Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Serenbe Traffic Study topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents say Serenbe traffic study fell short of council conditions; ethics and transparency concerns aired
Summary
Multiple public commenters at the April 1 Chattahoochee Hills meeting told council that a traffic study for the Serenbe Hamlet rezoning did not cover the entire Hamlet as required by a prior condition, and speakers pressed the council on enforcement and ethics concerns.
At the April 1 Chattahoochee Hills City Council meeting, several residents told the council that a traffic impact study tied to a prior Serenbe rezoning approval did not meet the conditions the council had set. The comments came during a packed public‑comment period before council action on several new-business items.
Debi Kelso told the council that the traffic study performed by Southeastern Engineering did not cover Serenbe in its entirety: “the study only covered the intersections of Watkins Road and Sardis Road, not the entire Serenbe Hamlet and surrounding intersections, which was required as a condition of this city council vote #25-059.” Kelso said the four-month deadline for the study had passed and argued that, under the city charter and UDC, the parcel should revert to rural zoning if conditions were not met.
Other commenters echoed process and transparency concerns. Mitchell Wolff told the council he had conducted independent reviews and raised questions about ethics enforcement and consequences for officials found to have misled the public. He asked the dais what penalties should apply to elected or appointed officials who knowingly mislead residents. Wolff also cited a rumor about Serenbe proposing a very large office building; he asked the council to confirm whether that was accurate.
Council and staff responses at the meeting noted that a traffic study had been submitted to the city, but public speakers and some council members said the submitted analysis did not match the scope the council had required. The council deferred the Rico Investments rezoning item to the Planning Commission for recommendation; the moratorium-extension motion later failed on a 2-3 vote.
