Clayton council tables vote on Warner Village rezoning after packed public comment

The Clayton City Council on Feb. 25 delayed a final decision on an ordinance to rezone roughly 183.1044 acres near the intersection of Sweet Potato Ridge Road and Main Street to a Planned Development District (PDD), saying it would take the matter up again at the council's next regular meeting and allow visitors to comment before the ordinance is read.

The rezoning measure — Ordinance 0012502, which would implement the Planning Commission recommendation to change the parcel identified as M6030100011 from Residential Single Unit District (RSD) to PDD and approve a preliminary development plan by SDG Warner Village LLC — drew more than two dozen speakers during the meeting's public-comment period, as neighbors and the developers addressed traffic, stormwater, density and process concerns.

The item matters to nearby residents because the plan would convert a large, mostly undeveloped property to a mix of housing types under a PDD. Opponents described concerns about water runoff and school, police and fire capacity; proponents, including several residents and planning supporters, said the development would add housing stock, broaden the tax base and create units younger residents can afford.

Councilmember Dana York, speaking as a resident, told the council, “We are not against development. We are not against developing this property. Love to see homes there. Love to see people live there, grow their families.” Another resident, Derek Muncy, who said he works in land use and zoning, said the property falls inside an overlay district and “has to be a PDD” under local code requirements.

Many neighbors described localized impacts. Didi Goodwin, an Inglewood resident within 300 feet of the site, said she had spent thousands on sump pumps and was “not looking to have it back,” citing concerns about groundwater and bedrock. Bruce Routson, who lives at the corner where a proposed main exit would be located, warned of additional traffic on Sweet Potato Ridge Road and asked council to “vet” the developer's track record.

Developers and their representatives responded directly in the meeting. Mark Schnicki, identified as the developer with Schnicki Development Group, described the pre‑purchase due diligence performed on soils, wetlands, sewer and water capacity and said the team drilled 30 test borings and hired contractors able to excavate rock where needed. Aaron Horn, representing D.R. Horton, said his division has a local sales presence and offered residents visits to the model homes, noting warranty follow-up on completed houses.

Council and staff addressed process concerns raised repeatedly by residents. Several speakers criticized how a prior vote was reconsidered at a subsequent meeting without broad notice; Councilmember comments during Feb. 6 were a frequent subject of the public remarks. Council discussed changing its motion-to-reconsider rule after legal review; the council later introduced a separate resolution to amend council rule 4.7 (motions to reconsider) and tabled that resolution for further discussion.

After discussion, council voted to table the ordinance to the next meeting with the condition that visitors’ comments on the rezoning be allowed before the ordinance is read. The motion to table passed by roll call. Council also directed that the item appear on the next agenda, giving the public another chance to speak and allowing staff and planning to respond to outstanding technical questions.

Council members and staff repeatedly urged residents to bring specific evidence when alleging improper procedure. Law Director Martina Dillon and City Manager Amanda Zimmerman were referenced during the meeting as having provided procedural guidance about reconsideration. Several residents also said they would pursue a referendum and named Clayton City Charter Section 10.02 in that context.

What happens next: the council tabled the ordinance until the next meeting and agreed to permit public comment specific to the rezoning before the item is read and discussed. The council also introduced separate items — including potential changes to council rules about motions to reconsider — for future deliberation.

Votes at the Feb. 25 meeting left the rezoning decision open; council did not adopt the ordinance. Staff and the developer said they will continue technical work on stormwater and traffic and will meet with county engineers and the developer's consultants ahead of the next hearing.