The push by some for annexation of the county acreage west of Ga. Highway 74 in Peachtree City has me concerned.

For most of us who have moved to Peachtree City, the land use plan and accompanying zoning have represented a guarantee of what we were investing in, a contract with residents who bought into promises about what Peachtree City would be in the future.

We were told that, as a planned community, we would know in advance what the population will be when all of the lots are built on as planned, how much high density, low density, multi-family, office, commercial, industrial, open space, buffers, tree save, etc. would exist, and what the nature of these categories would be.

We are now being asked to accept annexation that can only be described as shopping by the developer for higher density.

In determining whether to annex, the advantages to, and the impact on the entire city should be considered.

When the annexation was denied previously, at issue, among other things, were questions of population density, traffic, proximity to Line Creek which provides us with drinking water, and protection of the floodplain and wetlands there that protect the quality of water in that creek.

Most of all, there was concern about what the county might do. That worry has been resolved.

The county fought the battle in court against high density, and won.

The land as presently zoned by Fayette County would allow nothing smaller than two-acre lots. That lower density ameliorates the other concerns.

If annexed, however, the density stands to be many times that, creating additional traffic that will not only exacerbate the present problem, but create new problems on Hwy. 74, in addition to the impact on our water supply that the additional impervious surface will create and the cost of the additional city services that will need to be provided.

I am aware that some of the residents who live nearby have been convinced that the only way they will get a road that allows them to access Hwy. 74 is if the land is annexed.

I wonder whether they have given consideration to how much additional traffic this higher density would create, as well as to the impact on them of having MacDuff Parkway become the shortcut from Ga. Highway 54 to Hwy. 74.

The city needs to consider what the lineup of traffic would be like on Hwy. 74 with this greater number of vehicles.

As for getting the road, it is probable that John Wieland Homes would have already built the road by now, had he not delayed development there in the hope of getting higher density through annexation.

The road will be needed, and Wieland has committed to it, whether the land is annexed or not.

So assume that a road would come, but with much less density, therefore less negative impact, if the land were developed at its current county zoning.

Peachtree City marketed itself to us based on its plan, the village concept. The land use and comprehensive plans call for a step-down of density as you get away from the village centers and toward its boundaries.

The land in question is indeed a boundary, bordering on Coweta County and away from the West Village commercial center.

With or without annexation the West Village already contains its full complement of commercial, multifamily and high density zoning. To add any more of these categories would be a violation of the intent of Peachtree City’s planning documents.

The only appropriate zoning here would be ER, multi-acre lots like those on the city’s eastern and northern outskirts.

Changing the plan now to accommodate a new agenda threatens all that Peachtree City represents to those of us who have come to love living here.

I can only conclude that the only ethical way to annex this land would be to bring it into Peachtree City at the same density that the county fought so hard, with the taxpayers’ money, to protect, and which our planned community would mandate.

Without that guarantee, it is preferable not to annex it at all.

Phyllis Aguayo
Peachtree City, Ga.