The Athens-Clarke County Planning Commission on Jan. 8 recommended denying a rezoning and master planned development (PD) application for 570 Prince Avenue, the site of the University of Georgia president's house, after more than two hours of public comment and technical questions.

Staff asked the commission to oppose the applicant's requested waiver that would allow roughly 53,541 square feet of hotel use in a commercial-neighborhood (CN) zone, saying the numeric cap in the code (10,000 square feet for hotel use in CN) was intended to scale hotels to the typical lot in that district. In its presentation, planning staff summarized the project's evolution: the applicant reduced the above‑grade building to about 38,500 square feet and decreased rooms from 116 to 72, but still seeks relief that staff concluded was too large given the ordinance's hard cap.

"Staff recommends denial," the planner stated during the presentation, citing concerns about scale even while noting the proposal meets many development standards.

The applicant, represented by Laurie Newcomer and attorney Julie Sellers, said the revised plan preserves the historic president's house and accessory structures, commits to preservation and conservation easements at closing, and adopts stormwater features intended to avoid worsening downstream flooding. Newcomer told the commission the team "listened to the feedback and we're here tonight with a much smaller hotel" and described design elements intended to protect the historic house and neighborhood.

Josh, the project stormwater consultant, told commissioners the team is designing to exceed county requirements and that porous pavement plus subsurface detention would bring modeled 100‑year runoff rates close to existing conditions: "The existing site right now ... has a runoff rate for the hundred year storm of 18 cubic feet per second. In this scenario with porous parking, we are at 19 cubic feet per second," he said, adding that modest additional detention would meet the target rate.

Public comment was heavily weighted toward opposition. Speakers representing the Boulevard Neighborhood Association, Historic Cobham Foundation and KeepAthensLocal, along with many nearby residents, cited multiple objections: that the hotel use requested is far larger than CN zoning allows, that preservation easements were not yet secured and therefore not enforceable, and that missing or partial stormwater and traffic information left open the risk of increased flooding, traffic conflicts and on‑street parking overflow.

Ian Thomas, speaking for the Boulevard Neighborhood Association, cited the staff report and said a waiver for 53,541 square feet "is far too great a deviation from the maximum allowed." Jasmine Paul, a Boulevard resident, said that the absence of a complete stormwater plan and a full traffic study should be "noted as part of the basis for that denial." Other residents raised concerns about pedestrian safety if a new turn lane is constructed on Prince Avenue, loss of tree canopy, noise from proposed events, and the precedent of granting a large numeric waiver in a residential edge area.

Commission discussion focused on the unusual lot context (a large government parcel), the code history behind the 10,000‑square‑foot hotel cap, and whether the PD mechanism and conditions could adequately protect the historic resources and neighbors. Commissioners split on whether a future‑land‑use designation should change: the body voted to recommend changing the future land use to Main Street business, a procedural endorsement that would reflect non‑governmental use for the parcel if ownership changes hands.

On the two formal recommendations sent to the mayor and commission, the planning commission voted to recommend approval of the future land use change and voted separately to recommend denial of the rezoning/PD request as presented. The motions were recorded by roll call and passed on the margins of the commission.

What happens next: the planning commission's recommendations will be forwarded to the mayor and commission for public hearings and final action; any preservation easements or development restrictions the applicant pledges would need to be finalized and recorded at closing to become enforceable.