Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Redevelopment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council removes daycare restriction at 2810 Atlanta Highway to clear path for redevelopment
Summary
Property owner sought removal of a daycare-only restriction at 2810 Atlanta Highway after repeated vandalism left a former church building damaged; council approved the change but added use restrictions to limit fueling stations, car washes and certain stores.
Get email alerts on the Redevelopment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A property at 2810 Atlanta Highway that had been restricted to daycare use will be permitted a broader set of AB‑2 uses after the Montgomery City Council voted to remove the daycare‑only qualification and to add restrictions barring fueling stations and car washes.
Why it matters: The property owner said vandalism and occupancy by people living in the building left the structure heavily damaged and made previous redevelopment plans infeasible. Council members said lifting the daycare restriction would allow the owner to pursue alternative redevelopment options while protecting neighbors from higher‑impact commercial uses.
Clay Phillips, an attorney representing Progressive Real Estate LLC, told the council he bought the former church building nearly two years ago and that vandals twice stripped the property, once causing about $500,000 in damage. “Within 2 weeks of after y'all approving it for what we asked for, the building was broken again. And this time it was destroyed,” Phillips said, describing drug use and occupancy that left the structure “ruined” and unsuited for the daycare operator that had earlier planned to occupy it.
Neighbors who spoke told council members their primary concern was blight and that they welcome redevelopment. Council members agreed to retain a queue restriction to prevent certain uses and to add explicit prohibitions on fueling stations, drive‑through windows and car washes; the council recorded the ordinance as adopted as amended.
The owner said he may demolish the building and start over, or attempt a full reconstruction, and emphasized the neighborhood’s desire to see the site redeveloped rather than remain a blighted property.

