At its Thursday night meeting, the Peachtree City Council will decide whether to allow a proposed 95.5-acre annexation just north of the city limit line to proceed to the second step in the process of bringing a piece of property into the city.

InLine Communities LLC wants to develop a subdivision with 191 homes along Crabapple Lane and Dogwood Trail next to Kedron Hills subdivision.

Papers filed with the city describe the project as leaving 47.25 acres, half the parcel, as open space plus a spot for a future emergency response station, while developing the remaining 48.25 acres as 191 single-family lots of about a quarter-acre each.

The city paperwork says that nearby Kedron Hills features lots at one-half acre, twice the size of the proposed annexation. But because the entire parcel is being considered, the “proposed residential density of 2.0 units per acre fits in the city’s future land use category of single-family medium, same as Kedron Hills.

City staff comments: “A slightly lower density would better achieve the ‘step-down toward city boundaries’ policy.”

Another point: the developer “is not proposing any multi-use paths,” a departure from usual development inside the city.

The city’s annexation process is two steps. The first step involves the developer seeking permission from the council to have city staff study the proposal and make recommendations to the council. [SEE CORRECTION BELOW.]

Staff comments on the initial proposal were mostly positive.

In other business, the council will consider a monthly salary bump for the elected members of council and will hold the second of three public hearings on setting a millage rate that will bring in more revenue than the same millage rate this year — in effect, a city tax increase.

The council also will honor the 2019 Peachtree City 12U Little League team that won the state title but lost twice last week in the Southeastern Tournament to the Virginia state champions.

[CORRECTION — The story above, first published last week, about the Peachtree City Council considering an annexation request, contains an error of fact. The city’s annexation process is two-step, but the council does not “always allow the annexation proposal to advance to the second step” because of due process concerns, nor is it required to.

Such a due process concern does not apply in annexation requests. It is limited and only applies in response to a request for lifting of a current moratorium on multi-family (apartment) developments to allow consideration of rezoning during a second step.

The council may — and did last week — reject a request for annexation on any grounds, because there is no constitutional right to annexation.

It is the policy of The Citizen to correct errors of fact upon notice. — CAL BEVERLY]