Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Rico 25 006 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council defers decision on 274‑unit Rico Road hamlet rezoning after heated public hearing
Summary
The council voted unanimously to defer a request to rezone 273.89 acres on Rico Road from rural to Mixed‑Use Hamlet for six months so staff and Planning Commission can gather additional information after extensive public comment and a 2–4 Planning Commission recommendation against the rezoning.
Councilmembers delayed action on a proposal to rezone 273.89 acres near Rico and Vernon Grove Roads after a lengthy public hearing on June 3.
Community Development Director Mike Morton summarized the application as seeking rezoning from RL (Rural) to HM‑MU (Mixed‑Use Hamlet) to allow approximately 274 residential units while preserving about 70% of the property — roughly 191 acres — as protected open and civic space. Morton also said the HMMU district would require about 10,960 square feet of nonresidential floor area and informed the council that the Planning Commission voted 2–4 not to recommend approval.
John Crespo, a nearby property owner who spoke in favor, said he supports property‑owner rights and that the applicant had indicated the developer would place conservation in perpetuity: "I very much advocate for property owner rights," he said. Several neighbors testified in opposition, raising concerns about density, traffic and whether adjacent landowners had been contacted.
David Robinson, a resident opposing the rezoning, framed his remarks around Section 3.10A of the city's Unified Development Code and Georgia zoning law, saying the applicant had not demonstrated that the rural zoning lacks "a reasonable economic use." Robinson cited purchase and comparable‑sale figures to argue that developing farmettes under current zoning could produce substantial economic value and therefore rebut the applicant's claim that RL zoning is economically infeasible.
Applicant Harrison Merrill Jr. responded to several factual claims raised at the hearing, disputing an assertion about an $11,000‑per‑acre mortgage: "We did not buy the property in 2018, we did not put $11,000 debt on the property in 2018," he said, and described ongoing work with planner TSW. Attorney Chris West said the applicant had provided traffic and other studies and offered to provide additional information.
After public comment and council questions, Councilmember Rodney Peek moved and Councilmember Camille Lowe seconded a motion to defer Item 25‑006 for six months and require actions from the Planning Commission during that period. The motion carried unanimously.
What happens next: The item will return to the Planning Commission for further study and additional information from the applicant on traffic, design and adjacent‑landowner outreach during the six‑month deferral. The council did not take a vote on the rezoning itself.
Provenance: Topic introduced SEG 010; discussion and public comments occur SEG 011–SEG 023; applicant remarks SEG 023; council vote to defer SEG 024.
