Planning commission recommends approval for 2415 Jefferson Road redevelopment with conditions

The Athens‑Clarke County Planning Commission on Nov. 20 recommended approval of a planned development to redevelop parts of the Homewood Hills shopping center at 2415 Jefferson Road, advancing a proposal that would add two multifamily buildings with 233 units (382 bedrooms), eight three‑bedroom townhomes, and a public plaza with an amphitheater.

Staff had recommended denial, citing concerns about sewer capacity, canopy loss, waivers to zoning standards and an overall composition that is heavily weighted toward one‑ and two‑bedroom apartments. Staff’s written report said the project was “partly compatible” with the comprehensive plan because it represents infill development, but flagged six requested waivers — including reductions in conserved canopy, block size and shared‑parking standards — and asked that the commission consider binding conditions if it were to approve the PD.

The applicant, represented by Jack Murphy of Carter, told commissioners the design had been revised in response to earlier review comments. The team said the plan steps townhouses along Magnolia Blossom Way as a buffer, concentrates retail that is viable near the existing shopping node, and places leasing, clubhouse, fitness and other “active uses” along the new internal drive rather than conventional storefront retail fronting Magnolia Blossom. The applicant also presented a shared‑parking analysis using ULI guidance and said the project would provide roughly 630–637 parking spaces total. "We believe this is the appropriate scaling for the project and the best way to set up the plan," Murphy said.

Neighbors speaking during the public comment period were sharply divided. Supporters — including a commercial real‑estate professional and several nearby residents — said the site’s retail has struggled for years and that redevelopment would improve facades, lighting and landscaping and could attract better tenants. Opponents said the project’s scale, five‑story massing near two‑story neighborhoods, and increased traffic and parking would harm the character of adjacent subdivisions. Several speakers asked the commission to insist on fewer units near the residential edge, a clearer phase‑2 plan and stronger limits on tree removal.

Commission discussion focused on three themes: the amount and location of residential density, whether ground‑floor areas should be built out as leasable commercial space, and transportation/ingress concerns at the Homewood Drive/Jefferson Road intersection. Staff explained that one possible compromise was to limit the bedroom yield to the acreage actually improved in phase 1 (approximately 8.8 acres) rather than the entire PD acreage, and to make certain commitments binding in the PD so future phases cannot simply build out residential in ways that create a large abrupt mass against single‑family edges.

On a motion to recommend approval the commission adopted staff condition 3 and several applicant commitments that were folded into the PD recommendation. Those additional commitments require that a majority of the ground‑floor frontage facing the internal drive be left as “active” uses (leasing, clubhouse, fitness, co‑working or ground‑floor units with individual entrances) and that ground‑floor residential units on the south side of the northern building have street‑facing entries to improve pedestrian activation. The commission’s motion passed 4–3.

What the decision means: the Planning Commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Mayor and Commission for final action. Approving the PD with the suggested conditions would allow redevelopment to proceed subject to meeting the county’s public‑works and sewer requirements, submittal of a final site plan and any building permits. If those conditions cannot be met the project would still need to return to the commission for changes.

Key quotes

"We went back and we reviewed it with our design team internally…and we really feel that this is the appropriate scaling for the project," applicant Jack Murphy said of revisions to massing and streetscape.

Staff noted that the property will require on‑site sanitary storage for wet‑weather flow unless downstream capacity is addressed.

Votes and next steps

The Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions (4–3). The project record will be updated with the binding conditions and forwarded to the Mayor and Commission for final consideration.

Ending note

The commission’s approval was conditional and narrowly split; the future of the shopping center will hinge on whether the applicant can meet sanitary‑sewer, canopy and shared‑parking commitments while meeting financing constraints the developer described.