RZ-22-007 to Come Up for Final Vote and May City Council Meeting
All indications are that the Sugar Hill City Council will take a final vote on 𝐑𝐙-𝟐𝟐-𝟎𝟎𝟕 (commercial complex at the corner of Sugar Ridge Drive and Highway 20) at the May City Council Meeting after tabling the case in March and April.
The case was initially brought to the public's attention in November 2022 when it appeared on the Sugar Hill Planning Commission (SHPC) meeting agenda for review. The case was put on hold when a quorum required for the hearing and vote did not appear at the November meeting, and the December and January meetings were canceled. Residents gave the developer and his attorney vigorous feedback about the case. Their concerns included the reduced buffer, the lack of a deceleration lane for the entrance off of Highway 20 (which would cause increased traffic at the Sugar Ridge Drive entrance), light pollution, drunk drivers originating from a restaurant serving alcohol, and the use of a septic tank and septic field for the complex.
When the case finally came before the SHPC in February, the developer, seeming to sense denial in the air after multiple residents voiced opposition to the project, agreed to certain key concessions. The developer decided he was willing to limit the buildings to no more than two stories, build only one building, not use the property for a restaurant, and withdraw his variance request. The SHPC included those conditions in its vote to approve the project.
When Planning Director Kaipo Awana presented the case at the City Council Work Session in March, he displayed the original site plan that included the reduced buffer and two buildings, and labeled the buildings for "retail/restaurant/office" use. He presented a staff report with his original four conditions, but none of the conditions that the Planning Commission had voted to approve. Those conditions are mentioned further down in the report. When he verbally presented the case, he stumbled over the list of conditions, even though they were not complicated. The City Council voted to table the case in March, and again in April at the developer's request.
When Awana presented the case at the May City Council Work Session on Monday, he showed a new site plan that included only one building and a new rendering that showed the remaining building with only two stories. He also provided a list of amended conditions, including stipulations that the project "substantially resemble" the site plan and rendering. He had also removed the "condition" that would have granted the developer the 35' buffer variance. That means the developer would be required to adhere to the relevant ordinance, which Awana stated is a 50' undisturbed buffer.
Awana did not include any conditions that would prevent the use of the property for a restaurant, because he said the City gets consistent feedback that people would like more dining options in the area. He said that if the Council was interested in including such a restriction, it could be added to the condition with a list of restricted uses for the property (no carwashes, convenience stores with fuel pumps, adult novelty retail stores, pawn shops, hotels, or motels.) No one discussed limiting the hours or alcohol licensing for a restaurant on the property, which probably would have addressed the neighbors' most significant concerns about a restaurant while allowing another dining option.
The Planning Department did add a completely new condition. If this case is approved, the City wants to require the developer to prepare a warrant analysis for a center turn lane on Sugar Ridge Drive for those wishing to turn left into the complex from Highway 20. If the study determines there is a need, and both Gwinnett County and the City of Sugar Hill approve this, the developer would have to pay for those improvements. That's a lot of ifs, and it's unclear what problem this would fix. It seems like it was mostly included for Council Member Taylor Anderson, who had mentioned at the March Work Session that he thought Sugar Ridge Drive needed improvements. Anderson also has a history of including meaningless conditions meant to appease the public. Residents were primarily interested in a deceleration lane on 20, so people would not use the entrance on Sugar Ridge Drive as the primary entrance to prevent getting rear-ended while turning left off Highway 20.
Planning Director Kaipo Awana still seems to take no issue with the use of a septic tank for the project. When questioned by Council Member Marc Cohen, he did say that he didn't think there were any other restaurants in Sugar Hill on septic, and that he didn't think there were many in Gwinnett County, although that exact information had been difficult to obtain.
At the end of the discussion at the May City Council Work Session, Mayor Brandon Hembree told the Council that if they had additional questions between the Work Session and City Council Meeting on Monday, they could direct them to staff. It was unclear if this directive was meant to save time at the May City Council Meeting (which is never a concern when politicians want to waste time talking about campaign stops) or to help Planning Director Kaipo Awana and the City Council Members save face.
If you are interested in this case, be prepared to attend the May City Council Meeting at City Hall on Monday, May 8 at 7:30 PM.
To see all 7.5 minutes of the discussion at the May City Council Work Session:
