Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Three finalists present competing approaches to 'Lawn on Main' redevelopment; council presses on vision, historic character and finance
Summary
CBRE, a public‑private partnership team, and JLL each presented approaches to market, finance and community engagement for the Lawn on Main site. Council focused questions on sense of place, feasibility (hotel size/parking), timelines and fee structures; consultants recommended a two-step visioning/feasibility then solicitation process.
Three finalists to provide development-advisory services for the Lawn on Main site made 15‑minute presentations and answered council questions about vision, community benefits and feasibility.
CBRE representatives emphasized market testing, mixed‑use options and the potential to use an adjacent site for structured parking. “Our goal is to give you clarity, confidence and optionality,” a CBRE presenter said, describing hotel, retail and public‑space mixes tailored to a compact site.
A public‑private partnership team (4PM/PPP Project Management) framed the work as a three‑legged process — government, private developer and construction — stressing local government experience and negotiation expertise for structuring deals and public improvements.
JLL framed the site as a destination opportunity and focused on preserving authenticity and programming. “There is something really good going on still,” a JLL representative said, describing local momentum and the importance of integrating local character into any development.
Council members asked detailed questions about outreach and community engagement, sustainability and LEED expectations, the consultant teams’ feasibility methodologies, timelines and fee differences (presenters’ proposed costs ranged from a milestone-based or success-fee structure to a $250,000 lump-sum fee). Consultants generally recommended that the city invest first in a clear visioning and feasibility phase — testing whether a hotel, parking deck and complementary uses pencil financially — then proceed to a targeted solicitation of qualified developers.
Council also repeatedly raised the site’s historic context and asked how finalists would ensure proposals reinforce Stone Mountain’s character rather than impose a generic design. Presenters described public engagement, market and program testing, and community-benefit weighting (local hiring, training and procurement) as central components of the selection process.
Council did not vote on a consultant at the meeting; members requested references and additional detail on milestones and proposed deliverables before moving forward with procurement.
