By Jeff Allen
NORCROSS, Ga. | Yes, I read Jeff Hopper’s article. I like Jeff and know he wants density done responsibly. My argument is that the density we added 30 years ago did bring traffic, but the main projects he references were single-family developments, Col. Jones Park and Georgetown Park.
He also points to a single-family project in Peachtree Corners (The Foundry), but I think he has the name wrong or I cannot find it. I did a quick Zillow search of that area and found 1,700 apartment vacancies and over 100 townhomes for sale under $500k. Begs the question: why are we adding more apartments exactly? What if I’m half wrong and at any given time there are 50 townhomes and 850 apartments available? Should we build more apartments? How many?
We weren’t talking about hundreds of apartments back then. Those projects Jeff mentions created stakeholders invested in the community who’ve been active in shaping downtown. Those properties have increased in value. You’ll be hard pressed to find apartments that do.
It’s an obvious fact that renters are less involved in their communities. I know this because I was a renter, as most people were at some point. I wasn’t involved in local matters then; I knew I wouldn’t stay long term. Statistics show I was in the majority mindset. Habitat for Humanity did a study proving this true. When you invite an influx of renters, you degrade the fabric of community. Jeff breezes over this point, but it’s much more important than he believes.
Therefore, you know where I stand: I’m not against all apartments, but we’ve built 1,900 apartments serving Norcross in five years. I’m against building more now. The 2020 census shows owners are already in the minority in Norcross, and that was before we built 1,900 apartments and very few single-family homes. These are undeniable facts. Yet council takes the stance that neighbors have been misinformed, so they don’t need to consider these opinions. This is misguided.
The council says “we never said we’re building apartments,” which is gaslighting. Current zoning laws refer to the Comprehensive Plan, which prohibits the kind of high-density multi-family they envision. So they have to change the Comp Plan. And they’re trying.
To say they’re not voting on apartments is disingenuous. They reinforce this by saying “the word apartments doesn’t appear in our Comp Plan.” Also gaslighting. When you combine “high density” with “multi-family residential,” there’s only one logical outcome: apartments. In Norcross; no other product fits that description. There have been submitted plans from developers confirming they want apartments.
Had council passed the Comp Plan this month, it would have removed all constraints on the Magnolia project at Holcomb Bridge Road and Buford Highway. The project would have ballooned from 48 approved apartments to 180 by right.
How can they say they weren’t voting on apartments? If they didn’t know this, they’re voting in ignorance and showing incompetence. If they did know, they were gaslighting us. Councilmember Matt Myers claims he would have introduced the moratorium on multi-family housing even if the Comp Plan had passed. I have no confirmation other council members were aware. I also know he had no guarantee the motion would pass – so this offers little consolation.
We’ve got to slow down.
- Have a comment? Click here to send an email.
