Downtown 2: Down by the River
The City prepares to develop its largest property. Is it being conserved, or going commercial?
Of the approximately 270 acres of land owned by the City of Sugar Hill, the 160 acres closest to the Chattahoochee River (labeled “the Riverlands” by the City government) are arguably the most desirable and valuable. The City has been sitting on all of the land for at least a decade, and much of it for more than thirty years. Currently, the Riverlands are mostly undeveloped.
In the last five or six years, the City has occasionally publicly mentioned potential plans for the Riverlands. Most of those references contain lofty proclamations about preserving the area’s “natural character.” However, official City documents have also (much more subtly) mentioned housing, institutional, and commercial development of the Riverlands.
In the summer of 2020, during the height of the pandemic, they conducted a "Chattahoochee River District Open House" to discuss what to do with the land. As you can imagine, not many people attended. As with most of their "public input" initiatives, there was no public proof of resident feedback. The resulting site plan called for a bunch of housing on the property.
In the past couple of years, the City has intensified its resolve to do something with the property, although they've been extremely furtive about it.
In 2022, the City quietly began resurrecting its dormant Development Authority, a type of public corporation similar to a Downtown Development Authority. The City of Sugar Hill specifically placed the Riverlands under the auspices of its Development Authority, although State law allows that entity to operate anywhere in the City.
The City of Sugar Hill could build trails and develop the Riverlands for parks and recreation without a Development Authority, just as it did with Gold Mine Park, Ridge Lake Park, and most of the Sugar Hill Greenway. The Development Authority gives the City the ability to build and manage commercial space, just as the City currently does in “Downtown.” It also gives the City the ability to enter into bond-lease agreements to grant tax-free status to private entities, the way it did with Solis Sugar Hill in “Downtown.”
One Council Member, Taylor Anderson, runs that show. It's not readily clear WHY this one person was given that much power, as it was never even discussed, much less voted on publicly. It appears that he may have selected the majority of the members, definitely chose which members would get the longest initial terms, and has a seat on the Development Authority himself. It is not a legal requirement that ANY elected official be on the Authority, and in fact, State Law allows no more than one elected official on it.
The Development Authority's debut meeting in January 2023 received only the barest minimum public notice—even yours truly, the City's most diligent follower, missed it. The meetings convene at 5:30 PM on the second Wednesday of each month, not exactly the easiest time for most people to meet. So far, only about four of the thirteen public Development Authority meetings have been attended by all seven “directors.” Public attendance is almost non-existent.
For the most part, these meetings lack a clear, substantial focus and feature a lot of useless rambling and pointless commentary. Not infrequently, it seems like some of the members don’t even know why they are there or what they should be doing.
The one meeting that DID have a focus was a presentation by a company invited by the City to propose some ideas.
The presentation included the standard recreational items most people might expect and want in a natural area next to a river, such as hiking, mountain biking, playgrounds, and outdoor fitness equipment. It also included some outdoor recreation items less commonly found in government parks, such as a zip line, a ropes course, and a climbing wall. It also included some recreational facilities that would involve a great deal of concrete, such as a BMX pump track and a skate park.
The company also proposed retail, a woodland restaurant, a brewery, a martini club, an indoor wellness facility, coworking space, a "rooftop experience," an "experiential hotel," glamping, a chapel, an amphiteater, small cottages, and an overhaul of "The Retreat at Orr's Ferry" (a large old house that came with the southern part of the Riverlands on which the City has already spent more than $100k). Many of these ideas would likely be commercial ventures, presumably to be owned and operated by the City of Sugar Hill through its Development Authority.
Although Anderson said at the time that these were all ideas, nothing was ruled out. The company's president obviously had spoken with the City prior to that meeting, and his team had put a lot of effort into the presentation. It doesn't seem likely that he would have done that if he weren't pretty sure his ideas would be well-received and lead to some work for his company.
Real Deal Sugar Hill posted the video of that meeting, and people in the community have been watching it. After that, the City’s discussion went dark. Nothing more was said about it in the Development Authority meetings, and although the company president has been back to the meetings, the Development Authority didn't discuss anything with him in front of the public.
Also, here and there, hidden within the frequent babble, are allusions by certain directors to previous discussions that did not take place at the public meetings, giving the impression that much of these public meetings may be intentionally meaningless while more substantive discussions occur behind the scenes.
To find out more, Real Deal Sugar Hill recently requested “any emails sent by or received by Taylor Anderson to/from any members of the City of Sugar Hill Development Authority January 1, 2022 through May 2, 2024,” as well as “any emails sent by or received by Taylor Anderson using the keywords "Riverlands" OR "Chattahoochee" OR "River" to or from anybody EXCEPT the City of Sugar Hill Development Authority (Mark Hagen, Lexie Crowson, Sheri Emigh, Mark Gernazian, Steve Graessle, Denise Hoell) for the dates January 1, 2022 through May 2, 2024”.
According to those emails, the City discussed and appears to be seriously considering a tennis complex with a pro shop and a parking lot proposed by a professional tennis school. Anderson provided them with a rough area where the City would want it, as well as surveys and topographic information. The school was already consulting engineers and asked for the geotechnical report so they could get a site-clearing plan together. This was discussed via email in May 2023. A year later, it has never been discussed in the public meetings of the Development Authority.
The City also discussed plans for AirBNB tree houses proposed by another Wild Timber resident (Council Member Taylor Anderson, Development Authority Chair Denise Hoell, and Vice Chair Steve Graessle are all residents of this community). City Manager Paul Radford seemed a little giddy when talking about the taxation possibilities. That was in July 2023. It has never been discussed in the public meetings of the Development Authority.
The City has also been trying to get a boat ramp into the Chattahoochee River, a plan that would probably involve permission from the federal government. Mayor Brandon Hembree was in full-tilt lobbyist mode working on House Representative Rich McCormick's office for that one. Those discussions happened in October 2023. They have never been discussed in the public meetings of the Development Authority.
Emails also revealed that the City had asked Senator Raphael Warnock for $8 million in federal funds for another pedestrian bridge over Highway 20. Radford seemed pretty giddy in that email, too, referring to it as “our pedestrian bridge near the river.” Again, this was not mentioned even once in a public meeting of the Development Authority.
Not only were these topics completely avoided in public, but the email chains ended very abruptly and without explanation. It's not a huge leap to surmise that the discussions continued on private channels. Real Deal Sugar Hill now has the private email addresses and cell numbers of almost everyone involved in any way with the Riverlands initiative. They were freely and openly provided in official emails by everyone involved, usually multiple times, seemingly to provide an alternate means of communication that could not be tracked by the City's Information Technology system.
However, it would be difficult to blame the secrecy on the City at large. The emails netted by this search indicate that while Anderson seems to be in very close communication with Mayor Brandon Hembree and City Manager Paul Radford about his plans, he has shared WAY less with other members of the City Council, even long before the elections. On rare occasions, his emails regarding the Riverlands included Council Member Alvin Hicks, but almost none of the emails were sent to Council Members Marc Cohen, Mason Roszel, or Jennifer Thatcher. After the election, nothing seems to have been shared via email with newer City Council Members Joshua Page, Meg Avery, and Gary Pirkle.
Likewise, his emails to the Development Authority seem to primarily include Chair Denise Hoell, Vice Chair Steve Graessle, and to a lesser extent, Mark Gernazian. Those are the members he personally chose to have the longer initial terms. Directors Mark Hagen, Lexie Crowson, Sheri Emigh were not included in many of these emails.
It appeared the only times he communicated with the staff were to ask the Assistant City Manager, Planning Director, and one Planning Department staff member to provide him with information or perform some task, and he didn't tell them very much.
When a representative from the Trust for Public Land (TPL) appeared again at the May 2024 meeting, he indicated multiple times that his organization wanted to know what the City's plans were. He even indicated that with that knowledge, TPL could possibly help the City obtain funding. NO ONE at that meeting provided ANY public response to this obvious request for information. If there were, in fact, NO plans, that could have easily been shared. They even waited until after he left to disclose the planned dates for their Open Houses, to which he could have, and probably should have, been invited. Real Deal Sugar Hill emailed him later to provide him with that information.
All of this secrecy is grossly inappropriate. Deliberately dodging Open Meetings laws is illegal.
The subterfuge suggests that Anderson and his circle intend to go well beyond recreation and conservation, as parks and trails are generally well-received by the public. As such, they're usually a bragging point and not the kind of thing self-congratulatory, attention-hungry politicians tend to hide. Commercial development in a natural area is much more likely to generate controversy and cause the government to clam up.
Historically, the City’s quiet maneuvers regarding real estate haven’t been a great sign for the Sugar Hill landscape for anyone except developers, bureaucrats, and self-serving political climbers looking to build cachet with developers, bureaucrats, and other self-serving political climbers.
During election season and as they began their terms, I voiced my concerns about the fate of the Riverlands to the City Council's three newest members. I expected and actively encouraged them all (but especially Gary Pirkle) to attend and observe the meetings and try to find out exactly what the City is planning to do.
I never saw much evidence that any of them tried very hard to do that. Everything in this article is information Real Deal Sugar Hill worked to obtain with no assistance from elected officials. I suspect much of it will be a complete surprise to the newly elected if they read the entire article.
Gary Pirkle has attended a few meetings. If anything comes before the Council, I figure he will vote no.
Meg Avery attended a few meetings, most notably the site tours. She commented on the beauty of the trees, remarked that The Retreat at Orr's Ferry would make a good nature center, and suggested that the City build a boardwalk on the property. I was intent on listening to as many conversations as possible to find out what the City was planning. I was alone in that endeavor.
Joshua Page has not attended any of the Riverlands meetings. However, he did reach out via email to Anderson in January to find out what was going on. Page asked for an in-person chat. Anderson never shared anything with him via email, but offered him a ride to Cities United in Atlanta so they could talk about it then. In a later discussion I had with Page, he hinted at what Anderson told him.
Page said he didn't think it was going to be "Downtown 2.0." An interesting choice of words, especially since it seems like that's pretty close to what they are planning. I suspect that phrase actually came from Anderson and he's already working to aggressively shout down the blowback over what he's doing with the Riverlands. Page indicated that he was told the topography of the property wasn't suitable for much development, although he added that he supposed it could probably be graded.
I've heard the topography argument a few times myself, but it doesn't make much sense. They've entertained several site plans now that show the Riverlands entirely developed with a variety of things. Either that was all a pure flight of fancy and a waste of a lot of people's time, or they figure, like Page and I, that with enough effort and money, they can make it happen.
Two YEARS after beginning this push to develop the Riverlands, after much private planning and discussion, the City is devoting TWO MEETINGS to public input, using its favored "Open House" format, which is more about sharing information with people one-on-one (with no accountability) than gathering feedback. Where are the options for the public coming from? The City's Parks and Recreation Master Plan open house/roundtables from October 2022, conducted by a firm that builds parks. The results of that initiative have not been revealed publicly in all this time for reasons the City has not disclosed. My guess is that we will also see some of these other items they've been discussing make an appearance, too.
When the Development Authority asked about the timeline for a final Riverlands master plan at their May 2024 meeting, an employee from the Planning Department said they'd have a final plan in September.
In the end, my concern and suspicion is that the Riverlands will be more about outdoorsy business ventures than the outdoors themselves, and will mostly be a woodlands-themed version of the "Downtown." An added concern is that the handful of businesses in the original Downtown apparently required six apartment complexes within easy walking distance to support them.
The "Riverlands Development Authority," which is mostly just Taylor Anderson, will decide who will work on developing the property and who will have a business there. That's a lot of power (which he will loudly and aggressively defend) and perks for the chosen few at the expense of the greater community. That’s why there’s always a cluster of greedy, “gimme” toadies surrounding him willing to get aggressive on his behalf.
The politicians of Sugar Hill have a long track record of acting as though the City’s land belongs to them personally. In fact, it belongs to YOU, the People of Sugar Hill.
You have a right to know what you own and to decide how your financial resources are invested there as we move forward. You also have the right and responsibility to ensure your Riverlands benefit this entire community.
The implications of the development and conservation decisions made for this natural resource extend far beyond our City Limits. Therefore, you also have the responsibility to ensure your Riverlands benefit the greater good.
While I'm all for thoughtful commercial development along Highway 20, we've seen the City squander a lot of area with commercial potential on dense housing. The ASPIRE Hwy 20 plan indicates that the City intends to continue doing that.
As a lifelong resident of the area - just like my parents and multiple generations before me - I’m interested in preserving the Chattahoochee River and surrounding area so the generations after me can enjoy it the way I have and experience the natural environment with its beautiful flora and fauna. Preservation of wild land is even more critical as manmade structures devour most of the area and nature can only be found in dedicated oases.
It’s time for you to get educated and involved.
— About the Riverlands —
The entire 160-acre Riverlands area consists of multiple parcels of land, divided into two distinct areas by Highway 20
Riverlands North
The largest part of the land holding that the City refers to as “the Riverlands” sits to the north of Highway 20 and is directly adjacent and to the west of the City of Sugar Hill Golf Course. It consists of about 85 acres and has been owned by the City of Sugar Hill since the late 80’s. It was originally part of an approximately 268-acre land tract that the City purchased for around $2.2 million from private landowners for wastewater treatment, but also for the City of Sugar Hill Golf Course, which the City originally considered developing with 27 holes. Gwinnett County estimates that the 99-acre parcel is currently worth $9,485,600. That would make the 85-acre portion the City wants to develop worth about $8,144,202.
Riverlands South
The smaller part of the Riverlands (about 75 acres) sits south of Highway 20. The City purchased most of that property from the Trust for Public Land in January 2015 for $1.5 million. According to a press release from the Trust for Public Land, the City intended to use the land for a local park and natural area.
In 2016, the City purchased some additional property adjacent to its existing Riverlands South parcels, increasing the Riverlands road frontage. According to the Gwinnett County Tax Assessor’s office, the total value of the Riverlands South property is now $4,287,900.
The land is primarily undeveloped except for an old house about a quarter mile off the road. The City refers to the property as The Retreat at Orr’s Ferry and spent more than $100,000 in 2016 to repair and renovate the building.
Some of the receipts for that work refer to vandalism and damage. The City installed a security system, which was later stolen. The City’s insurance reimbursed them for that, but everything else was taxpayer-funded, although most taxpayers have probably never even seen this building themselves. The boarded-up house that you see from Highway 20 close to the River is near the City’s property, but doesn’t actually belong to the City of Sugar Hill. It’s not even in the City limits.
Currently, even after six figures worth of work, The Retreat at Orr’s Ferry looks like this:
This was once a very large and probably beautiful home. But as you can see, even with its new HVAC systems, it has a lot of work (and probably money) ahead of it to restore its former glory and then make it suitable as a public building.
— Plans for the Riverlands, 2018 —
The City of Sugar Hill contracted with TSW Planning, Architecture, and Landscape Architecture for its 2018 “ASPIRE Hwy 20” report. The full report is available on the City of Sugar Hill website.
This report discusses the City’s plans for the Highway 20 corridor and designates the Riverlands area (referred to as “the Chattahoochee River District” at that time) as Node 1 of five different development nodes along Highway 20 in the Sugar Hill City Limits.
In ASPIRE Hwy 20, the City says a lot about the recreational potential for property and preserving its “natural character,” but also drops hints about its “potential for industrial and commercial uses.”
The report also includes a future land use map that shows the City’s desire for more medium and high-density residential and medium and high-density mixed-use in the area to the east of the Riverlands around the intersection of Highway 20 and Suwanee Dam Road.
For reference, the property that is now the Cadence Apartments in Downtown was shown as “medium-density mixed-use” on that map.
The report also reveals the City’s desire for another pedestrian bridge crossing over 20, seemingly similar to the one it’s currently planning for “Downtown.”
The report's text and a map at the beginning of the report provide a bit more detail about the City’s plans for the area.
The report first mentioned Node 1 in its section about the “Public Meeting” for ASPIRE Hwy 20. The report states that at this meeting, one of the exercises involved dividing attendees into smaller groups to discuss one of four of the nodes, with each small group summarizing its discussion for the larger group at the end of the exercise. The report provides a summary of what the Node 1 group supposedly said. However, there is no documentation proving what was said, beyond the little picture of sticky notes on a map that is more like decoration than real data.
The report again mentions Node 1 in its “Framework Plan Narrative” which was apparently authored by the City and TSW.
Trails are perhaps the first use most people associate with a natural area next to a beautiful river. The report includes a map of existing and proposed trails within the area, complete with icons representing a “Proposed Upgraded Pedestrian Bridge or Upgraded Crossing.” The pedestrian bridge the City is working on for “Downtown” is included, along with two planned bridges or “upgraded pedestrian crossings” near the Riverlands.
The report specifically discusses why the map says pedestrian bridge OR upgraded crossing.
Given the City’s enthusiasm and lack of fiscal restraint for its “Downtown” pedestrian bridge, it’s not a stretch to anticipate they’ll be trying to get one for the Riverlands, too. In fact, it’s not a big stretch to predict that the ego-enlarging prospect of having everyone see a large bridge with the City of Sugar Hill emblazoned on it as they cross the River every day might have them working and spending much more for a Riverlands Bridge.
In fact, an email from Senator Raphael Warnock confirms that he asked to appropriate $8 million (the heading of the table indicates the Amounts Requested are provided in “$000”) in the Fiscal Year 2023 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies appropriations bill to pay for a project that “will separate the pedestrian traffic from users of state route 20.” An email from City Manager Paul Radform confirms that the project is “our pedestrian bridge near the river.” Senator Warnock would have only included that project in his list of requested earmarks at the request of someone from the City of Sugar Hill.
Despite Senator Warnock's request, it appears the City was not awarded the $8 million for its desired bridge, as it did not appear on a list of approved projects provided by the House of Representatives later that year.
— Plans for the Riverlands, 2020 —
In 2020, the City of Sugar Hill contracted with the Bleakly Advisory Group to formulate more specific plans for the Riverlands. Bleakly conducted research that was later presented at a “Chattahoochee River District Public Information/Open House” meeting in July of 2020, at the height of the pandemic panic and restrictions.
Most of the research presented by Bleakly revolved around Sugar Hill’s housing, not around its commercial or recreational properties.
After the meeting, the City presented a slide show to the public, and a suggested site plan based on the feedback it claims it received at the meeting.
The survey results seem a little strange, but not when you consider that meeting attendees were given a limited set of options and that those options all came from the City or its contractor, not from any open public input process.
The proposed plan for Riverlands North is pretty clear in the slideshow, and includes a lot of housing. In fact, the plan seems to be to repurpose part of the golf course for housing. None of that is very surprising given that the Bleakly analysis, again, focused mostly on Sugar Hill’s housing stock and considered the golf course a drag on the area.
Less than half the land in the area is designated as “Greenspace.” The City of Sugar Hill also revealed during the Envision 100 update of the City’s land use plan that it considers the Eagle Theater and the Splash Pad (complete with astroturf) to be “greenspace,” so labeling something as future greenspace around here does not necessarily preclude tree clearing and concrete.
The City was less forthcoming about its plans for Riverlands South, which was purchased from the Trust for Public Land with the implication that preservation was a key goal there.
Utilizing a tactic commonly employed by governments when they’re required to reveal something they don’t really want to reveal, the images in the slide show are very blurry. On the second slide, they’re also presented with the legend upside down. Hey, the law just says you have to share it; it doesn’t say it has to be readable.
In the haze, you can still see that those proposed plans involve trails, an event space, what looks to be commercial centers at Highway 20, and “cottage courts.” It is unclear if the cottage courts were intended for temporary vacation rentals or permanent housing. That’s a valid question given the amount of housing proposed for Riverlands North in the same presentation.
— Plans for the Riverlands, NOW —
In its recently updated Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the City vaguely says of its plans for the Riverlands that, “future use and stewardship of this area will focus on activating existing greenspace, as well as creation of commercial uses where applicable, while preserving the ecological and cultural integrity of these lands.” It continues that, “The Riverlands Authority (Development Authority) was established with the primary function to guide development in the Riverlands District.”
The City of Sugar Hill Development Authority
A Development Authority is a type of public corporation similar to a Downtown Development Authority that is created by Georgia law for every local government (counties and cities) in the State. The county or city government simply needs to activate it by passing a resolution.
State law establishes the purpose of development authorities as “the development of trade, commerce, industry, and employment opportunities.” That's pretty clear, and there's nothing there about recreation and conservation.
In 2014, the City of Sugar Hill activated its statutory Development Authority (at City Manager Paul Radford’s first meeting as the official City Manager of Sugar Hill) and named all of the members of the Downtown Development Authority as members of the Development Authority.
That incarnation of the Development Authority never formally met, or at least, the City had no meeting minutes in response to an Open Records Request asking for “copies of the meeting minutes from all the Development Authority meetings from its creation in July 2014 through December 2022.”
In 2022, the City quietly began resurrecting its dormant Development Authority. While the City of Sugar Hill remains the official owner of the land right now, it has placed the land under the auspices of its reactivated City of Sugar Hill Development Authority.
State law mandates that a development authority must have between seven and nine "directors" and that no more than one of the directors can be from the governing authority. In this case, that would be the Sugar Hill City Council. At some point behind the scenes, it seems that the City decided Council Member Taylor Anderson would spearhead this reactivation of the Sugar Hill Development Authority and be that one director from the governing authority.
The public was not notified of the City's desire to bring back its Development Authority and appoint new members. Based on emails obtained by Real Deal Sugar Hill, it appears that Anderson selected four of the six other directors (Denise Hoell, Steve Graessle, Mark Hagen, and Sheri Emigh) himself, although it’s possible it was something that just he and Mayor Brandon Hembree worked out together. Hembree suggested that he nominate Mark Gernazian, and Council Member Alvin Hicks, recommended the nomination of Lexie Crowson. Anderson handled the public nominations of all members of the Development Authority. The City Council accepted all his nominations and his appointees were officially sworn into their positions in November 2022.
To stagger the terms of Development Authority directors, State law requires that some be given four-year terms initially, while others receive only two-year terms. Email confirms that Anderson selected which members (Hoell, Graessle, and Gernazian) would get the longer initial terms, and which members would get the short terms.
The debut meeting of the Development Authority in January 2023 received only the barest minimum public notice. The meetings convene at 5:30 PM on the second Wednesday of each month, not exactly the easiest time for most people to meet. Only about 4 of the thirteen public meetings the Development Authority has held so far have been attended by all seven “directors.” Public attendance is almost non-existent.
Most of those meetings lacked a clear focus and featured a lot of useless, rambling, and pointless comments. Not infrequently, it seems that some of the members don’t even know why they are there or what they should be doing.
“Open” Meetings of the Development Authority
After the resurrection of the Development Authority was completed in November 2022, the date of the first meeting was officially set on Friday, December 9, prior to both the December and January City Concil meetings. No mention of the meeting date was made at those meetings.
The Sugar Hill Development Authority quietly began meeting in January 2023 on the second Wednesday of every month at 5:30 PM, which is not exactly the most convenient time of day for most people, effectively reducing potential attendance by members of the public. In fact, it may not even be the most convenient time for the Development Authority members themselves. Out of the thirteen (13) public meetings held by this group, only four were attended by all seven members.
Emails obtained by Real Deal Sugar Hill indicate that the early meeting time was decided by Taylor Anderson. His reason? To make sure Development Authority members could get home at a reasonable time for dinner. No reason was provided why these people couldn’t schedule dinner around a meeting time between 6:30 PM and 7:30 PM, just like the City Council, Planning Commission, Downtown Development Authority, and all of the employees required to attend those meetings.
It’s also not uncommon for members of this group to simply attend via speakerphone. Over the phone, they are obviously unable to see the presentations. Given that sound is an issue even when you’re in the room, it’s doubtful they are hearing the meeting very well over the phone.
Sound at the meetings has been an ongoing problem. The Development Authority has either not been asked or has refused to meet in the City Hall Council Chambers where the City Council, Planning Commission, and Downtown Development Authority all meet. The Development Authority initially convened in the meeting rooms of “39th Street Station” (in the back corner of the E-Center Parking Deck). No one used microphones. The HVAC system and beverage refrigerators were consistently loud enough to prevent intelligible audio in the attendee recordings allowed by the Georgia Open Meetings Act.
Currently, they meet in the Community Room of City Hall, which is missing the overly loud HVAC and beverage refrigerators, but also has no sound system. Attendees can hear things, but clear audio recordings are still difficult to obtain unless you move around to get closer to the individuals who are speaking and process the videos afterward to enhance the audio.
The Development Authority has taken at least three different tours of the property. Some of the tours were not announced to the public, but were discussed at the next public meeting.
Two of the tours took place during the Development Authority’s regularly scheduled public meeting times in November 2023 and March 2024. Real Deal Sugar Hill accompanied them. On both of those tours, the group dispersed once the tour went deeper into the property. Development Authority members split off into different pairs during the tour and discussed things privately away from the rest of the group.
During the March 2024 site tour, the Development Authority toured the areas around Crayfish Creek, The Retreat at Orr’s Ferry, and the driving range at the Sugar Hill Golf Course. While some people (like Real Deal Sugar Hill) drove themselves, some of the Development Authority members shared vehicles on different legs of the trip. A member of Representative Andrew Clyde’s team was present for that tour, and the Development Authority members very enthusiastically offered him a ride between The Retreat at Orr’s Ferry and the Golf Course.
Real Deal Sugar Hill received no ride-share offers.
Potential Site Plan
As for the content of the meetings, Development Authority members talk a lot, but there’s a lot of rambling and almost no substance. It gives the impression that they are deliberately avoiding certain discussions due to the presence of Real Deal Sugar Hill.
Only one meeting, in August 2023, contained a substantial discussion about the Riverlands. The Development Authority hosted Joel Bowman, president of B+C Studios, a landscape architecture and planning firm in Atlanta responsible for several municipal projects and SOLIS apartment landscaping projects in the metro Atlanta area.
The B+C Studios presentation included the standard recreational items most people might expect and want in a natural area next to a river, such as hiking, mountain biking, playgrounds, and outdoor fitness equipment. It included some outdoor recreation items less commonly found in government parks, such as a zip line, a ropes course, and a climbing wall. It also included some recreational facilities that would involve a great deal of concrete, such as a BMX pump track and a skate park.
B+C Studios also proposed retail, a woodland restaurant, a brewery, a martini club, an indoor wellness facility, coworking space, a "rooftop experience," an "experiential hotel," glamping, a chapel, an amphitheater, small cottages, and an overhaul of "The Retreat at Orr's Ferry" (a large old house that came with the southern part of the Riverlands). Many of these ideas would likely be commercial ventures, presumably to be owned and operated by the City of Sugar Hill through its Development Authority.
B+C presented an overall site plan that showed how all of their proposed elements could fit within the Riverlands.
The presentation was referred to as a “proposal", and Anderson made a point of saying that they wouldn't necessarily do all of it. However, nothing was ruled out. Based on the meeting chatter and emails, B+C Studios obviously had spoken with the City prior to that meeting, and his team had put a lot of effort into the presentation. It doesn't seem likely the guy would have done that if he weren't pretty sure his ideas would be well-received and lead to some work for his company.
The entire presentation is available on the Real Deal Sugar Hill channel on YouTube.
And, here’s the slide deck B+C Studios presented in the video.
The presentation was not discussed further in the Development Authority meetings, and although the company’s president has attended the meetings again, the Development Authority has not discussed anything with him in front of the public.
Taylor Anderson did request a copy of the slide show from the Planning Department in February 2024, giving the impression that something there is being actively considered.
Nothing else resembling a plan has been discussed at the Development Authority meetings. However, if you listen carefully, there are multiple brief allusions to prior conversations that did not take place at the public meetings.
To find out more, Real Deal Sugar Hill recently requested “any emails sent by or received by Taylor Anderson to/from any members of the City of Sugar Hill Development Authority January 1, 2022 through May 2, 2024,” as well as “any emails sent by or received by Taylor Anderson using the keywords "Riverlands" OR "Chattahoochee" OR "River" to or from anybody EXCEPT the City of Sugar Hill Development Authority (Mark Hagen, Lexie Crowson, Sheri Emigh, Mark Gernazian, Steve Graessle, Denise Hoell) for the dates January 1, 2022 through May 2, 2024”.
In May 2023, the City began speaking with the management team from Claudio Pistolesi Enterprise (CPE), a professional tennis school. CPE wanted a tennis complex with a pro shop and a parking lot on the Riverlands. Anderson provided them with a rough area where the City would want it, as well as surveys and topographic information. The school was already consulting engineers and asked for the geotechnical report so they could get a site-clearing plan together. More than a year later, it has never been discussed in the public meetings of the Development Authority.
In July 2023, the City discussed plans for AirBNB tree houses proposed by another Wild Timber resident (Council Member Taylor Anderson, Development Authority Chair Denise Hoell, and Vice Chair Steve Graessle are all residents of this community). City Manager Paul Radford seemed a little giddy when talking about the taxation possibilities. That was in July 2023. It has never been discussed in the public meetings of the Development Authority.
The City has also been trying to get a boat ramp into the Chattahoochee River, a plan that would probably involve permission from the federal government. Mayor Brandon Hembree was in full-tilt lobbyist mode working on House Representative Rich McCormick's office for that one. Those discussions happened in October 2023. They have never been discussed in the public meetings of the Development Authority.
Not only were these topics completely avoided in public, but the email chains ended abruptly and without explanation. While it’s possible that those emails exist and just weren’t captured, it doesn’t seem terribly likely. Somebody would have had to break the email chain and avoided all use of the relevant keywords after that. And they would have had to do that in all three of these cases.
It's not a huge leap to surmise that the discussions probably took place partially on private channels or in person.
— The Future of the Riverlands —
Even the lightest development will erode the natural character of the area to some extent. That’s a given, no matter how hard anyone tries to argue otherwise. Trees have to be removed. Trails must be surfaced. Concrete must be poured.
Furthermore, there’s a startup cost for anything built there. The City may obtain some grants and use SPLOST proceeds to build things. But anything built must then be staffed, insured, physically protected, and maintained. Those costs are likely to be largely on the Sugar Hill taxpayers.
Therefore, it’s unwise to plan the use of this resource lightly, and the planning process should involve the entire community. So far, that has not been the case. The City has been actively and quietly planning in the background for at least a year and a half, and possibly for as many as two and a half years.
As usual, Taylor Anderson will play the victim and ask his “friends” to rally around him. I’ve already seen some interesting politicking in his emails and no doubt these individuals will reliably come running to save him, his/their plans, and their potential to gain something for themselves. But, no one can rightfully claim to be doing this for the whole community when there was so much obvious effort to keep the whole community out of it.
The good news is that the Riverlands are still standing proudly, representing arguably the SECOND best thing about Sugar Hill and North Georgia. I hope the FIRST best thing about Sugar Hill and North Georgia - the selfless, unconnected, everyday PEOPLE - will stand just as proudly and protect this resource.