First Look at Cousins’ Development Plan for Callaway Site

50 thoughts on “First Look at Cousins’ Development Plan for Callaway Site”

1. 
   

2. Great, another MUD. It’ll look just the same as the others, and in 20 years will look as dated as the others, and everyone will reminisce about the days when Decatur had a distinct look and small town feel rather than looking like every street corner in midtown.

   1. Your ideas, please?

      1. I don’t know, maybe traditional store fronts? I hear they’re looking for a place to put a school….

         I guess you just want everything to look like a cookie cutter mid-rise apartment building?

   2. you mean what’s on the site now — a rundown government building in the middle of an asphalt sea — is what gives Decatur that “distinct look and small town feel”? I’ll take a Cousins/AMLI mixed-use development any day over the current use.

      interesting about the 3,000-SF performing arts space… does the site now allow for a grocery that sells beer & wine?

      1. Actually just asked the city that as a follow up! Will let you know what they say.

         It’s only mentioned in the resolution where it says “WHEREAS, the original proposal included a clear east-west and north-south connection through the site, a higher percentage of commercial and retail space and strong commitments to anchoring the site with a major grocery store; and,”

         It’s certainly a question whether the current proposal still includes the space for a grocery…

         1. I wouldn’t think that 20,000 sq ft of total retail space includes a large grocery store, but maybe a neighborhood market. Something along the lines of the Candler Park market might be able to fit there.

            1. or Trader Joes!

            2. FYI, the Baby Kroger building is listed as about 16,500 sq ft by DeKalb County.

               1. I believe the “urban” Trader Joes store model (like the one I am familiar with in Washington DC) runs about 13000 sf.

         2. Don’t know if the site plans have been revised, but this excerpt from the posted May minutes of the DDDA indicate that a food market was no longer included:

            “There was strong support from the board for a quality food market in the place of a restaurant and for more retail space to provide a much-needed critical mass of retail. Instead of being a central piece of the development, retail
            and commercial offerings have been reduced and the site has become a predominantly residential development. The board supported a more balanced development.”

            1. Huh, thanks. Does that exclude the grocery option?

               1. My reading was that grocery was included in Cousins’ initial plans and then later removed, though the DDDA board was suggesting that it be brought back in. Also from those minutes:

                  “The amount of retail and commercial space is considerably less than originally presented in the winning bid proposal.”

      2. First picture has “Corner Gourmet” sign. At W Trinity and N. McDonough?

      3. + a bunch, Stu.

   3. Mixed-use development is a hallmark of lively towns/cities. Just because many current mixed-use developments look similar, doesn’t mean that in 20 years they will look dated. This design looks pretty good to me. Would you like a developer to build some neoclassical style buildings just so they look different?

      1. Now and forever. In fact, most of the small town character over one story in downtown Decatur — the Masonic building, the Parkers on Ponce building, the Lenz building, the Jeni’s / bank building, Eddie’s Attic, the Houston House — are all mixed use.

         Maybe not in form or design but, in terms of use, this proposal is a return to the way Decatur, and all cities, been historically (and now, again, presently) been built.

   4. In other words, never change anything ever!

   5. If the City wants to really create a commercial corridor with Trinity, there really does need to be more retail in this development. If the developer feels there isn’t sufficient demand for it now, I wonder if the 25 year performing arts space is intended to be converted to retail in 25 yrs? or is there some other space that can make the developer money now but later convert to retail? ideas?

      re the performing arts space- I REALLY hope this would double as movie screen along with live performance. I pine to be able to walk to a movie & dinner, and Decatur already has Push Push and the high school’s wonderful stage (I wish there was greater community wide use of the DHS performance center).

      1. Decatur had a community theatre group – the Neighborhood Playhouse, but it folded several years ago for reasons I do not know.

         1. Was that the one in the Beacon Hill complex? If so, was that the renovation the reason for their folding?

            1. Yes, that was where they were, but they closed up shop long before the Beacon Hill project.

4. The building before the Callaway building had the jail on the top floor. Now that is mixed use.

6. Thanks DM. I was interested in “changing the east/west private street into an unrestricted way public street”. Can someone explain?

   1. I think that’s referring to the small alley/drive between the high school football field and the Callaway property. Building that as a through street would be a big improvement for traffic circulation. It’s a curious and welcome item because to date the city has been going in the opposite direction, turning so many streets near this site into one ways (Maple, Howard, Dougherty) that effectively turn Candler, Trinity, and McDonough into traffic sewers.

      1. E Maple and Dougherty have been one way for over 20 years. Howard at least 10. It’s not a recent thing.

         1. Steve, I believe you’ve been here longer than most of us, and I typically respect your memory on the city’s past. However, I’m going to have to respectfully disagree here and side with TeeRuss. East Maple and West Dougherty were two-way as recently as 5(ish) years ago. Howard was two-way far less than 10 years ago. W. Dougherty was shrunk down to make way for a wider sidewalk, which was probably a decent idea. However, East Maple should definitely still be two-way, IMO, especially with the hordes that are about to descend on expensive/not-expensive Jakes Ice Cream, I mean, Revival restaurant. That little road could help ease traffic at the Trinity intersections, but it is less helpful if it’s a one-way. Any forward-thinking traffic planner (admittedly that variety of traffic planner can be hard to find) will tell you that one-way urban streets are 20th century planning. Two-ways allow us all to maximize our investments in our roads.

            1. I can tell you absolutely that E Maple has been one way for at least 10 years as I have been driving by and using it that long. I’m not as sure about the time frame for Doughetry, but it was one way when I last lived on S Candler 10 years ago.
               And, if it made 2 way, you must take care of the dozen or so parking places that would be lost.

               1. I would tend to agree as it relates to East Maple. It’s definitely 10+ years. As is Howard on the same stretch.

                  As for Dougherty, you’re both right. East Dougherty, which I’d imagine Steve’s referring to, has been one way for probably 15 years. West Dougherty’s one-way conversion was within the past several years.

                  1. Well there you go. I guess time flies when you’re sitting at red lights waiting to turn on Trinity.

            2. A two-way on E. Maple would be awful for the businesses on that street. Parking is already an issue, as are speeders cutting through. The street includes several law offices, the Day League (formerly Rape Crisis Center), and a Supervised Visitation Center. There are a lot of children that walk up and down that street. It needs to stay a one-way.

               1. +1, plus it’s way too narrow.

                  1. It is narrow, but I remember when it fit two-way traffic just fine. If it was two-way cars would go slower, solving the apparent speeding problem. One-way streets might seem like a great fix for immediate properties, but they aren’t a panacea and typically cause greater traffic and other problems elsewhere – hence TeeRuss’ reference to Trinity as a traffic sewer.

               2. The businesses don’t own that road, the people of Decatur do.

         2. Regardless of how long they’ve been that way, it’s still stupid. A city that is usually so progressive in so many areas is strangely behind the times in how to best manage our roadways. And don’t get me started on the lack of traffic circles.

            1. Your comment is poorly thought out. Businesses in Decatur support the tax base too. The street is too narrow and there is not enough parking as is. Bottom line. Your little personal inconvenience is not going to drive this issue, unfortunately for you.

               1. The obvious solution to me is to make Maple one way but in the opposite direction. Ever since they made that stretch of Howard one way from Church to McDonough (more like 5 years ago), all roads in the area flow west. Making Maple run east would give us all a way to get to Revival, the ballet school, etc. without adding to the traffic on Trinity.

                  1. This. Doesn’t impact accessibility or parking that some are concerned about. Simply allows the longstanding practice of “going around the block” to actually take place without pushing every car onto Trinity.

                  2. Back to my previous comment … E Maple has been one way westbound for at least the past 10 years. It was not changed 5 years ago.
                     As far as changing it, the folks who live in the townhouses on the Church St end may not appreciate have cars parked 10 feet from their front door, as the parking would have to move to the south side of the street.

                     1. I remember when it changed to one way – right at the time when they dug the big hole in McDonough for the storm water project. That was definitely less than 10 years ago. Before that it was two-way.

                        Again, to TeeRuss’ point. I’m thinking of the “greater good” and if it needs to be one way, it ought to be the opposite way of Howard, as tjh says. I may or may not drive on the street, ever. It’s not about my hang up. It also shouldn’t exclusively be about the wishes of the current residents and tenants on the street. Again, the road belongs to all of us. The current configuration of Howard/Maple is not logical for all of us.

                        1. “I remember when it changed to one way – right at the time when they dug the big hole in McDonough for the storm water project. That was definitely less than 10 years ago. Before that it was two-way.”
                           Sorry, you are dead wrong. That was about 3.5 years ago and It was one way westbound long before that, again more than 10 years ago. I can say that without fear of retribution because I drove it almost every day long before and after that project.

                  3. That would be a small step forward, no doubt. But one way streets are a relic of stupid 20th century thinking, and it’s troubling that our supposedly progressive town can’t figure this out.

                     And the argument that Maple has been one way for a long time just adds to my point. Gay marriage was illegal for a long time. Didn’t make it smart.

                     Bottom line – roads are paid for by all of us, and are for the greater good. Let’s make sure they are designed wisely for the greater good, and not for special interests.

      2. That’s correct. They want that east/west “private drive” to be a public two-way street. Originally they also wanted a public street bisecting the property north/south as well, but I heard they ran into design/financing issues with that set up so it was begrudgingly dropped by the city.

   2. If the roadway/pass-through/whatever is a “private drive,” the developers can continue to claim that the “parking deck will not be visible from the street,” and I suppose the developers would not be required to meet special pedestrian area requirements (sidewalk width, street trees, street furniture area, parking setback, etc.). It the roadway/pass-through/whatever is a “public street,” I think the developers would be required to meet all of those requirements – unless they request and receive exceptions.

8. Some may be interested in knowing that before the construction of the present building, there was a handsome brick church and small steeple in the middle of the property. I believe it was a black church.

   1. Was the church building there when the jail was there?

10. Can we extend the prisoner tunnel to brick store?

    1. Are you in the real estate game? Now that’s how you turn a liability into a marketable amenity!

    2. Just imagine all the drunks falling onto the Marta tracks from the pedestrian bridge in the prisoner tunnel.

12. I have seen the enemy… and it is us. pogo

14. In these renderings it appears as though the nice “park” area fronting McDonough where the market is held under the magnolia trees will be gone. Such a shame. Save the trees!

Comments are closed.