Alpharetta Wants to Make Plans for Vacant Auto Dealerships, Big Box Retail Stores
The City Council approves asking the Atlanta Regional Commission for help in figuring out how to best use these sites.
Photos
Alpharetta wants to know what the best uses for several vacant auto dealerships and big box retail buildings such as the former Home Depot Expo Design Center, so the city will ask the Atlanta Regional Commission for help figuring that out.
Amanda Day, the city's grants administrator, said the 2011 Community Choices Implementation Assistance program isn't a grant, but is a program in which ARC staff works with city staff.
"Basically they offer free staff time to work on any initiative a city would like to take on that involves quality growth," Day said.
The ARC staff will help evaluate these properties and help determine an appropriate reuse for the sites in deference to zoning, land use, transportation, open space and other quality growth issues, Day's report to the council stated.
In 2008 Alpharetta received the assistance to help figure out how to make Alpharetta more of a lifelong city.
Day said in its latest proposal, the city's initial idea mentioned vacant car lots. But after speaking to Community Development Director Diana Wheeler and some of her staff, other big box retail sites were considered, such as the former Home Depot Expo site off Mansell Road next to Sam's Club.
Day said those sites have great parking and great buildings that are in wonderful shape, but that they may not be used for the same purposes in the future. She said car dealerships aren't carrying as much inventory and don't need all the parking that the former Saturn and Ford dealerships off GA 9 have.
The City Council approved making the request for the program 6-0. Councilman Doug Derito was absent, and Councilwoman Cheryl Oakes made her vote via teleconference as she recovers from surgery.
Anthony Merryman
6:16 am on Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Make it a community center for the kids or a YMCA.
Anthony Merryman
Bob Pepalis
10:46 am on Tuesday, March 8, 2011
I'm not sure my story makes it clear that this is not city-owned property, it is owned by private parties. The city would have to buy it to do as you suggest. We do have one private indoor skating facility near one of these properties, The Cooler. Could the community support two rinks or two YMCAs, as there's already one of those off North Point Parkway?
Audrey Greenwood
8:54 am on Tuesday, March 8, 2011
I second Anthony's suggestion. Something for the community! Another reason to keep our town desirable.
I know my son would really appreciate an indoor skate park!!
Lee at rootsinalpharetta.com
1:51 pm on Tuesday, March 8, 2011
What am I missing here? Have the current property owners expressed an interest in selling to the city? If not then this exercise is all academic, right?
Bob Pepalis
3:31 pm on Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Lee, I'd say it's as academic as the Future Land Use Map. Ideas on that map don't necessarily match current zoning, but it's a best guess to what probably would be the best thing to happen in a location. This initiative is to find better uses for the property and be prepared if a property owner or applicant with a deal on the property comes to the city for something different, getting the city ahead of the curve. Only time will tell if this works.
Stacey Anderson
3:13 pm on Tuesday, March 8, 2011
The problem with an indoor skating rink is the way these buildings are contructed. The roof has support poles that would obstruct the surface of a skating rink. You could make a skate park with ramps, etc. but not a regulation sized skating rink.
Another suggestion is for the city to provide some type of incentive to someone wanting to start an events facility.
GA Jim
8:23 pm on Tuesday, March 8, 2011
You silly guys. Since the study is a collaboration between Diana Wheeler and ARC the only possible solution has to be ...
MORE HIGH DENSITY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS!
Don't you realize that is always the answer regardless of the question?
Lisa
9:24 pm on Wednesday, March 9, 2011
I think private businesses should develop the properties. Taxpayers have enough pork to demand cut without the government buying more or it.
Alien
11:29 pm on Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Is this considered infill? Or brownfield? Or redevelopment? Did I miss a buzzword?
If so, the answer will indeed be
MORE HIGH DENSITY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT!
Bob Pepalis
12:14 am on Thursday, March 10, 2011
The property is privately owned, so any changes would have to be requested by those property owners or someone who has an agreement with them. And those must have public hearings. Check the agendas for the Planning Commission and City Council regularly at alpharetta.ga.us to make sure you know if and when they are added to agendas. You can get the contact information from Community Development at that point–or when you hear an application is filed–and ask the potential developer for a meeting. Very few people take advantage of this.
No Name
11:13 am on Thursday, March 10, 2011
Yes it is up to the property owner, but what property owner would object to having higher density? Higher density projects bring the developer more $. A developer would be a fool to not wait for ARC's recommendation since regional councils across America are recommending these higher densities. Show me just *one* instance where a regional council has not recommended higher density for brownfields, just one. ARC brings the developer and the city convenient cover. The city would vote to approve because "the expert study shows..." and what city could resist more tax $ flowing into the coffers to pay for more things we don't need? The "experts" always trump the residents' input. Game over.