Jackson herald. (Jefferson, Jackson County, Ga.) 1881-current, May 17, 2023, Image 2

Georgia Historic Newspapers

Jackson herald., May 17, 2023, Image 2

About Jackson herald. (Jefferson, Jackson County, Ga.) 1881-current | View Entire Issue (May 17, 2023)

Page of 20

Prev Issue Next Issue

Text PDF JP2 (2.5 MB) Clip/Print Image

Page of 20

Prev Issue Next Issue

Return to Top

Newspaper Page TextPAGE 2A THE JACKSON HERALD WEDNESDAY, MAY 17, 2023 Jefferson continued from 1A Hoschton continued from 1A and heard a lot of public pushback about the plan, eventually voting to recom mend denial to the council. But since that plan ning board meeting, RWH Homes, the developer of the proposed project, has made some additional changes to the plans, a situation several council members said they wanted more details about before voting. Developers said on May 8 that they would be willing to seek a rezoning for an R-l development with 3/4 acre lots and homes at or above the $500,000 price range. The project had originally called for an R-2 develop ment with 43 houses. Since no details about how many homes would be involved in an R-l rezoning, the council voted to delay a final vote until its June meeting. JETT ROBERTS RD. PROJECT In another zoning discus sion, the council heard a proposal for an event facility and short-term rental facili ty on 18 acres on Lakeview Dr. off of Jett Roberts Rd. for the county's recreation programs, which have been growing in recent years as the population has increased. The deal for shared fa cilities is for 10 years with the option of renewal every 10 years up to a total of 50 years. The county will spend around $2 million to upgrade some of the facilities as part of the deal. The action comes amid other major recreation issues in the county as recreation offerings have become a ma jor amenity sought by new comers to the community. In November, Commerce voters will decide on a bond referendum on whether or not to expand that town’s recreation facilities. City officials in Com merce had proposed a deal with the county for the county's recreation depart ment to take over the city's recreation facilities and pro grams, but that idea was met with pushback from some Commerce citizens. The city council subsequently voted to put the issue on a bond referendum in November. If approved, the bonds issued to build new facilities in the city would be paid for by a hike in the city's millage rate. In Jefferson, the city coun- The property has a house and an outbuilding already. Owner Jeff Rolander said he wants to make the outbuild ing a reception hall facility for weddings and for the existing house to be avail able for short-term rentals for events. Rolander said he would like to keep the property in the family, but if it couldn't generate income from special event use, he might have it developed into a subdivision of 16- 18 homes. Several area residents spoke against the propos al. The city's planning board had previously heard the plans and voted to recommend denial to the council. But several members of the council noted that if the special event use isn’t approved, the city would have no say on the prop erty being developed with multiple homes since it’s already zoned R-l. Ro lander is seeking an AG-R zoning, a downgrade from R-l but one that allows special event facilities. cil is considering whether or not to build a $12 million indoor swimming facility (to be paid for with SPLOST and impact fees) and is also looking at an expansion of the city's existing recreation center, along with a possi ble dog park and pickle ball courts at the city park. The town has also recently con verted the old Dollar General store into a recreation room for senior citizens. OTHER FACILITY VOTES In other action May 15 re lated to facilities, the BOC approved: • a guaranteed maximum price of $14.3 million for the construction of the new county government admin istrative building. The board had previously approved Reeves Young as the con struction manager for the project. The new adminis trative building will be paid for with SPLOST 7 funds, which was approved by vot ers in November. • naming Reeves Young as the construction manager to oversee an expansion of the county’s landfill transfer station. • applying for a grant that would be used for a future county park off of Cabin Creek Rd. June 19 instead, following an additional public hear ing on June 15 (6 p.m.) at Hoschton's new city hall complex. One of the proposed proj ects would add over 1,000 homes to the city and a shop ping complex, while the oth er would bring 399 homes into Hoschton. Residents, nearly exclu sively in opposition, voiced their displeasure during a Thursday public hearing about the growth the large- scale developments would cause for the small city. “Please slow the grow, and let’s do this the right way,” resident Christina Brown told the council. PROPOSED PROJECTS Providence Group of Georgia and Rocklyn Homes seek the annexation and zon ing changes for the respective projects. Providence Group calls for a planned unit develop ment (PUD) of 399 residen tial units on nearly 110 acres fronting Pendegrass and E.G. Barnett roads, East Jefferson St. and West Jackson Rd. It seeks to annex and re zone a combined 33 acres fronting Pendergrass and E.G. Barnett roads to PUD. Shannon Sell, who served as Hoschton's Mayor from 2020 to 2021, owns 25.6 acres of that land, and Paul and Brenda Cheek own 7.4 acres. The property currently holds an agricultural-rural farm district (A-2) zoning in Jackson County. Addition ally, Providence Group asks to rezone 84.46 acres contig uous to the proposed annex ation tract from agricultural district to PUD. Of that acre age, 58.86 acres are owned by Sell and front East Jef ferson St., while 17.86 acres are owned by West Jackson, LLC, and front both East Jef ferson St. and West Jackson Rd. Development plans for the proposed PUD call for 291 detached single-family units and 108 townhomes. Ameni ties include multiple pocket parks, a clubhouse, a pick- leball court and a swimming pool. On Hoschton’s southern border, Rocklyn Homes re quests annexation and rezon ing of 287.14 acres owned by Mary Ann Kenerly and New Hope AME Church along Hwy. 53 from an ag ricultural-rural farm district to a planned unit develop ment (PUD) for a major mixed-use development of 651 single-family lots, 404 townhome units and 200,000 square feet of commercial space with 6.6 acres of out- parcels. Amenities include pickle- ball courts, a lake dock, pad dle boarding, dog parks, an amphitheater and trails. The project calls for 3.6 acres of civic space and 5.5 acres of church expansion. The property is situated on the east side of Hwy. 53, south of Pearl Industrial Ave. and across from the south ern portion of the large Twin Lakes subdivision. Two par cels of the proposed site are owned by Kenerly, totaling over 285 acres, while the church owns two small par cels. CITIZEN PUSHBACK An overflow crowd packed into Hoschton's small city hall for Thursday's public hearings. To accommodate all citizens who attended, a large segment of the crowd had to be seated in an adja cent room to the meeting room, but multiple residents complained they couldn’t hear speakers at the podium. The logistical problems of the small meeting room were an additional factor in the council scheduling a second public hearing in the more spacious meeting quarters of the new city hall. While some residents opted to hold their comments until that second public hearing, others pro ceeded with their objections on Thursday. Brittany Dozier, speaking about the Providence Group project, said the development would result in crowded schools, increased traffic and higher crime rates. “I will not watch Hoschton turn into Gwinnett County, and I hope no one else will either,” she said. Gary McGowan claimed Hoschton residents are told they need these develop ments. “We don’t need any of this,” said McGowan, who also referenced school crowding, crime and traffic problems. “This is just be ing forced upon us ... keep it (Hoschton) a small town.” Christina Brown said the pace of development in Hoschton “is creating a cri sis.” She said the proposed developments, along with other subdivisions approved, would push Hoschton's pop ulation density higher than that of Atlanta. Her concerns included the city's water sup ply, sewer treatment, school crowding, public safety staff ing issues and worsening traffic. “Our hometown feel is cer tainly going to be lost," she said. Brown also expressed con cerns about the city lacking a full council while consid ering these developments. Two council seats are open following resignations earlier this year. “I don’t think that four in dividuals should be empow ered to make such critical decisions about the future the future of Hoschton,” she said. Mayor Lauren O’Leary, who informed the crowd at the start of the meeting that her property abutted the proposed Providence Group project, asked about the lack of a Development of Region al Impact (DRI) study for the Providence project. Crowd members jeered when they learned a DRI review was not required because the project falls one home short of the threshold for the study. Melody Glouton, repre senting Providence Group, said Providence wants to hold a community meeting before the next public hear ing, to respond to citizen con cerns about the development. Rocklyn Homes’ proposal was met with a similar senti ment as Providence Group's pitch, with residents again feeling a large development was being forced upon them. “I really feel like you're trying to Christopher Colum bus us here with all the things we need and all the things that you think we need,” Dozier said to Rocklyn rep resentatives. “We have every thing that we need and want right here already.” Mike Osborne, who lives just outside the city limits, offered a blunt assessment of the project's impact on the area. “This wifi suck,” he said. “They’re going to take the prettiest piece of property in West Jackson and destroy it.” The amphitheater amenity particularly angered Osborne. “Am I going to have to lay in my bed at night and lis ten to that crap because I’m only going to be a half-mile away from it,” he said. “This is wrong. I've lived here 20 years now. I left Gwinnett County because of this crap. “They destroyed Gwinnett County. This is no longer West Jackson. We’re far-East Gwinnett. Y’all are destroy ing it if you keep letting this come in.” O’Leary noted that Rock- lyn’s development would require the city to add five police officers. Rocklyn has offered to donate land — the civic space — for a police precinct. But O’Leary said that land wouldn’t solve the problem, noting the need for a police building, equipment and vehicles. “Land isn’t going to do much for us,” she said. “Of course, we would appreciate it. We’ll never say no to free land, but that’s one of my ma jor concerns.” The council had city en gineer Jerry Hood on hand to provide an update on the city’s water and sewer system status with these subdivisions being proposed. Hood said an analysis showed the city is already facing a water and wastewater shortfall. He said the city has been "working fe verishly” to find more water. "Because even with the ex isting development, we need more water supply,” he said. O'Leary said she's re ceived impact letters from Jackson County Schools, the fire department, the city po lice department, the city plan ner and city engineer about potential negative impacts of the development. Another point of conten tion was Rocklyn represen tatives’ mention of a Jackson County school potentially locating on the site property. Residents who spoke were skeptical of this claim, but Shane Lanham, representing Rocklyn, insisted conversa tions have taken place. "Due to the fact that they are ongoing negotiations, ob viously, we can’t give much detail, but we are absolutely — I will tell y’all and look everybody in the eye and tell you — we are in ongoing conversations with the school district about a school site,” he said. Brown, speaking again to the council, asked why the applicants felt annexation into Hoschton was necessary for both projects. "If they’re seeking an nexation in order to get the rezoning request approved, they must have the feeling that they have a better chance with the City of Hoschton approving rezoning as to the county,” she said. The projects have drawn objections at the county level. The Jackson County Board of Commissioners objected to the two proposed property annexations in a May 4 called meeting, voting to send two letters of objec tion. "This request appears to attempt to circumvent the Jackson County public policy findings and to site a residen tial development in an agri culture fringe area in Jackson County without input from the county’s citizens and tax payers...,” the letters state. The letters also state that the annexations would have "a critical and negative im pact on Jackson County.” BOC continued from 1A GENERAL COMMERCE CITY SCHOOLS BOARD OF EDUCATION FY24 TENTATIVE BUDGET SPECIAL CAPITAL DEBT ESTIMATED REVENUES Local Taxes 4,975,000 REVENUE PROJECTS (SFS) Other Local Sources (TAVT) 515,000 QBE 13,838,420 Transfer/Intangible Taxes 60,000 ELOST 1,752,450 From ELOST Balance School Food Services 1,451,500 Other (On Behalf, Medicaid, Interest 165,000 State Grants 131,127 Pilot Payment 2,835,222 TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE 22,519,769 1,451,500 0 1,752,450 ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES Instruction-1000 14,746,413 Teachers, Para professionals, Instructional Materials, Software, Textbooks, Etc Pupil Services-2100 1,376,866 Athletic Supplements, school nurses, psychologist parent involvement coordinator, speech therapy,technology equipment and services Improvement of Instruction-2210 783,848 Technology specialists, travel, information services, supplies Instructional Staff Training-2213 54,417 Professional learning consultants, travel, registration, dues and fees Educ Media-2220 450,549 Media specialists, media paraprofessionals, software, books, dues/fees, equipment General Admin-2300 667,352 Board members, superintendent, worker's comp, liability insurance, purchased services School Admin-2400 1,722,230 Principals, Assistant principals, clerical, books, computer equipment Business Services-2500 249,976 Finance Director, clerical, software, travel. Dues/fees, purchased services Maintenance & Operations-2600 1,693,134 Lawn Services, Service Fort, Sentry Pest Control, Windstream, liability insurance, ABM, WM Student Transportation-2700 724,298 Bus Drivers, fuel, repair/maintenance, auto insurance Other Support-2900 15,500 UNUM (disability) 403B Match School Food Services-3100 35,186 1,451,500 SFS Clerical, Benefits, Grease trap cleanings ELOST 1,752,450 TOTAL ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES 22,519,769 1,451,500 0 1,752,450 Over (Under) Exp The budget will be considered for final adoption by the Commerce City Board of Education in the regular session at 6:00 p.m. on June 12, 2023 at the Commerce City Board of Education meeting. There will be two meetings scheduled for community input. These meetings will be June 1, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. June 12, 2023 at 5:30 p.m. at the Commerce City Board of Education office.