City Talk: Conflict over city’s plans, residents’ hopes as Civic Center fate is decided
This is the City Talk column by Bill Dawers, a longtime contributor to the Savannah Morning News.
In a recent press briefing, Mayor Van Johnson gave a quick overview of the city’s options for the future of the Civic Center.
He said that the city could raze the entire complex, demolish a portion of it or rehabilitate all of it.
Johnson gave the impression that city officials had no specific options in mind as the public engagement process was poised to begin with a series of invite-only stakeholder meetings on April 25.
Johnson did not mention that City Council directed staff in 2022 to begin developing plans for demolition of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Arena, renovation of the Johnny Mercer Theatre and construction of a new municipal office building along Oglethorpe Avenue.
In last week’s column, I noted that city officials had not yet released cost projections, but I estimated that the 2022 plan would cost taxpayers in the range of $100 million. I asked for official estimates again before writing this column but was told that the numbers had still not been fully vetted internally.
More City Talk: Questions about costs, priorities as Civic Center’s fate is considered (again)
Despite Johnson’s seeming openness to various visions for the site, city staffers have clearly prioritized the 2022 plan as directed by council.
“City staff is reviewing and considering the conceptual plans presented to Council in the report from 2022 as well as gathering input from City Council,” a city spokesperson told me via email. “The current public engagement sessions are designed to gather feedback from residents and stakeholders on the options from the 2022 report.”
In a recent Facebook post, 2nd district alderman Detric Leggett also indicated that the public engagement process would consider the three broad options outlined by Johnson. Leggett also omitted that the council had voted on a policy direction two years ago.
Leggett said in the post that the full demolition option would allow the city to “make a square or housing.” As I’ve noted numerous times in this column, City Council voted in 2019 for full demolition, which would allow for the restoration of Elbert Square, reestablishment of the historic street grid and mixed-use, private development with an emphasis on housing.
Unlike the 2022 plan, the 2019 plan would have been a moneymaker in addition to strengthening the residential fabric of downtown.
Over the course of three days, Leggett’s post drew nearly 400 comments. A significant number of respondents supported saving the Mercer, but there was little support expressed for construction of office space.
A large number of comments endorsed keeping the entire Civic Center, including the arena, to develop “a secondary venue complementary to the Enmarket for smaller events.”
Georgia House Rep. Carl Gilliard was among those who backed the renovation of the entire Civic Center, in part so that local promoters would have a more affordable option than the Enmarket Arena. Leggett himself showed significant support for the idea in subsequent public comments.
The renovation of the MLK Arena would likely be both impractical and extremely expensive. I don’t know if there is demand for a venue larger than the Mercer and smaller than Enmarket, but it would probably be smarter to construct a new building than try to rehab an aging arena.
The responses to Leggett’s post should worry the elected officials and city staff who have focused on the 2022 plan without ever being upfront about the costs and drawbacks.
Many residents clearly believe that the current engagement process will include broad options, not a singular focus on a plan that was adopted two years ago with no public comment.
Bill Dawers can be reached via @billdawers on Twitter and CityTalkSavannah@gmail.com.
This article originally appeared on Savannah Morning News: City Talk: City’s plans, residents’ hopes conflict over Civic Center
