New cities’ area of interest overlaps with Decatur’s

Posted by Dan Whisenhunt August 25, 2014

This story has been updated. 

One of the communities in North DeKalb looking to form new cities have released a map showing the areas under discussion, and those areas are also being targeted by the city of Decatur for possible annexation.

Decatur recently awarded a $25,000 contract to the Sizemore Group for annexation master planning services. The city of Decatur is looking to expand its boundaries from 4.2 square miles to 5.2 square miles, adding areas that include Suburban Plaza, the Kroger shopping center and Patel Plaza. It would also add between 4,000 and 5,000 people to Decatur’s population, currently about 20,000 residents.

On Aug. 24, the City of Briarcliff Initiative Inc. released its “Map of Area of Interest” of the places that the proposed cities of Briarcliff/Lakeside and Tucker are eyeing for a potential new city. That area of interest shows overlap with Decatur’s annexation goals in North Decatur.

“Almost all of the previous maps that have been made public have only included a narrow band around their proposed borders,” the city of Briarcliff Initiative’s Amy Parker wrote. “We hope that this map will put the area under discussion into a more visible context for ongoing discussion.”

After this story was published, Mary Kay Woodworth with LakesideYES sent an email saying, “I want to make it very clear that Amy Parker from (City of Briarcliff Initiative) does not speak for LakesideYES, and did not consult with us regarding the map that is published today.”

Briarcliff and Lakeside recently decided to begin working together to create a new – and as yet, unnamed – city.

Here is the map in question posted by the City of Briarcliff Initiative:

Source: City of Briarcliff Initiative

Source: City of Briarcliff Initiative

About Dan Whisenhunt

Dan Whisenhunt is editor and publisher of

View all posts by Dan Whisenhunt

  • King Tomen

    I do not think Briarcliff/Lakeside/Tucker will have good success annexing the entire portion of CoD lying north of College Ave. Seems like a pretty “coarse” map if it’s splitting entire cities that are not even eligible for annexation. In that case . . . what’s the point? it just creates more questions than answers.

  • underscorex

    Basically Decatur has to either crap or get off the pot – SOMEONE is gonna annex those areas, as everything ITP is gonna be divvied up between Briar Lake Cliff Dale whatever.

  • Amy, as I explained in my email to you, the map was cropped due to the limitations of my Wodpress theme. Nothing about the cropping of the map changes its meaning. It’s still obvious which areas you’re discussing. I’ve quoted your original post accurately, and nothing about what I’ve written changes the meaning of what you said. If you have any further comments about this, I suggest you write a letter to the editor: Thanks

    • Thanks, Dan. I do feel that showing the area that has been under discussion for over two years as a portion of the county as a whole was important to see, and if WordPress cut it down, so be it. Anyone who wants to the the entire visual can view it at the link that I posted above.

      This certainly has gotten some discussion rolling, which was the intent. We can all point at the same thing and talk about overlaps and conflicts. 🙂

  • Buck Winfield

    What’s to be gained by being a part of any new or existing city. Why is this idea hot with politicians, but not with residents? Why should be get excited?. We have been just fine with just one layer pf corrupt county officials, we hardly need a new layer of corrupt officials. Its only broken in the eyes of those who have something to gain, for the rest of us, we are just being asked to let some more folks “play government”. Didn’t we have enough of that with our high school’s student council?

Receive the Daily Email DIgest

* = required field