I have attended every open city meeting about the proposed development on Grady Avenue since early last year. The meeting Oct. 17 was especially frustrating.
The developer has, once again, tried to appease the opposition to his plan by saying he will make “changes” to the plan.
The community opposition to his plan is the apartments he wants to put in. None of his “revised” plans, however, have eliminated apartments.
His latest revision, voiced at the council meeting on Oct. 17, was to “designate some of the residences as age 62 and over residences.” He is only trying to appease the opposition and obviously thought this would do it. Wrong!
He also had the audacity to say that he “had some support for the project when he met with homeowners in the area.” Fortunately someone who attended this meeting was civic-minded enough to stand up and let everyone know that she attended the meeting he referred to and there was not a single person there in favor of having apartments on this property.
He also stated in that meeting that the absolute bottom line for apartments in order to “show a profit” and “provide expected amenities” was 200.
So no matter how he revises his plan and no matter how many times he is allowed to come back before the city, he will always have at least 200 apartments on his plan.
Since the apartments (not the townhomes or cottages) are our main issue, why keep kicking the can down the road?
I applaud the mayor for making a motion to deny the PCD request, which would require waiting a year before making another request.
However, shame on the council for failing to second this motion and instead voting to send it back to planning and zoning so the developer can bring yet another revision to P&Z, thus starting this entire process all over again.
Everyone recognizes the property owner’s right to have this property developed. Most of us have no objection to the development of this particular property. All we are saying is we do not want to turn into an apartment community.
Some young professionals (apparently the target audience) have discovered what we older folks already know; there is a lot to be said for a small-town life. In fact two such neighbors got up and spoke at the meeting and said as much.
Good for them. We need young folks to come here, but the young folks we want are those who want the same thing we have and are trying to preserve.
Since this entire process is going to start over, I hope we can keep up the fight and garner the support of the entire county, as what affects Fayetteville within the city limits ultimately affects anyone who lives near or has to drive through it.
Sandi Schofield
Fayetteville, Ga.
