The votes on the fate of
the retail center—officially listed on the City Council agenda for Monday as
CDP-11-06 and Z-11-19—have met with massive opposition from throughout the
city, even though it is a Buckhead issue, and just might affect fund-raising
and the election of council members who support the issues when they come up
for re-election, according to sources.
 |
| This aerial map of the area where the retail center would be developed shows its relationship to other major developments in the area. It was created by Gordon Certain of the North Buckhead Civic Association and includes the former site plan for the Sembler/Fuqua development. The new site plan has not really been made public. It was just recently revised. |
The City Council meeting
Monday is at 1 p.m. at City Hall, 55 Trinity Avenue in downtown Atlanta.
Buckhead Dist. 8
Councilwoman Yolanda Adrean at a meeting of the Buckhead Council of
Neighborhoods Thursday night urged Buckhead residents to come to the council
meeting and have their positions heard. The problem is that the public is not
allowed to speak about zoning issues during the public comment period of the
council meeting. That has to be done at the Zoning Committee meetings.
 |
| Dist. 8 City Councilwoman Yolanda Adrean |
BuckheadView counts at
least five, all of which represent and live in Buckhead who should be expected
to support their Buckhead constituents.
.
Those would be Adrean,
Dist. 7 Councilman Howard Shook, Dist. 6 Councilman Alex Wan, who chairs the
Zoning Committee and is vice chair of the Community Development/Human Relations Committee, Dist. 9 Councilwoman Felicia Moore and Aaron Watson, who is a
councilman at large, but lives in Buckhead and relies heavily on Buckhead
voters.
Other members of City
Council who might be expected to consider voting in line with the wishes of
Buckhead residents would be Councilman at large H. Lamar Willis, who
undoubtedly gets much of his campaign funding from Buckhead, and Council
President Ceasar C. Mitchell, who will not likely have a vote but earns most of
his income through his law office located in Buckhead.
 |
| Dist. 9 Councilwoman Felicia Moore |
 |
| Dist. 7 City Councilman Howard Shook |
Their NPUs also
supported the APAB resolution Saturday related to the Buckhead development,
largely because there is a concern that if the adopted CDP and Special Public
Interest area zonings are ignored by City Council, then they lose control over
planning and development in any area of the city.
Richard Rauh, the APAB
representative from NPU-B told Buckhead View “The vote was solidly unanimous
with NPU delegates endorsing it from all over town. There was no dissent,
none.” He said there was a quorum of 13 of the 25 NPUs at the meeting and
voting, which he called “a good representation on any Saturday” at the APAB
meetings.
“It was a solid citywide
consensus,” he added
 |
| The site plan above was the last one seen by NPU-B and rejected because of the 150,000 square foot Walmart store (top left in brown color) and 7 acres of surface parking lot in front of it. This plan apparently has been changed, but NPU=B and the Buckhead neighborhoods have not seen the new site plan and it is apparently not available online for viewing. The members of City Council apparently do have copies of the new plan. |
“The plan, I think, leaves a lot to be desired,” Adrean said. But she said a new site plan for the development does show less surface parking area, which was one of the major points of contention with NPU-B with the earlier plan.
The site plan by Lawrenceville-based Haines, Gipson and Associates shows space for multifamily residences but Adrean said no residential developer has signed onto the project. Substantial changes were made to the site plan after denial by the Neighborhood Planning Unit B, but that body has not seen the new site plan, Adrean said.
“I was not sent a revised site plan,” BuckheadView was told by NPU-B chair Sally Silver. “I have seen the proposed park design worked out with the Parks Department,” which apparently now includes a playground.
 |
| NPU-B chair Sally Silver |
Silver said, “Revised plans do not have to come back through the NPU,
only amendments to the re-zoning application. This particular case has no
application as it originated with the Zoning Committee of Council via Aaron
Watson's introduction in 2011,” she added.
Adrean
pointed out that the stakes are high related to this Council decision. “If they lose this vote,” she said about developers
Sembler and Fuqua, as well as Walmart, “there will be a lawsuit.”
It will be interesting to see how the members of City Council react to
the resolution sent to them by APAB, since 13 of the NPUs that represent their
council districts all approved the resolution on Saturday with no dissenting
votes.
The introduction to the APAB resolution reads: A Resolution by the Atlanta Planning
Advisory Board advising the Atlanta City Council to uphold provisions of SPI-15
in its current form and to REJECT proposed legislation CDP-11-06 and Z-11-19
(SPI-15 Lindbergh Retail Center) that has been forwarded to Council by both
Council's CD/HR and Zoning Committees without recommendation.
The resolution points
out that APAB is the citizen body consisting of delegates representing the 25
NPUs of the city “established by the Atlanta City Charter to be advisory on
citywide issues of planning and other public policy governmental matters to those
charged with legislative and administrative functions in city government.”
 |
| City Council President Ceasar Mitchell. Will he influence the vote of City Council? |
The resolution states
that APAB, along with various NPUs and others,” has for more than a decade
worked in concert with and support of the Department of Planning, Development
and Neighborhood Conservation of the city of Atlanta as it designed with care,
academic best practice and community consent the forward-looking Special Public
Interest Districts including that of (SPI-15) Lindbergh Transit Station Area.”
 |
| Dist. 6 Councilman Alex Wan, is chair of Council's Zoning Committee and vice chair of Community Development/Human Relations committee, both heard the issue. |
APAB pointed out that
denial of CDP-11-06 and Z-11-19 will preserve the intent of SPI-15 and sustain its
promise for an improved future for the Lindbergh Transit Station Area with
regard to reduced traffic congestion by continuing its future development as a
transit-oriented residential
environment primarily and
by continuing to reduce its effective function as a commercial destination that acts as
a magnet for wasteful and destructive automobile usage.”
APAB said approval of
CDP-11-06 and Z-11-19 ”is likely to undermine and perhaps destroy forever any potential
for the Lindbergh Transit Station Area to fulfill its visionary potential.”
It further points out
that NPUs citywide, in addition to NPU-F and NPU-B, “recognize the potential for detrimental
consequences of dismantlement of SPIs in their own areas and the effective abandonment
of years of citizen involvement that were devoted to crafting of those SPIs.”
(NPU-B also sent a letter to City Council members outlining is objections to both the land use and zoning changes for the proposed development. For that story, click here,)
(NPU-B also sent a letter to City Council members outlining is objections to both the land use and zoning changes for the proposed development. For that story, click here,)
No comments:
Post a Comment