It’s the first Monday of the month and that means there’s a Smyrna City Council meeting tonight. The meeting doesn’t get underway until 7:30 p.m., but one agenda item has already garnered attention.
Tonight the Council will decide whether to support the Downtown Development Authority’s potential purchase of six lots at the intersection of Concord Road and Dunton Street for $250,000. This resolution would also allow for the demolition of the partially completed structure at the site. If passed, the money to make the purchase and complete the demolition will come from the general fund contingency line. Currently the general fund contingency budget is $750,000 with no expenditures to date.
The history of the property is a story you’ve heard before. A developer began constructing a building on the property before the recession hit Metro Atlanta. The property was foreclosed on and is now held by State Bank and Trust. Construction came to a hault and the structure became what Ward 4 Councilman Charles "Corkey" Welch called “an eyesore.”
Welch said that in 2011 a developer came before Smyrna City Council to enquire about rezoning the property so that he could build a liquor store on the site. Eric Taylor, Smyrna's city administrator, said Smyrna's community development department expressed to the prospective buyer that the city was unwilling to change its alcohol ordinance regarding the property. The property is currently zoned to allow the sale of beer and wine, but not distilled spirits.
Taylor then suggested that the Downtown Development Authority make an offer on the property. The property was listed for $400,000, but Taylor suggested the DDA offer $250,000, Welch said. The offer was accepted, but on the condition that the deal close in two weeks.
“That was the bonus I guess for the seller of the property and we agreed to do it within 14 days,” Welch said. “Agreement was reached a week ago, Friday a week ago (Feb. 24). But within the 14-day-period from the time that he accepted—a week to 10 days ago that the offer went through and he accepted.”
Welch said city officials have discussed turning the lot into a park, but no official plans for the site have been made at this time. Once the property is purchased the city will pay to have the rusted frame demolished and recycled, he said. He also noted that this property was not part of the 2005 SPLOST Concord Road improvement project.
A small group of Smyrna citizens have criticized city officials in the past for using tax dollars to purchase properties that have become problematic to the city. Welch, however, said he considers this part of his duty as a councilman.
“I have to look at it from a standpoint that we were all elected to represent the best interests of the citizens of Smyrna,” he said. “I think even with Hickory Lake apartments and this parcel we’re doing just that. It’s a very good price on the property. Hickory Lakes we bought before my time, but I think it was purchased for safety reasons. Our police force spent so much time over there that we felt like it was a dangerous situation for the people living there.
“But I think the basis of it is that we feel like we’re working for the best interest of the city. That property has been an eyesore two years. If we can take it and do something positive with it that benefits citizens, I think we’re well justified in doing so.”
Taylor agreed calling the arrangement "a great deal."
"It's six lots for $250,000 and we're removing an eyesore," he said.
The Council will decide tonight whether to approve the purchase.
Other items on the agenda include the approval of an agreement making Croy Engineering the project manager for . because some members had more questions.
Tammi Sadler, assistant city administrator, outlined the duties of project manager before the last meeting.
“Making sure that the architect is doing what they’re supposed to be doing, the construction manager, Catamount, making sure they’re doing what they’re supposed to be doing or subcontractors that they use,” she said. “For example Catamount any invoices that they have, the architect, those all go through Croy Engineering.”
Deputy Fire Chief Roy Acree said that when fire stations were constructed in the past he and Fire Chief Jason Lanyon held this role.
“Basically Chief Lanyon and myself we didn’t oversee construction, we were the day-to-day,” he said. “We were the customers in other words like within a typical builder/owner relationship.”
The Council will also vote whether to approve a contract with Piedmont Geotechnical Consultants Inc. for construction materials testing and inspection services at Fire Station No. 5.
Other items include an amendment to the city’s planning and development code regarding an economic incentive program, changes to personnel policy regarding sick leave and annual leave, approval of the restated defined master draft plan and an addition to city property’s maintenance code regarding multi-family inspections.
The meeting begins at 7:30 p.m. and can be watched live on TV19, the Cobb County government access channel
Saying that this is a "conflict of interest" and that he is doing this for personal gain is blasphemous. Please support your accusation. Oh wait, you can't because it is baseless.
I encourage all readers to flag these kinds of posts that are libelous and slanderous.
I heard that R. Anderson likes to steal from Girl Scouts, rob the blind, and kick pregnant women in the stomach. See how easy it is slander.
1.) The DDA has not met on this issue nor discussed it so there are not minutes on this subject. 2.) No one has brought this topic before the DDA yet. 3.) The City is going to discuss this issue tonight in full view of the public giving you a chance to speak, if they vote to move forward it then has to be approved by the DDA at a future date and future meeting of the DDA. The public may attend any of these meetings. There is no secrecy, simply an urgency as typically is associated with an owner who is probably anxious to sell. If you disagree with the purchase say so, if you think it needs more time for public input say so. But why resort to making up things and falsely accusing people? Your posts are a negative drain on Smyrna as whole.
- Questing this purchase is good. Personally I have questions about this and I think a private buyer would be better! If you are referring to R. Anderson and Smyrna Sentinel, they are not questing the purchase, but attacking a member of the Downtown Development Authority with slanderous claims that have no place in a debate.
Yes. It's not the prettiest structure in Smyrna, but that doesn't mean it's a financial priority either. And according to Smyrna's website, we have 26 parks already. The rangers tell me we have more than any other metro city. We do not need one more park in this town! This money should not be spent on this property. And shame on the city for refusing to do right by it's people! Bring jobs, have Town Hall Mtgs, and stop buying everything up that's for sale! Get your priorities in order Smyrna!
So what are we going to do with it after we buy it? (And yes, this thing is bought & paid for because we all know it will be a 7-0 vote in favor.) Oh wait; there isn’t a plan because here in Smyrna we just like dropping money on some property and hope for best. Hasn’t worked so far, but third times the charm. But the plan. Smyrna may, emphasis on the may, build a park there. A 1.5-acre park nestled along a busy thoroughfare. Sheer brilliance. But tell me, how you going to pay for the park, Smyrna? We’ll spend more money, duh. Normal people/gov’ts typically have a plan when spending this kind of cash. But Smyrna isn’t normal. Smyrna doesn’t pass on deals to good to pass up. If Smyrna needs more money for land purchases, well they’ll just dip into the old general fund or use the DDA to pass out bonds (sneaky way of getting around that pesky Official Code of Georgia) like pixy sticks all in the name of progress! Whatever I’m done. This whole idea shouldn’t really surprise anyone. For once I just wish common sense would reign at a council meeting and that this proposal would be voted down. You guys have a good evening.
The city's leaders are salivating over that property - because it'll be bought with our money without our say. Even though it's listed at $450K the general fund isn't the council's personal checkbook. That's our money. We get to decide how it's spent. Don't people wonder where all this money comes from? How Smyrna is the only city not financially hurting in this economy? It's called moving money around and the mayor is a pro at it. It'll catch up with him one day though.
The alternative is to let private sector handle it. Smyrna doesn’t need to be in the business of buying distressed properties solely for controlling the land use of said property. That is the role zoning ordinances play and according to the article, the ordinances worked. Do I enjoy seeing that site as is? No. But as it stands it will either become a park or the city will flip it. If it becomes a park, again how will the park be paid for? And what kind of park are you going to put there? I can’t really see a children’s play area there being so close to Concord, so then what? And if Smyrna tries and flip it, well the conditions present will not change just because ownership changes, so you could potentially be holding this asset for a while. But say we get it sold; well then we’re back to the original problem of land use. Like I said, buying distressed properties to control land use is a dangerous (and costly) precedent to be setting. These altruistic, its all for the betterment of Smyrna, ideas that are poorly thought out and are paid for by either debt instruments or pulling form the general fund are going to hurt Smyrna in the long run, whether you want to believe it or not. It bothers me when taxpayer dollars are spent on something when there is no plan in place for usage of that something. That’s why I’m against it. But I want to ask, why would the city take away a potential revenue source and replace with something that will be an ongoing expense?
By the way, not sure why all of you are complaining. Even if the structure takes $100k to demolish, the city still stands to make a profit if they resell it. Once the structure is down, it'll be sold much more easily.
More parks is meaningless. Parkland is more important. One of the densist cities in the country (the borough of Manhatten) is probably about 1/6th park. Oh no! Let's develop Central Park to bring more business to NYC! People don't want park, do they? Do you see the land value of what's next to Central Park? It's obvious people do want park.
You still have to admit this purchase was a really good deal.(probably mainly because of the steel structure)
I know things have changed over the years in our educational system but have they stopped teaching civics? Some of these comments lead me to believe that there's not a clear understanding of government vs. private sector.
Bottom line: Even if you don't like the idea..there are more important things in life. K Davis. - I will write you a check for $5 if you would like. Just tell me where to mail it.