Clarity on ACTION
At last Thursday's Athens-Clarke County Commission meeting, the well-publicized proposed selling of the ACTION, Inc. property was again brought out as commissioners examined the recommendations of the Athens-Clarke County Planning Commission, which was to not approve the project.
ACTION, which is in a dire financial situation, is attempting to sell its property to a developer for $1.2 million. The organization, due to severe mismanagement, is roughly $1 million in debt, and this sale would all but erase their current fiscal problems.
This issue prompted an editorial by the Athens Banner-Herald and then some thoughts of my own. At the outset, I was cautious but tended to agree with the editorial's central thrust. However, a little bit of research and dialogue can go a long way and answer a lot of the questions I had.
- First off, let's by absolutely honest here ... it's solely because this concerns ACTION, an anti-poverty non-profit, that so much attention is going on here. If this had been a different structure occupied by a business that was opting to move, the recommendation to not approve the re-use of the property wouldn't be that big of a deal.
- Compound this scrutiny by the fact that one of the organization's board members is District Two Commissioner Harry Sims, meaning he's personally vested in this issue And, I have to ask with all sincerity, how is his participation in this discussion not a conflict-of-interest? I suppose in a small community you face this types of things all the time, so it's just not feasible to recuse one's self from all the debates you've had involvement in. Plus, that's not to say Sims is being inappropriate here. He's got legitimate and rightful concerns about the organization itself, and that's good to have in this discussion.
- Initially, I was critical of Amy Kissane's comment which - and I'm paraphrasing here - was something to the effect of the organization taking a lower amount of money for the property because this is a community decision. Again, on the surface that seems callous and prompted charges of elitism from the editorial. However, if you consider the context that quote was uttered in, it actually is more of a practical analysis of the situation. That is, the Oconee Street Building is currently zoned for a mixed-use purpose of commercial and residential. That's the decision the community made for that space to best mesh into its surrounding environment. As a result, the sale of said property must result in a use which fits that zoning. The exisiting proposal calls for a residential use only, which doesn't match up.
- Put more simply ... if someone came to me and said they were going to give me $750,000 for my property so they could stack up apartments on it, than I'd have the opportunity to sell my land for a ton of money. However, my land isn't zoned for that use, and nor should it be. As a result, I would have to go to the highest bid that features a plan that would utilize the existing zoning my house is currently under, and that could be considerably lower. So when Kissane talks about taking a lower amount ($900,000 has often been tossed around), that's reflective of the highest bid that featured a usage plan that matched the zoning.
- So, again, this isn't elitism. It's reality. Or, as Blake paraphrased from one commissioner ...
- The fact that one has to not consider the mission of the organization does not mean one is casting a blind eye toward its plight. The community - public sector and private sector - should work to help ACTION climb out of its debt, but it's obvious approving a usage of land which is contradictory to the existing zoning isn't necessarily the best way to do that. Particularly when it can still help by approving a use which does match the zoning and generates a large sum of revenue for the organization.
- Whether or not the new proposal calls for the demolition of the structure, I don't really have a stake in that yet. The building appears to be rather rundown, and it would cost a significant amount of funds to adequately renovate it for use. If it needs to be preserved, then perhaps the developer could find a way to work with someone like the Athens-Clarke County Heritage Foundation to do so. But, to me at least, that's a bit besides the point at this juncture. The primary issue at work here is proper zoning use, and the recommendation for disapproval is a legally appropriate one.
ACTION, which is in a dire financial situation, is attempting to sell its property to a developer for $1.2 million. The organization, due to severe mismanagement, is roughly $1 million in debt, and this sale would all but erase their current fiscal problems.
This issue prompted an editorial by the Athens Banner-Herald and then some thoughts of my own. At the outset, I was cautious but tended to agree with the editorial's central thrust. However, a little bit of research and dialogue can go a long way and answer a lot of the questions I had.
- First off, let's by absolutely honest here ... it's solely because this concerns ACTION, an anti-poverty non-profit, that so much attention is going on here. If this had been a different structure occupied by a business that was opting to move, the recommendation to not approve the re-use of the property wouldn't be that big of a deal.
- Compound this scrutiny by the fact that one of the organization's board members is District Two Commissioner Harry Sims, meaning he's personally vested in this issue And, I have to ask with all sincerity, how is his participation in this discussion not a conflict-of-interest? I suppose in a small community you face this types of things all the time, so it's just not feasible to recuse one's self from all the debates you've had involvement in. Plus, that's not to say Sims is being inappropriate here. He's got legitimate and rightful concerns about the organization itself, and that's good to have in this discussion.
- Initially, I was critical of Amy Kissane's comment which - and I'm paraphrasing here - was something to the effect of the organization taking a lower amount of money for the property because this is a community decision. Again, on the surface that seems callous and prompted charges of elitism from the editorial. However, if you consider the context that quote was uttered in, it actually is more of a practical analysis of the situation. That is, the Oconee Street Building is currently zoned for a mixed-use purpose of commercial and residential. That's the decision the community made for that space to best mesh into its surrounding environment. As a result, the sale of said property must result in a use which fits that zoning. The exisiting proposal calls for a residential use only, which doesn't match up.
- Put more simply ... if someone came to me and said they were going to give me $750,000 for my property so they could stack up apartments on it, than I'd have the opportunity to sell my land for a ton of money. However, my land isn't zoned for that use, and nor should it be. As a result, I would have to go to the highest bid that features a plan that would utilize the existing zoning my house is currently under, and that could be considerably lower. So when Kissane talks about taking a lower amount ($900,000 has often been tossed around), that's reflective of the highest bid that featured a usage plan that matched the zoning.
- So, again, this isn't elitism. It's reality. Or, as Blake paraphrased from one commissioner ...
But, as Commissioner Kathy Hoard pointed out, the commission can only legally consider whether the zoning requests meet criteria set out in the county code and land-use plan, no matter what cause selling the land would benefit.
- The fact that one has to not consider the mission of the organization does not mean one is casting a blind eye toward its plight. The community - public sector and private sector - should work to help ACTION climb out of its debt, but it's obvious approving a usage of land which is contradictory to the existing zoning isn't necessarily the best way to do that. Particularly when it can still help by approving a use which does match the zoning and generates a large sum of revenue for the organization.
- Whether or not the new proposal calls for the demolition of the structure, I don't really have a stake in that yet. The building appears to be rather rundown, and it would cost a significant amount of funds to adequately renovate it for use. If it needs to be preserved, then perhaps the developer could find a way to work with someone like the Athens-Clarke County Heritage Foundation to do so. But, to me at least, that's a bit besides the point at this juncture. The primary issue at work here is proper zoning use, and the recommendation for disapproval is a legally appropriate one.
posted by Jmac at 8:37 AM
9 Comments:
As Sims points out, though, it is troubling for those who advocate more mixed-use development (which for the most part entails adding a commercial component to what is a planned residential development) that developers are having real trouble filling commercial space in this town. If you look at Gameday, the Hodgson building, and the new space across South Milledge from the old Bi Lo, you see examples of new commercial developments that seem to be almost impossible to fill. There just doesn't seem to be a demand for new commercial space in these parts of town.
JMac - I hope other people get it the way you do.
Sadly, a few commissioners seem ready to cave over these incredibly bad projects out of sympathy for the agencies who are trying to sell the properties. Legally, the commissioner cannot consider these "heart-string" issues but...
Rich, that also gave me pause. But also, those projects have poorly-designed commercial spaces. There's NO parking for the Gameday projects (Gameday's choice -- not offering public parking) and no visibility since Subway is literally halfway below grade. I think they would actually have done better to have the commercial spaces on the backside, where they could be part of the whole Mercury/Toula's/whatever block. As for Hodgson Terrace, the spaces are also not very accessible. They do have parking, but getting to it is a pain in the ass. And there are no foot-oriented businesses past them, so there's no ambient traffic. Hodgson's, too, doesn't have the neighorhood's buy-in, so it's not as though people are going to go the extra mile to patronize that building as they sometimes do in other areas.
Another thought that keeps occurring to me is that these are new spaces, and we're overbuilt. So they're premium spaces, and therefore expensive. Which means that perhaps the consequences of our general overbuilding trend is being seen most in the poorly-designed, expensive spaces in question.
Eh, anyway. i'll rant about the ACTION bldg a bit on my blog if I get the time.
And Amen, Al.
Nicki:
Good point about the projects' designs. I also think that these spaces are getting slammed by all of the commercial space going up around the Super Walmart on Epps Bridge in Oconee. I guess to some extent what it says is that not only are we overbuilt in the residential market (which everyone focuses on) but the commercial market is pretty saturated as well.
I think you're on to something there Rich, though I don't think there's some more room to grow commercially (considerably more than residentially which is absolutely overbuilt). Nicki's dead on with regard to Sims's comments.
The South Milledge development is brand new, as is (more or less) the Hodgson development. I think you'll see some growth in those spaces over time, more so than the Gameday condos.
Another thing about the Gameday condos is that, quite frankly, that's not a terribly good idea. The better concept is to market that as a hotel (which they're doing more or less now) rather than an expensive place to buy and just use six or seven weekends out of the year.
an important point in all of this, whether you see it as a pro or a con is that land use planning is loooooong term planning so, you don't start changing the rules based on short-term market conditions.
There are many reasons why retail spaces are sometimes scarce and sometimes abundant. A lot of retail space could be considered overbuilt but it could also be just way overpriced. Perhaps we're in a slump for new retail start-ups for some reason. Perhaps there are a ton of folks who would like to start up a retail operation but the owners have not yet accepted that the over-supply in the market is sending them a signal that they need to adjust their prices.
You can take the other side of the argument just as easily. Prices for retail spaces are being kept high because the owners have some reason to believe that they will eventually be able to lease them at these prices and they are willing to risk losing a few months rent income to hold out for a tennant who will pay their price.
Land use planning is not concerned with either side of this equation - it's concerned with what will be good for the surrounding area at some point whether that be in 3 months or 3 years. Once you build a building, it's usually there for at least 50 years.
If I knew how to predict the market, even 5 years down the road, I'd probably have a lot more money than I have now. ;-)
I mistyped by the way ... I meant to say that there is more room to grow commercially.
That probably completely changes the crux of my last comment.
JMac:
I assumed that you had mistyped from the context.
On a related point that I just mentioned on my blog, I find it interesting that at the same time that smaller, unanchored retail developments are slow to lease, the "big box" market is having much more success as every space that was affected by the losses of K Mart, Target, and Wal Mart along Atlanta Highway has been filled.
While I think that Al does have a good point that it may be a lack of retail formation, I do worry that the increasingly potent retail agglomeration that is the Oconee County portion of Epps Bridge is going to siphon off potential tenants for in-town developments.
Athens-Clarke County is a unified city-county in Georgia, U.S., in the northeastern part of the state, at the eastern terminus of Georgia 316. The University of Georgia is located in this college town and is responsible for the initial creation of Athens and its subsequent growth. In 1991, after a vote the preceding year, the original city abandoned its charter in order to form a unified government with Clarke County, sportsbook, referred to collectively as Athens-Clarke County. As of the 2000 census, the consolidated city-county (including all of Athens-Clarke County except Winterville and a part of Bogart) had a total population of 100,266. The metro area had a population of 175,085 as of 2005 Census estimates. Athens-Clarke County is the principal city of and is included in the Athens-Clarke County, Georgia Metropolitan Statistical Area. http://www.enterbet.com
Post a Comment
<< Home