Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves rezoning to add 1.49 acres to Eastern Wharf plan; neighbors press council over possible new access
Summary
Savannah City Council voted to rezone a 1.49-acre parcel on East President Street into the Eastern Wharf planned development and placed the master-plan amendment on first reading. Neighbors voiced concern that a curb cut shown in the plan could create a new access that would increase cut-through traffic and safety risks; petitioners and staff said the curb cut already exists and may be controlled by GDOT.
Mayor Van R. Johnson II and staff advanced a zoning change on April 10 to fold a 1.49-acre parcel on East President Street into the Eastern Wharf planned development. The council approved item 13 — a zoning map amendment to change the parcel from light industrial to planned development — by voice vote and placed the related master-plan amendment (item 14) on first reading, returning for final action in two weeks.
Edward Morrow, director of development services for the Chatham County-MPC, told the council the parcel is currently zoned light industrial and that the requested change would align that corner with the rest of the Eastern Wharf PUD and its adopted standards. MPC staff recommended approval and the planning commission approved the petitions unanimously, Morrow said.
During public testimony, Susan Gorecki, a homeowner in the Upper East River community, urged the council not to establish what she called a “third entry” off East President Street. Gorecki said a new access could invite cut-through traffic, increase noise, spur loitering and vandalism, create congestion and reduce residents’ privacy and safety.
The petitioner’s representative and city staff answered that the curb cut depicted on the plan already exists as a prior driveway/curb cut and that the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) holds authority to alter or remove it through future projects. A city attorney and the petitioner’s lawyer told council there is limited municipal authority to prevent DOT-driven changes to a public road, and that DOT condemnation or redesign could supersede local plans.
Council members pressed petitioners and staff for clearer neighborhood outreach before items reach the dais. Several council members said they would welcome additional neighborhood meetings and written information so residents can raise issues early in the process. The council split the petitions: the rezoning (item 13) was approved on first and second reading at the meeting; the related master-plan amendment (item 14) was advanced on first reading only and will return for final action after staff provides clarifying materials about connectivity and the contested curb-cut arrow on the map.
John Gaskin, a developer appearing for a separate petition that will tweak internal lot-width standards, told the council his firm can remove the arrow showing the connection if that resolves neighbors’ concerns; councilmembers agreed staff should work with petitioners and nearby residents before the next hearing.
The council’s action changes the parcel’s official zoning designation and keeps the master-plan amendment open for additional review and neighborhood engagement. The council’s next opportunity to act on the plan amendment will be at its next scheduled meeting, where staff said it would supply additional documentation and engineers or petitioner representatives could respond to outstanding connectivity questions.
