FLOWERY BRANCH – The effort by a Buford developer to have three parcels of land annexed into Flowery Branch has hit another obstacle.
White Horse 70, LLC, wants to construct 102 single-family homes on 43-acres along McEver Road. To do so the developer needs sewer service and unincorporated Hall County presently does not offer sewer service to that area.
Last month the developer’s representative explained to the Flowery Branch City Council that Hall County officials were hesitant to predict when sewer service might be available to that area, so the move to be annexed into the Flowery Branch city limits and connected to Flowery Branch’s sewer system became a viable option.
But there was a problem with that effort: the initial building site for the proposed subdivision (in unincorporated Hall County) was not contiguous with property already in Flowery Branch city limits; it was very close to the city limits, but actually touching the city limits is a requirement for annexation into the city.
Not ready to give up, the developer was then able to work out an arrangement with the owner of a vacant lot directly across the street from the planned subdivision. That lot was in unincorporated Hall County as well, but more importantly, it touched property in the city limits of Flowery Branch and that made it eligible for annexation.
If that 0.96-acre site could be approved for annexation into Flowery Branch then, as a result, White Horse 70’s property could be also.
The owner of the vacant lot agreed to the plan, formalizing the arrangement in November. His annexation application became part of the application package submitted by White Horse 70.
Even with all that in place the Flowery Branch Planning Staff recommended denial of the application, saying it lacked compliance with requirements of the city’s Comprehensive Plan for the McEver Road corridor.
Staff said in its report, “As presented…the corridor will be disjointed and left to be developed as individual parcels”, something city leaders want to avoid.
Determined to succeed, the developer has taken his argument to the city council, trying to convince members that the subdivision is a good choice for the area.
But not everyone living in the immediate area agrees. At Thursday’s city council meeting the owners of property adjacent to the proposed site voiced their objection.
A longtime (but now closed) bed and breakfast establishment, The Whitworth Inn, has been purchased and converted into a residential wellness center for women in recovery.
Property owner Teresa Cantrell spoke on behalf of the wellness center which plans to open before the end of the month, operating under the name of Lightway Recovery.
She told council members that she served on the Gwinnett County Planning Commission for ten years and was very familiar with comprehensive plans and annexations.
“It’s an investment for my family partnership, both from a financial and emotional investment,” Cantrell said of the property to the west of the proposed subdivision.
“We did a large degree of due-diligence before we purchased this property,” Cantrell continued. “And we really felt it was an ideal piece of property for this type of business that we are running. It has to do with restoring women’s souls.”
“The wellness that’s going to take place there needs a peaceful atmosphere,” she added. She asked for increased buffers between the properties and relocation of several features in the site plan.
Susan Barge spoke next. She and her husband will be running the center on a day-to-day basis. She expressed concern that a sewerage pumping station, which will be part of the new subdivision, would sit next to the shared property line, in an area that contained walking trails and a nature center for residents staying at Lightway Recovery.
“Churches in the community, individuals, families, corporations have all poured in to this place, adopted rooms, and really dedicated themselves to pouring a lot of finances and attention into each and every detail (of Lightway Recovery),” Barge said.
“So I just pray you will consider all of that as you make your decision,” she implored.
The city council will make that decision at its next voting session, scheduled for March 19th.
