I remember as a kid playing stickball games in my front yard with the younger kid next door. We’d invent rules on where to hit the ball and how to score. What happens if you find yourself losing the game? No sweat! You just change the rules as you go along. You score things differently until the outcome matches what you want.

I had a flashback to this childhood memory yesterday. I was scrolling through the Alpharetta City Council meeting agenda for Monday when I came across a request from the Community Development Department. It seems they are suggesting changes be made to the city’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan (which is barely two months old).

The proposed changes would allow mixed use zoning on properties as small as 10 acres and would exempt apartments in mixed use from the 85/15 for-sale to for-rent ratio. Councilmen were given a page (which is not provided on the city’s website) that shows how the Avalon project would compare to the proposed changes. According to the cover memo, this page “demonstrates that Avalon would meet the modified MU regulations without variances.”

Remember that North American Properties wants 250 for-rent apartments in their Avalon development. Their request easily violates the 85/15 guideline. Is Alpharetta’s Community Development department suggesting a land use change so as to allow Avalon’s project to pass without a variance?

Councilman Mike Kennedy told me Monday’s discussion is to be about allowing different mixed use densities in each character area of Alpharetta. But this concept isn’t touched upon in the proposal from Community Development.

Kennedy eased some of my concern with this assurance: “It is not my intention – nor is it anyone else’s that I know of – that Avalon be considered under anything other than the CURRENT Mixed Use code as it is written today.”

At best this change is a suspicious and inappropriate matter to consider at this time. I would be most upset if I were a Councilman considering allowing Avalon to have apartments. This memo and its wording taint any vote in favor of apartments, even if that vote is made with the best of pure intentions. Let’s strive to be above reproach, guys!

Photo Credit: ChrisGoldNY (creative commons)

I want condos at Avalon.

That’s certainly something you won’t see me say a lot, but it’s true. Maybe I should be careful what I wish for. Let’s get back to apartments in a minute.

2030 Comprehensive Plan

North American Properties’ recently proposed Avalon project violates Alpharetta’s new 2030 Comprehensive Plan. It’s ironic in a way. The plan very much supports and encourages mixed-use projects like Avalon. I was critical of this and still believe this isn’t the will of the people. But it is what it is.

Avalon violates the land use plan by proposing 250 apartments in the development. The land use plan continues Alpharetta’s history of limiting apartments. It calls for a 85/15 ratio of houses to apartments in the city. Currently the fraction is skewed too far towards the apartment side.

It is certainly the will of suburbanites to have a healthy, yet limited mix of apartments. Avalon’s proposed 250 apartments would push the 85/15 ratio ever farther out of kilter.

So the ink isn’t even dry on the 2030 Plan and it’s already being challenged. This will be a critical first test of Alpharetta’s very young City Council. Everyone wants Avalon to be successful but it shouldn’t come at the cost of violating this longstanding vision. It also shouldn’t set a precedent of approving apartments in spite of limits on them. Does the council have the courage to stand up to Mark Toro on this matter? They should.

This will also be a critical test of North American Properties. Will they compromise and agree to abide by the city’s new land use plan? Or will they seek to undermine a plan that was designed to encourage their type of project?

In my mind I’d already resigned the fact that condos would be a part of Avalon. The only question left unanswered was how many we’d see. So when NAP proposed apartments it caught me off guard. I would be much more likely to support the project if the apartments were changed to condos. Let’s see how this chapter of the project unfolds.

Last week the final campaign contribution reports were quietly submitted to the state ethics commission. It’s boring stuff I assure you. Being an armchair political wonk, I found myself combing through reports from Alpharetta and Milton. I didn’t notice any 11th hour contributions that stood out. A few other things did jump out at me.

Spending

I’ve forgotten most of my college statistics class. But it seems pretty clear that dollars spent on local campaigns correlate to votes. It’s expensive to get your message to the electorate. Candidates dropped thousands on newspaper ads, mailings and robocalls.

Milton newcomer Lance Large spent a staggering amount of money (24 large) for a simple council seat… and won. David Belle Isle dropped the most cash in Alpharetta.

Length of Campaign

It’s also worth noting that both Belle Isle and Large ran lengthy campaigns. Both were among the first candidates in north Fulton to announce. Could this be a trend in the future?

Consultants

I’ve listed consultants when I see evidence of a campaign sending money their way. Nearly every establishment candidate had at least one professional working on their behalf. One interesting note is Fred Hicks at HEG. Four years ago he worked for Alan Tart and Julie Zahner Bailey. This time around he worked to defeat them. It’s all business I suppose. Then again, Hicks is building a pretty good track record in Milton.

A few things to note on this data… I’ve done my best tabulating the numbers, but mistakes are possible. What I call “spending” is total campaign expenditures minus loan repayments. I had incomplete or partial reports from Michael Cross and Hans Appen due to filings that were not made electronically.

Tonight Alpharetta’s City Council will consider the 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. This important act will likely get overshadowed by another item higher up on the agenda – an update on Westside Parkway. I anticipate the city to go public with plans for opening the road, which is a great thing. However, it will divert attention away from the approval of this unfortunate land use plan.

The city should postpone the vote on this plan until January for the following reasons…

• Nearly half the current council members are lame ducks. Mayor Letchas will not return due to term limits. Jim Paine lost his bid to become mayor and Cheryl Oakes was soundly defeated. It isn’t proper for those leaving office to cast such a vote with its longterm implications.
• The 2030 Plan was a campaign issue! It was brought up in most or all of the candidate forums. The voters considered this issue when selecting candidates. Allow the new council members and mayor to be seated and have the influence the voters wanted!
• David Belle Isle and Jim Gilvin campaigned on issues of density and urbanization and were elected. This plan reclassifies hundreds of acres of land in such a way as to add many more condos.

The city should table this plan until January 2012 and allow David Belle Isle, Jim Gilvin and Michael Cross to assume their roles on the council.

Last night’s election results were somewhat predictable with a few nail biters to keep things interesting. I tried my best to keep my personal opinions out of print during the campaign and think I was successful. Now that it’s all over, here’s my thoughts…

Cross and Mitchell

No surprise here at all. Ron Carter ran a weak campaign and tried to claim credit for the Westside Parkway/GA-9 reroute idea. In the end, he drew fewer votes than even Hans Appen.

As far as Appen, he was up against a very serious candidate in Michael Cross. I give Hans credit for giving it the old college try (no pun intended). I hope he stays active in local politics. He has some credible ideas to bring to the table. I thought Cross’ late-inning direct mail piece against Appen was unfortunate and certainly wasn’t necessary.

Mayor’s Race

I knew DeRito would finish third, I just figured he would have at least broken 20%. But congratulations to David Belle Isle! I would have put money on Paine to win this race given his deep roots and convincing victory over John Monson not long ago. It makes you wonder if Mayor Letchas’ direct mail piece might have backfired. In the end, I hope Belle Isle’s pledge to limit density was sincere. This blogger will hold him to it!

Jimmy Gilvin

It’s no secret that Jimmy and I agree on a lot. I like the idea of him being on Council because it provides balance. Most city and county governments in the suburbs have a mix of business and homeowner interests in politics. I don’t believe Alpharetta followed that model – until now.

Cheryl Oakes’ campaign followed a strategy that I like to call the reverse attack. Late in the game she claimed to be the victim of negative campaigning and smear attacks. Nothing could have been further from the truth. Gilvin only challenged her on issues, pressing her after misstating that she didn’t vote on Windward Mill (in fact she voted for it).

Ticketgate and the Paul Oakes incident were certainly distractions to her campaign. It’s ludicrous to think that Gilvin’s campaign had anything to do with these issues. I reported on the Paul Oakes incident (without commentary) and researched the accuser as best I could. I found nothing that would link her to Alpharetta politics. She’s just a mom who seems to be really ticked off and is willing to do something about it. That’s my take anyway. To suggest that Gilvin or his supporters could influence the AJC/WSB newsroom is to give them way too much credit.

Milton

I’m surprised incumbents Alan Tart and Julie Zahner Bailey were defeated. Milton voters usually have a nose for sniffing out business and developer interests in their elections. At the same time, if Alpharetta needs homeowner interests in politics, Milton may need to go the other way. Their tax base is indeed tilted too far towards homeowners. They need to expand the business base, I just don’t think Lance Large and Matt Kunz are the best choices to do that.

In the end… Folks are ready for the robocalls to be over and the campaign signs to disappear. I’m ready to write about something other than politics for a change!

Photo Credit: The Suss-Man (Mike) (creative commons)

Executives and employees at North American Properties, owners of the former Prospect Park development, have made campaign contributions to Alpharetta mayoral candidate Jim Paine. According to his October 25th campaign contribution report, Paine’s campaign accepted nine contributions from NAP employees totaling $1,800. No other candidates for mayor or council have reported contributions from NAP.

North American Properties has plans to begin construction on the Avalon project (formally Prospect Park) in August 2012 with a planned opening in late 2013. With such aggressive construction schedules, NAP would have to submit revised plans and a new site plan to Alpharetta pretty soon.

I do not believe it is appropriate for NAP to make contributions to candidates with such a large project looming before the city. Furthermore I’m disappointed that a candidate would accept such contributions. Jim Paine should refund the contributions and NAP should refrain from making political contributions this season. Do the right thing, guys.

It was an email titled “Small Town, Big Priorities” that caught my eye. At first it looked like just another email blast from a mayoral candidate. But this piece from David Belle Isle jumped out for an unexpected reason – density. Belle Isle identified “holding back density” as priority #2, right up there with issues like traffic and the downtown plan. I didn’t expect any of the candidates for mayor to make an issue of density. My curiosity was peaked.

Belle Isle’s opponents, Jim Paine and Doug DeRito, have pretty clear voting records. It would be hard for either of them to support lower density after voting for projects like Prospect Park, Windward Mill and Peridot (* – see my comment). Belle Isle can stand on the curious fact that he’s not voted on any of these large projects. It may be more of a positive coincidence that this happened, but it warranted additional discussion. I’m grateful that Mr. Belle Isle agreed to sit down for an interview last week to hash through some nitty gritty details.

…and it’s hard to deep dive on these issues without talking about the particulars of past projects. Let’s go through each of Alpharetta’s big high-density projects. Belle Isle wasn’t on council when Prospect Park was initially approved. However, he was around for the project’s final zoning changes in 2008. These changes saw density increases but not with the residential component of the doomed project.

Windward Mill happened squarely during his tenure on council. Belle Isle recused himself from the vote because of associations with a financier behind the project. In our meeting he expressed the most concern for this project primarily due to its distance from GA-400 and the effect it will have on traffic.

Belle Isle resigned his council seat prior to the Peridot vote this year. He was non-committal when I asked him if he would have supported the project.

I asked for examples of times when he opposed or spoke against projects due to density concerns. Apart from a few apartment complexes, he couldn’t provide examples.

Belle Isle said he would support a condo limit in Alpharetta, similar to what is in place for apartments. Yet as it turns out he was on Council when the multi-family designation was weakened, allowing condos to slip into the single-family side of the equation. This change was a seminal moment in Alpharetta’s recent history, paving the way for many more condos.

So how should density-minded voters choose in the mayor’s race? Belle Isle supports less density and has never voted for Alpharetta’s largest projects. However, he’s not on record speaking against high-density projects even though he’s had the opportunity to do so.  It’s a tough call.

I took a vow not to endorse candidates in this election. For the mayor’s race, that has been an easy promise to fulfill. I can honestly say I don’t know who would make the best mayor for Alpharetta. I don’t envy the choice Alpharetta voters have to make on Tuesday.

Here are a few more questions I posed to Belle Isle:

S. Lee Guy: If I had asked you 18 months ago, would you rather be a state senator or mayor, how would you have answered?
David Belle Isle: I would say mayor. I would rather be one of seven than one of several hundred.
SLG: Then why did you run for state senate?
DBI: I was growing frustrated with the way things were going in Atlanta and wanted to do something about it.

SLG: Alpharetta’s elections are determined by a plurality, not a majority. Should that be changed?
DBI: Ask me on November 9th.