PTC Council gets requests for 2 annexations — east and west

Sun, 08/03/2008 - 5:51pm
By: Cal Beverly

An existing shopping center on the city’s east border and owners of 35 acres in the West Village area want to come into Peachtree City.

The City Council will consider this Thursday night whether to initiate step one of the annexation review process for the existing Publix and SteinMart shopping center — known as Peachtree East — and, across town, the combined 35-acre tract off Senoia Road (Old Highway 74 North) and just north of the city’s newest named village — Wilksmore.

The Publix shopping center wants to come in as is, with no changes in its commercial uses or looks.

The center — built in 1995 — covers nearly 18 acres and contains five buildings and 22 retail shops totaling 147,602 square feet of commercial space. It’s currently zoned C-C Community Commercial under Fayette County zoning.

The three Hawthorne, N.Y., owners of the center say the annexation would be worth nearly $200,000 a year in property taxes to Peachtree City.

According to the application on file with the city, “The applicant understands that the city is in the planning process for designing multi-use paths in the general vicinity of Peachtree East. A possible bridge over [Ga. Highway] 54 is also being considered. The applicant will cooperate with the city if it is determined that the [cart path] bridge should cross [Hwy.] 54 in front of the shopping center.”

“There are no planned changes to the aesthetics of the shopping center,” the application says.

The west side tract includes the historic Wilks Grove Baptist Church, one of the pioneer black churches in Fayette County.

Representing the four property owners of the 35 acres is the well-known Fayetteville developer, Scarbrough and Rolader, which wants to bring the nearly undeveloped land in under the city’s AR Agricultural Reserve zoning, essentially the same zoning it now has in the unincorporated county.

The land abuts the recent 89-acre annexation by John Wieland Homes — now under consideration for rezoning to multi-family residential and commercial uses — and a large tract owned by Scarbrough that has been zoned in the city for upscale over-age-55 homes.

“The applicant is not proposing to rezone or develop the property at this time,” a city staff memo to the council says. Scarbrough and Rolader want the AR zoning “until the use of the property is determined,” the memo says.

The property’s land use designation, the memo says, is low-density residential.

Annexing the land would bring the city an additional $396 a year in property taxes, the memo says, while the city would pick up the responsibility of providing police and fire protection and other city services to it.

The advantages to annexing the land, according to the memo, is so “future access to the proposed MacDuff Parkway Extension can be properly planned for,” and “so land planning may be coordinated for the entire area.”

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 NeedtoKnow on Tue, 08/05/2008 - 5:59am.

The developers of Peachtree East built where they did because they did not want to follow PTC's strict guidelines. They basically thumbed their noses at PTC by building just outside the city. I believe they've asked before to be let in, and have been told no. I say we CONTINUE to tell them no. They didn't want to follow the rules, still would have no plan to make the place look any better, and yet they want to come crawling in? I don't think so!

The PTC homeowners on the other side of Hwy 54, and the residents of Shiloh (which has a PTC address but is not in the city limits), already use the crosswalks to cross with their golfcarts. I see no need for a bridge, but nor do I see that it would add to any more cart path traffic.

Submitted by Bonkers on Tue, 08/05/2008 - 1:27pm.

No million dollar overhead bridge for a golf cart!!!!

Dig a big trench, throw one of those big pipes into it, cover it up, grade out the ends like the one near 54 MacDonald's and let it go at that!

We sure throw a lot of millions around unnecessarily!

Hell we could pay for that out of petty cash.

Cost a little more at 54/74. I suppose.

JAFO 72's picture
Submitted by JAFO 72 on Tue, 08/05/2008 - 2:20pm.

A better idea would be to blast across 54. Now, that would be fun! There is no problem that can't be solved with the proper amount of high explosives.

“Every time you vote Democrat God kills a kitten.”


Submitted by Spyglass on Tue, 08/05/2008 - 8:41am.

For the reasons you state.

JAFO 72's picture
Submitted by JAFO 72 on Tue, 08/05/2008 - 9:41am.

Regardless of the bridge, what are the pros and cons of annexation? I'm not being facetious. I would like to start an intelligent conversation here that would address both. I believe (opinion) that annexation of the west side would be beneficial, whether it's redidential or commercial/industrial. There are many factors, or impacts, to consider though (taxes, density, extending McDuff). Planning of traffic and speed abatement needs taken into consideration as well. The same goes for the east side.

Now, back to the bridge issue. We have a useless bridge crossing the railroad tracks on HWY 74. It would be nice if our city leadership could inform us as to what is going on with this eyesore. We would like someday to use this bridge,as for now, it is a monument to idiocracy.

“Every time you vote Democrat God kills a kitten.”


Submitted by Spyglass on Tue, 08/05/2008 - 3:07pm.

I would give our City more control over what goes there.

And yes, the bridge & 2 tunnels just sitting useless really bugs me too. I was just over there on the golf cart. You can get to the tunnel at Huddleston and cross over to the Best Buy if you are willing to jump the curb, and go up the hill and through the mud in the tunnel (the landscaping on the roundabout on the Best Buy side did look nice, it's been let go, and now looks horrible). My Son & I did just that 15 minutes ago.

The closed tunnel near the Fire Station & 74 has also made access to the Avenue, etc, dicey at best via cart. Time to get on with finishing the path hooks to that one too. The new tunnel is in place, and will be very welcome to this cart driver.

It's ridiculous that these are sitting unused and not hooked up to our path system. I know that both the tunnel and the bridge were in the original plans when hwy 54 was widened in that area over the RR tracks.

Robert W. Morgan's picture
Submitted by Robert W. Morgan on Tue, 08/05/2008 - 5:44am.

Did you read this carefully?

“The applicant understands that the city is in the planning process for designing multi-use paths in the general vicinity of Peachtree East. A possible bridge over [Ga. Highway] 54 is also being considered. The applicant will cooperate with the city if it is determined that the [cart path] bridge should cross [Hwy.] 54 in front of the shopping center.”

This will be mismanaged by staff for sure. The shopping center owners have already staked out their position that they will be paying higher taxes. Therefore, it logically follows that the city should pay for the bridge. $2,000,000. Is that a good guess on cost?

So then we have about 50 families in Lexington and Governor's Square who can get to Publix on their golf cart, but more importantly, the trailer park residents who lost their driver's licenses can now access PTC on foot or cart.

That's not a win-win for the money (our money, remember) spent.


Robert W. Morgan's picture
Submitted by Robert W. Morgan on Tue, 08/05/2008 - 5:44am.

Did you read this carefully?

“The applicant understands that the city is in the planning process for designing multi-use paths in the general vicinity of Peachtree East. A possible bridge over [Ga. Highway] 54 is also being considered. The applicant will cooperate with the city if it is determined that the [cart path] bridge should cross [Hwy.] 54 in front of the shopping center.”

This will be mismanaged by staff for sure. The shopping center owners have already staked out their position that they will be paying higher taxes. Therefore, it logically follows that the city should pay for the bridge. $2,000,000. Is that a good guess on cost?

So then we have about 50 families in Lexington and Governor's Square who can get to Publix on their golf cart, but more importantly, the trailer park residents who lost their driver's licenses can now access PTC on foot or cart.

That's not a win-win for the money (our money, remember) spent.


Submitted by MYTMITE on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 9:21pm.

If we allow annexation for the land next to Weiland's annexation we would get $396.00 a year in property tax and we would have to provide police, fire and all other city services to them. Sure sounds like a winner to me. NOT. Even if this is a typo and we would get $396,000 a year in taxes it would still be a no win situation for the average citizen of Peachtree City. Can someone explain to me what the benefit to us would be?

Submitted by wdd5885 on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 10:30pm.

The 35 acres as is would bring in $396. Right now, it is undeveloped.

Submitted by Bonkers on Mon, 08/04/2008 - 3:53am.

You see, if a developer owns a piece of just land, we allow him to own it a long time with taxes nearly negligible.

This is so that he can make a lot of money on it later and contribute some to the republican party!

Submitted by wdd5885 on Mon, 08/04/2008 - 7:36am.

We allow private citizens to do the same thing. If you want, you can go buy a piece of land, pay taxes on it for several years, and then sell or develop it for a profit.

By the way, the developer is buying the land from private citizens who have owned it (as well as paid cheap taxes) for years.

Submitted by Bonkers on Mon, 08/04/2008 - 9:12am.

Well, a better tale is that in Gwinnett County where there used to be a lot of large farms, the developers got it rezoned and ran the farmers off---too much taxes!
Wonderful people!

JAFO 72's picture
Submitted by JAFO 72 on Mon, 08/04/2008 - 10:13am.

Keep in mind, this property has been on the council's mind for years now. As a matter of fact the issue of annexing this property into PTC has been an issue of contention for at least 5 years.

I agree with wdd5885. Would would want someone telling you what to do with property that you bought? You're saying that a land owner should submit to the whims of an online blogger. Life, liberty etc.

BTW. What does Gwinnett have to do with PTC. Where exactly is the farm land here? Dee Deedee!

“Every time you vote Democrat God kills a kitten.”


Submitted by Bonkers on Mon, 08/04/2008 - 11:48am.

OK, I will explain it for you----

When the developers are ready to build, they have the land suddenly zoned commercial or for home building---even farms are zoned commercial!

Then the taxes are too high to make money farming!!!!!!!!!! They have to sell.

Yes, they do have an "in" with the zone changers, you bet.

Do you understand it now?????

JAFO 72's picture
Submitted by JAFO 72 on Mon, 08/04/2008 - 11:56am.

My question was, where's the PTC farms, and how have they been impacted. If that is your argument, you're going to have to go back 40 years.

BTW, your knee jerk reaction as what a person can do with their own property is hilarious. Are you one of those people that is going to tell me what I can do in my own backyard? The Bonkers Politbureau perhaps?

“Every time you vote Democrat God kills a kitten.”


Submitted by MYTMITE on Mon, 08/04/2008 - 10:41am.

If I bought a one acre lot and decided I wanted to build two homes on it and the area was restricted to one house per acre, I would not be able to build the two homes. There are many restrictions and rules that must be followed. What I worry about is someone wanting to be annexed and saying it will be the status quo. Once they are in, expecially if Weiland gets all the concessions he wants, they will be wanting restrictions lifted. citing Weiland and his adjoining subdivision.

Comment viewing options

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