patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Proposed Ordinance Amendments Would Pave Way for Apartments in Dacula

Dacula City Council considering amendments to facilitate annexation and development of 157-acre tract near Winder Highway and Highway 316.

 

Apartments could become part of the Dacula landscape if council approves a set of proposed amendments to the city’s planned mixed use development ordinance.

Earlier this month, city leaders met with representatives from Walton Investing, Mill Creek Consulting and Rochester Engineering regarding the feasibility of annexing just over 157 acres into the city limits and eventually developing the property located near Winder Highway and Highway 316 as a “live, work, play” community.

One problem affecting the potential development is that the city’s current planned mixed used development ordinance is more restrictive than what investors would like. Mitch Peevy of Mill Creek Consulting asked council to consider working with the investment group to modify the ordinance and establish parameters that would make the site attractive to developers.

In an effort to facilitate the annexation and development of the property, Dacula City Planner Joey Murphy recently drafted a set of proposed amendments to the city’s current ordinance. The most significant change would increase the maximum allowable density per acre from eight units to 13 in order to make it possible for developers to construct apartments on the property. Other changes include eliminating the requirement that units be owner-occupied, reducing the required amount of open space in a development from 35 percent to 25 percent, setting the minimum square footage requirement at 600 square feet and changing the building height restriction from three stories to four.

“What it comes down to is does the City of Dacula and the city council and mayor support attached housing at a density up to … 13 units per acre,” Murphy said.

Currently, no concept plan has been submitted meaning city officials do not yet know exactly what the developers intend to do with the property. However, officials have expressed a willingness to explore the possibility of bringing a mixed-used development to the city.

“If there is a place for such a development in Dacula, this is probably the place for it,” said Dacula Mayor Jimmy Wilbanks.

However, Wilbanks emphasized the city has little interest in allowing the entire tract to be developed as apartments.

“I don’t think we can allow them to have 157 acres of apartment buildings. I don’t think that’s what we want in Dacula. I don’t think that’s going to happen,” he said.

Wilbanks added that any proposed development must be weighed against the city’s comprehensive plan and the city must also consider the impact on nearby residents.

“The bottom line is we’re all still kind of shooting in the dark,” he said referring to the current lack of a development proposal.

City Administrator Jim Osborn echoed the mayor’s sentiments.

“[The development group has] not told us exactly what they want,” Osborn said. “We have not seen a concept plan, they have just simply said ‘Dacula, put something together, let us look at it and we’ll say yes or no.’ So we’re just guessing at this point.”

Osborn explained that should council approve the proposed amendments, several hurdles would still have to be cleared before the project could move forward. Developers must request the property be annexed, submit a detailed concept plan and apply for rezoning. Additionally, the entire project would be subject to review by the Atlanta Regional Commission as a development of regional impact.

The Dacula City Council meets next Thursday, Jan. 5, but the proposed amendments are not likely to go before council at that time according to Mayor Wilbanks.

“I think there are still too many questions out there and too much coordination that needs to take place between the ownership of the property and the city and trying to get something both can live with as we go forward.”

Related Topics: Dacula City Council, Jim Wilbanks, Joey Murphy, Mitch Peevy, Planned mixed used development ordinance, and mixed used development

North Georgia Weather

6:12 am on Friday, December 30, 2011

You want to watch property values drop and people start to flee? Do it. It would be the worse thing for Dacula and the worst thing for the mayor and council.

Reply

Randy

10:15 am on Friday, December 30, 2011

Just what we need, something else to drive property values down!

Reply

Elizabeth

10:22 am on Friday, December 30, 2011

There is a "proposed subdivision" sitting empty, with a locked metal gate across the entrance on Harbins Road. The trees were ripped out and streets put in. We were told the developer went broke. I hope that does not happen with the 157 acre plan if it is approved. I agree that property values will drop, and people who can afford to will leave Dacula. The negative impact a massive apartment complex will have on the congestion on the roads, not to mention the public school system, will be disastrous – and costly to taxpayers.

Reply

Mickey Mauldin

10:56 am on Friday, December 30, 2011

Apartments near 316, great place for crime to flourish and Dacula to be in the news. The city leaders need to see how apartments effected Gwinnett County.

Reply

R++ - One of the famous "Dacula Crew"

3:03 pm on Friday, December 30, 2011

Well all those people Propeller will bring into Briscoe by 737s have to live SOMEWHERE. (Smiles)

Seriously,
The city council should move slowly in its consideration of changing zoning standards to make things attractive to developers. This seems to be a specialty of Mill Creek Consulting as of late, it may be worth the effort to see references provided where past commitments actually generated the RESULTS promised.
Perhaps annexation may be best for Dacula so it can control its destiny in the long run, but reducing open space requirements may bring unintended results.

Reply

M.K. Osborne

5:50 pm on Friday, December 30, 2011

Why not just plop some extended stay hotels there too , since were not into making substainable communities and only the fast tax buck solution seems to get attention .

Reply

Kay Woodruff

9:04 am on Saturday, December 31, 2011

I would think that if the City Counsel;s commisiion is to keep our City safe and prosperous that it look at other types of development. Apartments bring in a transient populous that require increased services without the benefit of long term interest in the community. It requires an increase in city services at a cost to the permenant residents who chose to live in this community because it was free of multiple housing. City taxes can only go up for faithful residents to accomodate segments that have little interest in the welfare of our city. I am opposed to the change in ordinance. Kay Woodruff

Reply
Patch_comments_icon

Kristi Reed

10:52 am on Saturday, December 31, 2011

One thing to keep in mind perhaps is the fact that even if the city does not change its ordinance, the property owners could turn to the county instead. Currently, the property is not in the city limits. Conceivably, the city could amend its ordinance and annex the property with the end results being more favorable than what might happen should the developers go to the county planning commission and board of commissioners.

This is a great time to contact your city council members and express your concerns and ideas as they consider these proposed amendments.

Reply

North Georgia Weather

2:29 pm on Saturday, December 31, 2011

All part of the Briscoe plan. Apartment dwellers won't complain about the air traffic.

The hand writing is on the wall. I wonder who will benefit from this?

Reply

Leave a comment