Business & Tech

PATCH VOICES: In Response to SAND and GPNA on 800 Glenwood Place Project

by Rick Laupus

Based on this recent Patch Voices Op-Ed piece from SAND and GPNA (PATCH VOICES: 800 Glenwood Project Battle Continues), I re-read city ordinance 16-36.001 (Beltline Overlay) last evening and would encourage others to do the same.

It is true is that the ordinance is an “overlay,” and thus adds a layer of guidelines to existing zoning, but does not de facto change them, or necessarily supersede them. To wit, "The existing zoning map and underlying zoning regulations governing all properties within the BeltLine Overlay District shall remain in full force and effect. The regulations contained within this chapter shall be overlaid upon, and shall be imposed in addition to, said existing zoning regulations..."

However, as part of this overlay, the director of the bureau of planning “may authorize variations from regulations...(that) satisfies the public purposes and intent, and provides public protection to an equivalent or greater degree." Which is what appears to have happened on the Glenwood Place project.

Herein lies the key problem. If the Beltline Overlay is indeed a "blueprint" with the force of law, why was there ever a need to rezone it? Shouldn’t it have been rejected out of hand by the office of planning? If that somehow did not happen, and it is, in fact, THE LAW, why not then get a court injunction to stop the developer or force compliance?

In a what can only be explained as a mild break with reality, GPNA and SAND claim they were taken off guard by the boldness of the developer. “No one expected this type of development to ever be submitted, much less approved by the City Planning Department, along the BeltLine,” they say. Is neighborhood leadership as naïve, as clueless as our city councilperson pretends to be? One would hope not.

Let’s be clear. From the planning perspective, the problems with the development were always about specific, detailed (BeltLine) requirements, to curbing, width of the road etc. According to our research, discussions between the developer and the Office of Planning and Community Development about parking matters were already ongoing well over a year ago. Adjustments to the development plans were made, variances applied for and given, and ultimately the SAP was approved in July of this year. Being out of step with the overall intent and vision of so-called BeltLine “blueprint” was never an issue.

Except for the neighborhoods. Their vision of what the BeltLine Overlay should do is dramatically at odds with what the Office of Planning and Community Development approved. It also appears to be at odds with anything acceptable to the developer. Both the neighborhood and developer claim that the other side was not willing to negotiate with them. No surprise there.

So where was Carla Smith during all this? She knew the developer and his lawyers, having accepted campaign donations from both, and from the lawyers as recently as March of this election year. As early as October 2012, she was copied on an email from NPU-W to the Office of Planning regarding Fuqua’s submission of the first SAP a month earlier. As a frequent attendee of NPU-W meetings (according to her supporters) she would have known how far apart the developer, property owner and residents were. Why couldn’t she see then that “the train was coming,” as Rick Hudson put it to APN. Would that not also have been an ideal juncture to step in and begin the process of getting a development all sides could be happy with?

If our councilperson was indeed, as asserted here, “working for us” why wasn’t she in the front of all this? Perhaps because, in a clear conflict of interest, she was trying to serve two masters simultaneously: her lawyer/developer contributors and Grant Park residents. And yes, GPNA, while politicians occasionally do go against their contributor’s wishes, typically they dodge the issue until circumstances force their hand. Ultimately, in an election year, Carla was forced to get down off the fence and stop playing one side off against the other. She chose, as politicians do in challenged elections, to go with the voters.

Politically speaking, this is all very predictable. Indeed, she seems to have made this her signature campaign issue. Who could blame her? In an off year, low-interest election, representing one of Atlanta’s poorest districts, and challenged for the first time in 12 years, she needed something to galvanize her supporters in the northeast, the part of the district where she has dedicated the majority of her efforts and most of her office’s largesse. 800 Glenwood Place was that issue. Hence, she waited until the process was almost settled before wading in and making a big splash with her rezoning petition.

No doubt her supporters will protest that view. If experience is any judge, they will do so vigorously and vehemently with sharp volleys of “idiot,” “liar,” and so on. Names aside, we on the other side of the political fence wonder why a long paragraph justifying (but not fully detailing) Carla’s campaign donations and her so-called dedication to the district is germane or even appropriate to this discussion. It would seem that we are not the only ones taking sides politically on this matter. For the record, the Welsh campaign strongly favors implementing the Beltline vision, but not a narrow interpretation of it, one that tramples over the rights of property owners. Residents of Grant Park may be surprised to learn that not everyone shares their view of the best way to implement the Beltline.

In the end, there are no really good outcomes here. The first of what may be several costly lawsuits against the city (which taxpayers ultimately will have to pay for) has already been launched. The BZA appeal will most likely be rebuffed, resulting in an expensive lawsuit by Grant Park residents against the developers. Lawsuits are always a tool of last result. You can be certain that when the lawsuits begin, the chance for meaningful negotiations has ended.

More’s the pity. It should never have come to this kind of all-or-nothing battle. It was within Carla’s power to do something long ago. Bring the parties together. Bring balanced solutions to the table. That’s what real leadership does and should have done here. Unfortunately, she and her partners chose brinksmanship. Whatever the final resolution, neither the neighborhoods or the BeltLine have been well served by it.

Mr. Laupus is a resident of Peoplestown.


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

More from East Atlanta