MIDTOWN GARDEN DISTRICT MASTER PLAN

As development activity around Midtown has picked up the Midtown Garden District has seein significant development pressure on all sides, yet had no neighborhood-specific masterplan to help guide land use decisions. In this context, the Midtown Neighbors’ Association (MNA) partnered with Councilmember Kwanza Hall’s office to seek out a consultant team, eventually selecting Lord Aeck Sargent, a Midtown-based planning and architecture firm, to lead the effort. The nearly year-long planning process, which lasted throughout 2016, was organized around three sequential phases, described briefly as follows.

PHASE 1: EXISTING CONDITIONS & ISSUES ASSESSMENT (JAN-APR 2016)

The first several months of the planning process focused around inventory of existing conditions and identification of key issues and opportunities. In addition to organizing stakeholder meetings and groups (see Section 2.3 for details), the planning team walked, biked and drove the neighborhood to document aspects such as sidewalk conditions, accessibility issues, housing types, building uses and street lighting. The team also gathered Geographic Information System (GIS) data from a variety of sources in order to map and analyze trends related to public safety and infrastructure. These first few months also focused on neighborhood outreach as a way to document a wide range of initial neighborhood issues, complaints, suggestions, opportunities and ideas.

 

 

PHASE 2: NEIGHBORHOOD VISIONING (MAY-AUG 2016)

With existing conditions, assessment and analysis complete, the planning team led the neighborhood through a series of highly-interactive public input sessions. Throughout the Spring and Summer of 2016, focus group meetings and public design workshops were held as a way for neighbors to collectively develop neighborhood strategies and design concepts. Using this input, Lord Aeck Sargent then developed concepts, illustrations, draft strategies and framework plans for focus group feedback and public discussion. This phase of the plan focused heavily on visioning for the future of the neighborhood, including both short- and long-term strategies.

PHASE 3: MASTER PLAN (SEPT-NOV 2016)

By Fall 2016, hundreds of neighbors had vetted design concepts, offered suggestions, voted on alternatives and, in some cases, even drawn their own design ideas for consid­eration. Based on stakeholder feedback the planning team then edited potential designs, developed additional concepts, drafted recommendations and put together a detailed list of short-term and long-term projects. A final public presentation was held to present the overall draft master plan to neighbors and gather additional feedback. Since the November presentation, the team has worked on a draft version of the MGD Masterplan Document. That Document is currently being reviewed by the Strategic Planning Committee.

The Midtown Garden District planning process utilized a wide range of neighborhood outreach and input tools in order to gather insight from hundreds of neighborhood residents over a roughly 10-month period. Described briefly as follows are the key planning groups, events and milestones that occurred throughout the process.

STEERING COMMITTEE

The steering committee for the plan consisted of a small group of neighborhood and city leaders including MNA officers and Council staff. The Lord Aeck Sargent consultant team met with the steering committee on a bi-monthly basis to discuss project management, schedule, and plan progress.

FOCUS GROUPS

Early in the process, four (4) different focus groups were formed, as follows:

• Development & Preservation
• Circulation & Infrastructure
• Healthy Living & Safety
• Greenspace

 

The focus groups were a way for stakeholders to strategize key issues and oppor­tunities facing the neighborhood. MNA and Council staff encouraged neighbors to sign-up for one or more focus groups (advertised at public workshops, on social media, email blasts, MNA website) in order to hone in on specific themes. Eight (8) focus group meetings were held during Phases 1 and 2 of the process.

 

PUBLIC WORKSHOPS

Three interactive Public Workshops were held throughout the planning process:

Public Kickoff Workshop (February 10, 2016) – With over 100 participants in attendance, this first public event was held at the Grady High School cafeteria. The meeting included a short project overview/introduction by city leaders and the planning consultant team. The bulk of the workshop included a series of interactive planning stations allowing participants to identify where in the neighborhood they lived, note major issues on neighborhood maps and document comments/suggestions. Lord Aeck Sargent staff were on-hand at each station to answer questions and help forward the discussion.

Second Public Workshop (August 10, 2016) – Held again at the Grady High School cafe­teria, this second public event was organized as an open house, including nine planning stations. Each station centered around specific project ideas and framework diagrams that grew out of focus group discussions. Project concepts included corridor /streetscape improvements, ped/bike infrastructure/types/routes and greenspace character examples. Larger-scaled framework diagrams related to future land use, susceptibility to change, potential transportation improvements and potential open space expansion were also displayed for feedback. The series of supporting existing conditions maps and data were also presented to participants through the stations. The workshop was facilitated by consultant staff with roughly 80 participants in attendance.

 

Final Public Workshop (November 10, 2016) – The final public event was held in the Grady High School Auditorium focused on highlights of the draft masterplan. The bulk of the event included a presentation/discussion by Lord Aeck Sargent staff and MNA outlining land use strategies, potential capital projects and possible neighborhood initiatives. A portion of the workshop included planning stations allowing participants to further weigh-in on plan elements, concepts, illustrations and strategies presented. Over 50 people attended this final workshop.

ONLINE SURVEY

An interactive online survey was launched midway through the planning process as both a way to reach a broader audience and gather more detailed feedback from stakeholders. The survey included 25 carefully-crafted questions relating to specific neighborhood issues heard during Phase 1. Question formats included both multiple choice and character image rankings. Respondents were also asked questions about themselves such as their tenure in the neighborhood, their age, housing type, household and which area within the neighborhood they lived. In some cases, this allowed the planning team to analyze particular question responses based on neighborhood “area” in order to find out whether some perceived issues were neighborhood-wide or more location/ street-specific.

The online survey, which was taken by almost 400 people, was available online for about 2 months and advertised through a wide range of social media platforms and websites.

Roughly ten months of survey input, focus group discussions, public workshop exercises and detailed conversations with many community stakeholders yielded a series of key drivers of the masterplan. The following include the major consensus highlights.

WALKABILITY

Sidewalk conditions were one of the most widely recurring complaints from residents.

• The online survey showed a desired focus on ADA and pedestrian “functionality” (83%) over aesthetic improvements (17%)
• Many expressed the need to create guidelines for preferred sidewalk/street design
• Better/additional pedestrian connections to the BeltLine were a persistent discussion topic and major desire for residents

 

INTERNAL STREETS

• Online survey respondents and workshop participants repeatedly stated that
• Vehicular speeding is al major issue along Argonne Avenue
• Speeding and cut-through traffic on 8th Street is a concern for many as it has become an increasingly significant east-west connector through the neighborhood

 

PERPHERAL STREETS

• Pedestrian safety along Monroe Drive should be a major area of focus.
• Connection to the BeltLine across Monroe needs to be improved and additional pedestrian crossings need to be added.
• Pedestrian safety along 10th Street (especially crossing 10th to the Park) remains a major concern.
• Piedmont Avenue is underutilized as a corridor. “Off peak parking” along east side is probably not the best long-term use of the roadway space.

 

ON-STREET PARKING

• Parking is not a neighborhood-wide issue; rather, the issue is very localized (closer to Piedmont Park and near Mary Mac’s, for instance).
• Add more permit-only parking . . . ranked lowest as an effective parking strategy.
• The online survey yielded widespread comments/complaints about permit-only parking. Those directly affected said it was hard to have visitors. Those indirectly affected said simply redierects parking onto adjacent streets.

 

PIEDMONT PARK FESTIVALS

• Opinions over the negative impacts of Piedmont Park festivals varied widely. Based on the online survey, an astounding 88% of residents either “love them” or “like them” whereas only 9% said they were a “major nuisance.”
• Although there was no overall neighborhood consensus on the degree of negative festival impacts,
• Almost all residents agreed that the amount of festivals in Piedmont Park should be limited and that better controls for them need to be instituted.
• Unsurprisingly, Piedmont park events were particularly favorable with newer and younger residents

 

HOUSING DIVERSITY

• Affordability seemed to be a prominent concern for many people in the online survey (many added specific comments).
• Most people expressed strong support to develop a strategy to continue the neighborhood’s history of diverse housing types and tenures.
• Many stakeholders suggested that future growth of affordable housing (flats) would make sense along the “periphery” of the neighborhood – Juniper Street, Ponce de Leon Avenue and along BeltLine corridor.

 

CRIME & LIGHTING

• 83% think that “lighting is a major issue to be addressed”. Furthermore, Phase 1 findings seemed to reveal correlations between lack of street lighting and crimes against people (Argonne between 6th and Ponce, for instance)
• The neighborhood was generally supportive of any strategies that increased camera surveillance in public rights-of-way (86% per online survey said cameras in ROW should be either an “aggressive” or “strategic” approach)

 

STORMWATER

• Flooding during major rain events is a very localized issue (like many issues in the neighborhood). Phase 1 findings seem to indicate deficiencies in the aging infrastructure.

 

HISTORIC PRESERVATION

• Based on the survey, 60% of neighborhood in favor of “Requiring a more rigorous city and neighborhood review process for demolition of historic structures.” Futhermore, almost 75% of the neighborhood in favor of “stronger development regulations as long as they don’t discourage new development.”
• Neighborhood consensus is not about regulating architectural style. It’s about needing a better process for reviewing demolitions.

GREENSPACE

• Households with children have been increasing in the neighborhood, creating increased desire for neighborhood park spaces (lacking today), even if small.
• Given growing prominence of the Midtown Garden Tour, a set of street design & planting guidelines (with focus on right-of-way) should be created

The consensus points yielded a series of Guiding Principles that are being used in the devel­opment of the overall masterplan. Specific initiatives and projects that will be detailed later in the final document are designed with these Guiding Principals in mind.

 

Manage & Calm Traffic: Establish strategies that slow and calm traffic on neighborhood streets, particularly as it relates to cut-through traffic and improving the experience for pedestrians and cyclists.

Alleviate Stormwater Management Issues: Professionally assess the Midtown Garden District’s ability to manage stormwater and mitigate flooding. Establish a holistic approach to stormwater management through a variety of measures including infrastructure/inlet maintenance, system repairs and upgrades and environmentally friendly enhancements such as rain gardens.

Preserve Historic Character: Identify strategies and mechanisms to better preserve existing historic resources where feasible including considerations for a neighborhood review process for demolitions.

Encourage Compatible Mixed-Use Development Along Peripheral Corridors: Ensure new mixed-use development along Ponce De Leon Avenue, Juniper Street and the BeltLine in ways that transition to and are compatible with the character of the interior of the Midtown Garden District. Provide opportunities for new pedestrian-oriented goods, services, shopping and entertainment. Avoid out-parcel vehicular oriented development.

Promote the Neighborhood’s “Garden” Character: Enhance the existing “Garden” char­acter of the community by defining neighborhood street design and planting guidelines, preserving and pruning healthy old growth trees, improving medians and landscape triangles and creating new streetscapes on key streets.

Enhance & Expand Open Spaces: Identify strategic locations for new public or private open space within the neighborhood interior. Encourage new open space in any larg­er-scale mixed-use developments.

Improve Operations & Impacts of Piedmont Park Events: Identify strategies to help mitigate the impacts of events at Piedmont Park for neighborhood residents including improving public safety, planning for traffic and parking, formalizing funding partnerships and considering a dedicated neighborhood festival.

The majority of redevelopment and future growth over the next decade is likely to occur along the periphery of the Garden District. To the west, the Juniper Street corridor is currently seeing perhaps the most rapid change with at least four redevelopment projects under construction. Over the next 5-10 years, the Ponce de Leon corridor – a key link between the MID and the BeltLine – will likely see increased redevelopment.

The land use strategies proposed here represent refinements of previous plan recommendations from the BeltLine Subarea 6 Master Plan (2011) and the Ponce-Moreland Corridors Study (2005). Versions of this map were reviewed and discussed exhaustively through multiple public workshops and focus group sessions and stakeholder meetings throughout the Garden District Master Planning process. The methodology of combining land use with implied density (in number of stories) is derived from the process used during the 2011 BeltLine Master Planning process (although not all categories match precisely).

Preservation of Residential Neighborhood Core (1-3 stories)

The historic core of the neighborhood will continue to be mostly residential with a mix of single-family homes, small scale multi-family apartments and condos, townhomes, duplexes and multi-plexes.

Zoning Implications: No changes recommended. The primary existing zoning category (R-5) is compatible and allows single-family and two-family dwellings and requires a maximum building height of 35’. The few RG-3 areas in the neighborhood allow slightly higher densities but require transitional height planes to adjacent R-5 zones.

Medium Density (4-6 story) Mixed-use along Ponce Corridor

This masterplan recommends the major overall land use change along this corridor. Past plans indicate low to medium density commercial uses on Ponce de Leon. Aside from a few ‘historic storefront’ areas like Myrtle and Ponce low density commercial is not the highest or best use for the land. This corridor offers opportunities for additional affordable housing, and neighborhood commercial through rezoning to mixed-use. The Ponce corridor is a primary arterial connection between the MID and the Beltline and future development should embrace a mix of uses with ground floor retail and residential above. This area should allow for higher densities, 4-6 stories, but maintain transitional height planes currently required by adjacent residential zoning districts.

Zoning Implications: Potential changes from C-2 to MRC-2 to allow mixed use development at higher densities.

Medium /High -density Mixed -use along the Beltline (5-9 stories, 10+ Stories)

This master plan defers to the BeltLine Subarea 6 recommended Land Use for areas directly abutting the BeltLine corridor. Subarea 6 plans show 5-9 story mixed-use as part of any longer-term redevelopment of the Midtown Promenade and/or Midtown Place (Home Depot, Whole Foods) parcels.

Zoning Implications: No changes recommended. This area is part of the BeltLine Overlay Zoning District, which includes specific requirements related to density, open space, pedestrian/bike amenities, streetscape, etc.

Medium- Density Residential along Piedmont Ave. (2-5 stories)

Current building character and densities along Piedmont Avenue should continue to be preserved in the future. Any future redevelopment of key commercial “nodes” at 10th and at Ponce should utilize mixed-use strategies including ground floor retail. The section of Piedmont between 10th and Ponce should continue as a predominantly 2-5 story residential corridor.

Zoning Implications: No changes recommended.

This current master planning effort reengaged the conversation around historic resources in an effort to better understand a potential consensual path forward to provide some level of additional protections, particularly from demolitions. This planning effort incorporated a number of public input mechanisms including one-on-one stakeholder interviews, conversations with key community leaders, a series of focus group discussions, three public workshops and an on-line survey that had extensive participation. The results of these stakeholder input mechanisms lead to several conclusions:

• There is clear and overwhelming concern among Midtown Garden stakeholders about the potential continued loss of historic resources. Only 4% of on-line survey responses were not concerned at all. Almost 75% of survey respondents were in favor of some form of increased regulations.
• There is no clear consensus around instituting guidelines or regulations that would dictate architectural style, additions, and alterations particularly if they would discourage new development.
• There is more concern about demolition and the loss of historic resources and somewhat less concern about alterations and additions to existing historic resources.
• Therefore, there is no clear mandate to create a formal local Landmark District through the Atlanta Urban Design Commission that would create strict regulations on demolitions, alterations and character of new development. However, there appears to be strong consensus for creating a formal process by which proposed demolitions of historic resources can be reviewed in advance in a public forum.

Recommendation 

Explore the creation of a formal review process in which applicants must go through a public review process before getting a by-right demolition permit for any “contributing” structures in the National Register District. This will likely require a number of steps including:

• Regularized updates to the original 1999 historic resources survey which originally defined which structures are “contributing.”
• Agreeing on the proper “public forum” in which reviews would take place (e.g., NPU? AUDC? MNA? specially created review body?).
• Agreeing on the regulatory mechanism which forces the review and the degree to which review comments have teeth.
• Agreeing on the information that is required to be presented (eg., economic justifications? plans for what gets built back?).
• Agreeing on reasonable timeframes for the reviews so as not to overly burden opportunities for new development.

While the Midtown Garden District has close proximity to two regional destinations, Piedmont Park to the north and the Beltline to the east, it contains almost no other usable open spaces that operate at a neighborhood scale. Additionally, Piedmont Park and the Atlanta BeltLine are not easily accessible to residents on the south and west side of the district who have a more than 10-minute walk to either. While opportunities are limited, this masterplan proposed a vision for expanding access to usable open space across the District. Key strategies include:

Enhance Existing Open Spaces

• Improve existing landscape islands along Greenwood Avenue between Charles Allen Drive and Monroe Drive. An enhanced detailed plan worked out with residents could increase their usability, could provide more landscaping, added seating, and new sidewalks with improved ADA access.
• Find opportunities to improve public access to existing underutilized institutional open space such as the Gray High School front lawn along Charles Allen Drive. A partnership with the Atlanta Public Schools could be explored to make this area more usable for neighborhood residents. Small and strategic interventions – like providing a few additional pedestrian access points – could make a big difference.
• Increase connections to the Beltline.

Create New Open Spaces 

• As indicated in the BeltLine Master Plan for SubArea 6, the best opportunity to create significant new open space within the Garden District is associated with full-scale redevelopment of the two existing retail developments adjacent to the BeltLine.
• While rare, some opportunities exist to create new open spaces by working with existing private property owners to convert underdeveloped portions of property into ad-hoc usable open space. Other opportunities could include finding a few small vacant lots (or lots that could become vacant in the future) and turning them into small neighborhood pocket parks. These types of private property strategies can be temporary as holding actions or more permanent depending on individual circumstances.

Add more ‘Garden’ to the Garden District

Improving the “garden feel” and design consistency of public sidewalk rights of way can have a beneficial impact and function as a neighborhood open space of sorts.

The neighborhood today includes a variety of mobility options for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists alike. However, issues such as poor sidewalk conditions, the need for safer pedestrian crossings, the need to address pervasive vehicular speeding and the need to better-connect to the BeltLine. Key points are outlined as follows:

Expand Interior Bicycle Network

• Better-connect the neighborhood to the City’s rapidly-expanding network of high-quality bicycle facilities. Key neighborhood greenways (i.e. bicycle boulevards) should be formalized and enhanced along interior streets such as Myrtle, 8th, 5th, 4th and Greenwood. These minor bicycle connections should connect safely to major bike routes along Juniper, Piedmont, 10th, Ponce and the BeltLine.
• Priority north-south bike routes should be Charles Allen Drive and the BeltLine. Given these nearby bike routes and limited space on Monroe Drive, the main focuses of Monroe Drive improvements should be pedestrians and vehicles.

Add Pedestrian Crossings across Major Streets

• Along 10th Street, create a more repetitive pattern of pedestrian crossings to increase pedestrian safety, driver awareness and reduce conflicts with bicycles.
• Along Monroe Drive, establish new “mid-block” pedestrian crossings allowing more direct access to the BeltLine, Midtown Promenade and Midtown Place
• Along Piedmont and Ponce de Leon Avenues, implement “leading pedestrian intervals” at existing signalized intersections

Additional Beltline Connections

• Although the BeltLine Subarea 6 plan is still reflective of the neighborhood’s long-term vision of future BeltLine connectivity, it hinges on redevelopment of the large commercial parcels which are also likely longer-term given current market conditions. As such, the neighborhood should prioritize creation of formalized short-term connection(s) to the BeltLine, even if temporary.
• Forthcoming Monroe Drive improvements should focus on major pedestrian safety upgrades to the BeltLine trailhead at 10th and Monroe.

Traffic Calming

• Both Monroe Drive and Argonne Avenue are major priority corridors for short-term traffic-calming measures

Projects Recently-Completed or Under-Construction

1. BeltLine Eastside Trail (2013) – The first trail phase constructed of the 22-mile Beltline project
2. Ponce de Leon Bike/Ped Improvements (2012) – This GDOT-led project included installation of buffered bicycle lanes
3. 10th Cycle Track (2013) + Resurfacing (2016) – Implemented over several phases, 10th Street now includes a two-way “cycle track” connecting the MID to the BeltLine. The corridor was recently repaved through the Renew Atlanta Bond program.
4. Juniper Complete Street (2017-2018) – This $5.5 million project being led by the Midtown Alliance includes a complete street “transformation” including protected bicycle lane, pedestrian upgrades, LED lighting and bioswales.

Short-Term Projects 

1. Argonne Avenue Traffic-Calming – This potential neighborhood-led project would include new stop signs, new/refreshed crosswalks and on-street parking upgrades
2. 10th Street Pedestrian Signals (MNA + Grady HS) – Added RRFP and Hybrid Beacon pedestrian signals augmenting existing signals
3. ADA & Sidewalks at Greenwood/Charles Allen – Creation of ADA connection along this corridor where no sidewalk exists today. The improvements would also seek to better-activate the adjacent passive green space.
4. Intersection Improvments at 8th / Grady HS – Improved student crossings and stormwater mitigation at this active pedestrian intersection
5. Ped Signal (RRFB) at Monroe/Greenwood – Addition of new pedestrian crossing in current .X-mile crossing gap between 8th and Ponce
6. Ped/Bike Connection to BeltLine – Creation of a short-term bicycle/pedestrian/ ADA connection to the BeltLine Eastside Trail
7. Monroe Drive Complete Street – This Renew Atlanta-led project includes “complete street” upgrades for XX miles of the corridor between XXXX and XXXX.
8. Piedmont Avenue Complete Street – As the northbound counterpart to Juniper Street, this Midtown Alliance-led project is envisioned to include permanent on-street parking, a protected bicycle lane and ADA/pedestrian upgrades

Long-Term Projects

1. Stormwater Infrastructure Upgrades – This effort could include a combination of small elements such as bio-retention rain gardens and clearing of grates up to large-scale improvements such as full subsurface system analysis and reconstruction/upsizing
2. BeltLine Trail – Northern Extension – Continuation of the highly successful east side trail, this project would enhance connectivity to the recent northern additions to Piedmont Park
3. Monroe/10th/Virginia Realignment – This current intersection creates severe alignment issues with a convergence of vehicular, rail, bicycle and pedestrian traffic. Potential realignment and re-signalization could greatly improve operations and safety.
4. Interparcel Connectivity (in tandem w/ future redevelopment per BL Subarea Plan) – Eventual redevelopment of these strategic parcels would create the opportunity to better distribute traffic, improve connectivity to Midtown Promenade and Monroe Drive and facilitate better bike/ped access to the BeltLine from the west.