If Friday’s Lowndes County Board of Supervisors meeting is any indication, the county may not only decline an opportunity to partner with Columbus on a proposed redevelopment project at Burns Bottom, it may also become a competitive buyer for properties needed for the city project.
Columbus Redevelopment Authority President John Acker presented supervisors with a plan to redevelop 80 properties in Burns Bottom — essentially five blocks running east along Third Street North next to the soccer complex from Seventh Avenue North to Second Avenue North — as a more attractive gateway to downtown. The planned project is the first the five-man, city-appointed CRA board has attempted to undertake in Columbus’ Urban Renewal District.
The project area includes 68 private parcels belonging to 50 owners, including 40 residential lots and 28 vacant lots, and Acker said most of the housing in the area is “low quality.” Both the city and county also own property in the area.
CRA’s plan
Acker, who first presented the project plan to the Columbus City Council on March 3, said CRA hopes to convince the city and county to partner in purchasing and preparing the properties for development. Then, private developers — who Acker says are not interested in dealing with a lot of individual property owners – could bid on larger parcels within the area to redevelop into residential or commercial lots.
The CRA has not yet requested funds from the city or county, but it plans to hire an independent appraiser for the project area, Acker said. Neither the city nor county can purchase private property for more than its appraised value. According to Lowndes County property tax records, a ballpark market value of all 80 parcels totals about $1.18 million.
“We felt this was the best project to start with,” Acker told supervisors Friday. “We felt it was the most doable and would have the most impact. There’s been a lot of speculation of what (the development) will be. Quite frankly, we don’t know.”
A redevelopment at Burns Bottom, Acker added, would better capitalize on other assets in the area, namely the county-owned soccer complex and the Riverwalk extension.
The county’s plan
Lowndes County Board of Supervisors President Harry Sanders said he supported a public project to remove blight at Burns Bottom, but he maintains the public project should have a public purpose. He said the county had already acquired a handful of lots near the soccer complex — and would continue to purchase properties as they became available — for public green space, a park facility or a buffer zone that would allow future expansion to the soccer complex.
“I just don’t see the county and city partnering to do the legwork for these developers,” Sanders told Acker. “If it’s such a good idea for these developers, they can come in and do it themselves. … We already control the soccer complex property and several other properties around it. I don’t know if the county would want to give up that control (of the properties surrounding the complex).
“I wouldn’t mind tearing down all the dilapidated houses in the area (if the county bought the property),” Sanders added. “We are a willing buyer for willing sellers.”
Acker agreed a park would improve aesthetics and quality of life, but pointed out such a development would not provide needed quality housing or add to the tax base, both of which could help improve schools and crime rates.
Further, Acker said “no one wins” if the county and CRA compete to purchase properties and suggested the two parties partner.
District 5 Supervisor Leroy Brooks said he likes the concept for the Burns Bottom Redevelopment, but he thought it was “incumbent on the city” to address its crime and school district problems in ways other than relying on redevelopment.
“I don’t want to be discouraging to the project, but I do have a problem with the county spending its money (for it),” Brooks said. “If you were asking me today for the money, I’d probably vote ‘No.’ But that’s today. It may be different later.”
On Friday, Acker told supervisors that the CRA did not want to use eminent domain to acquire properties and would rather work to reach agreements with the property owners. He also addressed supervisors’ concerns about developers bringing Section 42 housing — subsidized housing with property tax exemptions — saying the Burns Bottom area didn’t qualify for that program.
Higgins
Acker also told supervisors the Golden Triangle Development LINK had offered its support for the project plan. However, LINK Executive Director Joe Max Higgins told The Dispatch in a phone interview Friday afternoon that he knew of no such endorsement.
“We have not endorsed the plan,” Higgins said. “It’s never been brought up at one of our board or executive committee meetings.
He said the LINK helped the county acquire property for the soccer complex and later worked with the city and county to acquire property at Burns Bottom for a potential private development. While there was widespread support among property owners for the public soccer complex project, he said the LINK had “no measurable luck” swaying property owners to sell for an undefined private interest.
Higgins suggested a similar project along Highway 45 — from the Magnolia Bowl to Bluecutt Road — would have a greater long term impact on the city.
“That’s the cash register of the city with a lot of dilapidated, old property,” Higgins said. “I’m not saying the (CRA’s) project is bad. I’m just saying that if I could pick a six-to-eight block area to purchase property, tear down dilapidated houses and build something else in its place, that would be where I’d do it.”
Financing
Whether the city would actually need a financial partnership with the county to purchase Burns Bottom properties seems to be a matter of some debate, as well.
On Monday, Mayor Robert Smith told The Dispatch he didn’t think he would support the city moving forward alone on the project. Ward 3 Councilman Charlie Box said in a phone interview Friday, however, he wanted to see the actual numbers before making that decision.
“We need a whole lot more information before we can start making (funding) decisions,” Box said. “I’d like to say we wouldn’t need the county if they are not willing to partner with us. But once we get the numbers, they may end up not being true.”
Box disagreed with the county’s plans to purchase the property.
“I think it needs to be a mix of residential and light commercial with some green space mixed in,” Box said. “We would be giving up a lot of revenue if it all went to public green space. I don’t agree with that plan at all. There’s a much better use for that area than green space.”
Next steps
After Friday’s supervisor’s meeting, Acker remained positive that the city and county could work together on a Burns Bottom project, despite the county board’s cool reception.
“I’m not discouraged at all,” Acker said. “It’s kind of like a first date. You don’t know if that’s going to be your wife. It’s a process.
“I never heard a ‘No’ today,” he added. “I never heard anybody say they weren’t in favor of the project. I just heard a debate about what exactly the project would be.”
Acker said he’d be “shocked” if city and county leaders couldn’t agree on a plan forward for Burns Bottom, and he doesn’t see the two entities competing with each other to purchase the properties.
“(The county’s) plan isn’t bad, and ours isn’t bad,” he said. “We just need to agree on a plan and work together. … Would I say that a park (at Burns Bottom) would be a loss for the city and the Redevelopment Authority? Of course not.”
Zack Plair is the managing editor for The Dispatch.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 32 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.