Developer: Gillionville apartment project in Albany will not proceed

VALDOSTA — It doesn’t happen very often, but sometimes — just sometimes — a determined, single-minded group can band together, take on a large, well-financed entity and win.

That’s what happened in Albany last week when a fiercely united neighborhood group stared down a large developer and had developer blinked.

“We all felt like a bunch of little Davids going up against a Goliath,” said Russell Gray, who emerged as a spokesman for the Lake Park/Merry Acres neighborhood group that challenged Valdosta-based DHM Developer Inc., on Friday, three days after the Albany City Commission voted 7-0 to deny a rezoning request that would have allowed DHM to build an 80-unit apartment complex on property adjacent to the group’s neighborhood.

“There were a number of issues involved, but there was really nothing positive that would have come from that development had the city allowed it to be built,” Gray said. “It’s like I said at the commission meeting: At the end of the day, the commission did what was right for Albany.”

Even with the decision by the City Commission, many in the neighborhood group — Gray included — feared that DHM might challenge the decision in court or even move ahead with plans to build a smaller, more tightly-packed apartment complex on a 3-acre tract of the 7 acres they sought that already had the appropriate zoning (C-2) for such a development.

But Investors Management Company of Valdosta attorney Joseph Johnson, who represents DHM and spoke in favor of the development plan at the City Commission meeting, said Friday the company has no plans to proceed with the proposed project along Gillionville Road.

“First of all, moving forward with a 62-unit complex — which we could do without going through a rezoning request — would cram too many people into too small a space,” Johnson said. “But, most important, I think it became very apparent as this process moved forward that there was a great deal of opposition to the development. And it’s not our desire to make enemies in Albany.

“I do believe that the biggest problem was that the folks in that neighborhood fixated on the term ‘low- and moderate-income housing’ and there was something of a ‘not-in-my-backyard’ attitude. Especially when you consider that the city’s comprehensive plan calls for more affordable housing throughout the city. But we don’t want to create problems with our developments, and I’m certain there is no desire within the company to proceed with this project.”

Ward IV City Commissioner Roger Marietta, who was celebrating his 40th wedding anniversary Saturday, led the commission’s opposition to the development, challenging Johnson at one point and accusing him of “threatening” the neighborhood group. The commissioner said a plan distributed by Johnson that showed the 62-unit development that could have been built under existing city zoning was an attempt to intimidate the homeowners.

“I’m happy with the outcome of that vote, obviously, but I don’t think now is a time for anyone to let their guard down,” Marietta said. “I think people who live in that area — and, trust me, there are some high-powered attorneys who live there who were prepared to tie that development up in court for the next hundred years if it had passed the commission — are interested in protecting it from future rezoning attempts.

“I don’t know if they intend to pursue it, but I really hope they do. I think there needs to be further discussion about the zoning of that area.”

Marietta also said he was “a little disappointed” that city staff recommended approval of the development.

“I thought it was a little insensitive that these folks, many of whom were devastated by the (January) storms, had to go through this after having their homes significantly damaged by the storms,” he said. “I thought Russell did a fantastic job of presenting their case, and I was a little disappointed that our staff didn’t take that into consideration.”

But Albany/Dougherty Planning Services Director Paul Forgey said immediately after the commission meeting that the process implemented by the city actually “worked perfectly” in this case.

“I understand that emotions are a part of any proposal like this when people’s properties are involved,” Forgey said. “But we have a system in place whereby it is Planning’s job to look at any such proposal and scrutinize it based on existing laws and ordinances. Our determination (to recommend approval or denial) is based solely on the law.

“Then, we have hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Commission where the community is allowed to come forward and express its feelings. These boards then determine the outcome based not only on our zoning laws and ordinances, but how those laws and ordinances impact the community. I’m not surprised that the commission took the action that it did, but our office did its job in looking at applicable laws. In this case, the system worked perfectly.”

Gray, who is director of Physician Development for Privia Medical Group, said Friday he and others in the neighborhood group took exception to an article in Thursday’s Albany Herald that implied the neighborhood group’s primary concern was over rent-controlled units drawn into the DHM plan that would have given the developer tax credits by providing housing for low- and moderate-income tenants.

“As a matter of fact,” Gray said, “we were careful to make sure that our angst — our opposition — had nothing to do with race or socio-economic issues. Our primary concern was the number of people it put in this small footprint. We were concerned with this development devaluing our property, not who might be moving into the development.

“Our concern was about some outside company coming into our neighborhood and putting in a development that just didn’t fit. We would have been upset if they’d proposed building another (upscale) Tuxedo Place there.”

Gray also said a conversation with Johnson after the commission meeting helped him understand better why the developer wanted to locate the apartment complex on that property, rather than on existing vacant properties that would have been less expensive and less intrusive on existing neighborhoods.

“(Johnson) explained to me why they were so hot and heavy to build on that property (along Gillionville) rather than, say, the old movie theater property (on Gillionville near Slappey Drive) or even available property right across the street,” Gray said. “There are guidelines for developers when they’re applying for tax credits, and properties are scored in different categories. The more points they get (on a scale determined by federal officials), the more tax breaks they’ll get.

“Joseph told me even property right across the street on the south side of Gillionville would not earn them as many points as this property. And a mixed-development housing complex on other existing vacant properties would have meant less money and less profitability once the complex was built.”

Johnson, meanwhile, said that while he was surprised by city officials’ refusal to support the affordable housing project proposed by DHM because “there is a real need for affordable housing throughout the city,” the experience did not sour the company on the city.

“Oh, yes, we’d be open to working with the city of Albany on a future project,” he said. “We think, because of the dire need for affordable housing in the city, there will be other opportunities.”