COVINGTON, Ga – Monday night’s Covington city council meeting received a sizable turnout with citizens concerned about the five development applications previously approved for the Dorchester Place neighborhood.
City Attorney Frank Turner presented the council with an explanation as to why the appeals were being presented before them at the meeting. Attorney Thomas Mitchell assisted Turner in reviewing procedure and purpose of the appeals.
On April 26, Rivermoore Partners LLC filed five applications for certificates of appropriateness (COA) from the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) to build five house plans: Aspen, Griffin, Madison, Lincoln and Oakmont. These five plans were planned for a total of 46 lots in the Dorchester Place neighborhood.
Initially, nine Griffins, nine Oakmonts, nine Lincolns, 10 Aspens and nine Madisons were to be used across the 46 lots.
Subsequently, at their monthly meeting on June 7, the HPC conducted a hearing for the Aspen plan and allowed the applicant to present. The HPC tabled all five house plans for a later date, with no hearing for the other four plans.
According to Turner, under Georgia law and the City of Covington’s code, which is unique to the HPC and the COA, if applications are not approved or denied by the HPC within 45 days of the date they’re filed, they are automatically approved.
On June 10, the 45th day after their initial filing, the applications were approved.
As a result, adversely affected persons have the right to appeal a COA to mayor council, as per both Georgia law and Covington HPC ordinance. Twenty four appeals were timely filed, claiming the HPC abused its discretion in asking the council to reverse those COA approvals.
Turner informed the council that whatever actions they make could result in litigation and as a result, the next steps would be the three parties suing the city in superior court.
Both the Griffin and Oakmont plan appeals were accepted and their COAs were rejected without modification.
During the appeal of the COA for the Aspen plan, Dorchester resident Cathy Laseter began the appellants’ allotted time given to speak with a brief reminder for the council.
“Thank you so much for listening to us, we appreciate it so much. I know we are just a neighborhood, we’re going up against big guys. But just know that we are the little people who vote for you and love you. We just want you to know that we feel very strongly about our neighborhood.”
Ashley Short, another Dorchester resident, followed Laseter’s remarks with an explanation of the adverse effects of the HPC approvals on residents and evidenced how their decisions constitute an abuse of discretion.
“The City of Covington has declared that preservation, historical, cultural and aesthetic heritage of the city is essential to the promotion of the health, prosperity and general welfare of the people,” Short said. “We allege that these approvals are not compatible with or complementary to the existing Dorchester neighborhood or historic districts of Covington.”
Short expressed the appellants objections to the lot matrix and their concerns of the Aspen’s adjacency throughout the lots. Short mentioned there are 17 plans currently seen across 30 existing Dorchester homes and the current maximum reuse of house plans in the neighborhood is four times.
Short offered a compromise to modify the approvals to meet a middle ground for the Aspen plan — limiting the plan’s use to four times with no adjacency to each other.
Appellees included Attorney Bin Minter with Taylor English Duma LLP representing Quinn Residences Q. Dorchester, LLC and Rivermoore, CFO of Quinn Residences James Howley, and author of Dorchester design code for St. Bourke Ben Simpson.
Minter stated the COAs lapsed and the plans were accepted in 2021 followed by Howley, who explained he has adjusted plans on several occasions at the requests of the HPC and the city.
“As you heard from Mr. Turner, it is state law that if you go 45 days without a ruling on it, they’re deemed accepted,” Minter said. “So to say that that is a due process violation, to say that because they didn’t have a hearing, it was an abuse of their due process, is to say the state law violates due process. The plans before you today have been tweaked, they have been made more historic to the extent that that is a thing for the subdivision.”
The Aspen model was unanimously approved with modifications that there are to be no more than three to five lots containing the third generation Aspen model with no connecting like models, none directly across the street from each other and a minimum of three lots in between them.
The Madison plan, currently utilized by two homes in Dorchester Place, was agreeable with the appellants with no objections as long as standards are upheld. John Thurman of the appellants suggested for an additional two Madison models to be built instead of the original 10 applied for.
On behalf of the appellees, Attorney Minter stated the appellants were asking the council to rewrite the design code by “limiting the number of homes.”
Dorchester resident Vickie Floyd suggested for Quinn Residences to consider the variety of other plans in their plan book instead of the five approved for COAs.
“You have 25 beautiful plans that are already in our neighborhood,” Floyd said. “You wouldn’t even have to come through this process. You could file for building permits and build these beautiful homes in our neighborhood. So that's our fear – when you’re getting these three plans in a cluster, high density area because they're the only rear entry you have – no. You have 25 plans.”
Attorney Minter countered Floyd’s statement, saying the design code was adopted after that plan book.
The Madison plan was approved in a 4-3 vote with modifications, allowing three new builds for a total of five Madison plans total. None of the plans are to be adjacent or directly across from each other.
Next, the appeal of the Lincoln plan’s COA was discussed. Leigh Ann Knight, a Dorchester resident, voiced her concerns about the plans.
“These plans that they have submitted are basic plans. There’s nothing special about them,” Knight said. “The ones that are already there are based on the historic district – and that’s what we’re fighting for. We’re fighting for plans that will perpetuate what we already have. If we’re going to bring in close to 1,000 new residents here on these two streets, we want it to look good and we want it to be maintained. We want these houses to be timeless.”
Appellee Ben Simpson said there are an additional four plans awaiting approval by the HPC
The Lincoln plan was unanimously approved with modifications, allowing five Lincolns plans to be built. None of the plans are to be adjacent or directly across the street from each other, with at least three lots in between.
Following the Lincoln decision, councilwoman Susie Keck addressed the appellees.
“It’s obvious that we’ve got a neighborhood that really cares… and we’re trying to do a compromise here and all that’s gonna happen I hope, is if you've got 5 of each of your plans that are approved tonight, that maybe you could pull some plans that are already in the neighborhood, so that they win and you win.”
The next steps of the process following the council’s decisions are iterated in the City of Covington ordinance 16.52.340.
According to the ordinance, “the city may approve, modify, or reject the decision made by the commission. Appeals from decisions of the city pursuant to this chapter may be taken to the superior court of Newton County, Georgia, in the manner provided by law for appeals from convictions for municipal ordinance violations.”
Aside from the COA appeals, Monday night’s meeting included an oath of office for two Covington Police Officers, Officer Imani Roberson and Officer Denis Cerovic.
During the new business agenda, Jim ‘N Nicks Community Bar-B-Q’s alcohol beverage license and the purchase of 1,000 ITRON water ERTs were both approved unanimously.
The amendment of Title 5 was approved unanimously
The millage rate for fiscal year 2023 was levied at 5.764 mills with a unanimous approval. This new millage rate is a reduction from fiscal year 2022’s millage rate of 6.256 mills.
