Athens hearing on Pomeroy Road rezoning pits neighbors’ flooding and safety concerns against developer’s plan for 50 affordable units

Athens City Council held a public hearing Feb. 3 on a request to rezone an 8.237-acre parcel on Pomeroy Road from R-1 (single-family) to R-3 (multi-family) to allow a proposed 50-unit affordable rental building. Council paused other business and allotted extended comment time to a neighborhood task force and the developer, Spire Development, before returning to the regular agenda.

The neighborhood group opposing the rezoning warned that the site is a known flood storage area and said filling it would push water downstream. Jerry Miller, speaking for the Lamar Heights–Pomeroy Road Community Task Force, characterized the site as low-lying and “prone to floods,” said the road is narrow and has a blind curve, and called the proposed 3-story, roughly 45,000-square-foot building out of scale with nearby one-story homes and businesses.

Why it matters: The dispute pits the city’s stated need for more affordable housing against local residents’ concerns about public safety, stormwater management and the character of a neighborhood already contending with concentrated rental developments.

Spire Development representative Sean McMickle said the project would be financed with low-income housing tax credits through the Ohio Housing Finance Agency and would be strictly a 50-unit rental development. He described unit mix as one-, two- and three-bedroom apartments in a three-story, elevator-served building and said the design will include at least six units that meet 504/accessibility standards—“double the number required by building code,” he said. McMickle also said a civil engineer had been engaged and that the project will use an underground detention basin and the “critical storm” method to detain and slowly release stormwater; he said consultants estimate peak-hour trips from the site would be 23–25, or about a 1.9% increase in daily traffic on Pomeroy Road.

Residents disputed the traffic and stormwater conclusions. Aaron Leatherwood and other neighbors said the parcel regularly stores large volumes of floodwater and that filling it would displace storage to downstream areas. Leatherwood gave an example converting acre‑feet to gallons to emphasize scale, and noted that several neighbors report repeated flooding at adjacent properties. Neighbors also said the number of housing units that would access Palmore/Pomeroy Road at the blind curve would increase from roughly 5 to about 55, a roughly tenfold increase for traffic entering at that point.

Business owners near the site expressed concern for property damage and customer access. Eric Lucas, owner of Floor & More/Carpet 1, said his store has experienced repeated flooding and property damage and asked council to consider long-term economic impacts on local businesses.

Supporters and housing advocates emphasized local housing needs. McMickle cited a market study and Ohio Housing Finance Agency data showing high occupancy and rent burden in the Athens primary market area and said the project serves households at 30%–80% of area median income. He said rents would scale by income tier (example ranges provided to council) and that the project alone would be a small contribution toward a larger countywide need.

Council context and next steps: Council member Alan Swank read the ordinance title for rezoning (Ordinance 06‑25) during the meeting; the item was on second reading and no final vote was taken Feb. 3. Swank said a final vote is expected at the council’s next regular meeting. Council members and the administration noted that engineering, stormwater and traffic analyses will continue to be central to ongoing review.

Documents and evidence: Neighbors cited FEMA flood mapping, photographs of site visibility from the blind curve, business flood records and police call logs for nearby properties; Spire provided a civil‑engineering memo and a traffic consultant summary to council staff.

What council members flagged: Several council members asked staff to ensure that city public‑works and engineering recommendations on stormwater and road safety are part of the record before any final action. At least one councilor suggested exploring infrastructure investments that could mitigate localized flooding and improve pedestrian safety in the corridor.

No vote was taken on Feb. 3. The hearing closed and council returned to its regular session; the rezoning ordinance remains under consideration.