If stores want to attract customers, they have to be visible from the road, Julian Lee told members of the Fayette County Planning Commission last week.

The commission's proposed special architectural and design standards for Ga. Highway 85 north of Fayetteville is so restrictive that no one will want to do business in the corridor, Lee told the group.

And that's a problem for Lee, he said, because he is part owner of about 20 acres that he would like to market as a shopping center site.

"As this is written," he said, "it's too limiting."

This is the second round of public hearings for the "85 overlay" plan, a set of special restrictions designed to make the highway a visually pleasant entrance into Fayette County.

The county Board of Commissioners sent the proposed standards back to the Planning Commission after Lee complained that he hadn't had a chance to comment on the proposal.

The standards are intended to go hand-in-glove with a recently adopted land use plan for that area, which in turn is expected to work with zoning of property along the corridor to "establish and maintain a scenic gateway into Fayette County," according to planning officials.

A similar set of special requirements along Ga. Highway 54 between Fayetteville and Peachtree City is working well, officials say, and they want the same thing for 85 north.

Among restrictions are limits on the number of driveways allowed, architectural standards for buildings aimed at an office park appearance, plus rules stating that buildings front on interior roads or driveways rather than facing 85.

Facing the buildings away from the highway is among the least palatable of the restrictions, said Lee. "This is particularly fatal to retailers," he said.

He also suggested that applying the restrictions to properties 700 feet on either side of the highway is excessive. "Two hundred fifty feet is all that's needed," he said. Limits on the number of curb cuts is fine for small properties, he said, but "what about folks with 2,000 or 3,000 feet of road frontage?"

Planning Commission members thanked Lee for his presentation. The group conducted a complete round of public hearings on the plan in July with no response and presented the plan to the county Board of Commissioners for final adoption.

But when Lee addressed the county commissioners to offer input, the group sent the plan back to the Planning Commission for a new round of hearings.

"It's great to have someone come and make specific suggestions. We haven't had that kind of input in the past," said Planning Commission Chairman Bob Harbison.