Decatur approves special exception to allow additional off‑site parking for proposed downtown hotel despite neighbor objections

The Decatur City Commission voted to adopt an ordinance granting a special exception to increase the permitted share of off‑site parking from 80% to 93% for a proposed 6‑story AC Hotel at 705 Church Street, a change the applicant said equates to roughly 12 additional off‑site spaces.

Casey Kerzic of Planning & Zoning told commissioners the Planning Commission recommended approval (5–1) with two conditions: recorded, legally binding shared‑parking agreements (to be filed before land‑disturbance permit issuance) and a requirement that shared‑parking privileges remain in effect while the use exists. Architect Mike Clifford, representing Dream Capital and BCA Studios Architects, said the project would provide 144 guest rooms, 10 on‑site spaces (including one ADA space and four EV chargers), and a valet‑first operation with stacking space for about 16 vehicles on site.

Neighbors and property owners opposed the exception at the public hearing. Attorney Jonathan Allen and managing principal Jeff (recorded variously as 'Gladstein'/'Glassing') representing Church Street Station LLC said the developer’s plans risked interfering with a decades‑old shared and prescriptive easement used to access Hunter’s Alley, could block egress from adjacent properties, and lacked traffic, hydrology and emergency‑access studies. Other residents raised concerns about additional traffic at the busy Church/Commerce intersection and potential spillover parking at Decatur Cemetery.

Staff responded that the hotel is a permitted use in the C‑2 district and that height (80 feet) and zoning are by‑right; Kerzic and other staff said detailed engineering, multimodal transportation studies, hydrology review and fire‑marshal approval occur during the permitting and land‑disturbance review. Staff also noted that recorded shared‑parking agreements and required permits would be reviewed prior to final land‑disturbance and building approvals.

Commissioners debated the trade‑offs between downtown redevelopment and neighborhood impacts. After discussion, a motion to adopt the ordinance was seconded and passed. The roll call recorded the commissioners voting 'Aye' and the chair cast a vote in favor. Staff emphasized that additional engineering and permitting review remains and that the approval addresses only the parking special exception, not final construction or permitting.

Why it matters: The decision clears a zoning hurdle for a proposed hotel project that developers say will catalyze downtown activity; opponents say the special exception, if built as drawn, could harm neighboring businesses and traffic circulation and may prompt litigation. The project will still require engineering review, recorded parking agreements and permitting before construction can proceed.

Authorities and references: Planning commission recommendation; UDO/C‑2 district standards; applicant materials and the two planning commission conditions filed with the record.