.
Feedback

Opposition to Walmart, Lindbergh Project Builds

Influential members and associations in the community are urging those against the "big box" development to make their voice heard at Thursday's City of Atlanta ZRB meeting.

Those opposed to the are voicing their opinion ahead of Thursday's City of Atlanta Zoning Review Board meeting at 6 p.m.

One strong voice is NPU-B Chair and North Buckhead resident Sally Silver, who made a statement Tuesday afternoon about the hotly debated issue.

"The application filed with the City of Atlanta rezones 21 acres of residential parcels to commercial use.  The proposed use is not consistent with the current zoning (Special Public Interest District-15) and is suburban rather than urban in design.  NPU-B recommended denial of the rezoning as well as the companion Comprehensive Development Plan amendment (CDP-11-06)."

Silver is urging anyone concerned about this issue to attend the hearing in the second floor Council Chambers at City Hall, 55 Trinity Ave. 

"The proposed redevelopment would be a major departure from the intent of the Special Public Interest District and a major change for the area.  Therefore, it is important that citizens make their opinions known."  

The Garden Hills Civic Association (GHCA) also issued a statement of frustration to its members, urging them to "make some noise" in regards to the hotly debated development, which according to reports will include a .

"Throughout this process, we have remained open to change and good development.  We have listened to Sembler's plan.  We have made many suggestions. What was originally sold to us as the potential for a local grocery store on this residential site has now become another sub-urban development with a big surface parking lot, a 150,000 square foot big box store, a huge, 15-foot retaining wall separating foot traffic from the retail towering above, no residential component and no direct access to ancillary retail stores. You have to park your car and walk across the huge central parking lot to get into anything."

Despite numerous meetings and examples of walker-friendly urban development inline with the vision of a transit oriented development, the GHCA feels that Sembler is not open to negotiation, despite the recommendations to deny their plan.  

"The neighborhood, SPI-15 DRC, NPU-B, City Planning Department have all been against this. And somehow, it's looking like it may go through.  The way these advisory boards work is that they all make recommendations.  It is up to the Mayor, ultimately, to make the decision."

What is your opinion of this controversial development? Let us know in the comments below.

Come join the rest of the VaHi-Druid Hills Patch fans on Facebook!  It's Patch and Facebook together. Doesn't get much better than that.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Virginia Highland-Druid Hills Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Super Thomas Daniel July 12, 2012 at 03:24 pm
Who cares? You need to focus your attention on something a little more meaningful than Wal-Mart is near us but not in our neighborhood. I'll shop there.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Jeff Young January 26, 2013 at 08:38 pm
Ms. Sears, Clearly, you don't want to engage in a reasoned debate on this issue. When you wroteRead More "let's work together" you forgot to add "so long as we do it my way." If your real concern was removing invasive non-native plants, would you be spending all this time and effort raising money to build expensive bridges and a 31 mile trail?
Jeff Young January 26, 2013 at 08:42 pm
Since our announcement unveiling the PMG web site, I have been waiting to see if anyone from SFCRead More would substantively address the thoroughly reasoned positions and impressive factual sources you will find if you visit the PMG web site. But no, and at first you might think that it’s the few pro-SFC commenters who are the small, but loud minority. However, SFC all along has chosen to work behind the scenes, as though they were trained in Washington politics. They don’t want to face up to neighbor concerns, or new academic research on trails, or even have to provide half-detailed specifications to justify the cost and impact of their grandiose scheme. Could it be they know how to obtain funding and approvals the political way, without the bothersome public? Could it be they know what is good for the rest of us and just need us to shut up? What country is this? Here is an example. SFC managed to get DeKalb County to file a grant application with the State without any public hearing, telling the County Commission that the community supports the SFC connected trail plan, and seeking funds for connecting Zonolite park to their other proposed trails. This contradicted what SFC told MLPA, that connecting trails were not part of the Zonolite work. And, SFC did not tell the Commission or the State about the negative feedback acknowledged in the Park Pride Report. (continued)
Jeff Young January 26, 2013 at 08:43 pm
At that MLPA meeting, PMG’s position was that we would not oppose work confined to ZonoliteRead More that was not for connecting to the larger SFC trail plan, if that was the result of an open process involving the impacted neighbors and businesses. Did we feel snookered by the DeKalb grant application? You bet. So what I say to SFC is: let’s debate this out in the open and have the same sort of dialog we all now expect when the use of property is taken up a notch, whether it’s a for condo, or a road widening, or a re-zoning, or a trail. PMG will keep on sharing facts with decision makers and impacted neighbors until that happens.