It appears Decatur, one of Georgia’s densest cities, is on the verge of adding some greenspace. The city may be purchasing the United Methodist Children’s Home, 77 acres of largely undeveloped property just southeast of city limits.
The city commission will vote on whether to put a contract on the property during its regular meeting 7:30 p.m. Monday at City Hall, 509 North McDonough Street.
According to City Manager Peggy Merriss, the contract has already received approval by the UMCH’s 34-person board.
When reached late Friday afternoon John Cerniglia, vice president of development at the UMCH, wouldn’t comment, other than to say he’d attend Monday’s meeting. Cerniglia has previously said the UMCH has heard from “dozens of interested people — home builders, brokers, developers and, of course, the city.”
Although the UMCH board voted to sell in January, the property never actually went on the market.
Decatur Mayor Patti Garrett also didn’t want to comment.
“I don’t want to disclose any additional information until the meeting,” she said. “I encourage everybody to come out.”
According to pre-meeting agenda notes posted by the city, the purchase price is $40 million or about $520,000 per acre (the current market value for residential property within city limits is $1 million per acre, and $1.5 million per acre for commercial). The recently created Public Facilities Authority will assist in financing the purchase. According to the notes that financing "could include bonded debt, loans and transfers from the general fund and/or capital improvement funds."
Further: “If the purchase is financed solely through the issuance of bonds, it is estimated that a millage rate increase of approximately 1.4 mills will be needed to meet debt service payments. This is about $350 for a property valued at $500,000.”
Related: Historic DeKalb children's home decides to sell despite criticism
Related: Should Decatur buy United Methodist Children's Home property?
The contract stipulates the UMCH will retain ownership of the Moore Chapel, built in 1906, one of the four oldest buildings on campus (there are 31 total), and the most architecturally significant. The city will also protect the grave of Jesse Boring, who founded the home in 1871 and moved it to the present site in 1873.
The grave is in front of the existing administrative building, which would be renamed to honor Bev Cochran, who was the UMCH’s executive director for 43 years until 2012 (he died last year).
After approval the city has “100 days to secure financing and then 15 days to close the transaction. The UMCH would have up to 60 days after closing to vacate the property … the UMCH staff anticipates that they will be able to vacate the property in late summer/early fall.”
Once the city assumes ownership, according to the agenda notes, it would be annexed into the city, followed by community-based master planning process that would include nearby neighbors, UMCH alumni and others.
Garrett, and other city officials have indicated the city would like to use much of the property for recreation and green space. Superintendent David Dude has also said the school system would like to partner with the city for building or renovating playing fields and/or a gym.
“We definitely have a need we can’t meet with current facilities,” Dude said recently.
Decatur has 22,000 people within 4.2 square miles, and as of July 2015, only 2.1 percent of the city’s land is used for parks (or 4.12 percent counting the city cemetery). According to research by Downtown Decatur Neighbors, this compares to 5.2 percent for Atlanta and 8.4 percent nationwide in both medium-high and medium-low density areas.
Although no one will comment for the record, it doesn’t appear the city is interested in commercial or a mixed-use development for the site. It’s likely that any proposed residential development will focus on affordable housing of some kind.
In a recent interview, Decatur-based realtor Frank Golley (who is not connected in any negotiations involving the property) studied a topographical map of the UMCH and concluded that by no means is the entire property developable.
“From front to back, the property drops from 1,030 feet to 970 feet,” Golley said. “You have a lake back there and a creek. You can’t build within 75 feet of the center line of a creek. So I would say about 28 acres cannot be developed.”
About the Author
