Form-Based Code Committee Meeting - July 9, 2026
Form-Based Code Committee Meeting - July 9, 2026
The Form-Based Code Committee met on July 9, 2026, to consider six cases involving modifications to the downtown code. The meeting began with swearing-in of speakers, rules of procedure, and a reading of the downtown code's intent. The committee approved three cases, denied one, and deferred one. All votes were unanimous unless noted.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Case FBC 26.10 (Medal of Honor Heritage Center): Multiple members of the public spoke in favor. Bill Rains (1129 River Crest Drive) supported the LED screen, emphasizing the need to attract youth and the building's obscured visibility. Charlie Coolidge Jr. (recent Chattanooga resident) urged approval on behalf of veterans and the city's national significance. Linda Moss Mines (city and county historian) argued the screen would connect past and present. No speakers opposed, but the committee read three emails from residents (names not provided) opposing the sign on grounds of protecting the plaza as a public space and concerns about visual clutter.
- For other cases, no public comments were offered.
Discussion Items
Case FC26.1 & 3 Street Way (West Side Revitalization) – Old Business
- Applicant: Dina Harvison (Lightfoot Design Group) representing Columbia Residential, with owner Jim Grawley. They requested four modifications: (1) allow a monument sign (pedestal) at the main entrance, (2) reduce the monument sign setback from 18 ft to 5–6 ft, (3) increase monument sign height from 6 ft to 10 ft, and (4) allow skyline signs on buildings facing Interstate 24 (which are four stories; code requires over four stories).
- Justification: Site constraints (downward slope, equipment, handicap access) and limited visibility from the highway; the sign is critical to identify the new development and attract residents. The branding was finalized after the February meeting deferral. Committee members noted the steep grade and that the sign would be the only visible identifier from the interstate. No objections.
- Outcome: Motion to approve all modifications passed unanimously.
Case FBC 26.10 Aquarium Way Unit 104 (Medal of Honor Heritage Center) – New Business
- Applicant: Vince Butler (National Medal of Honor Heritage Center). Request to allow a 15 ft x 15 ft LED message center sign (225 sq ft) and to exceed the maximum ground floor sign square footage (48 sq ft allowed). The sign would be mounted above the front doors, visible from the aquarium plaza, with no sound except during events, and turned off at closing (5–6 pm). No commercial advertising; used for educational messages and recipient recognition.
- Opposition: The staff read three emails from residents opposing the sign on aesthetic and park-preservation grounds. Applicant responded that the aquarium plaza is not a recognized city park and the sign is not visible from the passage (a city park). Committee discussion raised concerns about precedent, light pollution, pedestrian scale, and enforcement. Tom Mundell (CEO) offered to put restrictions in writing and remove the sign if the building is sold.
- Outcome: Motion to deny the modifications (allow message center sign and exceed square footage) passed. Motion to deny: approved. (No second motion; vote was on the denial motion).
Case FBC 26.14 1427 Williams Street (First Things First) – New Business
- Applicant: Kristen Harris (office manager). Request to exceed maximum ground floor sign square footage (48 sq ft) with a 173 sq ft brick wrap sign featuring new logo and tagline “for the family.” The building is rented; landlord provided support letter.
- Discussion: Committee members expressed concerns about the size (173 vs. 48 sq ft) and impact on Williams Street, noting the street is narrow and the sign would be large. Alternatives were suggested: separating the logo from the tagline, calling the tagline part of a mural (since mural rules allow larger non-advertising graphics). Applicant asked for deferral to redesign.
- Outcome: Motion to defer granted. Applicant to bring revised design.
Case FBC 26.15 1429 Market Street (Spot Design Studio) – New Business
- Applicant: Jerry Price (Spot Design Studio). Request to reduce awning clearance from the required 9 ft to 7 ft 8 in above grade due to structural issues (deflecting precast masonry beam). The awning is 3 ft deep, backlit with simple address, no logo. It meets IBC building code and CDOT approval. Precedent photos of nearby awnings were shown.
- Discussion: Committee noted the hardship from structural deflection and found the design architecturally appropriate and pedestrian-scaled.
- Outcome: Motion to approve the reduction passed unanimously.
Case FBC 26.16 1247 Riverfront Parkway (Medical Office Building) – New Business
- Applicant: Joe Kreitz (LME Architects). Request to decrease the minimum lot frontage (90% required) to 70% for a second-phase addition to an existing surgical/dermatology center. The building frontage is 360 ft; even at 90% it would exceed 300 ft max, so staff approval could not be used. The previous phase one approval (2020) allowed 40% for phase one but did not cover phase two. Parking needs prevent meeting 90%.
- Discussion: The addition will add pediatrics on first floor and offices on second. Committee recognized the operational constraints and that the frontage reduction would allow functional parking.
- Outcome: Motion to approve the reduction to 70% passed unanimously.
Case FBC 26.17 609 East 11th Street (Change of Use) – New Business
- Applicant: Dylan Fuller. Request to decrease minimum ground floor glazing (50%) to the existing condition and increase primary street setback (max 15 ft) to the existing setback for a change of use from an art studio to a gym and café. The building is non-conforming; exterior work includes replacing opaque garage doors with clear doors (improving transparency) and adding an ADA ramp.
- Discussion: Straightforward – the building already exists; changes are minor and improve transparency.
- Outcome: Motion to approve both modifications (decrease glazing to existing, increase setback to existing) passed unanimously.
Key Outcomes
- Approved (unanimous): FC26.1 (West Side signs – all four modifications), FBC 26.15 (awning clearance), FBC 26.16 (lot frontage reduction to 70%), FBC 26.17 (glazing and setback modifications).
- Denied (unanimous): FBC 26.10 (Medal of Honor Heritage Center’s LED screen and square footage exception).
- Deferred: FBC 26.14 (First Things First – sign variance). Applicant to bring a redesigned sign.
- The committee noted the next meeting is August 13, 2026.
Meeting Transcript
The agenda will be followed. Swearing in if you're planning to speak. Lee Helena. Reno Rapp here. Sarah Brockdon. Lindsay Wilkie. Thomas Palmer. Here. Jack Wood. Here. Okay. If you plan to speak, you must be sworn in and you must sign in. Um when you begin to speak, please say your name and then state your address and your interest in the project for the record. Uh there's a laser pointer available if you need to point to any drawings or pictures. Um you may leave after your case is heard. If you do leave, please go beyond the wood doors. The little area right here is very noisy and uh can disrupt the meeting. Uh if you defer your case, you'll need to notify staff when you'd like to be heard. Uh major modification permits shall be issued within a week of the meeting through the online application portal. And this meeting is being reported. Um rules of procedure. There'll be a staff presentation of up to seven minutes. Uh the applicant will then have seven minutes to speak to the case. We will then call for community comments, uh, either for or against. We'll allow nine minutes total. Um then the applicant has a chance to respond to those comments for another two minutes. And then we will go uh into committee discussion, uh, which we will no longer have uh audience participation, and then we will go into a motion and a vote. Okay, here's the one. The downtown code is intended to balance conservation and development by promoting development that maintains downtown position as a region's pre predominant economic civic and cultural center. All right, umoting development along transit corridors that enhances their function and is as mixed use, walkable centers that serve surrounding residential neighborhoods, providing standards for compatible transitions of use, building scale height between existing and new development, guiding reinvestment in established neighborhoods that builds upon and reinforces their unique characteristics, promoting preservation and protection of historic resources, providing clear and consistent procedures for appropriate and effective public involvement and land use and development decisions. Code is intended to achieve design excellence in the built environment by providing building and site design standards that address public aspects of private development and how building form placement and uses contribute to the quality of the public realm, providing parking and access standards that appropriately balance pedestrian and vehicle needs and result in safe pedestrian environments of the highest quality, promoting high quality innovative landscape design that advances function and the beauty of downtown. The code is intended to guide downtown's prosperous and sustainable future by providing clear regulations and processes that result in predictable, efficient, and coordinated review processes, promoting sustainable building and site design practices, promoting diverse housing options, providing standards for interconnected streets and development patterns that support all modes of travel, including walking, walking, bicycling, public transit, and driving, promoting conservation of land, energy, and natural resources, establish uh the standards established in the downtown code are attended to achieve the following. Maintain a safe, walkable, attractive urban environment along the street, maximize opportunities for redevelopment and investment in the downtown core, provide diversity of housing options, promote development that will support transit and commercial services, the community desires. Protect established single family residentials from incompatible development, protect the integrity of established historic districts and significant historic/slash civic landmarks, balanced development opportunity and conservation along the riverfront by promoting development scale form that maintains public accessibility to the river, considers public-private benefits and scenic views along the river, considers the impact of topography, both in terms of reasonableness and of the standard when applied to a particular site and the potential impacts on adjoining properties, increase the tree canopy, and support adoptive plan policies and recommendations. However, site-specific uh features, topographic changes, lot size, regular dimensions, physical barriers or easements may create conditions that make compliance with a specific standard impractical or undesirable. It is also recognized that an alternative design solutions may achieve the principles stated above and may not comply with a specific standard. It is a responsibility of the applicant to meet the burden of clearly demonstrating the reason for the requested code exception and to provide sufficient documentation to illustrate how the modification is related to a site constraint and or how the modification would equal or exceed the existing standard in terms of choosing the achieving the principles stated above. Our role is the committee, review requests for major modifications to the FBC that do not qualify for staff approval and reveal appeals to staff decisions or interpretations. Motion to approve? Yeah, second. Second. All those in favor? I'm gonna show cherries. All right. On to old business. First case under old business is FC26. One and three street way. So WNZ. And they're requesting for modification. One to allow for a new monument sign, sign construction to reduce that setback on the E to be 5B to see max conventions allowed for the monument sign to title six might be and then allow skyline signs on the building or four stories.
openpublica.com