One more thing on that
I know it appears that I'm obsessing over this, but I think it's worth pointing out that Amy Kissane's letter, while full of valid points, also doesn't address the central issue ... which is, again, that this is a zoning issue. Whether or not the building is preserved, as of now, is completely beside the point.
posted by Jmac at 7:22 AM
7 Comments:
I don't understand why the preservationists are so upset with Action. If they had over a dozen developers seriously consider the site and reject it, what the heck else are they supposed to do? It looks like they have done all that they can do. Let someone put their money where there mouth is.
I really want to get into what I think is the bigger problem with the ACTION Inc. and Boys & Girls Club properties (and by that I mean over-regulation and micromanagement of private property by local government), but do not have the time right now.
So, I will limit myself to this issue instead. Though I do not think that it should be, the supposed historic nature of the ACTION Inc. building is very much part of the rezoning equation.
From the online briefing materials for tonight’s Commission voting session:
“This structure is not listed in the National Registry, but it is eligible. Many believe that this structure housed Athens’ first public school for black children, but Staff was unable to find evidence supporting that claim. However, Staff did find evidence that it was among the first publicly funded schools. Although the property is not located within a designated historic district, nor designated as a landmark, the site and building are significant cultural and historical resources.”
From the Planning Department’s recommendation:
“At the Planning Commission meeting February 1, 2007 the Planning Commission expressed great concern with the loss of a significant cultural and historical resource, which would be inevitable if this binding plan is approved as shown. The Planning Commission showed great interest in the measures in which were or were not taken to save this building from demolition and questioned if an adaptive reuse had been truly explored. Action, Inc.’s acting CEO, John Scoggins prepared a letter (dated February 12, 2007) to explain the process of liquidating debt incurred by the organization through mismanagement by previous administrators and to clarify some misinformation. However Staff feels that this letter fails to demonstrate that Action, Inc. took considerable measures to preserve this historical structure."
From the Planning Commission’s recommendation:
“In Section 9-20-5, a Special Use Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the proposed use conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the approval criteria that is listed in the report. The Planning Commission found both the elimination of the mixed use and the loss of a historic cultural resource did not meet the approval criteria i.e. Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use.
Another aspect of the Planning Commission review of the Special Use was that the use would be in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are implemented by Athens-Clarke County. The current Comprehensive Plan’s guiding principle for Growth and Economic Development states that Athens Clarke County needs to support growth that protects community resources and needs to protect and capitalize on the historical heritage of the community as a major economic development tool."
Thus, the rezoning decision will depend, at least in part, on the historic nature of a property that is “not listed in the National Registry,” “not located within a designated historic district,” “nor designated as a landmark.” As an aside, eligibility for listing on the National Registry means nothing in and of itself. When you get down to it, this is just an old school building that would cost a fortune to renovate.
Sure it would be nice to save the building in the abstract. But we do not live in an abstract world. I say let ACTION Inc. and the Boys & Girls Club get what they can for their properties and do some good with the money.
God, how I hate public comment. I'd almost rather listen to Carl Jordan.
Almost.
The Mayoress is acting awful snotty and lecture-y at the meeting tonight. She says she doesn't want a Gameday place - well honey, if I were that developer, that's exactly what your schoolmarm-ish behind would get, whether you like it or not.
You can catch more flies with honey than you can by being a female dog.
I keep meaning to blog on this, but I'm just too damned busy.
Anyway, taking exception to your comments, James. Why is the school not designated? Because the school district chose not to designate it. that does not mean it is not significant. It simply means that the property owner has chosen not to have it designated in order to restrict the minimal additional restrictions that designation would impose.
The value of historic designation is mostly in the eye of the beholder. Its only legal value is in either how it dovetails into local laws (it doesn't in ACC) or the additional review it requires in very specific cases (not this one). But the school system did not choose to designate, and solely because they did not want any potential restriction standing between them and selling their property for the highest dollar. Ditto the pursuant owners.
And also taking exception to your comments, Adrian. They have not "done everything they could do." They have done everything they could do with certain non-negotiables -- namely their price. Which takes for granted that our local land use laws are negotiable.
And finally, this issue is also important because it's the second such case of what will be many. (and God knows that College Avenue school case worked out *fantastically.*) All of the BOE's old properties will be on the block, and due to neglect, a lack of protection, and designation of zoning which makes it more lucrative to demolish than reuse, all of them are in danger.
Zoning schmoaning. It's their property, they paid for it, as far as I'm concerned they can do what they please with it.
Hey chuck: So if someone buys the property next to yours and wants to put a chicken plant next to it because it's their private property you'd be all for that, I guess?
Post a Comment
<< Home