Community Meeting On Park Place Hotel
Share this post by email - No Comments - Add A Comment »By Michael Pearson
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 05/02/08
Park Place may be a good spot for a hotel in Monopoly, but to residents of Gwinnett County’s Park Place community it’s no such thing.
A developer wants to build a three-story Ramada-brand hotel and separate retail center topped by condos at the corner of Rockbridge Road and West Park Place Boulevard, just south of U.S. 78.
Traffic concerns top the list of complaints, but residents also worry the project would ruin views of nearby Stone Mountain, decrease property values and add more commercial inventory to an area that already suffers from significant vacancies in existing strip centers.
“We’re holding on with the hope that Gwinnett County would do what it said it was going to do and revitalize,” Rebecca Heitkam said. “This is the exact opposite of that.”
Heitkam and other residents who attended a community meeting on the proposal Wednesday night said the project is simply more of the same commercial development that already exists in the area. In many cases, those storefronts are empty.
Moreover, the project is located in an area that will adversely impact residents of the Rockbridge Acres subdivision, which backs up to the site, and other nearby neighborhoods, they said.
But Greg Sportsman of Hobgood Construction Group, which is managing the project, said there’s nothing in the area like the mixed-use proposal, which he said is modeled on Suwanee Town Center.
“We’re trying to do everything we can to make this something that will blend in with the community instead of standing in stark contrast,” he said.
Sportsman said the project design calls for a six-foot berm and 15-foot-tall trees to screen views of the buildings from Rockbridge Acres properties behind it.
The hotel would include 80 rooms, a full-service restaurant and meeting space that could accommodate weddings and other events, Sportsman said.
The two-story retail building would include condos priced at about $200,000 on the top level, he said.
He also said the project team is willing to accept conditions to forbid businesses objectionable to residents, as well as even more significant changes to the plan if that’s what residents want.
“If we put up something you guys don’t like, it’s not going to be successful,” he told residents.
Frances Smith, president of the Park Place Community Association, said she worries what might happen if residents run the developer off. The land is zoned for office and institutional use and residents would have little input if the site were targeted for such a project.
But there’s no question the project is a bad fit for the specific piece of land it’s being proposed for, she said.
“We need that kind of development, maybe even bigger, in one of the blighted areas. We need that closer to the mountain, not backing up to a residential neighborhood that obviously wants nothing to do with it,” she said.
The project is scheduled to be heard by the Planning Commission on May 13, but it is not uncommon for proposals facing significant community opposition to be delayed while developers and residents try to work out an agreement.
Leave A Reply To “Community Meeting On Park Place Hotel”
You must be a registered user and logged in to post a comment.
Opposition To High-End Stone Mountain Hotel
Share this post by email - No Comments - Add A Comment »By MICHAEL PEARSON
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 05/01/08
Residents of Gwinnett County’s Park Place community in Stone Mountain aren’t interested in seeing a developer put a high-end hotel on vacant land near aging subdivisions.
About 50 people packed a small hotel meeting room Wednesday night to to oppose a plan to build a three-story Ramada brand hotel and a retail center topped by condos at Rockbridge Road and West Park Place Boulevard.
Resident Will Weston said one of the chief complaints is traffic. The area is often clogged with mile-long backups at rush hour as it is, he said.
“People just don’t want it,” he said.
Other complaints include ruined sight lines, decreased property values, adding more vacant commercial space to the area and the threat of sending an area already teetering on the edge of decline into a full death spiral.
Residents worry that adding more commercial space in the neighborhood could worsen conditions at existing shopping centers that already have vacancies, or make it difficult for the new project to succeed.
The 57,000-square-foot project is scheduled to go before the Planning Commission on May 13.
Leave A Reply To “Opposition To High-End Stone Mountain Hotel”
You must be a registered user and logged in to post a comment.
Gwinnett Commission Wants TAD On July Ballot
Share this post by email - No Comments - Add A Comment »Voters would decide whether or not the county should have the power to create tax allocation districts.
By MICHAEL PEARSON
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 05/06/08
The Gwinnett County Commission on Tuesday formally requested a July 15 referendum on giving the county power to create tax allocation districts.
The Georgia General Assembly passed legislation this year allowing the county to hold the vote, despite voters’ rejection of an identical measure last year and a Georgia Supreme Court ruling that severely diminishes the ability of the taxing districts to generate revenue for redevelopment projects.
Supporters of tax allocation districts said voters did not understand what they were being asked when the issue last came before them. Supporters also note voters in several Gwinnett cities later approved such districts in those cities after intensive public education efforts.
Tax allocation districts work by freezing the amount of property tax revenues collected by governments and directing revenues generated by rising property values into a fund used to pay for redevelopment projects. In February, the state Supreme Court ruled that the state constitution forbids the use of school funds for anything but education, taking away nearly half of the revenue available to TADs.
In addition to the Gwinnett voting bill, the General Assembly passed legislation to allow voters statewide to decide whether they want to reverse that opinion.
The TAD referendum will be the only non-partisan issue on the July 15 primary ballot.
Leave A Reply To “Gwinnett Commission Wants TAD On July Ballot”
You must be a registered user and logged in to post a comment.
New Mountain Park Elementary Principal
Share this post by email - No Comments - Add A Comment »Valerie Robinett, currently an assistant principal at Ivy Creek Elementary, will be Mountain Park’s new principal effective June 1. She replaces current principal Debbie Allred, who is retiring at the end of the school year. Robinett has taught at several Gwinnett schools since 1998.
Leave A Reply To “New Mountain Park Elementary Principal”
You must be a registered user and logged in to post a comment.
Graduation Banners
Share this post by email - 2 Comments - View And/Or Add A Comment »Changes to the temporary signs section of the Gwinnett County Sign Ordinance were approved by the Gwinnett County Board of Commissioners on March 25, 2008. These changes include adding a section to allow for graduation banners.
Graduation banners may be placed on residentially zoned property. Such banners may be no more than 24 square feet in size and must be maintained in good condition and individually attached to a pole, mast, arm, or other structure. A graduation banner may not be displayed on any lot for more than 60 consecutive days.
• Sign Ordinance Amendment 2008-001 (PDF Document)
2 Responses To “Graduation Banners”
Leave A Reply To “Graduation Banners”
You must be a registered user and logged in to post a comment.
May 13th PLANNING COMMISSION SUP AGENDA
Share this post by email - No Comments - Add A Comment »GWINNETT JUSTICE AND ADMINISTRATION CENTER, AUDITORIUM
TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2008 AT 7:00 P.M.
CASE NUMBER :RZC-08-058
APPLICANT :A. OMOTAYO IDOWU
CONTACT :GREG SPORTSMAN
PHONE NUMBER :678.482.1581
ZONING CHANGE :O-I TO C-2
LOCATION :2400 BLOCK OF WEST PARK PLACE BOULEVARD :2200 BLOCK OF ROCKBRIDGE ROAD
MAP NUMBER :R6058 018
ACREAGE :4.54 ACRES
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT :COMMERCIAL
RETAIL USES :(REDUCTION IN BUFFERS)
SQUARE FEET :56,900 SQUARE FEET
COMMISSION DISTRICT :(3) BEAUDREAU
DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL
CASE NUMBER :SUP-08-039
APPLICANT :PAWNMART, INC.
CONTACT :FRED J. STOKES
PHONE NUMBER :678.518.4341
ZONING :C-2
LOCATION :3700 BLOCK OF STONE MOUNTAIN HIGHWAY
MAP NUMBER :R6053 123
ACREAGE :0.58 ACRES
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT :PAWN SHOP
SQUARE FEET :5,040 SQUARE FEET
COMMISSION DISTRICT :(3) BEAUDREAU
DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS
CASE NUMBER :SUP-08-043
APPLICANT :ROCKBRIDGE SELF STORAGE, LLC.
CONTACT :R. LEE TUCKER, JR.
PHONE NUMBER :770.232.0000
ZONING :C-2
LOCATION :5300 BLK OF STONE MOUNTAIN HWY :1900 BLOCK OF ROCKBRIDGE ROAD
MAP NUMBER :R6060 009
ACREAGE :1.08 ACRES
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT :SELF-STORAGE FACILITY :(CLIMATE CONTROLLED)
SQUARE FEET :120,075 SQUARE FEET
COMMISSION DISTRICT :(3) BEAUDREAU
DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS
CASE NUMBER :SUP-08-049
APPLICANT :ROCKBRIDGE SELF STORAGE, LLC.
CONTACT :R. LEE TUCKER, JR.
PHONE NUMBER :770.232.0000
ZONING :C-2 LOCATION :5300 BLK OF STONE MOUNTAIN HWY :1900 BLOCK OF ROCKBRIDGE ROAD
MAP NUMBER :R6060 009
ACREAGE :1.08 ACRES
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT :BUILDING HEIGHT INCREASE TO 4 STORIES
SQUARE FEET :120,075 SQUARE FEET
COMMISSION DISTRICT :(3) BEAUDREAU DEPARTMENT
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS
Leave A Reply To “May 13th PLANNING COMMISSION SUP AGENDA”
You must be a registered user and logged in to post a comment.
May 6th PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING AGENDA
Share this post by email - No Comments - Add A Comment »GWINNETT JUSTICE AND ADMINISTRATION CENTER
TUESDAY, MAY 6, 2008 AT 7:00 P.M.
CASE NUMBER :CIC-08-016
APPLICANT :VESMONT NASH PRESERVE, LLC.
CONTACT :LAWRENCE KASMEN
PHONE NUMBER :404.841.8910 EXT. 700
ZONING :R-100 CSO
LOCATION :3600 BLOCK OF FIVE FORKS TRICKUM ROAD
MAP NUMBER :R6089 001, R6089 002
ACREAGE :74.88 ACRES
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT :CHANGE IN ARCHITECTURAL CONDITIONS
UNITS :123 UNITS
COMMISSION DISTRICT :(3) BEAUDREAU
DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS
CASE NUMBER :SUP-08-050
APPLICANT :VESMONT NASH PRESERVE, LLC.
CONTACT :LAWRENCE KASMEN
PHONE NUMBER :404.841.8910 EXT. 700
ZONING :R-100
LOCATION :3600 BLOCK OF FIVE FORKS TRICKUM ROAD
MAP NUMBER :R6089 101
ACREAGE :3.00 ACRES
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT :SINGLE-FAMILY CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION
UNITS :5 UNITS
COMMISSION DISTRICT :(3) BEAUDREAU
DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS
Leave A Reply To “May 6th PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING AGENDA”
You must be a registered user and logged in to post a comment.
Park Place Area Sidewalks
Share this post by email - 1 Comment - View And/Or Add A Comment »Evermore CID Project identified by the Park Place Activity Center Study.
Click To Enlarge
Planned sidewalks will connect to existing facilities and extend opportunities for safe pedestrian travel along West Park Place Blvd and crossing under U.S. 78.
This project is the result of a partnership between the Gwinnett County Board of Commissioners, Evermore CID and Park Place Community Association and is funded through the Gwinnett County SPLOST. The Park Place Activity Center Study, completed in July 2007, identified additional sidewalks in this area as a strong community desire.
• Park Place Area Sidewalk Project
One Response To “Park Place Area Sidewalks”
-
CorinthHills.org Says:
May 5th, 2008 at 1:43 PMEvermore CID to extend sidewalks in Park Place area.
By Arielle Kass
Staff Writer
Gwinnett Daily PostLAWRENCEVILLE - Where the sidewalk ends in the Park Place area, people are still walking - from hotels, to the post office and to local stores.
A project by the Evermore Community Improvement District will extend the sidewalks, connecting disconnected segments and extending some pieces to increase pedestrian safety in the area.
CID director Brett Harrell said the project will also help link one side of U.S. Highway 78 with the other, allowing a pedestrian connection under the road.
“It will tie the whole area together,” Harrell said. “There’s a good bit of foot traffic in that area now.”
Harrell said the sidewalk project will cost about $260,000, money that comes from the county’s penny sales tax. Each of the CIDs has allocated funds for sidewalk projects in revitalization areas.
Concrete will be poured during the first three months of the year, Harrell said. About seven segments will be affected, including sidewalks along West and East Park Place boulevards from Bermuda Road to Eastford Trace and Rockbridge Road from Pounds Road to East Park Place Boulevard.
As construction to put a median on U.S. Highway 78 continues, Harrell said pedestrian connections across that road will become increasingly important. The improvements will also include upgraded traffic signals and mast arms at some intersections in the area.
“It will be aesthetically attractive,” Harrell said. “It will feel more like a true community. It will build upon that sense of place, as well.”
Leave A Reply To “Park Place Area Sidewalks”
You must be a registered user and logged in to post a comment.
Adobe Acrobat
May 7th, 2008 at 4:18 PM
You must be kidding. With Gwinnett’s problems with traffic, illegal immigration, budget, and other issues, they took the time to worry about including graduation banners in a law. Personally, I think graduation banners are tacky and even cheesy (referring to the ones that go on the entrance of subdivisions), but I realize that at that point in your life, kids think that graduating from high school is the most significant thing in life. However, even if they are tacky, do we need a law addressing them? So we need Gwinnett cops and code enforcers wasting time trying to figure out if a banner has been up for 59 days or 61? Just another example of the out of control influence of government in the most menial things in our lives. When are we as citizens going to say enough and tell government to back off?
May 12th, 2008 at 2:16 PM
By MICHAEL PEARSON
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 03/24/08
Turns out those celebratory graduation banners that pop up every spring in front of Gwinnett County subdivisions have one teensy, weensy little problem.
Technically, they’re illegal.
Just in time for graduation season, the County Commission is set to address that problem Tuesday with an ordinance that would put proud parents back on the right side of the law. The ordinance would also spare code enforcement officers the awkward task of having to pull down signs blaring such happy news.
“It was a big issue because you had parents who wanted to show pride in their kids and they’re weren’t able to,” said County Commissioner Mike Beaudreau.
The issue caused a ruckus last spring, with rumors of a ban on the signs leading to complaints to the county and eventually an informal suspension of the rules on graduation banners.
Kathy Holland, director of the county planning department’s development division, said parents have always been allowed to post a sign of up to 16 square feet in their own yards celebrating a graduation.
But nothing in the county’s sign ordinance authorizes the display of graduation banners typically found at the entrance to subdivisions, she said.
“What was happening is they were being removed through the typical sign sweeps,” she said.
If approved, the new rules will allow banners of up to 16 square feet for up to 60 days, so long as they’re kept in good repair and don’t encroach on the right of way.
At that size, some neighborhoods could still get into hot water.
While individual signs are by far the most popular, most neighborhood groups go for signs of 15 to 32 square feet, said Nicole Mewhiney, account manager at FastSigns in Norcross.
Jill Stoneberg, a resident of Flowers Crossing at the Mill in Lawrenceville, said her neighborhood association would likely ask that the county increase the size of the banners to make sure her 600-home subdivision can get all of its kids properly listed.
“The smaller the banner, the smaller the fonts,” she said. “It’s hard to read.”
Holland said she realized some groups may not be happy with the size restriction, but said her office tried to remain consistent with what was already contained in the law regarding such signs.
“It’s something we didn’t want to discourage but felt we needed to have some control,” she said.