Does the affected community get an actual vote on whether this moves forward? — a resident Question [Submitted via app] The meeting polling was a “pulse check,” not a formal vote. Under APS Board Policy KG, any final agreement is subject to a public vote by the Atlanta Board of Education, informed by this community engagement. Comments & suggestions on this topic (acknowledged): This meeting feels disingenuous given the number of non-neighborhood track club members voting on discussion topics — why are so many here? — a resident Comment [Submitted via app] Acknowledged (comment): This concern about who was in the room is heard and taken seriously. The report breaks input down by proximity so the composition of the room is transparent, and directly-impacted residents' input is identified as such rather than blended with non-resident input. The Track Club conducting the engagement creates a conflict of interest; when will Atlanta Public Schools engage the community directly? — a resident Comment [Submitted via app] Acknowledged (comment): This is a fair concern, best addressed by Atlanta Public Schools. It is noted and being conveyed to APS; under Board Policy KG the prospective tenant runs the input process, but the request for direct APS engagement is heard. This isn't really community engagement — it's a controlled setting. We wanted an open question session, and weren't warned to have phones ready for what became our only input opportunity. — residents Comment [Submitted via app] Acknowledged (comment): This feedback about the meeting format is heard and noted. It will directly inform how future sessions are structured — more time for open questions, clearer advance communication — as Atlanta Track Club has committed to additional engagement. The Track Club is making the project seem like a certainty, which makes people feel opposition is futile. It is not too late. — a resident Comment [Submitted via app] Acknowledged (comment): This is heard clearly: no decision has been made, there is no scheduled Board vote, and the project remains in an early phase. The intent of continued engagement is to keep the outcome open, not settled. Please note that residents of other nearby neighborhoods are also affected — our kids go to school here. — a resident Comment [Submitted via app] Acknowledged (comment): Well noted. The report-out includes adjacent neighborhoods (Peoplestown, Mechanicsville, Grant Park) as a distinct group precisely because they share in the impacts, and their input is counted. Stormwater & Flooding · 29 votes as a priority topic Flooding and stormwater are recognized as needing dedicated attention that they did not receive at the meeting. Stormwater management is also a statutory requirement: civil engineers and the Department of Watershed Management must review runoff, drainage, and site design before any permits are approved. Atlanta Track Club has committed to detaining stormwater on-site and to coordinating within the broader neighborhood stormwater context,and will bring specific technical answers back to the community as the engineering discovery process progresses. These questions are important inputs to that work with Atlanta Track Club acknowledging that it hopes this development can help improve stormwater challenges felt by residents for decades. AThe meeting hasn't adequately addressed flooding and environmental impacts, including prior Watershed infrastructure. Development shouldn't increase flooding for residents. — a resident Question [Asked aloud] It was acknowledged that flooding had not received sufficient discussion; no detailed engineering response or mitigation strategy was provided in the meeting. Atlanta Track Club's follow-up materials note environmental, stormwater, and flooding concerns require additional technical evaluation and dedicated community discussion. Source: the meeting minutes — NOTE: acknowledged as not adequately answered; see suggested response below.
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker