Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am doing that. I gathered up my savings and bought a building a block away from Five Points MARTA and am now building out commercial and residential space that will have no parking and cater to transit riders.
But the problem is zoning. Downtown is one of the few areas in the city where there are no parking minimums and no oppressive density restrictions. Now that the cat is out of the bag about south downtown all the buildings are getting bought up and transformed with minimal parking added. So I'd love (and no doubt others too) to find a similar project somewhere else in the metro but there is no way I am going to buy twice the amount of land only to fill it with parking.
Terrific move, jsvh. You're going to be very pleased with this astute investment.
With regard to parking, it's a matter of evolution. Even NYC (other than Manhattan) has required off-street parking minimums.
The reality is -- whether we like it or not -- Atlanta and most other large American cities have grown up around the automobile And parking is an inherent element of that.
That doesn't mean we can't start giving more priority to other ways of getting around. We can and we should.
However, reducing parking minimums is going to take developers who are willing to take the leap and pursue projects with less parking. That will also require lenders with enough vision to back those projects.
Based on the discussions I've had with city officials and planning staff over the years, I believe the city will support such reductions in the right situations. They're already looking at it in areas like the three major SPI's.
So if you've got a project in mind and would like have reduced parking or even no parking, I'd urge you to go ahead and file your application. Be sure you have your ducks in a row so that you can empirically demonstrate that your project will work and that it won't negatively impact the nearby areas.
I really wish I had the capital, and was in a place in my life where I could be doing some proper development myself. I'm not where near that, though. Oh well.
While it is certainly not easy, it is more possible than you think. The building I bought cost less than a house in the suburbs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjay57
Terrific move, jsvh. You're going to be very pleased with this astute investment.
With regard to parking, it's a matter of evolution. Even NYC (other than Manhattan) has required off-street parking minimums.
The reality is -- whether we like it or not -- Atlanta and most other large American cities have grown up around the automobile And parking is an inherent element of that.
That doesn't mean we can't start giving more priority to other ways of getting around. We can and we should.
However, reducing parking minimums is going to take developers who are willing to take the leap and pursue projects with less parking. That will also require lenders with enough vision to back those projects.
Based on the discussions I've had with city officials and planning staff over the years, I believe the city will support such reductions in the right situations. They're already looking at it in areas like the three major SPI's.
So if you've got a project in mind and would like have reduced parking or even no parking, I'd urge you to go ahead and file your application. Be sure you have your ducks in a row so that you can empirically demonstrate that your project will work and that it won't negatively impact the nearby areas.
That's how progress takes place.
It certainly is turning out better than I expected. I couldn't figure out why anyone was not hopping on this area of town with its great bones, connectivity, and history. But I still thought it was going to be a decade before people clued in and a serious turn around took root.
But yeah, that is why I have taken up such an interest in zoning. This project is made me realize how important it is in allowing our city to thrive, offer affordable housing options, and good transportation. I have already been trying to look into doing this again other parts of the city but the zoning is a big barrier. A lot of the good architects won't even look at a project if the zoning is not there. They have found these fights with the city and NPUs for rezonings to not be worth it. And after being in a lot of neighborhood and zoning meetings myself (as a neighbor) I must say I don't blame them.
That is why most developers just stick to building strip malls and McMansions, because it is what the zoning allows and encourages.
But yeah, that is why I have taken up such an interest in zoning. This project is made me realize how important it is in allowing our city to thrive, offer affordable housing options, and good transportation. I have already been trying to look into doing this again other parts of the city but the zoning is a big barrier. A lot of the good architects won't even look at a project if the zoning is not there. They have found these fights with the city and NPUs for rezonings to not be worth it. And after being in a lot of neighborhood and zoning meetings myself (as a neighbor) I must say I don't blame them.
That is why most developers just stick to building strip malls and McMansions, because it is what the zoning allows and encourages.
You might be surprised. Many, many areas on the north and east sides of town have been rezoned to allow for greatly increased density. And these are by NO means strip malls and McMansions -- they're very high quality, compact single family homes, townhomes, apartments and mixed use projects. You can often get zoning for 10-20 homes per acre and possibly more if you're in the right location.
You probably saw my post a few weeks ago giving a number of examples of this. What I see the NPUs (and to some extent the city) pushing for is quality. Put in a good project, work with the community and there's usually not all that much pushback.
You might be surprised. Many, many areas on the north and east sides of town have been rezoned to allow for greatly increased density. And these are by NO means strip malls and McMansions -- they're very high quality, compact single family homes, townhomes, apartments and mixed use projects. You can often get zoning for 10-20 homes per acre and possibly more if you're in the right location.
You probably saw my post a few weeks ago giving a number of examples of this. What I see the NPUs (and to some extent the city) pushing for is quality. Put in a good project, work with the community and there's usually not all that much pushback.
Well, the zoning laws say otherwise. The people might think they are pushing for "quality" but all the laws are mostly just restricting density. As long as you are in the setbacks, provide the required parking, and don't do anything radical like, gasp, split it into a duplex, you can build design the house to be literally look like a sore thumb if you want.
And while I am open to spending days of my life fighting to rezoning one parcel to slightly higher density, the many of the people that I have talked to that have spent a lot more time in the industry prefer to just avoid spending the extra tens of thousands of dollars and delay the project by months.
That is why our zoning overhaul is so badly needed. I think about every out there would prefer a duplex that fits in with the character of the neighborhood to a McMansions that is out of place. But our zoning laws dictate the opposite.
Well, the zoning laws say otherwise. The people might think they are pushing for "quality" but all the laws are mostly just restricting density. As long as you are in the setbacks, provide the required parking, and don't do anything radical like, gasp, split it into a duplex, you can build design the house to be literally look like a sore thumb if you want.
And while I am open to spending days of my life fighting to rezoning one parcel to slightly higher density, the many of the people that I have talked to that have spent a lot more time in the industry prefer to just avoid spending the extra tens of thousands of dollars and delay the project by months.
That is why our zoning overhaul is so badly needed. I think about every out there would prefer a duplex that fits in with the character of the neighborhood to a McMansions that is out of place. But our zoning laws dictate the opposite.
I'm honestly not following that, jsvh.
Harken back to the three projects I mentioned. (And there are MANY more like them).
Z-14-01: 2.99 acres on Shady Valley rezoned from R-3 to RG-4, to allow for 38 new residences.
Z-14-75: 4.41 acres on Wieuca rezoned from R-3 to MR-2-C to allow for 30 new residences.
Z-15-53: 2.1 acres on Haverhill rezoned from RG-2 to PDH to allow for 30 new residences.
How can you insist that these are not vastly increasing density? How else do they get 30 single family homes on two acres? Or 38 on 2.99 acres? That's packing them in pretty good. And these are high quality homes.
Yes, they had to go through the process but I don't think there were any humongous battles over it. This stuff is par for the course these days.
Yes, I still consider those all only slightly higher densities.
Also, good and poor quality McMansions can be built without rezonings in all of those. Most developments out there are built without dealing with rezoning.
Why keep the bad stuff legal and force those that want to do a good development to go through the wringer and spend tens of thousands of dollars and months of delay to their project?
Can you name anywhere else in the metro that is zoned to do a project like what I am doing in South Downtown (Build a mixed use commercial / residential building with zero lot line and no parking a block away from a rail MARTA station) for the price I paid (< $50 SF)?
Yes, I still consider those all only slightly higher densities.
Wow, I guess it is a matter of perspective.
With R-3 you'd normally get a maximum of 5 houses on 2 acres, so they're bumping it up by a multiple of 6 or 7.
Quote:
Can you name anywhere else in the metro that is zoned to do a project like what I am doing in South Downtown (Build a mixed use commercial / residential building with zero lot line and no parking a block away from a rail MARTA station) for the price I paid (< $50 SF)?
I sure can't, jsvh. It sounds to me me like you hit a homerun.
With R-3 you'd normally get a maximum of 5 houses on 2 acres, so they're bumping it up by a multiple of 6
I sure can't, jsvh. It sounds to me me like you hit a homerun.
And that is the problem. We have a lot of land in the metro, can't we open some more of it up to those of us that prefer an urban lifestyle? We drive a lot of people out to the suburbs and into cars that would prefer to be living in transit connected places in the city.
Even the "great deal" I got was still over $2M an acre and those prices have doubled since I bought last year. These artificial restrictions on density and urban living is doing a lot of hurt to affordability in the city.
And that is the problem. We have a lot of land in the metro, can't we open some more of it up to those of us that prefer an urban lifestyle? We drive a lot of people out to the suburbs and into cars that would prefer to be living in transit connected places in the city.
Even the "great deal" I got was still over $2M an acre and those prices have doubled since I bought last year. These artificial restrictions on density and urban living is doing a lot of hurt to affordability in the city.
$2 million an acre sounds pretty durn good for what you got.
How many housing units are you putting in?
What are they typically getting for those 2,600 acres around the MARTA stations?
$2 million an acre sounds pretty durn good for what you got.
How many housing units are you putting in?
What are they typically getting for those 2,600 acres around the MARTA stations?
Even nicer areas like Brookhaven go for less $1M an acre, often with a decent house on it. Doraville $0.3M an acre. Land in less desirable areas can be had for less than $0.05M ($50K) an acre.
I mean, we are talking power of ten price increases we are imposing on urbanites by artificially limiting our dense housing options near transit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
