Roswell Okays $70 Million Project at Founders Square

publication date: Jun 9, 2008

 | 

author/source: John Fredericks / STAFF

By John Fredericks / STAFF

City Councilman Kent Igleheart

Charlie Brown, meet Brad Barnett.

Barnett, CEO of TalMar Development Companies did in nine months and with a few thousand dollars what Brown couldn’t accomplish in two years and nearly one million dollars. He got a density project approved by Roswell City Council. In the heart of the historic district, nonetheless.

Barnett’s project started as a boutique hotel in October of 2007 and wound up the biggest mix use project ever approved by the Roswell City Council.

Mill Village at Founders Square, approved by a unanimous 6-0 vote at Roswell’s Council meeting on Monday night, paved the way for a hotel, retail stores, offices, condos and townhouses in what is now a floundering Founders Square area. The existing buildings would be demolished, and their six current tenants, including landmark Chaplains Café, would be relocated.

Mayor Jere Wood was ecstatic with the outcome and proclaimed, “This is the most significant project this Council has approved in my tenure. I hope it is a resounding economic success. This will become the model for future quality redevelopment in Roswell.”

Barnett was lauded by city staffers and Council members alike for his desire to listen to the community and weave their suggestions into his plan. Barnett said, “We worked very closely with the Historic Preservation Commission and other community leaders to be sure we fit well within their vision for their city.”

Mill Village at Founders Square will consist of four major buildings spanning 3.64 acres at the southeast corner of Mill Street and Highway 9 adjacent to Town Square. The cornerstone of the project is a luxury 75-room hotel that will be four stories high from a street level vantage point. The development also includes a 7,000 square foot high-end restaurant, 21,400 square feet of retail and 31,500 square feet of office space. The project’s residential enclaves hail 30 condos and 11 townhouses.

The entire initiative is being financed the old fashioned way: privately, with no tax payer funding requested. This cleared the pathway for quicker than normal approval.

Local architect Lew Oliver handled the design of the concept since its original cherette inception and was praised by Wood as, “The father of the design for this project.”

Mimms Mum
Several current Founders Square tenants voiced concern that their existing landlord and property owner Mimms Corporation has been ambivalent to their apprehension about relocation. Current leaseholders include Chaplains Café, Cooper Music, Racket Shop, Shearamore Salon, Guru Indian Restaurant and Wildflower.

Shearamore Salon owner Rafaela Moura asked, “What will happen to the tenants of Founders Square? What will happen to us? We have built our business here and we have a clientele, we have sweat equity.  What type of relocation compensation can we expect? Our current landlord (Mimms) has been unresponsive.”

Councilwoman Lori Henry answered, “Although this matter is between landlord and tenant, small business owners are the lifeblood of our city and their success is vital to our success.”  She urged the new property owners (TalMar) to work closely with the current Founders Square occupants along with the city’s economic development department to keep them,  “Prosperous and ensure their ongoing success.”

Roswell’s New Way to Redevelopment
Kathleen Field, Roswell’s Community Development Director echoed the mayor’s sentiments and said this endeavor may prove to be the blueprint for future redevelopment success.

Field’s top lieutenant at City Hall, Brad Townsend, summed up the difference between Mill Village and the failed Roswell East Charlie Brown debacle. “He [Barnett] got total community support.”

Roswell Councilman Kent Igleheart was poignant in his comparison. 

“This project was properly conceived and appropriately scaled. There was genuine give and take with real, authentic community input and involvement throughout each step of the process.  Brown’s proposal was ill conceived and couldn’t be adapted. His form of community involvement was bogus and disingenuous. This started from the bottom up. Brown’s was manufactured from the top down. That’s the difference.