Here are the facts, in case you care:
Executive summary: (1) the 'residence' is necessary; (2) the location is expensive; (3) the cost is prudent and reasonable taking into account the use of the property and the local cost of existing homes and new construction.
The bishop of a large diocese is the functional equivalent of a CEO of a large corporation. His "residence" is actually not his, but belongs to the diocese; it is the center of operations for the office of bishop. It is not only a residence but also a guesthouse, dining room, meeting venue etc. A bishop is constantly receiving visitors - diplomats from the Vatican, visiting priests, bishops, abbots, heads of religious orders, etc. He holds conferences and seminars there. So this "residence" is actually a multi-purpose venue and necessary for the archbishop to do his job - the alternative is renting hotel conference and banquet space, which is just money paid with no lasting benefit.
You also need to know about the area where the Cathedral is located. CtK was built in 1937 when Buckhead was WAY out of town, and you could have gotten all the Catholics in North Georgia into a pole barn. Now the Cathedral parish alone has over 5,000 members, and the property is seriously overcrowded and built out to the max. But it is completely hemmed in on all sides - Peachtree Rd. to the west, commercial property to the south, two more churches to the north, and an existing residential neighborhood to the east.
This part of Buckhead is now a very trendy and expensive neighborhood, probably the most expensive in city limits except for West Paces Ferry - the little 3/2 bungalows on tiny lots behind the Cathedral are selling for anywhere from $600k to $1M (Zillow says you can get a real bargain on an unrenovated 1950s junker on a 10,000 s.f. lot - $375K!) The houses across Peachtree (W. Wesley/Habersham/Arden) are even more expensive. The Governor's Mansion is on the northern edge of that area.
Margaret Mitchell (the Gone With the Wind lady) had a nephew who died recently w/o family and left his home and land on Habersham as well as a large donation to the Archdiocese. The archdiocese (not the archbishop all by himself) developed a building plan which was approved two years ago: the current archbishop's residence on the Cathedral grounds was renovated and turned over to the clergy on Cathedral staff (there are six of them) for their residence, since they need to be on the spot while the archbishop travels a good deal. The Mitchell house was to be converted into the archbishop's new residence.
Somewhere in this process it was determined that the Mitchell house could not be renovated. My family has built 3 houses from scratch, added on to 2 of those and renovated two others - plus I've represented architects and general contractors, so I am pretty familiar with the calculus between renovation and new construction. I have no idea what exactly was determined, but there are plenty of reasons - structural, layout, condition - that a house can't be renovated cost-effectively, and you're just better off starting over.
$2.2 million is NOT an unreasonable cost in this neighborhood for either a "deep" renovation or new construction. There are some TEN AND FIFTEEN MILLION DOLLAR homes in this neighborhood. No joke.
You are contradicting him, he didn’t just apologize, he confessed, and he is selling the building.
While I understand and respect some of your argument, the bequest was for the CHURCH, not the ABP. So the CHURCH decided to spend the money. Moreover, I do not care who comes to visit the ABP, even the Pope himself. That is no reason to have expensive digs. Everything is a matter of perception. And especially in these days where religion is under continuous attack. The CEO argument fails miserably in the context of religion.