The Worst of Atlanta Urbanism (Duluth: low income, real estate, 2015)

[arjay57]

Well, I have to agree with some of these.

The Worst of Atlanta Urbanism, 2016

[Forhall]

Mostly agree except 8 and 10. There's nothing wrong with focusing on luxury apartments and homes and not low income for a while, as Atlanta needs many years of gentrification to become safe and we need upscale housing to bring in the people most likely to gentrify.

And underground Atlanta is disgusting and needs to be redeveloped regardless of what the developer demands. They require the streets so they can clean them up protect their investments.

[ATL Urbanist]

Underground is sad as hell and should have been sold for redevelopment years ago. But that's no reason to give away the streets along with the parcels, particularly not to WRS which has experience in nothing more than the development of Walmart-anchored suburban strip malls.

There's a sweet spot that sits in between the horrible status quo of Underground and "give the suburban strip mall developer whatever they want, even the streets." That sweet spot is worth finding. These streets have been anchoring the historic grid of the city since 1840. They sit beside the busiest transit station in the system. What happens at Underground will affect Downtown greatly for decades to come. Getting it right with a forward-thinking redevelopment is important.

[Forhall]

Originally Posted by ATL Urbanist

Underground is sad as hell and should have been sold for redevelopment years ago. But that's no reason to give away the streets along with the parcels, particularly not to WRS which has experience in nothing more than the development of Walmart-anchored suburban strip malls.

There's a sweet spot that sits in between the horrible status quo of Underground and "give the suburban strip mall developer whatever they want, even the streets." That sweet spot is worth finding. These streets have been anchoring the historic grid of the city since 1840. They sit beside the busiest transit station in the system. What happens at Underground will affect Downtown greatly for decades to come. Getting it right with a forward-thinking redevelopment is important.

Making the streets private is not a big deal. People are really over thinking it and throwing around images of people getting kicked off of the street, etc. That's not going to happen except maybe to loiterers who are doing nothing but trying to cause trouble, and I think we can all agree that's a good thing. Instead, imagine all the freedom they will have. Instead of begging the City to upgrade lighting or provide landscaping, the developer can do it themselves. It's a chance to really change the whole area around underground for the better. Give it a chance.

On the other hand, I agree with you about WRS. Hopefully they try to make something a little more upscale. A Walmart anchored development in the heart of downtown will do nothing to attract the type of people needed to really gentrify downtown. The new development needs to be independent shops and restaurants along with more upscale chain stores like Anthropologie, Pottery Barn, maybe a department store like Saks or Nordstrom, etc.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by Forhall

Making the streets private is not a big deal. People are really over thinking it and throwing around images of people getting kicked off of the street, etc. That's not going to happen except maybe to loiterers who are doing nothing but trying to cause trouble, and I think we can all agree that's a good thing. Instead, imagine all the freedom they will have. Instead of begging the City to upgrade lighting or provide landscaping, the developer can do it themselves. It's a chance to really change the whole area around underground for the better. Give it a chance.

On the other hand, I agree with you about WRS. Hopefully they try to make something a little more upscale. A Walmart anchored development in the heart of downtown will do nothing to attract the type of people needed to really gentrify downtown. The new development needs to be independent shops and restaurants along with more upscale chain stores like Anthropologie, Pottery Barn, maybe a department store like Saks or Nordstrom, etc.

Instead of focusing on luxury stores, the UA project needs to focus on retail that will help all of downtown's residents and priced for everyone. Why are we so quick to judge WRS, there was a point where Cobb County's Paces Properties had never done an adaptive reuse project, but they were given an opportunity.
While I agree the street abandonment should have required public input, I can see where WRS is coming from. One of the things that has kept other Atlanta-based developers away from UA project is the fact that many middle income and above consumers have a stigma of the area as being unsafe due to the loitering problem. Privatizing the streets will allow WRS greater ability to patrol these streets, than APD can.

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by cqholt

While I agree the street abandonment should have required public input, I can see where WRS is coming from. One of the things that has kept other Atlanta-based developers away from UA project is the fact that many middle income and above consumers have a stigma of the area as being unsafe due to the loitering problem. Privatizing the streets will allow WRS greater ability to patrol these streets, than APD can.

There are tons of downtowns all across America that have made turnarounds without privatizing city streets. If you redevelop downtown by providing retail and other amenities that a lot of people will actually lose, that takes care of the loitering problem--solution by dilution. Privatizing the streets comes across as a very suburban-minded solution IMO.

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by Mutiny77

There are tons of downtowns all across America that have made turnarounds without privatizing city streets. If you redevelop downtown by providing retail and other amenities that a lot of people will actually lose, that takes care of the loitering problem--solution by dilution. Privatizing the streets comes across as a very suburban-minded solution IMO.

It's actually quite common in many urban areas across the world. My daughter's home in the heart of Central London (Belgravia) sits on a private street across from a private park.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...-direct-action

[Stormhammer]

Originally Posted by Mutiny77

There are tons of downtowns all across America that have made turnarounds without privatizing city streets. If you redevelop downtown by providing retail and other amenities that a lot of people will actually lose, that takes care of the loitering problem--solution by dilution. Privatizing the streets comes across as a very suburban-minded solution IMO.

I can't recall the specifics, but I know when Duluth was turning itself around, the powers that be made sure that the city still had ownership of the streets/sidewalks.

Why, you may ask? Because if they wanted to throw an event/festival, they wouldn't have to go to every single business and ask permission to do so. I found it to be a smart move on their part.

In regards to point #1 - most mixed use developments are going to have parking... otherwise you're going to severely limit yourself on consumers. However, I haven't seen how it specifically affects the Beltline ( e.g. is the roadway into it crossing over the Beltline )

... I'm mildly envious that a mixed use development where you can live in an apartment with a Kroger, a Chickfila, AND a Waffle House.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by Stormhammer

I can't recall the specifics, but I know when Duluth was turning itself around, the powers that be made sure that the city still had ownership of the streets/sidewalks.

Why, you may ask? Because if they wanted to throw an event/festival, they wouldn't have to go to every single business and ask permission to do so. I found it to be a smart move on their part.

In regards to point #1 - most mixed use developments are going to have parking... otherwise you're going to severely limit yourself on consumers. However, I haven't seen how it specifically affects the Beltline ( e.g. is the roadway into it crossing over the Beltline )

... I'm mildly envious that a mixed use development where you can live in an apartment with a Kroger, a Chickfila, AND a Waffle House.

Duluth does not have the stigma issues that plaque UA and Five Points area. WRS wants to attract top name tenants and customers, but many people are afraid of that area due to the loitering and perceived crime issues.

[Forhall]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Duluth does not have the stigma issues that plaque UA and Five Points area. WRS wants to attract top name tenants and customers, but many people are afraid of that area due to the loitering and perceived crime issues.

Exactly correct.

People don't understand how much hedging of bets there is in real estate. UA won't be developed until the developer is sure they have tenants. When they go to tenants, especially upmarket stores, they will look at the site and ask "Why would I put my upper middle income shop in this sketchy area with tons of homeless, loiterers, and even gun violence?" The developer must be able to say "We will own the streets and clean it up". If they respond with "We are hoping APD or the city does something" then the other side will walk away.

Reality is, the only types of shops you will get with the streets as they currently stands are check cashing, laundry mats, bail bondsman, and Walmart. That's sort of the opposite of gentrfication and will lead to a much worse downtown. Getting tenants like Sprouts, Whole Foods, a high end fitness center, Starbucks, Nordstrom, and all of the higher end boutique stores will require massive investment and beautification. That requires the developer to have control, not begging city of Atlanta to do it on their own time and dime.