Within a few years, the former Pilgrim’s Pride property on Pryor Street could be home to a picturesque park and a mix of housing options.

Until that happens, however, it may be a 32-acre field of green grass waiting to be developed. Athens officials know they want something important on the site, but nothing definite has been decided.

For several months, workers have been demolishing and removing the remnants of the former chicken processing facility. Once cleared, grass seed will be sown.

At Monday’s meeting, the council took a step toward defining what could eventually be built there as it agreed to name Nashville-based Farmer Morgan LLC as architect for the project. Council President Harold Wales felt Farmer Morgan made the best presentation in January.

Though it named an architectural firm, there was no rate of pay discussed. Wales explained he felt it was important to get the architect on board first, then review plans and projects as they come along.

“(The plans) would come back to the council for a vote,” he said. “We’ll tell them we can afford it or we can’t.”

The idea of hiring an architect for the project without first discussing money was questioned by some members of the council. District 3 Councilman Frank Travis said he understood the council needed a plan for the property but wanted more specifics about the cost of the plan.

Similarly, District 5 Councilman Wayne Harper said he felt the city should establish an idea about what would be done to the property before hiring an architect.

“I’ve never seen anything like this; what we’re doing,” said District 4 Councilman Joseph Cannon.

Mayor Ronnie Marks said the Pilgrim’s Pride project is different, because no budget has been set for the project. Improvements to the site will come from the city’s first tax increment financing district. The TIF was approved in January 2018 for the purpose of making $2.7 million in infrastructure improvements on the north side of town.

TIFs give municipalities the ability to issue bonds to fund a number of infrastructure improvements. Those bonds are repaid through property tax revenue collected off increased property values.

“I think the best option is a fixed rate or hourly rate on getting us a master plan,” Marks said.

Cannon then questioned what the finished plan would include and if the architect would only be planning the park or areas that could be sold to residential or commercial developers.

“There’s no one on the city staff who can tell us how to design that,” said District 1 Councilman Chris Seibert.

Wales said he believes Farmer Morgan would be the firm the council could relay its “wishes and dreams” to. He believes the city has enough prior experience with architects to know Farmer Morgan “will do what you ask them to do.”

“I don’t think we can move the project forward without bringing on an architect,” he said.

Farmer explained his firm would conduct a market analysis of the property, examine other city parks and meet with stakeholders, including citizens and developers, to gather input. He said the research and the meetings would help develop the final plan.

“We want something with citizen engagement, market-driven and not pie in the sky,” he said. “I’m understanding the park component should give value to the property for developers. … You get a planning document that leads into these other things.”

In addressing the council’s concerns about cost, Morgan said, “Price is a stickler, so we’ll give you a scope of work and a price that gets you there.”

During the council’s public comment period, resident Scott Marshall said he had nothing against the firm but asked why the council chose this method of choosing an architect.

“I want a park as fast as anybody else,” he said “I feel like the city needs to define a scope of work and then put a request for proposal out to any landscape architect firm that’s interested … so when we start looking at it, we’ll have an idea about what it will cost. We get more options when we get a proposal.”