By MONROE ROARK
Staff Writer

It took four hours of discussions Thursday night, but the developers of a proposed Home Depot on the west side of Peachtree City got the go-ahead from the City Council over the objections of many residents in the area.

The vote was 4-1, with Annie McMenamin the lone holdout, in favor of honoring RAM Development's appeal and reversing a previous denial by the Planning Commission.

For most of the council, it boiled down to the fact that the city had no legal justification for denial, but doing so would open up the city to the possibility of “significant damages” and damage the integrity of the city's land use plan, according to Mayor Bob Lenox.

“There's really only one rational move to make,” said Councilman Jim Pace.

Councilman Robert Brooks pointed out that the developer had already agreed to several major concessions with regard to improvements on Ga. highways 54 and 74, which a residential developer would not be able to do on that site.

“If we can get these improvements with private help, let's do it,” said Brooks.

Councilwoman Carol Fritz mentioned that several local residents had put her on notice that they were watching which way she would vote, which she considered a personal insult.

“I would prefer it go in at Kedron,” she said, referring to the site Home Depot had been considering for much of the past year. “But they are legally entitled to go there. I'm still concerned about safety and having only one access to the site.”

The safety issue was still enough for McMenamin, who instigated the discussions that led to the city's traffic impact ordinance, to oppose the project. She specifically cited a two-lane bridge over the railroad tracks and the possibility of auto accidents causing massive gridlock, which public safety officials had stated in previous meetings.

McMenamin moved to table the appeal for a month, but she lost that vote 4-1 as well. Brooks then moved to approve the project, and he was seconded by Pace before the final vote was taken.

City attorney Jim Webb — who usually gives council his legal advice behind closed doors — briefed the council publicly at the beginning of Thursday night's discussion, pointing out how he believed the law was stacked in favor of RAM Development and the Huddleston family, who owns the 42 acres in question.

“Zoning is not an issue,” said Webb, pointing out what many have repeated for the past few months — that the site is zoned commercial and has been for more than 20 years.

Webb added that the city cannot stop the development if it complies with all city ordinances, and that there exist some “well entrenched” constitutional rights for the land owners.

One of the questions Webb advised the council to consider was whether the developer was bound by the traffic impact ordinance, which was passed after the initial proposal for this project was submitted.

RAM head Doug McMurrain and his legal counsel have told the council several times that they are exempt from the ordinance, but McMurrain added that his company has followed its guidelines anyway to foster better cooperation with everyone involved.

City staff has stated that the initial plan was submitted in haste to beat the traffic ordinance, which was already rumored to be in the works at the time of the original application in August. Nevertheless, Webb said the developer would “have a strong case under existing case law” to win that argument should it go to court.

Webb advised the council to also consider whether it believes the plan meets all city ordinances, including the traffic ordinance, and if it does not, to give specific reasons why.