Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Honest.

This is really great. I'm just gonna read it from here and still are going to deal with.

All right. So, welcome to the May 7th, 2026 meeting of the Athens County Planning Commission. Um, if you're watching this meeting on YouTube, you'll find the meeting agenda at accccclgov.com/planning. For those of you here in person, there's a sign-in sheet and copies of the agenda on the table by the door. So, here's the process for the items on the agenda. First, staff will make a presentation. Then, we move to public comment in support of the application. We allow 10 minutes for the applicant to address the commission followed by the members of the public speak speaking in favor who receive three minutes each. After comments in support of the application, we move to comments in opposition. All speakers receive three minutes, but if you're here representing a specific interest group such as the homeowners association, and we've had two requests for two different one request per item um on the agenda for this um we may allocate the appropriate um amount of time which is 10 minutes. When addressing the commission, please provide your name, address, and nature of your interest in the project. After public comment, the applicant or the representative may request a two-minute response. Please note the timer. It will display a yellow light when you have 30 seconds left and a red light when your time has expired. Once you've heard from members of the public, the planning commission will discuss the item. We will not receive additional public comments unless there is a specific question to be addressed. Exhibits may be displayed by the applicants or the public at the podium. Written correspondence received by noon yesterday has been forwarded to the commission. I promise you all we got it um and has been placed into the record. Um any additional written materials to be placed into the record must be read during public comment. Please direct your comments to the planning commission and not to the applicants. And please refrain from applauding or jering any of the speakers. And finally, please note that this meeting is being broadcast

live and our microphones are sensitive. Please silence your thing about the first.

Yes. Yes. I also wanted to note for those of you who are here for the first item, just a reminder like it's it's there for comments. So, we will not be making any decisions. There will not be any votes on that tonight. So, we are glad that you're here. We want to hear what you have to say, but like don't feel like this is the last stop on this journey. Okay. So, thanks. All right. Um, can I have a motion to introduce staff report? So, all in favor?

I um motion to approve the minutes from the April meeting. Okay.

All right. All those in favor say I. May courts make. Okay. Is there anybody here to comment on May court? All right. Um Okay. So, we'll move to our new business. Item number one, 1490 with Davis Road. Okay, I'm uh presenting the SE report for 1490 Wit Davis Road. This is in case number 2026-04-0646. So, the type one request before you for comments. The applicant has requested a change to the um study map from RS25 to AR. This also requires a change to the future for land use map from single family residential to rural. The subject property is 9.48 acres in total. Um the surrounding area is mostly single family residential um subdivisions with the exception of the property property to the north which is Whit Davis Elementary School. Uh the future current future land use um shows that the subject property as well as surrounding properties are largely single family residential. Uh the school is obviously uh government. The request is to um change the future land use to plural for the for the web property. Uh the zoning shown here is RS25 with government to the north. Um the request

is to uh reszone to AR. Um the RS25 currently is in keeping with the residential character of the area uh and as well as the property itself. The reszone will create an isolated district. Property also does not meet the 10acre minimum um size requirement for AR zoning and would require a waiver or a variance. Um, zooming out a little bit here, you can see that the nearest AR to the east is off of Old Lexington Road and to the south uh, Barnett Schultz Road. There's stream and an associated 75 foot riparian buffer on the north uh, corner of the property. Uh, here's the site plan. It shows the location of the the house and outuildings. The proposal states that the property will remain um primarily residential while hosting small private events. The location for these events is unspecified on the plan. Um rural events facilities are permitted in uh AR zones but only with a special use permit. So staff finds that this project is partially compatible with the 2023 comprehensive plan. Um it does encourage the preservation and adaptive reuse of historic structures though the house uh has and will continue to be residential. So this really uh applies just to the outbuildings. Um it does not though encourage or it does not cooperate with CCSD. um to support or to select beneficial sites for schools and support appropriate land uses for adjacent properties. Um it also

does not meet stated housing goals of increasing oops increasing uh supply or variety of housing or by providing access to affordable housing. Um the intention of the request is to create a rural event space. Um, it's this component of the request that is not compatible with the existing single family character of the property or of the surrounding area. The proposed future land use change is not compatible with surrounding single family residential and the zoning would create an isolated AR district. This concludes the staff report. Thank you. Now we'll hear from the applicant. Good evening, planning commission. I'm Kayn KD and the residential studio lead for SPG planners and engineers. Our office is located at 1725 Electric Avenue, Sweet 320 in Watkinsville, Georgia. I'm here on behalf of my clients, homeowners Mark and Mindy Berdall, and a request to reszone their property at 1490 Wood Davis Road from RS25 to down zone to AR agricultural residential zoning. As as you just learned, this property is surrounded by Wick Davis Elementary School to the north and to the east, as well as adjacent to Hunter Ridge neighborhood to the south and Lexington Estates's neighborhood to the west. The site has a single point of access from Whit Davis Road and it does not connect to the surrounding adjacent neighborhoods. While this request could be considered a spot zoning and would require an amendment to the future land use map,

this property is notably larger than the surrounding RS25 parcel and is consistent in scale with nearby agricultural residential properties, though slightly below the 10 acre recommended minimum. However, what makes this property especially significant is its history. This site dates back to the early 1800s, predating the Athens, clar county zoning code, and is believed to be one of the oldest remaining home sites in the county. Originally established by the Dean family around 1800, the property contains the original homestead, kitchen barn, and carriage barn of the estate. Here on the 1893 map of Athens, Clark County, 1490 Wit Davis Road is identified under the name Joel Dean in that small red circle there. The Dean family started this pastoral homestead for generations. Historic photographs showcase cherished family memories on the property. And this family memory drawing on the the right side reflects a landscape and layout that still resonates today. The property was later owned by the Dillard family beginning in the 90s which continued who continued to care for it through several decades before the Berdall's purchased the property in 2024. Since acquiring the property, the Verdalls have have formed close relationships with both the the Dean and Dillard families and have been deeply moved by their stories and connection to the land. Members of both families are here this evening in support of this resoning request, which aims to preserve the property's historic and agrarian character. This is a beloved family home and will continue to be as the burdal's personal

primary residence. They are currently undergoing a thoughtful renovation that prioritizes preservation of the site's historic integrity. original structures including the main house which is in the very center of the site shown with the letter small letter A, the kitchen barn which is to the north of the home and the carriage barn that's in the bottom southwest corner of the property and a an art studio are being carefully restored with an emphasis on retaining architectural character and reusing original materials wherever possible. A formal garden will be incorporated to the east of the the home which is inspired by the previous owner's garden in the same location. Additional improvements are complimentary in nature including a new detached garage with a driveway extension and a swimming pool with private patio terrace for the BDL's family. In order to preserve the main houses's historic architectural features while accommodating additional living space for the burdening children, the house was carefully lifted to incorporate a basement as shown in these images. During construction, the original Dean family cabin construct constructed of longleaf pine with a fieldstone foundation was uncovered along with the historic kitchen barn of similar wood peg construction. Discoveries like this underscore the remarkable historic value of the site. As the architectural elevation and site plan show, the overall design approach is to preserve the historic integrity of the site while creating fluid connectivity between each structure and highlighting the pastoral beauty of the site. The request to reszone to agricultural residential is intended to support this preservation effort and

allow for appropriate low impact use consistent with the property's history. Specifically, the reszone would preserve the original homestead and pastoral character of the site by keeping the remaining 9.48 acre historic estate intact as one single parcel. It would allow the existing non-conforming barn structures to remain and function cohesively with the main residence and new garage. It would permit smallcale equestrian use and continued agricultural activity. It would also allow for the future construction of an accessory dwelling unit to support an aging family member. And last, it would provide the opportunity through a special use permit to host occasional small-cale events such as a historic home tour, school field trip, or small family gatherings. In closing, the request is not about changing the character of the property. It's about protecting it. The Balls are committed to honoring the legacy of this land while ensuring it remains a vibrant lived in family home for generations to come. And we appreciate your time and consideration and we're happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Now we will hear from anybody else in support of the application. Good evening. My name is Mindy Ball. My husband, Mark Ralph, and I are the owners of 1490 Whip Davis Road here in Athens. Um, Kayn has done an excellent job of really touching on basically anything I was going to say, but I will just give you a little bit of more support information about who we are and what we are. We relocated to the Athens area after 22 years of living in Peachree City, Georgia. and raising our children there. We moved here with the intention of having a smaller, quiet lifestyle and having a chance to be out of a suburban neighborhood and use my background here at the University of Georgia in history and preservation to actually preserve something. Um, the added benefit is that our middle son attends the University of Georgia. Our younger daughter is a soccer player, goalkeeper from Emanuel University in Franklin Springs. So, it sort of was a nice, you know, meeting point of a lot of things that held our interest to us. So, we made the purchase almost two years ago now. Hard to believe. We have been renting in the Five Points area for the last year and working diligently on the home. The blessing about all of this has been we moving here and not having any kind of network whatsoever besides a few college friends who did the same thing after their kids were when they were empty nesters. We stumbled upon a wonderful team of people from Todd Burton to Hardy Morris to Kayn KD to make this come true because we are no experts in renovation besides weekend warrior projects and I have a design background but no true preservation experts by any stretch of the imagination. This has been an absolute godsend and a way to really be connected with the area with the interest of Athens, Georgia, the history of the area. On top of which, a very unique

situation in the fact that we're only the third owner in 236 years to be exact. This was a revolutionary war grant of a piece of land from 1790, a land lottery. It was one purchased by um uh Charles Dean, who was the ancestor of seven generations to live in the home after him, including my neighbors who actually are an RS property residential and they are on with Davis Road. They're two driveways down from me. That wasn't included in that earlier. Um, through that connection, the people we bought the house from, the Dillards, who were a longtime family from the Athens, Georgia area, were lovely and they were so happy that when they heard from their real estate agent that we were going to indeed save the house and not not not intend to someone to purchase it and remove the home or sell to the developer, they were very supportive and we've gotten to know them. And the blessing about this is we now get to call them friends as well as her extended family as well as the dean sisters who were the last two generation to grow up in the home. Through that we get together, we have lunches. They've shared pictures. They're the first person to see anything that we do, any decision we make. They'll be the first person to be back there the day that the last board's done and the last piece of blue paint tape is removed. They have made this a blessing and a joy. Um, all I can do is just reiterate one more time that this is indeed a private single family home with the intention to preserve the history of the property to be able to in RS designation use several historic structures on site without having to remove them, but also accommodate for what we want to do as far as family life, have a garage, therefore we're adding a structure. So that is Thank you for letting allowing your time to speak. Thank you. Anybody else here to speak in support of the application? Anybody here to speak in opposition? Oh, we do have one person to start off to speak in Yes. Yes. You go ahead. We have a neighborhood representative.

10 minutes. 10 minutes. Yeah.

Good evening everybody. My name is Cass Hall. I live in Hunter Ridge at 336 Dear Trigger Landing. I moved to the United States of America in 2020 to take a position as a professor of astrophysics at the University of Georgia. This year I'll be eligible to apply for American citizenship and I plan on spending the rest of my life here. I am here tonight to ask you to deny two things. The proposed resoning of 1490 at Davis Road from RS25 to AR and its special use. I am speaking not only as a nearby resident but also on behalf of 58 signitaries to this position who do not want this resoning and special use to go ahead. I want to start by saying that I understand why people care about this property. I understand the desire to preserve a historic home. I understand that the current owners may be sincere, well-intentioned, and trying to find a way to care for their property and their family. But this decision is not only about the current owners. It is about the zoning of the land and about what uses become possible once that zoning is changed. This decision should therefore be about the long-term impact on the surrounding neighborhoods. The application presents this as a residential resoning, but the documents tell a different story. The pre-application materials specifically ask about accommodating weddings or other small events on the property. The planning report states that AR zoning would allow limited low impact event use and also says that the current RS25 zoning does not permit the event use given by the actions. This is not simply about preserving an historic home. This is about changing the zoning to allow event use in the middle of an established residential neighborhood. That is why residents are concerned. Weddings and events are not ordinary residential use. They're not the same as having family over for dinner or hosting a birthday party in your backyard. Many

years ago, I worked at a wedding venue. I have firsthand experience of just how disruptive even the quietest of weddings are. Weddings involve vendors, caterers, rental companies, amplified music, microphones, DJs, setup breakdown deliveries, and groups of guests arriving and leaving at the same time. Even a small wedding can mean concentrated traffic, parking pressure, noise, lights, and late night activity. The application also acknowledges that acknowledges that Wick Davis Road is the only access point to the property. That means every event, every caterer, every florist, every rental company, every ride share, every guest, every DJ would use the same residential road and the same school adjacent corridor. The planning report estimates fewer than 15 daily trips, but that does not reflect the practical reality of event traffic. Event traffic does not come evenly spread throughout the day of bursts, people arriving to unload, guests arriving all at once, cars leaving all at once, and cleanup crews departing later. This is especially concerning because this property is not isolated. The surrounding area is predominantly residential. The applicant's own report says the property is bordered by Hunter Bridge and Lexington State, both zoned RS25, and that it is directly adjacent to Wick Davis Elementary School. This is next to homes, families, children, and a public elementary school. It's not the right place to introduce event venue use. The site plan also shows that this is not a passive preservation effort. It shows new drives, parking, outdoor gathering areas, use of existing structures. The report also acknowledges that storm water management still needs coordination with public works and these are real impacts, not hypothetical ones. I have in my possession a petition from nearby residents in Hunter Ridge and Wavely Woods with 58 signatures opposing this reasonzoning. Of the 60 households who opened their doors when I knocked, only two did not sign. One household was moving that day and one household was

personally friendly with the owners. This means that if we take the 60 people sampled as representative of our neighborhood, 97% of residents do not want this resoning and special use to go ahead. This message is clear. Please do not move forward with this. I also want to be very clear that this is not an attack on the current owners as people. They seem like very nice people. They may be completely sincere and they may fully intend to be good neighbors, but zoning is not based on personal promises and it should not depend on personal trust. Reszoning is permanent. It runs with the land. It will outlift the current owners, their current plans, and their current insurancees, insuranceances, and intentions. Even if the current owners are well-intentioned today, they could legally change their plans tomorrow and hold weddings every weekend with vendors, DJs, music, guests, traffic. At this point, nearby residents would have very little recourse because the use we objected to would already have been enabled by the resoning. That is why this decision has to be made based on what the zoning allows, not what on the current owners say they intend to do. Life changes, people move. I know that personally. I thought I would spend my life in the UK. If you had asked me eight years ago where I would be now, I would have answered very truthfully, England. I did not imagine that I would get to live my own American dream right here in Athens. But life took me somewhere unexpected, and I'm grateful that it did. None of us can guarantee where life will take us. The owners of 1490 cannot guarantee that they will own this property forever, even if it is their intention. So the question before you is not only whether these owners intend to keep things peaceful. The question is, what happens when the property changes hands? What happens when the next owner sees not just a family home, but a resone property with event venue potential? Will the next owner keep faith with the neighborhood? Will they protect the peace and quiet of Hunter Ridge, Lexington Estates, Whit Davis Road, and Waverly Woods? In today's world, I doubt it will much. Furthermore, as we all learned at the town hall, there are multiple ways for the owners of 1490 to achieve their goals without reszoning. They can apply

for variances for the individual structures. A small parcel of land could sold to Mindy's father for his standalone house then incorporated back into the property on his passing which God willing I hope is not for many many years. It matters because this resoning is not the only path forward. The owners have other options. They can preserve the historic home and explore legal solutions for the existing structures. They can pursue their family goals without permanently changing the zoning of this property and placing the burden of worry about our future peace on surrounding residents. They can even apply for a special use permit to host one or two weddings a year, but that is truly the scale of what they intend. The inconvenience, scrutiny, and delay of that process would serve as a built-in safeguard against the property gradually becoming a regular event venue. By contrast, reszoning the entire property to AR removes that safeguard. The fairest compromise is not to permanently resone this property over the objections of the neighborhood. Fairest compromise is to deny the reasonzoning, protect the 58 nearby residents who sign this petition, and allow the owners of 1490 to pursue the alternative options that I have just discussed. These options are very clearly available to them. I respect private property. I respect historic preservation and I respect the current owner's desire to find a path forward. But I also ask you, the planning committee, to respect the residents who live around this property, who will have to hear the music, see the lights, navigate the traffic, and live with the consequences long after this vote is taken. This proposal is incompatible surrounding residential neighborhoods. It is opposed by the residents who will be most directly affected, and it is unnecessary for the owners of 1490 to achieve their stated preservation goals because other options exist. Please deny the reasonzoning of special use of 1490 with Davis Road. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Anybody else to speak in opposition to the

Hello, my name is Bram Tucker. Uh I just recently moved to that neighborhood. I live on that 300 deer trigger a U landing. I must not have been home when the last speaker came by to knock on doors because I certainly would have signed that petition. Um I uh just want to echo what the last speaker said and add some personal context. The what I want to echo is to say the concern is really about uh events and the concern is not about the current use and the current uh owners but about what the long-term ramifications would be reszoning and the fact that one never knows the future and the current owners cannot predict how long they will be uh able to hold on to the property. um at some point they will have to sell it and it's a at some point it might be a wise commercial decision to sell it. They should be free to do so. But once they sell it as a reszoneed property, the future owner could of course have uh big parties every weekend and that is not something that I moved to the neighborhood for. I've lived in Athens for 20 years. I'm a professor at the university. I've uh for the last 20 years, my wife and I lived uh on Plasky Street, not far away, just down the street from the mayor. And over the course of the time that we lived on that street, downtown has become increasingly noisy. I remember when what is now Creature Comforts Brewery was the uh snow tire factory. And when it was snow factory, you know what I mean, the snow tire place. When it was Snow Tire, our neighborhood was very quiet. Our old my old neighborhood, Plasti Street. And now uh one of the major reasons we moved was the constant every night thumping music from downtown from either the fraternity house on Palaski Street or from Creature Comforts. Their beer is great but their music is not great. Um and all the rest of the downtown. We know that the

development of Athens has been more density. And the feeling that you get as someone who wants to live in the city is that if you want quiet, it's hard to find the right place. So, we moved out to Deer Trigger Landing and it is very quiet and that's the number one thing we value about that neighborhood. I believe that the uh that the owners of this property are sincere in their intentions to keep the neighborhood um uh preserved and quiet, but one cannot tell what the future trajectory of that uh property will be if it is reszoned. So, I urge you to vote against uh the reasonzoning. Thank you.

Anyone else? Y'all can just come right in. Hi, good evening. My name is Fory. I'm a resident who is in my front Well, I was on the map a few times. I can stand at my front yard and see the barn and the road um that's on the property. What was your last name?

Kuna Farair. Yes. Um and I wanted to speak out as opposed to it because I do not believe this property is fitting in the characteristic or um appropriateness of the neighborhood. I don't want to have to figure out the uh liability insurance of an owner or people nearby a school if you have equestrian activities within sight of elementary school students who will be able to see what they're doing if they're out for recess. And I had a school that wouldn't let us outside because of in and uh liability issues and it was something that was not good for the students, not good for the school. Um, however, the other reason is because when I was notified about this proposed resoning, I notified my father-in-law whose name is Kenneth Kunafair and he is an expert in sound engineering and has helped write the codes and regulations for many counties and cities around Georgia. And he informed me that if this is reszoned, then there is no legal limit to the amount of sound that is comes off the property as any sort of regulation doesn't kick in until you're a certain distance away from the property. So there would be no legal recourse or complaint a way to complain for the residents in the neighborhoods. There would be no limit to the sound that comes off the property. And I just want to throw my two cents in there. Thank you for the time.

My name is Katherine Mushalt and I live in Waverly Woods. Um, I speak for many of our ne my neighbors as well. I agree with what everybody has previously said and I we certainly support the historic nature of the renovation that's going on. I think that's wonderful. Waverly Woods is right across the street and we're all quite aware of how sounds carry because we've already had that experience from further places away from this. So the bigger concern is really the events that might be happening there. And the second concern is if they're no longer there and you change the zoning, uh, somebody else could come in and do something else. One of the things that I have not received satisfactory explanation is this looking at something that is for the 10 acre minimum and this property is less than 10 acres. So, some people have said, "Why are we even considering this when it doesn't meet the criteria for the zoning that you're considering?" The other thing I would add is it's not only the sounds for me, but we all value the wildlife that is nearby. Waverly Woods is a heavily wooded area and great wildlife. Uh, birds and other things and sounds like that do disturb their natural habitat. Um, so we would ask you to consider reconsider the possibility of reszoning this area. Thank you.

Anybody else?

Good evening. I'm LRA Roads and I live in Waverly Woods and have lived there for 32 years. The neighborhood is 50 years old. we just celebrated. And part of being in that neighborhood is for the nature, the quiet, the wildlife, the darkness, the whole thing that makes our living there unique. We choose to live there. I have 22 oak trees in my one acre lot. We have a huge arbor of birds and foxes and coyotes and things that we keep track of, but we also have a neighborhood. We don't have an association because we don't need one. We live and we work together. We have driveway parties on Friday night. We have a chili cookoff. We have a a springtime picnic on a breakfast on the driveway. We help each other when the need is there. We form the meals or we take them to the hospital or we we take care of the kids or we feed the pets. We're a neighborhood and we want to keep it that way. We want the quiet. We want the the nurturing. We want the ambiencece that we have lived at for 50 years. So I am totally against events with one driveway. Alcohol it's there. Um our children, our pets, our wildlife, deer already get killed on Whit Davis. add some more cars and you

get more uh damage on the cars and then on the people. So, I really support the idea that we live in a residence and want to stay in a residential area without events, without driveways, with lots of cars and parking on dirt is not part of what we can do in Athens. I know we've gotten citations in our neighborhood when a car is parked on uh not on gravel or in the back of the house or so if you have cars parked in the yard, you cannot do that. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else to speak on this issue?

Good evening. My name is Susan Oberg. I live in Waverly Woods as well and I'm a former teacher in the Clark County School District. Um, I have really no problem with restoring a historic property. I have no problem with putting a small residence for an aging parent, but I do have questions regarding what impact this is going to have, not just on the neighborhoods, but on the school district in the future. For example, a lot of people have talked about noise. Is the noise going to affect things that happen during the school day? Will it affect classes? Will it affect kids that are on the playground for gym class? Parking. An event venue that hosts a party between 85 and 150 people could produce cars for 85 to 150 people, plus vehicles for catering and rentals. Where are those vehicles going to go? Are they going to spill over onto the school fields? That will damage and destroy the lawn. And who will be liable for that? The school district or the venue owners? And if security fencing is put in place to try to mitigate that risk, who's going to pay for that? The school district or the venue owners? The other question I have is about alcohol. Um, I'm not a legal expert, but there are laws concerning sale or consumption of alcohol within a certain range of distance to a school property. And I want to know will those distances be observable? And in the future, if they leave and somebody else puts another and there's like events every weekend, what's going to happen then? Because there are very strict laws

governing the sale and consumption of alcohol near a school property. Lastly, I'd like to address regarding bonfires, open burning, fireworks, and sparklers on the venue property. and any possible unintended consequences of guests moving on to the school playing fields with pyrochnics. Commonly, event venues in Georgia have abandoned their contracts, forbidding fires, open burning fireworks, or sparklers in order to avoid potential risks. However, it's not always possible that all venue guests will be informed of or follow the restriction on such contracts. If a fire on the school property resulted from the violation, who would be expected to bear the liability for that? The school district or the venue owners? So, respectfully, I would like I feel possible negative impacts to the surrounding properties overwhelm any possible benefits. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else to speak in opposition? Hey there, my name is Kim Ramos. I live in Waverly Woods. Lived there a very long time and we are asking you to please deny this zoning request. This entire area has long been designated and preserved for single family residential use in Athens. We've just completed a planning process for our whole future land use map and we specifically reaffirmed and designated that this would remain a single family neighborhood. Our residents of Athens participated in that process in good faith and we think those carefully considered plans should be respected. This proposed use is also incompatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. A rural event center would introduce traffic and noise and congestion and disruption into what is a quiet residential areas where we all chose to live specifically because of the peaceful character. They've talked about the wildlife. I have five fox kits in between my house and the neighbor next door. They visit my garage every night. They don't want an event center 100 yards out the back door. They they don't they don't want that. A lot of us already experience the impact of noise from an AR-zoned property that is way further away uh and we can hear it inside our homes. Putting another such right outside of our neighborhood would dramatically worsen those conditions for us. It also doesn't fit in the requirements for AR. They need to have the 10 acres and they simply don't have the 10 acres to to make that work. So granting this request despite that deficiency, despite the future land use designation, despite all of these neighbor objections would amount to a spot zoning, and it's it's a it's a slippery slope and a troubling precedent that we just don't want. All we're asking is that the county follow its own adopted plans and protect the

residential character of our neighborhoods.

Thank you. Anybody else to speak in opposition? Hello, my name is Brian Reber. I live at 195 Tamarack Drive in Waverly Woods. And I I I have more questions, I guess, than than statements. But it it seems to me like uh the owner's goals are laudable and but it seems to me like reszoning it isn't required to meet those goals. And let me just pose what it seems to me. Uh the first goal is to keep the parcel intact to preserve it and and maintain the integrity of it and keep it natural. A conservation easement would do that. I believe build the father a house on the property. It seems to me that that could be done by carving out a portion as was mentioned earlier and either gifting it or selling it for a dollar and then bringing it back in when when it was no longer needed for that way. There are two structures. I was at a meeting Saturday and and said that there were two structures on the the property of barn and I think a kitchen barn is what it was called. Uh that uh non-compliant buildings with our RS zoning. Uh but that could be dealt with with a variance I believe. Uh I think uh I live for my wife and I live for uh years in a Victorian house in another state and uh and we regularly had fundraising events for the historical society and uh that was that was never a problem with the neighbors because we communicated with them and we we and and they knew that we were doing it for purpose of betterment of the community which I believe is what their

goal is as well. And so I think goodwill goes a long way for that sort of thing. And then finally, hosting weddings and events uh can be done with permits. I believe the municipal code includes activities on private properties, something that can be permitted. Uh you know, I want to trust the owners and I understand their goal of of uh succession to their next generation beyond. Uh but but like others have said, life gets in the way sometimes and and a future owner who wants this property to be primarily an event space, other commercial enterprise has will have no problem with that if you choose to zone it as as uh they are. The characteristics of the neighborhood have been stated. Wooded lots, wildlife, walkable streets, and we believe all this adds value to our property. Uh not sure how this plan as it is as it states in the plan protects adjacent property values and I don't believe it complements nearby land uses. Uh so I hope that u I hope that you will take into consideration these other options for meeting the owner's goals. Thank you. Else to speak in opposition.

Hi, my name is David Scott Stewart. I live at 245 Oak Meadow Drive, which abuts the back of this uh parcel. Um, I don't have any problems with any of the historical aspects of this, restoring, maintaining, even building another residence. I am concerned about the reasonzoning. I I'm concerned that, you know, that somebody else can come along and and do worse. So, I just wanted to let my let you know that I do not support this. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else? Hello. Uh, my name is Jay Norton. I live at 1153 Sugar Place. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Jay Norton and I am a homeowner in Lexington Estates's neighborhood. I am here tonight to oppose the resoning of 1490 Wit Davis Road and I respectfully ask that the commission deny the application. The families of Lexington Estates and those in the surrounding communities chose to live here for a reason that it is a quiet, stable, family-filled neighborhood. Reszoning this property to allow for free use as an event venue would permanently and irreversibly change the character of the area. And that is not a change any of us should take lightly. My concerns are practical ones. Event venue means loud music, amplified sound, and crowds of people, often late into the night. It means increased traffic on residential two-lane roads, overflow parking spilling onto residential streets and congested streets that can block driveways and delay emergency vehicles. It means increased ride share and taxi traffic at all hours. And it means strangers wandering onto private properties with neighbors never agreed to any of this. These are not hypothetical concerns. These are well doumented consequences of exactly this type of thing. I also want to speak to what that would mean for the families living nearby. As a parent with a young child, the thought of ongoing disruption to our evenings, weekends, and mostly our sleep is deeply troubling. Our elderly neighbors neighbors face the same burden. The stress of never knowing when the next event will upend the peace of our neighborhood is real and not something any family should have to deal with. And finally, this has financial

consequences. Event venues have a wellocumented negative effect on surrounding property values as shown by studies done by the Journal of Real Estate Research and data from the National Association of Realtors. Homeowners of this community had made real investments here. This resoning asked them to bear lasting financial cost for one property owner's desires. Commissioners, I urge you to protect the residents of this community who does not deny this resoning application. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else?

Great. Oh, okay. We good? I don't want to miss anybody. Okay. All right, cool. Um, so the applicant has uh two minutes for any response that they might want to give. Hello again. I'm Kaylin KD with with SPG Planners and Engineers and I I really appreciate the feedback of the community and I know that the BA dolls do. It seems that the the biggest concern is surrounding the request to to allow for small events and I would like to clarify that there are that the initial ask today is for the AR zoning designation. We feel that the AR zoning designation would once I I would like to reiterate to preserve the the historic nature of this site and preserve the historic structures that are on this site. The Balls would be would be happy with the AR requested zoning without the special use permit. This is their primary residence. This is not intended to be a commercialized event venue. We would also be open to conditions being placed on the special use permit or AR zoning or have a bond bonding site plan to ensure that the the events that are taking place are appropriate and um and are acceptable to the surrounding community. We um very much appreciate your time and thank you very much.

Thank you. Hey, so um I also wanted to reiterate I earlier mentioned about how we weren't taking a vote tonight. I wanted to make a note too about the timing of things because I know I feel like sometimes people are like why does government work so slowly? So we had this tonight. It's May. If this comes back in June for a vote, we'll then also have to go before the mayor commission. There is no merit commission meeting in July. So this means we would potentially vote in June and then it wouldn't be seen by the mayor and commission for a final decision until August. So I just wanted everybody to be aware of the timing of it. If it's like the end of June and you're like what's going on? It's just it's summer. So So that said, let's bring it behind the rail. Who wants to start the discussion? First, I just have a factual question. Um, we don't often see um request to down zone properties to AR. Um, is this something uh that that the planning department has seen much of in your tenure? When we have seen it, it has typically been related to the valuation of the property where um they it's a it's a a landholder that has no desire of moving on. They want different tax assessment on their property based on a change in the zoning classification. Um but no, we haven't had too many instances where anyone's really come forward with a down zone request. So, is it accurate to say that the assessor's office looking at a 9.5 acre RS25 parcel is going to look at it

is going to assess it in part based on development value or what would be development potential plays into their their valuation. I'm not really sure in what way or to what extent or how that impacts per on a percentage basis, but it is viewed it is factored in. Yeah. And and are there many parcels that are under 10 acres that are zoned AR? Yes. You know,

there are and and in those instances when you're under the the 10acre minimum is if you were going to create a new lot, that's what you're working for. There's also provision in the AR where you can create a oneacre lot every two years as long as the parent parcel it's coming from never gets below 10 acres. So there are mechanisms that have recognized that a a lot that is less in size than 10 acres is not dissimilar. It's just rather rare and there are only certain circumstances where that could play out. But we have had properties and we do have properties zoned AR that are less than 10 acres in size. Um, I guess I I also have one question for the applicant and I don't know if this is for um the owner or the the engineer um but you talked about the um advantages of reszoning to AR being that it facilitates the preservation or trying to use the same words you did but along those lines. Can you say a little bit more about that? What is it about the RS25 zoning that complicates the um the the preservation intention?

I'm not becoming an expert on learning in Athens, but I feel like I'm getting close. Um it with RS, my understanding is that you are limited to three structures and you can only on RS you can only have one primary residence. You couldn't have a second home. and I want to keep as much of this land intact. So the simple solution presented of people saying that I could just sell it to a for a dollar to my dad. I don't want to go through legality of that. I don't want it to be in someone else's name other than our name. I wanted to keep this is the last tract of that land. So I think it has a lot of history to Athens, Georgia. But RS limits you to three structures. And so we already have six or seven. And in order to use some of the ones that are older, I have to remove things. Now, I built a garage. We've chosen to do that because we want to house our cars, but um RS does not allow for that. Another thing that's not been touched at is if I want to actually have horses, RS is not allowed for that as well. I do have a pasture, but it's fenced. Um so, there are other factors. Unfortunately, in the last few weeks, um we were sort of the last one to know about a lot of the neighbors and the the the thought process. They took to social media, Reddit, and their neighborhood blogs and whatnot. And so I think understandably if I was someone who didn't know what I'm saying or what I this is the truth. Um I would be worried and but everyone is so caught up on this whole idea of an event center and a wedding center. I I it doesn't matter how many times I tell you this. Several of them I met previously on Saturday. It just doesn't matter. And there are and I can I can't speak to this as well as SPG could, but there are self-limiting factors on AR that we're we're trying the very thing that everyone's concerned about is the one thing that we would be concerned about. We never wanting on that property. Hence the application to do this. We do not want to run a business there. I'm three adult children. I want my family to be there. where this has gotten mired up is that the special use overlay which again is

does not pertain to this meeting for in particular and the the word the wordage on that form actually is ACC's wording not ours. So when we filled out that form and that question a lot of people saw that and hence a lot of the misunderstanding but doc they tried to dox my personal information they accurately put on public for how much we paid for our last house and how much it sold for. They tried to dox my husband's salary. They've threatened my property. They legally fit the definition of harassment. So, I I do have an attorney. So, I have actually have all the receipts for that. I have all the screenshots and I have read the letter of the law and that those actually do check many of the boxes for that. But, I cannot reiterate again. I hate it is not an event center. It is our home. A lot of people in their push back online said that we're paving the parking lot that belongs to Whit Davis Elementary that we're parking on dirt. Not these things are just false. from a sense of being worried. I understand. But in any way, shape, or form, I've been told that I'm going to be a threat to children, putting drunk drivers on the road, littering. Um, I'm my favorite one is I'm taking away the the value from east side restaurants because my place is going to be so cool and groovy. Everyone's going to come there to eat. My girlfriend has offered to get me a kiss the chef apron because I barely struggle to pick my own family dinner at this point. I'm not offering food. It is just my house. It is our home. Some of the opposition here present had said things online such as the fact that it's proof positive it's an event center because we have a pool and that kitchen building. The kitchen is if everyone's been to Williamsburg is that building they used to put back in your yard so your house wouldn't burn. It is remarkable that we even have that.

I I I understand but so it is not an event center. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. So just one more question just my No, I'm sorry. Not for you. It's for

looking at the code, my understanding is that the uh you know all what I've heard from all the neighbors is concerned about an event center. Um and looking at the code, it looks like that requires a special use permit. Is there any reason that um the future land use change and the reasoning to AR um that wouldn't permit anything like an events center, right? Unless an additional decision were made by the county to grant a special use permit. Correct. It would take that third decision to allow for the special event center, the the rural event facility.

Okay. And is there is is there any reason why a special use permit um needs to be granted for any of the other stuff for the the the buildings or or the other stuff if this were AR? No. Um

no. and and you know current conditions are not illegal. This would be viewed as legal non-conforming. I think where there is um a pinch point on making improvements on the property is adding yet another accessory building. Um but the ones that were there previously and prior to the code being worded the way that it is, those are fine. They just don't conform with what the rules are today. Um, as far as um other categories of zoning that would allow for pasture and for horses, um RS40 is a zoning classification that is RS that allows for um to have horses. Um there's a cap on the number of animals per acre. Um uh so there there there are other ways to kind of go about this, I think. Um the addition of a guest house is permitted by right. The problem is it's running up against the number of other homes or structures that are on the pro on the property. Not homes but structures. Um so the variance path is a viable path to address that question. Um so I'm I'm I'm taking your question and kind of peeling off some layers.

That's good because I was going to ask about Yeah, that's good. Let me just wrap up that um

there there I would also say there is the ability to subdivide um with a private drive three lots can be served as long as each of those lots meets the minimum square footage for the zone which a 9 acre tract would allow for some additional um lots to be created there by right so that and it wouldn't require a second entrance the current drive could be sufficient to handle that. Okay. Um so yeah, I mean I guess the the um I'm persuaded that this is not a great space for a fence venue. Um everything else seems pretty reasonable in terms of the preservation and the the um owner's desired use. Um and so I don't think that I would I'm interested in hearing what everyone else has to say. My preliminary thought is um I don't think that I would support a special use permit for an events space, but um all of the other concerns seem to be addressed by all the concerns I've heard seem to be addressed by not granting a special use permit and and reszoning to AR um doesn't seem unreasonable in light of the um unusual nature of the property at nearly 10 acres, you know,

in the interest of focing on focusing on the future land use of changing it from single family to agriculture, right? Do I have to rural? Sorry, from single family residential to rural. So that's what I would So what what is what are your thoughts? Um well, I'm interested in hearing what everyone else has to say. I'm openminded to that.

Oh, I didn't really have a whole lot to add. I was curious if variances would be a good path. I don't know if like, you know, we're talking about the text amendment later. I don't know if that would offer any relief if something like that was passed for them to be able to have an accessory to the house. Um, yeah, it seems like there's a lot of other paths. Maybe I don't know if I'm super on board with the with the change in the future land use. Um, you know, because it would be kind of creating like a unique spot. But yeah, I would almost like to see some other avenues pursued maybe before resoning.

I'll get to you one second. I just want to clarify. So as the 9 acre 9 and a half acre plot is now I couldn't have a course on that because it's in RS25. RS25. Yes. I'm I'm just I'm asking because as someone who grew up on a threeacre piece of land and we had to comprehend I couldn't have it worse on that much land. Um but it's but it's about the zoning right. So you're saying like RS40 is what like five acres like that or an acre?

I'm sorry. Agriculture is allowed in RS25 and RS40 was a limitation. That limitation is the keeping of livestock is allowed provided that no livestock shall be kept on any lot that is less than an acre in area. Okay. Um two, no more than two head of livestock over the age of six months may be allowed per acre. And three, if there's a barn or stable or other building or structure to house that livestock, it can't be located closer than 50 feet to any property line. So it has to be inwood to the site.

Do you have to have enough space to that? So I misspoke. What I was talking about with RS40 does apply for RS25. So the current zoning would allow for at at a a rate of two head of livestock, which a horse is not livestock. I don't want to confuse that issue. Two horses per acre. Um assuming that that works out functionally, but the zoning would not preclude that. that you just said applies to RS25 and RS4 and RS40. Yes.

Yeah. So, getting back into the the land use of family residential versus rural. Um I mean to me rural given that it is a farm and it's always been a farm. I think it's interesting this is coming up right after we finish the brand new future land use. Even though this is from the old one, but it has changed anyway. Yes, it's different. I mean, I'm with you on that. And it seems the spot zoning is not ideal, but the worst case scenario, if it's left the way it is and not down zone to AR, it could be turned into more single family homes. But I think I remember from the staff report that that's not possible because of the one entrance. So, this could never be sliced and diced into 20 homes.

Not 20, it could be three additional, right? Two additional homes. And if we downzone it to AR, then is it only two because it's like one per five acres or one? So what would be the cap of? So with with this lot being under 10 acres in size, if it were reszoned to AR, it could not be subdivided. Some level of protection for the existing structure to keep the historic integrity because it could not be subdivided further. Right.

I was just going to add that, you know, I mean, pres preserving the structure is great and everything, but it is right next door to a school, so it might not be a bad place to have future residences. at the sake of the historic nature of the property that way. Well, no. I mean, like saving the house and everything, but you know, I'm just saying, you know, infill infill development. Yeah. While I financially viable to build two Oh, sorry.

While I appreciate the owners wanting to preserve their land and reuse existing structures, I think we have to be really careful about making these kind of decisions, especially with the implementation of the new future land use map. It is very intentional and we want to provide consistency and if we're going to do that we need to start consistent. The other part is it doesn't address one of our most critical needs which is affordable housing. So all of those things are part of the future land use maps goals and this does not match that. It's clearly stated here. So for me it's a no. I I think it seems like by the nature of the parcel of the property that it wouldn't be financially viable to build more because you can only build what two more you can build two more homes on the property. Is that correct? I don't know. No, no developer is going to come in there if the family want to do it maybe. So I I don't think you have a real opportunity unfortunately to to you know affordable housing or any other housing that really moves the needle. Um, so as far as what what can be done with property preservation seems like the main goal. I think that's I don't have an issue with that. I get the slippery slope of we just had the future land use map come out and all of a sudden here we are with this kind of conundrum with changing it and said spot zoning. So I'm I'm iffy on that. But I think without the special use permit I don't think it's that would be damaging to the to the surrounding community to me. So, I've got another question for you, Bruce.

My biggest concern, again, we're looking at future land use, so um event space is not in my head right now. It it doesn't need to be, but we're we're now I mean, call it whatever you want. It's going to become farmland as far as the future land use goes. And my concern would be how many more um you you've gone over some RS this and RS that 25 and 40. How many animals or acre etc. But once we start making this agricultural how many more cows can be on that property if it were to go all the way through the zoning?

I see what I see. househ horses, anything that goes to the bathroom outside. Uh I mean the agricultural use would be unlimited if zoned AR. So there there is no cap of any sort like that. It would just be whatever practical limit there is. I thought that was the answer. I just wanted to make sure that's why I'm not for it. Could it be like Well, I guess that would be commercial use, but that's a good point. Like you could have tons of cows there. Yeah. And that that's not a fit. Yeah. No, that's a good point. That's all I got.

Yeah. Um I'm curious about some neighborhood concerns. I'm not going to pretend like we're not talking about the event venue as well. I understand that we this is about land use first and foremost, but but I do have some questions because that's what the neighbors are talking about and so I do think it's relevant. But one thing I want to know is when the neighbors are talking about already having a problem with the nearby AR zone property, what are they talking about? the fairgrounds. Okay. Yeah, I saw a mention in the comments. Yes. What allowed uses are allowed by right in an AR zone? What are the allowed us? What are the noisy uses? The noisy uses

that are allowed by right without a special use permit. I mean, I would I would argue any use at some point can make noise that's offensive. Yeah. So, for me to tell you which uses might be allowed and which ones may not, that's a tough ask. Um, that's okay. I mean, uh, what may what are we talking about? Major event entertainment or commercial outdoor rec well major event entertainment not permitted in the AR. Okay. Um, commercial outdoor recreation, which we have later on the agenda tonight, is a special use. I guess those would be the two obvious in the AR, right? Okay. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah, I mean I think Matt, you're on the right track of I don't actually don't see anywhere in the application where the applicant said requested a special use permit. I literally don't see that. Is it in the application? Like I see the future land use requests have been moved out. I don't see an application for a special permit as part of our packet. So was it in there? And I'm just Yeah, at this point the the application itself It had the three parts to it, but the analysis, the staff report at this point is only for seeing how the future. Yeah.

Okay. Um, but I think Matt's on the track or I agree with the tracker on that, which is that it doesn't seem like the special event part of this, you know, we're trying to focus primarily on the land use. It does seem like there's other land use solutions because I everything else that can be that the applicant says they want to do I think can be to some extent accomplished with an RS40 reszone. Um, and I mean I would say this is a really unique piece of property. Like I didn't really realize until I didn't know about this property and this super old um this history. So, I think it's I I would like to see something that does preserve the property. Like, as much as I'm always interested in advocating for for housing, not really right here. It is kind of special. And anyway, so I I think AR might be it does seem like there are some uses with AR on this property that not even the applicant wants or is interested in. So I I I feel like it this could be this nut could be cracked a different way.

Yeah. I guess just uh to kind of bring it full circle, you know, from from what I'm hearing um it does seem like perhaps the I'm hearing a lot of support for the applicants goals and and yet concern about whether the application that's for us is the best way to achieve those goals or the only way to achieve those goals or if there's might not be a different way to achieve it like through the variance process to allow an additional structure without changing the zoning for instance. Uh and um so um it's up to the applicant of course whether when we see something for comments they can bring it back the following month for a vote or they can revise it and and submit something different. Um and and um I guess I would encourage the applicant to just kind of look at at whether there's a slightly different way to achieve your goals that would um not raise um the the some of the concerns that you All right. Thank you. Um, great. Thanks all for the discussion. Um, now we're going to go to number 14.

That's what I was thinking too. You know, I was kind of go back to the like into that. I realized

I really don't like at home.

All right, our next case is 145 Hayward Island Parkway. This is a special use request 2026-40658. Um so uh since we have written this report, we have spoken with the applicants. Um I am going to allow the applicant to talk about anything they have in response to our report. Um I will say that a few things have come up and I will point those parts out that pertain, but I'm going to be presenting what was turned into us um just about a month ago. This is a special use request in the commercial general zone. Uh the request is to allow for ground floor residential in a commercial zone. The proposal as we see it is a mixeduse residential community uh with some variety in the housing that they are proposing. They are proposing 103 dwelling units on just over 7 and a half acres. They would like to have an approximately 1,000 square foot neighborhood commercial space in the front up by Hayward Allen Parkway and then they're showing 177 parking spaces with a combination of surface on street and then some park under units here in the multif family variety. They additionally have four variance requests. Uh those are for conserved canopy um to decrease parking. We have this large development requirements that um has a plaza requirement and I will go over that a little bit when we see the site plan. And then uh developments over 250 daily trips per the zoning code require asking to take that down to a single point of access. You click on it for me.

Thank you sir.

Okay. So here is the uh aerial of the site. We are right behind Hayward Allen Toyota, which is the roof you can see there in front. Um, we have an extension. If you have been out to the site or if you have been following along for the last year or so, we have a residential community coming in back here that got reszoned um, I believe in 2025. that community uh was required to extend this public right of way which is her Allen Parkway to come out and eventually connect to this which is the preserve drive. The preserve drive connects through a few multif family communities over to Mitchell Bridge Road and then Hayward Allen Parkway comes out to a signalized intersection at Atlanta Highway just a little past the eps uh bridge parkway splint. We've got uh property that was cleared a long time ago. Um there is a storm water facility that has been put in here. Um so we have a bit of volunteer growth and then we've got a power line uh easement and cut back through here and then a little bit of topography that I will show you. So the current future land use is general business that would remain in place with this request. The zoning change here is simply to add the special use uh allowance onto the property. There are no environmental areas. I believe what is shown here is that storm water facility. You can see small stream in the back and then you can see some flood plane coming off of the middle of Coney River that is right up here. Um one other thing I neglected to mention is this property that's being developed. You can even see some building footprints going in already. Look at our GIS staff. Um there is a connection a future connection. The greenway is to come up the middle Okone River on this side of the river in uh in the future. And so there is a proposed connection to

that uh Okone River Greenway through the multif family property solution. So here's a site plan of the location. Uh you can see two main um apartment structures here with some park under uh towards the side. This would have the commercial space in the front. And I believe this applicant um mostly is focusing on the residential, but they saw this as an opportunity to bridge that gap from the commercial to toward Atlanta Highway to the residential to the rear. Um they then are showing a group of attached units in the back here um of variety. Some of these are onebedroom. I believe some are twobedroom. They then also show a few detached units. I believe those are all of the two-bedroom variety. Um and they're even showing one duplex here. Uh they're proposing a little bit of surface parking here. Surface parking in front of the apartment structure. Small amount of on street parking would be allowed here. Um and then some amenity space. I believe they're showing a pickle ball court. Here is some of the representative architecture. So you can see here I just pulled the building up towards the front. This would be the rear of the building. It has the park under opportunity here. The front is this commercial opportunity here that comes through and comes out to a bit of a plaza space. Um so getting back to that, let me just jump back here real quick. So um for projects over 60,000 square feet, there is this large scale development requirement. The big thing with that is some plaza space that is generally for the commercial residential interface and to allow the public to enjoy some of those opportunities. Um, so they are showing some plaza space in the rear here that would support the thousand square feet of commercial. But what they would like to do is take the rest of that and then put it into this green space that would be open to the public as well and you know this this neighborhood here. So instead of having

um I believe this would require like 19,000 square ft of plaza space because of the size, they would like to do a lot of that in a community green space here to the rear. So that is one of the variance request and staff understands the reasoning behind that. So just wanted to mention that positive space real quick. Um here we have the uh detached units. So, we have the um single detached units. We've got the duplex detached unit. And then we have the rows of attached units. A few shots looking into the property. So, from the back corner here where the new development is coming in, looking towards the Toyota dealership. You can also see Hayward Allen Parkway here. It's got sidewalk on the property. Um, and then we've got sort of a boulevard situation coming down Hayward Allen Parkway. This is looking into the property from up on um the plane that it would be at. You can see back here is the preserve. It sits up. This property does at the back get a little bit steep in topography. There's a real quick jump up in the last uh 20 to 50 feet of this property that goes up uh I believe about 20 feet in height. Just another quick shot into the property. You can see some of the pines that have grown up over time. And then this is a look back into the residential property. So you can see the connection through here. Um the project here actually curves off this way. So it does not have that road frontage over here. It just goes into that sort of green space forested area that's a part of the adjacent property. Uh quick view of the streetscape if you were looking down. Um this is this is a little in front of where the entrance would be. So that commercial space would be kind of right here from my reading. I believe that entrance would be right here and then everything goes kind of back there off the off the screen. Um so staff sees this as compatible with the comprehensive plan. Um this is an infill

opportunity even though this has not had development. It has definitely had some other work done on the property. This is in a location that has good access to Atlanta highway to Epsbridge Parkway through to Mitchell Bridge and not too far off to Loop 10. Um there is a variety of housing in this. Um we asked that in these multif family projects we do not just sort of have a monoculture a lot of times. So we like to see that variety provides a little bit more opportunity um for the residents that would be a part of this community. This is a bit of a unique neighborhood with smaller houses that has some cohesion to it, which is also another factor in our comprehensive plan. Uh, compatible with the future land use map, the zoning map, and the ordinance. Um, staff sees that the special use criteria have been satisfied. Um, we do appreciate the potential connections that are here for this property onto Atlanta Highway and all the commercial that fronts along there for daily needs. Um and then we also see the the commercial uh transition uh just a little bit but a little bit of neighborhood commercial from going from commercial back to that residential um we see as a good opportunity here. We have asked for a table um I everything I've seen and our fire department is here I believe to speak to this. One of the big things was a comment from the fire department. There has been a conversation since that staff report has gone out. It sounds like our fire department has um some comforts with what the applicant is proposing. I will allow the applicant to speak to that and our fire marshall office to speak to that as well. Um in terms of the variances, this is mostly volunteer growth and um through the conserve canopy waiver process, staff can work with the applicant to get some better plantings back. Um, oftentimes we ask for more plantings, we ask for larger plantings, we ask for native trees and things like that. So, that would be a process that the applicant

could work through with staff. Um, staff, as I mentioned, supports the alternative design to the plaza space to be used as community green space. The access point, um, in terms of our zoning code is probably based off of some older fire department requirements or fire code requirements. The fire code has been adjusted. So projects under 120 units are now supported by the fire code to allow a single access point. Um something we might want to look at in our code. So relying on our team at the fire marshall's office, staff supports that as well. In regards to parking, um there's a little bit of confusion here on staff's part. There was some space added for that amenity space. There's some shared use opportunities with the commercial space. Um, so staff is simply saying that we're not sure that the exact number stated as a required amount is what would be required by this development. So this this uh request, we know they couldn't get down to the number they're asking for, but I think this request would be a little less if they explored those options. So we were recommending table um but uh we will hear from the applicant and then hear from this body and the public um to see if there's some opportunity for uh the changes they are going to propose. With that, I will conclude the staff report.

Thank you. Um, now we'll hear from the applicant. Thank you.

Yes. All right. You have the alternate that we sent out. Before you start, you're going to vote on accepting what you're handing out as the move. Okay. All in favor? All right. Oh, good. Okay, great. Yeah.

All right. Yeah, y'all said this would go smooth the last time I was here, so off to a good start. Um, yeah, as Martin described, uh, not much has changed from our original submitt on the concept review. We did run into a slight hiccup, which is why we've submitted this additional amendment into the report. At this time, uh, torch of power wouldn't allow us to have a wall. Fortunately, with the topography in that back corner, it does fall off sharply. So, we had to adjust slightly. Uh what we did was we took the building, slid it over, plan left, and also added a little bit extra rotation. Other than that, it's virtually the same. We did go from a few detach units. We decreasing our detach units down from 10, I think, to four or five. Um the overall unit mix is still there. And we do feel that it's a, you know, a good opportunity for this area just for the transition from Atlanta highway corridor and to the uh more dense apartment buildings to the north. Um Mark actually covered most of the things I was going to talk about, but I will just uh speak to the fire marshall's comments. They had a couple concerns that were alleviated when we discussed some of the hydrant locations. Everything comes down to appendix D uh and that's basically access for their vehicles as well as hydrant uh hose lay for firefighting needs and I think we have everything you know comfortably you wanted to say yes or no on that but

why don't we you give your presentation and then we can bring him up.

Okay, sure. Yeah. Um so we feel comfortable that any small discrepancies at this point will be worked through and review. Same thing with some of staff's comments. Uh I know I just want to go through really quickly some of their issues. They mentioned the sidewalk on Hwood Hayward Allen is actually under construction when we if this should this pass and move forward we're going to have to reservey that and we're happy to put sidewalk for that small section uh remaining in front of our parcel. Um penistration of the windows that'll obviously be handled at planer review as well for the building. um front yard parking. Uh we did have there was a little discussion about the parking on the right hand side was going to be running on the proposed road or road that's currently under construction. I think staff and uh our team has decided that that is not actually going to be an issue. So we've uh relieved we're relieved from that. block sizes were well under three acres and the open space uh 8% is actually for RM zonings and there is a child play area requirement as well. Right now we're showing pickle ball. We do have several green space options available for small play area. Uh but I do want to reiterate our target demographic for this is older you know aging in place permanent residents of Athens. I think the unit mix, you know, we have a several two and one veteran apartments and attached units. You know, we're definitely geared towards that older demographic. The amenities and also the neighborhood commercial I think speaks to that as well as the location, excuse me, the location. Um, you know, the variances I think Mark covered. The plaza requirement was a big one. Uh, we felt that it just wouldn't be proportional to the actual proposed development. If we had to have 19,000 square feet of plaza here, it would stick out, you know, be way out of

place. So, we felt the green space was a solid compromise for that. And we do have, you know, a fair amount of plaza off the edge of the building where we are going to have a portion of commercial that can be you utilized by residents as well as some of the neighboring properties and off-site visitors as well. Um, uh, as far as the parking goes, this revised layout does show the same parking count. Um, and I I see what Mark was saying. You know, we we had counted the entire amenity and since there wasn't a clear definition of parking requirements for the amenity. I assume 400 ft space for 400 square feet. And that probably is a little bit higher on the estimate. So, you know, instead of I think I believe it's 213 required that was calculated, it might be slightly lower than that. But I also want to point out, you know, with our target demographic and having some twobedroom units. I fully anticipate several of those or the patrons here will have two cars, but we're going to have several empty second bedrooms as well. So, we have, you know, number of bedrooms. We're close to that our parking count. We don't foresee it being an issue. Um yeah, I think with that being said, everything else is, you know, open for discussion. So if you have any questions, happy to answer it. Thank you.

Um anybody else here to speak in support of the application? Here to speak in opposition. Okay. Um, so why don't we get the fire folks up here? Hi.

Uh, good evening. Mr. Waters met with the fire marshals and uh he was able to tweak the plan to our satisfaction. U as it is the the plan that was handed out tonight. uh he is fully compliant with the um IBC appendix D. Uh he was able to make the turnarounds work. Um also the hydrant placement um and he's also compliant at this time with the Georgia amendment 120-3-3. So did everything we asked him to do. Anybody have any questions? um I think all the variances look sensible um under the circumstances you know that obviously you can't conserve canopy that isn't there um and the green space in L of the plaza sounds like an improvement u I don't have a problem with one access point fire margin have a problem with it and um anytime a developer wants to reduce our ordinances required parking spaces I'm all for it you know we require too much parking so those all seem good so I I don't see much of a reason to table it seems like stuff has been pretty well worked out so Just one question. So the tree situation, if we grant that waiver, they'll have to plant more trees as per the code when it comes to plants review, right?

Yeah. The waiver is for the conserved. It's not for the overall canopy. So they would have to compensate. They would still hit the overall canopy requirement. Okay. With but with new and potential new. That's right. Yeah, I think I like this one. It came through the last time. It seems like a great place for this type of housing. So, I mean, be happy to make a motion to approve with the waivers. Yeah. Okay. Any other comments on the Just to be clear, that's with the four variances that were good to me. Okay. All right. Can

can we just ask one real quick question? They're proposing a slightly different site plan here. Just want to make sure that that goes into the motion if that's Yes. So to clarify, I guess the exhibit that was handed out. Sorry. Right. I would like to make a motion to approve the updated site plan with the requested variable. Okay. That was a second from Sarah. Is that correct? All right. So, we're going to call out a vote motion from Jennifer Fleece to approve the update site plan requested four variances. So, uh Fleece, yes. Yes.

Paul, yes. Uh, yes. Sans, yes. Sanders, yes. And Lord, yes. Beautiful. Uh all

number 35 South Millers Avenue.

All right. Good evening, y'all. I think I'm the midpoint of our presentation at this evening. So, next up we have 735 South Village Avenue. That is going to be a special use request. Fairly straightforward. Applicant is requesting groundf flooror residential in an existing um commercial office zone. Um this last point on this slide, um I can amend. Originally, as in my report, um, I noted that there were some issues or some confusion around short-term rental use on this property. That's been clarified since I wrote the report. Um, so in this presentation, I can say after it's clarified, it will be a long-term rental. That's no longer a concern for us on the staff side. Um, another thing to point out, there will not be any changes to the site structure, the site layout, parking, site access, utilities, anything like this. Um we are just talking about a special use for residential on the first floor. Um this is the site as is a little bit about those existing conditions. Um again we're on the South Village Avenue corridor. We've got three parcels directly adjacent to this property. Um the parcels on the north and the south are zoned uh commercial office and we also have uh a rear adjacent parcel that is already zoned RS5. singly single family residential. Um, as y'all may know, the South Mill Avenue corridor is pretty pedestrian heavy roadway. It's got sidewalk connectivity, a mix of uses, um, included, but not limited to fraternities, sorority houses, restaurants, residences, and offices. Um, there also is already existing first floor residential use along this corridor as well. Um, looking at future land use, not a lot of action here. There is no change as part of this request. Um, and looking at the same for current zoning, we are just asking or the applicant is just asking for special use in this existing zoning. Um, just mentioned a little bit about existing

conditions. Here's some more detailed photos of the existing structure. We have a two-story structure that was originally constructed in 1950. Historically was used as a private residence. It spent some time being an office. Um, there is a gravel parking lot located behind the structure. And again, there are no proposed changes to what you see on your screen. Um, no site plan with changes. It's just going to be a survey of a property as is, and nothing here is proposed to change. So, with all of that said, uh, we do believe that, um, the proposal is compatible with our 2023 comprehensive plan. Um, specifically, it is pursuing an infill opportunity and redevelopment instead of looking at new building. Um it also is encouraging the preservation and adaptive reuse of an existing structure. Um in addition to that we find it is compatible with future land use map zoning map and our ordinances. Um so we would recommend approval of this proposal and that that stat board.

Thank you. Now we hear from the applicant.

Uh my name is Tyler Davis. Uh I'm not the uh the owner. The owner couldn't be here tonight, but he wanted me to just read a statement uh about this building, but um he said, "This building's been in our family for almost 40 years, and it's something we plan on owning and taking care of for many years to come. Uh my mother lives around the corner of Henderson Avenue, and this building at 735 Millage is something she takes pride in and loves as much as her historic home that she has lived in for over 50 years. She loves this home not only from the memories that were made here for the many years my father operated his law offices from this location but also for the beautiful historic elements that it possesses. Our family loves it so much we have spent time and money to properly name it the Gallas building. As you can see from the sign that currently stands out front. I want to assure you that we're going to do the right thing and maintain this beautiful house so it can continue to be an asset of the neighborhood. As the house currently sits, we are allowed residential on the second floor, and we do not want to disturb the historic integrity by adding a kitchen to that floor. I ask that you please approve our special use permit requesting to allow residential on the main floor so the kitchen on the first floor could be used by the bedrooms upstairs. Um, really not much to add to what was said. Uh, I guess I'm going to just highlight uh some points from my application report, I guess. Um, and it's most of this has already been said, so please forgive me for repeating it, but I've got 10 minutes and I know what to say. So, uh, the request the request is limited in scope and does not include any proposed changes to the existing structure, site layout, access, or overall lot configuration. Everything existing in and on the building will stay the same, and the sites lot will also stay the same. Um, the Millig Avenue corridor is characterized by a diverse mix of uses, including residential homes, multif family housing, professional offices, and small-scale commercial

establishments. The blend of uses creates a transitional environment where residential and office functions coexist. The proposed residential use is compatible with the established pattern. In fact, ground floor residential units are common along the corridor and contribute positively to the character of the area by maintaining activity and presence along a high pedestrian oriented street. While offices while office use are prevalent, more intensive commercial and retail uses are less common outside of major intersections due to access and visibility limitations. The subject property with its modest access and limited parking is better suited for residential use rather than higher impact commercial activity. Uh, Athens, Clark County continues to experience a strong demand for additional housing. Increasing the availability for residential units, particularly in centrally located areas, is a key key community priority. The property's location offers convenient access to UG employment centers, daily services, and amenities. As a result, residents are more likely to utilize alternative modes of transportation, including walking, biking, and public transit. This reduces traffic demand and supports broader community goals related to mobility and uh additionally the conversion of existing structures into residential units provides a meaningful way to increase housing supply without the impacts associated with new construction. Proposed special use meets the general intent of Athens Clark County approval criteria and that it is compatible with the existing mix of uses along the corridor supports the community's need for additional housing. utilizes existing infrastructure efficiency, minimizes impacts related to traffic, parking and site design, maintains the character and scale of the existing structure. So basically the conclusion is the requested special use permit represents a reasonable contextsensitive and beneficial reuse of the existing structure. Returning the main floor for the residential use aligns with the

historic function of the property, supports community housing needs, and fits appropriately within the mixeduse character of the Mill Avenue. I the applicant may request approval of the special use permit and appreciates the planning department's consideration. Thank you. Um, anybody else here to speak in support of the application? Anybody here to speak in opposition to the application? Okay. Hearing none else.

So, um it's hard to make it's hard to take a historic house and split it commercial and residential just like the applicant said. Um you start putting putting kitchens upstairs and downstairs just it gets complicated. there code issues. Uh I know through somebody else that has had a building on Mil Avenue to separate residential. You can't just say this is residential and that is commercial. There's code issues that uh again I say damaging. You're having to do things to that structure uh that it doesn't want to do. So I'd never uh particularly care for that. Um, I know this family and I I mean I know they mean well, but I'm also the person that like was discussed in couple of applications ago, turnover, somebody else owns it, what good or what bad could happen? And I don't see any bad uh that could happen with a new owner in that. Uh, Millage Avenue is originally a residential street. It's that simple. So, um, I like the idea. Yeah, agree. Seems like a seems like a good ask and turning it back to residential seems to make sense. So be in support.

Motion move to approve uh the requested special use permit. You can have it. All right. Great. So, we have a motion on the floor to approve the requested the requested special use permit. Fleece, yes. Barisford, Paul, yes. Yes. Pass. Yes. Sams, yes. Sanders, yes. And Lord, yes. All right, we have all yay. Thank you.

All right, now on to item number six. Thank you, Barnett Schles. All righty. Good evening everybody. Uh the following is the staff presentation for 1960 Barnett Scholes Road special use permit 2026 040648.

Yeah. The request is for a special use permit in order to create a surface parking lot which will uh the intention is to serve the function of the adjoining uh restaurant to the north which is Chick-fil-A. Um the proposal is that the existing building on site would be demolished in order to uh accommodate more parking. Uh this is an aerial photograph of the parcel in question. Um the structure on site is the old Burger King that would be demolished as part of the proposal. Uh this is the current future land use map which shows general business that would be unchanged. Uh this is the zoning map which would only change by adding that triangle designation to indicate special use. Uh this is the site plan uh provided by the applicant um showing uh the current Burger King structure which would be demolished um in order to uh to accommodate that service parking lot. Uh in general, staff finds that this proposal is incompatible with the comprehensive plan u primarily for its automobile focused uh nature and with commercial corridors having redevelopment potential. Um in general uh most plans associated with Athens County don't have much support for surface parking lots being added. Um and though this proposal was submitted under uh the previous future land use map, staff is kind of considering the guiding uh principles associated with the new future land use map. One of those um for the designation of this area of town center is for considering parking on a developmentwide scale. Uh so keeping in mind that there is a lot of surface parking in the adjoining parcels uh that could serve these uh the various businesses. staff doesn't see justification for approval of this request uh and therefore is recommending denial. Um there

on the chance that um this proposal is not recommended to be denied, staff does recommend that the proposal is tabled to address the following concerns. uh transportation and public works department has uh some current concerns about the distances between the successive driveways on Barnett Scholes. Um and that one of the driveways would potentially need to be removed. Um as well as concerns regarding street trees and some other code issues that could be worked out if the request was tabled. Um overall though, staff is recommending denial of this proposal. Who is the staff report? Thank you. Now we'll hear from the applicant.

You guys have the presentation. Can we send in? I have it. Yes. Give me one second. And while he's pulling that up. So I'm Jason Tulle with CPH. So we are the architect and engineer representing Chick-fil-A this request.

All right. And um I will start off just real quick just to clarify one of the points that staff made. We are not tearing down the building to create additional parking. So the parking that's already there on the Burger King lot now uh would stay. Uh so we're not proposing to add any additional parking. Basically just the building area that is there now would go away and would become green space. We would just plant it back. Um real quick also regarding the corrective actions uh that were listed, there were five of them. Uh the first one was talking about driveways. I think I can go to U. So, this is the demo plan. I'll go to this. So, this kind of shows what we're proposing. So, you can see that we're not proposing to add any additional parking. We would just be using the parking that's already on the Burger King site that's there. Now, um the only condition or corrective action that we really disagree with is the first one regarding removing a driveway. If you can see there, the site functions right now, one of the driveways is an in only, the other one is an out only. Uh that the pointer. Yeah. So uh this is the in only driveway. This is the out only driveway. Uh this up here currently serves the actually second action that they list or request is that we focus people to come in and out of that so that they can get to and from the signal. That is how the operator currently is operating his business right now. Uh if you're familiar with the site, uh sorry I'm going to skip ahead a few slides. The existing Chick-fil-A has an access right here to that side road. He shuts that off during peak times anyway to force his drive-thru people who exit to go back through the Burger King site and out to that back access road so that they can get to the sign. So, sorry, I know I kind of jumped around, but I'll go through the presentation now. I'll try to do it quickly because I know everybody probably wants to get home.

Um, so that is what we're requesting to do. Uh, the Chick-fil-A site, which is on the right of your screen here, uh, we were involved with that redevelopment a few years ago, which added the dual drive-through lanes for the site. Um, shortly after that was done, actually, I think during the construction, the Burger King went out of business at that time. So, Chick-fil-A actually has a long-term lease on the Burger King site as well. So the parking right there is, you know, right now, I mean, the Burger King is closed. So the parking that is occurring on that lot is serving the Chick-fil-A now. They're they're, you know, going to the Chick-fil-A. Um, so really what we're asking to do, in my opinion, would just be to make it safer by getting rid of a vacant building that's just going to continue to sit there. U so our request would be, you know, let's get rid of the building. Let's make it a green space. Let's make it more aesthetically pleasing. Uh was regarding the third action that was requested was to add street trees. And then the fourth action was to add additional buffering for the parking lot. Um you can see that this landscaping there, I believe that was the area that that was talking about. So we're okay uh with adding in additional trees as well. And honestly, if staff or this board would like, we don't have a problem with adding trees, you know, or additional landscaping within that green area as well if that's something that, you know, would be requested. And then the last item was bicycle parking. We're happy to add bicycle parking, you know, to the area as well. So, our request today would be that instead of denying or tableabling it, we would ask that you approve it. And if you do that and want to put those conditions, we would be happy to have an approval with the conditions that we do those corrective actions other than the first one which

was closing that driveway. And I will say I I don't know that this is not part of it, but the driveway I showed you earlier on the right side of Chick-fil-A, they said that if if you wanted one closed, that would be the one they would prefer to have closed off if you would want one closed. He said that signal backs up anyway. And so it's really hard for people to enter and exit out of that driveway. So he tries to block it off just for safety standpoint anyway. So he would be willing the when I say he the operator and he was sorry he couldn't be here tonight. He actually had a team member who was serving under him who got his first restaurant and will be moving to Mississippi to do the grand opening. And so the operator traveled out there to be be there as part of that grand open with him. Um but I think that was it. happy to answer any questions if you know staff or the board have

Yeah, you we're okay. No, I'm sorry. I thought you were asking. No, no, you're good. Thank you. Um, anyone to speak in favor of the proposal? Good evening. My name is Kent Middleton. I live at 195 Clyde Road on in the Green Acre Shopping Center. I came here tonight to oppose this proposal um and recommend that All right. Before you go, we were asking for anybody in support. So, just real quick, is there anybody here to speak? I'm I'm planning to support it. That's why I thought you said post it.

Right. I said I came here tonight with that intention. Oh, wait. Reveal. I'm a retired professor.

Adding a bit of drama. So, um I was going to recommend that the uh that the commission follow the recommendations of the planning department um for the reasons that they've stated that it's it's not consistent with the u future land use map and other reasons. I'd also point out it's not consistent with the uh um Kroger public's uh with the future land the the new future land use map um which designates the Kroger public shopping center as a town center and town centers as you know are mixed commercial and residential areas designed for walking, biking and transit access uh with centralized parking and they're auto out of oriented uses are not included in town centers. So, we wouldn't have the Burger King or the Burger King or the uh Chick-fil-A um if if if this were a town center um several years ago. So, uh, with nec with the necessary corrective actions, I think, uh, uh, I could support this. Um, removing one driveway, maybe re removing both driveways. Um uh so that um patrons coming to the uh Chick-fil-A enter through a signalized um intersection and then use the internal road to get to the uh to to Chick-fil-A. Um that's the way that the town center is going to function uh effectively in the future. people coming in at the um

signalized intersections and then using the internal road. Uh what I would hope is that um this proposal will be tabled and that the applicants will speak with the neighbors um as is common in in Clark County. And could we discuss um uh propose the possibility which I think I heard tonight that they would create a green space um in the um uh where the building will be knocked down and could we make that a permanent green space and in town centers green spaces and open spaces are welcomed and so so could we talk about that also could we talk about the possibility of including the u um the uh changes that have been recommended, but also could we possibly create a multi-use path along the front of the property? Um which would be consistent with the goals of many of the east side neighbors to create multi-use paths along that whole corridor. and that is being started uh with the T-spos proposals that are going to be voted on May 9th um May 19th. Thank you very much.

Hi, I'm Rudy Chimo. I live at uh 245 Milstone Circle. You'll hear from me again later. Um I don't know how many of y'all go to that area, but that Chick-fil-A has um it's a cluster and what they're proposing is fabulous because we have a we have a we have a building that's just sitting there rotting away. We can move the traffic to the left of the Chick-fil-A, get some of that uh some of that stuff as just around that intersection, relieve some of that. And uh uh green space, it just looks really beautiful. And if that's if that's the way you're all going to do it, uh that's an improvement for what we have now. Uh, and if we could close off that right entrance of where people go in and out to uh to that Chick-fil-A, which he has done during peak times, that is just a beautiful thing. And uh we drive it all the time. We're always in that area. We live way out, so we come in there to uh to shop and to eat. And I won't go near Chick-fil-A because it's just it's a cluster right there. And that whole thing next to it would just open up uh open up a lot of uh possibilities for Chick-fil-A and for the residents. That's that's all I've got to say. That's a wonderful idea. Let's have more of it.

Thank you. EV chargers. Put some EV chargers. Anybody else this? Hi, I'm Jeff Lewis, 5175 Old Lexington. I didn't come here for this and uh I have to be honest, I wasn't paying attention to the Pandora's box and what could be bad. Um but I do want to say I am a frequent visitor of the Jittery Joe's which is just to the right of that and since they have made this change the traffic flow in that area has improved tremendously. Um, I just want to throw that out.

Thank you. Anybody else to speak in support?

Okay. Anybody here to speak in opposition? Okay. Hearing none. I ask a grandfathering question. Um Bruce on the first proposed uh corrective action about removing one of the driveways is is that not um like a I don't know if legally non-conforming or or what what the terminology would be but because it exists in that way are they not entitled to continue to use it in that way? uh they are um when asking for the special needs consideration, revisiting traffic flow and safety opens the door for that discussion. So that's where that's coming. Okay. Can you can you speak to the um the if if if one of the driveways got removed, I assume the other one would have to be widened so it could be an inout. So c can you speak to whether it's um better or worse to do that as opposed to having a single in narrow driveway for entry and one a separate one for exit. I'm going to defer to our transportation public works staff

transportation and public work staff. So let's uh whatever. So the question about the the driveway is the width, right? Yeah. The two existing driveways on the

Yeah. So the width of the driveways right now would actually constitute a two-way driveway. Uh especially the one on the left hand side. It's a double out right now, but its width would make it where you could make it an in and an out. Uh same goes for the other driveway. Uh, you know, talking about Jason Jones, our our other transportation person here, you know, what TPW would like to see is actually closing this driveway because of its proximity to another driveway. It's quite close and make this an in only. Uh, that way as traffic circulating through this development and coming back out, it they'd be forced to go to the red light to to exit and enter that. I'm sorry. They'd be forced to

they'd have to go to the red light most likely or go all the way out. You mean go out into the other parts of the commercial site and circle around to the signal? Yeah. Exit. Which is a much better traffic flow. It's a lot lot safer. Okay. Thank you. I guess related to the same thing, can I just ask the applicant to speak to that? Is that a deal breakaker from y'all's perspective?

So the way and I know for some of the people who just mentioned that they they visit the site. So right now because this is the main entrance and exit of the drive-thru, he is actually coning off this area so that you the drive-through traffic can come through that access and then exit. And the people who are parking here who come in here to park have to loop around and go back out. They can't cross over and go. And so he would prefer to keep his dining in parking customers separate than his drive-through customers because that's where the traffic backs up for drive-through. So in our opinion, it's safer to keep that as a loop. U now if the concern is people wanting to make a left out of that exit, we would be willing to make that a ride out if you feel like that's a safer condition. Uh because I don't feel like you necessarily need a signal to make a ride out. Uh, but we would prefer to at least keep the flow of being able to come in, park, circle behind what used to be the building, which will now be green space, and then exit out that driveway still just from a safety standpoint. U typically what we've seen or I mean, we prefer the one way, you know, have one way in, one way out just because of the flow of traffic seems to flow better that way. Uh, you don't introduce the conflict points. Um, so yes, if if we did lose one, we would have to make the other one an in and out, but then you would be kind of bringing people together there. And so we'd prefer not to do that if we didn't have to.

Can people drive around the front if they came all the way like circle around the building and come out that? Yeah. So, you're saying can they come right through here? Yeah. So, if they Yeah, there is currently a lane. Uh, I don't have my presentation up anymore, but yeah, there there is a lane there. It's right there. So, if you kept this the drive-through traffic separate from the traffic parking there, they could just come in and out of that one on the right. If that one on the left was closed, correct? Would that be possible to move?

They could. And that's what I was saying. They prefer not to do that. We'd prefer to keep it just, you know, one way in and one way out without having the people having to come back here to then make a right and conflicting with the people who are also coming in off bars. So that's that's the only conflict point that that creates is you have somebody you know coming in off Barnet should maybe at a higher speed than you're leaving the exit and so that becomes a question then so you're not actually gaining any parking spaces correct no

why I just feel like like I kind of caught what you were all talking about but honestly I'm just looking at this I'm like this is such a weird parking situation. Why not? And honestly, the Burger King shaped piece of sod to me is just weird, too. Well, that's why I was saying we could add landscaping like trees or something.

Why even do that? Why not just completely redevelop the site? Like, why not, you know, maybe maybe Chick-fil-A needs to move. Maybe you just expand. Like, why why be hemmed in by this? So, at the time that we did the So, the the easy answer is because we just remodeled the Chick-fil-A beside it. So, it was just done like two years ago. Uh, and all the money invested into that. So, in the future, that is probably what would would happen further down the road. Uh, they had actually looked at trying to get control of this piece of property when they were redeveloping the Chick-fil-A to do just that. And it was not available at that time. Shortly after Chick-fil-A went under construction, it became available. And then they did uh secure it and have it under a long-term lease now. Um so that

leases on both of the properties. Yes, ma'am. And they can develop both of them however they wish. I mean in in accordance with county requirements. Yes. Okay. I think that's all. You have a question or No, I have a comment. Okay. All right. You're good. Thank you. Call you back up.

All right. No problem. So, I just want to say that that Burger King is actually a really high in demand commercially used property. It is very hard regardless of what you might feel about drive-throughs to find them in Clark County. And I believe that that wouldn't be a use that would be compatible with the future land use map. So, having that there grandfathered in, it would be pretty sad actually. It's kind of tragic that Chick-fil-A has a long-term lease on this simply to get the parking. That building is only vacant because there's a long-term lease from Chick-fil-A. I know that I had several clients that were interested in it

and it wasn't available because it was already swooped up by Chick-fil-A. So, I don't see the benefit of a green space in the middle of a parking lot with all the traffic coming around. I don't have much of an appetite to support this at all. I think it's an important commercial use to retain and it would be sad to see it go. I kind of had similar feelings come into this too and I didn't really hear anything like Yeah. Is there anything wrong with the building? Like why can't it just be another restaurant? Could have. Yeah. Yeah. Because in that case I'm Yeah. I'm not super excited about just tearing a building down just to tear it down.

No. Um, I guess I have a different perspective. I, you know, my, um, I'm very familiar with this area. My kids used to go to school over there for a number of years. Um, I've been to that Chick-fil-A and that Jittery Joe's a bunch of times, uh, Napper Burger King, but I've been around that area a lot. And um it seems to me that in uh because of customer demand um the Chick-fil-As's in Athens, Clark County and that canes on Baxter just don't have nearly enough on-site parking and traffic flow. And so I appreciate that the applicant is proactively trying to fix that. I mean, they they, you know, have enough demand that it's economically feasible for them to pay more for that Burger King site than anybody else who wanted to put a restaurant there, right? And so, um, the cars are going to be there one way or the other. And um and so I appreciate that the applicants trying to manage that traffic flow and and u solve the problems that a lot of other chicken restaurants in Athens seem to have with drive space and and parking space. Um and given the the future land use change that the town center thing, I think a reduction of one in the total number of drive-throughs in that area is not a bad thing. U and uh so I'm I'm inclined to support it. Um, and I would be I mean I think the the Burger King shaped uh green space is does feel a little bit awkward. Certainly um adding a bunch of trees around it um would improve it. You know, people might who park and go into the Chick-fil-A to get food with their family, they might, you know, if there were tables out there, they might like to come out and eat their food outside rather than inside. and and u it does seem like u

probably a good thing to have. Um my only question is really on the the removal of the driveway, that first um corrective action and and um it seems to me there that it's the left turn that's the problem. People exiting that site trying to turn across multiple lanes of traffic then using the signal that's a problem. And so at the very least I'd like to see that south driveway become a right exit only a single lane right turn exit and and the other the north driveway remain as just a single um in um but I think this seems like um the neighbors who spoke about it um who know it better than most of us um seem to think it things have gotten better there and that this is an improvement and so I would be inclined to support it.

Um I think this is a staff question when a special use permit or um use permit is not so much related demolishing the building but creating service park not right or is it both? Retaining the building leaves at least the presumption that the parking is serving future use in the structure. So removing the building only the only recognizable use on the site is a commercial park. That's what's for your special use. Okay. So that's interesting. So if they had um had only requested a demolition permit, it probably would have triggered this process.

Correct.

Okay. Got it. And um is there when that process happens what's the sort of opportunity slashlimitation of creating a surface parking lot like what is we there's not a binding is that site plan binding okay so that's what would limit it because of the drawing more or less would is is the idea the way I'm interpreting this and I think something the applicant said is that the Burger King shaped green space is sort of preserving this future redevelopment of the property back into um some sort of commercial use. Is that like why wouldn't the applicant ask for disel is it presumably for that or is that just notable?

No, that's that might be a good question for the applicant. Yeah, maybe I will ask you that. Can can you restate the question? Yeah. Well, I guess I might even understand. I mean, I think you said something earlier to this effect, but the idea is that there is probably a future development plan for the property and the the goal isn't to maximize that spot for ser for service parking spots, maximize the property for service parking spots. you still have this green space in the middle that could presumably in the future become a building if if in a redevelopment scenario or or is that I'm just kind of trying to understand.

Yeah. So, uh, so the future, I mean, if in the future if they did do a redevelopment, which I I believe, uh, you were talking about earlier, it would probably be a combined both lots, you know, what would be the best layout for Chick-fil-A, the drive-thru and the parking as a combined taking all of the land together because the the Chick-fil-A site right now is tight. I mean, it's a very tight in-n-out site. So that was what we had looked at when like I was saying when we did the redevelopment of the Chick-fil-A, we had looked at acquiring both pieces of property. And so so I think I think what you're asking is no, it's not putting the green space in the Burger King building footprint is not necessarily to preserve the ability to to go back and put another business there. Now, it does it does serve that currently. So, if Chick-fil-A, you know, for some reason did not need it in the future or whatever, uh, the landlord, it would preserve his right to then come back. The utilities would still, you know, be stuffed in that area. The parking lot, the drive, everything would still serve to function. A business going back in that area. Uh, they would just have to go back in and build whatever business, you know, building, you know, whether it be Starbucks or whatever it came in, they could build their building there and and start operating.

That makes sense. Thank you. I think I understand and it's and even with the special use permit the right exists period. It's still one of the by right uses. It's really more that the footprint makes sense from the standpoint of how that site has already been built out and developed.

Correct. Yeah. I mean and I know that the term has and I don't know you know technicality you know it the special use is to create a surface parking lot in a on a lot with no use. We're not creating the lot. it's just going to remain after the fact of what we do. So, because it's obviously there and that's why I wanted to clarify, we're not adding or gaining any spaces. And and the last thing I will say is the Chick-fil-A site is under parked and so we got a variant or we had to get approval to use off-site parking to serve the Chick-fil-A needs. And so, some of the off-site parking that we got approved for with that use was from here. Okay.

It it was the request to demo that started this process.

That makes sense. I guess I dig in a little bit to the surface parking lot request because we've had some weird history with that on this body, I think. And um at least I feel like with this application there's fairly I don't think anyone I think we understand what's happening here and that that um there's some been some cases in the past that I won't name that have felt sort of disingenuous or where a condition is being described that I don't necessarily agree with but that causes the cascade of of decisions that and somehow still wind us up with a surface parking lot in a place we'd rather not have one, but um I feel like this application makes sense to me. Um I normally um I normally have kind of a bias against putting service parking lots in certain spots and I think our zoning code does too, but um um and I also usually like to air on the side or comment on the side of what what our staff are recommending. But I think in this case the questions that you all have asked in the discussion make me more inclined to um to agree to want to recommend approval. you know, maybe with this with the staff's um recommendations with the with the thing you described, Matt, about that southernmost driveway being right and so for right now only. Anyway, so this discussion has been useful and regardless of what we want things to be, you know, this is very successful business and um I was thinking of the location out on I guess is just past Academy Sports in Atlanta Highway. That's a big lot for that Chick-fil-A and it needs it. It uses it. So, um I I I don't I don't

worry that the space wouldn't be utilized well, you know. Uh I guess yeah, I'm still kind of hung on just like tearing down a perfectly good building just because, you know, the whole reduce, reuse cycle seems like we could totally reuse this building and it would be a big impact to build something new and tear something down. you know, so uh yeah, it's a little bit of problem of Chick-fil-A is making like they took over this lease and it's vacant because of them and now they're saying that oh being vacant is a problem, but you know, I don't know. So yeah, I'm having a hard time getting behind it just uh because of those things.

It's a perfectly good building. Oh, good. Oh, sorry. Um I thought you were pointing more in that direction. So, um, can I actually ask a question because it it does matter a little bit. So, Chick-fil-A has a lease on that property. Yes, sir. Okay. And the building is included in that lease. Yes.

Okay. And so, the um the the owner of the property owns the building and they have obviously okay for that to be um the building to be torn down at y'all's expense. No doubt. Yes, sir. Um, how long and I'm asking because what's going to happen to the building? How long is that lease? 20 years. 20 years. 20 years from today basically. Uh, from I think two years ago. So 18 more years. Yes, sir. So the buildings has no use unless you want to put another Chick-fil-A there, which you could probably do and still double the people come if you did

but but it's serving no purpose to the lease and it's not going to because y'all aren't going to get in the um into something else there. So okay, that's all I need there. Thank you. No problem. Um, so I understand the well perfectly good building, but it's not going to be in 18 years. Um, it's not going to be a perfectly good building in seven years. So, um, taking it down, people things change. Um, putting grass there, I actually trust um, we're not supposed to trust anybody, but if anybody's going to see what the neighbors want, want trees? Do you not want trees? Do you want a picnic table? do not want a picnic table, that company will do that. Uh because it's it makes them money to do that. Uh so you don't have to trust the reason. It just makes sense uh to keep everybody happy. But um we're not tearing down uh trees and putting up a parking lot. We're not um charging people to park there um and making money that way. they're merely they're just taking care of something that is going to be a problem. Um, and it is a little bit more little bit of green space and it sounds like when the money has re been recouped for the new renovation they did at the Chick-fil-A building, they may go back here and try to organize that space to make it make sense as one big piece of property that isn't just one odd Burger King shaped um in the middle. So, um, and that again benefits their bottom dollar. That is not to trust money. Money is going to make people make decisions, but these are good decisions. Uh, so, uh, in the parking, I'm like, I mean, besides our parking staff, uh, nobody's better at traffic flow than a Chick-fil-A

drive-thru, period. So, it's going to work itself out, but I know we have to put the points in there to make sure it does. I'll just say, and I'm a vegetarian. I've never experienced Chick-fil-A drive-thru. I'm just saying. But I feel like we're missing an opportunity if we approve this as just a green space. Like I feel like it's like the least amount of effort for what is essentially a sea of parking on the east side. And my my feeling is like, are we leaving this space better than how we found it? like is this going to be an improvement for the drivers that drive through that parking lot that is just parking lot after parking lot to parking lot. Um I mean my feeling and I you know I probably won't get vote in this but like my feeling is like if we're making a green space can we actually make it a green space like could we ask for tables and benches and trees and like something that would actually make it useful for the neighbors to come over and enjoy rather than this oddly shaped piece of turf. that that's just my that's the that's the only thing if they're going to go down that road that's the only thing that make me feel better about it is like let's make it a useful piece to add to the neighborhood that

yeah I I totally agree with that and I I wanted to ask uh you Bruce is that like um would the way to accomplish that if that was this body's recommendation would it be to um add a condition that says you know there have to be um tables and trees on the green space so it's not just a sunbaked patch of of grass. Um it's it's it's hard to design something on the fly in the form of a condition. Um but to say a condition of approval that might include um that the green space include uh for for starters for the trees you could say trees equal to the parking uh ratio of the spaces adjacent to the the site where the building is. And so you would probably end up with a minimum of hard for me to tell but potentially two trees maybe one. Um, if you felt more than that, you could specify a number to be determined in consultation with the arborist and you could say outdoor seating to be provided and that just leaves it open-ended for what kind of design of outdoor seating it it turns into. Um, I think that's that's a workable solution. If if this body is headed towards a recommendation of approval if that includes consideration of the traffic flow, I might suggest we ask transportation and public works staff again about your notion of a write in write out. And that would be a condition. It would be a refinement of the wording that staff put up there on the screen um to get the width appropriate and to have a design modification to restrict flow to right in right out. That would be changing the curve line. That would not be just paint on the asphalt. That would be changing

the curve line. Just a consideration. Yeah. Thank you. Can I can I ask uh transportation to uh just come up and and comment on the right out from the south driveway as a solution to the concerns that you

Yes. Good evening. My name is Jason Jones. I'm a transportation planner with the transportation public works department and we think that um we would be immunable to that solution. it would, you know, still accomplish our goals of reducing the turning conflicts coming in and out. Um, for that, let's picture the left driveway with those two arrows. That's the exiting driveway of the Burger King property. We would want that to be a right out only. And we would look in plend right out because we do have a lot of problems with compliance whenever we set up a, you know, a painted right in, right out. Sometimes people turn left anyway. So, we'd want to we'd look at that in the design. And then for the the ingress driveway on the right side don't know that we would it would be it' be nice to see a right in there but I don't know if that would be something we'd stick too far to. Thank you.

Are you good? Yeah. Okay. I just want to I'm still not in support of this being that it looks like I'm in the minority here. Um you have a green space in the middle of a parking lot that's serving a drive-thru so cars are coming and going. I see a lot of safety risks for small children in a green space where there's that kind of level of traffic. So if this was moving towards an approval with some sort of binding site plan for that green space, I would just ask you consider fencing some kind of barrier kids from starting out into the middle of park lot.

It's kind of interesting actually. I think this would be one of the more interesting ones tonight. Uh it so it seems like where we're at because considering Chick-fil-A owns both parcels, we're not going to open competing business in the Burger King spot. So if we vote no, it just kind of stays like it is seems or there's just a vacant building because I mean you're not going to you're not they're not going to put a McDonald's by their own Chick-fil-A. It could be like a like a free workspace or something. They don't need to make if they don't need to make money off of it. You could just put a coffee machine in there and let people work for free, you know.

It's true. I don't think after I just don't think that's going to happen. Well, no, but you could. You could.

So, so the so the no vote is to keep it exactly as it is with that which was a terrible burger there. I bet. Yeah. I'm on the inside a bunch. Um and so so it's just going to sit there as is. I feel like with um with some of the things like I like that idea fence in or having an area to kind of protect kids up that's really good idea. I think like at least putting the green space there something to it something positive as opposed to just the status quo of what it will be for another 18 years. Would it be appropriate to ask for a table to further develop the records?

It would be completely appropriate, especially if if what you're wrestling with are design features for something to give direction to the applicant as part of a table to return with some design features for the green space. I think it's totally appropriate. And some of the traffic, they could do the track some changes into that. because I'm I'm not I mean not that I get about and I'm not in favor of it but I'm also not a fan of just designing something block either. So I' see people are more amenable to that has been able to like be approved by traffic and things like that. So

can I ask the applicant just to um comment on the idea of a table? Is there some burning uh timeline issue that would if we asked you to come back in 30 days with uh having consulted with staff to address both the physical right turn only out of that southern driveway and um trees and outdoor seating and whatnot on the green space.

Yeah, I mean there's not a burning I mean that would have to get done. I mean, obviously, we came here tonight hoping that we could get approval with the conditions that we would, you know, and we could have something before we went to the uh to the mayor council, you know, before we came to the next meeting. But, I mean, no, I I obviously would rather be tabled, have a chance to work with staff, and be denied. So, I would say that would be my second preference as opposed to approved. Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. Um, so I'll make a motion um to table and um ask the applicant to work with staff to address design issues for the green space and the southern driveway in light of the comments that they've heard tonight. Second. Any other discussion before we I want to understand because I I want to when you're mentioning fence um are you fencing it off or are you just fencing so people can go in and enjoy the space however they want

and there's some barrier for the 5-year-old taking on I think the intention is driving that if you have that kind of traffic and mobility with a green space in the center. Any kind of barrier that would stop a young child from being able to run out into the traffic, someone had their back turned for a second is in my mind essential, but but still allowing them to go and use the space. You're not having to wait to get into it. Yeah. Well, that's what I thought first. not fencing at all so you couldn't get there but and if you're in that green barrier to keep people inside from darting out or whatever say okay I can understand that then

can I ask a clarifying question um I don't have a problem with it come on well I mean and and it's not my clarification is I I hear you on the fencing there was mentioning mentioned about like seating and things like that so I just want to make sure I understand what it is that you are wanting to see uh if we are tabled. So I mean I know we talked about trees. I know we talked about making the left right out only uh and I know we've talked about fencing. I just want to make sure that what I bring back you know to staff or at least as a starting point with staff that I understand what it is you guys are looking for. Sorry. I had the same question. I wanted us to talk about that a little bit more too. So you have really clear Yeah. That was my only

direction. Yeah. So, I think it's fair to um work with staff on the in andout situation, like the optimal driveway situation. Um like for me personally, I would like to see something that where staff is like, "Yes, we not want this." Not just like, "Oh, this was our second choice. It's fine." Yeah. I want to see what they want.

Yeah. And I understand that that is with a hard not just getting rid of the left arrow. That is a make it force to the right with curving. Um, and I mean for me I I see it as how is this an amenity to the neighborhood? Like how is it make it something that someone is going to want to walk over there and get a sandwich and sit down and enjoy it near the restaurant? Like make a true amenity for the neighborhood and and your customers. Okay. And and to me that means trees and seating. Yeah. Yeah. I mean maybe it's a patio, maybe not. Maybe Yeah. But definitely seating, some shade to some capacity. Yeah. And can I just sort of Yeah. Anybody please step in

now? We're designing and I'm not designing. Um but once you start saying, well, you know, because we kind of maybe were even assuming this was going to be st used and it was mentioned by somebody um here and it makes sense. This could also just turn into a bunch of dirt and bad grass. And so I think in the what we're talking about as well is not only the physical use of it, but the sightly look to it. Make sure if it's going to be green space, I forgot which one of y'all said it. Make it green space because that's what's a that's kind of what feels like if we're if you're going to get this green space, that's the silver coin that's gonna maybe make this happen. So actually make it green space. Um, not just some green among a bunch of bad dirt that ends up a hard rain pushes it over into the parking lot, which doesn't sound like something you would do, but

yeah, Chick-fil-A pretty good about being that it has to be. So, when you just drive by looking, it's like, "Oh, that's nice green space." And then you keep on riding your bike or walking or jogging or driving past. And the other last question I had, and honestly this is probably I can just ask staff, but they mentioned bike parking. So would you want the bike parking by the green space? Um I'm assuming just to to have it come to there or would you want it more oriented towards the Chick-fil-A and and like I said, that's something I can work out with staff, but that was the one of the last things I had. Maybe just present.

I just want to say there's also it sounds like this it might be sort of a temporary whatever goes there too, you know. So like it's not going to be like for forever maybe it's just going to be for a little while. So you know I don't want to I don't want to mislead as far as little while. When I say they would look to redevelopment that or redevelop that's typically like seven to 10 year time frame.

Yeah. But I like I guess I wouldn't want to see plant a bunch of big giant trees that are never going to mature, that kind of thing. No, like it would be kind of a waste of time and you know, and the idea of a fence I'm not really in support of either because there's no fences anywhere in that parking lot, you know, so fences are an eyesore to me. I kind of think that you know people are responsible for themselves. Uh maybe put some bushes or something, but yeah, I mean it's going to be like I think just the picnic tables shade and that would that would satisfy me because it is kind of just a temporary thing. They could do a hedro around the the curve. That would be better for me. I would think that would look better. I mean I mean it's all about deterring Yeah. is running. Yeah. I mean I'm talking about like a continuous hedge like you've seen a lot if you zoom.

Yeah. And because I mean they they wouldn't be able to run through that. So I mean that would keep them in that area as well and that might be a better look and not since we're to me when I think of a fenced in area my first thought would be like people are going to think it's like a dog park. Yeah. And you know do a dog park. Yeah. Exactly. And so that would be my only concern with doing that. Yeah. If we put a binding site plan on this that they have to go through this process again if they want to make it something else, right? Yeah. Yeah. Well, only as it relates to a parking lot. Yeah.

So special use is only for that particular use is it binding. It's not a PD. Um, so anything else that's allowed in commercial general zoning, they could do by right. Okay. Yeah. So they could go back and redevelop that green space into a building. Correct. Not have to ask for That's right. Yeah. But that green space once it is redeveloped to a building could never be a drive-thru again unless they got a special permission. Is once the drive-thru is gone, correct? On that cannot come back on that corridor. I think like town center now or whatever. Yeah. Okay. There's plenty of drive-throughs over there already right now. We got KFC. We got Wendy's.

We have a motion. Do you feel satisfied that you have your I think so. Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? I second it. Okay. Just want to repeat that motion back for clarity. Um kind of going with the simplest versions that I heard. So, we're tableabling and asking the applicant to work with staff to further develop green space and driveway designs. Yeah. All right. Feeling good to vote.

I've got a question. Sorry. Yeah. I just want to make sure that's real clear. So, what you're saying about now that it's town center is if this driveth through building goes away, it can't just be replaced with another one later. Yeah. Okay. About right. Okay. I just want to also kind of make sure the app understands that as well. Just that and I don't necessarily think that's the plan is to build another one. It could be the expansion of the one that's already there adjacent to it, but I think it's important. Um, so anyway, that's all I had to add to that.

Should I reread a I think we need it restated. No. Okay, good. I'm good. Call it. All right. Great. Yes. Harrisford, yes. Paul, yes. Yes. Sams, yes. Sanders, yes. And Lord, yes. Got eight. Yay.

All right. Um, we're in this next one. I'm going to call for a break, but 6130 Old Lexington Road. Hi everybody. Good evening. I'm going to present the case for 6130 Old Lexington Road um SP 2026 040664. The request is for a special use permit for commercial outdoor recreation for park and AR zoning. Um this is a current aerial of the property. Um this is the current future land use. Um it's rural designation with no proposal to change it. Um same for the current zoning. It's currently zoned AR. There's no proposal to change it other than just to request a special use. This is the current proposal. Um this was this will be a binding site plan. So all of this will have to be built as shown here. Um staff would like to note that in the application there was some proposal for a golf course and some other minor additional uses that are not shown on the site plan. Um um staff finds this compatible with the 2023 comprehensive plan. Um it encourages publicly accessible gathering spaces and development projects. um it's compatible with the future land use map and the zoning map and current ordinance. Um however, staff does um request that or recommend a tableling at this time to kind of go over some of the concerns regarding the proposed golf course, some of the other mentioned uses that aren't shown and overall the parking um parking calculations. Okay, that concludes steps on both. Thank you. All right, thanks. All right, now we'll hear from the applicant.

Good evening. I think this is the one we've been waiting on, the last one, right? Um my name is Casey Marvet with Sandy Creek Landcraft. I'm here representing the applicant, Mr. Andy Bars. Um as stated, we're seeking a special use uh for this AR property uh for commercial outdoor recreation. Um the proposal centered around the low inensity RV park uh designed to work with the rural characteristic of property rather than against it. Uh we're trying to preserve large areas of open space and existing canopy to create a a quiet conservationoriented recreational use. Um we mentioned some of the additional uses as trails, aggra tourism elements. We talked about aupic uh garden type thing. um possibly equestrian uses and we talked about a small non-hole golf course. Um not your typical uh country club environment, something a little more laid-back and uh contextual with the rural environment. Um overall um through the the process, staff agreed that the proposal was compatible with the land use map, the comprehensive plan, and the surrounding rural character of the area. Uh staff also noted that um Athens Clark County currently does not have a year-round RV park in a natural setting um which we believe is a a positive here and uh highlights unique character of this proposal. Um most importantly uh the staff concluded that the request meets the special use criteria. Um I do want to briefly address some of the remaining staff comments uh regarding the flexibility on the plan. um concept plan initially does not lock in the golf course layout. Uh the primary request for you tonight is the RV park and the overall land use framework. Uh we intentionally left that flexibility uh maybe to our dismay, but uh for future low impact accessory recreation uses so

the project onto market conditions. Um I mean to to crank, you know, we're not sure a golf course is financially viable. Um but it fits within uh the definition of commercial outdoor recreation. I believe campsites uh and golf courses are specifically mentioned in that definition. Uh commercial outdoor recreation is by nature a fairly broad land use category. The accessory uses discussed whether golf related agurism equestrian trails or other low impact recreational uses all generally fall within that broader classification. Uh we didn't want to be misleading by presenting a fully designed golf course that may not ultimately be the accessory that's pursued. Um could support a golf component. Uh we're wanting to lean heavily into the aggra tourism, keep some portions of it as a working farm and have the the new pick. Um we did uh decide in the narrative uh to go ahead and propose some specific limitations to that commercial outdoor recreation. There are certain things that we don't want to see there. Uh we don't want ATV trails. We don't want racing, high-speed recreation. We don't want unrelated commercial uses. Um the intent is to create a quiet managed uh recreational environment, not a highintensity development. Uh we want to be contextual to the surrounding agricultural property around it. Um, additionally along with the comments from staff, uh, building elevations, we did not provide building elevations at this time, uh, because the accessory uses are still to be. Um, our kind of take here is we wanting to be adaptive uh, in the process. We're not asking for any variances. Um, any building that we put on site will will meet all Athens Park County code. Uh, same would go with the parking comment that staff made. Um, obviously the parking calculations would change drastically if we have a golf course or

a UPIC. So, we've illustrated some parking throughout the site. Um, we have 114 acres to to work with. So, we're confident that we can meet all codes related to the parking required. Um, additionally, uh, any and all storm water erosion control, lighting, environmental protection, all of that will adhere to current county and state regulations. Um, so from our perspective, uh, all of these sort of remaining items are uh implementation details that we feel can be addressed during permitting. Um, and it's not necessary to uh to determine whether commercial outdoor recreation is an appropriate land use on the property. We appreciate staff's review and respectfully ask for your consideration. Here to answer any questions. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Is there anybody here to speak in support of the proposal? Okay. Is there anyone here to speak in opposition? And y'all can just come right up. You know, I'm not going to call on anybody. So feel free to We have a 10-minute speaker. Oh, we do have a 10-minute speaker. Yes. I'm sorry. The 10-minute speaker will preede everybody. Where is my friend in the blue and the black? Yes, that's me. Great.

Good evening. My name is Rachel Bartlett Cruz and I live at 5555 Old Lexington Road. I am here tonight representing a coalition of neighbors and over 400 applicants who signed a petition asking you to look past the eco-friendly branding of the Spring Lake proposal and focus on the data. In our AR district, the law envisions one home per 10 acres, which would be roughly 12 families on this 113.85 acre site. The applicant is requesting 200 RV units. Mathematically, this is a 1566% increase in density. The staff report notes that per the applicant, the proposal also avoids the intensity and permanence of a subdivision development, but that is a distinction without a difference. 200 units of temporary blackwater, 200 units of temporary traffic, and 200 units of temporary noise create permanent degradation to the green belt. If a developer came in here asking for a 1500% density increase for a subdivision, they'd be laughed out of the room. Why is this being considered just because the homes have wheels? Crucially, the staff report justifies the density by stating that the RV use will be for temporary duration with no permanent living accommodation proposed at this time. However, I've come through the proposal and I have found zero provisions, zero stay limits, and zero enforcement mechanisms to ensure that the stays remain temporary. without a binding condition that limits stays to, for example, 14 days. This commission is effectively approving a 200 unit highdensity residential park without enforcement. Temporary is just a marketing term that's being used to bypass the density requirements of AR zoning. If you approve this without state limitations, you're setting a precedent that allows permanent highdensity housing anywhere in the green belt, provided that it's on a chassis.

Our neighborhood is a protected green belt. In fact, an adjacent property is currently enrolled in a 10-year conservation use value assessment covenant. These neighbors have legally committed to keeping their land rural in exchange for the county's protection. By even considering a 200 unit commercial resort on the border of a conservation tract, the county is breaking its promise to those residents. If you look at the site plan layout, which I know you'll have in front of you and is also on the screen, but I have one that's a bit marked up to highlight a few things here. About 96 of the 200 proposed RV slots, which is nearly half the project, are placed directly on the border of neighboring lands. Furthermore, approximately 40 of those sites are clustered in immediate proximity to a conservation lands pond. This isn't buffered or isolated recreation. It's a highdensity wall of commercial activity being pushed right against the fence lines of families who have pledged to protect their land's rural integrity. The staff report accepts the applicant's claim with minimal grading, stating, as stated by the applicant, the request is designed to minimize environmental disturbance through the preservation of existing canopy, limited grading and land disturbance, protection of natural drainage features and integration of development with existing topography. This approach is intended to reduce impacts to soil stability, water quality, and natural habitat systems. We challenge that claim with the applicant's own data. The proposal suggests the ability to eliminate up to 36.4 acres of tree canopy. To put that into perspective, 36 acres is roughly the size of 27 football fields. Removing that much forest doesn't just change the view, it destroys the sponge of the wershed.

According to the USDA Forest Service 2022 report from Forest to Faucets, forests clean drinking water in a variety of ways. First, tree leaves and branches slow rain water down before it reaches the forest floor, preventing erosion, especially during heavy downpours. Rainwater is then naturally filtered as it moves through the soil. Tree roots keep sediment from reaching streams and absorb nutrients that would otherwise pollute waterways. I also pulled the USDA's forest to faucets 2.0 0 geospatial modeling data specifically for Big Creek, which is the wershed that this property belongs to. The model identifies wersheds critical surface drinking water and it assesses potential threats. For the Big Creek WHED, the highest identified threat to the water yield and quality was land use change. By converting 113 acres of rural forest into an industrial scale RV park, this applicant is triggering the exact threat that the USDA warns will degrade our water supply. Staff admits in section 4C that ACC sanitary sewer is not available. This means that 200 units of black water must be handled on site, which I've noted here. The site plan shows two dump sites for the RVs. RV Blackwater is a concentrated biohazard containing pathogens like E.coli and Salmonella along with chemicals like formaldahhide. These chemicals are designed to kill bacteria. Septic systems depend on a living ecosystem of bacteria to break down waste. These chemicals are like kryptonite to our septic systems and natural soil microbes that we rely on in rural Athens. One equipment failure or one overflowing tank during a heavy rain sends a biohazard plume directly into the Big Creek WHED. You cannot call a project conservation forward while installing two industrial

scale biohazard disposal sites next to a natural water body. In addition to the RV dump sites, the proposal does also include several restrooms and septic drainage areas, which are kind of hidden on the map, but these little black dots are the restrooms. And these green highlighted sections are the septic drainage fields. I would like to note there's an additional greening section here and here that I believe are septic drainage as well, even though they're noted as that on the the map. Um the layout and design makes it appear that those would be those as well. Then regarding the traffic of the area, the staff report mentions that there are no concerns focusing on volume. We are here to talk about geometry. A 40ft class A motor home has a turning radius that requires it to swing into oncombing lanes of traffic and a breaking distance three times that of a normal car. Old Lexington Road was built for tractors and family vehicles, not for a constant length of 200 industrialized vehicles. Forcing this kind of volume into a residential corridor ignores the vision zero safety goals and project 53 of the county's comprehensive plan. One accident involving a school bus and an oversized RV is a price that's too high for the economic development that doesn't belong here. Unfortunately, we must also look at the applicant's track record. The principal developer operating under entities like Bars Natural Resources LLC has a clear pattern for targeting protected land. About two years ago, he pitched a 50 foot, sorry, 50 lot housing subdivision on nearly identical agricultural land that is located just 3.2 miles up Highway 78 about four to five minutes from the property in question. At that time, he said, "I'm not trying to impose a vision." He viewed the land as an opportunity to serve the county and stated,"I only want to do something that would be a true asset to the community." Here he's telling you a subdivision is a threat that only his RV

park can prevent. This is a developer who buys protected land and tells whatever story houses one year and RVs the next that he thinks will get him the highest density possible. He isn't a conservationist. He's a developer looking for a blessing to ignore the rules of our AR zoning. The 2023 comprehensive plan is clear. Preserve the green belt by decreasing development pressure. A566% density increase, the loss of 36 acres of canopy, two biohazard dump sites, and no enforcement of temporary stays is the absolute definition of development pressure. You allow this, you're telling every developer in Georgia that the Athens Green Belt is open for highdensity commercial exploitation. We respectfully urge the planning commission to protect our water, our safety, and the county's own comprehensive plan by recommending denial of this request.

Thank you. Thank you. Great job. Who is next to speak in opposition?

My name is Deborah Shre. Sreve. I live at 5545 Lexington Road. I've received a letter that says that the back well it does say the back of course that my property is 400 ft from the proposed development. Um I can hear the I can hear every event at the fairgrounds and it's much further than 400 ft. Um I don't know if how many of you live in the woods but sound travels through the woods really well. Um, so I um I definitely oppose it. My husband and I bought that house in 2019. It was the fulfillment of a dream we had had for years, and that was to not live in a subdivision, but to live where you could not see the house from the road. Um, when we first drove in there to look at it, I said, "Oh my gosh, you can't see the house from the road." And um we lived there for several years. Um basically about three years very happily. We were uh the the it was 2019. So 2020 the uh the pandemic came in and I I I enjoyed all of it because I was retired and I worked outside in that yard in that garden every day. It was wonderful. We've planted a lot of trees. Um I dug a huge garden that um I struggle to keep up with sometimes now. Um but my husband after three years um was diagnosed with cancer and he passed away in 2022. Um I thought that I would hate living there after he died. I thought it would everything would remind me of him, but it was strangely not ever the case.

It was the opposite. I feel very confident there. I feel very um I feel his presence. I feel um just great, you know. It's it's it's a wonderful place to live. It's my paradise. It's my cabin in the woods. I'm leaving it to my daughter. She lives there with me since my husband died. Um what she does with it is is her own thing, but I would like for the property value to not drop, and I am being told that it will drastically with this RV park. I don't know what the future holds. It could become a a a a slum trailer park for all I know. Um and our property values could plummet 400 ft of my back property. Um okay. I said I'm going. Sorry. I'm very nervous. Um, I agree with all the things that that she said. Um, I'm not going to repeat them. That's not really um necessary. She's much more eloquent speaker than I am. Um, it's the personal thing for me. Um, I have one of the smaller properties that's just under three um acres, but

Thank you. Thank you, M.

Okay. Thank you. Please vote against it. Good evening, Gail Chimo, 245 Milstone Circle. I live 1.7 miles from this proposed project. And for me, I've always lived in um cities. I was born in Miami. I lived in Houston. I've lived in Tampa Bay area. And when we moved to our house, I fell in love with it. We are It's quiet there. The night sky is amazing. I love that I have birds and pollinator garden. I just love it. But my main concern here is protecting God's natural world and those that are in it. I drive on old Lexington to get to Lexington and that road is beautiful. The tree canopy, the forest there is awesome. And for Athens, I mean we are the tree city of the world. We are in the tree city of the world community. We are named a Tree City USA by the Arbor Day Foundation. So this hurts me to hear that tree canopy will be, you know, plowed down, diminished at a time when we are focusing on our housing. And on the east side, we have had housing developments pop up where they have clearcut the land. So, we're losing that tree canopy. So, that is part of my issue here. The

other issue is the water. An RV park with 200 sites can require 10,000 to 20,000 gallons of water per day. That's the size of a big above ground pool every day. And if you add a golf course, that's even more. And if where I read somewhere it could be a golf driving range which would mean probably putting up giant lights and as I said I love my night sky. Um, so with this with resolving the housing crisis and losing those uh tree canopies, isn't it time to look at protecting our natural resources where we can by counterbalancing the immediate needs for housing yet keeping our tree canopy, green spaces, and biodiversity, keeping it thriving by not approving projects s that harm our environment and only benefit a few because they will come and go. And let's talk about the biodiversity there. All that land. Do you remember in the summer you used to see fireflies blinking, blinking, blinking? Well, now we don't.

Thank you.

Okay. Thank you for your time. Uh hello, my name is Lucius Malcolm. I am at 5525 Old Victington Road right here. And I am going to read for you for David Blackman who lives right here. So you see we both back up to it. David Blackman, my neighbor, uh is a double ampute who cannot be here. And so he asked me to read this for him. I'll do so. My name is David Blackman and I own a residential property directly adjoining the parcel on Old Lexington Road that is the subject of this special use permit. I am unable to attend da da da as I am a double amput and I told you that I strongly and unequivocally oppose the application. My family has lived on this property for decades. We relied on the agriculture residential zoning designation to preserve the low density rural and residential character of this area. What is now proposed a large-scale commercial recreation development anchored by an approximately 200 site RV park is not a minor deviation from that framework. It is a fundamental and incompatible transformation of land use. This proposal would impose an intense commercial operation directly against longestablished residential property. It introduces a use defined by continuous turnover, transient occupancy, concentrated activity into a setting that has historically been stable, quiet, and residential. That is not a compatible transition. It is a direct intrusion. The scale alone is unacceptable. A development designed to accommodate hundreds of temporary occupants will

generate sustained traffic, noise, lighting disruption well beyond what this area has reasonably absorbed. The cumulative impact will permanently alter the character of the surrounding community and erode the quiet enjoyment of adjacent properties. The proposed RV component is especially problematic. High density, short-term lodging. This nature brings constant turnover of occupants and activity at all hours. For those of us who live immediately next door, as you see, this creates an ongoing and unavoidable loss of privacy, predictability, and security. These are inherent consequences of the use itself, not hypothetical concerns. Equally troubling is the president this approval would set. Granting a special unit permit of this magnitude in an AR district signals that zoning protections relied upon by residents can be overridden by large commercial ventures that undermines the integrity of the county's land use framework and reasonable expectations of property owners. I'm going to cut that a little bit short. I'm agreeing with what my friend and my neighbor has said and we have been there for well over 30 years and it's right in our backyard. So you guys just consider would you like that in your backyard.

Thank you. Anybody else?

Hello, my name is Terry Johnson. I stay at 3:15 Big old Circle, which is on the back side of that property. Um, I also know that listening to the fairground music every other Saturday is one thing. And now you bring in 200 different units in one place. And if I'm not mistaken, didn't Athens have a thing that said trailers are no longer accepted here? And now you going to bring them in on wheels. So why would why would we do something like this right here to impact the environment more than it is now?

Um the traffic is going to be terrible right now. U on Lexington Road and Morton Road. I know we have had several wrecks there and people do not slow down right there. So just up the hill there's going to be another place. The same thing's going to happen. There are no lights up there. We have one and we still have wrecks. So once again, does anybody want to look at this and do a a real study on it because this is going to impact and impact every last one of us in so many ways. And I'm definitely against it. I don't want to hit no golf clubs in the morning. I work late at night. I don't hear. And then you got to listen to whoever's in the park. They sitting there playing their music all night long. Then we got to call the police. And then that that's another problem. Now the police got to go out there and do some work now. So I'm against it. Thank you very much.

Thank you. I'm Jeff Lewis, 5175 Old Lexington Road. I think Bruce is turning that thing quicker every time as it get as it gets later.

So, I I I really wasn't preparing to speak. I I was just coming to gather information. I really thought that's what this was. Um I want to point out one I don't know which one's the lay. This is where the fairground is for those of you that aren't familiar. I live almost uh down where old Lexington in Morton Cross. It's I looked it up on my phone. I'm almost two miles away from the fairground and I enjoy the music that comes out of there on Saturday. Uh a lot of times it goes kind of late, but I can hear word for word when guys are on the microphone. I can hear what they're saying at my property. Um, when I see this, my first thought was, uh, UG home football games, there's 140 fans that are going to come after that game and stay there. Um, the the rental for folks coming in from out of town, uh, is there's just not enough space. I mean, that was my first thought is they can they can make a year's worth of money on what they could charge on those seven weekends um because the demand is so high. And I can't imagine the sound uh that would come out of there. I I'm an RVER. I I love camping. I've never uh hooked up my RV anywhere other than a a state park, which is uh overseen by a staff 24 hours a day. So any kind of noise ordinance, there's somebody there that's managing it. Uh I don't see that this place would be required to have that. So I don't know who would monitor uh the behavior. When I first moved my property, I moved a used mobile home out there and I had to spend several thousand dollar putting at the time. I thought the mobile home was going to sit on it. Uh it had to have a concrete skirt. I couldn't put a

metal skirting. I had to put cinder block. I thought the house was going to sit on it. It was simply decoration. Um the county required me to put up decoration on a mobile home. And as the last gentleman mentioned, I had thought about it. Now we're going to roll in uhund and some mobile homes a day potentially. Um, I just my last thing I say is if you haven't been out there, uh, take a couple minutes to drive out. This project just does not fit. The area doesn't fit what any residents out there signed up for, uh, when we purchased those blocks. Thank you. Thank you.

Hello everyone. DG Sandu of 5505 Old Lexington Road. I am a veterinarian by profession and as a veterinarian I love all animals. I really truly do. You can ask everybody. And one of the things that concerns me is the pressure on the biodiversity and the wildlife in this area. Putting over 200 trailer homes or RV parks or whatever it is. But at the end of the day, you're going to take habitat away from the animals. One of the animals of concern is the wild turkey, which according to many websites, including organizations that watch and monitor the populations of the turkeys uh that are native to this area has windowled and they have reported that consistently. This will also contribute to that. The other thing is that there is a lot of wildlife in there that would also be affected by the I guess noises uh the traffic uh even the deforestation that comes with it. One of the things that Mr. Bar prides himself on uh and is on his website is sustainability. I don't think that he's familiar with the term. Does anybody know the three pillars of sustainability? Can you tell me what they are? planet, people, and profit. I think he's just focusing on that third one. Okay. Why? Let's focus on planet. Deforestation doesn't help. Okay? We know that the people, the neighbors are going to be affected. And yes, while he gets a profit, we don't really benefit from that. If you don't have those three pillars in balance, lighting and green washing, which is what he's doing. The other thing is a

golf course. Did you know that there is a 2.23% higher incidence of Parkinson's for those that live within a one to three mile radius of a golf course. I did not sign up to live on a golf course. I came from Cuba. My husband immigrated from Romania. He served in the military and we're both members of society. We pay our taxes and we did not choose to live on the golf course. We also didn't choose to live near neighbors that will pollute. We chose a quiet area. I love agriculture. I garden. I live of the land. The things that I do, I share with my neighbors. I share with my friends. I really want you to take a look, a closer look at the green lighting and the greenwashing that is behind this development. I want you to take a look. Thank you very much for your time. I oppose this.

Wait, turn this.

Uh, my name is AI. That's my beautiful wife you just heard from. I also live at 550 Old Lexington Road with her. Um we have two beautiful children. Um Judge is seven and Mercy is five. And uh we have the pleasure of raising them in this agricultural rural area that we have intentionally sought out, found and acquired. The family that built the home personally handed it down to us. They in a sense wanted to make sure that the right family takes over. They built it in 1970. I've got to know my neighbors really well. Deborah rescued my daughter on her third birthday. We had everybody looking for her. She she went from our house over here all the way across past Lucius's house and Jennifer's house and past Blackman's house and over to Deborah and she was admiring the art in the front yard. We know our neighbors. We all have a tight-knit community. We all made conscientious decision to live in this agricultural rural area with intent. We look out for each other and we're looking out for each other now. And I want you to know that you as our representatives are here to look out for us. When Andrew Bernard, when Andrew Bar purchased this property, he purchased agricultural rule property, not a commercial property. The straw man argument that Athens is lacking this act this ruled sporting event is just false. It's not true. We're not lacking it. I can make the same argument that we're lacking a

space for storage of nuclear waste facility in because we don't have any. But I can say anything I want. The truth is it's a lovely property. I hope it gets used for what it's actually zoned for. And I hope he uses it for that. He's a welcome neighbor. We love what we have. We just want to keep it what it is. If I get 10 new neighbors out of it, that's fine. We'll have 10 new members of our society and we'll appreciate them and we'll look after them. But this 200 RVs with 200 speakers and 200 possibly additional drivers that are going to flow in with these RVs every Friday and flow out every Sunday. And they have nowhere to go out except right through here. Some crazy intersection that doesn't even exist yet. And then out through here. And this is the most wild curve. And it bangs like on a race like on a racetrack. go so far. You can't make a left turn out of here. You'll die trying, especially with an RV. And then you have all the deliveries, you have everything else, and then just everybody straying into our properties over time. It's going to happen. You're so close now. Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

How are you all doing? My name is Andrew Cruz. I live at 5555 old Lexon Road. U my wife is the first one to speak up here. Um now granted I'm not as eloquent as my wife is. However, the Lord blessed me to be the sledgehammer. All right. So one thing that my wife mentioned was black water. All right. 200 units of black water. Okay, Mr. Sams. Now that bottle in front of you, sir, you see how clear your water is? Imagine there's like a little tint of yellow. All right. Cuz someone peed in your water bottle. That's what we're talking about with Blackwater here. You're talking about 200 units of Blackwater that possibly could be poisoning my children. Now, I have three kids, 6, four, and two years old. Granted, obviously, they enjoy a good agricultural property right now. They enjoy nature the way the Lord made it. And we're trying to preserve that for them, for that future generation. I don't want to see them poisoned by 200 units of people coming in getting drunk on football games and basically screwing up our way of life. All right. Also, one thing my wife mentioned was an RV the size of an RV or how it drives. All right, Miss Fel, you mentioned with the Chick-fil-A thing previously that you were concerned about 5-year-olds running around in a parking lot. Okay. being at risk of being hit by a car that's going 5 10 miles an hour, right? Oh, Lexon Road, that speed limit is 50 miles an hour. Do you know the size of an RV is about the size of a school bus? All right. In Afghanistan, I've seen children ran over by vehicles the size of school buses. That is a vision that I live with every day. I don't want to see the Sandus children have to go through that. I don't want to see them have to go through that. All right. Now, I don't know why Mr. Bars is trying to make a quick buck, poison our kids, or run them over with

RVs, but I ask y'all, please think about the neighborhood, think about the land, and how we can preserve it for future generations. Thank you. body else to speak.

I am Jennifer Malcolm and I live at 5525 Old Lexington Road and I've been there 50 years. Um, my home is going to be directly impacted because Andy's property is directly behind us with an access road to the right of my home. It will destroy our organic garden. And Andy keeps saying that we're just a tenth of a mile from the first RV park where the first RV will be parking. Well, our other neighbors, the Sandos, are exactly one/tenth of a mile from my home. We can hear them in their yard. We can hear the dog barking. We can hear them talking. And then with this coming in plus the um fairgrounds, it's going to be a disaster. We're introducing crime. We moved our son out of an area where there were robberies and shootings and we put a guest house in the back of our property. His guest house, main bedroom is exactly 10 yards from Andy's road that he's proposing to come through our property. So, we as a whole neighborhood beg y'all to give us mercy here. Thank you. Anybody else?

Rudy Chima 25 milstone circle and wow. Wow. I mean, come on, folks. We can't even get water into uh trailer park down the road on 29 for years. And now we're gonna we're going to accommodate this. I couldn't purchase on on that road because there was nothing available when I moved there nine years ago or I would be on that road, but I'm close enough. I'm on off of Morton in uh Shaw Creek Farms. I can't believe that what I hear every Saturday night comes from over two and a half miles away and is the uh uh is the fairgrounds. So, this is only 1.7 miles from my house. It's gorgeous. We've already been We've already screwed up and going to put a going to put a fire station on Old Lexington Road. I don't know how they're going to work that out because there's only two lanes. So, here we are degregating again what we have out in East Athens. We live out there because we like the way it is. We don't want RVs. I go camping. I'm not an RV camper. I'm a tent camper. And when I go into these parks, I get as far away from the RVs as I possibly can because you got generators, you've got noise, you've got music, you've got And I love music. Make no mistake about that. But I want peace. I want quiet. Nine years ago when we moved there, the sky was as dark as it could be and I thought that I was at my son's house in Montana reaching up and grabbing the stars. Y'all have done

a good job of watching all that go away. It's less light, more pollution, and there's just no reason for this. Now, Mr. bar wants to develop that land. And then around the corner, he's got a big old sign for sale for uh um gaming as far as hunting land. He calls it hunting land, and that's what he's trying to sell. So, I don't know what he's trying to do, but they didn't like what he wanted to do in Oglethorp County, and I don't think we like what he wants to do in this county. I'd say that he stays in his own county, Okone, and build it there. go.

Maybe he can build it in his backyard if he's got that much land or that much money. But leave us alone. And remember, y'all, you all work for us. You live with us. We live with you. You don't want You don't want You want a a drive-thru. You don't want a green space. And now you want to take away more green space. Come on, folks. Let's stop this nonsense. Save the people. Anybody else to speak in opposition? Hey, hearing. Hi. Hi.

Um, my name is Quinn Shrie. I live at 5545 Old Lexington Road um with my mom there. I think it's it's 400 feet from where this is going to be. Like she was saying, um I believe that describing this project as low impact does not align with reality. Um the environmental needs for 200 RVs and a golf course are not low impact. The traffic would not be low impact. Um I know a couple people have mentioned the curve on Old Lexington Road. Um there's like steep curve goes around a bend you can't see. About once every six months we have someone land in our driveway because they wipe out on that curve. Um, and that's that's, you know, a regular sized car. That's not RVs trying to get around that. So, um, we have a nice forested community. We have a lot of wildlife. Um, and I, this would drastically change our community. I don't believe it affects the character of our neighborhood. Um, and I believe the applicant is more concerned with profit than any benefit to our community. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. Um, the applicant has two minutes to respond.

Just a few clarifications. Um, thank everybody for all the the feedback and input. Um, we certainly are not trying to ram this down anybody's throat. So, we're we're trying to uh to figure out a working solution that that meets the needs. Um staff has determined it is a compatible use and within the AR zoning in Athens, Clark County, commercial outdoor recreation is a compatible use. Um, I do want to point out, um, I had several conversations with Tim Griffith with ACC traffic, talk through the the traffic numbers. Uh, this did not meet the threshold for traffic impact analysis. Uh, and he had no concern as to uh, our proposal where RVs would enter and exit. The Lexington Highway portion, that is not intended as an RV entrance. That was just simply for the farm stand. Um the portion that goes down to Old Lexington to plan South there was intended to be um emergency vehicles, emergency service only. Uh it has very limited front edge. It's not intended to be a a full service drive. Um I do want to uh offer up we we've heard a lot about events uh tonight. Uh we don't want events. We don't want noise. We want a quiet, peaceful uh place. So,

going to police it uh willing to offer up if there are any conditions that want to be placed on this. Uh we're open to any of those negotiations. Thank you for your time. All right. Who wants to start? Uh, I guess I mean the idea of an RV park is, you know, one I'm not opposed to. We don't have one here in Athens. Um, I do have some concerns about this just, you know, it's weird property shape and, uh, I guess I have a question for Bruce. Are there any like setback requirements for this type of this type of development?

Um, because it does seem pretty close to some of those property lines. So there are setback requirements in AR for development of residential uses. Um that's certainly something you know buffering is another thing that can be taken up as part of a special use consideration. Um so that would be open for discussion on this.

What would the what would the buffer requirement be if these were buildings? So the the reason why I'm flipping through this and I don't know it off the top of my head is a the AR zone is different. Okay. Um it it does get treated differently. We t typically have less density

concerned with with our buffering. So the wording here is that um whenever any non-residential use other than agricultural abuts or district other than AR those buffer so that's the buffering requirements wouldn't apply in that case the special use and that's that's if somebody was coming in by right so special use is an opportunity to take into account the unique circumstances with the property with the use and any other sort of circumstantial things that come along with it and establish those buffers as part of the review and the approval if it moves forward for approval.

So is there no require if it was a residential structure would there be a required setback from the property lines? So we have let me answer the question on setbacks. The buffering or setback I guess setback or buffer requirements for residential property. So the three buffering types we have when we have incompatible uses next door to one another is 10 feet, 20 feet and 50 feet.

Uhhuh. 10 feet planted with a fence. That's usually for a more dense application of things. 20 feet planted at a minimum is usually what you see if you don't see those densities. 50 foot natural is the is our baseline for not taking any action just using whatever vegetation is there. 50 feet would be that offset. Um in the AR zone there is um structure separation again this is thinking residentially primarily

30 feet um we have front yard setbacks of 30 feet we have sideyards adjacent to a street of 20 and we have rear yard setbacks of 30 feet um we also have other things about the AR zone 10% lot coverage is your maximum so density is really really low. Um, these are typically residential standards. So, where we have something that jumps out of the residential use, that's when we tend to consider these as special use reviews and we can have variable setbacks and buffers.

Okay. Well, that's good. Thanks. Because, you know, one of my main concerns with this plan is that it does seem awfully close to the property line. So, you know, at the least I would like to see those kind of like residential buffers, I think, in order for me to be in support of this. I also kind of think, you know, and that's mostly just because it's such a weird shaped property. If this was just a square and you were flopping it down in the middle, I don't think it would be a problem. But there are a lot of adjoining properties that would be impacted. And I also kind of think that I mean 200 seems like a lot. I would probably have to have that be like under 100 to be in support of it, you know, just because that does seem like a really intense use. Um, yeah. So, I think I have a lot of concerns with uh how this is as planned and I'll let somebody else talk on sure I'll think of something else maybe.

Um for me this is a huge no. I think this is um exactly what a green belt is for. I'm worried about groundwater. I'm worried about um septic slash uh complete lack of sewer. Yeah. I I mean I think I pretty much agree with everything that all of our public um input gave us. I this is this is we're trying I think there's been criticism over the years of piercing our green belt and this 113 acres in our green belt. Um and right now it is zoned by right to build one house per 10 acres. And I think actually when you think about the sort of stated purpose of the green belt, it is for super low res um density residential and I think that is what makes sense to me. I agree with what Sarah just said and I would just add to that that for all the environmental concerns, for all of the reasons that the surrounding neighbors are opposed to this, we all as Athenians benefit from the green belt. That's a community benefit to all of us. If we give this up, there's no real community benefit aside from revenue that we'll get from taxes. maybe from the sales of I I don't even I don't see the community benefit for what we would give up giving up this size of a bar this use mostly for people from outside of Athens to come for temporary stay and then leave.

Yes, it's the temporary nature of it. You're not creating a community really. Um, and that that is part of what I, you know, what I would like to see with a large development, especially one of this size, is create a new community that is part of that. I mean, just even before all the environmental issues, which there are tons, you know, at least something to think about.

200 short-term rentals. Um, and I've been to I don't know what it's called. Uh, off but anyway, um, one of the RV parks for football. I mean, it is all that. It is nothing but that. And there's they're not trying to hide it. It's in the middle of an industrial park.

Raise hell all you want. No one cares. Um, that's why it's there. And it's a great community. I mean, they're having a good time and they're safe and their kids and and there's nothing wrong with it. Um, but it wasn't quiet when I went there. It was a football game and it was it was great. There's nothing I see that would restrict that or should there be. Um, but as I think Jennifer mentioned a little bit, it is the the green belt in a sense. And there might be a place in some areas that aren't in an industrial place that this might make more sense. But when you put it next to property with houses on it or you put it even next to a certain farm and or a neighborhood next to a farm, that changes things because these people were there first and and that that makes a little bit of difference. If this was here first and people moved nearby and they wanted to expand the RV park. Yeah. It's kind of like I say when people get mad at paternity noise on Millage Avenue when they live a block off of it. It was there. Um this wasn't there when these people bought here. So that does make a little difference. Um, so yeah,

I'm I'm just going to say as someone who grew up with a family with an RV and like our summers were spent at campgrounds, like I get like that the the fairgrounds is noisy, but like that's not a campground. Like you don't go to a campground and like have a concert. So like I don't um and like what you're saying like the um the game day sort of RV park, like that's one certain use. Um, and sure, you don't know who um could come, you know, whatever and stay, but this seems like a different vibe. Question for staff as far as a special use, two questions. Um, would we be able to put restrictions like there has to be 24-hour staff or um like that type of thing? Well, I recognize too that's like another for staff to like figure out how to enforce that. But like is that the type of thing that we could add to something like this?

We we've had certain uses where a condition of approval has required a 24-hour contact, you know, that information to be on file and available at all times. Okay. Um and then is this is this like a binding plan? Yes.

So this I mean y'all this was my issue like regardless of whatever is going on there. I when I read the narrative and looked at the plan, there were like just pieces that were just missing. So to me, that was the issue of like what are we even approving? So I guess my question is if there's anybody with questions or hesitations and would like to see changes and staff was recommending a table anyway, would it make sense to like offer up some ideas that you would want to see changed if that's something that you would support? There is no circumstance for me under which this would be acceptable. So, if anyone else wants to talk about that, I'm

I'm the design and the concept is is fine. The location is inappropriate. Yeah, I think that's kind of how I feel, too. Like, I could be in support of something like very small there because I kind of agree with Kristen, like, you know, I know RV folks and stuff. It doesn't necessarily mean there's bad people or it's going to be a huge party, but this just seems Yeah, like Monique said, seems out of place and not the right fit for this lot. kind of like I said before, it's just too weird a shape. If it was just like a square and you put it in the middle, good to go. But this place, I don't think it's going to work. Yeah, I was going to say what Monique said. I agree with that. It's just not I mean, it's something that I think Athens, Clark County couldn't benefit from, but I don't think this is the right location.

I I would add or go along with what it's been said. If it were less than 200 further away, more toward Lexington Road, pushed away from the neighbors houses, uh, it would take less to do that. You would have to go down a whole lot the terrain. I mean, I I can read a topo map pretty easily. You you you can't do it on this property. Uh, certainly not with 200. Uh, it would have to cut it down. But infringing so much on uh neighbors that are already there. Um that's an issue that I don't know that they could give. But that's what it would take less and further over away.

I'll make a motion to deny. Second. Okay. Any other comments? All right. We'll do both. All right. We've got a motion to deny on the table. Fleece, yes. Harrisburg, yes. Paul, yes. Laughlin, yes. Pass, yes. Sams, yes. Sanders, yes. And Lord, yes. All right, that is eight. Yes. break. nine.

I was say like looking at it all.

Yeah, that's how you should get people to stop talking. You should start beating the gavl when the light turns on. Yeah. Nobody wants to talk about that. I'm walking around with a piece of sand. They're all staying to talk about text amendments.

Yeah. Okay. All right. Minimum dwelling unit size. Let's do it. Do the unit size first, right? Don't ask. Just

Okay. So, last two items on the agenda. I would like to take them up separately, but I'm I'm gonna do a little bit of setup and I'm going to go through it really quickly, I hope. Um so this is the first two of a series of effects amendments that will be coming to the planning commission as a whole out of the planning commission subcommittee. The subcommittee has been working really hard uh since being formed and to the to the point that within I don't know less than two months time we're sitting here with two text amendments out of this group. Um that that says a lot. I want to name some names. So, the planning commission representatives that are on the subcommittee are Matt Hall, Christa Morales, Alex Sams, and the chair of the subcommittee is Sarah Barisford. We still we have membership on the subcommittee for discussion purposes um from the GI committee initiated this. Uh that also includes Matt, but uh Reverend Daryl Bledsaw, Daniel Gilmer, Jeff Bishop, Charles Smith, Buck Bacon. Um they are the GIK committee members that brought these items forward. Uh got them in front of the commission with a resolution being formed to do this work. So this is the first of a series of these. We wanted to have comment uh from folks about these text amendments. um we'll have more opportunities for comment. So, I'm saying that um for the record, but also for anybody who's still viewing. Um tonight was for discussion. Tonight was not for advancing these to the commission for consideration. Um but a chance to kind of present these ideas in a text amendment format. If there's any change to be made, if there's any input that uh needs to be taken into account by the committee, we will do that and bring it back before the planning commission for the June meeting. Why don't we go ahead and hit the next?

I guess I could use you could use if you want just yell at you want to use your free will. Yes.

All right. So, the minimum dwelling unit size. Um, this was one that is a pretty straightforward text amendment. The full amount of the text amendment is on the screen. So, presently in our code, we have a minimum floor requirement. It's been here as long as I've worked here. My understanding is it was a part of the zoning code um in the late 80s. Um, so it predates unification, but having a 1,000 square foot minimum for single family homes. And then we also have less than that 600 square ft of minimum area per unit in the RS5 single family and RM districts. And then a multif family dwelling would be 450 square ft at a minimum. Um the discussion amongst the committee was how do we tackle this and remove the numbers. What we learned in our research was our building code officials use this when they are going out on a code enforcement check to make sure that folks have the minimum habitable floor area if there's a code enforcement issue. So it stood to reason why don't we use this as our basis. So that is the recommendation that the minimum habitable floor area instead of a number would be a requirement for all residential dwellings regardless of type. um they would meet the requirements of this adopted addition of the International Property Maintenance Code. And um we did keep in a sentence that's currently in there with one qualifier that the minimum habitable floor area that's required won't include porches, patios, garages, or carports. So if you meet the minimums in here, you can also have porches, patios, garages, and carports. it just won't count toward the minimums because the way this code reads and the way it's set up. It's really talking about safety

distances off of features inside a home. It's talking about means of egress and the distance between doorways. It's talking about how much landing you have to have at the foot of some stairs. It really focuses on safety. Um, the other reason why I think we have landed on this as a recommendation, there is some case law that is as recent as December I think of of last year where in the state of Georgia it was found in a community um that what the date I think theirs was 1,200. Y'all check me. Is that what I said? 1,200 square feet. Is that right? 1100

1100. All right. uh, 1100 square feet was their minimum. Um, it was challenged. The challenge succeeded and it was found unconstitutional to have a minimum square footage that was arbitrary. It didn't have basis. So coming back to this gives us a basis that leans on health, safety, and welfare, which is the baseline test for making sure that what you're what you're doing in your zoning code is appropriate. So I that's the extent of the staff presentation on this. If if committee members if you have anything to add. Can I just add one thing to that? I think it's like you said the um idea is that the minimum regulatory requirement ought to be governed by health, safety and welfare considerations. The market of course um will not often produce very small dwelling units because there's not a lot of people that want them. But there are some people who don't necessarily have a lot of choice and who would be delighted to have a 250 foot studio apartment if the market would produce it and that's what they could afford and it's um it's a roof over their head. It's shelter and and so the idea is you know um that that arbitrarily large uh minimum square footage requirements are basically a method of economic exclusion. Um, adopting this change is not going to lead to a bunch of tiny homes getting built because if somebody has a buildable parcel, you know, they're going to a builder is generally going to want to build a larger house that will generate more um margin for them, you know, but this just gets one hurdle out of the way. And so that if somebody wanted to build apartments that didn't have 450 square feet in the studio units that were 350 or two whatever, you know,

those would be lower priced and they would meet some people's needs. And so um there's no health, safety or welfare reason to object to that. Um and so that was the the sentiment is just you know um let's remove that arbitrary hurdle and let um the market provide more housing choices for more different people at more different income levels. Okay. It's interesting that the limit was 450. Yeah. Because that seems kind of I mean I lived in a 300 foot studio in California for years in you know so it's crazy. I didn't even realize you couldn't even have a 300 foot apartment here. Interesting.

Let's see if this is where you live, Mike. I lived in somebody's basement. I was one of those. I was applicable to the next one. I was in I was an accessory suite. Okay. So, these are examples. These are examples of of how floor plans can meet that IPMC requirement. Um, so the lower left has dimensions for the hole as of a 12 by 16 footprint. Um, most of these up here I think are going to work out to 384 square feet. The ones on the right I know are 384. Um, what I had think mine was that big.

Yeah, I think mine was 300. Yeah, 300. So it just it just shifts the onus to the design of the space. So, from a practical standpoint, from a planned submittal standpoint, the way staff, if this were to pass as proposed, the way staff would have to verify this is we're going to have to have a floor plan that shows compliance. Um, a lot of the development that we're seeing right now, these people have floor plans already. We just don't typically need them. This creates now a reason why we would need that on the record. It seems great. I don't see why we haven't been doing this all along.

Yeah. And you know, Matt, you said that like it wouldn't necessarily create a whole bunch of like tiny homes, but I wouldn't have a problem if there was a whole neighborhood of tiny homes. Oh, absolutely. And this would this would open the door to that if a developer with a multif family parcel wanted to do a tiny home thing. This removes one. That's great. Crazy. Totally sounds like a good idea. It's not allowed. What what is there any reason that 450 was do we have is there any history to that? Yeah. So if there is history it's been lost in the midst of cabinets. I I will say that the 1,00 number is is is fairly common. Um that doesn't make it anything other than common

state by state you mean or international? Many states. Yeah. uh within the United States, you'll see 1,000 pop up as a minimum. Um, a lot of that was driven by concern for smaller units and the perception of what those smaller units mean. Um, and so it was kind of a, you know, everything kind of swings pendulum sort of with policy sometimes.

And so Athens has a lot of units that are south of 1,000 square feet. And I think there was a community value that said we want more and and that number was arrived upon. I think it was it was common practice amongst many communities and so it was a number that was selected. Um we have other numbers in the code and we're going to talk about that in the next text amendment that do have more of a mathematical basis for why they exist. Um the 450 for the multif family was an attempt to kind of go through this exercise of what is a livable area and come up with a number right

that exercise of coming up with that predated this code. Okay. And so I think the 450 was an attempt to be reasonable in a multif family context to come up with a livable area that was safe and you know met community values and that and was an interpretation of a building code. At that time it was the southern building code or standard building code. Um and it was just written differently. Bruce, I would just add to that. It was also there there's pretty good history on this that you know it used to be that people with with very limited means lived in a lot of them in cities particularly lived in SRO's right single room occupancy essentially a hotel style unit u you know and and

like yeah like a boarding house kind of thing and and I think we're um I don't know I don't I haven't seen Athens history on this but I think um cities nationwide side. There's a lot of documentation that a lot of them were trying to outlaw that when they imposed higher multifamily square foot, you know, numbers higher than 150 or 200 or whatever. Right. Correct.

The other thing I would add to just to this conversation is um this applies to the the one we're talking about now as well as the next one we're going to talk about is that um especially the when we start talking about the secondary dwelling units, you have to kind of get in into that. You got to read this over a few times before it makes sense because it is a little bit dense. But um I think from the standpoint of the committee work if any planning commissioner has any words smmithing or recommendations would our ideal situation to get to get that feedback in the next couple weeks so that the committee can talk about it before this comes back around to this body in June. Is that kind of the idea is if we got some feedback in the next couple weeks that would give time to tweak and

I would say in the next week. Okay. Um, you know, this has been in your possession since Friday. It's not a ton of time, but the next meeting of the subcommittee is two weeks from today. And so if there was the opportunity to have something to staff that we could share by the end of next week, um I think that would allow us some time to compile things and bring it back to the committee, get it to the committee, not so that we share it on Thursday, but so the committee has it in advance and we can have a meaningful discussion on that Thursday meeting. If there are changes to be made, we'd like to make them and and move on to the next set of text amendments. Okay, great. You ready for the next one?

Okay, cool. Oh, actually one thing about this one. Do you think that we need to um refer to the definition of habitable in this or do you think it's fine? Like the habitable is defined elsewhere. Yeah. Does the 91515 should it refer to that? It's all in title nine. So I think yeah, so it's in the same title. Okay. Hey now. Sorry. don't know what Hey, stop in charge.

All right, so secondary dwelling units um otherwise aka accessory dwelling units. Um but there was a lot of uh good discussion on this topic with the committee on figuring out what words mean, working within the words we have in the code today and adding new terms as needed to make sense out of what the target is here. And the target is as as all of the text amendments are that are on the um the study list is to increase housing opportunity availability with the hope of realizing some housing affordability. Um and so this is an attempt to revisit the ADU question. When this was brought up a couple years ago, three years ago now, two and a half, um the text amendment was very simple. It was very streamlined and I think that might have been its undoing was we have a definition in the code um for guest cottage that precludes having a cooktop. And the notion or uh Yeah. And so the notion here was let's just allow cooktops. And that was the the text amendment two and a half years ago was wherever those accessory buildings are allowed today um they would still be allowed and we wouldn't wouldn't have the situation of saying no cooktop anymore. Um I think what this discussion recently has been has been more nuanced. It has looked at design. Um it has recognized that secondary dwelling units can exist in one of two formats. One as a detached unit which the phrasing coming out of the committee is calling those a backyard cottage and

then also as a secondary suite which would be under roof of a structure. Um to distinguish two units inside of one structure from being a duplex. There was terminology coming out of committee to make sure that the secondary suite is subordinate and we have a definition for what subordinate means. We'll get to that in a second. Also is a set on maximum size for these. 1,00 square feet is the maximum size. Uh that was an attempt to address scale but also balance it with livability. Um there was a lot of discussion in the committee about who are the people that we're intending this for. I thought was a really good discussion. It's um it's meant to hit kind of a wider uh range of opportunities and particularly folks um perhaps that are aging in place or have mobility issues. 1,00 square feet was deemed by the committee to be a more reasonable number to allow for access, wider doorways, more mobility within a restroom or a kitchen or a bedroom. Um, so could you do smaller? Yes. But setting that ceiling at 1,00 was intended to kind of keep a context that was subordinate to a main house. Um, there were some caveats on that though. So in the AR zone, not in an AR neighborhood because AR neighborhoods by definition are meant to be like treated on the same level as RS subdivisions. But where you have AR property, there would be no maximum square footage on these units. Um the thinking there is you have more space, the context is different. Um other rules would apply. You have other things like lock coverage and setbacks and such. Um the definition of subordinate would still apply. So let's talk about that.

Subordinate means three things are in place. One that the unit is behind the front building plane of the primary structure. So can't be in the front yard. Two that it's oriented towards a primary structure and toward the interior of the property or toward a right of way. So what is it not oriented toward? It's not oriented towards the neighbors. Um, three, with reference to scale, the unit must have less square footage and fewer bedrooms than the primary. So that's what's helping differentiate it from a duplex. Typically doesn't have to be, but a duplex is typically a mirror footprint. This from definition of subordinate would preclude that from happening and keep this other unit in a secondary function. Uh, another thing that was talked about a good length uh, in committee and there were difference opinions and I'll say this about this committee. That's what's cool about this committee. Nobody's drinking from the same cup in this committee. Everybody has takes on this that that work their way around the room. Um, and the end product is after a lot of discussion and um, consensus perhaps total 100% agreement. I haven't seen it yet. Um, but consensus for sure. So, it's a good group. But with regard to parking, uh the notion here was that secondary dwelling units may include but aren't required to include one additional off streetet space. Um we know that's going to be a point of discussion. Um but coming from committee, I think this was a starting point. So where are these things going to be? Okay. So permitted with limitation we have RSRM commercial zones and the AR where these units would be fine. Where they would not be permitted is largely where we

don't allow residential today. So we don't allow residential in industrial. We don't allow it in EI the light industrial. We do allow some residential in EO or employment office zone. Um but that tends to be more of uh housing associated with an office park or a campus development. In this case, these were not kind of folded into that context. And then the IN is the institutional zone. Um that is meant to be more of a campus setup and those are approved almost through a PD process. We don't have any of it on the map. Um but if there was a need for this, it could be taken up as part of the in discussion and be made part of a binding plan. So we really have the four zoning categories where these are an option. Um there were some other things that come on now. There we go. Other other items that the committee took up and I apologize for the small font. I want to get this on one slide. Um but the the group did agree that there were some other items that needed to be thought about. one um is that you know the whole point of this is to increase opportunities for housing and and this is a way to do it. The second bullet point is recognition that a good bit of discussion was about design. What should these look like? Um not just orientation wise but what will be the material? What are the design expectations? um and thinking that there needs to be input from the public, input from this body, and we know we're going to get input from the commissioners on the notion of design as we move along. Um third bullet point is is kind of an exciting thought and I think committee's excited about it, staff's excited about it. The notion here is that these backyard cottages in particular are a bit of a new animal to live in our code. There is an expense with those.

anytime you're doing something new and somebody's going to come forward, um those tend to go to the people that are easily capitalized to to jump at it. Point here is to make these available to everybody. So, a thought, a strategic thought here that the date of adoption doesn't need to be the same as the date of effectiveness for the ordinance and that the time in between could allow for a design competition to take place. Let's get the rules in place and say that they've been adopted. Let's have an effective date that allows time for a design competition that essentially builds a catalog of plans. And the competition would set the bar to say you will be eligible to win this competition or be recognized for a prize of some sort if you meet the code expectations that we've outlined. That would be the criteria. Um, further I think we were expecting that what the participants would do is try to create architectural treatments that fit Athens and create a book of plans that could become off-the-shelf options. For those folks that can't afford an architect or might not have the means to put together a design, we've got a set of plans that are already approved. All you have to do is work out the site work to get it located properly on your property. But the plan itself, here you go. And the goal would be for the cost of the paper to print it on or whatever it may be, some nominal thing. Um, somebody could have a set of plans. Uh, fourth bullet is coming back to that parking notion. And what this bullet tries to outline is there's there needs to be recognition given that certain circumstances are going to work better for parking than others. We have rightways that are narrow. where on street parking is not a viable option or perhaps a one side of the street option

is the only way to go. Um certainly speed or amount of traffic on a given roadway may impact that as well. Um so this is this was a talking point on more than one occasion with the subcommittee. So we just wanted to get that in front of the public and and all of you. Um and then some images. So, you know, this is the kind of thing we're talking about. We had a tour scheduled for this morning until it got rained out um to actually visit some examples in Athens um with the committee. We're going to do that next time we meet and we can also certainly take up whatever input we receive too. But the point is we need to get familiar with this as a type and it lives among us. it this is not this may be new to our code for single family. It's not new to our code for multif family and it's certainly not new to our community as far as having these existing in many many contexts. Um it's surprising how many have the tour that we were going to do today. We were doing the walking kind of layout of it. We had to we had to struggle to pick the path because we had so many options. There was a boulevard option. Um there were several five points options and so the one that we landed on um we felt pretty confident we could do in two hours and it was how many were we likely to visit? It was almost was it almost 20?

Yeah, for sure. Yeah. And the route was really simple. It was parking at the Five Points Fire Station, going two blocks down Mill Circle, coming back, going down the alley behind the Styles Apartments, coming out to live in one of those. Okay. I was about to say I had one of the ones on right there behind the what's the antique store now? You know, I was at 117 and a half Westview. So, my address, my driveway was on the other side. But I lived in that house for like nine years when I was a grad student. It was only like 800 square feet. I loved I can walk across the street to Earth Fair. It was fantastic. Cool spot. Yeah, it was a great spot.

And coming up Lumpin, there are several that you can view looking to the east on Lumpin. And then coming down to was it Greenrest? Yeah. No, Carlton. Carlton. Isn't that right? Carlton. We were going to walk down Carlton and then take a turn and go up Terrace. Several there. Yeah. And then we were going to take a little spin on the other side of South Mill um where there are just a handful of things within easy walking distance. But I think the smallest one that we could find was on Morton North View. North View. There we go.

Um it it's pretty remarkably small. How small is it? We were going to find out. I'm just going to lay tape measure on it if we could, but it's right at the corner of North View and uh Woodro. No, what's that? What's that side road? That is Woodro. Woodro. Look at me. It's uh there two on that property. One is 702 feet. The other one is 368. Oh, yeah. The 368 one was built in 1965. I could live in either one of those. Perfect.

That's good job. Um, you know, it it's we want to build comfort with this concept because it it it definitely it has it has folks that are for it and it has definitely got some detractors. And so the notion here with the subcommittee is to build familiarity through the design contest, but also to draw attention to the fact that we have these all over the place, dozens and dozens and dozens. And we've we've also permitted many guest houses um perfectly legally using the code that we have today with the understanding that they just didn't have a full service kitchen. There was no cooktop, no oven. Um we're going to pull that data and have that available so so that we can speak intelligently about how many of those we permitted because I think that's also an important thing to understand. All right, I'll stop. any questions about I you know there's a lot of text to this is a much longer text amendment um I didn't put the whole thing on the screen so if you haven't read it I encourage you to read it Sarah's point push at it if if the wording has sticking points um bring to our attention I was say I had a specific question about the AR and that when I lived out in Colorado I had a friend that had you know an apartment above a barn so they managed like the ranch property. So like if the barn was bigger than the primary house, does that count as like it's not really a subordinate? Is it part of the barn or is it

Yeah, it's like the top of the barn. Okay. It's like the second story of the barn. So how would that be c how would that be? That is not different than a garage apartment. Okay. The apartment above the garage is the unit. The garage where people park,

not the unit. So, if it was like a big horse stables and then just had a one-bedroom apartment on the second floor, it would just kind of like a garage. Yeah. And I think I think that's a really like I found um when I'm looking at this, it's that's kind of an interesting and fun and useful way to look at this code is sort of like imagine yourself like okay I want to build whatever you want to build a apartment on top of a garage or I want to build and then like see if this code gives you what you need to figure out whether you can build or not and what the limitations might be around that. That's a that's a good way to do it. Yeah. Um, that's the only one I could think of when I do it.

So, will there be room in the design standards for modular? Like I I keep seeing so many different advances where you can buy a tiny house on Amazon and slap it together and Yeah. Like a Sears catalog house like nonstick build. Yeah. It still leaves the freedom for stuff like that. I think we just don't get into design standards at all in here really. Right. But that's just code, right?

Well, okay. So, and we did the committee did talk about that too, that many of these may be of a prefab sort, right? Um, if you overregulate the design, you remove the potential for the prefab option, which is potentially the most affordable version of this. Um, I I think there was an acknowledgement of that and and not trying to overregulate the design. However, there was much discussion about making sure that the materials and the placement aren't jarring and don't don't aren't disruptive um for the neighbors in particular. Um and so I think I think what we're going to end up talking about I the text amendment right now just puts the structure in place to let these happen. Um, I think we're hoping that the design contest gives some shape and and and gives some predictability to some of the things that you're likely to see happen, but not become overly prescriptive. Mark,

the group did explicitly say they wanted feedback from this body, the public, and the mayor and commission on design. That was that was one of the takeaways said. I I love the idea of having the design catalog that they can just, you know, pick from kind of like right off the shelf. I think that's great. I think it would be great if that did include some prefab options that were pretty creative because that is probably the most effective and cost-effective way to be able to get it done. Yeah, I know. It would probably be too hard to like have pre-approved prefab things because then you'd have to get into like I think building category. Yeah, building standards are one thing, design standards are another. Yeah. Like, yeah. Building stands

to say that like I can't have a little gabled roof on my because it's not the design code for this little house in the backyard. I think that's crazy. Yeah, that's just nuts. Yeah. But making sure that the materials used Yeah. Pass code, things like that. That makes a lot of sense. Yeah. It's not just like a shed. It's got like insulation. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Right. They're there building standards for it, but the idea that like, oh, it can't be red or, you know, you can't, you know, things like that. Have a tin roof or something. I wouldn't want that kind of stick. Exactly. Like that to me is like way way over, you know, I think keeping it within this the health and safety Exactly. as we had with the FAR makes sense. But like

I'm imagining there's a lot of building materials that are coming down the pipe that we just don't know of yet. Right. That could be more cost effective, could be more environmental environmentally friendly, especially for still have design standards, too. you already have a selection from the the kits that you build the the the tiny home out of. You know, for sure to your question specifically about prefab, this does not speak to that at all. In other words, it doesn't prevent it doesn't prohibit it. It doesn't speak to it in any capacity. Right. I guess as long as they met whatever other standards there were there. Yeah. It should be a standard that addresses both stick build and prefab. Right. Yeah.

Yeah. One thing we that was discussed on the committee and this is what I'm about to say is my opinion. I'm not sure that it represents that of anyone else on the committee and certainly not everyone but but um in some areas in Athens there are design standards that apply to the construction of a new single family home like in a historic district you know and fair

if you're in Boulevard you're going to need to go and get a certificate of appropriateness for your design for your new ADU that you want to put in your backyard because you're in a historic district. Uh but because what we're trying to do here is open the door to new more affordable housing things, I think we as a matter of principle should not apply design standards that don't apply to um principal residences, you know. So if you're in an area that's not in historic district, yeah, um if I'm in Forest Heights, there's no historic district. If I want to put up a gabled Victorian looking ADU, more power to me, right? I mean, like I just think um neighbors complain sometimes in Five Point somebody tears down an old house and puts up an enormous

new house that they think is not in keeping with the neighborhood, but we don't regulate that. We allow that to happen. And so I think we should treat um secondary dwelling units according to the same principle. That's a great point. Yeah, I agree with that. Okay, there's just um one clarification um on the um definition of subordinate on the second page. What you had on the slide was more complete than what is in the handout.

I noticed that too. I had some suggested that's that wording still to me seems a little bit awkward and I what I wrote down from my meeting was that what we said was the orientation of the subordinate this is just related to orientation of the subordinate dwelling shall relate to the principal structure and not to surrounding properties like that part was a little simpler to me that was more understandable than what made it so we we might But what you had on the slide which I think is important was or toward the interior of the property or toward a right ofway. So if you have a corner lot um and there's a principal house facing street A and you want to build something facing the perpendicular street B, you can do that. But this doesn't allow that. This says what's on the handout says secondary dwelling orientation shall be toward the property on which it is located and not to adjacent property. It doesn't have all the extra stuff about orientation that's on your slide there. So, I just wanted to flag that. Um, I'm sure, but I think the way you have it there feels right.

Or the interior. Sure. Is that Yeah, I think maybe you because I assume that the committee is going to look at this one more time before it comes back here. So, but yeah, I think that makes sense. Yeah, that makes sense to me. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. One thing I did als there was something you said earlier that maybe pause for a second which is that um for AR for AR that's not a neighborhood but AR we are not we're not limiting the size of the accessory right but it is still subordinate yes okay so that that piece still applies okay

so does that mean somebody could do a 3000 foot ADU if they have 4,000 foot house in an AR and one fewer bedroom in those 3,000 square feet, right? I guess that seems fine on 10 acres, you know, if you want. Um, so is there going Oh, I I just have one more very small um nit which is in the definition on the first page of backyard cottage which by the way for the benefit of everyone the committee discussed how a lot of people hate the word ADU or accessory dwelling unit or don't know what it means or it sounds foreign and but backyard cottages sound like

much you know warm and fuzzy and so we went with that on purpose for that reason. Um so in that definition Bruce um I wanted to call everyone's attention to one thing but then also make a what I think is a necessary edit. So the second sentence says the structure must be accessory and subordinate to a the old definition of ADU says to a single family dwelling and we've changed that to principal dwelling because if you live in a duplex in a single family neighborhood you should be allowed to build an ADU too I think right and that was a conscious decision the committee made and that's what the word principal instead of single family is doing if anyone wondered that. Um and then the the correction Bruce is the parenthesis then says see definition of subordinate and dwelling single family and I think

and dwelling single family should be deleted there because that's a holdover from the previous definition. That's right. Because you could in theory if you had like one of those houses on Boulevard that's divided up into a bunch of apartments, you could still put something in the backyard because it's not Yeah. I mean that would be perfectly okay because it's not a single family house but it would still be able to have a backyard cottage. Exactly. Yeah. I get that. It makes sense to me. Okay.

Um, so yeah, the I like the um I'm a big fan of the ADUs or backyard cottage, all of that. Um, as long as this subordinate the what somebody in our committee brought up and it was it was in my brain just hadn't come out properly is this is why I'm always so big on the market. Market's massive and powerful. it's going to flow and we can do all our regulations and this and that, but the market's just going to go right on top of it. Um, market's going down right now. Um, I'm looking at all of this in in this committee as if we don't need any more housing or we do need housing because

if if we if we just do it to get more housing, we're going to have a problem somewhere. It's coming. You can't overcorrect. And so, we don't want to. And we're doing a good job, I think, doing things smart. And we have our discussions and you win some, you lose some, but the committee walks out at least in an agreement. But the somebody did bring up the interesting thing about all of this and and I don't have a backyard cottage. I have my house and that's it. if I were to build one, value of my house goes up and it's out of reach of more people. And this was a banker that said this and and that's an interesting thing. We are doing things that oh, it's going to do this, but we're going to get flanked. And you're always getting flanked in business and and it's not always a bad thing or a good thing. You just don't see it. So, the flanking of this is everybody runs out and does this, which everybody won't. I'm going to bring that up in a minute, but um the property just went up and a house went from $300,000 to to $500,000. And that's a big jump. If you're in real estate, you know how hard it is to take somebody from that one to that one and then to the next. So, that's just an interesting thought out there that that's just coming around the corner. It doesn't mean I'm not in favor of these. It's just there. The other thing is they're not cheap. I mean, if I go whether it's um you know um prefab or any of that, it's it's going to cost money. And we we talked about guest houses versus um the uh cottage, I guess, in the kitchen is the main thing. And so there are reasons why people might just have a guest house and not a full-on full-time rental type thing and because there's going to be a lot of

cost involved in doing that and so that's why there there's a little difference but that's there's always kind of something out there and so but but the the view that I'll be bringing back to the um or continuing to do with the the committee is let's let's Don't make regulations and ordinances in a panic because it is not always going to be this way because I used to own some apartments on Mill Avenue. We couldn't rent them all out 20 years ago.

Own you know because it was two bedrooms, one bath. Everybody snubbed it. But so it's not always just like we got to have we got to have got to it these ordinances will hopefully be in a way that it it doesn't harm and I'm a big fan of do no harm to the good people in this world who have saved their money bought a house and they don't want to trailer park next to it um or done this. So, we don't want to do things that collapse the value of the neighbor. And that's where I threw a little push back on the size um of of units and not units, but of houses. I'm cool with that now because it's less regulation. Um but not to carry on, but there there's we always have to kind of think the market's doing this always and you get in the middle of that and you're having to look around, you're going to get hit.

You just try to narrow it down to how bad. And so you you put one of these in your backyard, the value of your house went up. Although I've, as I said in the meeting last, I had I've had several clients that every time there's one of those at a house, they don't want it. They're like, "What am I going to do with it?" So, but the value of the house still goes up and it will sell for that, but it also takes some of the market away. So, always something. Alex, to your point though, that could actually be a help to get some people into a home that they couldn't otherwise afford because now they've got an extra structure they can rent out. Yeah. I mean, if I'm looking at a $500,000 house in Five Points that has ADU, I can get 200 $2,000 a month off of that.

Or it could be or that other family member, right, share put some money in. Well, now the whole you're you're in the landlording business and a lot of people don't want to. I don't disagree, but the price is coming up. It's just like buying any rental. Yeah. Are you going to cash flow and you know, so that's that's up to the market. Yeah.

Kind of be like a pool. People are either going to want it when they build that when they buy the house or not, you know. But I kind of see this is an interesting opportunity to maybe make up for some of the, you know, STRs that are going to be sunseted, too, because these would still be allowed to be short-term rentals because it's, you know, if the person lives on property. So, you know, you could still have a lot of people are probably going to want to build these and make them short-term rentals because there's not going to be any more short-term rentals in Five Point soon because they're all going to be sunseted, you know, and that's a good short-term rental.

Yeah. And this is a good short-term rental. these are the ones that we're trying to encourage people to have. So, I think, you know, I think it's this would be, you know, more of an asset to like, you know, it's going to help renters who might rent them like I did when I was a grad student or, you know, short-term rentals. And so, yeah, it'll make the the house property value go up, which, you know, hurts affordability in that category, but, you know, helps out the renters, I guess. So, makes the banks the banks don't go along with the potential rent. That's the problem. Somebody's going to, but again, that's market issue. That's not our issue. And the affordable housing suits are starting to recognize that income as um something that can play into your loan. So Fanny and Freddy, yeah, they'll count 75% of their rent.

Especially if you said you were going to make it a short-term rental, probably you could be like, I'm going to make a ton of money off this thing. And you know, because it's almost like you're buying a rental investment with the property that you're buying. I'm not saying that would apply across all levels of homes, you know, home prices, but I think there's a based on that would be that it does help people if they can count that income to help them get their home edits. Yes, please. By what is today? Thursday. No later than next Thursday, right? Um, if we ideally early next week, early next week would be awesome.

Yeah, I don't really have I mean I think it's I don't really I don't have anything specific for you. Yeah, you're not going to get any homework from me. I uh I like it as it is. I do want to clarify there was the big thing about the design contest design standards by neighborhood. I totally get the idea that the Clark County is going to say you can only do these five styles of a home. That's not what I think it would just be an option that you wouldn't have to I was just making sure I I was probably going on

not the only option actually we have those actually like um 20 years ago we did a comp 30 years ago we did a competition for pre-approved infill designs in historic districts and there's four that are on our website. A onebedroom, a two-bedroom, a threebedroom and a fourbedroom house that are just automatically allowed in historic districts. Got it. Okay. Um, and so it would just be something like that. Just a resource. Yeah, plans are free or a nominal cost and okay, people can just build them if they don't if they're trying to do it on a budget. Yeah, that would save people a lot of money because it's a big cost to get those plans drawn up and especially then you come and you don't even get to build it and yeah, it's good.

Bruce, I was going to mention that our pre-approved historic district plans that are online, the one and two bedroom units are under a,000 square feet. So, that might be a good starting point for I mean, we can do a competition and get some new ones, but you could also just take the two-bedroom, 952 foot one that we have online. Excellent. Build that. Yeah, very smart. And those were designed to be expanded over time. So, that's another kind of feature of that is an interesting concept. Um, but appreciate the feedback and getting um any kind of edits back next week would be fantastic.

Report Yes, really quickly. Um, really quickly 10-year-old is waiting. 10:30 is then it's okay. Um, the the zoning items that went up from last month's meeting to the mayor and the commission, if you didn't watch, the results went as follows. Um, the request for 155 Wit Davis Road was withdrawn. Um, Whit Davis, which one was that one? Whit Davis. That was a a LITC project. Uh right off of Whit Davis, right behind next to the park storage place. Oh yeah, exactly.

Um uh the request for 4190 Lexington Road and 150 Pine Cone and 120 Mertz. The the the reszone to RM1. Um there was a request to hold that until the June meeting. Um the the applicant is in conversation with Commissioner Davenport to work through um some potential changes to the submitt possibly involving a binding plan. Um I think that's one of the outcomes that Commissioner Davenport was interested in. So that'll come back in June. Uh come back to us or to the county commission?

To the county commission. 1165 Ogal Thorp um was voted on was passed with a commission defined option. So um the one condition that they carried forward word for word from this group was about the access to Landor the the street on the back that it would be only for emergency access. Um after a community meeting they were responding to some feedback to make the project only two stories and so keeping the same square footage that took the building and made the footprint go bigger. So those binding setbacks that they profered wouldn't work and so they they took those away. Um building now is required to be no more than two stories and there is an enhanced buffer along the western lot line. an additional five feet with fence over over and above the normal buffer. Um the landor condition uh and the same conditions about age restriction and the AMI. So that passed. Um and then the request for new Jimmy new Jimmy Daniel the town homes that passed. Nice. There you go. The only other thing I would point out is next time we meet with y'all, the planning department will be fully staffed for the first time in eight years. We will have all positions filled. The last piece is a planner, too, and she starts May 25th. Um, bringing her all the way back from Chicago, but she's an Athenian. Um, she was working for APA. Um, so we'll be at 100% strong. You're not afraid to jinx it by announcing it. I've already her mom is dialed in. So I Mom's let it dance.

Yeah. Mom's like, "Move home." That's it. That's it. So that's Yes. More officer. Are we doing that? Oh, yeah. Oh, shoot. Yeah. The Yeah, the nominating committee. Yeah, we've been we've been hard at work. Yeah, we've been working. Oh, man. We had so many meetings. When do we need to vote? We half of our slate has responded, the other half hasn't. So, we're still working on something. So, do we need to vote on that tonight or should we vote on that in June? When does the I mean, the officers need to be in place for this meeting. So, we have to So, we have to elect them in June. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

I feel like the people who need to know will know and we will have a slate and chances to get them to vote. Yes. Brilliant. Yes. boring anybody just throwing their head in at the last minute, but like know that they're late. So, yeah. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Good job. 50%. All right. It's a really easy job that should should have been done fast, but I tried. Yeah. I have no report. That was my report. So, yeah. All right. Yeah. All right. All those in favor of majority.