ISCOVER D XPERIENCE E XPLORE DEKALB COUNTY

COMMISSION DISTRICT 2 PRODUCED BY THE DEKALB COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY (LONG RANGE PLANNING DIVISION) TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE Of CONTENTS

Statement of Purpose ...... 4

Vision Statement ...... 5

Commissioner Biography ...... 6

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Community Assets...... 7

Methodology ...... 9

Population ...... 10

Education ...... 28

Housing ...... 34

Income ...... 48

Transportation ...... 54

Current State ...... 58

Next Steps ...... 60

Conclusion ...... 61

3   2 DEKALB COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS VISION STATEMENT STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

DISTRICT 2 ITH RESPECT FOR THE ROLES OF THE OTHER TWO W BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT, THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF DEKALB COUNTY, THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, IS COMMITTED TO EXCELLENCE IN PUBLIC SERVICE AS A WAY FOR THE PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE IN The purpose of the Commission District 2 Profile is to create an informative resource for A RESPONSIVE GOVERNMENT. County constituents and stakeholders that highlights pertinent information about the District. The profile describes key statistics about the District’s asset conditions and demographics, provides a peer analysis from other Districts, County-level comparisons and proposed next steps. The District profile is designed to showcase the strengths of the District while conveying the challenges and opportunities that the district’s constituents, employers, employees and xcellence is defined by fulfillment of our mission visitors encounter. This base of information will set the platform for well-informed dialogue and through: innovative policies for the future of District 2. E • Embracing and valuing the diversity of the community • Creating sound public policy • Providing independent oversight • Prioritizing and allocating resources • Collaborative problem solving

Statement of Purpose Vision Statement  5  4 w

JEFF RADER COMMUNITY ASSETS

DISTRICT 2

E-IMAGINE WHAT IT MEANS TO LIVE IN A COMMUNITY THAT ENHANCES THE R QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL RESIDENTS REGARDLESS OF THEIR E THNICITY , H OUSING TYPE, OR E CONOMIC STATUS

Commissioner Jeff Rader’s legislative agenda has focused on governmental integrity and quality of life. The Commissioner has sponsored legislation regulating late night establishments as well as legislation requiring Interior Housing Code Compliance for multifamily rental housing. Additionally, Commissioner Rader is an advocate for seniors, advancing Life Long Communities and championing a new 15,000 SF Senior Center in Mason Mill Park, which opened in 2015. EDUCATION HISTORY RECREATION Rader serves as Chairman of the Association of County Commissioners of Georgia Federal DRUID HILLS HISTORIC DISTRICT DRUID HILLS GOLF CLUB Committee, as vice-chairman of its Defined Contribution Pension Fund Board, and on the The center is part of the DeKalb County The Druid Hills Historic District was The club has roots that date as far back ACCG Policy Council. He is also a member of the Georgia Planning Association Board of School System and offers resources not established in order to protect and as 1912 and the original golf course was Directors, representing planning officials. Mr. Rader’s work has been widely recognized. only for teachers and students, but the preserve the late 19th/early 20th designed by Herbert Barker that same In 2014, he was honored by Common Cause with a Democracy Award for his work to public as well. Along with its spectacular century architecture associated with the year. In 2003, the course underwent major improve governmental transparency. In 2013, he received ACCG’s Legislative Advocacy planetarium shows featuring its digital neighborhood. It is enforced through renovation. The history of the Druid Hills Award. Prior awards include Citizen Action’s Citizen of the Year, and a German Marshall immersive projection system, the Science zoning laws and guidelines. This process Golf Club is an interesting one. More Fund of the United States Fellowship. Center offers an array of science-related protects Druid Hills and its property owners recently, the golf club has been the host events and exhibits. by preventing construction and alterations of the qualifying tournaments for the U.S. In his private life, Rader is a City Planner, and has held staff positions in local government, that may not be in keeping with the historic Women’s Open as well as the Dogwood served as Vice President for Transportation Programs at the Metro Chamber architecture and streetscape of Druid Hills. Invitational, a top-tier amateur tournament of Commerce, the inaugural Planning Director of the Georgia Regional Transportation for men. Authority, Executive Director of the Regional Business Coalition, and Vice President of the Greater Atlanta Home Builders Association. Currently, he is a Principal with Commons Civic Planning and Development, a non-profit devoted to enhancing the public realm and expanding the sharing economy.

Board of Commissioners Mission Statement To improve the quality of life for stakeholders of PEAVINE CREEK PATEL PLAZA DECATUR WATER WORKS DeKalb County through governance, representation, and accountability.

Commissioner Jeff Rader /[email protected] / 404-371-2863 DISTRICT HIGHLIGHTS

Commissioner Biography Community Asset  7  6 DISTRICT 2 METHODOLOGY DEMOGRAPHIC DISTRICT 2 RESEARCH AND

To obtain the estimates depicted in the charts and infographs found in this report, staff did an analysis of the area using Esri’s Community Analyst COMPARISON COMMITMENT: software. Community Analyst data contains estimates generated by Esri’s WE STRIVE TO GIVE OUR team of demographers, statisticians and analysts as well as data from the VERY BEST. US Census, the American Community Survey, administrative records and private sources. In order to analyze the spatial characteristics of certain features, data from the American Community Survey was downloaded from the Atlanta Regional Commission and mapped. This same set of data will also provide the basis for the proposed next steps at the end of the document. However, it is important to keep a few key facts in mind:

1. Estimates are just that; estimates. Additionally, each estimate has a margin of error or MOE. The MOE is a measure of the variability of the estimate due to sampling error.

2. The most current, accurate estimates for each feature were obtained. For comparative purposes, this means that only information from the same datasets can be compared. Looking for patterns between different vintages or sampling methods might yield less than accurate results. (The exception being information regarding the change in features over time.) Essentially, variety of methods/means used to compile this information results in minor discrepancies between them. Despite this, the data presented in this report is still valid information that comes from reputable agencies and can give us meaningful information about the population in the area we are discussing--bearing in mind analysts (and readers) are aware that these discrepancies exist.

Commissioner Rader at the groundbreaking

Methodology  9  8 POPULATION

District 2

This section highlights certain segments of the population in the unincorporated region of Commission District 2. What is the importance of this? The answer is simple: people and the built environment are inextricably linked. In order to understand a place, look no further than its residents. After all, each community develops its own specific character from its people. By identifying the characteristics of a population that inhabits a space, DeKalb County officials are able to make plans and policies to meet the unique needs of a given area. Therefore, in this section, the following attributes will be discussed: •Total population numbers •Race and Ethnicity HONESTY: •Age Cohorts and Median Age WE WILL BE HONEST WITH EACH •Educational Enrollment and Attainment OTHER AND OUR STAKEHOLDERS BY COMMUNICATING OPENLY AND •Vulnerable Members of the Population PROFESSIONALLY.

Population  11  10 The population for the entirety of District TOTAL UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 POPULATION CHANGES UN- 2 accounts for about POPULATION INCORPO- 20.79% of DeKalb’s The population for the entirety of Unincorporated District 2 Population Change District 2 amounts to approximately RATED DEKALB total population. This NUMBERS 120000 112,622 number can be broken 152,823 residents which accounts for COUNTYDistrict DIS 2- 100000 20.8% of the DeKalb County region’s down into two parts: TRICT 2 total population. This chart depicts the unincorporated 80000 how the population of Unincorporated region and its 62,866 District 2 has changed over the years. municipalities. 60000 The decrease in residents from 2010 While raw numbers to 2017 is primarily attributed to the are important 40000 incorporation of Brookhaven and the 20000 annexation of other municipalities. 152,823 from a growth Furthermore, the slight decrease that management and 0 is seen in 2017 is more than likely due 2010 2017 to the City of Atlanta’s annexation service delivery of the areas in and around . (Source(s): U.S. Census standpoint, it is Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File also important that 1, Esri 2017 data.) The estimated This graph shows the annual rate of Unincorporated we investigate Annual Rate Population Percent Increase figure for the population percent increase for the District 2 Unincorporated other segments current boundaries of Unincorporated 2010-2018 2018-2023 region of District 2 of the population District 2 in comparison to the current is: boundaries of the Unincorporated and analyze any DeKalb County. Although these are only predictions, the population is 0.99% emerging pattern. projected to increase annually at a 62,866 In order to ensure percentage higher than that of the 0.78% County’s. Source(s): U.S. Census the sustainability of 0.95% Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. 0.53% Esri forecasts for 2018 and 2023.) the unincorporated Unincorporated DeKalb County Unincorporated District 2 parts of the County, policymakers must The estimated come up with Incorporated figure for the strategies to alleviate Cities population residing in District 2’s cities the need for future is approximately: incorporations and annexations. (Source: American 89,957 Community Survey)

(Source(s): Esri 2017 Estimates) Commissioner Rader at MLK Dinner in Brookhaven

13   12 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 RACE AND ETHNICITY

ccording to the American Community Survey, the race and ethnicity of Aresidents is a critical factor in the basic research behind numerous policies— especially those for civil rights. This data can also be used in planning and funding government programs that provide services for specific groups as well as to evaluate programs and policies to ensure their equity. The table on this page shows the racial and ethnic breakdown of residents in the unincorporated region of District 2 as a percentage. The bars and the “Difference” column show how these numbers deviate from the same features for DeKalb County. Unincorporated District 2 is a predominantly white District; its population of residents identifying as black or African American is 42.08% less than that of the County’s. However, Asian residents and residents who are two or more races are somewhat higher than the corresponding County percentages. (Source: Esri 2017 estimates) Additionally, a spatial context is needed to give more weight to these numbers.

ATLANTA DEKALB CARNIVALE 2017 15   14 This depicts the percentage of the non-Hispanic white population at the Census Tract level and divided by This depicts the percentage of the non-Hispanic African American population at the Census Tract level and Commission District. With the exception of a few tracts in and around Brookhaven and Chamblee, almost the divided by Commission District. In almost direct contrast to the map page opposite, the tracts in around entire region of District 2 is predominately white. Brookhaven and Chamblee as well as Decatur appear to have the highest concentration of African American residents--though their percentages are much lower than elsewhere in the County.

17   16 This depicts the percentage of the non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander population at the Census Tract This depicts the percentage of the Hispanic or Latino population at the Census Tract level and divided by level and divided by Commission District. The northern tracts in and around Chamblee as well as the parts of Commission District. With the odd exception, it seems that the cities of Brookhaven and Chamblee have the Atlanta that contain Emory University appear to have the highest concentrations of residents that are Asian or highest concentration of Hispanic or Latino residents. Pacific Islanders.

19   18 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 AGE GROUPS AND SENIOR CITIZENS

It is important to ask questions about age to understand the size and characteristics of different age groups. This is primarily for governing bodies that provide assistance or services for specific age groups such as children, working- age adults, women of childbearing age, or the older population. Age-related data can also help enforce laws, regulations, and policies against age discrimination. (Source: American Community Survey) The infographic to the left depicts the breakdown of age in the unincorporated region of District 2. With a median age of 37.7, the majority of Unincorporated District 2’s population (69.5%) is aged 15-64. However, it is important to note that 15.3% of residents are 65 years old or more. This is much higher than the percentage for the entire County (11.8%); the population percentage for senior citizens is higher still for Unincorporated DeKalb (12.2%). This implies that residents aged 65 and over are more concentrated in unincorporated areas--and more concentrated still in Unincorporated District 2. (Source(s): Esri 2016 estimates)

This chart shows the changes in Unincorporated District 2’s senior Unincorporated District 2 Changes in population over time. According to the graph, the senior population Senior Population has increased 6% in the last seven years, indicating that the District may have an aging population. 15.30% (Source(s): U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1, Esri 2017 estimates.) 9.30%

2010 2017

This depicts the percentage of the population over 65 at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. The majority of senior citizens appear to be concentrated in Districts 1,2 and 3, although the other areas appear to have some tracts with a high percentage of senior citizens. In Unincorporated District 2, the tracts with the highest percentages of seniors appear to be in the central and northeastern parts of the District.

21   20 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 VULNERABLE MEMBERS OF THE POPULATION

As with senior citizens, there are certain members of the population that it is important to collect data on because of the question of equity. We must look at statistics for certain groups of people to ensure their needs are being met. Data about vehicle availability, the veteran population, poverty or residents living with disabilities can help to provide assistance or services to meet their needs. It also functions as a means to evaluate other government programs and policies to ensure they fairly and equitably serve these residents. (Source: American Community Survey)

Essentially, these are members of the population that must be protected and it is important to see where these individuals are located in order to ensure that they are getting adequate service.

UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 HOUSEHOLDS BY POVERTY STATUS The chart below depicts the rate of poverty at the County and District level in both their incorporated and unincorporated regions. The chart suggests that areas with higher concentrations of poverty exist in municipalities as well as the unincorporated areas. Unincorporated District 2’s poverty level is 5.3% lower than that of Unincorporated DeKalb. The DeKalb region as a whole has a poverty rate of 19.00%, a figure that is somewhat higher. Furthermore, although the poverty rates for the County are higher than Unincorporated District 2’s, it is important to look at the spatial distribution in order to understand where it is concentrated. By doing this, poverty alleviation efforts could be made more effective. (Source(s): American Community Survey 2016 five year estimates as prepared by Esri, American Community Survey 2016 five year estimates)

Income in the past 12 months below poverty level 20.00% 19.00% 18.00% 16.90% 16.00% 14.00% 12.80% 11.50% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% This map depicts the percentage of the population living below the poverty line the Census Tract level and 0.00% divided by Commission District. Poverty appears to be the most concentrated in the parts of Brookhaven, District 2 Unincorporated DeKalb County Unincorporated Chamblee that are near Buford Highway as well as Atlanta and Decatur. However, areas in the unincorporated District 2 DeKalb County region--such as the parts north of Atlanta and south of Chamblee also have areas that are either comparable to or higher than the county percentages.

23   22 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 DISABILITY AND MOBILITY

The infographs on this page indicate that an estimated 172 or .58% households in the area do not have a vehicle. More significantly, over 3,941 households (or approximately 13.18%) in Unincorporated District 2 have at least one person living with a disability. In this context, a disability as defined by the American Community Survey includes those with a condition that is physical, mental, or sensory (such as blindness or deafness), but can also include other conditions that may result in difficulty with self-care, going outside the home or employment. Because households with no vehicle require a robust transit system and residents with disabilities need access to services, it is crucial to see where both of these groups are located. (Source(s): American Community Survey 2016 five year estimates as prepared by Esri) UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 VETERANS The veteran population of Unincorporated District 2 accounts for approximately 11.09% of the Unincorporated County’s. Likewise, when cities are factored into the equation, District 2’s veteran population increases slightly to 14.13%% of that of the county’s. As the district has nearly a quarter of the veteran population, it is important that there be a spatial representation of where they are concentrated. (Source(s): American Community Survey 2016 five year estimates as prepared by Esri.)

There are There are 2,740 5,597 Veterans in Unincorporated Veterans in the entire District 2 District 2 region

There are There are 39,603 24,074 Veterans in the entire Veterans in Unincorporated DeKalb County region DeKalb County This map illustrates the percentage of civilian veterans at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. In comparison to other areas such as Districts 3 and 5, District 2 appears to have a relatively low Right: Atlanta Veteran’s Day Parade percentage of veterans. However, there are still one or two tracts in the eastern and western-most portions of the district that where at least 8.41% to 10.70% of their population are veterans.

25   24 This map depicts the percentage of the civilian, non-institutionalized population living with a disability at the This map illustrates vehicle availability at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. Much like with the veteran population, District 2 has a The highest percentages of residents without automobiles in District 2 appear to be in Decatur and Buford somewhat lower concentration of residents living with a disability than other districts. However, it is important Highway area--both of which are located relatively close to MARTA stations--with the exception of the to keep in mind that many disabled residents may need to travel to places in District 2 in order to seek services, tract that encompasses Emory University. The lowest percentages appear to be to the west of the district, the goods or other attractions and make plans accordingly. Druid Hills Historic District and just south of 85.

27   26 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 EDUCATIONAL ENROLLMENT

Agencies such as the Census and the American Community Survey use educational attainment data to measure changes in education over time, evaluate educational attainment of our workforce and understand the continuing education needs of adults. These agencies also ask about educational enrollment to understand the 111,778 characteristics and needs of school-aged children. Currently, there are a total of residents ages 3+ are enrolled in 13,998 residents ages 3+ enrolled in school in Unincorporated District 2. Of those school in individuals, 21.6% are enrolled in an undergraduate program.(Source: American Unincorporated DeKalb County Community Survey 2016 five year estimates as prepared by Esri)

UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

22.06 % of them are currently in college undergraduate programs

The infograph on this page shows educational attainment for Unincorporated District 2 expressed as a percentage. Although only 3% of residents have no diploma, nearly three quarters of the population have at least a bachelor’s degree. When municipalities are taken into account, only 8% of residents have no diploma while a 66% have some type of college level degree. This implies that the unincorporated regions of District 2 have a much higher level of educational attainment. This is especially important because a recent study by the Atlanta Regional Commission directly links an individual’s economic stability to educational attainment. (Source(s): Esri 2017 estimates)

However, the percentages for the County are somewhat different. Unincorporated DeKalb County has a higher percentage of people with no diploma (10%), 37% of residents have reached a level of education that includes at least a bachelor’s degree, a figure that is 9% higher than the district level. The trend only continues as far as the entire DeKalb County region is concerned--although 11% of residents have no high school diploma, 43% have a bachelor’s degree or beyond. This hints that educational attainment is not uniform and therefore must be analyzed further. (Source(s): Esri 2017 estimates)

(Source: American Community Survey 2016 estimates generated by Esri)

Education  29  28 This map depicts the percentage of the population 25 and over with a bachelor’s degree or beyond at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. The fact that Unincorporated District 2 has the This map shows the percentage of the population 25 years and older with less than a high school diploma highest concentration of residents with a bachelor’s degree or beyond practically leaps to the eye. The at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. The map clearly illustrates that the lowest majority of tracts in the District show that 44.71% - 89.8% of residents aged 25 and older have at least a percentages of residents 25 years and older with no diploma are in the unincorporated areas of District Bachelor’s degree. 2. However, the parts of Brookhaven and Chamblee that are around the Buford Highway area have comparatively higher dropout rates.

31   30 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2

PEER ANALYSIS Households with no Vehicle Availability This table compares Unincorporated District 2’s vehicle Geography % Rank availability with that of other districts. (Source(s): American Unincorporated District 1 1.10% 3 Community Survey 2016 five year estimates as prepared by Unincorporated District 2 0.58% 5 Esri) Total Population This table compares Unincorporated Unincorporated District 3 2.50% 1 Geography # Rank District 2’s population with that of Unincorporated District 4 1.53% 2 Unincorporated District 1 32,499 5 other districts. (Source(s): Esri 2017 Unincorporated District 5 1.04% 4 Unincorporated District 2 62,866 4 Estimates) Unincorporated District 3 121,364 1 Households with at Least One Member with a Disability This table compares Unincorporated Unincorporated District 4 107,925 2 Geography % Rank District 2’s population living with a Unincorporated District 5 88,404 3 Unincorporated District 1 13.11% 5 disability with that of other districts. Unincorporated District 2 13.18% 4 (Source(s): American Community Race and Ethnicity This table compares Unincorporated District 3 26.35% 1 Survey 2016 five year estimates as African Hispanic or Unincorporated prepared by Esri) White Asian Unincorporated District 4 21.93% 3 Geography Rank American Rank Rank Latino Rank District 2’s alone alone Unincorporated District 5 23.64% 2 alone alone racial and ethnic Unincorporated District 1 48.56% 2 22.56% 4 13.28% 1 24.93% 1 breakdown with that of Veterans This table compares the how much of Unincorporated District 2 71.88% 1 11.58% 5 10.81% 2 6.76% 2 other districts. Geography % Rank Unincorporated District 2’s veteran population Unincorporated District 3 6.89% 4 90.06% 2 0.52% 5 1.80% 5 (Source(s): Esri Unincorporated District 1 5.94% 5 accounts for that of the County’s and compares it Unincorporated District 4 15.31% 3 69.49% 3 10.31% 3 3.60% 3 2017 Estimates) Unincorporated District 2 11.09% 4 with that of other districts. (Source(s): American Unincorporated District 5 4.46% 5 91.33% 1 1.02% 4 2.76% 4 Unincorporated District 3 31.80% 1 Community Survey 2016 five year estimates as prepared by Esri) Senior Citizens This table compares Unincorporated District 4 26.16% 2 Geography % Rank Unincorporated District 2’s Unincorporated District 5 23.63% 3 Unincorporated District 1 12.60% 3 senior citizen population with Unincorporated District 2 15.30% 1 that of other districts. (Source(s): Unincorporated District 3 14.70% 2 Esri 2016 Estimates) Educational Attainment This table compares Unincorporated District 4 10.90% 4 No High High Bachelor's Unincorporated District Some 2’s level of educational Unincorporated District 5 9.60% 5 Geography school Rank school Rank Rank Degree or Rank College diploma graduate Beyond attainment with that of other districts. (Source(s): Poverty This table compares Unincorporated District 2’s Unincorporated District 1 12% 2 18% 4 25% 4 46% 2 Esri 2017 estimates) Geography % Rank population below the poverty line with that of Unincorporated District 2 3% 4 9% 5 17% 5 71% 1 Unincorporated District 1 14.70% 4 other districts. (Source(s): American Community Unincorporated District 3 12% 2 30% 1 32% 2 26% 5 Unincorporated District 4 13% 1 24% 4 29% 3 34% 3 Unincorporated District 2 11.50% 5 Survey 2016 five year estimates as prepared by Unincorporated District 3 18.10% 2 Esri) Unincorporated District 5 9% 3 27% 2 36% 1 28% 4 Unincorporated District 4 20.80% 1 Unincorporated District 5 15.60% 3

2010-2018 Annual Rate Population Percent Increase This table compares Unincorporated District People Per Square Mile This table compares estimates for Unincorporated Geography % Rank 2’s annual rate population percent increase for Geography # Rank District 2’s people per square mile with that of Unincorporated District 1 0.36% 5 the years 2010-2018 with that of other districts. Unincorporated District 1 3,757.11 1 other districts. Please note that the unincorporated Unincorporated District 2 0.95% 1 (Source(s): U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Unincorporated District 2 3,450.38 2 population and unincorporated footprint were Unincorporated District 3 0.42% 3 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2018.) Unincorporated District 3 2,305.11 4 used to calculate this figure. (Source(s): Esri 2017 Estimates) Unincorporated District 4 0.38% 4 Unincorporated District 4 2,841.63 3 Unincorporated District 5 0.64% 2 Unincorporated District 5 2,259.24 5

33   32 Suburban Neighborhood Center Town Center

DeKalb County Housing really affects all “Fair Housing is not an Believes the in good aspects of a person’s life. option; it is the law.” Health of the -CSA San Diego County Community

HOUSING FAIRNESS: Now that we have already discussed who comprises the population of WE STRIVE TO ENSURE Unincorporated District 2, it is time to analyze where they live. ALL SIDES HAVE EQUAL CONSIDERATION. In this section, the following attributes will be discussed:

• Housing Units and Household Size • Housing Tenure and Vacancies • Dates of Occupancy • Types of Households • Type and Age of Housing Stock • Housing Costs and Values

Pictured: Aerial view of Oak Grove Neighborhood  35  34 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND UNITS UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 HOUSING TENURE

Housing tenure is important to look at because very often renters and owners have different expenses and Agencies such as the Census and the American Community survey look for data on lifestyles. According to Esri 2017 estimates, the majority homeownership, tenure and rent to determine whether adequate housing is affordable of Unincorporated District 2 consists of Owner Occupied for residents as well as provide and fund housing assistance programs. Furthermore, housing. The difference between Owner Occupied and Renter federal agencies use data about the cost and value of housing for the same reasons. Occupied households in the region is approximately 456 units. These statistics also help enforce laws, regulations, and policies against discrimination However, just looking at housing tenure by itself does not in government programs and in society. The total number of housing units in provide a full picture of what is going on in a neighborhood Unincorporated District 2 is approximately 31,735 and the average household size or a given community. In order to gain a better sense of what according to Esri estimates is 2.1. This is somewhat lower than the average size for is happening “on the ground”, we must also analyze how DeKalb County (2.5) (Source(s): Esri 2017 estimates) tenure has changed over time, how Unincorporated District 2’s housing tenure compares to other areas and how many units are vacant. This will give us a better sense of neighborhood This graph depicts the changes in stability as well as the needs of residents. (Source(s): Esri 2017 Unincorporated District 2 Changes in Households households from 2010 to 2017. estimates) The decrease is likely attributed to the incorporations and annexations This graph shows changes in tenure from mentioned earlier in this document. 2010 to 2017 for Unincorporated District Unincorporated District 2 Changes in Housing Tenure 48,372 (Source(s): U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2. Throughout the years, renter and 2010 Summary File 1, Esri 2017 owner occupancy have been more or less Renter Occupied Owner Occupied estimates.) split evenly within the district. However, it would seem that there is a slight trend 29,910 towards renting in 2017. (Source(s): U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary 2017 50.76% 49.24% File 1, Esri 2017 estimates.)

2010 2017 2010 52.90% 47.10%

This graph depicts the changes in This chart makes a comparison of housing Unincorporated District 2 Changes in Housing Units housing units from 2010 to 2017. tenure at the county and district levels As with households, housing units and includes both the unincorporated and decreased as the footprint for the incorporated regions. The breakdown in unincorporated region of district 2017 31,375 tenure for District 2 varies widely from that shrunk. (Source(s): U.S. Census of the County’s. The percentage of renters Bureau, Census 2010 Summary for Unincorporated District 2 is 6.7% File 1, Esri 2017 estimates.) higher than the Unincorporated County’s. When all of DeKalb is compared with all 2010 53,030 of District 2, that number decreases slightly to a difference of 6.42%. (Source(s): Esri 2017 estimates)

Housing  37 36 This map illustrates the percentage of owner-occupied housing units at the Census Tract level and divided by This map shows the percentage of renter-occupied housing units at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. Although there are not as many as other districts, the tracts with the highest percentages Commission District. Although it also has a high percentage of owner occupied units, the highest percentage of homeownership are located in the southern parts of District 2--most notably in and around the Druid Hills of renters appear to be located in the central and northeastern-most parts of the district--particularly along Historic District--but the central eastern portion of the district also has high percentages of homeowners. Buford Highway, although the tract that contains Emory University also has a high concentration.

39   38 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 HOUSING VACANCIES

As of 2017, roughly 1,825 units in Unincorporated Commission District 2 were vacant or unoccupied; a figure which amounts to 5.8% of the area’s housing stock. This is somewhat lower than the 8.4% vacancy rate for the entire County (which includes both the unincorporated region and municipalities). However, as renters and homeowners often differ in terms of lifestyle and cost of living, it becomes necessary to analyze their vacancy rates separately. Policymakers and planners can then map where the vacant units are located and identify and blighted areas. That being said, it is also imperative to analyze the types and quality of housing stock available to better identify the needs of the community. (Source(s): Esri 2017 estimates)

This chart shows the changes in Unincorporated District 2 Changes in Vacancy Rates vacancies from 2010 to 2017 for Unincorporated District 2. Although the impact of incorporation and annexation makes it somewhat difficult to gauge, there appears to 2017 5.75% be an overall decrease in vacancies. (Source(s): U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1, Esri 2017 estimates.)

2010 8.80%

This graph compares vacancies in Housing Vacancy Comparison Unincorporated DeKalb County to those of Unincorporated District 2. Currently, the unincorporated region of District 2’a vacancy rate is lower by 3.85%. However, just because the Unincorporated DeKalb County 9.60% vacancy rate is comparatively low, that does not mean that there are not areas with a higher concentration of vacancies--especially when the differences in lifestyle, finances and Unincorporated District 2 5.75% decision making between owners and renters is considered. (Esri 2017 estimates)

This map illustrates owner vacancy rates at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. Although there is only one tract north of Atlanta that has a somewhat higher percentage, the majority of Unincorporated District 2 appears to consist of owner occupied units. However, some parts of Brookhaven-- north of Buford Highway--has relatively higher owner vacancies.

41   40 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 TYPES OF HOUSING STOCK

Federal and local agencies might also ask about the number of units or type of structure for the same reasons they inquire about housing tenure, vacancies and homeownership. The number of units provides valuable information about the housing density in a given area. Furthermore, data about moving dates and the age of housing stock to ensure adequate housing is available and affordable for residents as well as provide and fund housing assistance programs. Both of these features are also an important metric for gauging neighborhood stability. (Source(s): American Community Survey)

Housing Units by Units in Structure Unincorporated District 2 Unincorporated DeKalb County 1, detached 47.60% 62.40% 1, attached 6.50% 6.00% 2 0.50% 0.90% 3 or 4 5.30% 4.50% 5 to 9 9.70% 8.50% 10 to 19 10.90% 8.70% 20 to 49 8.80% 4.80% 50 or more 10.40% 3.70% Mobile home 0.10% 0.50% Boat, RV, van, etc. 0.10% 0.00% The above table depicts types of housing stock available to residents of the Unincorporated areas Commission District 2 as well as DeKalb County. Although the majority of housing units within the unincorporated district are detached single family, almost all of the types of multi-family housing have higher percentages than their county- level counterpart. (Source(s): American Community Survey 2016 five year estimates prepared by Esri)

Housing Stock Age Unincorporated DeKalb County Unincorporated District 2 Built 2010 or later 0.60% 1.30% Built 2000 to 2009 16.50% 12.70% Built 1990 to 1999 15.80% 12.90% Built 1980 to 1989 17.70% 15.40% Built 1970 to 1979 17.80% 9.70% Built 1960 to 1969 16.10% 20.70% Built 1950 to 1959 10.60% 19.60% Built 1940 to 1949 2.80% 4.60% Built 1939 or earlier 1.90% 3.20%

Median Year Structure Built 1980 1972

This table shows the age of the housing stock. Older housing stock can be indicative of a number of trends; it can either suggest historic architecture or blight. By seeing when development is taking place (or isn’t) we can learn a lot about a given area. The median year a structure is built in the unincorporated district is 8 years older than that of the This map illustrates owner vacancy rates at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. They county with the largest percentage of housing stock being built from 1960-1969. (Source(s): American Community are mostly located in and around the tract containing Emory University (which may be partially accounted Survey 2016 five year estimates prepared by Esri) for by the school year). However, parts in and around the Druid Hills Historic District and the region south of Chamblee and around the Lakeside area also have a higher percentage of renter vacancies. This implies that despite the larger number of renter-occupied housing, there are still many rental units standing vacant in some areas of the district.

43   42 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 HOUSING COSTS AND VALUES

The above infographic shows important housing stats for the area. Because it can change frequently, rent data can be difficult to quantify. That being said, the Median Contract Rent is $974 dollars, a figure that is $197 more than the median for Unincorporated DeKalb County ($777). Additionally, the Median Housing Value for DeKalb County is reported to be $195,734 which is lower than the values for Unincorporated District 2 by $167,483. Home value, cost of living and rent can tell a lot about an area--namely, housing stock quality and affordability. The Median Home Value and Contract Rent for the region are higher, implying that the cost of living may make housing in this area inaccessible to other county residents; which may give rise to the question of equity. If a region has dilapidated housing stock, then it might be “affordable”, but it is certainly not equitable.Therefore, it is important to look at other geographies as well as additional determining factors. (Source(s): Esri 2017 estimates, Rent estimates American Community Survey 2015 five year estimates)

The above chart makes a comparison of the Median Home Value between the county and the district level as well as the incorporated and unincorporated regions. In both cases, DeKalb County and District 2 are higher in terms of home value than their Unincorporated counterparts, indicating that values in many of the municipalities are higher This map shows housing values at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. The as well.(Source(s): Esri 2017 estimates) delineation of home values is very stark and most of the higher-value homes appear to be concentrated in Districts 1 and 2--particularly in the Druid Hills Historic District and the city of Brookhaven.

45   44 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 PEER ANALYSIS Median Year Structure Built This table compares Unincorporated Geography Year Rank District 2’s median year a structure Household Size This table compares Unincorporated Unincorporated District 1 1980 3 is built with that of other districts. Geography # Rank District 2’s household size with that Unincorporated District 2 1972 5 (Source(s): American Community Unincorporated District 1 2.50 4 of other districts. (Source(s): Esri Unincorporated District 3 1976 4 Survey 2016 five year estimates Unincorporated District 2 2.10 5 2017 estimates) prepared by Esri) Unincorporated District 4 1981 2 Unincorporated District 3 2.60 3 Unincorporated District 5 1988 1 Unincorporated District 4 2.70 2 Unincorporated District 5 2.80 1

Median Home Value This table compares Unincorporated This table compares Unincorporated Housing Tenure Geography $ Rank District 2’s median home value with District 2’s housing tenure with that Geography Renter % Rank Owner % Rank Unincorporated District 1 $,284,440 2 that of other districts. (Source(s): of other districts. (Source(s): Esri Unincorporated District 1 49.30% 2 39.24% 5 Unincorporated District 2 $363,217 1 Esri 2017 estimates) 2017 estimates) Unincorporated District 2 50.76% 1 49.24% 3 Unincorporated District 3 $145,506 4 Unincorporated District 3 34.42% 5 52.80% 2 Unincorporated District 4 $166,494 3 Unincorporated District 4 41.04% 3 47.35% 4 Unincorporated District 5 $131,973 5 Unincorporated District 5 38.09% 4 61.91% 1

Average Spent on Mortgage and Basics Vacancies This table compares Unincorporated This table compares Unincorporated Geography $ Rank Geography % Rank District 2’s vacancy rate with that of District 2’s average amount spent Unincorporated District 1 $7,678 2 Unincorporated District 1 11.37% 3 other districts. (Source(s): Esri 2017 on mortgage and basics with that of Unincorporated District 2 $9,833 1 Unincorporated District 2 5.75% 5 estimates) other districts. (Source(s): Esri 2017 Unincorporated District 3 $6,025 5 Unincorporated District 3 13.30% 1 estimates) Unincorporated District 4 $6,682 3 Unincorporated District 4 11.62% 2 Unincorporated District 5 $6,671 4 Unincorporated District 5 8.45% 4

Type of Housing Stock

Geography 1 10 to 20 to 50 or Mobile Detached Rank attached Rank 2 Rank 3 or 4 Rank 5 to 9 Rank 19 Rank 49 Rank more Rank home Rank Median Contract Rent This table compares Unincorporated Unincorporated Geography $ Rank District 2’s median contract District 1 37.9% 5 5.7% 4 1.3% 1 8.6% 1 10.5% 1 12.7% 1 12.9% 1 9.9% 2 0.6% 2 Unincorporated District 1 $823 2 rent with that of other districts. Unincorporated Unincorporated District 2 $924 1 (Source(s): American Community District 2 47.6% 4 6.5% 1 0.5% 5 5.5% 2 9.7% 3 10.9% 3 8.8% 2 10.4% 1 0.1% 4 Survey 2015 five year estimates) Unincorporated Unincorporated District 3 $755 4 District 3 72.0% 2 5.9% 3 0.6% 4 4.3% 3 7.0% 4 6.0% 4 2.4% 4 1.2% 4 0.6% 2 Unincorporated District 4 $737 5 Unincorporated Unincorporated District 5 $758 3 District 4 60.1% 3 5.7% 4 1.0% 3 3.7% 4 10.1% 2 11.5% 2 5.0% 3 2.4% 3 0.4% 3 Unincorporated District 5 73.4% 1 6.4% 2 1.2% 2 3.2% 5 6.8% 5 5.2% 5 1.5% 5 1.1% 5 1.0% 1 This table compares Unincorporated District 2’s housing stock types with that of other districts. (Source(s): American Community Survey 2016 five year estimates prepared by Esri)

47   46 INTEGRITY: WE ADHERE TO ETHICAL AND PROFESSIONAL VALUES AND BEHAVIORS, WHICH INCLUDE COMMON COURTESY, RESPECT, AND TRUST. INCOME

District 2

In prior sections, we have discussed who makes up the population of Unincorporated District 2 and where they live, but there are some questions that still remain. Where do they work? How do they get there? What do they earn at their jobs? These are all important to know as this information can be a question of economics, service or even equity. For these reasons, it is important to understand where residents are employed as well as their incomes. In this section, the following attributes will be discussed:

• Type of Worker • Unemployment • Location of Workplace • Income and Earnings • Commute Times • Means of Commute to Work

Pictured: North DeKalb Mall Area circa 1965

Income  49  48 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 TYPE OF WORKER

Unemployment statistics can be difficult to report on because they frequently change on a monthly basis. However, federal agencies still gather data about unemployment as well as industry and type of worker for the planning and funding government programs that provide assistance and services to the unemployed. Furthermore, this helps ensure they fairly and equitably serve the needs of all groups as well as enforce laws, regulations, and policies against discrimination in society. (Source(s): American Community Survey)

The above infographic shows the largest of the classes of workers are in white collar industries. Additionally, although it varies from month to month, the given unemployment rate is much lower than that of the entire County’s. (7.2%)(Source(s): Esri 2017 estimates)

UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 LOCATION OF WORKPLACE

This chart shows the percentage of Unincorporated District 2 residents Unincorporated District 2 Location of Workplace who work both in and out of DeKalb County. A slim majority of residents in 1% Unincorporated District 2 work outside of the County, a trend that impacts many things from commute times to 48% 51% the wear and tear on our infrastructure. Additionally, that also means that many residents are likely spending their money elsewhere. (Source(s): American Community Survey 2016 Worked in state and county of residence five year estimates prepared by Esri) Worked in state and outside county of residence Worked outside state of residence

This map shows the rate of unemployment at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. The map plainly illustrates that unemployment is not uniform by any means and that with a few exceptions, the northern half of the County tends to have lower unemployment rates.

51   50 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 INCOME AND EARNINGS

This infographic shows important income-related data for the Unincorporated region of District 2. The Median Household Income for the region is higher than the DeKalb County region’s ($53,994) by $13,558. Additionally, the Per Capita income for the region is $51,027, which is $18,995 higher than that same figure at the County level.The difference in these numbers indicates that incomes not uniform throughout DeKalb. (Source(s): Esri 2017 data)

This chart shows a breakdown household income with the bars showing the deviation of Unincorporated District 2 from the entire County. Although the largest income group is in the $50,000 to $74,999 range--a figure that is comparable to the County’s Median Household Income--the ‘Difference’ column provides important context to these figures. According to the chart, more households in Unincorporated District 2 fall within the 6-digit range than other places in the County. (Source(s): Esri 2017 estimates)

This bar graph makes comparisons between four geographies in terms of income. Both District 2 and its unincorporated region have slightly higher incomes than their County- level counterparts. (Source(s): Esri 2017 estimates.)

This map depicts the Median Household Income at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. As for District 2, the tracts immediately west of 285--near Buford Highway--fall in the lowest range for income and while many fall in a bracket that includes the County levels, that does not mean that all of these tracts make close to that figure.

53   52 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY

Just under a quarter of residents in Travel Time To Work Unincorporated District 2 (24.50%) take 20 to 24 minutes to get to their 90 OR MORE MINUTES 1.00% jobs, a figure which is much shorter 60 TO 89 MINUTES 3.30% 45 TO 59 MINUTES 7.60% than the County’s highest percentage 40 TO 44 MINUTES 4.80% (which is 30 to 34 minutes). 35 TO 39 MINUTES 3.30% (Source(s): American Community 30 TO 34 MINUTES 16.20% Survey 2016 five year estimates as 25 TO 29 MINUTES 8.10% prepared by Esri.) 20 TO 24 MINUTES 24.50% 15 TO 19 MINUTES 13.20% 10 TO 14 MINUTES 12.00% 5 TO 9 MINUTES 5.10% LESS THAN 5 MINUTES 1.10%

This chart shows the most popular Commute for Workers 16+ means of transportation to work and 5.20% Worked from Home compares Unincorporated District 2’s 8.20% percentages to that of Unincorporated 2.80% Other Means DeKalb County’s. Most residents in 4.40% Unincorporated District 2 drive to 8.30% Public Transportation (excluding taxicab) work alone--even moreso than people 4.40% in other places in the County. 10.30% Carpooled Considerably less people also carpool 6.80% 73.30% or ride transit to their jobs, but at Drove Alone least 8.20% of residents work from 76.30% home and don’t commute at all. Unincorporated DeKalb County Unincorporated District 2 (Source(s): American Community Survey 2016 five year estimates as prepared by Esri)

Decatur MARTA Station This map depicts the percentage of the population that commutes to work via public transit (excluding taxi cabs) at the Census Tract level and divided by Commission District. Despite having numerous MARTA stations within the district, it would appear that most of the residents in District 2 do not use public transit for their commute. The exception is along the Buford Highway corridor in Chamblee and Brookhaven--which sees higher concentrations of those commuting via MARTA.

55   54 Transportation UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 PEER ANALYSIS

Type of Worker This table compares Unincorporated Median Net Worth This table compares Unincorporated Geography White Collar Rank Blue Collar Rank Services Rank District 2’s type of worker with that Geography $ Rank District 2’s median net worth with Unincorporated District 1 64% 2 18% 3 18% 1 of other districts. (Source(s): Esri Unincorporated District 1 $44,270 5 that of other districts. (Source(s): Unincorporated District 2 83% 1 8% 4 9% 4 2017 estimates) Unincorporated District 2 $65,169 1 Esri 2017 data) Unincorporated District 3 62% 3 19% 2 18% 1 Unincorporated District 3 $60,083 2 Unincorporated District 4 64% 2 20% 1 17% 2 Unincorporated District 4 $53,338 4 Unincorporated District 5 64% 2 20% 1 16% 3 Unincorporated District 5 $55,490 3

Workplace Outside County of Residence This table compares Unincorporated Geography % Rank District 2’s percentage of those Travel time to Work More than 30 to 34 minutes Unincorporated District 1 51% 3 employed outside their county of 90 or Unincorporated District 2 51% 3 residence with that of other districts. Geography 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 59 60 to 89 more Unincorporated District 3 57% 1 (Source(s): American Community minutes Rank minutes Rank minutes Rank minutes Rank minutes Rank Unincorporated District 4 51% 3 Survey 2016 five year estimates Unincorporated District 1 5.50% 1 6.90% 1 7.70% 4 2.70% 5 2.40% 4 Unincorporated District 5 52% 2 prepared by Esri) Unincorporated District 2 3.30% 5 4.80% 4 7.60% 5 3.30% 4 1.00% 5 Unincorporated District 3 3.90% 4 4.30% 5 13.20% 3 8.60% 3 5.00% 3 Unincorporated District 4 4.40% 3 5.50% 3 14.20% 2 10.00% 2 5.50% 2 Unemployment This table compares Unincorporated Unincorporated District 5 4.50% 2 6.70% 2 15.20% 1 12.70% 1 6.80% 1 Geography % Rank District 2’s unemployment rate with Unincorporated District 1 4.90% 4 that of other districts.(Source(s): This table compares Unincorporated District 2’s travel time to work (greater than 34 minutes) with that Unincorporated District 2 3.60% 5 Esri 2017 estimates) of other districts. (Source(s): American Community Survey 2016 five year estimates prepared by Esri) Unincorporated District 3 10.00% 1 Unincorporated District 4 9.20% 3 Unincorporated District 5 9.60% 2 This table compares Unincorporated Commute for Workers 16+ Median Household Income Public Worked Geography $ Rank District 2’s median household income with that of other districts. Geography Drove Transportation Other from Unincorporated District 1 $57,648 2 (Source(s): Esri 2017 data) Alone Rank Carpooled Rank (Excl. Taxis) Rank Means Rank home Rank Unincorporated District 2 $67,552 1 Unincorporated District 1 70.80% 5 16.40% 1 4.90% 4 2.20% 4 5.80% 2 Unincorporated District 3 $48,351 5 Unincorporated District 2 76.30% 1 6.80% 5 4.40% 5 4.40% 1 8.20% 1 Unincorporated District 4 $53,027 3 Unincorporated District 3 74.10% 2 10.30% 3 9.20% 3 1.90% 5 4.40% 3 Unincorporated District 5 $50,876 4 Unincorporated District 4 71.43% 4 11.30% 2 9.80% 2 3.30% 2 4.40% 3 Unincorporated District 5 73.70% 3 9.40% 4 10.00% 1 2.50% 3 4.50% 4 Per Capita Income This table compares Unincorporated Geography $ Rank District 2’s per capita income with This table compares Unincorporated District 2’s means of commute with that of other districts. Unincorporated District 1 $33,831 2 that of other districts. (Source(s): (Source(s): American Community Survey 2016 five year estimates prepared by Esri) Unincorporated District 2 $51,027 1 Esri 2017 data) Unincorporated District 3 $22,944 4 Unincorporated District 4 $26,091 3 Unincorporated District 5 $22,087 5

57   56 UNINCORPORATED DISTRICT 2 SUMMARY

In prior sections, the demographic, economic and housing characteristics of Unincorporated District 2 have been gathered, measured and interpreted. On its own, the information presented is merely interesting; however, it is important to look at the so-called in order to gain a sense of the current conditions of the district. In doing so, policymakers will be able to identify the needs of their community based on the unique characteristics of the people who comprise it. At a glance, the readily observable trends that exist within the district are as follows:

• Ethnicity: Unincorporated District 2 is predominantly white • Households: The unincorporated region has a smaller average household size, indicating that many residents may live in non-family households. • Senior Citizens: Unincorporated District 2 has a higher number of seniors and may have an aging population • Vulnerable People: The unincorporated district has comparatively low percentages of disabilities, veterans and other vulnerable members of the population, but it is important be mindful that these people might still frequent the district to access services and other amenities. • Education: Unincorporated District 2 has among the highest levels of educational attainment and a low dropout rate with the exception of some areas in its municipalities. • Tenure: Unincorporated District 2 has slightly more renters than owners. • Vacancies: Unincorporated District 2’s renter vacancies are much higher than that of the owner vacancies. • Expenses: The unincorporated region may have a comparatively higher cost of living (home values higher, mortgage higher, rent higher). • Commute: Unincorporated District 2 has a low percentage of people who commute to work DISTRICT 2: using public transportation. CURRENT STATE AND NEXT STEPS

59   58

District Current State CONCLUSION

The purpose of this report is to analyze the demographic characteristics of Unincorporated District 2 and provide a spatial reference for selected population characteristics. In doing this, the Long Range Division of the Planning Department was able to identify areas that might have certain characteristics and needs that require further study. However, the success of any future recommendations are dependant on the cooperation of policymakers, residents and a wide range of organizations.

NEXT STEPS That being said, it’s important to stress the existing assets in the District such as its parks and services. It is crucial to remember that the strengths mentioned here in this report remain accessible to vulnerable members of DeKalb’s population as well The research done for this project has laid the groundwork for future studies, plans and as DeKalb residents other Districts and municipalities. policies. The goal of this section is to identify such projects. Additionally, this section also includes areas of interest that each Commissioner has expressed based on the information found in their profile. Therefore, while certain bullet points are found in each document, some variation will still occur. Based on these criteria, the following needs have been identified:

• A comprehensive, County-wide Housing Study • Neighborhood-level demographics and planning • A study detailing developmental patterns as they relate to poverty and access to resources. • A study detailing development and access resources and services for an aging population. • A connectivity study for parks, greenspaces and greenways.

Druid Hills Golf Course

Conclusion  60 WE BELIEVE THAT ACCOUNTABILITY AND FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ARE ESSENTIAL FOR PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN GOVERNMENT.

STEWARDSHIP

Produced by: DeKalb County Department of Planning and Sustainability (Long Range Planning Division) 330 West Decatur, Georgia 30030

 62