JULY 15, 2009
JORDAN NOVET
Residents of the Academy Place and Stonegate subdivisions were fuming Tuesday after the Starkville Planning and Zoning Commission voted to approve the rezone of a parcel of land in their neighborhood.
The land at issue is a 12.7-acre plot off Academy Road, between Montgomery Street and Louisville Road.
It has existed in the C-2 zoning category, meaning it is a general business district, and developers Les Lindley and Frank Brewer had requested the board rezone it as an R-3A plot, to reserve it for single-family dwellings. Lindley and Brewer are interested in building 63 housing units on the land and selling each for $100,000 to $200,000, since 60 percent of houses in the price range sell within six months, said an attorney representing them, Johnny Moore, during a public hearing on the rezoning during the meeting.
“This is the last parcel of Academy Road that is still zoned commercial,” Moore said, while making an argument the neighborhood is more residential than commercial and is worthy of rezoning.
Of the 40 or so people who attended the meeting, excluding the commissioners, several were residents of subdivisions around the land. Some of them spoke out in opposition of the rezoning, citing property values, drainage, traffic, density and sunset viewing as potential issues.
Read complete article at Commercial Dispatch.
I certainly understand the anger of these residents who were body slammed by the Planning and Zoning Board. What changes have occurred on Academy Road to warrant a re-zoning (other than accommodating the developers)? Will my alderman, Eric Parker, be able to vote on this issue since he is the “former” business partner of the developer?
Someone help me out on this one, seriously. Starkville needs 100-200K homes. Academy Road, to me, already has too many strip centers and commercial property. Seems like single family homes is the best use and will help preserve the character of the neighborhood and prevent more commercial development.
Do the folks living on that side of town actually want more strip malls? What am I missing?
Well written Bill. I mean, let’s build more crappy manufactured building strip malls that we can’t fill and parking lots (which are bound to be in front) which we won’t take care of or plant anything in and it will all be abandoned in 10 years… That is better than R-3A. Why would we want neighbors?
Bill / Bethany-
Would it be appropriate to build 8 houses on a single one acre lot on Greensboro St, or to tear down 4 houses in Greenoaks and convert to 8 houses on the same 4 R-1 Lots? Rezoning to R3A would allow that to happen.
Bill, what you are missing is this is primarily a DENSITY issue- NOT a Commercial vs Residential!
Bethany– Think about it- how often do you hear of a mob from two neighborhoods packing a meeting and asking FOR the possibility of a crappy strip mall constructed next to their homes?? Do you REALLY THINK they would ask for that if they didn’t feel it was the best option?
MAYBE they are more concerned about row houses like on Stark Rd. being built next to their homes and rented out VS a strip center. R3A WOULD allow that to happen. The developer has not applied for a plat. They could build 101 housed on this property. 101 on 12.7 acres. THAT’S what R3A is. Who would that be marketed to? Although R3A states it is a “Single Family” designation, so are the Stark Rd row houses. The city’s definition of Singly Family means no more than either 3 or 4 unrelated persons living in a dwelling. Would you want that in your back yard?
MAYBE they are concerned with the values of their homes going down due to saturation and lack of demand- if their home is currently worth $205,000, and the developer builds a comparable home for $175,000 next door, then a $30,000 transfer of wealth occurs that pulls $$$ out of their home value and puts it in the developer’s pocket at closing.
MAYBE the $1.2 Million price tag would lead to something nicer than a strip mall being constructed. The Farm Bureau District office across the street looks pretty good.
As far as the neighborhood, do ya’ll realize 90% of the land on Academy Rd is ZONED COMMERCIAL? There is only one house that touches Academy Rd- it is a rental house at the intersection of S Montgomery & Academy and has a S Montgomery address. EVERY OTHER HOUSE is located behind a commercially zoned or constructed buffer.
These residents are not opposed to growth- they are opposed to BAD growth.
GoState is absolutely correct. I’ll add just a few points.
1. This property IS ALREADY zoned commercial. It has been for 30+ years. It’s been for sale for as long as I’ve lived here. Yet, amazingly, no developer has bought it and built a “crappy” strip mall or “manufactured buildings.” Why? I think I know–and it has something to do with making a reasonable return on a huge investment. To do so would most likely require, not a “crappy” commercial development, but a very “uncrappy” commercial development.
2. If this property is developed residential, there will be (at a minimum) 187 housing units coming on the market DIRECTLY ADJACENT to Academy Place in the next few years (minimum 63 in this one + 124 in Carpenter Place). Between 63 and 101 of these will be directly adjacent to the R1 neighborhood, Stonegate. Even if these sold at two per month (faster than the very nice homes being built in Carpenter Place are selling), it would take at least 7-9 years just to clear the market of NEW units, not even considering re-sales of existing houses in the area. That’s best case–it could be up to 225 units if the maximum 101 go on Academy Road. Do you really think that the homeowners in this area will not lose value in their homes when this happens?
3. Homes in Academy Place have been re-selling over the last 1-2 years in the high $100,000s and low $200,000s, based on information I”ve seen. The developers have said only that they plan houses in the “$100,000-200,000″ range. Well, there’s a huge difference in building a development of $200,000 houses and one with $100,000 units, up to 8 on an acre. But with R3A, anything except apartments or multi-unit is possible, including Stark Road or Highland Plantation style row houses. Renting is allowed. And the designation “single-family” means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Even the city planner (and the city attorney) have said that they do not believe the city’s definition of single family could be enforced as it currently stands. And even if it could, it allows for at least 3 unrelated people living together. If a development of $100,000 units is built directly on Academy Road, with up to 8 units on each acre, who do you suppose will be the primary residents of this development?
4. A Planned Unit Development (PUD) allows for greater density than an R-1 residential, but requires developers to adhere to stricter standards related to quality and submit more detailed plans related to the development. Academy Place is a PUD, and it’s pretty doggone nice. I have to wonder: why did the developers not apply for a rezoning to a PUD?
In short, I can fully understand why residents are willing to take their chances with commercial development on this property, given the alternative.
Reminds me of the old saw: What’s the difference between a developer and an environmentalist?
A developer wants to build a house in the woods and an environmentalist already has a house in the woods.
If we follow your logic we should not build any more homes down South Montgomery because of the density issue.
Well, I guess there are different ways of looking at things. I’ll throw out another way.
It seems to me that BB’s logic suggests that anyone who buys an already existing home in an already approved development (in the woods or otherwise) gives up their right to be concerned about any additional development that goes on around them and should just keep quiet. In other words, a resident is somehow hypocritical if he/she owns a house in an already developed area but express doubts that rezoning to allow 63-101 additional housing units (of unknown type) adjacent to them is such a great idea. I doubt if most area residents (along South Montgomery or elsewhere) would subscribe to that particular notion when it comes to their back yards.
Of course, I guess it’s silly for these residents to be concerned, since we all know that there has never been any residential development in Starkville that has turned out badly for existing homeowners in adjoining neighborhoods. Right?
Bill-
NOOOO–We should ensure development down S Motngomery is at a density of R1- Not R3-A.
I don’t think you are grasping the density issue.
For Example, there are 200+ acres of land on Montgomery St within the city limits that is still undeveloped. Traffic is at a standstill as-is. Forward ahead 10 years and assume this is sold and developed- would the City be better with 1600 houses in a stack and pack fashion on that acreage, or 800 houses on that land. See the difference?
No one is advocating against development- everyone knows something will be built there. The issue is which of the 2 is better. There are actually much better options for the property (i.e. R1 Zoning). However, the only 2 right now on the table are stay as commercial or change to much higher density housing).
StateGuy,
I actually agree with you that the leadership of Starkville has been AWOL on developement issues. Too many beautiful old neighborhoods ruined by greed and the building of cheap apartments. Of course, the property owners who built are just as responsible as the city leaders who let them.
Those impacted by the project should weigh in to balance the developers’ claims of building a Utopia. However, in this particular case it is my opinion that the pros outweigh the cons, as far as the greater good is concerned. I could see tightening the restrictions to keep students from living there, goodness knows they’ve got plenty of other options.
The traffic generated by commercial entities, offices aside, would, in my opinion be greater than the new residential traffic. Also, if you think losing your “sunset view” is bad, wait until you are greeted each day by the back end of a commercial strip. Dumpsters, HVAC units and asphalt.
Stunned at tonight’s board of alderman vote on this. Kudos to Ben Carver, an elected offical who stands up for Starkville’s homeowners. Looks like he is going to follow in Sumner Davis’ shoes and provide his ward with true leadership. Everyone in Ward 3 is out of luck. The Ward 3 rep on P and Z doesn’t show up when it counts and our new alderman can’t vote because of all of his conflicts of interest. At least his opponent John Gaskin is still involved and is standing up on the side of the owners of existing homes and neighborhoods.
Let’s have an election do over!
Ooooh Lola, I think a re-do is an excellent idea!!! Of course, if Eric Parker doesn’t stop recusing himself at every meeting on important issues, Ward 3 should consider how to legally get rid of him…for the good of the Ward.
Hmmmm. Maybe Ward 3 citizens need to pursue hiring an atty for a number of reasons. I wish getting rid of our new alderman would solve all our problems with the way our new municipal officals are behaving. Where is all that fine leadership we were promised? From the looks of things, they are more interested in having near-unanimous or unanimous votes on issues than they are in doing the best thing for Starkville’s citizens.
How I long for the good old days when we had a mayor who was not afraid to take a stand and aldermen who were not afraid of split votes. Is this progress?
If this is what Mayor Wiseman had in mind when he was mouthing off about “bringing the people together”, I’d say we’ve been suckered (which I suspected all along).
Wow, Amazed. I am shocked you attack Parker Wiseman. I didn’t know your true feelings toward him.
Amazed you are the most negative person on this website. Why don’t you do us all a favor and move away for the next 4 years. Last night the vote was 5 to 1 and Mayor Wiseman didn’t cast a vote at all.
CJ, do you live adjacent or near this development? Do you travel South Montgomery or Academy Road on weekdays during the school year? How do you feel about the development? Are you just defending the current mayor?
Sorry Carol, I’m not going any where and my view is not necessarily negative. It’s more of an observation of what I’ve seen so far. So to be fair, I’ll just continue to observe.
MSDawg, I don’t personally know Mr. Wiseman and therefore have no true feeling about him. What I do know is that I’m still not convinced he’s going to have the best interest of Starkville in mind, but it’s still early in the game. If that makes me mean and negative, then feel free to label me as such, but calling me names doesn’t exactly make you look too good either, now does it?
I am saying if Amazed wants to blame someone, he should blame the right people. So yes, I am defending the Mayor Wiseman.
Yes, I do travel down South Montgomery all the time. Traffic is bad, but that is a problem with poor planning for the beginning.
Personally, I wish developers would look at doing some work around the new annexed land in Ward 5, 6, and 7. There is plenty of land and we should be building affordable housing all across the city. But we all no why that isn’t happening. It is more profitable to build in Ward 3.
CJ, why is it more profitable to build in Ward 3? I’m sure we could use more affordable housing across all of the city, but I’d like to see some attention given to the older, established neighborhoods. One of the big issues of the campaigns (all candidates) was about helping existing neighborhoods (safety issues, appearance, etc.). It truly annoys me to see people taking care (and pride) in their yards, only to have the curbs full of weeds. Any ideas on why the city can’t figure out a way to spray or when resurfacing is done, they can’t fix the curbs so they don’t look a wilderness. How about encouraging neighborhoods to have Neighborhood Watch programs (I won’t get in to how well the police department handles those types of situations)? Do these issues not matter now?
CJ, I think it’s admirable that you defend Mayor Wiseman. I hope to one day be able to join you, but not just yet.
Mayor Wiseman needs to spped up us smart land usage plan for the bypass before every developer in town builds a home in their yard of their neighbor’s yard!