New company making bid for PTC

Unnamed venture is relocation of 63-year-old production business

A new manufacturing facility that would relocate to south Peachtree City and bring 165 jobs is asking to be annexed into Peachtree City’s southern border.

A new manufacturing facility that would relocate to south Peachtree City and bring 165 jobs is asking to be annexed into Peachtree City’s southern border.

In addition to bringing jobs to the area, the as-yet unnamed company will also be locating on a parcel of land that is currently zoned for a rather large shopping center and office complex at Ga. Highway 74 south and Redwine Road.

The company is relocating from another area and plans to spend $7 million on the building alone with another $2.55 million in equipment for the facility.
The plan calls for a 142,000 square foot building that will serve as a corporate headquarters and production facility, according to the annexation application filed on behalf of the unnamed company.

The company will conduct light metal fabrication along with electrical, welding, grinding, refrigeration, woodworking and other trades which will be performed in-house, the application said.

The production process does not produce any emissions or excessive noise, according to the application. The building is being designed to leave room for a future expansion.

The unidentified company has been operating for 63 years and is a third-generation family owned business that has an average employee tenure of 22 years.

Peachtree City Mayor Don Haddix said the building will be more than 1,000 feet away from the nearest subdivision which is located in unincorporated Fayette County.

Should it come to fruition and be annexed by the city council, it would prevent the 77-acre site from being used as currently zoned for the large shopping center that was approved by the county commission in 2000.

That rezoning drew the ire of Peachtree City officials, particularly because the shopping center would be located so close to the existing Wilshire Pavilion shopping center. This annexation would in essence eliminate that threat, as the current city council has expressed significant concern about the number of empty commercial establishments that exist inside the city limits.

Should the annexation be approved, the city would rezone the property to the necessary zoning category. In this case the unnamed applicant is asking for a light industrial zoning.

The company will operate from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday for office personnel and from 7 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday for skilled production personnel. Truck deliveries are estimated to be from 10-25 per week and will be limited to business hours only.

The planning commission will get first crack at the proposal and will forward a vote to city council as to whether it will or will not recommend the rezoning. The final rezoning power rests with the city council.

Haddix said he is familiar with the company’s owner, having known him professionally for a number of years.

Peachtree City Community Development Director David Rast said he will be requesting more information from the applicant to finalize the first step of the annexation process.

That first step involves the proposal first going to the city council, which must decide if the concept is worth pursuing. If that approval is given, then city staff will work with the developer in more detail to flesh out the plan before a final vote is taken on the annexation proposal.

pumpkin
pumpkin's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/19/2009
let them build it and they

let them build it and they will come. at least its not another golf course. what's with the multiplex at 74 and end of dividend empty for years.

this one will pass through, it is a haddix croney some type of dye fitters or related probably. why is it unannounced if haddix is linked up with them through past, just tell us who they are?

inkslinger
inkslinger's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/20/2007
Corp. Hdqtrs. vs Shopping Center?

With this limited information, I see this as a plus for PTC. 165 jobs, corp. hdqtrs., no emissions or noise, almost no traffic, family owned with loyal employees, tax income to PTC. What's not to like here? Want another shopping center there? This one sounds good to me.

mgarlow
mgarlow's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/06/2008
New Production Facility

Let's slow down and look at this. Is it really necessary to build a new facility? Is it not possible to remodel or refurbish the vacant property formerly operated by Photo Circuits? Or, and this begs my main question, is the old Photo Circuit land such a toxic dump that it is just going to sit there like an forgettable nightmare? Why?

mudcat
mudcat's picture
Online
Joined: 10/26/2005
Go walk through the Photocircuts building

Then you'll see why no one in their right mind will ever consider taking on that renovation. Back door is open on the building closest to the church.

The owner would have a better chance of selling if they knocked the building down and then had some land in a prime location to sell. Otherwise ----get used to it sitting there for years. Maybe the city can get involved and fine them $500 a day until they clean up. Or Dar can buy it and put in a skating rink.

ohmygosh
ohmygosh's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/14/2008
Agreed

there needs to be a moratorium on new construction sites until the current stock of vacant sites is depleted. Why should PTC spread out their industrial area so far away? you will not only end up with more traffic in that direction, but the infrastructure install costs will again be placed on our wallets. Let's keep everything in one place, and offer some really attractive incentives for moving into an existing building.

The Wedge
The Wedge's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/09/2008
The issue with those sites

is that sometimes a green field makes more sense. The photo circuits layout may have a bad flow for whatever process this new company would use. It can be difficult to retrofit a building that was layed out for another intended use.
The owners of the photo circuit buildings, if they really want them to be occupied, should spend the money to clean it out and reconfigure it, or to offer to do it upon sale or long term lease with a manufacturing company. otherwise it is easier to use a greenfield.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
Wedge & Sites

Now you folks be patient with Wedge--after all, he can only suppress that ME Analytical side so lmuch! Not only that, if the company wants to spend $7M for a new building,why not rejoice at the idea of new jobs for someone? Regardless, I know I'd rather have a tenant with a long track record of success than some unknown bunch of retail shops in yet another shopping center!

TinCan
TinCan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/29/2005
Green fields

Aren't there already plenty of "green fields", or maybe woods, within existing industrially zoned areas of the city. Seems to be a lot of open space on Dividend and Hwy. 74 between TDK Blvd. and the Baseball / Soccer complex.

inkslinger
inkslinger's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/20/2007
Hella, NCR, Avery Dennison, Rinnai, Cooper, Sigvaris, .....

Panasonic, Gardner Denver, Hoshizaki, Matsushita, Wilden, etc....Do these sights bother us? I think not. They remind us of the employers who have invested in our city and keep us employed. They all have frontage on 74.

This will be more conducive to our come to work and live concept than another retail mess.

The Wedge
The Wedge's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/09/2008
Tin Can, my reply

was more about why someone would want to build new instead of using an existing structure. Now if the question is where are they going to put it, it is all about who owns the land and how it is zoned. If the parcel is zoned industrial (light) and a company acquires the property through sale, then they should be able to build wherever they want to. If you do not want it in a given location, then the government must zone it accordingly.

TinCan
TinCan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/29/2005
Your point Wedge

I got it. Guess my point wasn't that clear. It was that if it is necessary to build new rather than refit, which I would also prefer, that I didn't think annexing that spot was necessary. I also agree that it may be the only ways to stop what seems to be another unnecessary shopping center in the area.

The Wedge
The Wedge's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/09/2008
I understand it now...TC

Tin Can, Maybe that land is owned by people not choosing to develop it right now. I am not sure.

TinCan
TinCan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/29/2005
Good point Wedge

I was of the impression, probably mistakenly, that the city owned the industrial land.

(Later, upon giving it some thought.)
Glad no one took the opportunity to suggest where my head may have been with the comment about city owned industrial land. Guess there would not have been that lengthy Calulla Hills discussion if that were the case.

The Wedge
The Wedge's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/09/2008
Tin Can

I think you have good questions and thoughts. I just do not know who owns the vacant lands that front highway 74. Land deeds are public though, we can find out if we want to.

inkslinger
inkslinger's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/20/2007
John Munford- A Stutter

seems to have taken hold on the first paragraph?

jevank
jevank's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2008
Typo, John Munford?
John Munford wrote:

The company will operate from 8 a.m. to 5 a.m. Monday through Friday.

John Munford
John Munford's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/27/1973
Got it Jevank, thanks!

Yes sometimes even the obvious escapes my fingers when they're typing.

Thanks for catching it!

Recent Comments