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.

<!--

-----------