2015 08 04_Marvin L Clermont_Reduced

Marvin L. ClermontAssociate Project Manager, Midtown Alliance

Midtown Alliance Landscape Enhancements Tree Well Adopti on Program

Pershing Point Park Enhancement Project Street Furniture Deployment Annual Tree Replacement City Maintenance/Midtown Green Coordinati on Wayfi nding Enhancement Project

Atlanta Regional Commission 2013 LCI Implementati on Report

Policy One-Pagers Historic Preservati on Tax Credit Analysis LCI GIS Mapping

Tapestry Development CorporationClarkston Development Foundati on Consultati on

Historic District Development CorporationHOME Fund Applicati on - 610 Irwin Street

HDDC Property Portf olio Henderson Place Community Volunteer Event

Landscaping/Hardscaping Experience Natural Retaining Wall Stone Retaining Wall

Outreach English Avenue Volunteer Event Lakeshore Area Regional Recovery of Indiana (LARRI)

Coursework The Eff ects of Sea Level Rise on the Gullah-Geechee in Coastal Georgia Bloomberg Homeless Asset Mapping

Writing Sample LCI Implementati on Report Clarkston Development Foundati on Personal Writi ng Sample

Table of Contents

Work ExperienceMidtown Alliance

Historic District Development Corporation

Tapestry Development Corporation

Atlanta Regional Commission

Page 1 | Marvin Clermont

Midtown AllianceResponsibilities

Landscape Enhancements

• On a biannual basis, coordinate with contractors to create a plant design which incorporates an aesthetically-pleasing palate combining color and texture

• Perform needs-based assessment for plant material in medians, pocket parks, and other areas for which Midtown Alliance is responsible

• Monitor replacement and maintenance of such areas to ensure each is maintained to the standard expressed in our annual contract

Marvin Clermont | Page 2


Tree Well Adoption Program

• Contact potential partners for the Tree Well Adoption program with the objective of creating an aesthetically-pleasing pedestrian experience

• Sole point of contact responsible for managing takeoff, scheduling, payment, and installation of tree well fencing throughout the District



Pershing Point Park Enhancement Project

• Coordinated with contractors to facilitate and schedule monument restoration as well as hardscape, landscape, and lighting enhancements


Midtown Alliance

Responsibilities

Street Furniture Deployment

• Perform needs-based assessment for street furniture deployment throughout the District; potential infrastructure includes benches, bike racks, trash bins, and recycling cans

• Coordinate delivery and installation of benches, recycling bins, and trash cans to ensure all are located in high traffic areas to maximize proficiency


Midtown AllianceResponsibilitiesMidtown AllianceResponsibilities

Annual Tree Replacement

• As part of a team, identi fy, track, and communicate dead, diseased, or hazardous trees to contractor for replacement on an annual basis

• Create supporti ng documents to facilitate removal and installati on of street trees and understory plant material

"Á

"Á

"Á

"Á

17th

14th

10th

5th

North

18th

16th

12th

8th

Peac

htre

e St

reet

W. P

each

tree

Spri

ng

4th

3rd

Pine

Pied

mon

t

Juni

per

Cypr

ess

Ponce de Leon

Spri

ng

W. P

each

tree

Peachtree Street

Pied

mon

t

Arts Center

Peac

htre

e W

alk

Peachtree Place

15th

11th

7th

6th

5th

Linden

Buford Hwy. Connector

Peachtree Street

W.P

each

tree

13th

Will

iam

s St

reet

MIDTOWN

ARTS CENTER

NORTH AVENUE

CIVIC CENTER

MID Boundary

Tree Installation

PREPARE BY MIDTOWN ALLIANCE ON 11/14/2014

°0 0.250.125

Miles0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2,000200

Feet

MAP EXHIBIT BTREE INSTALLATION

011

053

054

061

049

014

051

062

021

050 056

055 057

058059 060

028

052

Street trees Midtown Boundary



City Maintenance/Midtown Green Coordination

• As part of a team, delegate responsibilities to the Midtown Green landscaping and maintenance team to resolve a wide array of issues throughout the District

• Coordinate with the City of Atlanta, Department of Watershed and Public Works to document and replace infrastructure in the City right-of-way



Wayfi nding Enhancement Project

• Responsible for collecti on of existi ng Wayfi nding signage throughout the District to assess project viability• Sole point of contact responsible for marking locati ons in need of sign replacement and monitoring project schedule to maintain various installati on and budget benchmarks



Responsibilities• Performed data analysis and extrapolated conclusions on development patterns in LCI areas for the 2013 Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Implementation Report

2013 LCI Implementation Report Highlights

• 79 out 109 LCI areas completed and return the Development Inventory portion of the survey

• LCI areas make up 5% of the total land area within 15 counties;however, account for a large amount of development within these counties.• 1,699 developments were reported since

the beginning of the LCI program in 1999. • LCI areas account for 7% of housing units, 24% of commercial square footage, and 38% of office square footage

Mixed-use development can take on various forms. In urban and CBD areas it typically means that multiple uses are contained within a single building (e.g. retail on the bottom floor, office and residential above), while in less urban or suburban areas it may mean a mix of land uses adjacent to each other within the same district, neighborhood or development. Mixed use development helps to create safe, walkable, communities by locating retail, ser-vices, schools and other uses in close proximity to residences thereby making automobile trips unnecessary (for most trips).

Table 1: Developments by LCI Counties, as Reported in the 2012 Survey

County Area Completed Not

specified Planned Pre- Construction

Under Construction Grand Total Percentage

Atlanta 360 95 66 56 15 592 34.8%

Barrow 2 1 1 4 0.2%

Cherokee 188 2 190 11.2%

Clayton 8 1 2 11 0.6%

Cobb 78 4 10 17 109 6.4%

Dekalb 32 4 21 12 69 4.1%

Douglas 12 1 13 0.8%

Fayette 35 7 5 47 2.8%

Forsyth 3 2 3 9 0.5%

Fulton 195 22 7 13 12 249 14.7%

Gwinnett 312 2 5 6 325 19.1%

Henry 18 1 7 26 1.5%

Newton 27 3 30 1.8%

Rockdale 5 2 5 12 0.7%

Spalding 10 2 2 14 0.8%

Total 1,285 130 129 69 86 1,699 100.0%

reported since 2001.

Table 2: Developments by LCI Study Year, as Reported in the 2012 Survey

LCI Study Year # of Areas # of Projects Res Units Hotel Rms Com Office

2000 10 172 9,027 100 1,537,402 287,186

2001 8 452 23,947 3,800 8,606,130 17,008,647

2002 7 101 6,562 0 802,374 404,448

2003 8 87 4,446 692 859,392 714,394

2004 7 272 5,763 194 2,113,224 960,891

2005 7 65 5,144 141 2,621,407 2,879,363

2006 4 45 234 41 114,208 15,216

2007 4 73 1,484 550 685,863 498,537

2008 2 22 1,150 - 2,188,948 4,182

2009 4 20 2,279 480 565,000 855,000

2010 3 5 285 - - -

2011 2 1 - - - -

2012 1 - - - - -

Grandfathered 12 384 13,202 3,135 2,176,612 11,191,288

Grand Total 79 1,699 73,523 9,133 22,270,560 34,819,152

These numbers reflect the 79 LCI Communities that responded to the 2012 survey.

Residential Development

The LCI program assists communities with planning for a diverse range of housing that includes single-family

Table 3: Residential Development Summary

Land Use Quantity Projects % of All Projects Avg Q/ Project

Residential 73,523 811 48% 91

Table 4: Stage of Development by Land Use

Land Use Completed Pre-construction Planned Under Construction Remaining

Residential 520 63 89 50 96

construction. Only 32 of these projects will contain fewer than 100 residential units. These communities have consistently

add more than 100 units per project. The location of these projects achieves the goal of mixing uses by placing compact, quality housing in or around job centers and rail transit.

Chart 4: Number of Residential Units Reported

2,0000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000

Midtown

Buckhead

Downtown Atlanta

Upper Westside

Gwinnett

West End

Perimeter Center

Cumberland

Bolton/Moores Mill

Peachtree City

8,466

7,570

4,160

10,493

3,448

3,437

3,682

3,433

2,519

2,260

Commercial Development

A strong, growing economy is essential to the success of any metropolitan region. The Development Inventory survey assesses the strength of commercial development in LCI communities since the last reporting period. Commercial

8 9

Table 1: Developments by LCI Counties, as Reported in the 2012 Survey

County Area Completed Not

specified Planned Pre- Construction

Under Construction Grand Total Percentage

Atlanta 360 95 66 56 15 592 34.8%

Barrow 2 1 1 4 0.2%

Cherokee 188 2 190 11.2%

Clayton 8 1 2 11 0.6%

Cobb 78 4 10 17 109 6.4%

Dekalb 32 4 21 12 69 4.1%

Douglas 12 1 13 0.8%

Fayette 35 7 5 47 2.8%

Forsyth 3 2 3 9 0.5%

Fulton 195 22 7 13 12 249 14.7%

Gwinnett 312 2 5 6 325 19.1%

Henry 18 1 7 26 1.5%

Newton 27 3 30 1.8%

Rockdale 5 2 5 12 0.7%

Spalding 10 2 2 14 0.8%

Total 1,285 130 129 69 86 1,699 100.0%

reported since 2001.

Table 2: Developments by LCI Study Year, as Reported in the 2012 Survey

LCI Study Year # of Areas # of Projects Res Units Hotel Rms Com Office

2000 10 172 9,027 100 1,537,402 287,186

2001 8 452 23,947 3,800 8,606,130 17,008,647

2002 7 101 6,562 0 802,374 404,448

2003 8 87 4,446 692 859,392 714,394

2004 7 272 5,763 194 2,113,224 960,891

2005 7 65 5,144 141 2,621,407 2,879,363

2006 4 45 234 41 114,208 15,216

2007 4 73 1,484 550 685,863 498,537

2008 2 22 1,150 - 2,188,948 4,182

2009 4 20 2,279 480 565,000 855,000

2010 3 5 285 - - -

2011 2 1 - - - -

2012 1 - - - - -

Grandfathered 12 384 13,202 3,135 2,176,612 11,191,288

Grand Total 79 1,699 73,523 9,133 22,270,560 34,819,152

These numbers reflect the 79 LCI Communities that responded to the 2012 survey.

Residential Development

The LCI program assists communities with planning for a diverse range of housing that includes single-family

Table 3: Residential Development Summary

Land Use Quantity Projects % of All Projects Avg Q/ Project

Residential 73,523 811 48% 91



Residential 520 63 89 50 96

construction. Only 32 of these projects will contain fewer than 100 residential units. These communities have consistently

add more than 100 units per project. The location of these projects achieves the goal of mixing uses by placing compact, quality housing in or around job centers and rail transit.

Chart 4: Number of Residential Units Reported

2,0000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000

Midtown

Buckhead

Downtown Atlanta

Upper Westside

Gwinnett

West End

Perimeter Center

Cumberland

Bolton/Moores Mill

Peachtree City

8,466

7,570

4,160

10,493

3,448

3,437

3,682

3,433

2,519

2,260

Commercial Development

A strong, growing economy is essential to the success of any metropolitan region. The Development Inventory survey assesses the strength of commercial development in LCI communities since the last reporting period. Commercial

8 9

Regional Comparison of Developments In addition to information gathered from the development inventory, ARC also gathers regional development data from Co-Star, a real estate information company. This information allows ARC to compare the amount of development in LCI areas to the amount of development in the entire region. The data reported in the LCI Development spreadsheets contained

development patterns. The following chart compares the amount of development within LCI areas to overall regional development. `

Table 12: Comparison of Development of LCI Areas and the Region

LCI Communities 15-County Region LCI Share

Land Area 132,984 2,705,263 5%

Office Development, 2000 - 2012 19,170,973 49,962,947 38%

Commercial Development, 2000 - 2012 16,758,419 69,527,002 24%

Residential Development, 2000 - 2012 35,593 491,621 7%

they lag behind in residential development. This shows that we have a “spatial mismatch” in where employees live and where the jobs are located. In order to create an environment where people can reasonably walk or bike to work, school

the economic downturn than surrounding areas, leading one to believe that LCI communities are thriving.

Employment

Along with the communities themselves, the workers who live in LCI areas also share a trend. According to the 2010

a sense of community by integrating housing and employment, as well as historic character and development patterns.

a wide variety of employment options. Jobs are available in LCI communities, and the people in the communities are making a good wage.

10-year GrowthThe implementation of an LCI plan is a long-term process. However, each completed LCI study includes an implementation

assess progress and make adjustments to maintain the spirit of the original plan.

resources), a 10-year update/full plan or it may determine that its LCI plan is complete and requires no additional funding.

Thirty-five LCI communities reached the 10-year milestone by January 2013. During this time, LCI communities have

development projects. The increase, by percentage, is depicted in Table 18.

Table 13: LCI Growth Comparison

Study Year Residential Units

Hotel Units

Commercial Space

Office Space

No.of Projects

LCI Count

2000 6,922 100 645,650 76,000 84

2001 8,167 3,346 2,729,712 13,313,624 150

2002 3,094 - 278,057 115,380 36

2003 1,729 143 401,391 1,297,211 15

GF 8,374 1,497 997,161 7,955,749 76

2004 Total 28,286 5,086 5,051,971 22,757,964 361 49

2000 9,027 100 1,537,402 287,186 172

2001 23,947 3,800 8,606,130 17,008,647 452

2002 6,562 - 802,374 404,448 101

2003 4,446 692 859,392 714,394 87

GF 12,878 3,135 1,827,692 11,555,631 264

2012 Total 56,860 7,727 13,853,990 29,970,306 1,076 109

101.0% 51.9% 169.9% 31.7 198.1% 122.4%

14 15

Regional Comparison of Developments In addition to information gathered from the development inventory, ARC also gathers regional development data from Co-Star, a real estate information company. This information allows ARC to compare the amount of development in LCI areas to the amount of development in the entire region. The data reported in the LCI Development spreadsheets contained

development patterns. The following chart compares the amount of development within LCI areas to overall regional development. `

Table 12: Comparison of Development of LCI Areas and the Region

LCI Communities 15-County Region LCI Share

Land Area 132,984 2,705,263 5%

Office Development, 2000 - 2012 19,170,973 49,962,947 38%

Commercial Development, 2000 - 2012 16,758,419 69,527,002 24%

Residential Development, 2000 - 2012 35,593 491,621 7%

they lag behind in residential development. This shows that we have a “spatial mismatch” in where employees live and where the jobs are located. In order to create an environment where people can reasonably walk or bike to work, school

the economic downturn than surrounding areas, leading one to believe that LCI communities are thriving.

Employment

Along with the communities themselves, the workers who live in LCI areas also share a trend. According to the 2010

a sense of community by integrating housing and employment, as well as historic character and development patterns.

a wide variety of employment options. Jobs are available in LCI communities, and the people in the communities are making a good wage.

10-year GrowthThe implementation of an LCI plan is a long-term process. However, each completed LCI study includes an implementation

assess progress and make adjustments to maintain the spirit of the original plan.

resources), a 10-year update/full plan or it may determine that its LCI plan is complete and requires no additional funding.

Thirty-five LCI communities reached the 10-year milestone by January 2013. During this time, LCI communities have

development projects. The increase, by percentage, is depicted in Table 18.

Table 13: LCI Growth Comparison

Study Year Residential Units

Hotel Units

Commercial Space

Office Space

No.of Projects

LCI Count

2000 6,922 100 645,650 76,000 84

2001 8,167 3,346 2,729,712 13,313,624 150

2002 3,094 - 278,057 115,380 36

2003 1,729 143 401,391 1,297,211 15

GF 8,374 1,497 997,161 7,955,749 76

2004 Total 28,286 5,086 5,051,971 22,757,964 361 49

2000 9,027 100 1,537,402 287,186 172

2001 23,947 3,800 8,606,130 17,008,647 452

2002 6,562 - 802,374 404,448 101

2003 4,446 692 859,392 714,394 87

GF 12,878 3,135 1,827,692 11,555,631 264

2012 Total 56,860 7,727 13,853,990 29,970,306 1,076 109

101.0% 51.9% 169.9% 31.7 198.1% 122.4%

14 15

Hotel Development Hotel development in LCI areas is a good way to track corporate travel because the LCI areas with the most hotel square

Table 9: Hotel Development Summary

Quantity Projects % of All Projects Avg Q/ Project

Hotel 9,133 48 3% 190



Hotel 27 14 0 6 1

Table 11. Top 10 Office Square Footage and Hotel Units

LCI Area Office Space (SqFt) LCI Area Hotel Units

Midtown 10,728,031 Midtown 3,135

Buckhead 10,419,397 Buckhead 3,106

Perimeter 3,922,000 Downtown Atlanta 1,141

McFarland-Stoney Point 2,636,372 College Park 475

Downtown Atlantat 1,211,400 Cumberland 304

Gwinnett 1,181,447 North Druid Hills 200

Cumberland 865,403 Town Center 194

North Druid Hills 850,000 McFarland-Stoney Point 144

Roswell Road 465,000 Covington 278 141

Upper Westside 385,632 Union City 111

Table 14. LCI Areas with Most Hotel Rooms Reported

Growth Around the Airport

College Park, not traditionally a center for hotel development, ranks in the top five for new hotel units because

airport is growing, in part due to the work of the Atlanta Aerotropolis Alliance. The Alliance is comprised of elected

owners, as well as the Airport Area, Clayton County and

goal is to lead the discussion on airport area planning and development and to identify strategies and actions related to improving the airport area.

Mixed-Use Development

and residential above). In less urban areas it may mean a mix of land uses adjacent to each other within the same district,

policies that encourage compact development, allow a mix of uses and require interconnected streets. The use of smart codes, form-based codes and overlay district zoning are other common tools that foster mixed-use development and diversify the types of housing units in a community.

respondents reported that seven percent of all projects included a mixed-use component. Twenty-four percent of mixed-

clearly demonstrate the goals of mixed-use development.

Chart 8: Percentage of Developments with Specified Uses within LCI Communities

Commercial & Office | 23.6%

Commercial, Office & Hotel | .7%

Residential, Commercial & Office | 18.8%

Residential, Hotel, Commercial & Office | 7.6%

Commercial & Hotel | 3.5%

Hotel & Office | .7%

Not Reported | 11.8%

Residential & Commercial | 23.6%

Residential & Hotel | 1.4%

Residential & Office | 2.1%

Residential, Hotel & Commercial | 6.3%

12 13




Hotel 9,133 48 3% 190



Hotel 27 14 0 6 1




































12 13




Hotel 9,133 48 3% 190



Hotel 27 14 0 6 1




































12 13


The Atlanta region is a collection of vibrant neighborhoods and places that people and businesses want to call home. Over the last decade, many of these communities have improved the quality of life for their residents with help from the Livable Centers Initiative (LCI).

LCI was created by the Atlanta Regional Commission in 1999 to reduce vehicle emissions and help the region meet stringent federal air quality standards by providing travel options other than driving. Through grants, LCI encourages local jurisdictions to implement development strategies that link residents to shopping, dining and other activities via sidewalks and bike trails, rather than strictly by roads. The program has become popular and, during the last 14 years,Number and Types of Funded Studies per Year

has grown to include 109 communities.

LCI communities receive an initial grant to study and plan their town center, activity center or corridor. Once their plan is complete and adopted, the area is eligible for additional money that enables them to conduct supplemental studies of specific issues or to design and build transportation projects identified in their LCI study.

Every two years, ARC conducts a survey of all active LCI communities in an attempt to measure the success and effectiveness of the program. This document is a summary of the 2012 survey results. The full report can be found at www.atlantaregional.com/lci.

Planning Funds Awarded per Year

Cos

t

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

$1,400,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

New LCI Study

Supplemental Study

LCI Innovation

2013 Livable Centers Initiative

IMPLEMENTATION REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2000–2012 Livable Centers Initiative Studies

40 Courtland Street, NE Atlanta, Georgia 30303

atlantaregional.com

For more information about the Livable Centers Initiative, including how to apply for funding, please contact:

Dan Reuter Community Development Division Manager

404.463.3305

Please consult ARC’s LCI webpage for more details:

www.atlantaregional.com/lci

Local governments and non-profit organizations are eligible for LCI grants. The program has three primary goals for its funding:• Encourage a diversity of mixed-income residential neighborhoods, employment, shopping and recreation choices in activity centers, town centers and corridors.

• Provide access to a range of travel modes including transit, roadways, walking and biking to enable access to all uses within the study area.

• Develop an outreach process that promotes the involvement of all stakeholders.

2000 2001 20020

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 GF** Grandfathered LCI Grants

Num

ber

of s

tudi

es

Activity Center

Town Center

Corridor

LCI F

UN

DIN

G G

OA

LS

Map Prepared by the Atlanta Regional Commission

2013 LCI Implementation Highlights

The 2004 LCI Implementation Report states that 46 respondents to the Development Inventory survey reported that 28,000 housing units, 5,000 hotel units, 5.0 million square feet of commercial space, and 22.8 million square feet of office space would be developed as a result of 361 projects funded by LCI communities. The 2013 LCI Implementation Report reports that 79 of 109 existing LCI’s responded to the Development Inventory survey. The LCIs reported that 73,000 housing units, 9,100 hotel units, 22.2 million square feet of commercial space, and 35 million square feet of office space would be developed as a result of 1,700 development projects.

10-Year Growth



Policy One-Pagers• Researched demographic, social, and economic data related to TOD and aff ordable housing in the 10-county region

• Designed six one-pagers using Adobe InDesign and ArcGIS to illustrate the need and eff ect of the cost burden on the low to moderate income populati on

Inclusionary Zoning One-Pager

Needs and Tools to Preserve Affordable Housing

The Atlanta region is the second fastest growing metropolitan area in the nation, with a current population of about 4.1 million people. As population and economic growth increase, local governments like Atlanta are looking for ways to prevent displacement of lower to middle-income residents and provide long-term affordable housing options.

A typical household in the Atlanta region with a median income of $58,390 spends an average of $14,305 in transportation costs annually. That’s $1,192 per month, ranking Atlanta 44th out of the nation’s 51 largest metros.¹30% of typical households in the Atlanta region with median income of $58,390, spend over 30% of their yearly income on housing and 80% spend more than 45% of their yearly income on housing and transportation costs.

Working families in the Atlanta region with incomes between $20,000 and $50,000 spend 61% of their yearly budget on housing and transportation costs.²

Atlanta Mitigates Displacement and Preserves Affordable Housing

Housing is considered affordable if it costs no more than 30% of the monthly household income for rent and utilities and no more than 45% of housing and transportation costs. Policies are needed to preserve and create affordable housing.

Marisa GhaniSenior Planner, Land Usep: 404.463.3309f: 404.463.3254e: [email protected]

Market demand for the number of households likely to be looking to rent or buy housing near transit will increase to 14.6 million households by 2025 and 15.2 million households by 2030, with just under 229,000 in Atlanta³

This map illustrates housing and transportation costs as a percent of income. In the Atlanta region, most people spend over 45% of their income on housing and transportation costs.

1.Average Annual Transportation Costs for the National Typical Household, 2012, Center for Neighborhood Technology. p. 1-2.; 2.B. Lipman, A Heavy Load: The Combined Housing and Transportation Burdens of Working Families, 2006, Center for Housing Policy: Washington, D.C.; 3. Center for TOD Demand Estimate Update [cited 2013 4/22/2013]; Available from: http://www.ctod.org/portal/sites/default/files/2008demestctod.pdf. 4.Metro Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, , MARTA’s Policy Framework and Strategic Approach to Action, 2012.; 5. Atlanta Development Authority, Atlanta Beltline Affordable Housing Trust Fund Developer Grants, 2011. p. 1-38.; 6.Arlington, Virgina Department of Community Planning and Development., 2006p. 1-4.; 7. The Effects of Inclusionary Zoning on Local Housing Markets: Lessons from the San Francisco, Washington DC and Suburban Boston Areas, 2008, Center for Housing Policy. p. 1-13; PICTURES and MAPS: Source - H+T Affordability Index, tumblr.com - mass housing;

MARTA applies a 20% affordable housing policy goal for housing affordability as part of all joint development projects (residential and mixed-use TOD). This is one way that MARTA looks to provide affordable housing options near transit stops.

The City Council created the Beltline Affordable Housing Trust Fund (BAHTF) to create and preserve affordable housing in the Beltline neighborhoods with approximately 115 units planned. Once completed these units will be a prime example of connecting affordable housing to public transportation.

5

4

Need for Affordable Housing in AtlantaTransportation Costs as a Percentage of Annual Income


Transit to Health One-Pager

People who live or work in communities with high quality public transportation tend to drive significantly less and rely more on alternative modes of transportation contributing to many health benefits.Neighborhood design features that support transit, such as walkability and mixed land use, also support public health. Health benefits of transit-oriented neighborhoods include increased physical fitness, improved mental health, improved basic access to medical care and healthy food and reduced traffic crashes and pollution emissions.¹

Public Transportation Accessibility Improves Physical Fitness

Public Transportation Improves Health

Nearly half of Americans do not meet the Surgeon General’s recommendation of 30 minutes of physical activity daily. Walking to public transit has proven to help transit users meet their daily physical activity recommendations.²

Marisa GhaniSenior Planner, Land Usep: 404.463.3309f: 404.463.3254e: [email protected]

Atlanta - Sandy Springs - Marietta was ranked 21st out of 50 of the largest metropolitan MSA’s in the US American Fitness Index5

Areas for Improvement

Percent obese

Percent with asthma

Lower percent walking or biking to workLower percent primary health care providers per capita

Lower percent city area as parkland

✓✓

Strengths

Tennis Courts

Golf courses

Rec centers per capita

✓

Of people with safe places to walk within ten minutes of home, 43% achieve physical activity targets, compared with 27% of less walkable area residents²

In Georgia 65.0% of adults were overweight, with a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 25 or greater (US: 63.7%); 30.4% of adults were obese, with a BMI of 30 or greater (US: 27.5%)

1. Litman, T., Evaluating Public Transportation Health Benefits, 2010, Victoria Transport Policy Institute. p. 1-32.; 2. Dannenberg, L.B.a.A., Walking to Public Transit: Steps to Meet Physical Activity Recommendations, 2005, Centers for Disease Control: American Journal of Preventative Medicine. p. 274-280.; 3. The Food and Research Center, The Most Recent National and State Prevalence for Overweight and Obesity (including the District of Columbia), 2011, Center for Disease Control and Prevention: The Food and Research Center; 4.Silver Comet Trail. [cited 2013 4/4/2013]; Available from: http://www.silvercometga.com/. 5.Chamness et al., ACSM Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas, 2012, American Fitness Index. p. 1-128.

Our Region is Working to Improve Accessibility

Through the LCI program, ARC continues to implement accessibility improvements such as sidewalks, multi-use trails and bicycle lanes to expand transportation alternatives and enhance mobility.Construction of the Beltline, a 22-mile network of multi-use trails that encompasses much of Atlanta, has created the potential to reconnect 45 neighborhoods through alternative modes of transportation.Atlanta’s PATH Foundation has developed 25 miles of greenway trails connecting the city’s communities. The Silver Comet Trail is a 61.5 mile long trail that is used for hikers and bikers, walkers, and is also wheelchair accessible. 4

3


Atlanta Regional CommissionHistoric Preservation Tax Credit Analysis • Calculated and analyzed program fees and tax incenti ves to assess economic impact of state programs on employment

• Calculated, in Excel, the economic multi plier, wages, and jobs created as a result of historical tax credits awarded in the Metropolitan Planning Organizati on (MPO)

• Applied fi ndings to defl ators to account for decades of infl ati on

Excel Consolidation, Calculation, and Extrapolation• Over two decades of state-wide data was sift ed through, by hand, and consolidated, in Excel to ensure that only historic tax credit by the MPO was included

• The economic multi plier was calculated to extrapolate the job and wages created by applying and rati os identi fi ed in research


• The totals were multi plied the defl ator to adjust for infl ati on

• Over 200 properti es were identi fi ed creati ng just under 800 jobs, and over $500 million over the last three decades


Atlanta Regional CommissionLCI GIS Mapping

§̈¦20

O a k l a n d C i t y /O a k l a n d C i t y /L a k e w o o dL a k e w o o d

W e s t L a k eW e s t L a k e

§̈¦20

W e s t E n dW e s t E n d

Ca

sc

ad

e R

d S

W

Ca

sc

ad

e R

d S

W

W W

hi t

eh

al l

St

SW

W W

hi t

eh

al l

St

SW

C h a p e l S t

S W

C h a p e l S t

S W

Ra

l p h D

av i d

Ab

e r na

t hy B

l v d S

W

Ra

l p h D

av i d

Ab

e r na

t hy B

l v d S

W

Approve of CID

Existing LCI Community

Proposed CID Boundary

´0 0.4 0.80.2

Miles

Proposed West End CID Boundary

D o w n t o w n D o w n t o w n A t l a n t aA t l a n t a


V i n e C i t yV i n e C i t y

§̈¦20

§̈¦20

H U D C h o i c e H U D C h o i c e N e i g h b o r h o o dN e i g h b o r h o o d

J o s e p h E . B o o n e B o u l e v a r dJ o s e p h E . B o o n e B o u l e v a r d

P a r k S t r e e tP a r k S t r e e t

No r t

h s i de D

r iv e

No r t

h s i de D

r iv e

No

rth

sid

e D

riv

eN

ort

hs

ide

Dri

ve

M . L . K . D r i v eM . L . K . D r i v e

Jo

se

ph

E.

Lo

we

ry S

tre

et

Jo

se

ph

E.

Lo

we

ry S

tre

et

West End

Vine City

Downtown Atlanta

HUD Choice Neighborhood

´HUD Choice Neighborhood

0 0.35 0.70.175Miles

§̈¦20

O a k l a n d C i t y /O a k l a n d C i t y /L a k e w o o dL a k e w o o d

W e s t L a k eW e s t L a k e

§̈¦20


Ca

sc

ad

e R

d S

W

Ca

sc

ad

e R

d S

W

W W

hi t

eh

al l

St

SW

W W

hi t

eh

al l

St

SW

C h a p e l St

S W

C h a p e l St

S W

Ra l p h D

a v i d Ab e r n a t h y B

l v d SW

Ra l p h D

a v i d Ab e r n a t h y B

l v d SW

Approve of CID

Existing LCI Community

Proposed CID Boundary

´0 0.4 0.80.2

Miles

Proposed West End CID Boundary

Downtown Atlanta -2001 | 5 Year in 2006; 10 Year Update due this year

Project Name

Study Downtown Atlanta LCI Study

Supplemental StudyBaker Street Two-Way Conversion Feasibility Study

Supplemental Study 10 Year LCI Update

Supplemental Study Traffic Simulation Model

Supplemental Study Streetcar TOD Study

Transportation Project Piedmont Avenue Pedestrian Improvements

Transportation ProjectPeachtree Street Downtown Midblock Pedestrian Crossing

Transportation Project Decatur Street Pedestrian Improvements

Transportation Project Simpson-West Peachtree Ped Rail Connections

Transportation Project Luckie St. Two-Way Conversion

Transportation Project Atlanta Streetcar Transit Enhancements

Vine City - 2008 | 5 Year due in 2014; 10 Year due in 2019

Project Name

Study Vine City LCI Study

Transportation ProjectMLK Blvd Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities

West End - 2000 | 5 Year in 2006; 10 Year Update due this year

Project Name

Study West End Historic District LCI

Transportation ProjectRalph David Abernathy Boulevard Streetscape and Intersection Improvements

Transportation Project Ashby Street (Lowery Boulevard) Streetscape

Transportation Project Lee Street Streetscape


Project Name













Project Name




Project Name






Project Name













Project Name




Project Name





Atlanta Housing Authority - HUD Choice Neighborhood

West End Community Improvement District


Church St.

Church St.

Scott Blvd.

Scott Blvd.

Dekalb Industrial Way

Dekalb Industrial Way

Bill Thrasher Dr.

N. Decatur Rd.

Medline LCI

´

0 0.3 0.60.15Miles

Medline | Redevelopment Corridor

Chamblee LCI Boundary

´

Chamblee | LCI Boundary Expansion

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.40.05Miles

Peachtree Blvd.

Broad St.

Chambl;ee Tucker Rd.

New Peachtree Rd.

Medline LCI

´

0 0.3 0.60.15Miles

Medline | Redevelopment Corridor

Chamblee LCI Boundary

´

Chamblee | LCI Boundary Expansion

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.40.05Miles

Peachtre

e Blvd.

Broad St.

Chambl;ee Tucker Rd.

New Peachtre

e Rd.

Medline was awarded $120,000 - Th is study focuses on the area around DeKalb Medical Center and will plan for redevelopment of underutilized and vacant properties to create a variety of housing options and an appropriate mix of commercial, offi ce, and retail.

Medline

Chamblee

Chamblee was awarded $80,000 for a 10-year major plan update


Responsibilities• Researched and compiled best practices models for potential housing redevelopment and preservation strategies for the city of Clarkston, GA

• Identified and aggregated key components of the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) and Placed-in-Service (PIS) grant application packages

• Created a database to segregate several key categories, such as partners, clients, and funders, in order to expedite the targeting process to increase the proficiency of the company’s marketing and public relations efforts

Clarkston Development Foundation Consultation

• 7,748 remaining units accounted for 21,964 of the population in the service area.

Tapestry Development Group

• 5,804 occupied housing units (74.9% of the occupied housing units) are rental, accommodating 16,854 people (77% of the total population).

• 1,944 housing units (25.1% of the occupied housing units) are owned, accounting for 5,110 people (23% of the total population)

Total Population by Block

Total Occupied Housing Units

§̈¦285

§̈¦285

E Po

nce

de L

eon

Ave

Memor

ial D

r

Stone Mountain Fwy

Rockbridge Rd

Lawrenceville Hwy

Brockett Rd

Cooledge Rd

Stone Mountain Fwy

Clarkston

Zip Code 30021

Interstate

Major Roads

0%

0.1% - 66.7%

66.8% - 84%

84.1% - 94.4%

94.5% - 100% ±0 0.5 10.25 Miles

C L A R K S T O NC L A R K S T O NU N I N C O R P O R A T E DU N I N C O R P O R A T E DD E K A L B C O U N T YD E K A L B C O U N T Y

U N I N C O R P O R A T E DU N I N C O R P O R A T E DD E K A L B C O U N T YD E K A L B C O U N T Y

Percentage of Occupied Housing Units - 2010 CensusPercentage of Occupied Housing Units - 2010 Census

§̈¦285

§̈¦285

E Po

nce

de L

eon

Ave

Memor

ial D

r

Stone Mountain Fwy

Rockbridge Rd

Lawrenceville Hwy

Brockett Rd

Cooledge Rd

Stone Mountain Fwy

Clarkston

Zip Code 30021

Interstate

Major Roads

0 - 58

59 - 234

235 - 608

609 - 1154

1155 - 2080 ±0 0.5 10.25 Miles



To t a l P o p u l a t i o n - 2 0 1 0 C e n s u sTo t a l P o p u l a t i o n - 2 0 1 0 C e n s u s


§̈¦285

§̈¦285

E Po

nce

de L

eon

Ave

Memor

ial D

r

Stone Mountain Fwy

Rockbridge Rd

Lawrenceville Hwy

Brockett Rd

Cooledge RdStone Mountain Fwy

Clarkston

Zip Code 30021

Interstate

Major Roads

0% - 5.3%

5.4% - 15.4%

15.5% - 31.6%

31.7% - 62.5%

62.6% - 100% ±0 0.5 10.25 Miles



Percentage of Vacant Housing Units - 2010 CensusPercentage of Vacant Housing Units - 2010 Census

§̈¦285

§̈¦285

E Po

nce

de L

eon

Ave

Memor

ial D

r

Stone Mountain Fwy

Rockbridge Rd

Lawrenceville Hwy

Brockett Rd

Cooledge Rd

Stone Mountain Fwy

Clarkston

Zip Code 30021

Interstate

Major Roads

0% - 5.3%

5.4% - 15.4%

15.5% - 31.6%

31.7% - 62.5%

62.6% - 100% ±0 0.5 10.25 Miles



Percentage of Vacant Housing Units - 2010 CensusPercentage of Vacant Housing Units - 2010 Census

Percentage of Vacant Housing Units• 1,215 Vacant Housing Units of 8,963 total housing units (13.6% vacancy rate)


Responsibilities• Assisted with the preparati on of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Community Housing Development Organizati on (CHDO) and Healthy Food Financing Initi ati ve (HFFI) grant applicati ons

HOME Fund Application• Awarded a $540,000 Constructi on Loan to rehabilitate housing for rent or ownership in the Marti n Luther King Historic District

• Confi gured maps to illustrate proximity of applicant property to the Beltline and other forms of public transportati on as part of the feasibility analysis.

Beltline View

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!. !.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

_̂

§̈¦85

§̈¦20

§̈¦20

§̈¦75

§̈¦75/85

§̈¦75

OmniAshby

Midtown

Garnett

Bankhead

West End

West Lake

Vine City

Five Points

Arts Center

Civic Center

North Avenue

Oakland City

King MemorialGeorgia

State

Lindberg Center

Peachtree CenterEdgewood-Candler Park

Inman ParkReynoldstown

10TH

14TH

HO

WELL M

ILL

IRWINFREEDOM

HA

NK

AA

RO

N

RALPH MCGILL

JOSE

PH E

LO

WER

Y

BO

ULEVA

RD

NORTH

SPR

ING

Atlanta Streetcar

0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25Miles

!. Marta Stations

BeltlineTrail

Beltline Transit

Interstate

Marta Line

Major Roads

_̂ 610 Irwin St.

610 Irwin St. (Beltline)

Map by: Marvin Clermont

Historic District Development Corporation (HDDC)


610 Irwin in Relation to the Beltline

!(

!(!( !(

!(!( !(!(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

North Ave NE

Boul

evar

d N

E

Irwin St NE

Angier Ave NE

Ralph Mcgill Blvd NE

Highland Ave NE

Wylie St SE

Gle

n Iri

s D

r NE

Park

way

Dr N

E

Auburn Ave NE

Decatur St SE

DeKalb Ave NE

East Ave NE

Lake Ave NE

State Route 10

Jack

son

St N

E

Morgan St NE

Felto

n D

r NE

Ran

dolp

h S

t NE

Elizabeth St NE

Edgewood Ave SE

Edgewood Ave NEKrog S

t NE

Euclid Ave

NE

Hilli

ard

St S

E

Wabash Ave NE

N Highland Ave NE

How

ell S

t NE

Waverly W

ay NE

Dallas St NE

Wad

dell

St N

E

Linden Ave NE

Jackson St SE

Hilli

ard

St N

E

Winton Ter NE

AIRLIN

E ST

Sam

pson

St N

E

Pear

l St S

E

Barnett St NE

John Wesley Dobbs Ave NE

Ashl

ey A

ve N

E

Daniel St SE

Boulevard Pl NE

Dixie Ave NE

I-75 Ramp

Hal

e S

t NE

Boulevard SE

Tye St SE

Rankin St NE

Ashland Ave NE

Arno

ld S

t NE

Linwood Ave N

E

Marcus St SE

Willoughby Way NE

How

ell S

t SE

Virgil S

t NE

Esto

ria S

t SE

Todd StC

hest

er A

ve S

E

Pine St NE

N Angier Ave NE

Selm

an S

t SE

Hog

ue S

t NE

Keny

on S

t SE

Fortu

ne S

t NE

Gartrell St SE

William

H Borders D

r SE

Chamberlain St SE

Old Wheat St NE

Kirkwood Ave SE

Cor

ley

St N

E

Shor

t St S

E

BOULEVARD

Austin Ave NE

Alas

ka A

ve N

E

Som

erse

t Ter

NE

Cur

rier P

l

Brad

ley

St N

E

Powell St SE

Pine St SE

McGruder St NE

Angi

er P

l NE

Pros

pect

Pl N

E

Lam

pkin

St N

E

Fitzgerald St SE

Tanner St SE

Madeira Ave NE

Cor

nelia

St S

E

Angier

Spr

ings R

d NE

Albi

on A

ve N

E

Williams Mill Rd NE

Johnson Ave NE

PAR

K LN

Spru

ce S

t NE

Mac

kenz

ie D

r NE

Field St SE

CO

OK

S A

LY

Pittman Pl SE

JACKSON PL

Flat

Sho

als

Ave

SE

Ensley St NE

Bere

an A

ve S

E

International Blvd NE

Atlantis Ave NE

Ran

kin

Pl N

E

BRA

DLE

Y ST

Druid C

ir NE

TENNELLE ST

Stone Mountain Fwy NE

Gra

pe S

t NE

Fortune Pl NE

McG

ill Park Ave NE

Belgrade Ave NE

EDIT

H S

T

Nut

ting

St N

E

Fort

St N

E

Gunby S

t SE

Airli

ne S

t NE

Krog St Underpass St N

E

TENELLE ST

INMAN MEWS DR

MC

GIL

L P

L

EDGEWOOD AVE

Park

way

Dr N

E

How

ell S

t NE

Krog

St N

E

Hilli

ard

St N

E

How

ell S

t NE

PARK LN

Barnett St N

E

Elizabeth St NEStat

e Rou

te 10

Edgewood Ave SE

State Route 10

Rankin St NE

Waverly Way NE

Sampson S

t NE

State Route 10

Kirkwood Ave SE

¯

0 0.2 0.40.1Miles

_̂ 610 Irwin St.

610 Irwin St. (Old 4th Ward)

!( Bus Stops

Interstate

Streets

BeltlineTrail

Beltline Transit

Old 4th Ward

_̂ 610 Irwin St.

Atlanta Streetcar

_̂


!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

610 IrwinParcel ID # 14001900070896Zoning Type: RG-2

Irwin St NE

Sam

pson

St N

E

McGruder St NE


Cor

ley

St N

E

Auburn

Ave N

E

Lam

pkin

St N

E

Lake Ave NE

610 Irwin St.

Old 4th Ward

!( MARTA Bus Stops

Streets

Beltline Transit

BeltlineTrail

¯

0 200 400100Feet

610 Irwin St. (Street View)


Street View


HDDC Property Portfolio• Performed GIS spati al analyses of real estate assets within the HDDC area of interest

• 24 Parcels on either side of Boulevard Street

• Property status included: Occupied, Vacant, Vacant Land and Property

Auburn Ave NE

Edgewood Ave SE

Irwin St NE

But

ler S

t NE

Bel

l St N

E I-75 Exw

y NE

Jack

son

St N

E

I-75

Ram

p

Bou

leva

rd

NE

Hill

iard

St N

E

Pie

dmon

t Ave

NE

Fort

St N

E

Old Wheat St NE


Chamberlain St SE

Butler

St S

E

Tanner St SEBell

St S

E

Coca Cola Pl SE

I-75

Exw

y SE

Piedmon

t Ave

SE

JACKSON PL

Boaz St SE

Porters Aly NE

I-75 Exw

y NE

I-75 Ram

p

I-75

Ram

p

I-75

Exw

y SE

Irwin St NE

Auburn Ave NE

Bou

leva

rd

NE

Ran

dolp

h S

t NE

How

ell S

t NE

Hog

ue S

t NE

Old Wheat St NE

Bra

dley

St N

E

AIR

LIN

E S

TA

irlin

e S

t NE

Gaspero St NE

Gra

pe S

t NE

Sam

pson

St N

E

How

ell S

t NE

Old Wheat St NE

See Map 1 See Map 2

Map 1: West Parcels

Map 2: East Parcels

1.

2.

3.

4.

14.

6.

9.

2.1.

3.

4.

25.

5.

13.10.

11.12.

17.18.

20.

21.19.

15.

22.

24.23.

16.

Map 1: West Parcels1. 142 Auburn Avenue Northeast2. 265 Auburn Avenue Northeast

3. 349 Old Wheat Street Northeast4. 348 Old Wheat Street Northeast

Map 2: East Parcels1. 507 Irwin Street Northeast2. 515 Irwin Street Northeast

3. 109 Hogue Street Northeast4. 85 Boulevard Northeast5. 479 Old Wheat Street Northeast

6. 112 Bradley Street Northeast7. 97 Howell Street Northeast8. 95 Howell Street Northeast9. 100 Bradley Street Northeast

10. 76 Howell Street Northeast

H D D C P R O P E R T Y P O R T F O L I OH D D C P R O P E R T Y P O R T F O L I O

§̈¦

§̈¦

7.

8.

Map 2: East Parcels Cont.11. 70 Howell Street Northeast12. 66 Howell Street Northeast

13. 71 Howell Street Northeast14. 610 Irwin Street Northeast15. 594 Auburn Avenue Northeast

16. 631 Irwin Street Northeast17. 619 Auburn Avenue Northeast18. 615 Auburn Avenue Northeast19. 609 Auburn Avenue Northeast

20. 66 Airline Street Northeast21. 372 Old Wheat Street Northeast22. Airline Street Northeast (Lot 98)

23. 1-3 Airline Street Northeast24. 13 Airline Street Northeast25. 75 Boulevard Northeast

Map by: Marvin Clermont¯

Vacant Land

Vacant Land and Building

Occupied

75

75

0 0.1 0.20.05Miles

0 0.05 0.10.025Miles

0 0.25 0.50.125Miles

Auburn Ave NE

Edgewood Ave SE

Irwin St NE

But

ler S

t NE

Bel

l St N

E I-75 Exw

y NE

Jack

son

St N

E

I-75

Ram

p

Bou

leva

rd

NE

Hill

iard

St N

E

Pie

dmon

t Ave

NE

Fort

St N

E

Old Wheat St NE


Chamberlain St SE

Butler

St S

E

Tanner St SEBell

St S

E

Coca Cola Pl SE

I-75

Exw

y SE

Piedmon

t Ave

SE

JACKSON PL

Boaz St SE

Porters Aly NE

I-75 Exw

y NE

I-75 Ram

p

I-75

Ram

p

I-75

Exw

y SE

Irwin St NE

Auburn Ave NE

Bou

leva

rd

NE

Ran

dolp

h S

t NE

How

ell S

t NE

Hog

ue S

t NE

Old Wheat St NE

Bra

dley

St N

E

AIR

LIN

E S

TA

irlin

e S

t NE

Gaspero St NE

Gra

pe S

t NE

Sam

pson

St N

E

How

ell S

t NE

Old Wheat St NE

See Map 1 See Map 2

Map 1: West Parcels

Map 2: East Parcels

1.

2.

3.

4.

14.

6.

9.

2.1.

3.

4.

25.

5.

13.10.

11.12.

17.18.

20.

21.19.

15.

22.

24.23.

16.








§̈¦

§̈¦

7.

8.







Vacant Land


Occupied

75

75

0 0.1 0.20.05Miles

0 0.05 0.10.025Miles

0 0.25 0.50.125Miles

HDDC Parcels in Plane View



Parcels West of Boulevard

Put Filler here

Auburn Ave NE

Edgewood Ave SE

Irwin St NE

But

ler S

t NE

Bel

l St N

E I-75 Exw

y NE

Jack

son

St N

E

I-75

Ram

p

Bou

leva

rd

NE

Hill

iard

St N

E

Pie

dmon

t Ave

NE

Fort

St N

E

Old Wheat St NE


Chamberlain St SE

Butler

St S

E

Tanner St SEBell

St S

E

Coca Cola Pl SE

I-75

Exw

y SE

Piedmon

t Ave

SE

JACKSON PL

Boaz St SE

Porters Aly NE

I-75 Exw

y NE

I-75 Ram

p

I-75

Ram

p

I-75

Exw

y SE

Irwin St NE

Auburn Ave NE

Bou

leva

rd

NE

Ran

dolp

h S

t NE

How

ell S

t NE

Hog

ue S

t NE

Old Wheat St NE

Bra

dley

St N

E

AIR

LIN

E S

TA

irlin

e S

t NE

Gaspero St NE

Gra

pe S

t NE

Sam

pson

St N

E

How

ell S

t NE

Old Wheat St NE

See Map 1 See Map 2

Map 1: West Parcels

Map 2: East Parcels

1.

2.

3.

4.

14.

6.

9.

2.1.

3.

4.

25.

5.

13.10.

11.12.

17.18.

20.

21.19.

15.

22.

24.23.

16.








§̈¦

§̈¦

7.

8.







Vacant Land


Occupied

75

75

0 0.1 0.20.05Miles

0 0.05 0.10.025Miles

0 0.25 0.50.125Miles

Auburn Ave NE

Edgewood Ave SE

Irwin St NE

But

ler S

t NE

Bel

l St N

E I-75 Exw

y NE

Jack

son

St N

E

I-75

Ram

p

Bou

leva

rd

NE

Hill

iard

St N

E

Pie

dmon

t Ave

NE

Fort

St N

E

Old Wheat St NE


Chamberlain St SE

Butler

St S

E

Tanner St SEBell

St S

E

Coca Cola Pl SE

I-75

Exw

y SE

Piedmon

t Ave

SE

JACKSON PL

Boaz St SE

Porters Aly NE

I-75 Exw

y NE

I-75 Ram

p

I-75

Ram

p

I-75

Exw

y SE

Irwin St NE

Auburn Ave NE

Bou

leva

rd

NE

Ran

dolp

h S

t NE

How

ell S

t NE

Hog

ue S

t NE

Old Wheat St NE

Bra

dley

St N

E

AIR

LIN

E S

TA

irlin

e S

t NE

Gaspero St NE

Gra

pe S

t NE

Sam

pson

St N

E

How

ell S

t NE

Old Wheat St NE

See Map 1 See Map 2

Map 1: West Parcels

Map 2: East Parcels

1.

2.

3.

4.

14.

6.

9.

2.1.

3.

4.

25.

5.

13.10.

11.12.

17.18.

20.

21.19.

15.

22.

24.23.

16.








§̈¦

§̈¦

7.

8.







Vacant Land


Occupied

75

75

0 0.1 0.20.05Miles

0 0.05 0.10.025Miles

0 0.25 0.50.125Miles

Parcels East of Boulevard


Henderson Place Volunteer Event• Assisted with coordinati on of an award-winning event that resulted in the renovati on of 3 aff ordable housing buildings, the installati on of a computer room, and the constructi on of a community garden using green building guidelines (Turnaround Recogniti on Award recipient)

• 60+ Volunteers from the neighborhood and United Way

• Financed using HUD LIHTC Program

• Tasks included painti ng 3 two-story buildings, building raised bed gardens, and mulching barren areas

Finished Product

Henderson Place Volunteers



Cut and Assemble Raised Bed

Supplement Area with Locally-sourced Compost

Install Plants

Materials

• Cedar planks• Wood Screws• Drill• Drill bit• Level• Carpenter square• Level• Miter saw• Compost• Plants• Shovels

Steps

1. Cut cedar wood planks to desired length using miter saw.2. Assemble cedar planks using drill and wood screws.3. Measure and prep the area in which you would like to install the raised beds.4. Remove fescue and grass and set frame in prepped area.5. Fill the frame with compost to support plant growth and retain moisture.6. Space plants according to to directi ons and water thoroughly.

Journeyman Landscaping Experience

Outreach

Landscaping/Outreach


Construction of A Decorative Garden with Natural Features

• Cleared plant materials and weeds to prep area for selected design.

Landscaping/Hardscaping Experience

• Installed stacked logs for use as a natural retaining walls (fallen trees were sawed to fi t and reused as retaining walls).

• Planted daylilies, spirea, abelia, lantana and other hardy plants to lessen the likelihood of disease and death.


Decorative Retaining Wall• Esti mated, sourced, and secured materials to build a four foot retaining wall designed as the focal point of a backyard walking trail

• As an independent contractor, excavated and leveled soil to install retaining wall on ti me and under budget


English Avenue Community Volunteer Group

• Volunteer event organized every Spring with/for members of the community

• Installed plants and amended soil to increase the survival of freshly laid sod

Volunteer Work


Lakeshore Area Regional Recovery of Indiana

• Area of Interest: Lake, Porter and Laporte Counti es in Indiana

• Program funded by the Lilly Endowment

• $8,000 in savings per job for materials and labor

• Demolished and renovated basements following fl ash fl ooding

• Installed sump pumps for qualifi ed applicants in less than 8 hours

Studio/Bloomberg Homeless Asset Mapping

Writing Sample

Coursework


Investigating the Eff ects of Sea Level Rise on the Gullah Geechee in Coastal Georgia• Award-winning presentati on at the Florida Academy of the Sciences | March 8th, 2013

• Assumpti on: 1.0 meter Sea Level Rise (SLR) by 2100

• Sixty-nine acres of Pin Point, Georgia expected to be inundated (Populati on 107 residents)

• Roads leading to Georgia Regional Hospital on Census block 1002 in Sandfl y, GA expected to face inundati on (Populati on 1,123 residents | 132 on Block 1002)

• Hog Hammock on Sapelo Island | 95% of the infrastructure is predicted to face at least parti al inundati on (Populati on 77 residents)

Studio - Fall 2012

Eff ects on the Gullah Geechee


""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"""" " "

""

"

""

"

""

""

""

"

"

""""""

""

"

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!!!

!

!!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

! !

!

!

!! !

! !

!

!!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!!

!

!!

!

!

D E K A L BD E K A L B

F U L T O NF U L T O N

Atlanta

Fulton

Bartow

Cobb

Coweta

Henry

Gwinnett

Cherokee

DeKalb

Paulding

Forsyth

Fayette

Douglas

Clayton

Rockdale

! Food Pantry

! Thanksgiving Meal

! Clothing Donation Program

! General Clothing Provision

! Project Overcoat

! Thrift Shop

" MARTA Rail Station

MARTA Rail Line

Expressway

¯0 5 102.5 Miles

F O O D & C L O T H I N GF O O D & C L O T H I N G

Map Created by:Michael Hellier | Marvin Clermont

"

"

"

" "

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Atlanta Inset

Bloomberg Project• Developed the GIS asset maps and Access database to identify and track the homeless population, existing services, and determine gaps in coverage

• Coordinated with Georgia State University and Emory University students and faculty to define strategies to resolve issues extrapolated from the initial data development

• Geocoded locations based on information compiled by team members from Georgia State and Emory University

• Color-coded each variable of interest to illustrate location of each type of facility

• Created inset of focus area in Downtown Atlanta to highlight concentration of services in certain areas and the lack thereof in others

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"""" " "

""

"

""

"

""

""

""

"

"

""""""

""

"

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!!!

!

!!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

! !

!

!

!! !

! !

!

!!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!!

!

!!

!

!



Atlanta

Fulton

Bartow

Cobb

Coweta

Henry

Gwinnett

Cherokee

DeKalb

Paulding

Forsyth

Fayette

Douglas

Clayton

Rockdale

! Food Pantry

! Thanksgiving Meal



! Project Overcoat

! Thrift Shop


MARTA Rail Line

Expressway

¯0 5 102.5 Miles



"

"

"

" "

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Atlanta Inset

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"""" " "

""

"

""

"

""

""

""

"

"

""""""

""

"

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!!!

!

!!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

! !

!

!

!! !

! !

!

!!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!!

!

!!

!

!



Atlanta

Fulton

Bartow

Cobb

Coweta

Henry

Gwinnett

Cherokee

DeKalb

Paulding

Forsyth

Fayette

Douglas

Clayton

Rockdale

! Food Pantry

! Thanksgiving Meal



! Project Overcoat

! Thrift Shop


MARTA Rail Line

Expressway

¯0 5 102.5 Miles



"

"

"

" "

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Atlanta Inset

Graduate Research Assistantship: Bloomberg

Homeless Asset Analysis & Mapping


2013 LCI Implementation ReportEmployment is a criti cal factor when tracking the success of the LCI program. Data reveals that while LCI areas only represent a small percentage of the region’s geographical footprint, LCI communiti es contribute exponenti ally to the Atlanta region jobs. According to the 2010 Census, 36% of jobs in the 13 county-region are located in LCI communiti es. Furthermore, 44% of the jobs in LCI communiti es off er an annual salary above $40,000 per year. These well-paying jobs represent 16% of all jobs in the region according to NAICS (North American Industry Classifi cati on System). Given the concentrati on of jobs and offi ce development in LCI areas, the LCI program is ulti mately helping to make these areas transit-supporti ve. Not surprisingly there are many new transit projects being evaluated that serve LCI areas such as the Northwest Corridor BRT which will traverse six diff erent LCIs in Cobb County.

In additi on to creati ng commercial and economic centers in the region, the workers who live in LCI communiti es share a trend. According to the 2010 Census, 39% of the employees who live in LCI communiti es earn a wage that exceeds $40,000. LCI communiti es create a sense of community by integrati ng housing and employment, as well as historic character and development patt erns. The employees who live in LCI communiti es represent 11% of the workforce in the region; however, their locati on provides a multi tude of opti ons for places to work. Jobs are available in LCI communiti es, and the people in the communiti es are making a good wage. These results are but a porti on of the goal that the ARC envisions when providing funding for development.

Writing Sample - Excerpts

Clarkston Development FoundationThe enti re populati on of the Service Area was 21,989 in 2010. According to the 2000 Census, the City of Clarkston’s populati on was 7,231 residents. The 2010 Census shows a populati on of 7,554 residents, representi ng a 4.5% increase over the 10-year ti me period. Clarkston fared well relati vely to other small citi es in Metro Atlanta. According to the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC), during this same ti me period, thirteen citi es in the ten-county region experienced declines in populati on. Two of these citi es, Doraville and Stone Mountain, are also located in DeKalb County.The City of Clarkston’s populati on is dominated by three races: White, Black, and Asians. Blacks account for 58.4% of the City’s populati on, while Whites and Asians account for 13.6% and 21.6% respecti vely. The remaining populati on is a combinati on of all other races. This is counter intuiti ve more specifi cally when looking at the Georgia state averages for these same races. The White populati on makes up 59.7% of people living in Georgia, while Blacks and Asians account for 30.5% and 3.2%, respecti vely. Another trend that diff ers widely between Clarkston and the state of Georgia is the percentage of foreign born persons residing in these locati ons. Clarkston’s populati on is made up 39.5% of residents that were not born in the United States, which is more than four ti mes the Georgia average (9.6%). This speaks directly to the percentage of persons who speak a language other than English at home. Clarkston’s percentage of those without English as a fi rst language is 39.5% of the populati on, more than three ti mes that of Georgia’s average of 12.7%.


2010 Prospective Student Writing SampleWriting Sample

It has been said that history repeats itself because no one is listening. Unfortunately, this rings true in Chicago since its inception. Th e people of Chicago have endured through long economic crests and troughs. Th is is due, in large part, to the cyclical nature of the economy and patterns of growth. One outcome of this cycle is gentrifi cation, which oft en results during a city’s economic upswing. Gentrifi cation is the restoration or upgrading of deteriorated urban property by middle-class or affl uent people, resulting in the displacement of lower-income people. Chicago’s urban planning has led to the gentrifi cation of many neighborhoods, which helped and hurt its residents. To improve the city’s economic and social viability, Chicago has introduced several urban renewal plans. One noteworthy plan was the Development Plan for the Central Area of Chicago of 1958. A central component of this plan was to build a University of Illinois campus in Pilsen, a predominantly Mexican neighborhood (Bennett 40). In 1965, UIC opened its doors to 10,000 students and as a result 5,000 people were displaced, 200 businesses were forced out and 800 homes were razed (Betancur 33). This patt ern conti nued in Chicago neighborhoods such as Lincoln Park, Bronzeville, and Old Town.

Chicago 21: A Plan for the Central Area Communiti es, introduced in 1973, is unquesti onably one of the city’s most controversial planning documents. Despite dissenti ng opinions about the plan, all converge on the substanti al impact it had on Chicago’s landscape. The plan emphasized downtown beauti fi cati on and hoped to provide an aestheti c environment which would not be rivaled by any American city (Bennett 41). It did beauti fy the city and att ract investment, but it also led to property tax and rent increases that displaced thousands of low-income residents.

There is debate over whether we are overlooking gentrifi cati on’s positi ve aspects. As citi es begin to thrive, commercial and residenti al properti es gain value. This bodes well for investors, property owners, and city coff ers. For those at risk of being displaced, there is constant concern over the city’s and developer’s decisions of where to build and how to value a property. Whereas to an investor, these are just variables to consider when examining lot sizes and square footage.

The current impact of gentrifi cati on cannot be measured but many Chicagoans believe it is prevalent today. Cabrini-Green is a housing development once home to 15,000 Chicagoans. As of December 2010 the last remaining building closed its doors. Although tenant acti vists may tell a diff erent story, gang violence and high crime rates were the death of the only public housing complex situated in an affl uent part of the city. It seems that once again the voices of low-income Chicagoans are not being heard.

Gentrifi cati on has both positi ves and negati ves, but more needs to be done to assuage the hardships that it brings to certain populati ons. Rent regulati on, which helps residents from being priced out of their neighborhood, is an example of a provision used to address the problem increased property value presents. This sort of initi ati ve helped my Grandmother live in the same apartment in Brooklyn for nearly 30 years. When dealing with issues around gentrifi cati on it is diffi cult to accommodate all sides. Increasing rent, for example, will always benefi t the payee and hinder the payer. As urban planners we need to create a new urban renewal paradigm that allow business and all residents the opportunity to shape and take ownership of their communiti es and hopefully create a win-win scenario. History repeats itself because no one is listening; it is ti me to allow all voices an opportunity to be heard.

Marvin L. Clermont

p: 312.618.9164

e: [email protected]

MCRP | Georgia Tech 13’

Land Use

Land & Community Development

Date post:	17-Aug-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	marvin-clermont-mcrp
View:	47 times
Download:	0 times

2015 08 04_Marvin L Clermont_Reduced

Documents