McDonough council defers Anderson Landing rezoning after residents press sewer, flooding and emergency service concerns

The City Council of McDonough on May 7 postponed a decision on Anderson Landing, a proposed 89‑lot residential development on about 54 acres, after hours of public testimony and council questions about stormwater, sewer capacity and emergency‑service coverage.

Wade Anderson, the landowner, told the council the property will be developed one way or another, and that he and his family chose Eastwood Homes because it proposed a lower‑density plan and “a little greener” approach. “We chose lower density deliberately,” Anderson said, urging a yes vote as the best way to preserve neighborhood character while addressing drainage problems he said predate his family’s ownership.

Stephen Jones, the project attorney for Eastwood Homes, outlined technical and contractual measures the developer proposed, including green stormwater infrastructure, a traffic‑impact study, a 5% rental cap enforced by a mandatory homeowners association, trash‑screening at each garage and a condition that no vertical construction occurs without confirmation of public water and sewer availability. Jones said the developer had commissioned basin and traffic studies and proffered conditions intended to reduce off‑site runoff and address neighbors’ concerns.

Residents from the adjacent Mountain Brook Village strongly opposed immediate approval. Theresa Miles, a homeowner in Mountain Brook Village, said repeated flooding and the risk of long‑term liabilities concern neighbors. “We support smart, responsible infrastructure‑first growth,” Miles said, urging the council to secure independent verification and performance bonds rather than proceed immediately.

Sophia Cummings, who lives directly below the wooded area behind the proposed site, told the council she had not seen evidence that neighboring homeowners created the drainage problem and said a smaller buffer would not be an adequate safeguard. Deborah Aqa, another Mountain Brook resident, asked the council to require completion of the Wade Farm pump station and a 75‑foot buffer to protect homes, and to hold developers to post‑construction monitoring and restoration obligations.

Council members pressed the developer and staff on technical details. Councilmember Johnson said response times for fire and police “matter” and urged careful planning before new neighborhoods are approved. Fire Chief David Williams testified that any expansion increases demands on the fire department and noted the city has had two stations since 2004; staff and council discussed the need to plan for a potential third station. City Administrator Keith and the city’s engineering consultant (Turnipseed) said a larger set of wastewater improvements and lift‑station upgrades is underway or planned, and that the Turnipseed capacity review incorporated the recent Weekley lift station improvements.

The hearing produced no formal approval. Councilman Scott Reeves moved to deny the rezoning; after further discussion the council instead adopted the city attorney’s alternate recommendation to defer the matter. The motion to defer case #250903 to the June 15 council meeting passed 6–0, with the council asking staff and the applicant to continue negotiations with neighbors and to provide additional documentation on sewer capacity, performance guarantees and construction sequencing before the next hearing.

The deferral keeps in place the status quo zoning while giving staff, the developer and community groups a month to pursue additional assurances and independent technical review. The council and staff indicated they will schedule follow‑up meetings between the developer and neighborhood representatives during the interval.

The city clerk re‑advertised the item for the next meeting and the mayor said she will convene a meeting with neighbors and the developer prior to June 15. The record closed for this meeting with the item continued to the June 15 council workshop.