Council hears wide-ranging opposition and technical defenses of proposed Pomeroy Road rezoning

Athens City Council held first reading on an ordinance to rezone a parcel on Pomeroy Road to allow multi‑family development, and during the meeting on Jan. 21 residents raised safety, drainage and neighborhood‑character concerns while the developer described engineering work it says would mitigate those risks.

The rezoning measure, introduced as Ordinance 06‑25, would rezone an undeveloped lot on Pomeroy Road from R‑1 (single family) to R‑3 (multi‑family) to facilitate a proposed 50‑unit affordable housing project, according to Sean McMickle of Spire Development. “We’re proposing a 50‑unit affordable housing project that’ll be financed by tax credits through the state of Ohio,” McMickle said, adding that the project would include an elevator, additional accessible units, and an underground detention system to control stormwater runoff.

The ordinance’s sponsor, Council Member Swank, moved at first reading to strike Section 2, which would have rezoned five parcels immediately west of 0 Pomeroy Road; council approved that amendment and the removed portion will return to the planning and development committee. That change leaves the original petition to rezone 0 Pomeroy Road intact while routing the adjacent‑parcels question back for additional committee review.

Why it matters: the proposal pits a state‑funded affordable housing plan against neighborhood concerns about traffic safety, flooding and impacts on nearby businesses. Residents said Pomeroy Road already carries high‑speed traffic and has a history of vehicles leaving the roadway; neighbors and business owners told council they fear added density would worsen those problems.

Residents described repeated crashes and near misses near the curve where the project would be located. “Pomeroy Road is extremely dangerous,” said Sharon Walker, a Pomeroy Road resident who lives on the curve; she described vehicles leaving the road, repeated fence and shed damage to nearby properties, and a recent collision at a veterinary clinic entrance. Another neighbor, Aaron Leatherwood, described the parcel as a leftover interior farm lot and warned that the site has long been regarded as a difficult development location.

Spire Development responded with technical studies it said should allay neighborhood concerns. McMickle said a civil‑engineering review concluded the project will require an underground detention basin using a “critical storm” method that the engineer expects will reduce runoff and not increase flood elevations on adjacent properties. McMickle also said a traffic analysis found peak‑hour trips would be small — roughly 25 AM trips and 23 PM trips — and would represent about 1.9% of daily traffic at the Pomeroy/Richland intersection.

Council and other commenters asked for more documentation. Council Member McCarrie asked for the engineering analysis and other supporting materials to be posted or provided to council so they can be shared with neighbors. “If we can have some factual data that we can even share with community members, that would be really helpful,” McCarrie said.

Other public commenters raised concerns about the configuration and likely impacts of three‑story buildings. Adam Lewis, a neighborhood resident, compared other local developments and cited police call‑volume concerns, parking pressure and potential spillover onto Coventry Lane. Lewis also criticized the developer’s financial incentives and said similar tax‑credit projects in the area receive substantial tax abatements.

Several speakers urged a broader planning approach. Jerry Miller and others asked that the city lead coordinated neighborhood engagement instead of reacting to developer proposals, and that council consider whether other, more walkable areas might be better candidates for higher‑density affordable housing.

What happens next: the council amended Ordinance 06‑25 by striking the portion affecting five parcels west of 0 Pomeroy Road; that section will return to the planning and development committee for further review. The rezoning of 0 Pomeroy Road remains in the ordinance and will proceed through second reading, a public hearing scheduled for Feb. 3, and later readings if it continues through the legislative process.