Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

It's really unless you have like a monetary stand, you know, because now we all like no. Yeah, I think it's fine. Yeah, I bet those two are

SLP planet for those of you here on HERS. Um, you might have seen the sign-in sheet, copies of the agenda. Did we forget the signin sheets? We're good. We've got more. I believe

we have more signin sheets. So, if you have not signed in, please sign in. Um, so here's the process for things that are on the agenda. So, first we're going to hear from staff. They're going to make a presentation. Then we're going to move to the public comment portion. We allow 10 minutes for the applicant to address the commission followed by members of the public who are speaking in favor and they receive three minutes each. After um after comments in support, then we move to comments in opposition. So, all speakers receive three minutes. But if you're here representing a specific interest group such as the homeowners association, um let us know so we can allocate the appropriate amount of time for you. Um and if that's the case, then just let Bruce know and we'll we'll take care of it. Um when you're addressing the commission, provide your name, address, and uh your interest in the project. After the public comment, um the applicant or their representative may request a two-minute response. Please note that Um, when it's yellow, you have 30 seconds left. When it's red, I'm going to give you the hook. Um, once we have 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 and we'll call somebody up to answer the question. Um, ex may be displayed by the applicants or the public at the podium. Written correspondence received by noon yesterday has been forwarded to the commission and it's part of the public record. If you have any additional written materials that you want placed in the public record, um then it must be read during the public comment period or we can have a vote to accept it as um additional documents. Please direct your comments to the planning commission and not to the applicants. And please refrain from uh applauding or cheering at speakers. And uh finally, please note that the

meeting is being broadcast live and the microphones are very sensitive. So um just be aware. And finally, silence your cell phone. I have a question. Yes. After you speak, can you go or is that kind of like No, you if you want to come up and talk and then take off. Totally fine. Yes. And I will say too, you don't feel like you have to be called on. You can form a line or you can just pop up and hop up. There is no order to it. I'm not going to like call names or anything like that. Y'all can just figure it out and figure out who wants to go next. So, any other questions? Yes. Is there additional time allotted for someone who's representing a homeowners association?

So, if that's the case with your item, then we're going to let let staff know and we can talk. So, up to 10 minutes for the opposition is available, but it would be one group. And what we ask is that, you know, if that's the case that you're speaking on behalf of several people and you have kind of a unified statement or you're their representative for making comment, let me know. We'll share it with Kristen and that way we'll know to bring that 10-minute period up first under opposition, but there's really only one of those for opposition. So, it takes a little coordination if there's multiple. So I know who to ask for first before we go with the rest of public comment

because everything after the 10 will be a series of three up to three minute segments for only one sp 10 a lot only one 10 because there's only one 10 for the applicant. The applicant gets 10. There's one slot of 10 of up to 10 minutes for opposition. Everybody else is up to three minutes. Can that 10 minutes be split between opposed or like organizations? Yeah. I mean if there could be two fives that's exactly the idea. Okay. That's exactly the idea. Or three threes and a one. Yeah. All right. All right. Cool.

You got you got a few chairs cuz we have plenty of bishops that aren't going to be here. [Music] [Music] Is there anybody? Is there anybody who's desperately needs a chair? Doesn't have one. Younglings chair. your hand if it's somebody like that will help out. Yeah, there's there's a couple

share open to talk during the meeting. Somebody needs

Oh, yeah. That's the biggest we've had in a long time. Oh, that's right. That's nice. Goes my dad in the 60s. That's really cool. All right.

Sometimes we're here till like midnight. I can't hear you. I guess I just want to make sure. Not tonight. Everybody's gonna go real fast. Everybody's going to go real fast. That was also hands down. I think so. Uhuh.

I know. Like when I went to the bathroom, Hey everybody, uh in light of the attendance tonight and because we have the fire marshall sitting right here, uh what we're going to do is reorder the agenda. Just looking at the faces that I'm familiar with, I I think that item number one under new business is likely got the most attention. And what we're going to do is move that item to the top. When that item's over, in order for us to continue business for the meeting, we'd encourage you to watch the live stream from home. We want you to be here to participate on that item if you're here for it. But after it's over, if you could move out of the building, that keeps us number that's on the wall.

So, which I won't say out loud. So, I appreciate that and hopefully that works for the assembled. Change the order to move 570 prints to item number one. But first, I'm sorry. What will be item number? Then we'll return to the normal business. So, we'll go to old business. Old Elbertton will be next and then go on. All right. Everybody understand? Okay. Thank you. Yeah. like it'll be official.

All right. Item number one, general business, introduction of staff reports. Can I get a motion to introduce that report? Second. All in favor say I. I. Right. Um item number two, um approval of the August 7th, 2025 planning commission meeting minutes. Great. Okay. All right. All in favor say I. I. Great. If I could. Yes. Let's speak really loudly and clearly with any motions tonight. Movers, seconders, please. And with discussion. Thank you. Gotcha.

All right. Item three, Mayport for review and public comment. Do we have anything from Mayports? No ma'am. All right. Any public comment related to make board? All right. Thanks, folks. Um, okay. Um, making executive decision moving up new business item number one to the first slot on the agenda. Five print avenue. Sorry, I messed up your power.

It's all good. Hi, good evening commissioners. We're starting with 570 Prince Avenue. This is PD 2025. That's go back to the front. 081577. Right.

A request is for a reszone from government to commercial neighborhood with a planned development. That would be a change to the future land use from government to main street business. Preliminary PD plan shows an addition to the existing historic structure. Um that will be a thin that I will point out to you shortly. and a new structure behind the existing historic structure that will house 116 hotel rooms and event space and underground parking. There are two waivers requested by the applicant. The first waiver is for the 10,000 square foot limitation of hotel use to um be expanded to 87,753 square feet by staff's calculations. Um, and the second waiver is to allow for required parking spaces to be located over 1,200 feet away, which is above the the normal um allowed distance. Right. So, looking at our proposed future land use would be a change here from government to main street business. As you can see, Main Street Business is nearby on neighboring lots. So, that would be something that we would like to see that it would be nearby, right? Um, as you can see, our current zoning is government here and would be changing to commercial neighborhood with a PD here. You can see on neighboring lots that there are no other commercial neighborhood lots adjacent. There are some sort of at a distance downprints uh but not not within

distance. This is a 2021 aerial view of the property representative of the current conditions of the property. But you can see the outline here shows the shape of the property as it exists. And to the left here is Grady Avenue. To the right along this little area is North Pope Street. And then this larger road over here is Barber Street. These lots here are all owned by the Episcopal Emanuel Church. A small lot here is owned by the government IT building. And then lots of residential neighborhood area back here. There are no environmental areas to contend with on this property. This is a representative of the existing conditions of the property of really more of the front half of the property. You can see the historic gardens on the front here. This is our existing president's house, the historic building that exists there today. Got parking area here. This is a one-story wooden garage that would be demolished with this plan. Down below is a one-story building uh that was a historic property. Um and it is one that is proposed to be moved to the back of the property. We'll show that shortly. This one here is another one-story building that would also be moved to the rear of the property. Um, this building, according to the applicants, is um the original building that was on the property. And, uh, we've got another historic

garden here, garden here as well. And as you'll see on the next screen, all of this area will be dedicated to the hotel, to the new building that will be placed. Check that out. Right. So, this is the proposed site plan. Got the historic gardens on the front are supposed to supposed to remain as they are. This is our president's house here, the existing historic building. Uh, and then this is the kitchen addition that's proposed would be the largest change to the actual existing building would be adding on that attached kitchen area. Uh, and this is some just more utility area there. And then we've got some accessible parking here. A fire lane here that goes along to the back. And this is a turnaround area for fire trucks. And this area here brings you back into the underground parking that would go under the building here. And then got a courtyard here in the middle of the hotel that goes all the way around. This walkway here takes you to the back of the property, which is where those two historic buildings would be moved to. Got this to show you the full extent of the property. So, sorry. So, we've got the that's that little section there that shows the walkway that would take you back to those two buildings. And this area here shows the existing uh tree area. There's just lots of landscaping and trees and all that which is proposed to stay. All right. Now, we're going to get into

the elevations. So this is our front elevation, the south elevation. This little guy here kind of orients us to see what we're looking at. So south view is going to be looking from this arrow on that way. We've got the president's house here and then as you can see the hotel on either side and behind it. And then this would be a show or a view from if you're standing behind the president's house and looking at it from the courtyard. This is our east elevation. Let me aside over here. This is the new addition for the kitchen on the historic building. little space between and then our the new hotel proposed our west elevation which goes this side of the property. So historic building there and hotel here and the rear elevation. So back here, this is showing the hotel here. A tiny bit of the president's house at the top. So it's a view of the building as it stands. Historic building as it stands. Can see some of the historic gardens that I pointed out. And um from the elevations, you can see that the hotel would be about here. Right. And this is just a view of those two historic structures that are proposed to be moved to out the back twothirds of the property. And the one that is on the the left side of the

property that um appears to just be more like storage, that sort of thing. And this was the one that the applicant said was one of the original or was the original building on the property. And this is a view of the side of the building. the president's house that would get that kitchen addition. So, it would come out about from this window section here and extend into the grass here. Right. So, our staff evaluation staff believes that this would be compatible with 2023 comprehensive plan um would support infill and redevelopment of historic structures. Those things are good. Um would be compatible with our future land use map that Main Street business is appropriate for the area. And um the two waivers requested uh staff does not support the waiver from the limitation of allowing additional square footage for hotel use. Um staff could see supporting the waiver to allow for required parking spaces uh to be located um further away. Uh we do see that there are potential places for for the parking to be closer. Um, and so that would be something we could be open to looking at.

Can you speak up a little louder? Um, I can try, but honestly, I'm projecting as best as I can. Um, the hotel use staff does see as compatible. Um, it's just that the large scale and the traffic generation are concerns. This concludes the staff evaluation. Thank you. Now we'll hear from the applicants.

My name is Jeff Payne. I'm chairman of Gainesville based Capstone Property Group where we invest in hospitality, medical office, multif family, and public shopping centers. First, I want to thank the Athens community for its interest and engagement in this project over the last few months. Although I must admit at times like tonight it's a little overwhelming. I've had the unusual journey to be with you tonight. I began my career as a real estate investor while a medical student in Augusta, Georgia over 40 years ago. Practiced opthalmology for 30 years while investing in medical office buildings, hotels, multif family and land. Interestingly, both hospitality and hospital have the same root hospice. After retiring from medicine, I've been blessed to blend my passion for hospitality with investing, including seven historic preservation projects. We view the opportunity to preserve what many believe to be one of the finest examples of Greek revival architecture in the state of Georgia, if not the nation, through an adaptive reuse project as both an honor and a responsibility. Capstone Welch's opportunity to bring a fourdiamond lodging and event space to Athens and the Prince corridor through our partnership with Hilton. Our architectural team will provide more details on all the reasons why we think this project fits within the code of Athens and its many positive impacts. But I will say this, I believe that a privately owned hotel of this scale is the only way, absent a very generous donor, to preserve and offer public access to the president's house while saving the green space at the rear and creating a significant benefit for the Athens community as a whole. We look forward to hearing your feedback tonight and from the community in the weeks ahead. As I said, we're grateful for the opportunity to preserve the president's house, offer some guaranteed protections to the community through the PD process, and provide public access to the home and garden should our project be allowed by the local government. I'd like to turn this over to Lori Newcomer with Athens-based ARC Lab.

Lori Bour Newcomer at 150 Palaski Heights. Um, thank you, Jeff, and thank you to members of the commission for digging into an unusually complex project. Um, I'd also like to thank the community for its engagement with us as we've developed these plans. Um, I'll be focusing on some technical aspects of the proposed potential uses, design, intent, preservation approach, and community impact in my remarks tonight while addressing the staff comments along the way. First, there are tremendous benefits to the public with the proposed hotel and restaurant use. Um changing this parcel from exclusive UG use to the proposed restaurant and hotel opens as picturesque and historically significant property to the greater public. The historic house is proposed to have a restaurant and bar located on the garden level, hotel lounge space in the parlor rooms to keep them compatible with the historic use and configuration and a special guest suite on the second level where bedrooms currently exist. The primary hotel use is in the proposed new construction building behind the historic house. The hotel is proposed in a U-shaped configuration both as an acoustic buffer to the surrounding residential neighbors and to define an outdoor court space which honors the significance of the relationship between the historic two-story rear porch with a formal patio and rear garden behind. The proposed courtyard will be open to the public with some limited patio seating for the restaurant and bar extending into and activating the space. The hotel and restaurant use are estimated to generate over $1.7 million of sales and motel hotel tax annually for the community. The hotel use beyond 10,000 square feet does require a waiver, but we contend that a high-end hotel is less impactful than other allowable uses within the CN zoning, which is how planning staff has advised us they would want to see this parcel zoned. Some examples of permissible stand uses include multif family up to 80 bedrooms on this size parcel and medical centers with no square footage limit. Aside from the 75% F which equates to 163,000 ft of building, almost double what we're

proposing. A high-end hotel is a far better use for this property and its context than these other permissible uses. On-site management for a hotel works to eradicate disruptive occupants and noise for the benefit of other guests. not typically the case for multif family. Hotels are also estimated to operate at an average of 65% occupancy rate. This means that only 75% or 75 of the proposed hotel rooms will be occupied on average. Medical centers yield much higher vehicle trips and traffic impact. None of these uses are likely to have underground parking again resulting much greater impact preservation of green space and the adjacent neighbors. For all of these reasons, we propose the hotel use is less impactful, more compatible with this property and its historic significance, and better for the neighborhood and other permiss than other permissible uses in CM zoning. We've heard a lot of comments about the size and scale of the building, and there are good reasons for both. Our approach to this project was to consolidate the building density and the portion of the property in line with other commercial and mixed density residential zoning along the Prince Avenue corridor. This was done both to preserve the legacy rear gardens and in consideration of the numerous single family property owners who abut that green space portion of the property. To conserve that much open green space, the parking was tucked below the proposed new building and courtyard. It takes a higher room count to offset hiding the parking. We feel like this is the best approach for the integrity of the property and to minimize impact on adjacent residential neighbors. With significantly lower room count, surface parking would be required, which would likely extend further into the rear of the property, reducing green space and increasing visual and noise impact. This project is 40 47% smaller, almost half of the floor area ratio that could be built by right as other permitted uses in the CN zoning and just over half the potential lot coverage. We have very intentionally kept the building area and lot coverage well below the zoning thresholds. We're also seeking this PD zoning overlay in order to ensure the binding site plan and building elevations that the historic house,

front gardens, and rear green space are protected for years to come. The preserved existing buildings total approximately 12,000 square feet. Of the new construction, just over 9500 um square feet of the ground level, basically one weighing of the building footprint, is intended for the event space. This grows the hotel area, but we feel it's important to provide indoor meeting and event space to help mitigate outdoor noise for the neighbors. The proposed does not meet the ACC ordinance definition of temporary events. The proposed meeting and event space is not temporary or open to the public, is intended for private events which are integral to the hotel use and its definition as a facility offering transient lodging, accommodations, and providing additional services such as restaurants, meeting rooms, and recreational facilities. This space is intended for hotel guests. Students will be required to be blocked when booking events or meetings and will continue to work with planning staff to resolve parking concerns for this program area. The Alta survey lists the property size at 5.047 acres, which is unusually large parcel for this area. The closest large properties include Emanuel Episcopal Church, the Clark County School District offices, and the Bridge Community Church at the corner of Chase and Prince. The subject property is 17 to 29% larger than these other properties. Lot size matters when talking about density and building size. It's why zoning uses floor area ratio to determine appropriate building size rather than prescriptive square footage and is why multif family development limitations are based upon bedroom per acre. A 10,000t hotel limit for CN zoning does not take into consideration property to scale. The minimum lot size for CN is 5,000 square feet. This parcel is over 43 times that size. We request that the commission considers appropriate building size based upon the underlying requested CN zoning or even adjacent co zoning limitations and addresses the waiver for the hotel use as a separate

issue which should be based upon a room per acre basis similar to multifamily. A luxury hotel which offers a workout room for guests, a larger lobby, and generousized guest rooms, but is otherwise well below massing limitations, is not any more impactful on traffic and surrounding property owners than the same number of guest rooms in a smaller building area. When looking at the rooms per acre of all the hotels cited by the planning staff in the report, the proposed project for 570 Prince Avenue is by far the lowest ratio at 23 rooms per acre. The next closest is Hotel Abacus at just over 29 rooms per acre and the Athenian at just over 31 rooms per acre. Hotel Hotel Indigo is 76.5 and the Rivet House is 120 rooms per acre. These other reference hotels have completely different site and lot size context. Calculating density by lot size, this proposed hotel is lower density than any other cited hotel in acts. Preservation is our priority. Our intent is to restore the existing home to the Secretary of the Interior standards. This will require significant investment in deferred maintenance and other improvements. It will also include an easement on the house facade and front gardens. By limiting the height of the three-story hotel to that of the historic home and placing it over 58 ft to the rear of the existing structure, the significance of the resource and its prominence along the streetscape is maintained. The existing dense evergreen plantings will remain in the front yard which further screen almost any visibility to the new building as illustrated in the providing existing photographs taken from Prince Avenue which unfortunately were not shared in the presentation. Um two-dimensional elevation drawings with no depth perspective or landscape do not tell the story the visibility of the proposed development. The submitted entry drive rendering which also was not shared is more accurate in terms of building depth. But even in that view, landscape which will remain had to be omitted just to even illustrate the architecture.

In summary, this use welcomes the public into the historic house and grounds is less impactful than other permitted scenes. The room density per acre is lower than any other hotel listed in SAP's report. And there will be minimal traffic impact according to the analysis we just received from the engineers which will be shared with the planning department. And this proposal consolidates and balances density to hide parking and preserve green space. Thank you very much for your consideration. Thank you. Is there anybody else here to speak in support of

Good evening everybody. Thank you very much for having us. My name is Parker Henderson. I serve as brand leader of Graduate Hotels by Hilton. I reside in Washington DC uh where Hilton headquarters is. Um I grew up just down the street in Gainesville though, so glad to be here. I've been with Hilton since 2003. So Hilton is excited to have another opportunity to serve our guest in this community in Athens with this project. Graduate Hotels was founded in 2014 and the first hotel opening was here in Athens. A lot has changed with the brand since 2014. Today, the brand focuses on creating unique hotels in university anchored towns, capturing local culture and school spirit, catering to perspective students, alumni, visitors, and business travelers. Authentic storytelling is at the heart of everything that we do, especially when it comes to design. Each hotel is completely different, brings to life its community, its community's history, the traditions, and local lore. Since the Graduate Athens opened in 2014, the owners and operators of the brand AJ Capital have designed and opened 35 more hotels throughout the United States in the United Kingdom. Just as a student starts as a freshman with meager beginnings, they grow. They learn from their mistakes. They embrace new opportunities and develop their craft. Graduate did the same thing. Think of your first apartment. Mine was very sad with simple handme-downs from friends and family in a dumpy space. But years after and many residents later, I'm proud of the home I've now created and the design resonates with who I am. The graduate brand has grown in that same sophistication. In 2017, the brand had already grown to 10 hotels and Incorporated Business Magazine awarded the brand with an enter design award which recognizes entrepreneurs design to uh build great companies. And in 2018, Fast Company named Graduate one of the world's most innovative companies. In

2022, Chip and Joanna Gains, the Magnolia Network, they created a show inspired by Graduate called Handcrafted Hotels and showcases individual properties in six of their episodes. By 2024, we were classified as an upper upscale brand through Smith Travel Research, just below luxury. Many locations had earned AAA four diamond awards. Few hotels have been invited into the American Express the hotel collection. Very exclusive membership there. And Graduate Auburn, one of our most recent openings, was just named by Southern Living magazine the best new hotel opening in the south. And last year, Hilton acquired the brand and inspected each of the hotels to make sure they can live up to the name of Hilton. All but one of those hotels came into the Hilton portfolio and that was Graduate Athens. It simply did not meet the Hilton standard. The quality of the plans of the President's House is one that aligns with our brand today. I can assure you it will be nothing like what you've seen here before. We intend to create something unlike any other graduate hotel in the country. Couldn't be more excited to bring it back to the city where it all began here in Athens, Georgia. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Anybody else to speak in support of the application?

All right, hearing none. Um, we'll move to anybody who's here to speak in opposition of this application. Remember, y'all can just come right up. You do not need micro. Is there anybody else that's an organization? Okay, I just don't want to take anybody else's time. Um, I'm here on behalf of an organization. Okay. It's the neighborhood preservation action and preparation. Okay. Are are there folks here? Yes, sir. That you're speaking on behalf of Yes, sir. It's helpful. Maybe have them throw their hand. Okay. You're speaking on behalf of them. Are we good to acknowledge? Yeah. Okay. Then we'll do the 10 minutes. Sorry. Could you say that organization again? I couldn't. It is Neighborhood Preservation Action Incorporation.

It's a neighborhood grassroots organization. You tell me when you're ready.

Okay. Good evening. My name is Laura Benz. I'm with Ben's Law, 19 West Broad Street. I'm here on behalf of Neighborhood Preservation Action. As I said earlier, it's a grassroots community organization uh for the preservation of neighborhood character and residential communities. Um you should have all received a copy of my letter that I submitted to the planning commission as well as mayor and commission dated August 29th sets forth some of the deficiencies that have been put forth in this application. I'm going to focus on two comments per primarily procedural. Then we'll also get to some substantive. Um, as you all are aware, this whole process of what we're doing is based on the constitution of Georgia and how it allows us to have due process and the zoning procedures law. And so, in order to make sure that we're adhering to those, um, we need to go ahead and look at what those procedures are that have been established in your ordinance and making sure that we're checking all those boxes. So it's clear that when the law procri prescribes when a local government has adopted procedures and policies to implement zoning and has police powers that adheres to those requirements based on the information that was submitted and that was confirmed via an open records act request. This application fails to check many of those boxes and did not satisfy. So we'll go through a little bit of that just so those people who may not be aware become aware. Section 9143 sets forth the process to assess a PD proposal. It provides that the intent of the process is to provide an opportunity for the planning commission to comment and provide substantive comments on the ordinance. Case law is clear. If the information that is listed in the ordinance is not provided, it prohibits the planning commission, the board, as well as the mayor from being able to make substantive comments because they have not satisfied providing the information that's available. The submission contained five documents. an August 1st cover letter, August 1st preliminary plan de development report, preliminary elevation renderings, preliminary site plan renderings, and preliminary site plan tree management plan. The only plan that was stamped was the tree management plan. So most of my

comments that were reflected in that letter go through that plan as it was being the only plan that could satisfy the plan requirements. Of the 16 items that are required on that plan, seven of them are missing. Um, in addition, it also requires that there's enumerated items 16 through 21 in your ordinance that requires other items. Utility coordination was not provided. Planning report specifically acknowledges that there are shortfalls in the application. The one glaring error that I was shocked is there was not even a signed application. So, pursuant to 9143, it contains language that is not discretionary. The applicant shall provide the executed application. The applicant didn't. The applicant must have a preliminary site plan that includes the items. The applicant didn't. So, as we go forward, the courts have held that the failure to provide the required information in the ordinance, as I said, hinders your ability to make substantive comments to help define what a master plan should be. Therefore, at this point, you can't make such criteria as far as land use, development, suitability if there are impacts on public resources because that information was not provided to you. The court of appeals in Harden versus Banks as well as the Supreme Court in McLur versus Davidson have specifically said that decisions that are made on incomplete applications, those decisions are set aside. They're no longer allowed to be valid decisions. Um, So looking additionally into other parts of your ordinance, it clearly says the plain lang language says that any of the failure to provide all of the required information is an incomplete application and it should have been removed from this agenda. However, you are all hearing this, so I'm going ahead and pointing out those deficiencies for your consideration. You selectively cannot choose which elements and which projects you're going to adhere to a certain standard. That's why we have due process. It's so that every applicant should be held to the same standard and

that the the the people that are here in this room making comments know that their voices are being heard and they're all being viewed in the same basis of the same uh information. Um we would assert that the shortfall the procedural shortfalls preclude this body from satisfying that element of the ordinance and that this body should have to convey again when a full complete application is done to start the preliminary plan concept as well. As far as substantive comments, there is a lot of discussion about waiverss or what could possibly be. We are only here to discuss. One of the members clearly said at the beginning of this meeting, any any type of reasonzoning would come before this board. That's true. So, the only matter is not what could be or is there worse options. Is is this option the best option? Does this option satisfy the law? And for some of the uh arguments that I've just set forth, it it doesn't even satisfy the procedural arguments to even be here. When we're looking at what is a PD, there are about eight different zoning classifications that satisfy Main Street zoning for your comp plan. So, there are eight different options that could be chosen for this particular property that would be in satisfaction of the comp plan. The only one that permits a hotel is CN and that is permitted as a 10,000 ft limit. So, it is a permitted use. It does not just go to size, it goes to the use. If you are going to have for PD, it clearly says in 9141 that the underlying basic district provided that the spirit and intent of such requirements are complied with in the total development plan. You can't argue that 10,000 square feet of a hotel is covered by a 90,000 foot hotel. If it was the intent of the comp plan to allow a larger hotel, they would have used uses for commercial general or commercial downtown. They didn't. They restricted it to CN knowing that the limit was a 10,000 f foot hotel there. I'm glad to hear that they're talking about there being protections

and preservations for the historical facade. There needs to be more conversations. How exactly does that building that's being presented on the side? How does that comply with historical standards? Who's going to hold easements? There's just a lot of information that hasn't been provided and it's not equitable to have this board asked to make comments on something that is not full. Uh we would respectfully request and will go ahead and provide substantive comments when a full application in compliance with the law is provided. Anybody else to speak position?

Sure. Tony Eubank 785 North Pope Street. My property abuts the back lot of this and this thing is massive. I mean it's massive. U it's it's it's going to be disruptive to everybody on Boulevard, everybody in Boulevard, everybody in Cobb, everybody that uses Prince Avenue. And I think that a waiver of roughly nine times the size of what's allowed in CN zoning, why even have it? Why have ZN zoning if that's what if that's what we're going to do? And I also want to re reiterate the last speaker. Don't tell me what it could be. I want to evaluate this. Okay? Don't threaten me with what it could be. All right? That's not a good way to do business. All right. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else?

Hey, I'm Stephanie Lynn from 226 Hill Street. The president's house has been owned and occupied by UG for more than 75 years, longer than some of us has been have been alive here. U many neighbors in Boulevard and Cobb have lived in this area for 30 years or more. With that low impact use in government zoning. Zoning serves as a contract with the community. It prevents conflicts between uses, protects property values, and preserves neighborhood character. When that contract is broken, it erodess the trust and stability families rely on when they buy their homes and build their lives. The developer is asking you to reszone this track to CN through a plan development. We do not oppose the reszoning itself. What we oppose is their request to disregard the zoning safeguard that limits the impact of hotels by capping their size at 10,000 square ft. To put this in perspective, the only other hotel in CN zoning is the Rivet House. 30,000 square ft. It's buffered by homes from streets and rail lines with only six nearby residences. By contrast, this track directly abuts 21 residential lots along 75% of its property line with only vegetative separation. Granting this oversized waiver could set a precedent for large-scale development in other CN zones on Prince Avenue. The applicant claims this isn't an expansion of use because the CCSD, the school district property, functions like a business, but in reality, it operates as a weekday office space with no heavy impact. They also argue downtown is just a block away. But we must resist zoning creep. Prince Avenue should not inherit downtown scale of taller buildings, reduce setbacks, and higher intensity. A planned development should deliver a unique community benefit that cannot be achieved otherwise. That's why we allow these things to happen. This proposal falls short of that standard. The developers site 50 new jobs, increased tax revenue, and additional hotel rooms as major benefits, but those outcomes

will result from a hotel built anywhere in Athens, not just on this site. What makes this property unique is its historic importance, its ties to UG, and the decades of investment made by the local families in this room. Athens does not know owe any developer a guaranteed return on investment, especially not at the expense of its neighborhoods. Approving this reasonzoning would take value away from those in this room who have sustained this historic community and hand it over to an outside interest, a very big outside interest. This hotel, if approved, would be the fifth largest in Athens, Georgia, larger than Hotel Indigo by 4,000 square feet. The limit of 10,000 square feet was not picked randomly. It was chosen with care. We ask that the project meet the zoning codes for CN zoning because it is not really a planned development. It's a request for a variance shrouded in a planned development. This will ensure that it does not change the character of the neighborhood, interfere with the community's peaceful enjoyment of their property, and tax the community's infrastructure. Thank you.

Thank you. Who's next?

Good evening. My name is Amy Cassain and I live at 526 Highland Avenue in Athens. I spent 16 years advocating for historic properties and historic neighborhoods in Athens as the director for the Athens Park Heritage Foundation, now Historic Athens. Um, this is certainly one of the most consequential historic developments to come along in a long time. And as the applicant said, you know, this is a great opportunity, you know, it is a great opportunity to have this property now perhaps more publicly available. But I think we have to look what CN zoning. It's commercial neighborhood. It's meaning cooperative, right? These things living next to each other, being next to each other. How can it how can they live together? How can they coexist? And the applicant and others are saying that, well, they're preserving the house and that's all that matters. Well, I care a lot about the house, as do everybody here. It's an iconic, incredible house. It's very important to our community. But that's not all that this is about. I mean that we also have historic neighborhoods. We have historic Prince Avenue. We have this is a community and and so this property you know at nine times as Tony Eubanks pointed out commercial neighborhood a hotel it's saying a hotel at 10,000 square feet you know not 90,000 square feet. So, I mean that it's just it's just kind of ludicrous to even think that they're in the same that we should consider those things in the same ballpark at all in the same conversation. And of course, it's not just the size, right? Because with that size, with 116 hotel rooms come a lot of other impacts, infrastructure, traffic, all these other things. And again, as Miss Benz pointed out, we don't even have all those details. So how can we really comment on what this project is going to be, what its impact is going to be and we you know it's very difficult to do that but we can comment just in general the size

the scale and does it can it does it really is it appropriate to coexist with our neighborhoods and our historic Prince Avenue. So thank you very much. Anybody else? Line up if you want. Falling all over people.

Hello, I'm Jason Taylor. Um I'm the current chair of the Boulevard Neighborhood Association, 419 Boulevard. There's some other folks. Um, and I'm just going to read this letter to offer our comments. As residents of the Boulevard neighborhood, we strongly support preservation of the UG President's House, and we are open to adopted reuse that is thoughtful and appropriately scaled. We are thankful to see a plan that protects the historic president's house and maintains the historic gardens in front of the house as well as the green space in the long narrow rear section of the property. Keeping those spaces as undisturbed as possible is not just appropriate but crucial as the majority of that acreage is surrounded by single family residential homes. However, we do have genuine concerns about some aspects of the proposed project. One, while the design seems sensitive to the architectural elements of the president's house, we are very concerned about the massive size of the new building. The planning department recommends CN zoning, but the proposed hotel is more than eight times the size allowed in CN zoning. We wonder if a development of this size is appropriate for this site and we worry that it could set a precedent for overscale development along the rest of Prince Avenue. Two, we are waiting the results of the traffic study which just came out, but we do not want development that diverts additional traffic on the residential streets or makes Prince Avenue more dangerous for us and our children. We're interested to learn what specific traffic engineering accommodations or changes may be expected. The waiver requesting use of 784 Prince Avenue for additional parking is problematic since there's no way to turn left onto Prince from that driveway. Using 784 Prince for valet service would therefore require cars to turn onto London and pass through the neighborhood to return to the hotel. Every substantial additional storm water volume is proposed to be sent into

drains on Grady Avenue. Those drains run under many houses from Grady to Virginia Avenue and then to the corner of Boulevard and Lynon Avenue. Uh such a major increase in flow could cause severe unintended consequences to our homes and land even if new infrastructure is installed. Four, we share the concerns of the neighbors over the noise impacts of a large event space and event close to residential communities. Five, the large underground parking deck requires extensive excavation and removal of many tons of soil. In any large excavation of this type so close to many historic buildings, we would like to know how problems that develop in nearby structures and with utilities will be addressed. Most possibly all of these concerns could be amilarated by simply limiting the scale of development. Ideally, the scale conform to the zoning ordinance has guided our community's development for the past 25 years. Alternatively, any changes in zoning should reflect and respect community input, especially from the affected neighborhoods. We would like to see that the expected continuing development along Prince Avenue happens in a way that enhances rather than degrades the safety, quality of life, and attractiveness of our neighborhood.

Thank you. You

uh good evening everybody. I'm John Divine. I live at 148 Virginia A. Um, and when I worked here with Bruce years and years ago, I was not used to seeing this many people. So, this is great. Um, my neighborhood association, Jason, just noted, quote, "Most, possibly all of these concerns could be ameliorated by simply limiting the scale of the development. The staff report goes further." Again, quoting directly, 87,753 square feet is too much in the midst of a neighborhood. Staff does not support this waiver. As a neighbor, I actually think the right hotel restaurant could be a benefit to the neighborhood. Um, I think it's important though that we not work downward from the requested accommodations in the proposal, but we begin any negotiation that helps the community meet our needs from the starting point of two basic foundations. First, the requested commercial zoning, uh, commercial neighborhood zoning would represent a dramatic departure from both the current and historic use of the property, which is of course single family residential. Um, imagine the contrast in your neighborhoods between going from a single family house um to the full range of byite impacts under CN from massive building size, parking requirements, and storm water demands to the noise, car trips, other daily realities associated with the arrival of hundreds of additional bodies where there have previously only been a handful. Second, setting aside the question of whether CN goes too far for this site, the hotel allowance within that zone is of course 10,000 square feet. While I think it's reasonable to ask for a small accommodation here and there for complicated projects, especially in trying to preserve a neglected historic building like this, um the proposal requests almost an order of magnitude of concession. That concession, if granted, wouldn't come from the planning staff. It wouldn't come from the planning commission. It wouldn't come from the

mayor and commission. It would come from the community. Um, and it would be absorbed by the community and all of us within it. So, zoning isn't this abstract um table that just shows how many zeros can go after the comma in the square foot column. It's really a an embodiment of our community's values um and the safeguards that we put in place collectively to help us keep a level playing field as families invest their life savings into the community. So for those reasons, let's please recognize that one, this project as proposed is too big. Two, we ought to be negotiating from the standpoint of what's allowed in the zoning ordinance and not down from how much uh from much higher bar that the proposal attempts to set. Finally, three, a more appropriately sign sized hotel restaurant would actually be pretty cool and I would look forward to having dinner or a drink there if it comes about. Thank you.

Thank you. Liz Demarco, 327 Hill Street. I want to dismantle the notion that not accepting this proposal will lead to an even more detrimental development. My family has lived on the other side of Prince, just a block away from the president's house for 25 years. When we bought our home, our surroundings were not as appealing as they are today, to say the least. All this positive change did not happen by accident. This has come from dedicated Athens residents caring uh Athens caring and devoting time, energy, and resources. Many have been in the neighborhood much longer than my 25 years. I want to point out three projects to remind us all that if they had been allowed, my street and the blocks around me would would have turned into an undesirable place to live. In all cases, it took tremendous effort to change the direction and results were solid, stable projects that enhance our area. First, 340 North Millage was an empty half block where a fraternity wanted to develop an oversized complex even for Millage Avenue standards. Instead, we now have a doctor's office appropriately situated on the block and beautifully landscaped. The double lot at 369 and 399 Megs is just the opposite corner from Big City was going to be another fraternity house, but now is a record studio with major philanthropic outreach into the Athens community. My last example was the former B&B Magnolia Terrace that turned into a fraternity rental house that disturbed us practically every night of the week. Because of neighbors

efforts, that historic house was eventually purchased and completely restored by a young family that again contribute to our community. Greek life plays an important role in college towns and there is definitely a place for fraternities, but I think we can all agree that they do not make the best neighbors and they increase the pressure for single family homes to turn over into disruptive rentals. I offer that an oversized hotel has some similar characteristics. Noise, light, trash, activity at all hours of the day and night and temporary residents that are understandably just there to have a good time. In addition, I want to point out that directly across from Prince Avenue from the president's house, there are four houses that are residential with two more residential houses just a block away down Prince. Um, one familiar with not familiar with this area may assume that those are businesses, but they are not. And additionally, Clark County Clark County School District offices are also a good fit for this area of Prince. Um, and I do have, since I have little time, I do have experience with graduate hotels in um, Indian uh, Indianapolis.

Thanks. Can I get Okay, anybody can go. I was not planning on speaking this evening. I have nothing prepared. I just got a little bit riled up. So, could you just say your name?

Katherine Rafy. I live at 225 Georgia Avenue, which is I'm just about a half block off Prince Avenue, and I've lived here for 20 years. Um, I think what a little bit got me is, and I really know that all of this hinges on the technicalities of code and variance and stuff, and I'm so appreciative for the lawyers here. That's not what I'm going to be addressing today. It's more that um I was a little bit put off by the notion that this building is going to become open to the public because I would ask you what public is that? And we can look around this room and who is here? Who is this building going to serve? I am a full-time city employee and I love working for my community. You all pay my bill with your taxes. I appreciate that. I could not afford to stay in this hotel. My friends could not afford to stay in this hotel or probably get a drink at its bar. I would the idea that this commission might make a variance to allow development that will push out the people who live here and work here and are employed by this government is honestly offensive to me. I would I I would ask I know this is a very large request um but that as a group I hope that you all are just thinking about this city as a place where people live and work and that we don't just continue to cater to temporary residents whether they be students uh weekenders um people who are moving through this community relies on its permanent residents and I don't see how this development ment assists that at all. It will only further push us out. I realized that the representative from DC was really trying to sell us on this idea of the hotel's exclusivity. And

every time he talked about that more and more, I got angrier and angrier because exclusivity is not what I think Athens is about. But I would just hope that you all take that into account um as you consider this proposal which is not uh in accordance with what we want for our community and for this residential neighborhood. Thank you. Speak in opposition.

Good afternoon. My name is Blair Dormy. My wife Betsy and I live at 357 Hill Street, a block from the proposed development. Uh, also notable, we have uh renovated uh and uh operate profitably a small hotel, a boutique hotel, this an historic rail hotel in Vermont and have just completed uh an addition of new construction on that. So that's part of the pers uh perspective that I'm bringing to this. I want to say while I'd like to believe it, u I don't accept that preservation is the primary motivation here. This is really more about making big bank. You can preserve this property by operating a an appropriately scaled hotel. A 25 room hotel could operate with a uh you know a net present a positive net present present value return on the income within uh the parameters of the ordinance. What they're proposing at 116 rooms is not designed for preservation. You can just look at this uh you know this graph in front of us. It's almost a visual re uh reputation of what they're saying about preservation. It is so wildly out of scale. So I ran some numbers on the 116 room development. We're talking a net present value in the tens of millions of dollars. You know, uh a very high return on investment. That's that's uh you know that's on the backs of the people who live around here. Uh you're basically would be awarding a windfall in profit to an

outside developer at the expense of the local residents. So anyway, there's a better way to do this. uh we'll see if they are up to that come coming back with something that would uh be appropriate to the community. There's what further point that I'd like to make. If you do grant this waiver at almost 90,000 square feet as opposed to, you know, from the 10,000 foot variance, I mean from the 10,000 square foot limitation, you're not just creating a waiver. You are basically eviscerating the ordinance. Anybody who comes afterwards, you're not going to have a leg to stand on in defending a denial of an application. Any any witting applicant is going to resort to litigation if you approve something like this. It is such an order of magnitude completely out of scale. I appreciate your attention. Thank you.

Anybody else here to speak in opposition? My name is Margie Spalding. I live at 739 Cobb Street. Excuse me. And I just wanted to say something about the easement that has been suggested that's going to be held on the house. And I know that the Georgia Trust for Historic Preservation has refused to hold the easement because of the scale of the proposed development. It doesn't meet the national criteria. So just I don't know where an easement is going to come from and I don't know how a guarantee that the house would be preserved would be uh would be guaranteed would be a would be uh what's the word guaranteed anyway that's just my point. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else here to speak in opposition? My name is Lee Epstein. I live at 1,800 Crescent Lane. Uh I've lived up and down Prince Avenue in Cobb and in four or five other houses. We had worked very hard to save the pres uh the Taylor Grady house down the street which was going to be turned into offices. Uh I've worked put together a foundation with a group three years ago for the president's house and we asked that people come behind us and push the board of regents who own it and push for the administration to have this many people come in front of the administration of the University of Georgia and to say wait a minute folks you have a treasure Here you have an iconic home. A lots of things can be done with five acres in especially including the you got the Taylor Grady house saved down there and you've got the two lots between the two on Prince Avenue where they tore down the old Michael homes. All that together and you've got Landmark Commons. We presented to the board of regents and I put in a bid for the house. I put in two bids for the house with a plan of what could be done. Uh it must be in my opinion the house must be saved. It must we got the preservation easements and the administration to agree that the board

of regents would require preservation easements for the house before it is uh sold or developed or okayed. They must have that. Well, the Georgia trust sadly will not accept it because I'm afraid this project uh is too big for to meet their specifications. So I would hope that we would consider either working with this group that wants to put money in and see if there's anything can be adapted to come within the reasons of reasonable thing. I don't know that can be uh after hearing all of the opposition to it. But I would say go into the thing and because they are going to restore the house and preserve that. See what kind of preservation easements can be come up they can come up with that must happen and then work with them and see if there are other alternatives. Look at the first thing we put as a as a campus for learning like with the Wilson Center coming in here that had housing and that had rooms and that had a restaurant and had all of these things in there. So there are other alternatives that perhaps we can work with these folks.

Thank you, Mr. Can do. So get those preservation easements on that for sure. Anybody else to speak in opposition? could I ask everyone that came to support the position of the people that spoke against it to to rise as we leave so you see Oh, sure. Yeah. Someone can come up and and say that someone who hasn't stand up if you're

stay and just just to clarify so we're gonna we're gonna discuss this after we get a the applicant will have two minutes to respond and Um, and then y'all are welcome to stay and hear the discussion because we're not going to vote on anything tonight. This is we're going to be um just talking about the proposal. So, just so everybody knows. So, thank you. With that in mind, would the applicant like to come up for uh two minutes of response? Um, so I need to repeat my name again.

Um, no. Okay. Yeah. um and really have anything prepared. But um I think just a couple quick things. I think that the design team and the ownership team very much are willing to work with the neighborhood and planning staff to get something that's going to be um hopefully um amendable to all. Um I will say we've had ongoing conversations with the Georgia Trust. There's a little bit of at odds with probably neighbor um considerations with that. our initial conversations, they want want any new construction all the way in the very back of the property behind all the Sith family residences. So, that was one of those issues that we're trying to talk through and find out whether the Georgia Trust is the right um group to hold that easement or whether it should be another organization, but there would have to be an easement um a preservation easement on the house and front gardens. Um they also would likely want the historic structures to remain the outbuildings where they are. So, it just pushes everything to the back of the property towards the residential neighbors. Um, and if that's something the neighbors are okay with, we're happy to work through that with everybody. Um, also, you know, working through the parking situations if this gets scaled down. Um, we I think we have a creative design team and we're happy to work through those things. I think we have one of the best landscape architects in Athens, probably the best. Um, and we can look at that, but parking is going to be impactful too as soon as we pull it out, you know. Um, but in general, we are very happy to work with everybody and this is really just an initial step to put it out there to get reaction. There's a lot of reaction. Um, so we we want to um we want to get this right. This is too important piece of property not to. Thank you.

Thank you.

All right. So, we're going to take it to this side of the room and y'all are welcome to hang out and listen or watch online um from the coolness of your car. And um for my commissioner friends, I'm going to make a suggestion that we focus um the discussion first on the use of the property as a hotel. Okay? And then as and just for the sake of everybody here with with a PD the the beauty of a PD is that we have some give and take with the applicant and we can talk about things that we like and don't like. And so I'm going to suggest after we talk about the use of the property as a hotel or for the current proposed use then we can talk about what we might like to see changed the next time this comes back to us. Okay. So just thinking about how we're going to structure our discussion because we heard a lot. Thank you everybody who came out. Who wants to kick us off?

Kristen, can I quickly? Yeah.

In the tow of everybody being here so early to to warn you of this, but uh I just wanted to disclose that as a realtor, I have sold the property to the applicant and I represented the property owner and not the applicant. So, if that was to get out, I want that spoken here first. I don't see that as an issue. I don't know if y'all see that as an issue or not. Um, and then since then he did reach out to me and mention the project. I told him being on the planning commission I cannot talk about the project and talk about anything else we want to can't talk about the project. So I'm just disclosing that here for record. Thank you.

Who wants to go first? Yes, I am comfortable with the use of it as a hotel. I think we can talk about scale and everything else later, but I'll just kick us off by saying that I do think a hotel would be an appropriate use on this property. I want to point out that the current building structures are 9,000 square feet. So, that gives you a sense of what would be allowed under CN zoning. Um, so just I'll start with that. See what other folks think. Mike

I don't have a fundamental issue with the change in zoning and use from you know it has to change from government zoning to something and I think that the CN co is a good change and yeah in a hotel under be okay I agreed I think a scalable you know change to that to CN that makes sense for the neighborhood but yeah I mean just in the concept of I I I agree with the reuse uh to be for a hotel. I do have concerns about utility with our existing infrastructure and how a larger scale facility would impact parents infrastructure. We have anybody from um

um not TPW um public utilities public utilities it is right back there. Yeah. Question I did have a question about this runoff. You know I can that's storm water. Sorry if it's water. If you have a question, if he could provide a warm and fuzzy, that would help because I'm I'm just not comfortable with the eight times the size of what we have here. You can check with water usage. Well, just the scale up of the facility itself, which means you're going to have more people, more density, and more usage. Yeah.

So, a question about water usage and sanitary sewer generation. Correct. Not not storm water, but No, not storm water. Joel, do you want to come up and briefly? No pressure. Sorry, put you on the spot. Um, yeah, I guess, you know, for from public utility standpoint, um, we do, you know, feel that this would, um, have a higher impact to, you know, public water, public sewer. Um you speak up.

Yeah, sorry. So we we did evaluate for capacity for this specific um you know amount of bedrooms in use and found that we do have you know capacity available to serve the proposed development. Um but you know allowing the variance to use a uh a um you know square footage of almost 90,000 as opposed to 10,000 square feet would um you know obviously have higher impacts on you know on our infrastructure. Um, you know, the the development specifically asked for 15,000 gallons per day of use um using planning's codes um just the density numbers there um we found that hey um maximum allowable buildout for um CN zoning or yeah per per the proposed CN zoning would 9,235 gallons per day. So, um there is a there is a difference in what is being asked and what is allowed by Right.

Thank you. Sorry to to just to reiterate. So, you said the the typical capacity for that would be about 9,000 and change and the request is for 15,000 gallons. That's correct. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Can I add to that? Yeah. Yes. Now that confuses me. Um, sorry. The No. Um, it maybe should have the 9235 is for CN that's that's what the property itself without the number of hotel rooms. That's it's not what you think that number of hotel rooms would need. It's what the the county believes CN would do.

That's correct. Yeah. There is a you know in the zoning code there's a maximum density number that we use you know in evaluating what the maximum you know if there was a reason what the maximum uh usage would be that that's allowed in that proposed zoning. Um, so that's density times acreage. Um, which is where we got the 9,000 number. Um, which is, you know, less than what is being asked by the development. Can the neighborhood if they use 15,000, can can that be supplied properly? And the

you're saying, do we have capacity? Is there enough water in Athens to uh and Prince Avenue? I'm not trying to be funny. I'm just like is there enough order or not? Yes sir. I mean you know we we evaluated that number that was being asked and that we do have sufficient capacity for what was being asked for um just to inform the you know planning staff and planning commission. We evaluate what the max is per the allowed zone and what's being asked.

Thank you. I have a question. So if the existing structure is 9,75 square feet and CN allows for 10,000 square feet, right? Taking the existing structure into account it could anybody if they wanted to work within the CN they could only add on a th00and square feet comply with CN of hotel use of hotel use. So you could only add 1,000 square feet to the existing somewhere on that parcel. You're saying if you if you turn the current thing into a hotel,

if you could turn it to a hotel and you stay in CN and work with the what's allowed at 10,000 square feet. You can only add on,000 square feet up to the 10,000 mark. That's of hotel use. Now there are other uses that are available in CN that don't have a cap. Okay. Like that. Then you're working with a cap of lot coverage and setback and building height floor area ratio some other things. The hotel use has its own specific maximum. Oh, I see where you're going. So you could have the current building and then build a 10,000 foot hotel behind it and just have a restaurant in the front part. The CN zoning would allow for that. Okay.

Um, I'm happy to continue talking about land use or we can talk about what we might on the proposal the next time it comes to us. So, say something about that.

Yeah. Um, well, I'm in support of a hotel being there and uh, yeah, I'm not in support of the increase from 10,000 to 87. It just seems way too much. It's too big of an ask. Seeing that it's already 10,000 kind of there. I could see a little bit to that number, you know, but not nearly what they're asking. So I don't think unless this was kind of shrunk in scale by quite a lot, I don't see how I would be in support of this.

Yeah, I tend to agree with that. I thought it was kind of interesting in the um the historic common foundation uh in their memorandum they mentioned um just a proposal of um right size to a maximum of 30 to 37 thou 37,800 ft. That's kind of interesting. It's not egregiously more than the 10,000 square feet. Um I don't I don't know if that's just kind of an arbitrary number. I guess they're looking at rivet house um or that w their waiver, I guess. Um that's kind of an interesting idea that doesn't go way out of character for the zoning. But yeah, the 80 the nearly nine times almost 90,000 seems pretty pretty crazy. ask um a question of the applicant the the easement that came up. Um I'm curious what what that tipping point was with um the Georgia trust taking on that Eastman. Like what is the size that makes what is that magical number? Right? Because I like what what is what is the size, right? um somewhere between 10,000 and 80,000. But so question for the applicant. Um you want me to come up?

I can I don't want to speak for the Georgia trust. Um but I do know our initial conversation said um if they were to consider it, they would look at it through the secretary of the interior standards for new construction on a historic property. Um, so any new structure back there would have to be significantly smaller and located as far away from the existing structure as possible. Um, was their initial comments. So, they didn't site an exact number. There was no light. They did not. Thank you.

So, in looking at it, this is a what we've got up on the screen is a good one. the I don't know why the size doesn't bother me more um and my background with preservation it it it should because you don't want to dominate the historic piece of of uh structure the but then I go back to the Lynen house go pick satellite look at that it's a massive structure behind the lynen house and it's not a hotel and but it's been done and again it's not a precedent. I'm not saying it should be though I'm not counting it as that. Uh then I look at it and again we're only looking at it for what it is. But all of a sudden I'm going well what if that was a educational facility? Um would would would that fit better or not? It's not our concern. It's what our concern is is what we're is the waiver more than anything.

The the fact that it's a hotel, it never occurred to me that that's that's an option. I I do like the idea of the hotel. Seems like neighborhood does too. I don't think that's into issue. Um, I do know and Epste made a comment about uh the Taylor Grady house and I know how enormously expensive a house like that is to maintain. So, whatever happens here, it's going to have to play that mind. And I don't know who wouldn't say, "Well, why? Let's just scale that one back right there." And the the math is not our concern uh with zoning, but y'all heard me say it before uh and I'll say it in all kind of meetings, math matters. And if math doesn't work, then there there is no uh nothing after the equals mark. It's there's no solution. So it I I think and and I know this has been said in some of the public meetings at all. I think the architects did a fantastic job taking 116 rooms, making it not feel like 116 rooms. It's not taller uh than the primary structure. That's important. It might not be short enough uh to to fit certain standards. Not our concern. I understand that. But that is um the the design of it is taking from the house a little bit but not not dominating. So I I'll I'll just say at least kudos to the architecture and and the whole group for at least trying to hide as much of the square footage as possible because you can make 8700 square feet look a whole lot bigger than that. Um,

the underground parking is probably what does make this even not laughable. Um, because you add parking to the back and you're adding a whole new aspect of of problems. Uh, cars running, cars idling, cars turning, cars everything. Um that's again the neighbors did say we cannot concern ourselves with anything except what's in front of us. Um but that is something that I think makes this project at least something you can look at and go well now they've actually done something and and I know about digging holes. They're very expensive to dig in a there's a rock they'll hit it and it'll cost them. So, um, but I like underground parking better than above ground parking when you're able to do that. So, I think that that much I can appreciate and I but I don't know how this goes, but yeah, the the boom of blasting that would concern me if I was living in 150 year old house. I I don't know. That's that's not in our area here. uh we don't deal with explosives on the planning commission but I think that has to be looked at and understood uh about that and I would say and and I don't know how this works with us either that that easement is an absolute must that that's not that's a that's a heck no for me if there is not a guarantee legally that that building is not going to be uh kept in the condition that it's in, particularly on the exterior. Um, I had offered the board of regents to guide them through

turning that into a local historic uh landmark. Um, no charge. Uh, they kindly refused, which is normal for a seller. Sellers don't want to do that. They want the next person to do it. Um, that would protect that. That that'd be the easiest thing. No one has to own the easement in a case like that. Um, I officially offered that. They they they did not uh accept that and but that would that would send everything back to a different place. But the easement I'll I'll just tell you I I university has to be held to that somehow if if they're going to be part of our community and they're a great part of our community. I don't want to step over that line. We they they are the the hand that feeds in Athens. So um but that somehow needs to be resolved in my opinion somehow ironclad or we go stretching waiverss to this extent and um we can go further with that.

I'll just piggyback on what Alex said. I I mean almost feels as the neighborhood representative said this is a conversation that's preliminary because that easement has to be in place. We don't know if it can be in place in this like it would be possible with this iteration. So it almost feels like this conversation is too soon to even have. In general, I'm not opposed to a hotel, but as the applicant said, scaling the the hotel down and having to have surface problem uh parking will create a new problem. Maybe a hotel is not the answer. possible that a restaurant, a bar, something else that eats as all that truly matters is that that the structure remains. Personally feel like that's far too much life back there. I disagree with having that much even though I think the architect did a beautiful job. Um I think it's too much life for that spot of Prince Avenue, but I don't even know if we can have this conversation before we know about the Eastman. Do

you want us to kind of move into We kind We've kind of naturally moved into None of us can hear what she says. Yeah. Yeah. Speak up. Yeah.

Yeah. She was just saying that we're moving into the discussion of what we want to see changed when the applicant comes back the next time. So yeah, I think what I would say is this. I I there is no way a waiver of more than eight times what will be allowed in a CN is going to fly. Like I I feel like we need to see that. This is a a really hard piece of property. It's a really cool challenge because anything that happens on this property will have to come through planning commission and the reszone and the community um because that's the nature of a piece of property that's currently zoned government. So I like that component where um something you know something like this can will always be subject to community input. Um and so my primary input is I guess a obviously scale everything that everyone said about that I definitely agree with. There are things that members of the community said that I don't agree with. Um I we we this comes up time and time again. This does not set a legal precedent. Nobody can come to us down the road and say you let that happen so you got to let me do it. Doesn't work like that. So I'm not worried about that. I do understand though the concept of precedent in the sense that you start to do something and then it creeps because people start to feel more like well it's happening down the road so that's okay if it keeps happening. So I just want to make the distinction between that kind of snowball effect versus actual legal precedent. They're not the same thing. Um, I really feel like I think the applicant said something that resonated with me somewhat, which is that this is you, it doesn't lend itself very

well to comparing it with other hotels because it's such a big piece of property and it its acreage is working against it. somebody could I mean the house is there so this wouldn't happen but like in another place this would get subdivided into three different pieces of property all with frontage that each could have a 10,000t hotel. So it's the the the house the historic house will will prevent that from happening. So I'm not worried about that. But I just I think that that's an interesting point the applicant made. Um, and uh, the other thing I wanted to say is that a piece of property that size should have all of its parking handled on the property. The idea of having some sort of shared parking agreement or parking that's over 1,200 square feet away is a no-go for me. Um, and I'm not quite as opposed to I have a sense for, again, Alex talking about the math, how expensive it is to build subsurface parking. So I think in a lot of ways the subser surface parking is driving the room count because it's looking at whether this pencils out and if there has to be some surface parking if the parking needs have to be handled on the surface. I I can understand if I can get my head around that if that's what it needs to look like. Um there was something else I think I wanted to say. Um, well, I guess I I did want to like from a design standpoint, from a site layout standpoint, from a landscape architecture standpoint, as well as architect, I think, this looks really good. Um, I just have a problem with the scale, a big problem with the scale. Like, I'm not That's something I also kind of wanted us to talk about a little bit was what would be okay? Like, this is times eight. Are we okay with times three? Are we okay? Like I would be interested to hear what you all have to say about that

because that's when it starts to feel a little arbitrary and it is arbitrary. And so I was just kind of wondering what folks thought about that. Like I think we had the rivet house as a something to compare and that one was 37 37,000 ft. Is that right? Yeah. Um, that seems re reasonable to me, but that's a different location. So, I don't know if any those were sort of the points I think I wanted to make. I'm curious if any of my fellow commissioners have any thoughts about that. Yes. I think you said the riverhouse was 20,000. That 20? Yeah. Yeah.

And um Yeah. And I could see like in terms of scale, I mean, that might not be too far off. I think something the size of Hotel Indigo, which is what this is, is way too big. something more, you know, in line with some of these other hotels that are on the list here would be more appropriate. You know, it is kind of a really large lot, but it's also a really strangely shaped lot. I feel like on other blocks, you know, the property owners would own all the way to the middle and there wouldn't be this kind of like strip of property owned by somebody else, but I don't know how other blocks work. Maybe is that, you know, like surrounding blocks would have there's not like this weird There is X block a weird Is there a weird middle one? Yeah. Okay. Well, it was Tasha House, but it's just kind of a weird Yeah. space.

Yeah. So, while it's a huge lot, it's like

Yeah. I don't know if that's doing it any favors or kind of against it. Like, it's big, but I wouldn't want to see a lot of stuff go in that back part anyway. But, yeah. So, I think terms of scale, I might be able to be talked up to with the right plan of, you know, the 20,000 neighborhood just because the current structure is 10. So, I could see building something something else that big. in yeah from my head would be more in that area but definitely not up to the eight times maybe two times you know depending on what it looked like because I do think there is enough land that there is room for something but just not this why I keep going back to the facade easement because I feel like there needs to I mean I want to see a facade easement and I I feel like if there can be a size that will align with facade easement. Otherwise, it feels arbitrary. I don't want it to feel like an arbitrary number, but

at least it's attached to something that makes sense. And I feel like there also needs to be a facade easement on the property for me to support this too. So, and I'll leave that to the historic preservationist to work out, but I feel like that would be for me a better middle ground, right? Because I feel like it is a little strange. 10,000 square feet is just the house. So, but you have five acres of land. Um, so yes, it's somewhere between 10,000 square feet and 87,000 square feet. But but who am I to say? I would rather leave that to like the the professionals in historic preservation. Yeah. And then come back and and bring that to us.

I'd like to see the plan for something at rank and that might help me visualize it one. If I could just add something to I think when we I think what will be helpful to us is to understand you know at the next stage we really need to understand traffic impacts um sewer water the usual stuff you know we need to understand what each of these various levels of increase would would mean in terms of um being able to absorb that from an infrastructure standpoint. There was a note in the staff report about replacing was it the sewer main would have to be changed

like it has a 4 in supply. We need a six inch supply or something. 4 inch sewer. It's currently served by 4 inch sewers, right? Shut it out. Yeah.

Yes. I think there was a comment about there was two options for connecting the sewer. uh one of the options was by code uh one of the options required uh you know off-site easement didn't really understand why that option would even be proposed when there is a direct connection to sewer. Um so I think our comment was addressing that saying that's not to code that would not be allowed sewer option two or B or however it was proven. Okay. Seems like if you scale it up two, three, maybe four times the 10,000, you're not going over that allow. You're probably, it seems to be out of those for sure, you're probably not going over the allowed um water usage earlier. So, a smaller development can eliminate some of those issues, too. too.

Yeah,

I heard earlier uh adaptive reuse that is appro is appropriately scaled and I'm I'm in alignment with that. Appropriately scaled to me means between 10 and 20,000. Um again, I still have concerns about the utility use just because of my background. I mean, anytime you have an increase in capacity, you're going to have an increase in usage. I would really would like to see what that study looks like, that engineering study. Um, in addition to that, my my pros are um that it meets the future land use and it's an appropriate location for something like this. I think it's even listed in in our report uh that it's a business area. So, it it has opportunities for people to meet, to fellowship, it's walkable, so it does align with our comprehensive plan. I do think it should be aligned with the neighborhood's goals as well.

So, I just want to kind of ask us this question. Is it are are our concerns more of the square footage or the 116?

Like what's what's more bothersome to us? And this is kind of for the applicant maybe to hear as well because this is part of the deal is for our comments to come back maybe use but and hand it back to the chair. But that that's that's what I'm trying to determine question issue. I think for me kind of it goes back to you know looking at the kind of spirit and the intent behind the ordinance you know I mean if it says that it was decided that 10,000 is appropriate for CN you know and I like to kind of well I can see a slight departure kind of going completely against the spirit of that idea is where my big hesitation is. You know I don't I don't like that it's such a big departure. It seems it just seems kind of like there was a reason why it was put at 10,000 and I think it was to protect scenarios like this and and I would just be uncomfortable such a such a big departure. You know, if the limit was, you know, 60 and they're asking for 80, then yeah, I'd be like, okay, that's a lot more reasonable. But I think it's just the the fact that it's such a big ask is what really gives me concern. I think that Alex asked this a good question though. Is is the thing that's so offensive the square footage or is it the number of hotel rooms?

I think you can't untether those right. I think those are locked together. I think those kind of move parts, right?

Yeah. I think what I thought, maybe this was in our report, but I think what I found myself fishing is I wanted to be able to sort of do the math and figure out like I was surprised that with 87,000 square feet, they were only getting 116 rooms. And I think that that has to do with the amount of event space, kitchen, restaurant, all of that. But I have been thinking about that what Alex the question Alex asked in terms of giving the applicant feedback that they can work with when it comes back to us is is what is it about the scale that we're we're um objecting to. I can answer at least for my own personal

my own personal problem with this scale and the 120 bedrooms in this location is where it's located on Prince and how it goes down to what one lane at that

so I it's too much in and out too much life being added right there on top of the disruption to the neighbors where that comes out on prints and how tight that is and all the work that that Mr. Eubanks has done on on Prince and trying to study what we can do to improve the Prince Avenue corridor. Maybe if this was down on the other side of village where the road widens out, I wouldn't have such a hard time with it. But I think that much light added right there on that part of the road coupled with all of the single family houses around it, it's the usage and the sale. So it goes to the 112 bedrooms and the size of the hotel and the coming and going all the events there the staff that just feels like a lot for that. So if they were going to build a building with 116 micro hotel rooms would we have the same problem smaller? Is it is it the traffic? It's the number of in and outs from the staff that would go

I think the staff would be lesser. You'd have less traffic from the events. It would be a less. I still don't know that 160 micro units or even two-bedroom apartments would feel right right there just because it's so much in and out and so much impact on the neighborhood. See, I' I'd actually argue that the three laning of Prince Avenue there makes it safer to go in and out because if you had to cross over if if it were still four lanes there, you'd have to stop to make that left-hand turn. You're now blocking a lane of traffic and then you have to cross over two more lanes. So, at least now we have a pocket where people can wait and turn. Yeah.

So, but the traffic increase right there. I know. I mean, it's It's cars. No, but I mean it's since it's Chris like it's a lot of cars. So, you know, it's it's going to be a commercial road. Alex, so I was just going to touch on the traffic thing. LA the experts do that. I don't I'm always surprised at how little all these big numbers do to the street

and even as chair of Toss 26 that comes up a lot and it traffic counts are surprisingly less of an impact than you think. What I'm saying is I'm not giving an opinion on whether I think it is or isn't. That's that's what reports are for. They're they're experts in traffic. The impact deal is going to tell us whether you know if it's too many too much traffic can't do it then it can't do it but or can't but I'm I'm not qualified to even say if it's too much or too little. I had a question on a different topic.

Okay. It was brought up at the beginning a long time ago now about kind of some deficiencies in the application and I was wondering if staff or council had any comment on that like what is that accurate? Are those things missing? Thank you. I'm going to ask if I could respond to that. Good. I just thought of that. I can tell. Thanks for asking that up.

Yeah. No, I we and we take those comments very seriously. So um I think what happened was there was an open records request where an incomplete response was provided because there are two procedural requirements to get the the ball rolling to get in front of you as a body. One is a pre-application conference request which we received and that conference uh request form was received on May 9th. Conference took place on May 14th. that has to happen before you make application and we received an application on July 17th. Um review was done by staff. It was found to be complete by August 1st and that allowed this process to move forward. Um so these things are in hand. I think what happened and I and I apologize if this is the case. That's that's on me. Um if the open records request was incomplete, that's a serious thing. we will treat it seriously and we will get the whatever missing documentation. It may not even be just these two things. We will go back and double check and make sure that information is shared with the requester.

But thank you for asking. Yeah. Yeah. We just haven't I haven't heard that before. So yeah, that's it was a different observation, but it's it is thorough. There's also a site plan. It's not just a site plan. You just have to read the labels. Okay. Nice. Thanks for that. Anybody else? This is our chance. I I do I do want to My two cents. Um I don't I don't mind the hotel use.

Um I don't think I even mind 116 rooms. I can't stop thinking about in like my Photoshop brain just scaling everything down. Um, but again getting into the I really want the easement to work and so I really want the scale to align with the easement and I want that to to be whatever that magic number is. I have a problem with the parking being offsite and there being a variance for that. So I hope that that gets resolved before it comes back to us because I don't know if I could support 1,200 feet away with a parking agreement. Um, and the utility issue, um, is is a little bit of a concern for me, too. Um, I can't stop thinking of it as like an ADU, um, behind a house. Um,

world's biggest ADU, right? But, um, but it's also it's it's a commercial venture, so um, and it's on a fiveacre lot. And this is where the 10,000 square feet I'm willing to give it a bit of grace because it's it's a fiveacre lot. The lot just to like just up I know that's a government lot, but if that were also commercial neighborhood, it would have the same standard. It just seems like it's apples and oranges. So, um so yeah, that's where I'm I'm willing to give it some grace, just not 87,000 square feet worth of grace. One more little thing.

Yes. And and I'm glad you said that that way. U not the ADU thing but the uh which was pretty good. Um but the other thing and it just jumped out at me and it should have been the first thing it the big hotel part does take a subordinate place on the property. the and and I I would want the applicant to be very careful how they listen to me say this because I'm not saying that's it, I'm done. I love it. Um or but for us to understand at least that's that the fact that it takes a subordinate place on it's not a subordinate size but a place on the property is from the street. That is that is a difference that um that that we're seeing here. And it it took this long for me of studying it, going to public meetings and all to hit is that is part of the reason I feel like that the 87,000 square feet doesn't feel like 87 square thousand square feet because it's not a small piece of land. There is a house in front of it that takes the um primary spot and you take the president's house out of it which you can university can tear it down tomorrow. They don't have to ask anybody. They can take it down. Um they can also the next person that buys it about an easement or protection can take it down. So and then you build this a giant structure there and we probably all be looking at it way different. It's like, whoa, 877,000 square feet white palm prints. Um, so I'm just sort of throwing that out as something that just kind of jumped in my mind is why another reason it feels like less than it is. So there there that is.

All right. Thanks. Um, all right. So we'll see the applicant and you all done. Yeah, I'm all done. Yeah. All right. So when will it come back first? Do we know? The applicant has an opportunity to gather make adjustments and so there's not a hard date when we'll see it again. Okay. Um it could be one or two cycles. Okay. All right. Thank you. Can we take a everybody around? We're gonna take a fiveinut break and then we're gonna come back. So, I'm gonna get up and go take a break anyway. Although, now I just need a big one first.

Oh my gosh. Yeah. Yeah.

I didn't get a plan. The only plan that I got that was

okay I understand but the ordinance says you will Someone has sealed.

Fire this thing up for a minute. Sorry. I'm not Gary's right inside of the fence. highlight. Then they eventually just looked up

surrounded by size.

I know. Hopefully. I think the last three are going to go for sure. Yeah, it was said, "Yeah, you can have You can always come visit.

Oh my god. Thanks. I got invited because my friend every Thursday morning it's 8 by

All right, All right, on to our first old business item. Old Albertton Road request 2025 05 1052. I'm trying to project. I'm known to be soft spoken. Can you all hear me? Yes, you all hear me? I might turn it off for All right, I'll do I'll do the best I can.

All right, my name is Stephen here to present the staff analysis for the case at zero Old Elbertton Road. The applicant has asked to reszone the property from agricultural residential to employment industrial which also requires a change to the future land use from rural to employment center. The non-binding proposal here concept plan is for just over 2 million square feet of industrial space unspecified tenants at this point. So we don't know what the use would be but just generally in that industrial category uh spread across four buildings. This is the site as it is you can see it's partially open fields agriculture at one point and also partially wooded. Up in the wooded area we have some creek areas and some water. This is about 230 acres. You can see just in the corner here is Coyle Middle School, which help you orient yourself. Uh, Old Elbertton runs along the property line to the uh, north west and then it eventually turns into Spring Valley Road as you get closer to town. Here is a visual of the uh, basically creeks and bodies of water on site with some riparian areas. You can see mostly up here, but also a little bit right here. and right at the corner. Applicant would have to stay out of those areas which uh particularly when you're doing large buildings constricts where you can put those on site. On the left you have the current future land use which is rural and on the right you would have the proposed future land use which is employment center. You can see we have government future land use down in the corner. That's Coyle Middle

School. Ordinarily, you would say, "All right, there's employment center across the street. Jumping across the street here, maybe not that big a deal, except if you zoom out, you start to see that this is a bit of a boundary line. Old Elbertton turns in Spring Valley. That has been the boundary line approximately for 25 years for the rural versus employment center. So again, here's the uh here's Coyle Middle School. The subject property is right here. On the right, you have the rural that was set up originally in 2000 and has been largely maintained. Folks call it the green belt, but that's not an official term. We have a belt of this rural land that goes around uh three sides of the county roughly, the the Jackson, Madison, and Ogalp side. You can see Winterville city limits right here. We also put in place and that rural belt was put in place to uh limit more development and suburban expansion into these areas, preserve them for agriculture, preserve the low inensity use um and and and prevent us from getting too much demand to extend infrastructure. On the other hand, we also set up the employment center area. This feeds into the Athena Industrial Park. It is our prime industrial real estate. It's largely what we market when we look for out of town industry that may be looking to relocate. Individual properties along here have gone in and out of the employment center versus rural category over the years, but we have largely maintained this boundary. Same kind of thing applies to the zoning out here, which is AR currently,

agricultural, residential, and then would move over to employment industry. This is a visual of at least part of the property. It's 230 acres, so we couldn't capture it all, but this gives you an idea of the essentially rural agricultural character of the area. Two-lane road, undeveloped, wide open expanse. Wow. Okay.

This is our big

this is our concept plan. Like I said, four buildings just over two million square feet distributed amongst those four. Uh and associate this is just a very high level concept plan. uh this would have to go through a significant amount of revisions to actually get up to a point where it would be approvable uh per and meet our development standards. And you have in your staff report some uh concerns from other departments, DPW, fire about things that would potentially have to change on this site to get it up to our standards. But you can see they're trying to stay out of the creeks and the riparian areas as they're required to avoid. In our analysis, the subject parcel is rural in nature. It's adjacent to a middle school. It's characterized, it's next to and characterized by low inensity rural residential uses and vacant tracks of land. It is not served by sewer. It would need to extend sewer to this site. And the the closest tie-in to the sewer system is at Coil Middle School, but that is um this site is downhill from that connection. So, they would have to go to the expense of pumping it uphill to get um to to tie into the system, which is an additional maintenance expense down the road. This property is also separate from the Athena Industrial Park because it's separated by that road. And the street frontage is on a rural two-lane road with fairly limited connections, particularly to major highways where you would want your trucks. Uh this is the kind of street that's probably not that suitable for significant truck traffic as you might expect or you know 2 million square feet of industrial use. So generally speaking, uh incompatible with the 2023 comp plan. We do have a list of target sectors in our economic development sphere that we're looking

for. bioscience, advanced manufacturing, craft beverage, among others. Uh the uses or the lack thereof that's been specified here don't really fit those target industries. So, we might want to hold this land for something that's a better fit for our targeted uh economic sectors. It's also incompatible with our future land use map. It's incompatible with the zoning map. And so for all of those reasons, we are recommending denial of both future land use and the zoning request. And that concludes staff. So we'll hear from the applicant. Uh he's gotation.

Good evening. Planning Commission, William Deal, Tucson Port Street,

here on behalf of the applicant tonight. Um, it's late. You You guys are now on item number one on the agenda. Uh, so I'm going to be brief. This is the second time we've been in front of you uh presenting this project. So, I'm going to breeze through the presentation. I had some homework that you all assigned me. I'm going to give you some answers on those uh from our last presentation. Uh, and then I'll be here to answer questions. And I know that there are a few in the audience uh that that have some questions and I'll answer those in rebuttal. So, uh we are looking at this site. As uh staff mentioned, this is a big site. It's 233 acres. Um this project has been in front of you all before. Uh there was a a residential development that was proposed maybe two years ago. That proposal was rejected. And in the discussion of that proposal, there was well this is a this is an industrial area and perhaps residential uses might not be appropriate considering the adjoining industrial uses. And so here we are. This is our presentation in line with that trying to meet that spirit. As I'll talk a little bit more, the existing agricultural residential is not feasible with this particular property. there is not a use that we can make of the property under its conditions under its current zoning district. Looking here, this is uh the surrounding uh land uses. Uh we mentioned this this has traditionally been uh a green belt kind of a barrier that was that was made over older and Spring Valley Road. One thing I do want to note that there has been some crossover. You'll see that there is a small parcel and I last time I remembered how the green button

green button that would make sense. There we go. This parcel here spring valley. So there has been some trans transition across the road albe it is it is limited. Uh I think this parcel presents a special case and and I'll and I'll uh present my reasons of why here as we work through the presentation. Um but the expansion the overall pattern of development here has certainly been to more intensive uses certainly been in the direction of industrial and that industrial pressure is really putting pressure on the existing agricultural uses. And uniquely our our property is in a position where it is uh given the lowest density, the lowest intensity of uses in its current zoning district, but it is directly across the street from some of the highest intensity of uses. And that really drives the need for some additional consideration in reszoning. There we go. surround surrounding land uses. You you saw this in the SAS presentation. Again, future land uses in this area have tended toward uh more heavy industrial um and and you you saw the Athena industrial park has developed starting to see infill. This project does envision industrial development. It is a long-term process. This is not something where uh if zoning was approved tomorrow, we'd start breaking ground. What we need is uh the ability to market this and we can't market it under its existing zoning. Uh we to bring this out to tenants, we need the uh at least some security on on what type of use would be permitted by the county. Again, I mentioned the expansion of the industrial uh base in this area. Uh we've seen a lot of big employers come into this area. We've seen a lot of utilities, a lot of infrastructure that's been built up around this area.

And what my client is asking for ultimately is the ability to share in that industrial development, to share in the utilities that ultimately their their property tax bill is paying for as well. Uh and so again, this area has been targeted for the expansion of utilities. There is sewer that is available. Uh and certainly we can meet the sewer capacity, bring in that sewer line to connect over to the middle school. uh and that would be a cost that was beared uh by the developer as these certain projects were developed as as we as we know particularly what the uses are. True. We don't have uh an enduser in place right now. Again, that's that's really a marketing issue. We we can't market this property to anybody under its existing agricultural district. There's just nobody is interested in in an agricultural property. Um we are proposing however we we understand that that county doesn't want to be in a position where they don't know what what's proposed is to limit the the type of development to what the code calls a level one industrial development. Level one industrial development precludes uses that have uh a lot of noise associated with it. A lot of truck traffic uh a lot of use of wastewater. So there are some capacities that would be built in uh within the zoning um and within the regulations for this particular property.

So one of the biggest pieces of homework that I had for you all is is to explain to you why this project is specific, why this uh particular parcel warrants uh the expansion of the industrial uh or excuse me the employment future land use and and the and expansion of industrial uses in this area. What's unique about this property, and I hinted at this before, we are a very, very large parcel that is zoned agricultural that has no utilities that are built in. It is adjacent to utilities, but to bring onto this site roads, sewer, uh, water, all of the utilities that you would need for any type of development, we have a huge hall it because this property is so large. So, we've got to bring this out. when we were looking at the residential type products, we were looking at $3 million of just horiz horizontal uh infrastructure. The same is true with industrial um that expansion that that kind of commitment requires us to have a have a greater density in this area. Another thing uh that I that I think is is incredibly important is it's true that this green belt has existed around Athens. But what is particularly unique about this area is that we don't see the the kind of transitional zoning that we would normally see. And so as you're coming down for example 129, you see industrial there, but you also see commercial, right? You don't go from industrial to immediately lowest in intensity agricultural. you see a transition of uses. You see housing coming in. That's not what we have here. We have uh again highest intensity of uses going then to the lowest intensity of uses. For those reasons, we're asking again for the approval of the zoning. We've proposed some conditions that we think kind of accommodate some of the concerns regarding the uncertainty of the end

user. Um certainly willing to discuss detail. Um but that's my presentation. I'll answer questions and and reserve time for rebut. Is there anyone else here to speak in favor of the application?

Hearing none. Is there anybody here to I believe we have a special um representative to speak in opposition. Christ. Thank you. Bruce,

is this Are we introducing something into the record? Uh perhaps. Okay. I just brought in so it'll take a motion for them to receive it. So that that'll be the first even before Miss Griffin starts. Yeah. So y'all I will entertain a motion to the hand up. Can we ask what it is? It's a layer from a letter from Mayor Dodd from Winterville and it's a petition that we started on change.org. or uh with signatures. I'll make that motion. Second.

Um all those in favor I I thought you could just around. Yeah. Give one over there. I can share with If I give one to Chris. Thank you.

We can I'm Karen Griffin. I live at 290 Old Overton Road uh in Athens, Georgia. Um my driveway is the separating um line between Cole Middle School and the property that's coming up for reszoning. This the first thing that I pass out for the commissioners was a letter from Mayor Dodd from Winterville and I just like to read it out loud so the rest of everybody can hear it please. Uh dear planning commissioners, I hope this letter finds each of you well tonight. I'm writing to you today to state my opposition to the proposed reszone from agricultural to EI employment industrial on old Elbertton Road. The timing is just not right for this reszone. The county county currently has available industrial land inventory, so there is no need to add more, especially in this area. We already have challenges from public safety due to our position at the outer edge of the county. Traffic near the school is already an issue during pickup and drop off and we have not seen the buildout of the measer property or the ramp up of Athena Studios in the already existing industrial corridor where there is land available. Industrial development of this size and at this time would overload our already overburden public safety departments both in the city of Winterville and throughout Athens clar county. With regard to timing and city planning, we are making improvements and preparing for the growth we will be seeing in the coming years through affformentioned um projects like the Meister facility and Athena Studios. But a reszone for

development like the one proposed tonight would throw all of that out of balance. I do believe that the development of properties in this area will occur in the nots tooistant future, but there are much better ways to develop and there are too many issues that need to be addressed before the city and county could possibly support any kind of reszone to support a development of this kind and size. Therefore, I urge you to vote against the reszone tonight for the reasons I described. Quite simply, it is out of place and unnecessary. Thank you for all for the work that you do and for your consideration of my remarks. Sincerely, Dodd Ferrell, mayor, city of Winterfell. He just wanted to for you guys to help. The other thing I handed out was a petition that we started on change.org. Um, as I said, that is my driveway. We have we bought 50 acres 20 years ago in 2002, 23 years ago, I guess. uh three uh we bought 50 acres and developed um there's six lots in there for we have five houses presently built and we have one more coming up shortly. They range anywhere from 75,000. Uh my my neighbors are in here and you'll hear from them later. But um we're very proud of where we live. Our property values have been protected because we've had the AR zoning in our front all this time. The petition actually was started because everybody in this area is a big community. It's at Winterville Northeast Quadrant. We're Athens really, but we're right there in Winterville. And that is a big community. We were there and we were living straight right down the street from there in Oakmont, which is the circle that's right there in the green um when they built Cole Middle School and my son was one of the first ones that graduated in the Cole Middle School of the 8th grade. So, you know,

we've been there and we've seen all of this and we've built in there because we knew we were protected. Um, in 20 years we've enjoyed the pro the property there. These uh friends, family, everything. There's 416 uh signatures from here that were was started a few weeks ago on before we start before we had the first meeting. And um you will see you'll laugh because there are some uh signatures in here that are as far away as uh Great Britain and um there's some in uh my son was the first one that was out of town. I said Winterville and Athens only. He is in Minneapolis but he wanted to be a part of it because he grew up there and you'll see a lot of uh we see a lot of the kids names in there and they're in Atlanta and different places like that. I didn't take them out, bless them, but there's 416 signatures there. Um I I've been a builder in Athens, Clark County for 44 years. I build residential homes. Um I love taking properties that need um renovation, uh new properties, and I have always taken care of the wildlife. This petition really talks about wildlife, the preserving of community, the preserving of the area and everything. Um, we have um three pro uh we have several projects going right now in the Winterville um at Northeast Quadrant that are over $2 million worth of of of projects that we've got going that um you know, it's because the people there. We're not waiting on the interest rates to go down. They want to build. They want to be a part of the community. So we are excited with our company to be able to provide that for us. They he showed the property and they showed four buildings. My mother's house is the property that adjoins that

property right where that lower building was touching our property. That lower point, if my mom were to stand, she's 95. If she were to stand at her den and look out her back up the hill, that's where the big that point would be right on her back door. So obviously personally, we would like to see it stay the agricultural in in building you can take the agricultural and you can divide it into 10 acre lots. That is acceptable supposedly. I've talked to everybody that's acceptable. You can do 10acre lots there. I know they keep saying there's no way to do it. Uh a residential building right now and the lots are selling for $30,000 an acre upwards. So I know that right now what he's asking for is about he was at a 12 million mark for the 230 acres. That's putting him at over 50,000 an acre and that's a little high for 10 acre plots. But if we could come back down to a little bit reasonable price, you can do it and not have to have the infrastructure that you're talking about. You you can have the se tanks, you can have the individual wells and water. We can do 10acre lots. You can also do 12 acre lots and every every year you can take off one of those acres. You can do two times off of that 10 acres. So, the 12 acres would give you your residential lot plus an acre to for your aging parents to move out there or your kids to move back home or you move into the little house and sell the big house to your kids or whatever you want to do. But anyway, um just ideas of ways to make that happen. It doesn't have to be huge industrial six football field lengths, four buildings standing there for this property to work. And um

we we saw their traffic study. It's got 2,000 extra cars per day on Old Everton. Well, when school is in session and the kids are going back and forth, the traffic wraps to the four-way stop and all the way down to the traffic line in Winterville. That is that is done. It is there. I've watched it. I've come in. I avoid the area when this when the kids are pinning in and out. But if you add 2,000 more cars over to our what we would be doing is coming out the driveway and trying to take a left or right and you got cars on your right and cars on your left. I I don't know exactly what we would do, but anyway, you've got that traffic study. EI can be done wonderfully though. Georgia Power is down on the corner. They're right there on on Boils Road and they um Boils Road and Old Elbertton, but they have two entrances into that Georgia Power facility. is the same way. They're down on Spring Valley, but they've got two entrances in uh they've got one on Spring Valley, they've got one on Athena. Uh this property only is going to have one entrance and it's going to be on Old Elbertton Road. It's just a tiny little two-lane road and I don't see how the bigger trucks and everything are going to come in and exit there. Um that's kind of where we stand. Uh, I know that you said the uh the you were talking about the land crossing over the little purple land. That's part of the Christian farm. And when the development authority bought that property for Misner and put that bonding on it, the Christian farm goes across the street. So that that part is not built on yet. It is it is has still got the Christian house on it. Uh the only thing I know they raise is honey. So they got bees and that's all that I know that they have there. But that's part of the bonding that was part of the micer company. So it had to be all bought. That was all part of the Christian farm and it was all bought all together and

put in a bonding and the taxes we were he was talking about the $25,000 a year taxes on the 230 acres when it gets reszoned. And the according to the tax office that property all of a sudden instead of $25,000 worth of taxes is going to go to 1.800. $850,000 per year of taxes unless they bond it out and do something different like that. I'm sure he knows about it. I'm just when we were doing um I just want to say that uh you know I'm we we are very community oriented. I would love to see something better there. Thank you.

Else to speak in opposition. Yes, you all can just come up. I got here first.

Hello again. My name's Angela Green. I live at 269 Taylor Lane in Farm. So, we're a little ways down the road from where this um development is proposed. So, obviously I oppose this resoning and the change to the um future land use map. And in general, I guess I believe in the future land use map. I think if people, smart people, decide how land is supposed to be used, that that's something that we should pay attention to. And I would really not like to see no more reasoning until the new version of the, you know, there's a new version of the future land use map coming out, I believe. And and I think it should have meaningful. And I also believe in that dividing line between the industrial and the agricultural, residential, green space, whatever you want to call it. Um, the people in this part of the county have had a lot of industrial development over the years, dating back many years. I think I haven't lived in Athens that long, but I think it dates back to the 1960s perhaps, the Dupont plant that caused the problem with wells. So this is a part of the county that has borne a huge burden of industrial development over many years and I think there has to be a place where the line gets drawn. I can't justify what's happened in the past. You know that's done. But for the future I think we need to say what should this land be used for? There are people who live here. I live here. Karen and her family live here. There's a middle school here because there are kids who live here. So I think that pretending we need to reszone this for industrial just given the capacity of industrial we already have and given what this part of the county has already borne as a burden of industrial development. I think that just I just can't make a case for this at all. Um

and I also do want to talk a little bit about the road. I am not a traffic expert. I have no idea about all of that. But I will tell you I drive Spring Valley Road and Old Elbertton and that is not a road that heavy trucking should be on e and either the the elder part is worse but Spring Valley is not good either and there's a reason Meisner has a separate entrance to their property on Athena because that's the safer way to get access to the property. So um I think I pretty much I feel like this feels redundant. I feel like I've talked to you and said exactly the same thing and and I apologize for that. But if this is the process, um then that's what we're going to do. And so I think that'll do it for me. Thanks. Thank you.

Uh good evening. My name is Mara Zuniga and uh I'm usually advocating for other communities and today I'm advocating for my own community. I live in the area. I own a farm which I've owned for about I would say almost 20 years. It's not an easy job. I mean in the daytime when we have our family business where we uh do abatement of very bad things for the community. That's our job. We've done it for years is just get rid of bad things from the community. And when we get home this is something constructive that we do is farming. We have cows and horses. we grow crops and one of the things that um that really concerns my family in the past years has been water quality. Now water quality is not something that anybody can just afford to know where where they can get it. I mean homeowners usually have a hard time. I had a hard time even though I I didn't know I had access to laboratories because usually when we test something out is usually for asbestous mold or lead. And I had no idea they tested for water, but uh it's expensive. It's expensive. There's a procedure that you have to follow. And I know in this area, we've had previous uh contamination. And I just recently sent uh a water testing. I have not received the the results yet, but I suspect um I don't know. I have a little suspicion that that there might be something there. Uh but I haven't confirmed it. But that is usually uh problems that farms uh look at because we have to water our crops, we have to water our animals. Um and it's a hard job. So all I'm asking you guys is to consider this because if you have we we do have a lot of industrial in our area and it is very concerning for us farmers and there are a few farmers. There's not maybe uh this other lady and myself, but there's a lot many

other people nurseries that use that water. So that's my biggest concern and the traffic as well. I would rather see housing which is something that in the community a lot of people are talking about is a housing crisis, affordable housing. I have not heard about any industrial uh crisis. I I do see there are other areas for that. So I would like you guys to consider that. Thank you very much. I'm Thomas Evans. U came to Athens 50 years ago to attend the University of Georgia. Um address Charlie Balden Road. The property that I live on joins this subject track. Um I just I didn't get your name. I'm sorry. Sir, sir,

can I ask him a question? No, you're later. No, you're talking to us.

Well, um, primarily I just got a few questions for him, but what I can say about the property is it is, uh, beautiful land. There's been a lot of discussion about the movement of the E1 zoning that's coming this way. Uh, I would submit that Clark County is a very, very small county. A and B there's a whole lot of it that's taken up by the University of Georgia and the Athens Clark County government and there's just not a whole lot of green space left. So I would like to see a line drawing where the E1 has already come to and keep this keep this property as residential and farmland which is the way it's rated now. I have 120 so acres that joins this that I live on and do some farming on as well. So, it's uh it's near and dear to my heart and I don't want to get emotional about it, but I'd really like to see it stay like that. Um or if it's going to be developed, I like the idea of small residential tracks, 10 acres, five acres. I think there's a demand for that in the proximity and staying within Clark County. So, I'd love to see you guys look at something like this and something like that and deny this continued expansion industrial into the farm land we got left.

Thank you.

Hi, thank you. My name is Carrie Valentine. I live at 288 South Main Street in Winterville, Georgia. Um I'm also a teacher at Coil Middle School and part of my duty as a teacher at Coyle Middle School is to um assist with car riders in the afternoon. So I know what that street looks like. Um I also serve on the Historic Preservation Commission in Winterville, Georgia, and I learned at a a meeting Wednesday night. Was it Wednesday? Tuesday. Um that this was proposed. Um and then I found your petition. Thank you. and shared it with everyone at my school because no teacher at Coil Middle School knew that this was um a proposed reasonzoning. Um so hopefully that helped with the petition. Um even my school principal didn't know about this and I'm honestly curious if the school district knows about this. Um I'm I'm really as an educator in Clark County for over 20 years. I can't imagine how you would consider putting more industrial, heavy industrial next to a middle school. Um, and and you're right, like yes, it's mainly rural, but it's residential. People live here. You know, children play here, communities live here. And I just want to say other thing. I already submitted my letter yesterday morning as soon as I could. Um, but public input was gathered throughout the fall of 2023 and spring of 2024 that provided the basis for the new future land use for Athens clar county. This is from your website. Um, and it says, "Our community is not the same place it was 20 years ago, nor will it be the same place 20 years from now. Athens clar county is an exciting and vibrant community. One of the fundamental responsibilities of local government is planning and the preparation of plans. Like other communities all over the country, Athensclar County must take active,

thoughtful steps to preserve a high quality of life. The path to accomplishing this goal involves planning and how land is to be used, protecting the natural environment, designing visually appealing places, and developing a transportation system that integrates a variety of options. We do call this a green belt and Winterville is not very far away. I live I work here. My argument to all of you is that if if that resoning is approved, there is no going back. It just starts to to come in to to the entire east side of Athens. Um so we lose our green belt. We say that the wishes and input of Athens, Clark County residents means nothing. And it means that we're willing to throw kids away. And I I really want us to seriously consider that that's a middle school.

Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else to speak in opposition?

Hi, good evening. My name is Jacob Campbell. I live at My family lives at 250 Oldton Road. So, we're very close to the property here. Um, in short, we're against such a drastic uh reasonzoning proposition. Um I you know it would be great if it was just beautiful farmland forever. I know that's not going to be but the current zoning does allow for um development under the current restrictions. They can build a beautiful neighborhood there 10 acre lots or maybe the five acre lots or whatever. But there is uh a market for how that land can be used and would not require it to be changed in order for it to be used. It's not um a piece of land that would be worthless if it's not changed. Um just speaking for myself, my family, we play a lot of board games and whenever you play a board game, you read the instructions and everybody plays by the rules. Otherwise, there's no point in doing it. When we moved here, when we were considering where to move, we moved here because we we loved how this area was and we looked at what could potentially happen in the future. And based on that information, the rules that were given to us, we spent every dime we had to buy our home and um made the biggest investment we could for our family. And that goes with everyone that lives around us. Everybody that lives around us uh made this decision to live here because of the rules that they were given when the game was started. and it is not fair to all those people to change the rules in the middle of the game to benefit one person. The argument could be made that it would be a benefit to the community and in you know um terms of employment or or income or anything like that and that that that that is a debatable argument. There's um other factors though that have u value that would be detracted from you know

including the quality of life, the environment um and the um betrayal to the people who lived around there and already made that commitment to to move to that area. Um two questions that I you know would encourage you to ask and and I appreciate everything you do. you commissioners, I think you do a great job around here from what little I know and understand. Thank you. But, um, would this be something that, you know, you yourselves would want to have plop down, you know, right in front of your and, um, how does it benefit the the community? And I'm I'm not talking about just a small group of people, but the entire community.

All right. Thank you.

Thank you. Hey, I'm Adam Evans. Uh, I live at 1143 Charlie Bolton. Um, our property backs up to this proposed development. Uh, changing the land designation and zoning for a speculative project like this set, that's a dangerous precedent. Uh in terms of traffic, 2,000 trips as an enormous addition to this infrastructure. Uh most recent census numbers count just over 2200 people in all of Winterville. This project puts families and children at risk with the school and the church right next door. Building at the upper reaches of the creek that is shown on the plan maps will have a negative ecological impact on wildlife and the environment for many many miles downstream. Surface runoff from this project directly threatens many species living directly downstream in what is currently a pristine springfed creek. A beaver created wetland exists immediately downstream that supports dozens of important resident species and migratory bird species. This is an incredibly important type of diverse ecosystem that is threatened nationwide by commercial development of this type. Habitat loss means species loss. Besides water pollution, air pollution, light pollution, and noise pollution are a concern for both humans and animals that share this green space. We chose to live in a designated agricultural residential green space because the stars are visible, because the water is clean, because the air is clean, because it's quiet, because the

city traffic is not here, because wildlife is abundant. We seek to live in harmony with the land and its non-human inhabitants. I believe this committee has both a moral and fiduciary responsibility to residents of this green space and Winterville. We invested our money and our lives in this place with the promise that it would remain green and beautiful. A place for us to live in harmonious balance with nature and other people that want to raise families in such a setting. The archetypal forces at play in this story are not new. They're playing out all over this country. Empire versus alliance, corporations versus people, financial wealth versus ecological wealth. I know which team I'm on. You have to ask yourselves here today, which side am I on? Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else here to speak in? Yes.

Hi, my name is Vance Whitner. I live at 200 Old Albertton um right behind um with where Karen and Mr. Campbell live. It's a beautiful place um to to live at. I oppose this. I'm against it. I also um have a place at 1220 Morris Grove Road and I also own 80 acres on Charlie Charlie Bolton and this would just be devastating to what we have built and what we've done back there. Thank you. You Hello everybody. My name is Jose Fagan. I live on 225 L Edwards Road. I like uh speak against this project. Also uh again a lot of the things that have been discussed in terms of the importance of the preserving green space within our community is uh paramount to quality of life that we have. uh agriculture is alive in that area and not only that agric farmers and people that live in rural environments are mostly the original stewards of land and we also take pride of that all the all that we do there tries to enhance upon what we see there that area in particular also drains towards the broad river uh broad river which is one of the most pristine rivers here not the only one in the state that's not damned so it's it's very important to keep that Um you see the maps on the on one side the purple but on the same token there's a lot of property that it's it's not industrial it's people that live there too and uh friends uh zoning and uh rules that uh propose protect that sort of thing are not uh something that of the past there should be alive the applica the applications here the the applicants mentions that the designation agricultural designation is but a vestige of outdated policies.

No sir, I mean this those things are important to maintain the diversity and the import the all the things that could recreate quality of life. There's a firefly. There's a lot of uh path going through there. It's going to go all the way to Union Point. There's also uh conservation easements that are for permanent per protected for perpetuity right in in the area of winter. So I mean there's something to be said about that and hopefully we should uh look into that and and keep that maybe that last frontier in terms of that old Elbert turn. I don't know that sounds like a movie. I've heard it before but nevertheless I think it's it's it's it's something that to be concerned with. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Hi, I'm Vanessa Campbell. Sorry, I'm probably gonna get emotional. Um, we live at Old Elbertton and my family and I, we have we bought the land over 10 years ago, but my both my husband and I are both first responders. So, for us, this was a huge change to move from Florida to have our dream here, and now it's being jeopardized. I would like I'm opposed to this. I would like to see the the land be used for like five 10 acre lots of like horse community or hobby farms, something that will benefit everybody and your the man that owns the farm or the land will still make money and it's a win-win for everybody. But what they're proposing is just very scary for me and my kids living back there. That's all. Thank you.

Any thoughts? Hearing none, I'll invite the applicant back up for two minutes.

Thank you. I have three minutes. I want to cover three topics.

Two minutes, three topics. Uh so be first I want to talk about the scale of the development because I I think as we're looking at this we're kind of losing sight of the distance that we have between the property lines where these uh these buildings are proposed where they can be built and talk about the uh the uses that would be allowed under the level one zoning district and then I want to talk about the feasibility of building out into the existing zoning districts. We're looking at 233 acres here. Um, this is a gigantic parcel and and these are big buildings. Two million uh square foot. I I'm not going to lie to anybody that it's a small change. Um, but we are seeing pretty dramatic increases to even what would be uh required under the existing zoning. So the buffers that you're seeing here along the side here, we've doubled those from the existing standards. Um, so you have a very large setback between the edges of the property. Um and we and we've been very conscious because we recognize that there are some kind of legacy properties that are along uh this these property lines. And so we've been conscious of that. I think the scale really is just it just kind of hides the fact that this is a big parcel. There's a lot of land to work with. Um addressing specifically the property. So again, uh our proposal we've um suggested that the u the uses be limited to the level one uh industrial uses. All of those provide uh restrictions on the amount of waste water that we can use, the amount of traffic that can be in the property, the types of waste water that we can use uh or that can come out of the property. So, so that is being built in through this is speculative, but that's the nature of industrial development is exactly what the industrial authority is doing across the street. They have entitlements, they have zoning, they market that. Lastly, uh with under the existing zoning, we have 10acre lots. to build 10acre lots on 233 acres, we have to build miles, literally miles of road

across this entire parcel to connect all of those. That is a huge price tag. It's a price tag that we cannot authent. Yeah. Um, all right. So, we'll take it on this side of the room. Does anybody want to discussion or make motion? Whatever you want to do. have a chance for questions.

Um, I just have a few things to say. Um, not in any particular order. Um, I do really appreciate the applicants arguments and thoughtfulness and responding to what we said last time. Um, and the willingness to restrict uses to level one is appreciated. Um, and I, um, at my very poor. I just agree with um that we have to hold this line. Um I think we have underutilized parcels in the county. Um I think if we were going to pierce our green belt, it's not here and certain not without a site plan that's binding. Um but even then I I don't see this as a place to do that. Um I don't think we were against residential here generally. I think we were against that particular development. Um, I think residential would be great on this parcel. Um, and I really the idea of residential when it came through before because I like the idea of kids living so close to school. Um, I'm, you know, even open to a type of development where you're aggregating housing into smaller lots so you can preserve more green space. I think there's a lot of different ways to do it that this commission would probably be pretty open to. Um, yeah. And finally, I I I sort of appreciate everything the applicant says, but I don't think it's our responsibility as a community to ensure that someone can sell their property. Um, there's other ways to sell it. There's other ways to look at it. And I just I just don't think for me this is not the right use in this space. Alex.

So, and I'm asking staff. I think I know the answer, but I'd rather y'all make sure I know the answer. Um, as is they can build and let's put creeks aside and all that, but the they can build basically 23 houses, correct? own 230 um 30 acres, right? And Sarah sort of mentioned this, but doesn't mean each lot has to be 10 acres. They can take the entire property, but bring 23 houses into a tighter community with a lot of green space. Correct.

No. So, so the only way to do that clustered form of development, we do have a conservation subdivision chapter in our code, um, which actually would allow them to do one unit for every five acres, but the notion is to cluster and set aside 50% of the land as open space in perpetuity. Um, that's a PD process. So, it it wouldn't be by right. They would have to come through this body and on it to the marin commission. But there's a section of code that would allow for the doubling of the density and clustering development. Should the land be able to be set up with wells and septic systems that would per, they wouldn't have to extend water. They wouldn't have to extend sewer. Um, and then the road network would have to be included in there, but the clustering would greatly reduce the amount of road construction that would have to take place. I to what extent I don't know, but hopefully that answers your question.

Yeah. No, it it better than answered. So, um I appreciate that. So, that said, this property has potential. Um it's not up to us to determine that or not. The owners have to determine that. But there there's we we can't see this as you have to take a 10acre lot. That's not the only option. And PD is what we're here for and that could be something brought up later and designed and sold. Uh the other thing is yeah I that's this is a line to be held in my opinion uh you cross that line that line was replaced there uh it is it is a and we've seen with 400 uh folks that signed the petition and the people that talk it is an important line. So I I believe in holding that line.

I do too and I'd like to make a motion to deny. Okay. and I it I appreciate the applicants thoughtfulness and listening to us and coming back with something more thoughtful, but I do agree that this is a line that we have very intentionally and absent of a specific use and a specific end user. I don't think now's the time. Made a motion. Sarah second. Any other discussion? Motion. This is a two vote. Okay. So, your motion to clarify.

My motion to clarify is to deny the future land use and to deny the zoning. I'd like to make a motion to deny the future land use. Second. Okay. Any discussion? We take a roll call vote. Yeah. Motion to deny the future land use request. Lee, yes. Harrisford, yes. Mclofflin, yes. Sams, yes. Sanders, yes. Yes.

Motion passes unanimously. Make a second motion to deny the zoning request. All right. Is there a second? Second. Oh, I think you can have that second. Any discussion for the motion? All right, we'll take a roll call vote. Right. Motion to deny the zoning request, please. Yes. Barsford, yes. Mclofflin, yes. Sams, yes. Sanders, yes. Lord, yes. Motion passes unanimously.

That's all.

All right. Next up is 24. Next 255895. Thanks. Sorry.

It's just like so distracting for me. I didn't even know it was going to rain. Brought umbrellas. All right. Good evening.

The following is a staff presentation for 2415 Jefferson Road, PD 202550895. This is a master plan development request which all seen before. The proposal is for the future land use to remain and for a plan development and commercial general CG. Um the binding plan is for two apartment buildings, eight town homes and to retain 92,000 square feet of existing commercial. On the screen now is a 2021 aerial photograph of the parcel in question. This is the Homewood shopping center. On the screen now is the current future land use which is general business. That would remain. On the screen now is the current zoning on the left which is commercial general and on the right is the proposed zoning which is commercial general plan development. The following are photographs of the existing parcel. Um various different commercial entities. There is the road along into homeland hills on the bottom right. This is the Dollar General market and the other commercial on the bottom of the screen to the right hand side uh is proposed to be demolished under this request. All right. On the screen now is the master plan development site plan. Um, this is it has been changed slightly since the last time you saw it. Um, so this is the currently proposed master plan development site plan. This is the one that you saw previously. I'm going to point out a couple couple key differences here. On the left hand side right here, you will see that the main change is that eight town homes have been added. Uh, there's also a proposed amphitheater here where previously parking was shown.

These are the proposed elevations. These again are slightly different from when you saw them at the preliminary plan development. These are the this is the other apartment structure and these are the proposed elevations for the um for the uh town home structures. Saff's recommendation is for denial. Um this comes from a couple different perspectives. Uh primarily uh public utilities has recommended denial uh due to the fact that sewer capacity is not sufficient to address wet weather flow limitations. Um planning staff has found is partially compatible with the 2023 comprehensive plan. Uh in terms of infill development, uh it is compatible with the future land use map as there is no change from general business and it has been found to be partially compatible with zoning. Um the area where staff is troubled the most when it comes to zoning is with the waivers. As you can see here, the applicant has requested six waivers. Uh waiver number one is from section 8715 um from the 10% conserve tree canopy to be reduced down to 5% uh which staff does not support this waiver is currently requested. The second waiver request is from 9102 L1 uh waiver that residential units must be on the second floor and above or in the basement. Staff does not support this waiver as currently requested. Waiver from section 9258C3. a waiver from the maximum block size of 3 acres. Staff does not support this waiver. Uh waiver number four, uh section 9258F1 A and B uh for additional standards for large scale developments. Waiver from requirement from buildings to be less than 300 feet in length and provide curb, sidewalks, and street trees.

Again, staff does not support this waiver. And waiver from section 9258F4A, parking standards between the building and the street. staff does not support this waiver. And finally, waiver six uh from section 932, parking space is required. Uh staff could support this waiver potentially if a more integrated design was presented. Uh so again, staff is recommending denial of the uh proposed plan development uh for the following reasons. And that concludes the staff presentation. Thank you.

Thank you. Um I like to hear from the applicants. All right. All right. Hey everybody, I'm Jack Murphy, um, chief investment officer at Carter. we are the applicant and uh appreciate you guys taking the time to hear about our project and your patience with process tonight. Um so what I'd like to do is um talk about all the changes that were made since the last um plan you guys saw and go into a little bit more detail than the staff report. Um before we do that, I do think it is always helpful to talk about some of the constraints on this particular site. So, first one I'd like to talk about is the Georgia Power Easement. You can kind of see here in this red dashed line. So, right now, the only thing can be built in there is either parking or plaza space, but nothing vertical can go in there. And that's going to be that way until Georgia Depower decides to relocate that easement and those lines, which we know is sort of on the plan, but there's no time frame for that to happen. Uh okay the other uh restriction is all of these build these suites that are in red here those all have tenants with term that goes through anywhere between 2030 and 2037. So you know there's just not a lot you can do with those buildings right now um without tenant approval. So we can you know talk to them about maybe sprucing up the facade um things like that but we can't can you know evict them or kick them out or anything like that. they're g, you know, they can be there as long as their lease says that they can. The sort of bigger restriction within that

is the Dollar General market that's in suite H. So, they have a restriction over this kind of entire parking area right here where we can't do anything to modify that area. And even the proposed improvements we're trying to do with the tree wells um and new striping, we're going to have to get their approval just to do that. We think they'll be okay with that, but we know that they not be okay with us popping, you know, a new building down right in the middle of their parking field until their lease is up and they're out of there and those restrictions are no longer kind of um levied upon us. So, with that being said, kind of the first phase where we focused the the redevelopment is kind of in the areas outside of the the constraints. And so you see kind of the two apartment buildings, the town homes that have been added, the retail rehabs that would happen at building C and D and the new retail at A&B, which we'll get into in a little bit. So um when we spoke last time and then we've had a number of community meetings and meetings with the city, um we uh sort of came to the conclusion that there were like there were two kind of main types of feedback we were getting. Number one was just impact to the neighborhood, primarily the cottages at Homewood, which is the neighborhood right here down Magnolia Blossom. Um, and then kind of the the initial homes right here by the property. And so what we tried to do to address those concerns, probably the biggest one was we got rid of this entrance that currently exists and now that will be bike and pedestrian only and e emergency vehicles, but day-to-day automobile traffic not allowed to go there. We added back this entrance here to, you know, obviously provide for an extra entrance um that we have to have. And then we added this buffer of town homes along Magnolia Blossom. So that removed u I guess 24 beds from this building B and uh placed them into town

home here, town home units here that we will believe will be for sale units. So it also added kind of a second type of product here, not just rental, but also for sale. Then if you recall, there used to be a storm water pond down in this area. And what we've done is we've taken that and buried it so that it's all underground detention. And that allowed us to move this a building further to the south and put some more parking down further to the south and sort of take the impact of these buildings and bring it down further south to where you won't see it quite so much um really even at all from some of the neighboring homes. Um that also allowed us to reduce this building by 40% so the building closer to the homes is smaller and we reduced the western elevation by 65%. So kind of when you're looking at it you see much less of building and it's a lot skinnier and so you you know it's not as big of an impact especially now that it's hidden behind the town homes. So that was kind of the biggest change as it relates to just neighboring properties creating that transition from apartments to forale town homes that create a buffer the neighbors. Uh the other major kind of change or comment that we heard was like why should we be excited about this? Um, and I think part of that was, you know, maybe when we presented, we didn't do a good enough job of talking about some of the things that maybe we don't need the uh, waiverss for, and we focused only on those, and we didn't really talk about, okay, the overall picture is that, you know, we've got a new retail use going here. Um, there will likely be La Pria re relocating from their existing space. the Chevron. We will begin uh leasing to find a restaurant that will come in to do an adaptive reuse of that building, hopefully keeping the existing structure and kind of doing something cool and funky there. Um this endcap retail space will be renovated and released to a new tenant. And then what's changed since the last proposal is we've added retail

space in the ground floor of both of the apartment buildings. This a space here is about 4,000 square feet. Uh we envision that will be a coffee shop or cafe. Um and then this B space um will be we're hoping some kind of yoga or something that will take advantage of the new amphitheater which we'll we'll hit on in a second. Um so if you look at this first phase which is includes the apartments in the town homes, you also have including this little J suite um it could be some kind of you know fast casual restaurant. you have over 20,000 square feet of new retail that's coming to this development which drastically needs something new and exciting and nicer. Um, and then you have in addition to that the rest of the things that are going to come along with uh the new development like the plaza space which we've increased by 20% to almost 37,000 ft and we made it much more purposeful rather than just kind of like isolated little blocks all around the development. There's 8,000 square feet right in front of this retail suite. And then there's another 30,000 square feet that kind of steps down, uses the grade, uses the easement um to create a nice little amphitheater right outside what we hope will be, you know, a tenant like a yoga shop or something like that that would take advantage of using that space as well. Um, you know, our our uh thinking of see how do I Okay, here we go. So, our thinking is that these areas, so this is looking west kind of from the existing retail that's going to remain back towards that coffee shop, will create a really fun and exciting area for people in the neighborhood to walk, bike, bring their dogs, come to hang out. Um, as well as amenity for uh the the residents of the of the space. Um, and then hopefully, you know, in improve the uh the businesses that are currently there to the point that they will spend money to upkeep their spaces

and, you know, we can, you know, work out deals with them to get them new signage and to improve the facades and really kind of create u, you know, a facelift or, you know, improve the existing spaces um that we would need their uh their cooperation to do. Um but this sort of starts the first phase of the redevelopment that ultimately once we're able to on the second phase we'll kind of continue to bring through this type of development. Um we hit the next one. Okay. Uh this is a view looking back towards the center from Homewood Drive. So Magnolia Blossom would be right here. So you can see the town home buffer. Here's the amphitheater kind of steps um down towards as you get closer to the uh the parking facilities. Um and in the back here you can see the existing retail that we've repainted and and put some new signage on. So um we are uh really excited about how this turned out. We think all of the feedback was really beneficial and we think this is a much better plan than the last plan that we presented and we think that's like the benefit of these meetings is that we actually do hear really good advice and thoughts and then we can take it back and incorporate what we can without kind of losing the economic viability of of the project. And so we uh feel like we've we're in a pretty good place um with with the community and we've gotten a lot of support. Um, and I guess one of the other pieces of, you know, kind of question marks that we're we're trying our best to answer is what does phase two look like? I think we've heard some comments from you guys before. Um, you flip to the next one. So, we put together this concept plan. And again, you know, like I mentioned, this this could take some time before we can uh get control of it to do something like this. But what we wanted to show is that by putting the apartments kind of back here and create starting to create

this uh kind of street walkway through here, that doesn't necessarily preclude us from having this like cool town center concept with a bunch of different retail and restaurants. Um, and still kind of cutting up the blocks and creating something that feels center in the future. um you know granted we won't know exactly what what will or will not work um until the future but that is something that we wanted to show that it is feasible to still um still have this and then uh the last thing you know that we were going to mention is just we you know we have heard a lot about traffic um I got to keep this short the traffic study the city DOT they all believe that there will be a minimal increase in traffic while there will be an increase um what our traffic study shows shows is that it would be 92 cars uh over the course of an hour at the peak hour.

Thank you. And I'll finish that later. Is there anybody else here this week in support of the project?

Good evening. I'm May Lane as you planners and engineers 1725 Electric Avenue. uh very briefly want to speak uh towards the sewer capacity issue the wet weather uh lack of sewer capacity issue. So just to clarify, this is a condition we have known is in place from the very beginning of working on the project and we've worked with public uh utilities department to come up with what would the solution be and uh there's a few options and and we believe in concept we've agreed on a on the solution to that namely an on-site uh slowrelease storage tank. And while this is somewhat common in other municipalities, it is new to Athens. So there are no standards to it. Even some some of the sizing parameters um are not yet established. Now over the next several years, it's going to become more common because we have these sewer capacity issues kind of across the county. But where there I think was a misunderstanding is we we understood the constraint. We have a concept on how to solve that. uh we because it's an infrastructure issue, not a land use or density or or form uh issue, we did not want to put something on the plan that would bind that infrastructure when it is still very much unknown exactly what that'll be like. Um and so I think for public utilities is here, you know, Mr. Joel Phillips and he can speak for for them himself, but our understanding with him was I don't I don't know that it helps the PD by binding something that is not fully thought out versus in it the lack of specificity in no way commits the utility department to serve it or or allocate any kind of capacity to it. Um, and so all that we're asking as a way,

you know, to clarify this issue is exactly what the arborist did in the staff report, which is to say this matter is better handled and plans review where there's plenty of time of back and forth between uh the department and and the engineers and the consultants to figure out exactly where this is going to go, how it needs to be sized um and all of that. So that that is what we're requesting is just a condition that public utilities would be able to withhold all their rights to serve this at plans review and and permitting. Um so anyway, like I said, Joel's here to answer this question and I'm available to answer any other questions as well.

Thank you. Another comments. Yes, come on up.

Hey, my name is Rita Reigns. I know it's after nine. Mine is short. I live at 269 Janice Drive, which is just down the road from this. Um, I'm here today in support of the Homewood Village Athens mixeduse development project. While attending the community information meetings put on by them at Chapelwood United Methodist Church in the office near La Perea, I saw a beautiful and wellplanned arrangement of green space, housing, parking, and retail spaces embedded within the designs for this property. I was highly impressed that Carter USA was willing to meet with community members that have a vested interest in how this property is managed and the types of businesses and housing placed there. I left each meeting feeling heard and valued as a future user of the broader range of businesses this new development can attract. Across the first couple of decades of my life, I have shopped at Zer Wind Dixie Echer Drug and during the next three decades continue to frequent this shopping center by taking my sons to get their haircut at the barber shop. Getting my nails done, going to La Perea, going to Dealas. I used to be over there. Big family. Really miss them and others. I've watched this once vibrant shopping center diminish into one that isn't well-maintained and it doesn't have the bustling activity with patrons that it once did due to the lack of upkeep diversity of preferred businesses to frequent. If La Perea wasn't there providing us with excellent customer service and delicious

food, the shopping center would have already withered away. This updated mixeduse development looks fabulous, but will also bring new faces of residents and shopping opportunities. I love the appeal of lingering in my area of town while being patrons of multifarious businesses, families, friends, and neighbors. Thank you. Anybody else could speak in support?

Good evening, everyone. My name is Ryan Wright. I live at 256 Magnolia Blossom Way. Uh I'm speaking tonight in support of the Homewood Village Redevelopment Project. Um uh to be clear, I don't think the proposal is perfect. Um like the planning staff, I share some concerns about its current balance of uses and I believe more ground flooror retail is essential if this is truly to become a destination rather than just a collection of apartments. Um but those are refinements we can continue to address together and they shouldn't overshadow the opportunity that is in front of us. The revised plan already shows progress. uh the addition of the town homes to soften the transition into our single family neighborhoods, uh stronger phasing to ensure long-term viability, and the improvements like plazas and amphitheater uh and better pedestrian and bike access. These steps expand public space and create eyes on the street, helping to foster safety and community life. I'm also grateful for the amendments to the driveway onto my street, Magnolia Blossom Way. Um and I'm but I am concerned about the lack of uh starter housing or the the missing middle options. And yes, there are some items that weren't further attention. Um, parking circulation and apparently the the sewer capacity issue. Um, but those are solvable engineering and design challenges. So, what we shouldn't lose sight of is the bigger picture. Uh, this redevelopment will bring much neededed housing, revitalize an underused shopping center, and align with ACC's comprehensive plan goals for infill, walkability, and smarter growth along Jefferson Road. I urge the commission, my neighbors, and the project team to see this not only as a challenge, but as an opportunity. With continued input and collaboration, Homeland Village can become a vibrant, connected neighborhood hub that sets the standard for future redevelopment in Athens. I'm grateful to uh I'm grateful for the design team's willingness to listen and to engage with the neighbors seeking our input. This project has improved measurably since June and I'm hopeful for its continued progression toward a truly exciting place for Athens

with a stronger mix of uses and housing types. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else to speak in support of the project? Hearing none. So, um we'll go to the opposition. So, is anybody here to speak against the proposal?

Good evening. My name is Heather Mroy. I am an owner at 228 Magnolia Blossom Way. I am speaking out against the proposal. The staff has once again done a fantastic job at summarizing the shortfalls of the proposed redevelopment. While a couple of small improvements have been made from the first proposal, they have added density, not removed it. They have done they once again have disregarded the wishes of surrounding homeowners. They're proposing removing large mature oak trees that provide a beautiful canopy entry into my neighborhood, the cottages at Homewood, and the privacy fence that has been in place for over 20 years, offering a buffer to the large commercial complex. In place, they've proposed a towering three-story set of town homes with modern straight lines that are not cohesive to our community. I'm in opposition of any redevelopment that includes a five-story residential structure near the end of this parcel at the rear. It's evident with the constraints that the redeveloper has mentioned that are in place with the Georgia Power easement and the leases that are in place for more than a decade for more than a decade from now that this isn't the best decision for them to push forward financially. I'm asking that y'all please vote to deny this project as the staff has recommended.

You else to speak in opposition.

My name is Patrick Stanley. Uh I'm at 185 Ashton Drive. Um I echo some of the things that uh Heather just said. Um my biggest concern though is right the the list of waiverss I think is a good illustration. Um the requested waivers are not necessities. You could build this project without those waivers. They are conveniences. And while there has been some back and forth with this, uh there are members of the community that are in there who haven't been spoken to. Canitos, which is a restaurant there, found out about this when my wife asked if they were looking forward to this. This was past June. These are folks who have moved in. They were planning a renovation and they didn't know about this. They had to hear about this from a member of the community. Things like this to me say that this is not a long-term investment. This is a quick return of investment. As somebody who wants to be living in this neighborhood until I retire or beyond, I want to know that whoever is developing there is developing with not five years down the road or 10 years down the road, but two, three, four, five decades. We're close, but this plan as it exists now, I think still has to be reworked to incorporate more of the long-term elements that were are needed. And I think while you're still asking for waiverss of things that are not necessities, it says where your priorities are.

Anyone else? Oops. I'll handle it.

Good evening. My name is Grace Tak. I live at 146 South Homewood Drive, just down the street from this project. At the last meeting, I was representing a large group of neighbors in opposition to the project. And I want to be clear that tonight, I'm just speaking for myself. I had a hard time choosing whether I was for or against. At this point, um, progress has definitely been made, but we haven't seen enough movement on some of the biggest concerns that were brought up at the last meeting. I'd like to see this project continue to evolve and move forward. The development team, as many others have pointed out, they have made a big effort to work with us and address the neighborhood's concerns, and I recognize those efforts. I'm happy with some of the changes including the bike pedestrianon entrance on Magnolia Blossom, the addition of town houses and increased plaza space, the reintroduction of some, though I believe not enough groundf flooror retail, and the clarification of the proposed phasing of the project to ensure that the existing commercial upgrades are completed prior to construction of the apartments. While I understand there are many constraints on this site, the proposal is still falling short in a few key areas and these are mainly driven by the inappropriately large scale and the large number of units that are being requested. This is resulting in a sea of surface parking that is supposed to remain um in addition to increased vehicle trips which incidentally 92 additional trips per hour doesn't sound that minimal to me personally. Um, I do believe the traffic study for the most part when it says level of service is not going to be um, significantly impacted, but there's no getting around the fact that there are going to be a lot more cars in our area and potentially cutting through neighborhood streets that are

already pretty unfriendly to people that are walking and biking um, due to our lack of sidewalks and lack of trafficcoming measures generally in the neighborhood. I support the provisions one through three that the planning staff has recommended if this project does proceed. And I have my own suggestion that autooriented uses like um drive-thrus and auto repair shops be prohibited on this site. It's logical that the residential density should be limited to what would be allowed on 8.8 8 acres since that's the only area of the site that will truly be redeveloped under this proposal. I believe that the project team wants to deliver on phase two, but there's just no guarantee that that will happen. As I said, it's come a long way. I'm grateful for the time and resources that have been spent on it. And I'd like to continue a constructive dialogue with the project team as this proposal moves through the process. I hope in the future I'll be speaking in favor. Thank you for your time.

If you I am Mary Stribbling. I live at 224 Magnolia Blossom Way. I am an original homeowner in Magnolia Blossom Way. Um, somehow these guys thought adding these town homes was going to be a positive, but it takes away our driveway into the community. We have developed trees. Our community has developed trees and all of a sudden now we're part of a shopping center and we certainly don't want to be a part of a shopping center. A huge thing to me is we have no guarantee. These places have these retail places have not been wellmaintained. We have no uh security that they're going to be redone. I think the one thing we've heard is painting, but it's not uh a solid commitment. And then when they were seeing other things to come, they were taking away parking spaces and they don't have enough parking spaces now. So, um I'm very much against this. I haven't said five stories is very very high when uh you're in one story and twostory houses all around this area. So, I am very opposed to it.

And traffic concerns. I don't know how you can add 264 apartments. I know some people are going to be public. I don't know how you can add that many cars and not have an issue on uh Homewood. Thanks. Thank you to speak in opposition. Hearing none, I'd like to invite the applicant. Oh, one other information. Those two Can you say your name and your address?

Sandra Hunt, 204 Magnolia Blossom Way. Lived there 20 years. Uh those two uh apartments that are fivetory high, what they failed to tell you that brings 700 plus new people into the area. Those people are going to have automobiles. I've asked that they put out of the town homes, leave our fence that we've paid dearly for and and do a number of garages for some of those cars. Otherwise, they're they're going to be everywhere. They're not enough spaces for 700 auto. Well, that's the that's our main concern. They don't need a six-story building. If they would show a plan that would reduce the number in those apartments, we wouldn't have any objection. But I think that has to happen. And I don't know how it's going to they're going to manage that much traffic and that much parking. They've they've they have no underground parking planned or anything, so it's just going to be out there. Thank you. I'm Colette Walsh. Um I live at 225 Magnolia Blossom Way. Um, I'm going to address the um town homes because I'm not quite sure or that they wanted to have some people own property, but they just kind of plucked these down on Magnolia Blossom Way. That's the

entrance that I don't have a little thing with the green thing to tell you, but um it's a narrower road than a normal road. when they said, "Well, there's not going to be anybody that's going to be able to park in front of the town homes." Well, the rendition, the artist rendition had cars parked all along there. So, I know it's a rendition and it's not going to be real, you know, but when somebody says, "I live at 101 Magnolia Blossom Way." They're not going to go to the back building and park in the little extra parking lot. They're going to pull up in front of 101 Magnolia Blossom Way, which is that little tiny road. The trash truck will not be able to get by. I mean, the trash truck goes down the middle of that road. The Leaf and Lamp would not be able to get by if and cars will park there. And unless the the owners of those town homes tell them to move, which they won't do because I know because they don't do it on my street, they're going to be parked there when all when somebody comes around that corner and smashes right into them when they're parked on the wrong side of the road in front of Magnolia Blossom Way. I just think plus the fact that we just put up $25,000 fence that they're going to tear down. There's five 20 year old oak trees that the cottages planted 20 years ago that will have to be taken down. Um it just seems like they did some good things over on the side by bringing in the the um driveway in a different place, but then they undid that by putting the town homes there right up against the um the street. Anybody else to speak in opposition?

All right. Hearing none, I'd like to invite the applicant back up for two minutes. All right. I'll have to try to hit here. Um, really quick, I think a lot of the commenters on the town homes, uh, the trees are not going away. Um the fence we've mentioned we'd be interested in hearing the cost of that because we reimbured the neighborhood for that. Um as far

that's not what we want. We want to exply the town homes are you know hurt this financially. So trying to deal with a lot of different opinions on what's what is and isn't wanted. Okay. Um we agreed to no breakthroughs. Um, we do need the waiverss. As far as Caneritos, we've talked to them about going into the building, unfortunately. You know, we can't go to someone else's tenant and tell them what's going on. And especially when we don't even know if it's going to happen. So, we, you know, that's not on us necessarily to have that conversation. But since that meeting that that was brought up, we have talked to them about going into a space within the existing uh development or sounds like potentially even relocating to another shopping center um somewhere else. Um, and as far as the parking goes, uh, I my my statement was just 92 cars in an hour. That's less than two cars per minute spread across three different, uh, exits. So, you know, it I hear you that it's it's a subjective thing about whether or not that is a lot of traffic, but the data says is that it is not to make a significant impact less than 2 seconds added to your drive time. Um, as far as uh whether we're a short-term owner looking to make a quick buck, we've already been working on this for well over a year. Um, it'll take another year to get started. There's two more years of construction. We've got an entire phase two. We're certainly not uh trying to get in and out or pull some the wool over anyone's eyes. Want this to be a successful development. We need the neighbors to support it in order for that to be the case. And so, um, I disagree with you on that one. That's all I got.

Thank you. Happy to answer any questions you guys have. Just let me know. Okay. All right. So, now we'll take it um behind the rail. Do we have any comments? You have a question? Okay. Can we get the applicant back up? Yes. Hoping you're getting your steps in to Yeah, I need it. Um, so one of the questions I had about the site plan, like an area that looks kind of congested to me is the area that is on the plan to the left of the amphitheater, the entrance here.

Yeah, that I understand why you, you know, when I first looked at this, I was like, "Oh, there needs to be an entrance, you know, somewhere between the two." But I remember what the topo is like there. Um, and so to me that entrance on that side. Wondering if you all considered, you know, that's just a it feels like it's kind of coming in the back way and it's a lot of u congestion for lack of a better word and circulation there. And I'm wondering do you have limitations of like why you couldn't push that upper apartment building in or um to the right on the this way?

Yeah. is like that seems to be the thing that's Well, so the one thing is there is um a utility box here that has like a ton of fiber going through it and it sounds like it would be millions and millions of dollars to move it. So like we couldn't move that. So if you remember originally we just had a kind of a street going straight through. Yeah.

Thinking that circulation would go here, but obviously that impacts, you know, the entrance way to the cottages. So, we added this one back. Um, as far as shifting this um to the right, I don't know exactly what that does for circulation. We also like the idea of like this passage here, like bites hung back and forth and like, you know, kind of uh creating this like walking street, you know, that feels really good and tight and doesn't feel like a parking lot. Um, how wide is the driveway? How wide is this driveway? No, the the cuz that pointed out that's not a driveway. That's pedestrian only. Yes, this would be pedestrian only and emergency vehicles in between the two buildings though.

How wide is this? Yeah. Well, yeah. How wide is that? Is that pedestrian only? Yeah. Oh, no. That's pedestrian. No, this is this is vehicular. That's a two-way 24 foot flat street with on street parking. Okay. I think that I didn't understand that. Yeah, I think we what we were thinking is, okay, we've got some parallel parking in there that slows down, you know, traffic and, you know, the sidewalks and trees in front of the building will create kind of like a nicer feel. Um, versus if they're offset a little bit, it just I don't know, something about that just doesn't feel right. And then, I mean, I don't know if there's other reasons why we couldn't. I mean, obviously you've got the easement here, but it might just hurt with your circulation for this parking then creating kind of like a dead end if you moved it to the right,

right? Um, and what about the the driveway coming into the into the development that I was talking about still on the left? Oh, here. Yeah. About how wide is that one? Yeah. 24 ft as well, I believe. Um, okay. Thanks.

Alex, a couple of questions so please bear with me. Um, one is to staff. So on page two and I don't know which staff we're going to be asking. I'm going to say it out in the world and somebody catch this. Um adequate infrastructure uh primary concern. This is the top paragraph page two. Um, attention should be paid uh to making this site more manageable uh for Clark County government utilities potential um withhold withhold additional density not be a burden on um sorry I'm just hit some on sanitary sewer is and it was mentioned up here also is that a county problem or is that a development? Like is that is the county unable to handle that situation or is that just regular development? Might defer to Joel to answer to the county side and then it may be necessary for Ed to speak to the developer side of things. So yeah, so this uh particular development does lie in an area where we have u capacity constraints. Um so there was an issue with us being able to handle you know this volume of of flow during wet weather conditions. you know, as as the the engineer um record stated, they they are aware of this issue um and you know are are proposing you know a solution in order to to accommodate you know this

development. Um so I think the main issue was we wanted to we wanted to see that concept uh you know presented because there was a little bit of openness there on you know hey we're aware of the issue but um you know maybe we have multiple options on how to handle that. Um, we just wanted to see, hey, we acknowledge the issue. Here's how we're going to handle that, you know, with on-site storage.

So, I guess what I'm really wanting to know as well is is the county weak or is this just an unusually big project to put on county at any place? Like who who started this situation? It would be more um old existing infrastructure. So the county in infrastructure is this two weeks the project. Okay. I just I wanted to I was trying to understand is this such an unusual project that you plot this anywhere on the county you're going to have the same issue but but it sounds like it's just at least in that spot you're going to have the issue. Correct.

So it's the developer isn't necessarily bringing the problem. They're just being asked to fix a potential thing. Okay. That's what I wanted to understand there. Um, and then I'm not normally a tableabler and I'm going to have to ask staff because you have to have certain reasons for tableling, but I'm I'm going to go back to a comment Mr. Aping said on another um project tonight. I know the company Carter well enough to know it's a good big city company. Um actually know the CEO. He was a roommate uh in college at one point. I haven't talked to him in years so I didn't disclose that. But point is that's it's a good company and we got good people. We got smart people on top of this project including the owners are smart current ones. And then we got Carter. And I don't know if Carter has done another project here in town or not, but some of the things I said during the comments and that y'all said, they did address. They listened. And I'm going to go back to something Henry Kissinger used to do and uh is famous for is his people would bring him reports and he'd flip through it and say, "I need more details." And they bring it again. and he'd go he'd go three times each time until they said,"I cannot do any better on the report. This one was going to have to do." And he said, "That's the one you should have brought the first time." So my thing here and and I don't know if it's appropriate, but they they fixed it. They brought it back. And I think they can do better. I think they they made some adjustments and they they did some things to the buildings, but they're still very tall.

They're still over next to the neighborhood. Um it's it it they I don't know if they can keep the same number of apartments or not but what is happening is they've they took a good step forward and didn't solve the problem and I believe they can I think they can come back and do better given another chance. And I I can't get it. I mean, there's some things in here that they did well, but again, the tall apartments right by the neighborhoods. The design doesn't blend in very well with the connecting neighborhoods. They added residential. I'm sorry. They added retail, which is great. Not enough. I don't think it's enough. They didn't I don't believe the square footage replaces the square footage. They're taking away. And so staff did mention in here that perhaps they add if we were to approve we we add uh along that uh driveway between the two buildings. But so I would I would be inclined but again we have to table for specific reasons and I may have to ask if we go along with that thought is table it let them ra rather than deny let them try again and bring listen to what we've been saying to what the people have been saying and bring back a better project because I know that company can do it and if they're coming into Athens for the first time it's a great way to do it, right? Because I will also say lastly, this is a prime piece of property where growth is going. And in my real estate knowledge, this property needs to be really, really good. It should be. And that is going to be the best thing they

can do for themselves. It's to me, it's going to pay them back if they just adjust and get it just right. So, that would I'm not making the motion to table yet. I'm just throwing the idea out because I know they can do better and bring something. And as Mr. Epting said, we got the right people here. Let's try to make this work and form. And that may be inappropriate for me as a a commissioner here to say that because I'm supposed to just say deny or approve, but that is my thinking at the moment. And I'll be quiet for now. Anybody else? Can we get clarification in that? Yeah. Can we clarify that?

Oh, just about getting clarification from staff about what uh Carrie, you're next. But Bruce, what is that a possibility that we're the table? Sure. It would be for one cycle and that would put them not back before you in October. It'd be November, but we don't I thought there were like three legal reasons for taping. Well, you need to pause. It's not just the pause. It's so we should give some very specific directions. Can you give guidance as you're drinking? Um yeah, I remember I I my family and I lived in Homewood Hills 30 years ago.

You lived over there when I was when I was a younger man. Um and I remember when that shopping center was really I mean it was it was popping. It was it was vital. You know, we went there all the time. it was it wasn't the the shell of a place that is now. So, I definitely agree with you that this is important and I think a denial would not be appropriate for this because I do think you know there's there's five of six waiverss that have been uh not supported by staff and I tend to agree with staff a lot of times a lot smarter than I am. Um so it's just it has to be adjusted you know it has to be made better um in my opinion because it is important. This is a this is a a cornerstone of that area and 29 is going to get developed. I mean, it's it's already happening. There's going to be more and more developments along that area. So, they need to need to fit with the character of the neighborhood in my opinion. So, I I definitely agree with what you're saying um about the idea of potentially tableabling this and asking them to come back and do better. So, some thoughts.

Mike.

Yeah, I appreciate uh the changes that were made. they did do a good job listening to a lot of a lot of things we had to say and I really appreciate that. Um I still think the kind of one of my concerns with this is the size of the buildings that they do seem you know five stories does seem kind of big for there you know so if any adjustments that particular concern wasn't really addressed I don't think the buildings are still are still big and maybe that's the theme tonight or things out of scale but uh I still still just kind of have this feeling that it does seem a little bit out of scale for that spot and I you know I do think that something needs to be done in there. And I do think that there are a lot of good things in this, but I'm just not quite 100% there yet either. Mostly just because of the size of the buildings.

Um I I was kind of sitting here thinking about like it feels like they got another shot at it and really improved it. I think quite a bit. Um, and I was thinking about sort of in our process how that could be how they get another crack at it basically because I don't think the I think PDS can be really fun because they are where we can go beyond approval and denial. They are where we can kind of um nerd out about site plans and really try to place ourselves in this space and how we would live in it or be in it or shop in it or whatever. But I so I would be in favor of that. And um I think for me the some of the specific feedback that I would give um and I'd like to hear from you all too because not the final word on this by any stretch, but I'm sort of focused on the area on the left because I think the circulations it doesn't work very well. Um, and honestly, the 3D rendering gave me the impression it did look really great with the kind of overhead lights between the two buildings. And that to me looked a little bit more like a little um kind of po type of little shopping lane. And so I don't quite understand on you know the sort of verticalish line that runs to the right of the amphitheater and down in front of those buildings on obviously the big building with the Dollar General in it is your limitation there. I don't know what your limitations are as you move up the site. Um, but I wonder about thinking about that a little bit differently to open your circulation up a little bit. Maybe, you know, maybe considering, you know, some of the

things I'm suggesting would sort of accidentally um respond to staff some of the staff concerns about variances or the waiverss. But I like I wonder about getting a a more pedestrian area between a couple of buildings. That's where you can build in a little bit more retail. Um, I know that's kind of hard to do, but I I think that as it is now, it it's a little bit too congested in there with the town homes right there and kind of having to wind your way in and through and then coming through the area between the two buildings. Just um it's still not quite right to me. And I I I don't I don't know if I can be much more specific than that. I just wonder if you got a little bit of wiggle room on the right side of the buildings. Um, and honestly, I like to I generally like to sort of um give staff the respect of their time and go with their recommendations. But on this one, I you know, if it keeps getting better and better, I am more inclined to say like, yeah, maybe that that waiver is appropriate. I mean, there's an overall concern that staff has talked about that the applicant is sort of using the PD process primarily just to get waiverss, and I I'm sort of sensitive to that. But, but the PD process also as a planning commission, a community gives us the opportunity to do the nitpicking I'm doing right now. And so, I do find I'm not I'm not opposed to the PD process being used for this. Um, I yeah, I've got I mean I could kind of really go into this plan a little bit further, but I'll just leave it at that. Let's see what you guys think. So, I know I don't get a vote. I'll get to you in a minute. I I know I don't

necessarily get a vote, but I did want to piggyback on what Sarah was saying. Um, would it be possible to pull up that picture with the with the lights? Sure. because I did I did want to pause on that a bit because I was getting the impression that this was going to be like a closed off street not street like a closed off pedestrian area. Um so could I get the applicant up to help me understand this a bit more? So, so and I guess a good thing we have a farm marshall here because I feel like you might have an opinion about this too. Um, so, so you're saying this is would be the plan or is this just an idea of a plan of what?

This is this is a a vehicular street that goes between the two buildings with parallel parking on either side. Okay. Lights strung across. So, I mean, theoretically, like I don't know what the rules are, but you could potentially get like a temporary shutdown like on certain nights or certain events or something, but I don't think you'd be able to just block that off completely. It just wouldn't be enough circulation throughout the property. I mean, talking about congestion, I mean, that would then really be congested. So,

thinking is like, can we slow the street? Like, we don't want this to feel like a big street. We want it to feel like a small street where you'd have, you know, like people getting doing parallel parking. It's like the slowest thing you could possibly have on the street. slow the cars down like we don't want people flying through there like they currently do. Um and then on the other side is where we have the pedestrian only entrance and exit on you know behind this going into the cottages. Right. Okay. I I guess so looking so looking at the um the phase two site plan.

Okay. And um my question for you was why why is there it seems like there's such a separation between the living space and the commercial space? I guess I was and I and I I say this mean like I truly appreciate the changes you made. I actually really like the town houses. I the apartments don't bother me at the height that they are just because the lot is so thick. But um I'm concerned by the amount of parking which is everywhere which I understand unless you're putting it underground. I get it. But um it just seems to me that it's like and this is where we live and this is where we shop and I really wish there was more integration. So when I look at this phase two, all I see are just these sort of retail islands and I think about the Oak Grove development down the road that annoys me. And so I just don't um want a repeat of that. And it just I just keep seeing roads and parking and um I would love to see like stacked even if it were just a couple stories on top of some of these retail spaces. Um, and and then what struck me too was, and I'm just telling you this because I'm telling you this, um, we saw a development on Lexington Road that had like an apartment building and then like other apartments and as soon as they built it, they peeled off that apartment building and sold that off. And so then I thought like, oh my god, is this going to be like this is peeled off from the rest of this. So like maybe help assage that sort of concern and what what could be done to possibly address the integration of this property more?

Yeah. Well, I mean it it certainly is tough given that you have all those existing tenants. So partly partly is this is just a tough site to solve. Um and if you want to make progress, it's like we've got to do something. And so this is hope, you know, kind of the best thing we can right now to come up with something that that starts the transition. Um, knowing that we can't fully finish the build out quite some time. Um, I hear you about, you know, peeling this off. I think, you know, having the the retail involved here will help kind of keep it a little bit cohesive. the shared parking too will make it a challenge uh to peel it off per se because if an apartment buyer comes in, they just want the apartments, they're going to want to have make sure that they've got parking just for them. Same with the commercial owner. They're going to say, "Well, you know, we're required to provide x amount of parking and we don't have that. Where is that? It's being shared, which is one of the waiverss is that we're below the parking requirement, but we feel like the constant feedback is, well, there's so much parking." It's like, well, then why is that being rejected as a waiver? So, you know, we're trying to share the best we can, but still have something that is is leasable and feasible and that renters aren't, you know, trying to park somewhere where they're not supposed to. So, you should be able to share between the uses and that would be really hard if they were two different owners because like how do you play in the sandbox like that? So the intent is that definitely to keep it um you know all same ownership the town homes aside those would probably be fe simple but the rest of it would be cohesive. Um and as far as like you know taking some of the density and putting it on phase two you know number one it's like we've got a certain to buy everything and you know by taking that density away that means that just gets spread over less units and fixed costs are higher and it's more you know it makes the economics not

work. The other thing is you know having like 10 or 20 units above retail is really expensive to build the So like we have condos that we're building above retail uh in in Winston Salem and the costs are coming in just like absorbently high because you just don't have any efficiencies. So it's really hard to do. Um we could look at something like that. We'll see what we've already kind of looked at going to four stories and taking those units away and what it does to the economics. Like we we have looked at that. We just didn't say well no it has to be five stories. We're not going to even consider it. Like we don't really care if it's four stories or five stories. Frankly, it'd be better if it was four stories because it'd be cheaper, but it just hurts the economics. So, it's it's it's a challenge and and we felt like of all the issues, you know, a 59 foot high building when there's a 44 foot high parapit already out there was not one of the biggest issues. Um, I know people like five stories. It sounds really tall, but it's it's

it's uh it's downtown. I I appreciate that. Thank you. I appreciate that. Yeah. Um, Shen, did you have a question before you? No. No. Or do you have do you have a question? End my comment from earlier because now I saw that rendering you just showed and to me what you're presenting with that road between is a little more for sort of an Atlantic Station look kind of. Yeah. I I think I think that what would be really great would be to have a little more retail on that street. I think I I kind of take back what I said about there needing to be like a dedicated just pedestrian thing right there. I don't think that Okay, cool.

I mean, my comment is basically that I don't know what else you could do given the site constraints as it is right now. So, it feels almost a little disingenuous to table it because I don't know how you make this project work without the density. And I don't know how you make that density work with outages behind it. If they could reimagine the whole shopping center and do it all at once, that would be a very different story. And I I hear what the applicant is saying about residential above commercial, but if you could have put four or five stories above the existing shopping center along the railroad, I don't think anybody would really have a hard time with the wall that it's going to create in the back. But we can't do that right now because of the existing shopping center. So for me, I'm not necessarily in favor of tableabling. I do kind of lean towards just straight denial because I don't know how you make this work and make it work for the developer and meaningfully scale it back when it works for the neighborhood. And I also feel like what we talked about the last time this came up, this is very residential focused. I know there's a phase two for the commercial, but it does split it in half and makes it not feel as unified as I think we'd all like to see it. I will entertain a motion.

Anybody wants to jump in with that? I just want to say I'm I'm really perplexed because I I appreciate the redesign. I think a lot of thought was put into that. Um it's modern. It kind of modernizes the area and it optimizes a very vacant space right now. However, I don't think what was captured as a blaring issue was incorporated in the redesign. And that's that's my my concern. Um, what issue was that again, what issue was that?

The fivetory facilities. I mean, this the buildings are just not appropriate for the existing space and neighborhood. Um, and if there was a way to kind of rededicate the capacity. I Who just said it? Did you just say like put the the the other apartments on top of the existing retail space? Yeah. I mean, I wish that was an option. I would probably say go. Yeah. All day long. Yeah.

I mean, I kind of feel the same way. I'm kind of torn on it a bit. I do understand that there are a lot of constraints and it would be better to kind of develop it all at once. But I also see that those constraints might be, you know, those are kind of an effective choices made by the property owner over time to sign these leases. They didn't have to sign these leases for such a long time. So they're kind of self-imposed constraints. So I don't have as much sympathy as I would if they were kind of externally constraints too. So kind of kind of agree with Jensen say of course doing it all at once would make the most sense and but I do see that that's not maybe not possible. I don't know I don't know how you get out of leases but it's hard to get waiverss from the government too. Um,

so I I'll just say one other thing that is and I I brought it up at the last meeting potentially and and again I don't like getting into design. It's not our business so much but hearing, you know, threetory, fourtory, fivetory from the Magnolia neighborhood is an architect can do that. I don't know if the numbers work. They might not work. They may they they tried it with four. It didn't work. And that might be even more expensive once you but not here to say that. And and again going back to it, we got we got good people here that are giving people a lot. I mean, a lot of good stuff. And I that's why I hesitate to just deny and throw it away. And then granted it'll go to the mayor and commission and they'll do what they do, but that's that's that is why I guess tableabling that just feels better in this case. Give them a change. They don't have to

make changes. They can say, "Nah, we're not we we'll just we won't do this project." And that'd be their their prerogative. But I just feel like we got the ingredients all there. We just got to let themselves stir it or sit or do something with it. you like to make a So I would like to make a motion that we do table this I have to state specific calls on this more time frame I think pardon time frame correct well yeah and and the time frame um what do we normally do two three me three months yeah table three months up to

yeah I'm sorry up to quicker fine and cause would be getting as specific as redesign that that's that's if I understand right that's not a cause that I can say correct well it's a little broad so

I don't want to put words in your mouth but the discussion tonight has focused on the waiver requests and whether or not those should be revisited. Um there has been discussion about building height. There has been discussion trip generation. There's been discussion about sanitary sewer and capacity. Um those have been things that have mentioned. There's probably maybe one or two other things. So I mean there those are specifics that can be part of the motion giving direction to the applicant to work on those items.

Okay. So my my reason for part reason is scaling the height on the neighborhood side lower scaling it up from a lower position higher as you go into the property. Does that make enough sense? Buildings from the west. So the the the west being lower than the east

and but I don't want to tell them they have to do that. That's that's where I'm having I hate tableabling because I like business to go do their business and they can leave it and listen to me. We kind of agree like I'd like them to be able to be as creative as possible. Yeah. So I I don't want to tell them that. So is it is it possible to say there is a concern regarding the height of the buildings on the western side and that is that's what you're getting at is yes that that may that is a very big concern here. So, um, and

I wonder if we I always even just in giving the the feedback I was giving earlier, I also I always um hesitate to do that because it's just my opinion, right? So, I don't want to tell the applicant to go back to the drawing board. And so I would be care like I don't think we're of one mind about the scale of the buildings, the height of the buildings. And so I don't want to give the applicant a recommendation that doesn't really address, you know, that that maybe addresses one person's concern but not the others. So not really helping. But

no, I mean, you're you're showing it's confusing for me to see. Yeah, leave it open and say that we need to have further development of the plan to address the concerns that have been stated at the meeting. I don't know. I'd be good with that if that's if that's a if that legally works. um kind of further address what's been discussed or but what one thing I want to point out is does staff ever take issue with the height of the building in the report? Is that a problem? Scale was discussed. Specific scale.

Okay. Yeah,

I would say this and Shar you just made the point collectively you're not of one mind on these issues and so I think leaving it broad sends a mixed message to the applicant as to what's um then that's what you don't want to do with the motions. So if if you categorically identify address traffic concerns raised or categorically identify um massing of the buildings, you know, then I think you're not giving a solution. You're identifying an aspect of of the plan that you want to have more attention given to. And I think that's that's probably fair um without getting into the specifics where you may disagree. Um but if you identify the hearing of concern and can agree on that, that's the purpose of the motion is to put something on the table to see where do things stand. The goal isn't to be unanimous necessarily. It's great when it happens, but

yeah, I think for me right now where my head is at is that I think if I were if my feet were held to the fire tonight, I would recommend to approve with the staff conditions because I, as much as I like thinking about site planning, I understand how challenging the site is and I I think I don't have a problem with the height right there actually um I don't know how yeah I sort of understand the developer statement about when you aren't you know if you're stepping in for example from the from the west side you are losing the sort of um you're you're losing your you're not stacking all your units anymore these more expensive steps like it's it again it sort of starts to make it less feasible and so I even hesitate to give

recommendations about that. So, I think when you were when you were starting to say you wanted the table, there's a part of me that thinks, well, I'm kind of curious to see where the group is right now. Um hopefully we before we do that but I don't really know the best way to do that or what kind of fits with you know there's something if if there's something we can you know even like thinking about my issue with the circulation on that north west cornerish of the plan like I don't really know how that gets I don't know if going back to the drawing board on that is going to help the applicants very much. Um I don't know kind of all over the place, but

if we were to vote for a table and it did not pass, could we then go back and and consider approval or denial recommendation? I think we can. I think we have to think about what order we do. But we can't go the other way. So we approve or deny, we can't go back in table. So yes. But if approval, a motion to approve fails to pass, you can, right? If you haven't, you haven't made a motion to deny, you've made a motion to approve. Okay. So, um, say that again.

If, for example, I were to make a motion to approve and it did not pass or didn't got didn't get seconded, but let's say it gets seconded, it doesn't get passed, we can still vote to table. Yes. If I move to deny and it failed, we could not vote to table. And I think that's the right order. You can still vote to table. If it denied if we deny Yeah, we can try all the options until we agree on something. Vote to deny. If it's failed, we can Oh, if it fail. Yeah, it's still got to fail. Yeah, that's true.

Y you'll see what I'm trying to do here, though. At least I get the flavor of what I'm trying to do. And I apologize. can't cannot nail that word. I guess so. So, I guess I'll make a motion to approve. So, let's just go ahead and clarify. Alex had started a motion to table. That fails for lack of a second. Yeah, we'll we'll save that if we need to do that. Okay. But we still later no harm no okay if you were to consider it enough we need a new motion

so I will make a motion to approve the request with the four conditions that staff if we were to recommend it that are in page two of the staff Oh, interesting. Okay. So, all right. So, I tried that. What's next? So, it just fails. Can I ask a question before it's been seconded? Um, we've got the we've got the waiverss though. So, you're include the motion's including

it was including the staff conditions. Yeah. Okay. So, the waiverss as they are and the staff condition, right? Well, we never got a second. So, it's dead. It's dead. So, who wants to try something else? back to the table. I mean, nobody seems to want to deny it. So, I'll make a motion. I don't know how to say it though. That we table I heard back up to

um up to three months. Bylaws say that it's an automatic one-mon table unless you decide on another on an extension. Yeah. Beyond three month beyond one month. So we so I can say up to three months. Yes. And they can make that one if they want. So okay. Um and the the massing is is my greatest issue here. I think that's what they can go back and work on. So that's how I'm saying the table. I'll second that.

Yeah. Okay. I mean, I would like to leave it as open as possible. There was the massing issue and others, but I think that'll that'll probably it.

Yeah. I think what we're sort of trying to communicate or what I'm trying to communicate is I don't want to deny this. I think they've worked really hard on it. I think it's a hard site. I think um I think we heard from the community last time. It was such a perfect example I thought of like the best community input because they were super specific. They were calm, cool, and collected. They gave really good feedback and the applicant incorporated it. And um one thing that came through to me on that feedback was that they wanted to see something happen here. So I don't want to kick this dam down the road to where they can't do what they want to do until the leases are up in 2030 and 2037. So we have somebody who wants to come and invest in this in a way that creates a neighborhood hub and I want to be encouraging of that. So that's where I stand on.

All right. So we have a motion and a second. We'll do a roll call vote unless there's any more discussion. That motion was made by Mr. Sams and seconded by Miss Paris. Right. That right. Yeah. Motion to table. Motion to table. Yes. Paris. Yes. Yes. Sams. Yes. Sanders. Yes. Yes. Table passes unus.

I can only go for two hours. So, thank you. I will need to recuse myself on the next item on the agenda. Sorry, there's a snack. All right. Snack report. It's like someone's got something in

I mean yeah I mean to nothing then you get nothing now you get an option I used nothing there I got canortos all not I don't want to John

bathroom break.

It's the final Jeopardy. We're so embarrassed. Hey,

quiet size. I couldn't hardly listen last time. I was st I'd be interested to see how he comes back. We're very close to sitting there. I agree.

Oh, that's awesome.

Right. There's a lot of transient unhappy.

All right. Wait for me. Never had Sorry, we lost Jen. So I would have been faster.

Alrighty. Here to present the staff report on 600 Ogal Thorp Avenue. Case here. The request is for a special use in a commercial office zone for a vet clinic. We uh have made vet clinics a special use largely to control where kindling operations might happen. Those are often but not always vet clinic and so that's why there was a special use. In this case there is no kindling operation with this clinic as stated by the applicant. So this is much more akin to an office use and so it makes some sense why they would be converting an existing office 600 ovalor to a vet clinic. an interior renovation, cosmetic changes to the exterior, a staff patio, an accessible entrance. So, largely keeping the building and the building's footprint, but making some renovations mostly on the inside. There is variance requested on parking lot screening, and we'll get into parking in a little bit. That's really the only hangup on this from a staff standpoint. Here's the aerial of the site. We have our square office building here with a little patio inside. We've got the parking lot on either side. This is uh the front part of an office complex that goes back as you go towards the top of your screen. This is going to matter when we talk about parking, but you can see those lots are built basically right up on the property line. There's no no buffer land between the parking lot and the property line. And there are two residential uh multif family developments on either side. And that's going to come up when we talk about the variance. You'll see there's plenty room on the front here. It sits fairly far back from the street. Um and the parking lot, as you may notice, is not um it's not built up to current standards, and that'll

factor in in just a minute. Future land use is mixed density residential. It's not changing as part of this request. It's commercial office zoning. This would be a special use in a commercial office. Um, and you can see this uh property is located along Oakthorp Avenue right where it hits Holman Avenue. As you're exiting Holman, this is basically your view. You see the front of the property here. If you're looking towards that property, this is on your left and this is on your right. This is the site plan essentially an asy of the property. We have our parking lots or building footprint and this is a proposal for the architectural elevations here. Again, largely cosmetic changes. In staff's analysis, we find that this is compatible with the 2023 comprehensive plan, mainly because it is the retention and expansion of a local small business that's been established and operating here. We like to promote the retention and expansion because that's really good for our local economy here. Those local profits are going to get cycled through our economy here more than if it was a, you know, national company. It is compatible with the future land use map and the zoning map. We do deem that it satisfies the special use criteria. It's a relatively low impact use. Like I said, there's no kenneling proposed here. So, that's the main concern with vet clinics. So, this is going to function much more like an office most of the time. It isn't an existing structure. So, there's not really going to be changes impact architectural or otherwise. However, in our review, we determined that the parking lot is going to need to be

brought up to existing code. So overall, we're recommending approval with a condition, but we're going to get to the variance here just to talk about the parking. So on the west side here, this would be the left side if you're looking at the building. We've got uh our dumpster right here. And you can see we've got a fence right up along that parking lot edge. And then on the east side here, looking to the right, you can see the parking lot there. There's a big tree island here, large tree at some point. And then the parking lot goes right up to that that property line over there. You got those residences on either side. In your report, we've detailed a handful of issues that they would need to correct as far as the parking lot to bring it up to code. Elected to ask for a variance from one of those issues, the one that would probably create the most difficulty in compliance, which is section 939E6. And based on their writing, it would be sub point B, not A. Uh to exempt the the property from the project from having to create a screen between the parking lot and those adjacent residential properties on either side of the property basically because there's not enough room between the existing lot and that property line to plant a screen according to code. So the variance has a five-part test. It needs to meet with five of those to get a recommendation for approval from staff. Condition number test number one is is this some kind of exceptional condition that's unique to this property. We would say it is. This parking lot has functioned in its current form since 1978 when the building was built. It would be legal non-conforming today, but it is um a bit unusual because it's not up to current code. it's long since um it was built long before then.

Would compliance create a hardship for the applicant? And we deem that yes, it would because it would create a significant cost for the business and disrupt the function of the parking lot for other offices because folks who are accessing the rest of the complex have to traverse this property. Test number three is, are these exceptional conditions created by the applicant? No, they're not. The applicant is trying to use the parking lot as is, as it's been since 1978. They did not create these conditions. Would the benefits be greater than the negative impacts? and staff assesses that yes, the you being that the use similar to the existing office, relocating an expansion of a local small business is of greater benefit than not bringing the parking lot into compliance. And then the final test is is this the minimum required relief the applicant is supposed to ask for um the minimum that it would take for them to get to compliance. In this case, that would be a full wave uh full variance on this. Um but the applicant has offered to plant a climbing ornamental screen on the fence. We do think that this is the minimum required. However, we can't verify that the fence is on the applicant's property. So, if it was on the other property, they would have to work out something with them to to do the planting. We do think that this satisfies uh variance, the five-part test there. So, we're recommending approval of the variance. We also have a condition related to those the rest of those corrective actions. There's about three times the amount of parking on this site than what it would be required by our code for the minimum. And we felt that it was in the best interest of uh of all parties that those corrective actions only be applied to the parking lot for the minimum number of spaces. So there's about 35 36 spaces

out here. they would be required about a dozen spaces and we would recommend only bringing up those those minimum spaces that dozen or so to the current code. There are some existing particularly when it comes to planting trees. Our code now requires that you plant a tree for every I guess seven spaces, right?

And this doesn't have that, but there are some trees on site that could be counted towards this. And so by only having to do um a handful that would that would enable the applicant to improve the property um and also bring the property into closer alignment with code. So recommending approval with this condition as well as supporting the variance. Thank you. Uh now we'll hear from the applicant.

Good evening. Um, my name is Jennifer Howard. I'm a veterinarian. I have been working and practicing in Athens for over 20 years. Um, I have a practice that I opened on Prince Avenue 15 years ago this year. Um, and we have outgrown our space, which is why we are looking at making this move. Um, we desperately need some more exam rooms and we very much need some additional office space. Um, I've been looking for about two years or so to try and find a new location to move into that would suit our needs. Um, that I thought would be attractive for clients that the patients would enjoy. Um, and honestly, I fell in love with this property uh 18 months ago when we first saw it. But a lovely little zen garden in the center of it. It's got access to a lot of fantastic for our patients for their patient comfort. So, um that is why we've really been wanting to pursue this practice or pursue this location rather. Um it's yeah, so that's what we'd like to do. I do agree that it would be lovely if we could get a screen there and I was out of town when this variance was coming through. um there after coming back into town, I did drive back through back that parking lot and saw that one of the other um practice or not practice building owners had planted a screen of bamboo. And there's definitely I know bamboo is invasive and I wouldn't necessarily choose that for the thing I would want to plant, but there is about a foot or so of um um ground that we would be able to plant something in. And if we didn't have the availability to use that streaming fence as a climbing trestle of some sort, then

u a solution like bamboo might be another option. But um yes, and I would be really excited to plant some trees because I love trees and there's some spots for it there. So that's all I really have to say. I know it's late. I appreciate your time. That all you need? That's whatever you want. That's good. Um is there anybody else here to speak in support of the application? Anybody here to speak in opposition? Okay, hearing none. Um, thoughts, motions, whatever you want. Start the motion. Okay. I think we just have one vote, right? On this or two?

Yes, the two. Yeah, the variance is part of the vote. Okay, I'll make a motion to approve with or I'm sorry. Yeah. Right. Yes. Second. Okay. Um, we'll do a voice vote. Sorry. Is there any discussion? I want to talk about this for an hour. All right. So, we have motion to recommend approval with the condition. Harrisburg. Yes. Sams, yes. Sanders, yes. Yes.

And I guess we have to vote. only. All right. Motion passes unanimously. Five to ite.

We won't be as loud. All right, back again. Back so soon 780 min highway applicant requesting a reszone here from RS5 to RM1. So that is our single family residential 5 to mixed density residential one. That is our smallest multif family c or smallest single family category like the smallest minimum lot you have to have to our lowest density multif family zone. They're proposing a non-binding concept plan that shows eight townhouse style units. The main feature of this property is how much environmental area is on it. It is right next it is right on the middle Okone River which means it comes with a 100 foot riparian buffer 100-year flood plane. It has steep slopes that really constrict the site. Only half the lot is inbuildable just because of of its proximity to the river and the slope. You'll see that here in in just a minute. All right. Future land use out here is mixed density residential. that uh doesn't have to change for this request. It's already compatible. The zoning would change from RS5 on the left to RM1. You can see there's already RM1 next to it and adjacent to the site here. So, that's compatible with the zoning map. You can see the site. You can see it's totally wooded. We have Mon Highway cutting through right here. Have the Glen View subdivision just off the screen. The intersection with Timothy is just up the street. You can see the middle okone coming through across the top of the screen and that's part of what makes this site challenging.

Um, this actually gives you this is a 1946 aerial of the site. So, no making highway, but we did have a bridge over here along the I guess left property line there. Uh this gives you a good idea of the kind of buildable area you're working with. You can kind of see it. It slopes up to a little bit of a null here. This clear cleared area is about the only area that you can build on. Those trees uh that area has been covered in trees basically for a hundred years. It would be considered a legacy forest the way we uh categorize it these days. And they're growing there largely because it made no sense to clear them. They're on a huge slope and they've just been allowed to um to grow and exist there undisturbed. This is again the riparian areas and the and the flood plane. So the gray area is basically what you're working with to build. So a very constrained site and that's why frankly it has sat for a long time. So this is how the applicants chosen to deal with the constraints there. They're about maxing out the area they can build on. um for eight townhouse units. Now, they didn't specify if these are going to be for rent or for sale. Um they didn't they could be for uh rent. They could be for sale as condos or they could be for sale as fe simple. U basically actually dropped plot lines there. Little bit of parking over here and then some driveways off of Mon highway. The staff analysis. We find this to be compatible 2022 comprehensive plan adding housing supply. Um we would encourage it to be owner occupancy because that may be the greater need rather than just rent. Um it would be rather difficult to subdivide this property and so they may have to go the condo

route if they want to do owner occupancy. It is compatible with the future land use map and the zoning map. There are again those environmental and topographic challenges that really constrain the site, really constrain how you can subdivide the site. So RS5 and RM1 have fairly similar standards in terms of the intensity of development that is allowed there. But RM1 does not require you to subdivide the property, whereas RS5 does. So reszoning to RM1 really gives them the flexibility to develop the property, but RS5 actually allows more bedrooms per acre than RM1 only if you simple form though. So what they're really looking for is some flexibility here. Not much change in terms of scale. So overall we are recommending approval here. And uh that concludes the staff report.

Thank you. Now we'll hear from the applicant. Good evening. I'll try to keep this short. I'm Mark Walton with Patrick and Associates Engineering. We did the layout that was on the screen. Um, and basically staff pretty much covered everything. This is a very challenging site. Um, we've tried to make the most harmonious layout that we could to match the topography. Um, I was really amused to see the 1940s photo because I was wondering why when we walked the site, the whole area that we have developed really doesn't have large trees, but everywhere else it is covered with monsters. Um uh another strange thing about the walk is we walked it with the uh individual that's selling the property and it felt like more of an interview like he wasn't going to sell it to anybody that uh I believe he lives in the area so he wanted to make sure that the developer not just going to throw something up. We tried to take uh the environmental situation there. Most of the buildings will be slabs, but as you go towards the left side of the drawing, the topography is dropping down. So, we've got a couple basement units and we're just trying to match the topography. Um, and I could babble on, but I'm not going to because it's very late and I'm here to answer any questions or I'm gonna sit back here in case you want to call me back up.

Thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else here to speak in favor of the proposal? Well, I'm the one that's selling the property. My name is Gilbert McMillan. Um, I had a lot of people calling me about this piece of property that was being offered for sale. And uh both of the people that I had talked to that contacted me about it were very interested in buying it to see how much they could develop on that piece of property. And that was not what I was interested in doing is finding the right fit for that piece of property given that I'm going to be looking at whatever's going over there. And so are my neighbors and I want to still be friends with them after I sell it to somebody else. But I found the right person and I think we have been working together. Uh, and I'm real happy with what they're planning on doing. It's going to be consistent with the value ranges in the housing that we have in Princeton Mill. And uh, I think my neighbors will still speak to me after it's all said and done. And we look forward to seeing this uh, come to fruition. And I appreciate your consideration. Anybody has any questions, I'll be glad to answer the ones that I can answer. But, uh, the developer over here is going to be the one you'll really want to talk to.

Thank you. Anybody else to speak in favor of the application? Anybody to speak in opposition? Oh, excuse me. There was one uh one thing I started to mention to you. These are not going to be rental units. They going to be sold uh individually be homeowned u occupied. It's not for student I shouldn't say that but it's a family it's a single family residential unit. Thank you.

Anybody else speak in favor or in opposition? All right. Hearing none, make it behind the row. Anybody have any thoughts, motions, questions? Yes. Uh, yeah. Years ago, I photographed this property and I think this is a good fit for it. I've walked all around it. I kayak past it and take out at that bridge all the time. So, as long as there's a condition that I can still pull my kayak out there. Just kidding. Yeah. No, this uh mean I would make a motion to approve. All right. Second. Second. Okay. Um, any other discussion before we go?

I just have one question for the applicant. So, this is a pretty magical piece of property. Like Mike, I'm familiar with it. My husband had bike trails out there and I've walked it a million times. Um, are these Tell me that the town houses are going to take advantage of the river view in a meaningful way. We're going to as much as we're allowed to. There's the hund foot Athens Clark County riparian buffer. So I want to see the trees go. But okay, but in the winter you'll have a good view in the winter. I live on the river and I get a good view in the winter. It's just too too perfect of a spot

and the the residents will have the right to walk down through the buffer. So yes, ma'am. Okay. Um let's do a a voice code. It's not a roll call. Not roll. Did I say? Yeah. Roll call. Sorry. Sorry. Yeah, we'll do we'll do roll call. Whatever. Whatever the one is really name to approve. First from Mr. Lord, second from Mr. Lee. Yes. Paris. Yes. Laughlin.

Yes. Sams, yes. Sanders, Lord, yes. Motion passes unanimously. That one only took 10 minutes. Benefit from being late at night. Yep. 135 and 150 McClung Road zone 20258566. It's here. I know, right? Yeah. And there's nobody who's

then it's just us for the last.

Yeah, I'm offended I don't get an audience. Um, yeah, it it's late. I will try and be as quick and articulate as I can on this. Um, this is a reszone for 135 and 150 McCclung Road um zone 202508-1566. Um, the area in question, we're going to look at it um is being requested to reszone from RM2 to CG um on two separate parcels. Um it is a change to the future land use map from mixed density residential to general business. Um and and the purpose the impetus for all of this is facilitating a commercial drive um that's going to serve the commercial property that was recently approved through plan review. Um so we're going to take a look at it. Now, I do want to call out um this is a little bit odd uh what you're seeing because everything happened in such quick succession. Um there were a series of projects that were in review. There were a few final plats that were also being reviewed. Um, those have been approved, but I say that to say that the tax maps had not been updated at the time of the property line maps, saying that another way, had not been updated at the time that this was put together. Um, so the the coloring you see there is accurate. The the the change in the zone um in the future land use map, sorry, is accurate, but what you're seeing in blue is not. Uh, but we will get to that and I will make it as clear as I can.

Great. Thank you. Um, we're looking at the future land use map now. We're looking at the um at at the proposed zoning. Um, again, we're taking this section that is going from RM2 to CG. It's just this little piece. This is what it looks like today. It's a beautiful culde-sac. Um there are plans to, you know, develop this area. Um there there's a road extension that's going in that's going to serve the the rest of the parcel to the north. Um hopefully an interconnection to the east. All still very early. Okay. So this is the recorded plat. Um and it's a little bit difficult to see. I apologize. I will make this as clear as I can. Um, so this is where the future road is going to go in. This is the shape of the property today after the replatting. This line that you see up here is the property line that went away. So that does not exist. What we're dealing with is this piece and the little beak. This is an approved site plan for a Dollar Tree that is coming into what is currently zone CG. Now, what is being proposed for the reszone is this this beak and I just refer to it and a little sliver right here right on the other side of the property line. I believe Bruce mentioned at the during agenda setting that we are creating a split zone with this. U that is true. Um it's not ideal. It's not all bad. Um but it's it's factual. Um it's also worth stating that we are solving a split zone with this. So um right now this parcel as

platted is zone CG and this is RM2. So we would be solving a split zone while creating one. It's kind of a one for one. This is the commercial drive. um the whole reason for for this small little reszone. So the intent as staff understands it is to further develop the rest of this land for multi-use or I'm sorry multif family use um hence the R&2 designation. Now this dollar tree currently is uh approved to have access here and here off of this road extension. Ideally, they would also have my hand shaking if you can't see the laser pointer. Um, ideally, they would also have an access here primarily for truck traffic. Um, this this is proposed to be heavy duty asphalt. Um, it it really kind of provides some relief for the rest of the circulation here to have this access. The problem is is you cannot have any degree of commercial traffic over residentially zoned property, which is the scenario that we currently have. So at the moment the applicant is approved for this buildout. If this reszone is approved they will come back with another submittal to apply for this connection. Just kind of another view to see what we're looking at. Um again this is with the old property lines and what is being reszoned. This is with the new property lines that exist today and what is being resonable with the 2023 comprehensive plan. Um this area was looked at previously um by this board for a reason. Um this is kind of just fine-tuning what was previously

presented. Um, it's compatible with the future land use map and and staff believes map. That concludes staff report. All right. Now we hear from the applicant.

Good evening. Good night, huh? Bryce Hicks, WA Engineering. Uh, Zach, you did a great job. So, I think I could not be any more long-winded than needed. Uh, just thank you all for your time. It's a lot of time tonight. Uh yeah, this is basically the whole reason we're here is because of a relatively obscure piece of code. I say that Bruce, not insulting, demeaning the code, actually referring to my 11 years at the planning department. I can guarantee you I missed this as a comment on something somewhere. Um it's not a piece of it's not a piece of code that rears its head too often, but yes, it's it's in there and we we need to do it. Um but yeah, this basically as Zach said, this is going to allow improved vehicular circulation uh and overall increased site function. It's not going to have any negative effects on anything other than, you know, trading one split zone for another split zone. So, I mean, not not so terrible, but my colleague Stephen is here. If you've got any more technical questions, uh I'm just a pretty face. So, uh please let us know if you got any questions. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else here to speak in favor of the application? Anyone here opposed who wishes to speak? All right. Hearing none comments, questions. Motion.

Two votes on two votes. Yes. I'll make the motion to approve the future land use request. Okay. Second. Okay. Um, all in favor say I. I see I just Oh, opposed. Okay. All right. Um, I'll make a motion to approve the zoning request. Second. All right. Um, any discussion? All those in favor say I.

Thank you.

All right. Okay. Um I'll be super quick and Bruce is gonna have a little details on this, but I'm just going to mention it first if you can. Um, October 12th, is that 14th? 14th. October 14th. Mark calendar. It's an opportunity to go to a merit commission work session and listen to them talk about the future land use map and the short-term rental

things. I don't know, but like it's going to be a topic of discussion. So, while we're not necessarily going to get a joint like chitchat, it's at least opportunity to go and like see what they talk about and maybe grab people as they walk out. So, what time? It starts at noon in this room and it's in this room. Yeah, that's a Tuesday, right? Will you send out like a email? I can. Okay. It's late a lot. Email it to me at some point. October 14th. October 14thon 14th noon. Yeah. That that was my report.

Okay. Uh just to piggyback on that, the what will be presented at that work session. Um we will do the future land use map presentation. Um we're working right now with manager's office to see if there's a way to do um kind of a one-on-one opportunity with the commissioners uh to speak to answer questions. um in advance of that work session so that when we get into the work session, they are they feel grounded about the future land use and and in a position to really poke at it and not just hear it, but actually to ask questions and and and maybe alter it and and do some things where we're responding and um moving it forward onto an agenda for a vote. That's the goal. Um, but their comfort level is key. So, we have to get them there with that. Uh, short-term rentals. So, there's two parts to what's going to be presented and coming out of the mayor and commission's work session in August, wasn't it? Yes. Um, we took the discussion that that took place um and and here's here's the way we're going to handle it. Um, there will be a series of text amendments that deal with title N with the zoning chapter, which will not deal with licensing. It will deal with the sunset clause. It will deal with it'll kind of put to rest the the notion of the relief valve. Um, we have a couple cleanups to do with the references to parcel. Um and and so and and the uh the notion of a special use direction was pretty much given that um the notion for special uses to kind of go away and um instead there would be some treatment given in the text that would allow for a certain percentage of short-term rentals to be commercial short-term rentals to exist in certain locations without needing a special use.

Um, there was a concept that was presented to say that beyond that percentage for another amount, you could get additional commercial short-term rental if you used inclusionary zoning at a 1:1 ratio. So, for every affordable unit, you would have the ability for a CSTR up to a max. The percentages that the mayor expressed interest in in that discussion were 5% by right. an additional 5% is what what we're going to propose using inclusionary zoning. So that would put a potential cap at 10% that would be by right and then that's it. Um licensing is on the table for discussion but it will be a concept for how a licensing process would come together. um attorney's office is taking the lead on that but working with our department to get language pulled together but there's going to have to be coordination with some other departments as well that are involved in other licensing practices. So we have to kind of make sure we're we're getting all the players involved and the sections of code dealt with that licensing will exist outside of the zoning code. So the way this is if the work session discussion goes well, we would have a set of text amendments that would be moving forward in all likelihood on the November December cycle that deal with the zoning related aspects. The licensing would be on a separate timeline to be determined.

How's that? Sounds like progress. It's something. That's interesting. Yeah. Do we need to not that I want to get into a session anybody wants for me but um yeah I mean just like the doing the text amendments because I know I I wouldn't be in favor of getting rid of the sunset unless we had like a licensing thing in in place. So like whereas I expressed interest in that before that wasn't like a standalone interest. So yeah that was on that I shouldn't say the sunset's going away. Yeah,

it would actually I think what's being talked about is um kind of an indefinite term um where we would have attrition over time as short-term rentals either cease operation or or they come through and get you know other kinds of permitting and and that sort of thing and they come off of that. But the the sun suns setting for the legal non-conforming ones that's not for the new ones.

Yeah. So the sun setting is is only dealing with a finite number that over time is is going to shrink. Either because people got permits to operate outside of being non-conforming, they become conforming or they just cease to operate. So um anyway, that's the plan. Be very cool. Merry Christmas to all if we can kind of smooth that one out. Easy does. I'm gonna say this, too. The alarm on the building is going to go. So, let me leave the building to turn off the alarm before you go. Unless we can get out of here in six minutes.

Uh, no, no, no. Like, I think it's set automatically at 10:45. Yeah. So, just y'all sit tight, but I have nothing more to report. Okay. Let us out. A motion to leave. I would say we need to leave in two minutes before we s motion. Jen seconded. All in favor say I. I. Oh