The Atlanta BeltLine: Where Atlanta Comes Together

[Florida Power And Light]

It is absolute nonsense to say that Riverside-Avondale does not have architecture worth preserving.

But who exactly is saying that?  This is what I don't understand about people's comprehension.

So it must be RAP level discourse and regulatory action or you think that all history should be demolished?  I think RAP is an organization that gaslights all people into thinking that Riverside and Avondale would literally be a ghetto without the historic district status and oversight.  I contend that what we would be would actually be something better and further along than the neighborhood is now without all of the BS oversight.

It remains to be seen at this time if in fact Riverside and Avondale are to become a " Ghetto".
Riverside likely a bit ahead.
Ortega further behind.

[simms3]

Brooklyn is a good example of what happens when there is no preservation and/or design guideline policy in place with a little direction and teeth. Sure, economic development has happened. However, the place is about a cookie cutter and soul-less as can be.

Did Brooklyn really have the charm in the modern era that Avondale and Riverside have?  Nobody's going to wholesale bulldoze an entire intact single family neighborhood filled with sidewalks and historic homes just to build whole-block Group 4 Design apartment buildings.  And I can predict one response to that - Brooklyn was largely black and Riverside/Avondale largely white.  Yes, this is true.  Riverside/Avondale are actually pretty diverse now, but it's also more of a socioeconomic thing - Riverside/Avondale have way more general affluence and the residents and their existing home values would make it pretty hard to see the same thing happen.  Brooklyn was also largely already demolished by the time new investment decided to come in and the blank slate was part of the appeal for getting those larger developments off the ground.

I'm also willing to give Brooklyn a chance as it continues to develop into something better each year.  It's not even close to finished being built out.  What I will say as well is that in literally ANY major city, areas that are filled with predominantly new residential towers mixed in with office buildings are often soulless.  The "neighborhoods" are always where it's at in terms of life and charm.  Areas with smaller lot sizes are always more charming and walkable than areas with very large lot sizes.

Saying that what is going into Brooklyn would certainly happen wholesale to Riverside/Avondale if historic district regulation weren't in place is a form of the kind of gas lighting that I feel like happens in this city!  I think enough of us are at a certain intellectual level to know that it wouldn't!  I wish people *would* know that people still desire to come in and fix up an old home even without a historic district status attached to it (look at plenty of other neighborhoods just in Jax).

What I would welcome is small versions of the investment Brooklyn is getting on currently vacant or clearly teardown lots.  And if the designs of such infill weren't the apparently mandatory "new-old" bungalow look, I also wouldn't shed a tear.

On this very forum we have people salivating for real public transit and walkability (and cool things like we see in Atlanta), but many of the same people seem to be advocates for an organization and level of historic preservation oversight that kills infill investment and opportunity for increased density in the urban core in these areas.

The same crowd that wants more bars and this type of restaurant and that type of restaurant in Murray Hill also does not want any more apartments coming to the area.  It's sad to say, but it's the same type of mentality as the people in Baker County, who want more commercial and more restaurants but no more rooftops.


Bottom line, I'll go back to my original point - I wish we could give our neighborhoods the "Atlanta makeover", which would require loosening the thumb of RAP and existing historic district preservation guidelines, a makeover of our collective mentality towards growth and infill, and the welcoming of a wider variety of designs and densities into our urban core.

[thelakelander]

Brooklyn is a good example of what happens when there is no preservation and/or design guideline policy in place with a little direction and teeth. Sure, economic development has happened. However, the place is about a cookie cutter and soul-less as can be.

Did Brooklyn really have the charm in the modern era that Avondale and Riverside have?

It had the charm of Cabbagetown in Atlanta. Very different from Virginia-Highland, but still charm and preservation worthy with infill directed to certain corridors like Memorial Drive instead of Carroll Street.

[simms3]

Brooklyn is a good example of what happens when there is no preservation and/or design guideline policy in place with a little direction and teeth. Sure, economic development has happened. However, the place is about a cookie cutter and soul-less as can be.

Did Brooklyn really have the charm in the modern era that Avondale and Riverside have?

It had the charm of Cabbagetown in Atlanta. Very different from Virginia-Highland, but still charm and preservation worthy with infill directed to certain corridors like Memorial Drive instead of Carroll Street.

Yea, but in the very modern era did it?  I remember Brooklyn pre-Riverside Ave widening, and I even remember the old Acosta vaguely.  I just stayed at a buddy's in Cabbagetown as well.  I feel like at least in my lifetime, Brooklyn and LaVilla were pretty much already hollowed out.  I remember one fairly significant brick building on Riverside that was demolished to make way for the widening.  Obviously we all remember the firehouse that was demolished to make way for FIS (didn't the city provide opportunity for the private sector to come in, move it somewhere else and do something with it?)  I love brick, and certainly in my fantasies Jacksonville never demolished all of the downtown-surrounding areas, but the fact of the matter is that by the time new investment came to Brooklyn, it was long hollowed out (probably even well before RAP was formed).

I am focused on the here and now.  I do not think that Riverside and Avondale risk being demolished wholesale for cookie cutter crap and Group 4 Design/Vestcor disgusting apartments.  We do at least have the rents in those neighborhoods and the home values to fuel much better on a smaller infill scale.  So one has to ask oneself, why is it that there is never really any infill built in Riverside and Avondale?  Literally nothing ever gets built...there are empty lots and buildings in disrepair literally everywhere.  There's a lot "for sale" right freaking near the Shoppes of Avondale less than a block away on St. Johns that should be a no brainer.  There are people with brains and money.  So why doesn't even the low hanging fruit ever get eaten?  We have to ask ourselves this question and acknowledge that there may be an issue with over-regulation and activist level histrionics.

In fact, I'd like to add a garage apartment to my backyard over a garage (a minor form of infill is it not?), but I can't legally do so because I can't go above my current one-story roofline (nevermind the fact that there is a super cute 1934 one story on my own block with a matching two story garage and apartment in the back).  I'm not sure yet if this is a city zoning issue or a RAP overlay issue, but it is an example of just how far-reaching and ridiculous the regulations are on homeowners and why it's so damn hard to do anything cool, creative or "infill".

The regulations surrounding ADUs and the fight over even just slightly loosening them recently is just another example in this city of how crazy it is, how NIMBY it is, how over zealous everyone is for their "idea" of preservation and character maintenance.  In the views of the preservation activists, it is better for my one neighbor to keep his house looking like a crack house (and it is beyond repair and nobody will ever buy it because it's not worth saving) than it is for me to put in modern windows and a garage + upstairs apartment in the back of my 1952 cinder block home.

Isn't that scenario by definition discouraging investment on a small, homeowner scale?  So too is this type of stuff discouraging investment on a larger scale in our commercial areas.  Atlanta does not seem to have this issue in its urban core areas.

[thelakelander]

Brooklyn is a good example of what happens when there is no preservation and/or design guideline policy in place with a little direction and teeth. Sure, economic development has happened. However, the place is about a cookie cutter and soul-less as can be.

Did Brooklyn really have the charm in the modern era that Avondale and Riverside have?

It had the charm of Cabbagetown in Atlanta. Very different from Virginia-Highland, but still charm and preservation worthy with infill directed to certain corridors like Memorial Drive instead of Carroll Street.

Yea, but in the very modern era did it?  I remember Brooklyn pre-Riverside Ave widening, and I even remember the old Acosta vaguely.  I just stayed at a buddy's in Cabbagetown as well.  I feel like at least in my lifetime, Brooklyn and LaVilla were pretty much already hollowed out.  I remember one fairly significant brick building on Riverside that was demolished to make way for the widening.  Obviously we all remember the firehouse that was demolished to make way for FIS (didn't the city provide opportunity for the private sector to come in, move it somewhere else and do something with it?)  I love brick, and certainly in my fantasies Jacksonville never demolished all of the downtown-surrounding areas, but the fact of the matter is that by the time new investment came to Brooklyn, it was long hollowed out (probably even well before RAP was formed).

I'd consider the 1980s and 1990s to modern times. In 2000, Brooklyn was still pretty much in tact. Even after Riverside Avenue was widened, much of the neighborhood was still in tact. Much of the demolition has taken place since 2005 or 2006.

I am focused on the here and now.  I do not think that Riverside and Avondale risk being demolished wholesale for cookie cutter crap and Group 4 Design/Vestcor disgusting apartments.  We do at least have the rents in those neighborhoods and the home values to fuel much better on a smaller infill scale.  So one has to ask oneself, why is it that there is never really any infill built in Riverside and Avondale?  Literally nothing ever gets built...there are empty lots and buildings in disrepair literally everywhere.  There's a lot "for sale" right freaking near the Shoppes of Avondale less than a block away on St. Johns that should be a no brainer.  There are people with brains and money.  So why doesn't even the low hanging fruit ever get eaten?  We have to ask ourselves this question and acknowledge that there may be an issue with over-regulation and activist level histrionics.

In fact, I'd like to add a garage apartment to my backyard over a garage (a minor form of infill is it not?), but I can't legally do so because I can't go above my current one-story roofline (nevermind the fact that there is a super cute 1934 one story on my own block with a matching two story garage and apartment in the back).  I'm not sure yet if this is a city zoning issue or a RAP overlay issue, but it is an example of just how far-reaching and ridiculous the regulations are on homeowners and why it's so damn hard to do anything cool, creative or "infill".

The regulations surrounding ADUs and the fight over even just slightly loosening them recently is just another example in this city of how crazy it is, how NIMBY it is, how over zealous everyone is for their "idea" of preservation and character maintenance.  In the views of the preservation activists, it is better for my one neighbor to keep his house looking like a crack house (and it is beyond repair and nobody will ever buy it because it's not worth saving) than it is for me to put in modern windows and a garage + upstairs apartment in the back of my 1952 cinder block home.

Isn't that scenario by definition discouraging investment on a small, homeowner scale?  So too is this type of stuff discouraging investment on a larger scale in our commercial areas.  Atlanta does not seem to have this issue in its urban core areas.

I'm focused on the here and now, primarily with neighborhoods like LaVilla and Eastside. Brooklyn is used as the example of what they don't want their areas to become. On the other hand, they also don't want to be as stringent on infill development as Springfield and Riverside. Every neighborhood has a different vision. I don't know Riverside's, but stay out of their business as well.

[simms3]

I'd consider the 1980s and 1990s to modern times. In 2000, Brooklyn was still pretty much in tact. Even after Riverside Avenue was widened, much of the neighborhood was still in tact. Much of the demolition has taken place since 2005 or 2006.

I just looked at a satellite imagery from the 2004 basemap on Jax GIS and to me Brooklyn did not look very substantially intact at that point.  Riverside Ave had been widened by then and the blocks from Riverside to Magnolia were swept clean.  Most of the buildings lining Park are in fact still there at this point, and by 2004 the little residential areas were already mostly vacant lots and the houses that existed then are still mostly there today.

LaVilla was clearly long gone, super sadly.  Cringy driving past Sandy Yawn's and Daily's vacant lots today.

I'm focused on the here and now, primarily with neighborhoods like LaVilla and Eastside. Brooklyn is used as the example of what they don't want their areas to become. On the other hand, they also don't want to be as stringent on infill development as Springfield and Riverside. Every neighborhood has a different vision. I don't know Riverside's, but stay out of their business as well.

That's a fair point!  See and look at LaVilla, starting to get some infill coming in.  The Eastside is a future look, but I would consider the Union Terminal deal to be part of that neighborhood and that's a big investment.  These are much riskier areas when it comes to fundamentals, compared to Riverside and Avondale, yet I would argue pound for pound they are receiving more investment into new projects.  San Marco certainly is receiving a lot of new investment, and we can all see it.

I'm glad to hear that there are areas that want looser restrictions than are in place in Riverside/Avondale because things would grind to a halt all over the city if the whole urban core adopted RAP's control exertion.

[thelakelander]

I'm with a client today but will share photos of Brooklyn spaces that have been razed since we've had the forums, tomorrow.

[HeartofFlorida]

It's good to have 16 Fortune 500 corporations headquartered in your city.

It's more important to have a vision and visionaries that will see a plan to fruition than Fortune 500 corporations.  All the money in the world means nothing if you throw it into a dumpster fire.  Atlanta (and other places large and small) make a plan, rally the community and stick it out with a common goal in mind.

[thelakelander]

Great point. Jax is a good example of a city that has thrown lots of money into a dumpster fire, having only vacant lots from demolitions to show for it. I'd argue that Lakeland is a good example of doing the opposite. Lakeland only has one Fortune 500 company. Yet, it was able to fund a $100 million park with private money. That only happens after a city has demonstrated its willingness to invest in itself in a right and efficient way.

[HeartofFlorida]

Great point. Jax is a good example of a city that has thrown lots of money into a dumpster fire, having only vacant lots from demolitions to show for it. I'd argue that Lakeland is a good example of doing the opposite. Lakeland only has one Fortune 500 company. Yet, it was able to fund a $100 million park with private money. That only happens after a city has demonstrated its willingness to invest in itself in a right and efficient way.

The first (and probably most important) step is getting the collective mindset heading in the same direction.  I don't know much about J-ville but living in Atlanta and a being native Lakelander, I can attest that years of me being overly critical and frustrated about my hometown have paid off with some things they've gotten right. 

Going back almost 2 decades when the city (Lakeland) made a push for downtown residential infill projects, I was EXTREMELY skeptical that they would get it right, let alone get anything off the ground.  I'm sure you recall back in 2007 when acquisition of the area north of the police station was targeted for massive residential infill via eminent domain.  It took years for the city to complete getting the land and even longer to find the right developer to kickstart that project but in the end, Lakeland got what it wanted in the Mirrorton project.  That's part of the first step.  Since that time, several more infill projects have been proposed, U/C or completed as if the flood gates have opened up.  The most recent being Lake Wire on the former Florida Tile site.  I love the project but if there's anything I could change, I would add a little more height even if the project had an extra phase or two as I feel the density aspect is a little underwhelming topping out at 4 stories.

I am more excited to see other projects that have been proposed, particularly infill on the Ledger property and the proposed 7-story residential mid-rise a block east of Florida Avenue and Lawton Chiles Middle.  Below is a list of items pulled from Catalyst Lakeland.  The site is great in visualization but poor in execution:


Vision
Massachusetts + Oak Phase 1: Mixed Use: 5 stories - 9,300 SF, 88 Units
Massachusetts + Oak Phase 2: Mixed Use: 5 stories - 9,300 SF, 88 Units
Police Station site: 350 residential Units
Catapult lot: 172 residential units - multifamily/Parking garage/retail
West DT: 240 Unit & 80 Unit
City Parking lot: 344 Residential Units

In Design
Oak Street: Multifamily/Retail/Garage - 7 stories -201,600 SF - 200 Units
The Joinery expansion
The Ledger Redevelopment - 1500 Units

U/C
Lake Wire Multifamily - 630 Units
Indiana + Lime Apts - 48 Units
Orange Street Apts - 32 Units

Completed
2016 NoBay: Multifamily/Retail - 60,000 SF - 54 Units
2019 Yard on Mass: 2,800 SF
2019 Heritage Plaza Garage (824): 40000 SF-Office-Retail
2019 632 Lake Mirror: Office-17,500 SF
2020 Mirrorton: 305 units
2020 Springhill Suites Hotel: 96,000 SF-126 room
2020 Catalyst: Office/Incubator: 40,000 SF
2020 The Joinery: 14,000 SF
2020 Rec Room:
2021 The Garden: Multifamily - 90 units
2021 Midtown Lofts: 80 units
2021 The Well: 4,700 SF
2022 Summit Consulting: 130,000 SF-Office/Parking Garage


Available Surface Lots
Wells Fargo
Terrace Hotel
Lake Mirror Center


Another big factor in alignment with some of the plans Lakeland has is the mayor on record and a driving force behind the push for 8,500 people living in DT Lakeland.