Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Pomeroy Rezoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning Commission recommends rezoning for Pomeroy Road affordable housing after contested hearing (3–1)

Athens Planning Commission · December 19, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning Commission voted 3–1 to recommend rezoning an 8.2‑acre parcel at 0 Pomeroy Road from R‑1/R‑2 to R‑3 to allow a 50+ unit affordable housing project proposed by Spire Development. The hearing featured sustained public concern about flooding, stormwater, traffic and a dispute over whether the rezoning application was properly signed.

The Athens Planning Commission on Dec. 18 recommended that City Council rezone an 8.2‑acre parcel at 0 Pomeroy Road from R‑1/R‑2 to R‑3 to allow a 50+‑unit affordable multifamily development proposed by Spire Development. The commission’s recommendation passed 3–1 after extended public comment and debate over technical and procedural questions.

Sean McMickle of Spire Development told commissioners the project would be financed with 9% housing tax credits allocated by the state and would produce workforce‑oriented affordable units. He said the development would be an elevator‑served building with a mix of one‑, two‑ and three‑bedroom units and that rents are targeted to households at roughly 30%–80% of area median income. McMickle cited model rent ranges for net tenant‑paid rent (one‑bedroom: about $350–$815; two‑bedroom: about $420–$1,150; three‑bedroom: about $480–$1,300) and said Spire intends to cover water, sewer and trash while tenants pay electricity.

Flooding and stormwater were the most persistent concerns raised by neighbors and business owners. Andy Boat, who owns property on Richland Avenue, and others described repeated flooding in the Coats Run corridor and urged that broader watershed issues be addressed before allowing additional impervious surfaces. In response Spire said it would design an underground detention system and ‘‘we will be detaining the stormwater on‑site and slowly releasing it into the existing storm system’’ and that final engineering approvals would be required before construction.

A procedural dispute also featured prominently: resident Aaron Leatherwood said when the application previously reached city council the law director had determined the owner had not signed the rezoning request and therefore Spire lacked standing. Leatherwood told the commission he had submitted a petition and that the resubmitted application shows different signatories; he urged the commission to require proper owner authorization. Spire representatives replied that Craig Kennedy signed the application as trustee and submitted a letter assigning Spire as agent.

McMickle also addressed concerns about traffic and crime, citing an independent traffic analysis that estimated roughly 23–25 peak‑hour trips associated with a 50‑unit building at the site and describing property management measures — interior/exterior cameras and key‑fob access — and coordination with police as ways to limit public‑safety issues.

Public speakers included city council members and affordable‑housing advocates who emphasized long waiting lists for housing assistance and high occupancy rates in existing affordable properties. Solve Spiones, chair of the Affordable Housing Commission, cited housing authority waiting lists and urged support for the rezoning.

On a motion made from the dais, the commission voted to recommend the rezoning to City Council (motion moved by a commission member and seconded; recorded voice vote resulted in a 3–1 recommendation). The commission and public noted that if council and then the developer proceed, the project will still require a full Title 41/site engineering review and any Army Corps of Engineers or county engineering inputs addressing watershed issues before building permits would be issued.

Next steps: the Planning Commission’s favorable recommendation is now scheduled to be forwarded to City Council for its public hearing and decision; engineering reviews and any required legal clarifications about application standing will also continue.