Clicky

"Motor Court" Homes Proposed for Bell Rd: Withdrawn

August 23, 2017
10 Comments

Yellow = driveway

"Motor Court" Homes Proposed for Bell Rd: Withdrawn

The developer was requesting to reconfigure a portion the Bellmoore development into small 1 story ranch houses with shared driveways on tiny lots.

It was an unusual design, to maximize the land for development into smaller more affordable homes. 

Tremendous outrage from area residents was received, as a result, the developer requested to withdraw their application at Monday nights meeting. City Council quickly approved the request.

This is a tactic more frequently being used. With an approved withdrawal, the developer can come back immediately with new plans. If it is denied, they have to wait a year. The negative side of the withdrawal is resident fatigue and time wasted on fighting 2 rezoning cases (that is, if they are both inappropriate) and also forfeited staff time.

Community Development is outsourced to CH2. Within their contract, they do 20 rezonings per year. These withdrawals and new applications factor individually into that quota.

Source: City of Johns Creek

SHARE THIS ARTICLE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

10 comments on “"Motor Court" Homes Proposed for Bell Rd: Withdrawn”

  1. I have to question how well our resources are being managed in Johns Creek. All I see is massive development however you justify 20 new projects a year or even five years it's too much for this little place. We need to halt development (sorry ch2 ) for at least 10 years to catch up with the dadgum traffic problems we have. The other day I spent an hour-and-a-half getting to Marietta from Johns Creek because of the massive traffic here in our city. Bumper to Bumper all the way to highway 400. Ridiculous. I am not discussing merely the loss of tree coverage which is horrendous, I'm talking about our air quality soil quality and water quality.

  2. It was also revealed during last week's City Council that Community Development Dept would be brought in-house and not part of the renewal of the CH2Hill outsourcing contract. Two good things come out of this - new staff on Johns Creek payroll and no contractual restrictions regarding number of zoning cases.

  3. I like the plan. Johns Creek needs more affordable housing. I would like to see smaller homes in the area. We don't all need to live in McMansions. However, I don't think we should be issuing any new building permits unless we have the infrastructure in place first.

    1. No more apartments, condos or townhomes.

      No more high density

      No more variances for the cronyists.

      No more corruption.

      No more Bodker!

  4. It always amazes me how the direct correlation between increased development, particularly at higher densities, and increased traffic congestion is either ignored or not understood. Granting development variances from existing zoning is exacerbating what is widely acknowledged as Johns Creek's biggest challenge - traffic, and yet we continue to encourage developers by granting exceptions that then become the precedents to allow yet more high density development. This "game" is essentially a subsidy that allows developers to make a bigger profit without having their having to account for the additional burden placed on roads, city services (police, fire, ambulance, parks), and schools. And guess who pays for that subsidy? Johns Creek taxpayers - when we're told we need to increase revenues to pay for roads, services, and school expansions. Who does our City Council represent - residents, or developers and special interests?

    This madness needs to stop until we can get our traffic congestion under control. Our City Council should focus on solving current residents' issues and concerns before they encourage even greater issues by allowing more development.

  5. Glad to hear that the City brought community development back in-house given Ch2m hill was recently acquired by Jacobs Engineers; a publically traded firm on the NYSE. Hopefully, the City can pull more of Ch2m hill's work back in-house or re-bid their contract.

    Jacobs answers to Wall Street every 3 months. I doubt their focus will be on the best interests of JC residents and more focused on increasing their revenues and profit margins to boost their stock value.

    1. ... vote for:

      . Issure Yang - Post 1

      Stephanie Endres - Post 5

      Alex needs them on the Council!

    1. If CH2MHill is only committed to process "up to twenty (20) rezoning and use permits per year", what happens when #21 is submitted? Does it have to wait until the next fiscal year? Is it processed at some increased cost to Johns Creek?

      In either case, when a developer withdraws a petition, it would seem that they have wasted our taxpayer dollars.

      CH2M Hill has been an employee owned company until recently, when Jacobs Engineering purchased the company for $2.85B. As was stated above, their profit motive will increase under new ownership and the pressures of quarterly financial reporting.

      It's time to dump CH2M Hill. No other city in North Fulton County has had to rely on "interim" management for such a long period of time. The cozy, no competitive bid process to renew their contract demonstrated a lack of consideration for the opportunity to seek better alternatives.

  • magnifier