[ad_1]
Monday night kicked off with an anticipated planning commission gathering with a sizable audience already filling the Lumpkin Planning & Development building lobby and vestibule before the stated commencement time. Due to the inclement weather, the crowd spilled outside the walls, taking refuge under the building roofline. The meeting agenda was quite loaded, covering three variance requests, three project proposals, and the much-publicized Flourish Community presentation, which appeared to be the public’s primary interest.
DEVELOPING THE FLOURISH COMMUNITY
Nearly 90 minutes into the meeting, the last proposal called Flourish Community was taken up. The meeting room was notably packed, all available seats occupied, with observers following the proceedings via a live Zoom stream from different parts of the building. The proposed Class VI subdivision was situated on Pink Williams Road and Dawsonville Highway, precisely parcel 022-066, Rebecca Mincey, Community & Economic Development Director, started. The commissioner then read out the County code relevant for Class VI subdivisions and broke down the hearing process.
She proceeded with some stipulations the department had pre-briefed the applicant about, including a required traffic study and improvements along Dawsonville Highway as informed by the Road Department. Then, it was time for Seth Barnes Jr., the applicant, to take the stage.
Barnes described the intended Flourish Community as a residential arena, specifically catering to adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. He drew inspiration for his plan through careful study of similar concepts across the nation. The structure of this community, akin to the 55 and older community with an HOA (Home Owners Association) attached, was designed to maintain reasonable HOA costs by featuring a high concentration of homes. Barnes then proceeded to discuss the development specifics, such as a state-approved septic system, proposed road widening, and lesser traffic predictions given the residents’ nature.
VOICING SUPPORT
Barbara Bosanko, Planning Commission Chairperson, opened the floor for public comments supporting the development. Jacqueline Daniel, ConnectAbility Founder and Director, expressed her full endorsement, recounting her interactions with families over the years and their recurring needs such as housing, belonging, transport, and employment. Michelle Steinberg was the second and last person to publicly support the proposal, highlighting the need to care for underserved members of the community.
HITTING RESISTANCE
Lani Henning led a faction of community members in opposition to the proposal. Although she commended Barnes’ vision, she firmly believed the chosen property was misplaced for this type of development. Henning also outlined a list of her concerns, including traffic issues, the property’s geographic isolation, and the project’s incompatibility with the community’s aesthetic. Over 160 residents signed a petition against the proposal, demonstrated by Henning.
THE REBUTTAL
Barnes then relinquished his time to Payton Anderson, his record’s engineer. Anderson proposed an onsite sewage treatment facility with an EPD-approved drip emitter system, leading to an audience uproar. He reassured them that the state EPD would adequately regulate the proposed system, but a few murmurs were still audible.
THE SURPRISE
Mincey abbreviated the raw, preliminary site plan but emphasized Bosanko’s need for more information. As the commission pondered whether to approve, table or deny the proposal, Bosanko proposed tabling the proposal awaiting a broader public discussion—an idea echoed by other audience members. Unanticipatedly, property owner Larry Tanner revealed he had been misled about the project’s nature and decided to withdraw his property approval. Tanner formally rescinded his application for the project to be heard, and the commission concurred. The news was met with an overwhelming applause from the audience.
[ad_2]
