OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Norcross, Georgia/City Council & Urban Redevelopment Agency
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Norcross City Council Meeting Summary - March 2, 2026

City Council & Urban Redevelopment Agency — Monday, March 2, 2026
BodyNorcross, Georgia
SessionCity Council & Urban Redevelopment Agency
DateMonday, March 2, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
Meeting Thumbnail
⇩ GET FROM SOURCE

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Original source
Transcript — Verbatim

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Speaker 1

0:00

Um ready.

0:08

We shall have a time by doing uh well into tonight's uh council meeting.

0:18

Uh the mayor is uh on us and so I am filling in for him today.

0:27

Um let me ask everybody before we start to make sure your phones are off and other electronic devices.

0:35

And we'll start with an indication by Council and Bay for example uh each one to that uh uh this time uh first of all regions to uh uh uh we have to show uh uh all uh present for a human who's on the style I see the business.

2:08

Um is uh approval of minutes from the last meeting.

2:13

Do I have a motion?

2:16

Um I'll like make a motion to approve the mayor to be the council meeting on February 2nd 2026 and the policy that session, the executive session on February 16th 2026.

Unassigned speaker

2:32

I'll

Speaker 1

2:33

preach the function.

2:35

Um I can make a motion to approve the mayor for the regular council meeting on February 7th, 2026 and all two work session on February 16th.

2:48

Um discussion.

2:52

Hearing none, all in favor say I.

3:01

Um is to set tonight's agenda.

3:07

So we would move to the uh item on the um under the consent agenda.

3:23

And um we'll ask for council consent on any of these items.

3:30

If we don't fill them out of consent, we will move to the session vote.

3:36

Uh amendments of the 2020 23 file comprehensive time discussions expand down to the publication and design.

3:51

Um three clusters are one enhancements.

4:03

Um item four, increase for judgment solicitor.

4:10

Item five, property I was for construction of a public safety administration building.

4:18

So it's phase two quality correctly easement between the city and the DAP.

4:36

So and it's uh streaming wetland mitigation for us.

4:43

Well cross screen of the project, LCI number 001 6067, session okay.

4:52

So uh for a moment.

4:56

Item one is discussion.

Unassigned speaker

5:00

So for a moment discussion and two is discussion and five is discussion down the big motion set uh because uh motion uh setting you have any classes having set the agenda and uh presentations and so on um we would like to open the floor to citizens uh design to address the government uh for uh this is not too the item that's on the curtain to the three um so we're talking about this and uh three minutes to the name address and then what um drive and work in the local for 44 years.

Speaker 1

6:30

Um my first job's pharmacy and telephone and signature in 1989.

6:40

Um since there I've been selling home and no problem in the area since 1995.

Unassigned speaker

6:50

And

Speaker 1

6:50

I was just community love this community.

Unassigned speaker

6:54

I

Speaker 1

6:55

wanted to find out this desirable but uh with those.

7:23

Are we building and creating branches to them open trying to methods for the entrance of local residents?

7:31

This comprehensive plan should allow in with the future designers of residents as well when you use the computer plan to work with the options not just the occupied housing, but for people who have a state bounded community and that your constituents have standard that they want.

8:02

Even if it's a tip for the use changes, it's an alternative special use time.

8:14

My question is the house is a project itself.

8:17

If you use the C Best if one of the given to us at some point, uh so you can see the model to one that would be well.

8:48

What are you doing to the mobile phone housing?

8:54

If you want to define some areas for identity housing is uh wheel and care for the community, now to reduce the mental cost to find out due to things.

9:22

We need to end the situation about any future apartments in the same.

9:28

Um I want to say it's open lower, and I think you're full of science.

Unassigned speaker

9:35

Looking to us as you know what happens when you start with the test full of four and then we have two.

Speaker 1

12:41

And so we should have to use it.

13:00

So it's also the also which is a big value of my own year.

Unassigned speaker

15:09

So

Speaker 1

15:13

it's a use of the industry.

15:46

We do it's about how you find

Unassigned speaker

15:56

the

Speaker 1

15:56

need to choose

Unassigned speaker

15:57

to

Speaker 1

15:57

say what's difficult.

Unassigned speaker

16:16

Um

Speaker 1

16:20

you know, uh see the uh people move around less difficulty.

16:29

So this uh this is a function, I think it's not fewer than this in and look forward to working with you.

16:54

Um thank you for all of you and thank you for supporting all the cost and listening to all the residents.

17:06

Um also four of us and we now send a one three point two percent three percent previously percent of what we do.

17:31

Um design to how we forest you are strong as a bunch of what's inches of all the details.

18:26

They should comprehend to the city halls in the Elizabeth because we are still in the course of class because it's true not only the C One costs of special use of it, but also for some of us and walls and buying the vision but see what you use in the wall as well as it uh controls.

19:27

All is fine with a free decision to require special use on this removal for all the controls for example.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Miscellaneous██████████████████████████26%
Procedural██████████████████████22%
Zoning█████████████████17%
Affordable Housing████████8%
Community Engagement████████8%
Engineering And Infrastructure████████8%
Public Safety█████5%
Budget Equity Analysis██2%
Technology and Innovation██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Norcross City Council Meeting Summary - March 2, 2026

The Norcross City Council held its regular meeting on March 2, 2026, at 6:30 PM in the Council Chambers. Mayor Pro Tem Bruce Gaynor presided in the absence of Mayor Craig Newton. The meeting drew extensive public comment, primarily in opposition to the proposed amendment to the 2045 Comprehensive Plan, which ultimately passed on a 3-2 vote. The council also approved expanded downtown parking designs and appropriated $5 million for the construction of a Public Safety Administration Building.

Consent Calendar

  • Minutes Approved: The minutes from the February 2, 2026 Regular Council Meeting and the February 16, 2026 Policy Work Session were approved unanimously (5-0).
  • Thrasher Park Lighting: Staff was authorized to proceed with the lighting enhancement proposal from TheOutdoorLights, Inc.
  • Pay Increase for Judge and Solicitor: Approved to remain competitive in the current job market.
  • Property Deed and Easement: Authorized execution of a Parking Easement and Corrective Deed between the City and the Downtown Development Authority.
  • Mitigation Credits: Approved a payment of $112,900 for stream and wetland mitigation credits for the Norcross Greenway Project.

Public Comments & Testimony

The public comment period featured significant opposition to the proposed 2045 Comprehensive Plan amendment.

  • Lonnie Latham: Opposed high-density multifamily allowances and requested a focus on owner-occupied high-density housing such as condominiums.
  • Charlotte Osborne: Opposed the amendments, citing plans for over 6,700 apartments along a one-mile stretch of Holcomb Bridge Road and a petition signed by 650 residents.
  • Jacques Laurent: Announced his candidacy for Georgia House District 97.
  • Paul Sumner: Opposed the plan as written but supported the council's decision to require special use permits (SUPs) and remove by-right status for multifamily. Supported Councilmember Bare's recommendation to pause approval until a strategic roadmap is developed.
  • Lawrence Hurtley: Opposed the plan, stating no one at the mayor's community meeting spoke in favor. Urged the council to postpone the decision.
  • Jan McKenzie: A 25–30 year resident, expressed concern over traffic, the number of apartments, and a perceived lack of council responsiveness to public input.
  • Faye McFarland: A 54-year resident, opposed apartment expansion and discussed issues with corporate ownership of single-family homes and rental property management.
  • Jim Eyre: Praised the downtown parking design and recommended approval. Discussed the comprehensive plan vision, noting the city is young (average age mid-30s) and majority-minority.
  • Yassin Moghazy: Running for Georgia House District 97, stated his primary purpose was listening to the community and thanked the council.
  • Joe Beach: Resident of 2910 Queens Court, noted heavy opposition with only one speaker in favor and that no apartment residents participated in community input.
  • Ann Beach: Questioned the qualifications of those speaking in favor and urged the council to listen to residents.

Discussion Items

1. Amendment to the 2045 Comprehensive Plan (2026-65) The council considered a resolution amending the Imagine Our Future 2045 Comprehensive Plan. Staff reported that the community engagement process was complete and the plan met minimum state planning standards. Councilmembers debated density designations, with some expressing concern over multifamily allowances in certain character areas. A motion to approve passed 3-2.

2. Expanded Downtown Parking Planning and Design (2026-59) The council considered approving the 60% engineering design and a budget amendment of $98,000 from the Mayor and Council Contingency fund for 100% construction plans. Discussion included traffic flow, landscaping islands, and construction phasing. A motion to approve passed 4-1.

3. Appropriation for Public Safety Administration Building (2026-34) The council considered appropriating $5 million from the general fund for construction of the Public Safety Administration Building. Councilmembers requested a tour of the space and a comprehensive update on the project timeline and budget for the March 16 Policy Work Session. The motion passed unanimously (5-0).

Public Hearings

  • Rezoning Request (RZ2025-008): A public hearing was held for the rezoning of 705 Lively Avenue (PKST Lively LLC) to M1 Light Industrial. The request was approved unanimously (5-0) with conditions, including a 50-foot setback from abutting single-family homes and a restriction on motor vehicle sales (permitting indoor repair as an accessory use).

Key Outcomes

  • 2045 Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Approved (Vote: 3-2). Discrepancy note: The official meeting minutes contain conflicting information for this vote, listing Councilmember Hixson under both the "Ayes" and "Nays" columns.
  • Expanded Downtown Parking Design: Approved (Vote: 4-1). Discrepancy note: The official meeting minutes contain conflicting information for this vote, listing Councilmember Bare under both the "Ayes" and "Nays" columns.
  • Public Safety Administration Building Funding: Approved (Unanimous: 5-0). Next steps include a council tour and a full project update at the March 16 Policy Work Session.
  • Rezoning (705 Lively Avenue): Approved (Unanimous: 5-0).
  • Adjournment: The meeting adjourned to an executive session for legal, personnel, and real estate matters at 8:32 PM.

Meeting Transcript

Um ready. We shall have a time by doing uh well into tonight's uh council meeting. Uh the mayor is uh on us and so I am filling in for him today. Um let me ask everybody before we start to make sure your phones are off and other electronic devices. And we'll start with an indication by Council and Bay for example uh each one to that uh uh this time uh first of all regions to uh uh uh we have to show uh uh all uh present for a human who's on the style I see the business. Um is uh approval of minutes from the last meeting. Do I have a motion? Um I'll like make a motion to approve the mayor to be the council meeting on February 2nd 2026 and the policy that session, the executive session on February 16th 2026. I'll preach the function. Um I can make a motion to approve the mayor for the regular council meeting on February 7th, 2026 and all two work session on February 16th. Um discussion. Hearing none, all in favor say I. Um is to set tonight's agenda. So we would move to the uh item on the um under the consent agenda. And um we'll ask for council consent on any of these items. If we don't fill them out of consent, we will move to the session vote. Uh amendments of the 2020 23 file comprehensive time discussions expand down to the publication and design. Um three clusters are one enhancements. Um item four, increase for judgment solicitor. Item five, property I was for construction of a public safety administration building. So it's phase two quality correctly easement between the city and the DAP. So and it's uh streaming wetland mitigation for us. Well cross screen of the project, LCI number 001 6067, session okay. So uh for a moment. Item one is discussion. So for a moment discussion and two is discussion and five is discussion down the big motion set uh because uh motion uh setting you have any classes having set the agenda and uh presentations and so on um we would like to open the floor to citizens uh design to address the government uh for uh this is not too the item that's on the curtain to the three um so we're talking about this and uh three minutes to the name address and then what um drive and work in the local for 44 years. Um my first job's pharmacy and telephone and signature in 1989. Um since there I've been selling home and no problem in the area since 1995. And I was just community love this community. I wanted to find out this desirable but uh with those. Are we building and creating branches to them open trying to methods for the entrance of local residents? This comprehensive plan should allow in with the future designers of residents as well when you use the computer plan to work with the options not just the occupied housing, but for people who have a state bounded community and that your constituents have standard that they want. Even if it's a tip for the use changes, it's an alternative special use time. My question is the house is a project itself. If you use the C Best if one of the given to us at some point, uh so you can see the model to one that would be well. What are you doing to the mobile phone housing? If you want to define some areas for identity housing is uh wheel and care for the community, now to reduce the mental cost to find out due to things. We need to end the situation about any future apartments in the same. Um I want to say it's open lower, and I think you're full of science. Looking to us as you know what happens when you start with the test full of four and then we have two. And so we should have to use it. So it's also the also which is a big value of my own year. So it's a use of the industry. We do it's about how you find the need to choose

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com