zoned RM15. The applicant cited exceptional topographic conditions (stormwater runoff from Stringer's Ridge) and the shallowness of the lot as hardships. The applicant's representative, Alan Jones of Stone Creek Consulting, explained that the pergola is part of a stormwater management solution. A letter of support from adjacent property owner Josh Barr was submitted. Board members questioned the hardship justification and noted that the pool and patio had already been constructed, potentially creating the need for the variance. A motion to approve with a condition requiring a survey failed (3-5). A subsequent motion to deny passed (5-3).
- BZA Case 2639 - 5943 Hickson Pike (Special Exception for Drive-Thru): Applicant Clint Wolford requested a special exception to allow a drive-thru as an accessory use to a commercial bank in the CC (Commercial Corridor) zone. The property previously had C2 zoning which allowed drive-thrus by right. Staff recommended approval, noting that the use is compatible with the commercial corridor and would comply with all codes. Board members expressed concern that only an artist's rendering was provided, lacking a detailed site plan. The applicant stated the ultimate buyer would build the bank. After discussion, the board voted unanimously (7-0) to defer the case to the August meeting to allow the applicant to submit a detailed site plan.
Key Outcomes
- Variance denied for BZA 2636 (225 Peak Street): The motion to deny passed 5-3. The applicant must wait 12 months to reapply.
- Special exception deferred for BZA 2639 (5943 Hickson Pike): The case was deferred to the August meeting to allow submission of a detailed site plan.
- Chairman and Vice-Chair Elections: The board re-elected the current chairman and Mr. Betbees as vice-chair.
- Ethics Training: The board adjourned the regular business and conducted an ethics training session.
Meeting Transcript
Please keep the remarks to within five minutes. Your case is going to be denied, you have two options. Before a vote on a motion is made on your case, you may request that the board deferred case to a future meeting in order to modify the request. Or you may request that your case be withdrawal. If a case is denied, the applicant must wait twelve months to reapply to the sport and same request. Appeals of decisions this board are made to change the court. And I'd also like to uh ask everybody, or not ask. I hope everybody has a great 250th 4th of July. So with all that being said, I have June minutes that we're just shooting. Do I have a motion to accept? So moved. Mr. Manual motion seconded. Okay. Ms. Rashid seconded. All those in favor say aye. Minutes are approved. I don't have any revisions of the agenda. I do have other business. We will conduct a chairman election again. And I've been sub question about problem notes. We have no old business, so we'll be able to start in the new Ms. Wood. Good morning, board. Just as a reminder to reintroduce myself in Lynnwood. I'm the new development review planner with Lane Development Office. So I'll be transitioning into the board administrator board. So I meet you here. Applicant is Dale Schmidt. The zoning is RM15, residential neighborhood zone, which is a single manly detached residential zone. Variance request is a reduction in the side and rear yard setback for an accessory structure. It's a metal hurdle. The applicant construct over there pool. And it's the reduction from five feet to two feet. This instance is very unique to the site. So I think it will be best if you hear more of the details about the reason for the variance from the applicant. And he has his representative here as well. And so here's just a reminder of the request for the applicant. Thanks. For accessory structures, the interior side setback is five feet in the code. The applicant is requesting two feet. And similarly for the rear setback for accessory structures of five feet, and the applicant is asking for two feet as well for the pergola. Oh, this is a typo. Sorry about just ignore that. It's two feet two feet. Here is an uh aerial image of the site here. Um it'll be back in this back corner. That's the request. Other side meant.
openpublica.com