Pratt Land & Dev., LLC v. City of Chattanooga
| Decision Date | 21 January 2022 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 1:19-cv-10 |
| Citation | 581 F.Supp.3d 962 |
| Parties | PRATT LAND & DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CHATTANOOGA, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Tennessee |
Adam D. Nugent, Pro Hac Vice, Simon H. Bloom, III, Pro Hac Vice, Bloom Parham, LLP, Atlanta, GA, Benjamin T. Reese, Craig R. Allen, Spears, Moore, Rebman & Williams P.C., Chattanooga, TN, for Plaintiff.
George A. Dean, Tune, Entrekin & White, PC, Nashville, TN, Melinda J. Foster, Joseph Allen Kelly, William Gerald Tidwell, Jr., Phillip A. Noblett, Office of the Chattanooga City Attorney, Chattanooga, TN, for Defendants City of Chattanooga, City of Chattanooga City Council.
John M. Phillips, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, Chattanooga, TN, for Defendants Rick Thompson, Steve Hunt, Francis Geier, Chuck Grant, Lorraine Foreman, Jim Folkner.
Before the Court are the Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 75] of Plaintiff Pratt Land & Development, LLC ("PLD"); PLD's Motion for Hearing [Doc. 78]; the First Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 91] of Defendants City of Chattanooga ("the City"), City of Chattanooga City Council, and Chip Henderson; and Plaintiff's Motion for Hearing [Doc. 111] on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment.
The extensive briefing and record in this case and the wealth of case law on the issues presented in the summary judgment motions make oral argument unnecessary. Plaintiff's Motions for Hearing [Doc. 78 & 111] are therefore denied. For reasons that follow, Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 75] will be DENIED and the City's First Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 91] will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART .
This action concerns the October 2018 rezoning of an approximately 2.6 acre plot of land located at 1001 Reads Lake Road (the "Clubhouse Parcel"). [Doc. 1-1 at ¶ 17; Doc. 83-34; Doc. 82-4 at ¶ 6].1 The subject property was a small piece of the larger Quarry Golf Course property and housed offices and a clubhouse. [Id. ; Doc. 75-2 at 3-4]. After learning of the potential sale to PLD and redevelopment of the Clubhouse Parcel into multifamily housing, members of the community organized opposition to the redevelopment of the parcel. [See, e.g. , Docs. 83-1]. Chattanooga City Councilman Chip Henderson became aware of that opposition and introduced a resolution that led to the eventual rezoning of the Clubhouse Parcel. [Doc. 75-8 at 5-6, 24, 38]. The attention the development received also revealed the zoning history of the Clubhouse Parcel and what Henderson believed was a defective notice relating to a prior rezoning. [Id. at 26]. The Chattanooga City Council eventually approved Ordinance #13377, amending the Chattanooga City Code, Zoning Ordinance so as to rezone the Clubhouse Parcel to include conditions that, inter alia , prohibited multifamily uses. [Doc. 75-13; Doc. 83-34 at 2]. A close review of the history of the property is required to understand the parties’ claims.
The Quarry Golf Course began operating on Reads Lake Road in the early 1970s. [Doc. 83-7]. The overall property is approximately 52 acres, including the 2.6 acre parcel that is the subject of this litigation. [Doc. 82-4 at ¶ 3]. Prior to 1977, the Clubhouse Parcel was zoned R-1, along with the rest of the golf course. [Doc. 83-9]. In 1977, the owner requested rezoning of the Clubhouse Parcel to accommodate offices in the clubhouse. [Doc. 83-9 at 1; Doc. 110-6 at 10]. Staff recommended approval of a rezone from R-1 Residential Zone to R-4 Residential Special Zone, citing the following reasons:
[Doc. 83-9 at 2]. The Planning Commission approved the recommendation. [Id. ]. The Commission identified surrounding development as "Golf Course, Apartments." [Id. ]. The Land Use Plan "show[ed] area being used for residential open space purposes." [Id. ].
In 1980, the Planning Commission approved a request to rezone the Clubhouse Parcel from R-4 Special Zone to C-1 Highway Commercial Zone. [Doc. 83-14 at 3]. The property owner sought rezoning to accommodate a bar in the restaurant / clubhouse.2 The staff recommendation noted that the zoning was not in accordance with the land use plan. [Id. ]. The recommendation states:
[Doc. 83-14 at 3] (emphasis added). An ordinance effectuating this change was passed on September 16, 1980. [Doc. 83-14 at 5]. The Clubhouse Parcel was zoned C-1 Highway Commercial zone from 1980 to 2002. [Doc. 82-4 at ¶ 7]. Residential use was not permitted under the C-1 Highway Commercial zoning. [Doc. 83-11 at 3, pg. 108].
In 2002, the property was again rezoned as part of a mass rezoning for several hundred properties following an amendment to the City of Chattanooga Zoning Ordinance. [Doc. 83-10; 82-1 at ¶ 2]. C-1 and C-6 Zones were eliminated from the Chattanooga Zoning Ordinance and all properties with this zoning were rezoned to C-2 Convenience Commercial Zone. [Doc. 83-10 at 1]. Roughly 600 properties were included in the mass rezoning. [Doc. 82-1 at ¶ 3].3
The C-2 Convenience Commercial Zone exists to promote "the clustering and development of businesses, offices, and service facilities to serve the demand for goods and services generated both by area residents and by transients traveling to or from other neighborhoods or places of employment." City of Chattanooga Code, Division 13 – C.2 Convenience Commercial Zone, Sec. 38-181 (1995); [Doc. 83-38]. The principal permitted uses of the zone include, among other things, retail and service establishments, dwellings other than manufactured homes, bowling alleys, banks, office buildings, restaurants, hospitals, and commercial signs and billboards. Id. At some point the adjacent golf course was closed to the public. [Doc. 82-4 at ¶ 5]. As compared to C-1, C-2 is "very wide open," permitting more uses than would be permitted in C-1. [Doc. 83-11 at 3, pg. 107].
In connection with the mass rezoning, the City of Chattanooga published a legal notice that the Planning Commission was holding a hearing regarding the rezoning (the "2002 Notice"). [Doc. 83-11 at 4, pg. 133]. The notice did not identify specific properties that would be discussed or include addresses for the affected properties. [Id. at 5, pg. 134]. Owners of the properties subject to rezoning did receive a letter about the rezoning of their property, but adjacent property owners did not. [Id. at 5, pg. 135]. The minutes of the January 14, 2002, City Council meeting indicate that there was no opposition to the rezoning. [Id. at 5, pg. 136]. Bryan Shults, Senior Planner for the City of Chattanooga, testified that this was somewhat surprising, as opposition to zoning changes is fairly common. [Id. ].
By way of background, the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Regional Planning Agency ("RPA") is a joint agency of the City of Chattanooga and Hamilton County.4 The staff is made up of professional city planners, urban designers, graphic designers, and administrative personnel. The RPA serves as staff to the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission"). The Planning Commission in turn makes zoning and land use recommendations to local legislative bodies, such as the Chattanooga City Council. At the time of the rezoning that is the subject of this action, the Planning Commission was comprised largely of elected officials or their representatives, developers, builders, and real estate agents. [Doc. 83-28 at 2]. John Bridger was the Executive Director of the RPA. [Doc. 82-1 at ¶ 1]. Bryan Shults was the Senior Planner for the City of Chattanooga, having previously served as Senior Planner and then Subdivision Coordinator at the RPA. [Doc. 82-4 at ¶ 1].
Pratt & Associates, LLC, was started by James E. Pratt, Jr., and his son Win Pratt in the 1990s. [Doc. 110-6 at 3-4]. Pratt Homes, LLC, Pratt Home Builders, LLC, and Pratt Land & Development, LLC, are also Pratt entities. [Id. ]. The Pratts own these companies and Win Pratt is the President of each. [Doc. 75-2 at 3; Doc. 83-25 at 10]. PLD is the land development branch of the Pratt Companies. Win Pratt testified that the original intent in purchasing the Clubhouse Parcel was to develop some sort of multifamily product. [Doc. 110-7 at 3].
December 19, 2017: Pratt Homebuilders, LLC, as buyer, executed a Commercial Purchase and Sale Agreement to purchase the Clubhouse Parcel and larger surrounding property from Landham Norman, Inc. [Doc. 83-16]. The purchase and sale agreement was contingent upon obtaining Hamilton County zoning approval. [Doc. 83-16 at 7]. The seller retained the right to maintain possession of the clubhouse / office located on the Parcel for up to nine months after closing, rent free. [Id. ].
February 2018: In late February 2018, "Pratt & Assoc" filed two applications with the City of Chattanooga. [Doc. 110-9]. One was an application for rezoning of the Clubhouse Property from C-2...
To continue reading
Request your trial