Originally Published: 17 September 2007
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
A developer proposes an 1,800-house subdivision.
Opponents cry foul to anyone who’ll listen. They protest.
The developer returns to the table with a scaled-back project. Instead of 1,800 houses, 1,500 will be built. And to show that he’s community-minded and dealing in good faith, he promises to plant a few more trees and shrubs and agrees to other changes that are cosmetic at best.
On the hot seat, county commissioners praise the project and the developer’s stellar reputation. This project, the elected officials say, will be an asset to the community. So they give it the green light, even if it doesn’t fit the comprehensive land-use plan.
In these here parts, it can happen. And in other states like Florida, the story typically ends no differently. There, practically anything goes when it comes to residential and commercial construction. Developments are seemingly allowed anywhere, built over any type of geographical terrain.
Well, there’s a grass-roots, nonpartisan group that’s trying to nip willy-nilly development in the bud, before the entire state gets paved over. It’s called Florida Hometown Democracy, founded by Florida natives Ross S. Burnaman and Lesley Blackner, according to the Web site www.floridahometowndemocracy.com.
Florida Hometown Democracy wants to put a referendum on the 2008 ballot that would require voter approval of changes to master growth plans. Say an entrepreneur wants to build a CVS Pharmacy in Ocala, Fla., at a location that’s inappropriate. If city leaders OK’d it, the people of Ocala would have to agree to it.
I lived in Central Florida for eight years, so I know and can tell you: Metropolises in the Sunshine State have got nothing on Gwinnett - and vice versa - when it comes to the mind-boggling proliferation of strip malls and subdivisions. Both locales are first-place contenders for the King of Sprawl award.
Burnaman grew up in Winter Park, Fla., near Orlando. Blackner’s a Jacksonville native. Both are attorneys. And like so many of us, both are sick of what sections of their hometowns and other communities have become.
A mess.
When I interviewed Burnaman Monday, we exchanged examples of the nonsense that goes on here and in Tallahassee, his home. Strip malls go up on one side of the road while another strip mall with vacant space sits across the street. Strip malls and storefronts sit right next to one another, yet are not connected by a road or walkway.
If the people had a stronger voice, Burnaman said, they’d be more protective of a community’s quality of life. His organization is trying to collect 611,000 signatures by Jan. 31 to qualify for the November 2008 ballot. So far, they’ve gotten about 500,000. He thinks developers would stop proposing outrageous projects that don’t fit land-use plans if they had to win over citizens.
“We simply want to have a citizen veto at the tail-end of the process,” said Ross, who once worked for the Florida Department of Community Affairs, the state’s planning agency.
“We’re not cutting out the politicians. The only way a [proposed project] would get on a ballot is if a majority of the politicians wanted to do it. If local planners and planning agencies and politicians want to go forward with a project, they have to sell it to the citizens. If people had a vote on these issues, then maybe [growth] would be more constrained.”
Naturally, the idea has its critics, namely the Florida Retail Association, the Florida Homebuilders Association and the state Chamber of Commerce, according to articles in various Florida publications. They say passage of the amendment would stymie the state’s economy and raise the cost of projects. The same concerns would be raised in our county, our state, against such a measure in our county, I suppose.
Yet it seems that more and more Gwinnettians are voicing their discontent with the growth pattern that has been allowed to proliferate. It’s a concern that gets aired routinely in the opinion pages of AJC Gwinnett News and one that I hear often in the community. True, property owners have the right to develop their property - as long as it fits zoning regulations and the growth plan. But let’s be real: Rules get bent all the time. How else can you explain so many situations where buildings sit out of character with their surroundings?
Surely, there’s a better way. We need a more balanced, sustainable approach to a decades-old pattern of development in this county.
Maybe Florida Hometown Democracy is on to something.
What do you think?
Rick Badie’s column appears on Sundays, Tuesdays and Thursdays. Contact him at 770-263-3875 or e-mail rbadie@ajc.com.
Comments
By Alexis
September 17, 2007 7:15 PM
I say we should retake the land being occupied by the illegals in this county and gentrify it; then move on to the rest of the county. I don’t think it is smart land-use policy to be developing needless and expensive propositions when we have a ton of land being occupied by non-citizens that should be reclaimed and put to better use. Then we should move on to further development, as I strongly believe development is the key to economic growth in this area and if the development stops so will growth.
By Sandy_G
September 17, 2007 8:50 PM
I think the Hometown Democracy idea is wonderful. That’s what is so frustrating and maddening about the rezoning process in Gwinnett, hundreds of people can write, call and email the county commission protesting a rezoning and then a couple of hundred make time to show up at the meeting and voice their disapproval and it passes anyway.
We have county leaders who have no vision and no backbones and the citizens no longer have a voice in the process. The county land use plan is meaningless and zoning ordinances are continually “tweaked” in the form of variances so they too, have become meaningless. When it takes private citizens to reclaim blighted areas and pay for improvements out of their own pockets (think Gwinnett Village CID, Evermore CID, etc.), then our county government has completely lost touch with the citizens of Gwinnett. It’s time for a little “check and balance” in the system and for us to make sure that our county government is “For the people and by the people” once again.
By Dave
September 17, 2007 9:20 PM
I don’t think we should allow any further development of any areas. Development is how bad income areas are made. All development should be stopped to avoid poverty places and a bad economy and where you have to live in a bad place that has crime. We should stop development so people don’t lose their jobs.
By BobG
September 18, 2007 2:05 AM
Here’s a simpler solution— accept no application for rezoning unless the proposal is in accordance with the Land Use Plan.
If a developer (or owner) wants to build something that doesn’t match the LUP, he must first petition to change the Plan… and the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that the proposed use is more suitable than the use established by the Plan.
Land Use Plan changes can only be filed twice a year and a public hearing would be required, as is done now. Only after the LUP is amended could the developer then file a rezoning application.
This approach would do two things -- first, it would increase the value of the Plan; the LUP would become much more than a non-binding “guideline for growth,” as it is considered now.
Second, deviations from the Plan would not occur under pressure of a pending rezoning, after just a 20-minute public hearing. As it is today, the LUP is often ignored simply because somebody asked… because a developer filed a rezoning. The Plan should be more binding, more authoritative than that.
The solution has always been simple -- develop a plan and follow it. Make deviations from the Plan difficult to effect.
By T
September 18, 2007 6:08 AM
I find it impossible to believe that the state of Florida actually has a “Master Growth Plan”.
So, I assume as part of this bill being introduced, a “Master Growth Plan” will be let out for bids and a land-planner will come up with this document?
Does anyone realize what it would take to draw a land-plan of that size that would actually mean anything?
Dumb idea.
I certainly wouldn’t want a rezoning in Gwinnett looked at on a statewide level.
Also, what about property owners that have large tracts of land? If you owned 100 acres would you want the state to decide a “Master Plan” that includes your property?
Again I say dumb idea …
I liked some of Bob’s ideas.
By robo
September 18, 2007 7:00 AM
What I can’t believe is people actually buy these monopoly board houses in these butt-ugly, over-priced developments. I don’t even like driving through one, much less spending hard earned money to live in such a souless place. I guess living near little Jimmy’s soccer field is not a priority of mine. Scenery is. Plus, worrying about my mailbox color p** off the heomeowners association, never keeps me up at night.
Actually, I hope more dense, suburbanite villagers group together. I sure don’t want these sheeple living around me.
By LT5000
September 18, 2007 7:06 AM
This Wednesday at 6:30pm at the Global Mall on JCB and 85 the Gwinnett County CID will be holding a forum on the Security in Gwinnett County CID.
I suggest everyone show up and complain about the illegals and the trashing of Norcross.
The article can be found in the Gwinnett Daily Post.
LT5000
By jim d
September 18, 2007 7:33 AM
There ya go Rick,
It’s just another part of the “Mexican Plot” ;)
By Bonedaddy
September 18, 2007 7:39 AM | Link to this
Yes, good idea, lets let the mob rule mentality preside of zonings now. The commissioners have already placed incompetent, unqualified people on the planning commission to appease the mob mentality, what makes average Joe smoe with no civil engineering background the authority on how to plan any damn thing. Most of the ones I have spoken with can’t plan their way out of a wet paper bag. There is nothing wrong with commercial development, people have to live, work and shop. When areas go into decay, then you re-develop. What do you think helps drive the economy and all of our jobs people? After all, it was a mean spirited developer who built your home or crappy subdivision, your place of employment, and where you get your food, clothes and medicine.
By jb
September 18, 2007 7:51 AM
I have lived in Gwinnett for just over five years. Stopping all rezonings by forcing a statewide vote is not enough. Not nearly enough. We need to reclaim land that has been rezoned and developed.
The optimum population of Gwinnett was reached August 22, 2002. My position is that any rezoning which ocurred after that date should be voided.
After voiding these zonings every office building commercial building, parking lot, residence, school, hospital, fire station, and library built on those properties must be demolished. The land must be returned to the virgin forest that it was when that optimum population was reached.
The people who live, work and play at these places? They can move into a intown condo or to Cobb or Forsyth or somewhere, anywhere. Just not here.
By BobG
September 18, 2007 8:23 AM
Bonedaddy, I don’t necessarily agree with your assessment of the competence of the planning commissioners but, in reality, they don’t really plan. And we wouldn’t have to worry about their competence at all if we implemented my proposal, described above.
The Land Use Plan is the product of months of development by planning professionals and staff, not unqualified citizen appointees. Follow a sensible plan and “spot” zonings and conflicts between uses are minimized or eliminated. Incorporate innovative concepts into your plan and you move in the right direction whereas, currently, land use is often determined by who makes the most noise at a Commission hearing.
I don’t have a problem with development, but let’s do it right. By following a sensible plan, many of our problems could have been avoided.
By Alexis
September 18, 2007 9:57 AM
“Jerry, it’s Frank Costanza. Mr. Steinbrenner’s here… George is dead… Call me back.”
By Sandy_G
September 18, 2007 1:22 PM
JB, What you are describing (tearing down properties) is not legal, so that’s not going to happen. Neither is stopping all new development.
Most Gwinnettians don’t want to stop development, they just want to develop “smarter” so that one development doesn’t create a wave of development that overruns an entire area and forever changes the area in ways that create traffic gridlock, declining property values, empty store fronts and increased crime 5 or 10 years down the road.
What we want is “sustainable development”. We don’t want big box stores and gas stations built without some guarantee that the store won’t be allowed to sit empty five years from now.
We’re talking about simple things like development that is planned hand-in-hand with some thought to how the increased traffic will also be dealt with. Shopping centers that are interconnected or built on access streets so that they don’t seriously impact traffic on major thoroughfares. Shopping centers with stores closer to the street and parking lots in the rear instead of the front. New subdivisions with homes that don’t cover more than 50% of the lot and that have some built-in green space or leave a certain number of mature trees in place.
This is not rocket science. It’s just common sense and it’s completely doable without a lot of additional expense on the part of the government.
|
