Hugh White Honda presented a Title 41 site‑plan communication July 16 to the Athens City Planning Commission to build a roughly 24,000‑square‑foot dealership and service center at 250 Columbus Road, but city staff said annexation, utility tapping fees and stormwater controls must be addressed before permits move forward.

The developer’s architect, Dustin Todd of Arch Hall Architects, said the project would include a showroom and expanded service department and that the site would be raised to remove it from a flood plain. “We’re looking to do a new roughly 24,000 square foot dealership including showroom and service department just to the north of the existing building,” Todd said. He said the dealer plans to use the latest Honda prototype and is coordinating annexation and property combination with ownership.

City staff told the commission that, under city code, water and sewer service cannot be supplied to the site unless the property is annexed or a pre‑annexation agreement is approved by city council. “We’re not allowed to provide water and sewer to that site unless they’ve annexed or they have a pre‑annexation agreement by the city council,” said David Riggs, a city staff member who presented the review memo. Riggs also said staff is calculating tapping capacity fees for the development.

Staff and the developer discussed several technical issues the commission flagged. The developer plans to connect to a pressure force main, and utilities staff asked that the tie‑in be performed per city specifications. Stormwater reviewers requested additional details about detention and water‑quality controls; Riggs said the site is at least partly within the city’s wellhead protection area and confirmed the applicant will need additional reviews at permitting. Riggs said federal and state stormwater standards would apply and that staff expects the applicant to provide extra details before permitting.

Commissioners and consultants also discussed parcel configuration. The proposed development currently involves three parcels, including a triangular parcel that is outside city limits. The project team said the ownership intends to combine parcels after annexation so the new building does not cross property lines. Mason Malcolm of Kleinger’s Group, the civil engineer on the project, asked whether splitting the property into two parcels (one for each building) would trigger setback variances; staff said parking does not count as a structure for setback purposes and that splitting the parcels could simplify approvals.

The commission also raised site design items the Shade Tree Commission will review. Commissioners noted the tension between tree plantings and dealership operations—debris from trees can affect displayed vehicles—and asked the applicant to work with city staff on tree placement and quantity. The applicant said it will present to the Shade Tree Commission before returning to the planning commission.

Public safety and lighting were discussed. A city public‑safety representative said security lighting is important for a dealership and referenced a recent vehicle theft from the location; commissioners asked the applicant to use cut‑off fixtures and to follow city lighting standards by property line. The transcript records the commission discussing city light‑level standards but does not record a single numeric standard consistently in the public minutes.

No formal vote was taken at the July 16 meeting. The commission classified the matter as a communication; staff said the site plan will return as a formal case at a future meeting (the commission scheduled its next meeting for Aug. 6) and that permitting would not proceed until annexation or an acceptable pre‑annexation agreement and required technical reviews are complete.

Why this matters: The site straddles city limits and a wellhead protection area; water and sewer provision, stormwater controls and public‑safety design features determine whether the project can reach permitting and whether the city must approve an annexation agreement before utility connections are made.

Calendar note: The applicant plans to present the site plan to the Shade Tree Commission, then return to the planning commission as a case for potential forwarding to city council.