Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears debate over 61‑unit mixed‑income development proposed for Hardy Avenue
Summary
Developers and staff tout a 61‑unit mixed‑income project on Hardy Avenue as transit‑adjacent workforce housing while nearby residents raised traffic, flooding and school capacity concerns; staff said trip generation was well below the threshold for a full traffic study.
A proposed four‑story, 61‑unit mixed‑income apartment building at Hardy Avenue and 4th Street drew extensive questions and public opposition at the Chamblee City Council work session on March 12.
Josh Marks of Regent Partners, the project's applicant, told the council the community would provide “mixed income, high quality, affordable housing” and stressed long‑term ownership of the property. “We're very excited about being able to bring mixed income, high quality, affordable housing to the city of Chamblee,” Marks said during his presentation. Staff recommended approval of the Development of Community Impact (DCI) with conditions but recommended denial of several specific variances and waivers tied to materials, balconies and site requirements.
Neighbors raised multiple objections. Ronnie Mayer, who said he owns properties nearby, said the project would “destroy the neighborhood” and that existing infrastructure and emergency‑vehicle access are already strained. Resident Catherine Pettigrew cited recurring backyard flooding and narrow access on 4th Street, and asked how added traffic would be managed.
Councilmembers pressed the applicant on materials and longevity. Marks said the developer seeks some waivers (including reduced brick coverage and use of fiber‑cement siding) for cost and aesthetic reasons but said the product will be durable and the developer expects to maintain ownership for at least 15 years. On traffic, staff highlighted the project's trip‑generation analysis: about 200 daily trips, 24 added AM peak trips and 31 added PM peak trips — well below the 1,800‑trip threshold that would require a full traffic‑impact study, Matt Adams of planning said.
The council did not take a final vote on the DCI at the work session; members indicated they want to balance the city's affordable‑housing goals with neighborhood safety and design concerns before the proposal returns for formal action.
