54 West CCD - Round 3

It appears after the Council Meeting, as described in my last post on this issue, another permit request was submitted... and again denied.

The rejection this time said:

• The spacing is approximately 800'.
  
• Minimum required spacing is 1,000'.
• The plans needs to be reevaluated and include alternatives such as:
• Right in/right out only access to 54.
• Connections to the McDuff and Planterra Way lights.
• Closing the median strip on 54.
• Combinations of the above.
• The above options would provide safer traffic circulation within the development and reduce impact on 54.
• The revised study and plan must be approved by Peachtree City.
• A plan approved by Peachtree City must then be submitted to and approved by the GDOT along with a driveway permit application.

Here are issues with these options:

• Right in/Right only only:
• Would require a U-Turn for west bound traffic to access the site.
• Makes exiting the site more difficult and dangerous in heavy traffic.
• Drivers wanting to go to Walmart, etc., would have to cross traffic to the get to the turn lane in a very short driving distance. There will be accidents.
• How many Big Boxes would rent in at a site with no light? Or stay over time?
  
• Connecting to the Planterra Way issues:
• Would only go to Planterra Way, not Huddleston.
• Would promote cut through traffic in Planterra.
• Right in/right on only on Planterra Way has already been deemed too dangerous.
• Connecting to McDuff:
•  Forces west bound entry and east bound exit traffic to be on 54 longer.
• Offers no traffic relief, as the Secondary Road to Huddleston would, thus promoting future cut through traffic on Planterra Way.

There are also the issue that the Special Use Permit was conditioned upon getting the light and the road abandonment upon getting the Special Use Permit.

As said before, this is far from over.

54 West CCD Revisited

In my last posting I said:

I read into the minutes the following email forwarded to Councilman Sturbaum and me by a constituent:

In response to your inquiry xxxxxxxxxxx submitted on 6/6/2008 12:26:57 PM to Georgia Department of Transportation:

xxxxxxxxxxx,

Thank you for contacting YOUR Georgia Department of Transportation.

Our District Traffic Operations Engineer spoke with a consultant from A and R Engineering last September; October concerning this area and the installation of another traffic signal. This intersection of Line Creek Drive and Hwy 54 in Peachtree City sits between two existing traffic signals. Adding another signal to this area would not meet with our guidelines for spacing requirements between two signals, a minimum of 1000 feet. The consultant was offered different suggestions at the initial meeting and has not made another request to Georgia DOT for the installation of a traffic signal at this mentioned location.

Again, we thank you for submitting your inquiry to the Georgia DOT. Please continue to contact us with your comments and questions.

Thanks,

Constituency Services
Georgia DOT

So, you can see this issue may be far from over.

According to another independent source GDOT has again confirmed no light will be granted and that in fact CCD has not filed for again for a permit to install a light.

But Doug McMurrain, of CCD, at the Council Meeting, said it is still in process and could take up to 9 months for approval.

Obviously, this issue is not over and there will be follow up work to do. Some efforts are being pursued to gain access to the light for The Shoppes at the Piazzas, which, without a light at Line Creek, opens up another set of issues, including CCD asking to build a portion of the South Secondary Road to connect to Planterra Way, which Cardiff Park and some in Planterra Park oppose.

Bottom line is the Special Use Permit is not a done deal yet, a Secondary Road to Huddleston is far from off the table, the status of the Road Abandonment is now in question and what kind of development will occur on the CCD property is unknown, if any at all ends up being built.

A lot of questions without any real answers at this point in time.

54 West CCD Approved

At the Peachtree City Council Meeting on June 19th the controversial CCD development Special Use Permit proposal was approved. Some key points in the agreement were:

• 175,000 sq' allowed. That is 25,000 above ordinance.
• Two Big Boxes were in the plan. None are allowed in the ordinance.
• $500,000 is to be paid to Peachtree City for abandoning Line Creek.
• Per efforts by Councilman Doug Sturbaum and myself the plan was redesigned to allow for easy attachment of a Secondary Road that would extend from CCD to Huddleston Road via Fulton Court.
  
• CCD would be allowed to proceed with grading and construction of berms, landscaping etc, pending approval of a light at the intersection of Line Creek and 54.
• If the light is not granted the berms and such would remain. This would be at CCD cost, not city cost.

I read into the minutes the following email forwarded to Councilman Sturbaum and me by a constituent:

In response to your inquiry xxxxxxxxxxx submitted on 6/6/2008 12:26:57 PM to Georgia Department of Transportation:

xxxxxxxxxxx,

Thank you for contacting YOUR Georgia Department of Transportation.

Our District Traffic Operations Engineer spoke with a consultant from A and R Engineering last September; October concerning this area and the installation of another traffic signal. This intersection of Line Creek Drive and Hwy 54 in Peachtree City sits between two existing traffic signals. Adding another signal to this area would not meet with our guidelines for spacing requirements between two signals, a minimum of 1000 feet. The consultant was offered different suggestions at the initial meeting and has not made another request to Georgia DOT for the installation of a traffic signal at this mentioned location.

Again, we thank you for submitting your inquiry to the Georgia DOT. Please continue to contact us with your comments and questions.

Thanks,

Constituency Services
Georgia DOT

So, you can see this issue may be far from over.

If the light is rejected then CCD must return to Council with a new plan. What rights he retains from the agreement made with CCD in a 3-2 vote remains to be seen.

My concern is where this development will end up at the end of the process. Even with a light I believe this development is too big and Big Boxes are not good for Peachtree City.

The approval was 3-2, as follows:
For:
Mayor Harold Logsdon
Councilman Steve Boone
Councilwoman Cyndi Plunkett
Against:
Councilman Doug Sturbaum
Councilman Don Haddix

When noted in prior debates Peachtree City already had a glut of empty retail, that position was challenged. Councilman Sturbaum and I surveyed the largest retail centers and found an overall 19.1% store front vacancy rate, with Wilksmoor units by the developer proposing the above approved plan having a 34.89% vacancy rate on already existing stores.

I also noted Coweta was building too much retail and had a huge vacancy problem. Which was also challenged. But in a report by Southeast Real Estate Business it was said:

Counties with vacancy over the 20 percent level include Coweta, Paulding, Spalding, Hall, and Clayton; Douglasville also has a vacancy rate over 20 percent.

I understand the right of a developer to build within ordinance. I do not understand giving the right to build extra beyond ordinance when many locales that operated under the thinking of 'more is better' have found out it is not and are trying to change to the Village concept, which Peachtree City was founded upon.

We need to return to the Village concept with a realistic approach to the future concerning local employers to allow people to live, work and retire in Peachtree City. Retail employment will not meet that goal.

ACC - Making the Final Two

Dean Collins appeared at the Peachtree City Council Meeting on May 15th
to announce Peachtree City and Newnan were the final two choices for
relocation. The whole Council and citizens attending the meeting were
very pleased to hear this great news.

Mark Hollums, Doug Sturbaum and I were grateful the work done to date
has moved us forward in the process.. We have high hopes and reasonable
expectations Peachtree City will be picked as ACC's new home.

Much work ahead but we are all willing to roll up our sleeves and get
back to work.

This would be a great gain for our fair city.

CCD 54W Development

The CCD 54W Development once again is returning to Council for vote.

As background, in a 3-2 vote Council abandoned parts of Line Creek drive
and Circle to enable a larger development on the site. They also allowed
planning for development that requires Special Exceptions to build Big
Boxes and more footage than our Big Box Ordinance allows outright. As in
39,000 and 42,000 square feet when the cap is 32,000 per building and
175,000 total feet when the cap is 150,000. So the site is big and dense
for its actually size.

So why allow extras when Peachtree City has many years worth of empty
retail space? How can it make sense?

If not the total reason a big reason is the budget. As we all know the
economy is way down, thus our city income is way down as well. So,
building footage increases the Tax Digest and collects some one time
fees plus adds property tax collection, thus helping the budget in the
short term.

The problem with this is that without increasing the consumer base,
meaning more people spending money in Peachtree City, there are no
increases in sales. So we end up with more empty retail space because
businesses cannot operate unless they make enough profit. As well
infrastructure and service costs to Peachtree City increase while there
is no gain to our largest revenue source, sales tax, thus those short
term budget gains turn into long term losses.

Put the simplest way, we gain some short term money at a long term loss
by adding empty buildings to Peachtree City.

Please remember, the Shoppes at the Piazzas, next door to this site, is
currently under construction and adding a lot of new space as well.