• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Little Five Points Studio Georgia Tech Graduate City Planning Studio Led by Professor Michael Dobbins This report was authored by: Georgia Tech Graduate Studio Professor Mike Dobbins Daniel Arias Cameron Boissiere Ed Caddell Kelly Dervarics Deborah Postma Cooper Scranton Rachel Staley Charles Stickels With guidance from the Little Five Points Alliance Additional support: Candler Park Neighborhood Organization Inman Park Neighborhood Association Little Five Points Business Association Little Five Points CID 1 Table of Contents Objective .........................................................................................................3 History of Little Five Points ...............................................................................5 Demographics of Little Five Points .................................................................7 Previous Plans for the area .............................................................................9 Public Engagement Process ........................................................................11 Crossing Moreland ........................................................................................14 Moreland Streetscape ..................................................................................24 Ramps to Dekalb ...........................................................................................38 Connectivity ..................................................................................................48 Findley/Euclid Plaza ......................................................................................62 Parking in Little Five Points ............................................................................68 Economic Development ..............................................................................96 Bass Field ......................................................................................................110 2 PLANNING CONTEXT OVERVIEW/OBJECTIVE The Little Five Points studio is a required issues, we were encouraged to consider practicum for students in their second the widest range of ideas that others year of the Master’s program in City had and that we had. In other words, and Regional Planning at Georgia at this point, we were not to restrain our Tech. Its teaching purpose is to prepare thinking by all the barriers that inevitably students for entry into the working world. would stand in the way of actions. Students synthesize the theoretical knowledge they have gained in their Assessment of Choices other course work, which they apply The interactions between our research, to real world planning and design analysis, and ideation then provided problems. a way to frame the choices that might emerge for further action, a Faculty identify places or issues that decision agenda. For that purpose, we afford students the opportunity to developed a system of measurement develop approaches for considering that we came to call a “truth filter.” This the problems comprehensively, device provided us the framework for involving the steps required to complete assessing the issues that would lie before a full report on their findings, as might moving forward on the range of ideas be expected in practice. These steps that we and others in the community include research, issue identification, had. ideation, analysis, consideration of options, and conclusions. Aimed at resolving outstanding issues, these truth filters provide a way of In the case of Little Five Points, Professor gauging the feasibility and utility of Mike Dobbins heard from a colleague proceeding on any one or another who lives in the neighborhood that of the ideas. Thus we have set up there were a number of issues that she measuring sticks in four categories: thought might be ripe for consideration cost, organizational complexity, and in the studio teaching environment. And positive impact, for which we have set indeed they filled the bill for meeting the measures from low to high, and the studio teaching purpose. timeline, for which we have set the measures from short to long. Accordingly, we formed the studio and set out to research the issues and At this point, these measures frame engage the ranges of organizations a sense, not a quantitative metric, of and individuals involved in all aspects of their interactive effects on assessing community activity. This report lays out utility and feasibility. For example, an the results of that quest. idea might seem great with potentially a high positive impact, but when Issues and Ideas considering the cost, including the Issues identification emerged through likelihood of funding sources, the reading history and past reports, organizational collaborations necessary extensive field trips, and engagement to move it forward, and the length of with all the relevant citizen and business time required to carry it out, the idea organizations. In our analysis of the might lose its allure. Conversely, an idea 3 might seem more modest, but still have a positive impact, a manageable cost and funding source, and high prospects for organizational cooperation - then the idea might be a go. Outcomes Finally, what we offer represents four months’ worth of effort that has generated zeal from what we have learned to push some of these kinds of ideas and assessments forward, here or in our future practice. There are many specific observations in the following Inman Park residents visit the studio to pages that we hope the communities provide history and context to the students. will find useful in pursuing positive October 2019. outcomes. On a broader scale, we hope that this work will feed information and ideas into the current Euclid LCI. We believe also that the work could play a role in producing amendments or follow-ups to the 2017 Moreland LCI so that, as modified, it could attain the approvals necessary to support follow- on capital funding for one or another projects addressed here. We deeply appreciate the opportunities and support provided to us from the Attendees of a Little Five Points Alliance full range of community representation meeting gather to view boards presented and particularly to the Little Five Points by the studio group. November 2019. Alliance. We hope that this work will assist in the Alliance’s mission to find cohesion around the issues it is trying to knit together, which we view as an absolute necessity to sustain all of Little Five’s unique assets while providing for unmet needs. The Alliance’s support for sure has advanced and enriched our teaching and learning experience. Thank you! - Mike Dobbins and studio 4 PLANNING CONTEXT HISTORY OF LITTLE FIVE POINTS Named for its convergence of five Organization of Neighborhood streets akin to Five Points in Downtown Development or BOND was formed in Atlanta, Little Five Points came into 1972; Bass refers to the original name existence as the result of expanding for Little Five Points, which was Bass transportation and neighborhoods District. BOND was the first community along these five streets. In the 1890s, based credit union in Georgia and the first Atlanta streetcars were helped finance local homeownership constructed just south of the Little Five in the area. Points. The population of Atlanta’s Eastside grew as the new trolley lines The 1970s revitalization of Little Five served the surrounding neighborhoods Points continued to expand as more of Inman Park, Edgewood, Candler businesses were opened, homes Park and Poncey-Highland. As the were restored, and improvements result of converging trolley lines and were made. The eclectic atmosphere booming neighborhoods nearby, Little of Little Five Points was solidified Five Points was formed and became a through its opening of unique retail major commercial district in the Atlanta and dining establishments. Additional area. Little Five Points was officially draw came with the formation of designated in the early 1920s as a Radio Free Georgia in 1973 and the commercial area by the City of Atlanta. Little Five Points Halloween Festival in the 1970s with the addition of the From the 1920s to the 1960s, Little Five parade in 2000. Today, Little Five Points was a thriving commercial district Points continues to be a thriving that relied on the support of surrounding commercial district that boasts neighborhoods as both prospered. over 60 unique retail and dining New developments continued to be establishment, street art throughout constructed, and there were grocery the area, and multiple entertainment stores, drugstores, movie theaters and centers. a variety of dining establishments in the area. By the 1970s, however, Little Five Points was in a state of deterioration due to the proposed construction of a highway through the surrounding neighborhoods and white flight from the city. Residential and commercial buildings in the area were vacant and rundown. A revitalization soon took place as people began to buy and rehab the existing residential and commercial buildings in the area after being priced out in other neighborhoods. Additionally, the Bass Businesses along Moreland, 1980 5 Findley Plaza 1978 Euclid Drugs at Euclid and Colquitt, 1980 6 PLANNING CONTEXT DEMOGRAPHICS Little Five Points and it’s surrounding neighborhoods sit within the larger Atlanta area, a racially and economically diverse metropolitan region. In order to examine demographic data specific to our area of study, we used census tract data from the US Census Bureau, as well as previously collected data found in the Lifelong Inman Park report and

Load more

  125

Copy Link