‘Proactive’ annexation ahead for PTC?

Tue, 03/06/2007 - 6:03pm
By: John Munford

Councilwoman Plunkett questions validity of survey showing public’s dislike of growth by annexation

When talk turned to future growth in Peachtree City at last weekend’s City Council retreat, officials also talked about possibly growing outside the city’s current boundaries through the process of annexation.

Although council didn’t dive into details, there was talk of the city being approached in recent weeks by property owners and developers to annex additional property.

The general consensus was that council would hold a workshop on the matter in the near future. Council workshops are open to the public.

City Councilwoman Judi-ann Rutherford said she thinks the city needs to take a proactive approach to the annexation issue.

“If we want to expand the boundaries, where do we want them to be?” Rutherford asked.

Another consideration, said Councilwoman Cyndi Plunkett, is how such annexations would affect the city’s police and fire services.

City Planner David Rast said the city’s comprehensive plan committee had talked about “determining where the growth boundaries of the city should be.”

In a survey of about 500 city residents conducted by the committee, only 7 percent of respondents said they wanted the city’s future growth to come from annexation. The question posed how the city should grow in the future, and 54 percent of respondents said they would rather the city not grow at all. And 39 percent said they prefer continuing residential growth until build-out occurs.

Plunkett said she questions whether the survey question on annexation was worded to guide respondents toward a particular answer.

In addition to possible growth through annexation, Peachtree City will also continue to grow through redevelopment, said Mayor Harold Logsdon.

“Redevelopment could be huge,” Rutherford added.

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by Roadrunner on Thu, 03/08/2007 - 4:19pm.

Arrogant Council person? You really think so??? They've ignored every quality of life issue for the residents of PTC in their effort to push through TDK for their Coweta developer friends, and now 93% of the people who responded negatively to their great idea about growing the city further were guided incorrectly towards a particular answer and really didn't mean "NO" to even more growth... Truly, we should not elect anyone who doesn't have to use PTC roads to commute back & forth to work every day. Growing by annexation means much higher density for the annexed property means even more cars on the road than has to be there. What could be wrong with that??!!!

Robert W. Morgan's picture
Submitted by Robert W. Morgan on Fri, 03/09/2007 - 7:43am.

I'll start out at a third grade level for Spear guy, the people named were in office (aka incumbents) when they ran for re-election. They were arrogant, they were defeated by opponents - all of whom were political novices. Lenox may belong in the arrogant group, but he was not defeated, he could not run in 2001 because of term limits. He was elected once and re-elected twice. Revisionists have tried for years to sell the lie that Brown defeated Lenox which gave traction to the myth of the "old guard" - but in fact Brown defeated a Delta pilot and served one term and lost when he attracted 6 opponets in his first attempt at re-election.
Now, spear guy, stop reading, the rest of this is way beyond your double-digit IQ and is intended for others.

Redevelopment of older projects is a perfectly valid way to stimulate economic growth without expanding the city limits or destroying open space. An older shopping center can be redesigned as a mixed use project generating more tax dollars and more business for the tenants in the new center. Shopping preferences have changed greatly since 3 of our retail centers were built - no I don't mean big boxes, at least not here. Older apartment projects and condos can be improved by starting over. Industrial buildings can become retail or office.

The main point is that some developer will see the potential and come in and propose 1 building or center be changed and the city will react with surprise and turn it down. Better they should be proactive, recognize that it needs to be addressed ahead of time and have a plan or process in place that is almost a pre-approval of a certain concept - then things will be redeveloped properly without all the disorganization.

Redevelopment is also a form of recycling which is a nice way for the socially responsible libs can support an endeavor from which capitalist pigs profit. See, we all can get along after all.

Robert W. Morgan's picture
Submitted by Robert W. Morgan on Wed, 03/07/2007 - 8:21am.

When only 7% of the people responding to a survey say they want growth through annexation, that means 93% don't. It was not a trick question. It was an easy question to understand and answer (I answered no and I knew what that meant).

Most elected officials who gained office through a 50 to 60% margin of victory are smart enough not to go agaist the wishes of 93%. Those that do get labeled arrogant and lose elections. Do the names Weed, Rapson, Dunn, Wells ring any bells?

On a brighter note, Judi hit the nail on the head about redevelopment. That's where city staff and council should focus. Older subdivisions, shopping centers, even churches and other areas that sorely need improvement or replacement should be identified and the owner or owners offered financial incentives and the staff's cooperation in creating something better. Deal with that proactively and you won't have to scramble around when Walgreens or Hooters wants to buy a vacant building.

Spear Road Guy's picture
Submitted by Spear Road Guy on Thu, 03/08/2007 - 8:54am.

Ah RobeMudcat W. Morgan, when you say, "Those that do get labeled arrogant and lose elections. Do the names Weed, Rapson, Dunn, Wells ring any bells?" and you don't list the name "Lenox," something is bad wrong. You know he was the worst of them all (okay, made neck and neck with Dunn).

What do you want the city to do with some of our crumbling neighborhoods and buildings? Are you going to create a special anti-Hooters zoning? Are you going to ban drug stores? Get real buddy.

Vote Republican

Submitted by skyspy on Wed, 03/07/2007 - 7:58am.

The question was very clear, and the people have spoken. You just don't like the answer.

Put it to a city wide vote.

We the citizens are sorry to interrupt whatever money kick-back sceme you were counting on. If we wanted to live in Riverdale we would have bought homes there. But we didn't! We bought homes here, where we thought we would be safe.

Not only are you ignoring what the people want, you are ignoring our police chief. When the riverdale you people want so badly gets here, we aren't going to have any cops to protect us.

When that happens, I hope the thugs hit your homes first, you deserve it more than the rest of us. You worthless idiots!!!

ArmyMAJretired's picture
Submitted by ArmyMAJretired on Tue, 03/06/2007 - 6:18pm.

54 percent of respondents said they would rather the city not grow at all.

Only 7 percent of respondents said they wanted the city’s future growth to come from annexation

That's pretty simple, put it on a ballot if you don't like the questions.


bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Tue, 03/06/2007 - 6:52pm.

Maybe the City Council should be asking how they can alleviate the commute for those that live here and work somewhere else instead of questioning "how" the city should grow?

Since neither PTC nor Fayette County have done a traffic study to determine the number of commuters and the revenues they bring into the county in over TEN years, they have no idea of the impact that continued growth will have.

The PTC City Council along with the Tyrone City Council and the Fayette County Council have all publicly said that commuting is becoming harder and harder each year. PTC has taken GRTA to court over increased traffic concerns. The state of Georgia has published that there is a 12 BILLION dollar shortfall in needed road money in the state.

The current level of infrastructure support, Police Fire/Rescue and local schools are maxed out now and they want to figure out how to “grow the city”?

I guess the commute from the, recently taxpayer bought and paid for, “tennis center” to the local watering hole is still reasonable enough for them that it's not a concern.

I swear, the next local fool that runs for office in PTC better have a real job! Soccer moms and retirees need not apply because they will have no clue as to what this city really needs.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.