Stop Irresponsible Overdevelopment and Require Responsible Growth at 6775 Big Ridge Road

Petition Regarding SDP-26-31 — Proposed 51-Lot Big Ridge Subdivision

We, the undersigned residents of Big Ridge, Colonial Shores, Hidden Harbor, and surrounding Hixson communities, respectfully request that the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission and Hamilton County officials not allow the proposed 51-lot subdivision at 6775 Big Ridge Road to advance in its current form without a thorough evaluation of its density, traffic impacts, drainage, topography, environmental impacts, infrastructure demands, and compatibility with the surrounding community.

 

Our position is not that this property can never be developed.

Our concern is that 51 residential lots represent an unnecessarily intense development of one of the remaining large wooded tracts along Big Ridge, with potentially permanent consequences for traffic, drainage, public safety, wildlife habitat, tree canopy, infrastructure, and the established character of this area.

Big Ridge has historically developed as a predominantly single-family residential community characterized by substantial homes, larger residential properties, mature trees, wooded areas, natural topography, and abundant wildlife.

These qualities are a significant part of what makes Big Ridge unique and why families choose to live here.

Future development should respect that character rather than simply maximize the number of homes that can technically be placed on a parcel.

⸻

RAPID AND CUMULATIVE OVERDEVELOPMENT

Our concern extends beyond one subdivision.

Residents have watched development continue to accelerate throughout Big Ridge and the greater Hixson area, often one project at a time, without a clear public accounting of the cumulative impact these projects are having on roads, drainage systems, public infrastructure, natural resources, wildlife habitat, and the established residential character of our community.

Hamilton County and the Regional Planning Agency should not evaluate each new development as though the surrounding growth has not occurred.

The adopted Hixson–North River Community Plan establishes an important planning principle:

Infrastructure should lead development — not development lead infrastructure.

Before another 51 homes are added to Big Ridge, residents deserve to know whether existing infrastructure has actually kept pace with the development that has already been approved and constructed.

That analysis should include:

• Current and projected traffic volumes on Big Ridge Road;
• Road and intersection capacity;
• Emergency vehicle access and response demands;
• Stormwater and drainage capacity;
• Cumulative increases in impervious surface and runoff;
• Loss of mature tree canopy and wooded land;
• Fragmentation of wildlife habitat;
  School and public-service impacts; and
• The cumulative increase in residential density throughout the Big Ridge area.

Approval of development one parcel at a time can ultimately result in significant overdevelopment even when each individual project is viewed as technically compliant in isolation.

The relevant question should not simply be whether one more subdivision can fit. The question should be whether Big Ridge’s infrastructure, environment, roadway network, and established community can responsibly absorb the cumulative level of development being approved.

We therefore request that Hamilton County evaluate SDP-26-31 in the context of existing, recently approved, under-construction, and reasonably foreseeable residential development throughout the Big Ridge area, rather than treating these proposed 51 homes as an isolated project.

At some point, approving projects one parcel at a time without evaluating their collective effects stops being responsible long-term planning.

Responsible planning requires growth to occur at a pace and intensity that existing or planned infrastructure can safely support while preserving the qualities that make Big Ridge a desirable place to live.

⸻

CHATTANOOGA’S NATIONAL PARK CITY COMMITMENT

Chattanooga has received international recognition as North America’s first National Park City, celebrating our region’s connection to nature, parks, forests, waterways, biodiversity, outdoor recreation, and quality of life.

That recognition should mean something when decisions are made about how our community grows.

Big Ridge is exactly the type of area that contributes to Chattanooga’s identity as a city connected to nature — mature tree canopy, wooded hillsides, natural terrain, wildlife, and established neighborhoods integrated into the landscape.

We recognize that the National Park City designation does not prohibit private development and does not replace zoning or subdivision regulations.

However, it does represent a public commitment to a greener, healthier, more environmentally responsible Chattanooga.

That commitment should be reflected in land-use decisions.

When nearly 30 wooded acres are proposed for intensive residential development, residents believe decision-makers should ask:

• How much mature tree canopy will be permanently lost?
• How much natural habitat will remain after development?
• How will wildlife corridors be affected?
• How will natural drainage patterns be affected?
• Can development occur with substantially less clearing and grading?
• Can meaningful wooded buffers and natural open space be preserved?
• Does the proposed density reflect Chattanooga’s stated commitment to protecting and integrating nature into the places where people live?

There is a fundamental inconsistency in celebrating Chattanooga nationally for its natural landscape while allowing those same landscapes to be incrementally removed through piecemeal development without meaningful consideration of their cumulative loss.

A National Park City should demonstrate that growth and conservation can coexist.

We are not asking Big Ridge to stop growing.

We are asking that growth occur in a manner consistent with the values Chattanooga has chosen to promote nationally: preservation of nature, environmental stewardship, healthy communities, and responsible access to the outdoors.

Big Ridge’s forests, wildlife, hillsides, and natural character are not obstacles to development.

They are part of what makes Chattanooga worthy of being called a National Park City.

⸻

HAMILTON COUNTY’S OWN REGULATIONS REQUIRE MORE THAN MINIMUM LOT COMPLIANCE

Hamilton County’s Subdivision Regulations establish standards intended to protect more than simply minimum lot dimensions.

The regulations address:

• Harmonious development;
  Coordination with existing and planned roads;
• Adequate transportation;
• Adequate drainage;
• Public health and safety;
• Avoidance of population congestion;
• Adequacy of public services; and
• Protection of the general welfare of future property owners and the community at large.

Simply demonstrating that individual lots may satisfy minimum zoning dimensions should not end the inquiry.

The question should not simply be:

“Can 51 lots fit?”

The question should be:

“Are 51 lots appropriate for this property, and can this intensity of development satisfy Hamilton County’s adopted standards for harmonious development, transportation, drainage, public safety, and general welfare?”

⸻

TRAFFIC AND ROAD SAFETY

Big Ridge Road was not designed as an unlimited development corridor.

Before adding traffic from 51 additional homes, residents deserve objective evidence demonstrating that Big Ridge Road and the proposed subdivision entrance can safely accommodate the resulting traffic.

We request disclosure and review of:

• Existing traffic counts on Big Ridge Road;
• Projected daily vehicle trips generated by the subdivision;
• Any traffic-impact analysis performed;
• Proposed entrance location and design;
• Certified sight-distance measurements in both directions;
• Road grades at the proposed entrance;
• Turning movements;
• Emergency vehicle access;
• School traffic considerations;
• Pedestrian and cyclist safety;
• Construction traffic impacts; and
• The cumulative effect of recently approved and proposed residential development on Big Ridge Road.

If no cumulative traffic analysis has been performed, residents deserve to know how Hamilton County can determine that existing infrastructure is adequate for continued development.

⸻

STORMWATER AND DRAINAGE

Converting a large wooded tract into roads, rooftops, driveways, sidewalks, and other impervious surfaces can significantly alter natural drainage and increase stormwater runoff.

We request public disclosure and meaningful review of:

• The project’s hydrology report;
• Existing and proposed drainage calculations;
• Pre-development and post-development runoff assumptions;
• Grading and drainage plans;
• Proposed detention or retention facilities;
• Stormwater discharge locations;
  Downstream impacts;
• Erosion and sediment controls;
• Natural drainageways;
• Water Quality review comments; and
• Potential impacts to neighboring properties.

Existing residents should not bear increased flooding, erosion, drainage, or runoff problems resulting from development upstream or adjacent to their homes.

⸻

TOPOGRAPHY AND LAND DISTURBANCE

Big Ridge is defined in part by its terrain.

Development on significant slopes can require extensive grading, cutting, filling, retaining walls, removal of vegetation, and alteration of natural drainage patterns.

Before this project advances further, residents deserve to know:

• What percentage of the property contains slopes greater than 15%;
• What percentage exceeds 20%, 25%, and 30%;
• How much cut and fill will be required;
• Whether retaining walls are proposed;
• Whether significant natural drainage features will be altered;
• Whether geologic or geotechnical conditions have been evaluated;
• Whether roads have been designed to reasonably follow the existing terrain; and
• The total acreage of land that will ultimately be disturbed.

The natural terrain of Big Ridge should not simply be treated as an obstacle to be removed in order to maximize residential density.

⸻

TREES, NATURAL RESOURCES, AND WILDLIFE

The property at 6775 Big Ridge Road is not simply vacant acreage.

It is a substantial wooded tract that contributes to the natural character of Big Ridge and provides habitat and movement corridors for deer, birds, and other wildlife routinely observed throughout our neighborhoods.

Responsible development should include meaningful consideration of:

• Mature tree preservation;
• Overall tree-canopy loss;
• Wooded perimeter buffers;
• Wildlife habitat fragmentation;
• Natural drainageways;
• Streams and wetlands;
• Riparian or water-quality buffers;
• Permanent open space;
• Environmentally constrained portions of the property; and
• Opportunities to design around existing natural features rather than clearing and grading as much land as possible.

We recognize that wildlife presence alone does not prevent development.

However, nearly 30 acres of wooded land should not be cleared or fragmented without meaningful consideration of the environmental and community value that land currently provides.

⸻

NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER AND RESPONSIBLE DENSITY

Big Ridge has historically been characterized by established single-family neighborhoods, substantial homes, mature vegetation, natural topography, wildlife, and generally lower-density residential development.

We are concerned that concentrating 51 homes onto this tract represents a significant shift in development intensity.

This is not an argument against new neighbors, new homes, or reasonable development.

It is an argument for development that fits the community in which it is being placed.

A lower-density plan containing fewer homes, larger lots, substantial wooded buffers, natural open space, and reduced land disturbance could allow reasonable development of the property without unnecessarily maximizing its density.

The goal should be compatibility — not simply capacity.

⸻

OUR REQUEST

We respectfully ask Hamilton County and the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission to:

1. Require full public disclosure of the technical record supporting SDP-26-31, including the preliminary plat, staff report, grading and drainage plans, hydrology calculations, roadway information, agency comments, variance requests, conditions of approval, and Planning Commission action.
2. Require objective evidence that the development satisfies Hamilton County’s subdivision standards concerning harmonious development, transportation, drainage, public safety, and general welfare.
3. Evaluate the cumulative impact of development throughout Big Ridge, including recently approved, under-construction, proposed, and reasonably foreseeable residential development.
4. Require meaningful traffic and roadway analysis, including safe ingress and egress onto Big Ridge Road.
5. Require meaningful stormwater and downstream drainage analysis before additional approvals are granted.
6. Evaluate the site’s topography and the extent of grading, cutting, filling, and land disturbance required to accommodate 51 lots.
7. Require meaningful preservation of mature trees, wooded buffers, natural drainage features, wildlife habitat, and open space.
8. Evaluate whether substantially fewer and larger residential lots would produce a development pattern more compatible with the established character and physical constraints of Big Ridge.
9. Do not grant variances or exceptions without clearly documenting the hardship, public-interest justification, and factual basis supporting those decisions.
10. Provide residents a meaningful opportunity to review and comment upon the project before final plat approval or other substantial approvals occur.
11. Explain what cumulative-development analysis has been performed to determine whether Big Ridge Road and surrounding infrastructure can accommodate the residential development already approved, currently under construction, and proposed.
12. If no cumulative analysis has been performed, explain how the County can reasonably determine that infrastructure is leading development rather than attempting to catch up after development occurs.
13. Evaluate whether the proposed development appropriately balances growth with preservation of the natural characteristics Chattanooga publicly celebrates through its National Park City designation.

 

We are not asking Hamilton County to prevent reasonable use of private property.

We are asking Hamilton County to ensure that development of nearly 30 wooded acres into 51 residential lots represents responsible development — not simply the maximum development technically achievable.

Big Ridge is a unique residential community.

Its wooded landscape, wildlife, topography, established neighborhoods, and lower-density character are worth protecting.

Growth should complement Big Ridge — not fundamentally change it.

Infrastructure should support growth before growth overwhelms infrastructure.

A National Park City should demonstrate that growth and conservation can coexist.

Growth is inevitable. Overdevelopment is not.

We respectfully request a lower-density, environmentally responsible development plan that protects public safety, infrastructure, surrounding property owners, natural resources, wildlife, and the long-term character of the Big Ridge community.

 

⸻

 

For transparency, the following subsequent letter will be submitted with this petition:

 

 LETTER TO HAMILTON COUNTY AND THE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION

 

Subject: SDP-26-31 — Request for Records and Further Review of Proposed 51-Lot Big Ridge Subdivision

To the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission and Hamilton County Development Services:

I am a Big Ridge area resident writing regarding SDP-26-31, the proposed 51-lot subdivision at 6775 Big Ridge Road.

I recognize that the property is privately owned and may be developed consistent with applicable law.

My concern is whether the proposed intensity of 51 residential lots on this particular property has been adequately evaluated against the existing conditions of Big Ridge Road, cumulative development in the surrounding area, the site’s terrain and drainage, natural resources, surrounding residential development, and Hamilton County’s own subdivision standards.

I have reviewed the Hamilton County Subdivision Regulations, and several provisions appear directly relevant.

Section 101.2 addresses whether land being subdivided can be safely used for building purposes without danger to health or peril from flood or other menace.

Section 101.4 addresses harmonious development, adequate transportation and drainage, avoidance of congestion, and avoiding development that creates danger or injury to health, safety, or prosperity because of inadequate transportation, drainage, or other public services.

Section 102.3 recognizes the Planning Commission’s authority to impose reasonable subdivision conditions to protect the safety and general welfare of future property owners and the community at large.

Section 104.1 further establishes that the subdivision regulations represent minimum requirements intended to promote public health, safety, and general welfare.

Against those standards, I respectfully request clarification regarding the factual basis supporting a 51-lot layout at this location.

Please provide, or identify where the public may obtain, the following records associated with SDP-26-31:

1. The complete preliminary plat, including individual lot dimensions and acreage.
2. The Planning Department staff report and recommendation.
3. The resolution or other official documentation of any Planning Commission action.
4. The vote, minutes, meeting video, and all conditions associated with any approval.
5. All subdivision variance requests and the written findings or justification supporting any variance granted.
6. The project’s grading and drainage plans.
7. The hydrology report and drainage calculations.
8. Pre-development and post-development runoff calculations and assumptions.
9. The location, capacity, and discharge points of proposed detention or stormwater-control facilities.
10. Hamilton County Water Quality review comments and requirements.
11. Existing and proposed topographic information.
12. Information identifying areas exceeding 15%, 20%, 25%, and 30% slope.
13. Any geotechnical or geologic information reviewed.
14. The total acreage expected to be cleared, graded, or otherwise disturbed.
15. Plans for preservation of mature trees, wooded perimeter buffers, natural drainageways, or permanent open space.
16. Identification of any streams, wetlands, floodplain areas, water-quality buffers, or other environmentally constrained portions of the property.
17. Roadway and entrance engineering for the proposed connection to Big Ridge Road.
18. Sight-distance measurements in both directions from the proposed entrance.
19. The grade of the proposed subdivision street as it approaches Big Ridge Road.
20. Existing traffic counts for Big Ridge Road.
21. Estimated additional vehicle trips generated by the proposed 51 homes.
22. Any traffic-impact study, transportation analysis, or roadway-capacity analysis performed or relied upon by staff.
23. Agency comments from Hamilton County Engineering, Development Services, Water Quality, emergency services, utilities, and other reviewing departments.
24. Any analysis of the cumulative effect of other recently approved, under-construction, proposed, or reasonably foreseeable residential development along Big Ridge.
25. Any analysis addressing mature tree canopy loss, habitat fragmentation, natural open-space preservation, or consistency with Chattanooga’s broader environmental and National Park City commitments.

 

I would also respectfully request responses to several broader questions.

What objective evidence supports a determination that a 51-lot subdivision at this location constitutes harmonious development and provides adequate transportation and drainage consistent with §101.4 of the Hamilton County Subdivision Regulations?

What cumulative-development analysis has Hamilton County or the Regional Planning Agency performed to determine whether Big Ridge Road and its supporting infrastructure can accommodate the residential development already approved, currently under construction, and proposed — including the additional 51 lots contemplated by SDP-26-31?

And, if no cumulative analysis has been performed:

On what basis can the County determine that infrastructure is leading development, consistent with the planning principles established for the Hixson area, rather than attempting to catch up after development occurs?

Big Ridge is an established, predominantly single-family residential community characterized by mature trees, wooded properties, significant natural terrain, wildlife, substantial homes, and generally lower-density development.

I recognize that neighborhood character alone may not prohibit development permitted by zoning.

However, Hamilton County’s subdivision regulations expressly address considerations extending beyond minimum zoning dimensions, including harmonious development, roadway coordination, transportation, drainage, public safety, and general welfare.

For that reason, I do not believe the question should simply be whether 51 lots can technically or mathematically fit on this property.

The appropriate question is:

Are 51 lots appropriate for this property, and can this intensity of development satisfy the standards Hamilton County has adopted to govern subdivision of land?

I am also increasingly concerned about the rapid and cumulative pace of development occurring throughout Hixson, Big Ridge, and surrounding areas.

Each subdivision may be evaluated independently and found technically compliant while the combined effect of repeated development continues to increase traffic, stormwater runoff, infrastructure demand, tree loss, wildlife habitat fragmentation, and overall residential density.

At some point, evaluating each parcel in isolation no longer represents responsible long-term planning.

The adopted Hixson-North River planning framework recognizes the important principle that infrastructure should lead development rather than follow it.

I therefore respectfully ask:

Has Hamilton County affirmatively determined that the infrastructure supporting Big Ridge is keeping pace with the development currently occurring?

If so, I would appreciate seeing the analysis supporting that conclusion.

If not, approving additional development without understanding the cumulative effect should itself warrant further evaluation.

I am also concerned about the apparent disconnect between the rapid loss of wooded land through piecemeal development and Chattanooga’s broader public commitment to environmental stewardship.

Chattanooga has been recognized as North America’s first National Park City, celebrating the area’s forests, waterways, biodiversity, outdoor character, and connection to nature.

I recognize that this designation does not create an independent zoning restriction.

However, when nearly 30 wooded acres are proposed for intensive development, I believe it is reasonable to ask whether local planning decisions are being made in a manner consistent with the environmental values Chattanooga is promoting nationally.

A National Park City should be able to demonstrate that growth and conservation can coexist.

I respectfully request that the County consider whether a lower-density design utilizing fewer homes, larger lots, substantial wooded buffers, meaningful natural open space, reduced land disturbance, and preservation of mature trees would better satisfy the purposes of the subdivision regulations while still allowing reasonable development of the property.

Finally, if preliminary approval has already been granted, please clarify:

• The exact date and nature of that approval;
• The Planning Commission vote;
• All conditions attached to the approval;
• Any variances that were granted;
• What governmental reviews and approvals remain;
• Whether revisions to the preliminary plat are anticipated;
• When a final plat may be submitted;
• What opportunity neighboring residents will have to review or comment before final approval;
• Whether additional public hearings will occur; and
• What administrative or judicial review rights and applicable deadlines may exist for an aggrieved neighboring property owner.

I respectfully request that this correspondence be included in the official public record for SDP-26-31 and distributed to the Planning Commission and Hamilton County personnel involved in review of this project.

This community is not opposed to responsible growth.

We are asking that growth on Big Ridge respect the existing roadway, infrastructure, terrain, drainage, natural environment, wildlife, established residential character, and the people who already call this community home.

Growth should complement Big Ridge — not fundamentally change it.

Infrastructure should lead development — not chase it.

Growth is inevitable. Overdevelopment is not.

Thank you for your consideration and for providing the requested information.