First Signs of Demolition at Allen Wilson Terrace
Decatur Metro | September 10, 2009
Scott sends in this pic of a fence that’s been erected around Allen Wilson Terrace. 
It’s the first sign that the long planned demolition and redevelopment of this site as a blend of subsidized and market-rate housing is underway. To the right, I’ve included a couple pics from the architect’s website of what the finished project will look like. (Click to enlarge) From what I’ve heard about this project in the past, the larger building facing Trinity will be mixed-use and include first floor retail.
Obviously whenever public housing is redeveloped there are concerns about what will happen to current residents. In the case of Allen Wilson, the city has long planned for this moment 
and has been intentionally leaving units vacant for several months after residents had left voluntarily. This gives the city the flexibility to move residents around while construction moves forward in phases. And while being moved from building to building may be inconvenient, none of the current residents are being displaced.
Latest from Decaturish
How ’bout those pork chop eaves in the rendering? Good lord. If you skipped class that day in Architecture School, you can always look it up in a book: http://tinyurl.com/mvymgr
I guess they want to emphasize the “affordable” aspect through subpar detailing. Sigh…
(General comment; not a reply to Scott)
Anyone else skeptical about how much demand exists for street-level retail spaces along that portion of Trinity? Personally, I preferred the (admittedly) small strip of yard space and people sitting on their front porches. Seems the most likely customer base (other than the residents, of course) would be the government employees who probably head home at 5:00 PM.
Agreed there, Scott. Does it really have to “look” cheap, to “be” cheap? Why can’t they build something that will at least have a chance of looking good in 10 years. This looks destined to look tired after the first rain and ray of sunshine hits it.
That said, huzzah to the city for taking bold steps – great job on retaining afforable housing in a mixed income setting – we will all benefit from that. Now, about your choice in architects . . .
Good God! Just refurbish the brick buildings if you can’t build something decent! Isn’t there a Hippocratic oath for architects? What ugly, ugly, UGHLY buildings.
Damn, just damn.
Looks like they took the same approach with the “Village at Oakhurst” project (pictures at the architect’s website), which I always thought were Habitat for Humanity homes, given the -ahem- minimalist look.
Not saying they should not have looked into renovating the current buildings, or that they could not do a better job, but it is affordable housing people. Unless the taxpayers want to pony up, its not like they’re ever going to be architecturally significant buildings for public housing.
Even the 1930’s-40’s era public housing that has mostly been replaced in the last decade were not really architectual jems. They were simple, plain brick boxes that were meant for nothing more than a decent place to live for people who previously lived in slums.
More important to me, is that I hope the City really keeps its promises not to displace anyone, particularly families with children who attend Decatur schools.
The current buildings underneath their facades are red brick boxes. The “dormers” were added about 15 years ago.
It’s not about creating something “architecturally significant,” Pete. It’s about getting the details right. The Housing Authority is paying for an architecture firm. It doesn’t cost anything more to expect competency in traditional details if you’re paying for a traditionally-styled building.
Despite their simple nature, the existing 30s/40s era buildings were at least architecturally consistent and appropriate in their use of materials, proportions and minimalist details.
One of the goals of the Housing Authority is to include market rate housing together with the subsidized units. Given a (however unfair or unwarranted) market bias against property amongst subsidized housing, it would be a smart move to try and overcome this bias with an appealing and desirable product.
I think “architectural significant” is achievable and well warranted within the context of affordable housing. ULI has many examples from across the country. I know it may be easier said than done, but I don’t think it is unreasonable for the design bar to be set relatively high.
OK, now for the politically incorrect question. When I first moved her last year, I heard that Decatur is required by law to have public housing. Is this true?
As someone who used to work for the Atlanta Housing Authority (or the 5th ring of hell, as I like to call it) don’t buy that people are not being displaced and that families are not going to face hardships. Housing authorities have sold the public a bill of goods on that – it’s all in the wording- unless there is guaranteed one for one replacement housing, these families do struggle and end up in often worse situations. Families end up with Housing Choice (Section 8 ) vouchers, which may seem like a better deal, but in reality it is not. They often have a hard time finding housing near work and known transportation, the fabric of communities and support systems are destroyed – it’s a mess. Studies in California, where deconcentration of poverty through mixed income public housing blocks was born, are showing this system to be a huge failure. Decatur has been trying this sort of thing since I worked at AHA 10 years ago. They originally wanted to tear down Scottish Rite in Oakhurst. If Noel Khalil or any of the developers involved in the AHA HOPE VI projects are involved in this expect low quality and a lot of delays. Also expect this to be mostly market rate housing with the developer (who will most likely now be the “owner” of this public property if they are following the AHA model) profiting tremendously from tax credits.
An old report from InDecatur in Sept 2007 reported this as the breakdown…
“The new plan calls for 189 public housing dwellings and 18 market rate dwellings within five multi-story buildings and 13 cluster homes on the part of the site that will be zoned institutional. Also planned is an 85-unit mid-rise building for senior citizens. “
DM, how many are there now? And you really need to take out your recycling.
Huh? Oh I get it…yep, my house is just full of old print outs of Decatur blogs. It’s a sorry sight.
Dude, I was totally thinking of that magazine thing that comes in the mail from the city. Durrr!
They may not be displacing current residents, but what about the ones who haven’t been able to get public housing because the city has been “intentionally leaving units vacant” for the past few months? Has there been rising demand for public housing in the face of fewer units as a result of this? Just wondering.
Good point, CSD Mom. One wouldn’t think that in one of the worst economic slumps in 70 years demand for affordable housing would go down. One would think demand would go up.
Very curious.
Demand for public housing has gone way up because of the economy. With more and more families losing their homes to foreclosure, public housing is usually their only option. I haven’t heard anything about Decatur “intentionally leaving units vacant.” Is this a rumor or fact?
It’s what I recall the city manager saying when she was explaining how the city was managing not to displace current residents during the construction. Leave some units vacant so that folks in the first buildings demolished could move in when construction began.
She can confirm or deny.
That’s correct. DHA would not allow development to start until temporary housing was found for all residents who were going to be displaced. That is not the same as intentionally leaving units vacant and preventing others from getting housing, as was claimed by CSDMom.
Correction: I was quoting a phrase from DM’s original post. That’s why it’s in quotes.
I don’t understand. What’s the viable alternative? Pull the plug on a project years in the making because of the economy?
When it comes to public housing, there’s always a heart-strings argument. But from what I’ve heard, these buildings are in pretty bad shape and need to be replaced. So that’s what the city is doing…and it’s incorporating mixed-use on site. That seems pretty sympathetic to me.
After what I learned at AHA about HUD and housing authorities and what I know from I current job, Tyler & CSD, I feel confident saying “it’s a plot!”
I work the archiecture firm that is redeveloping Allen Wilson. First of all, the rendering is not the final design. The project has been redesigned several times since 2005 and still is being tweaked. Plus, it’s very rare that a finished product will ever look exactly like the rendering. Also, I don’t think it’s fair to compare DHA to AHA. Decatur has learned from the mistakes Atlanta Housing Authority has made over the years and they are careful not to duplicate any. Also, currently there are 100 units and we are replacing them with approximately 200 units once the complete development is done.
The DHA website says there are 200 units there now. Is the reduction to 189 public housing units still current? No doubt the plans have evolved since Sept 2007.
The plan is to replace the 200 with at least 288, plus the possibility of up to 18 non-public housing units. 200 goes to 300. Sorry, I didn’t proof the comment before.
An increase of 100 public housing units? That’s A LOT of new kids for CSD. Do they know about this?
I thought this housing project was being modified to a mixed-income development. I thought the idea was to move away from the massive housing project model that ghettoized poor people. Having only 18 non-public units out of 200 or 300 doesn’t accomplish that change at all. When the rest of public housing is moving away from concentrating poor people in massive developments in downtown areas, it’s too bad Decatur is behind the times on this trend.
Deconcentration models are not working the way PHAs and HUD claim that they would. Housing vouchers place additional economic hardships on the resident, increase the cost to the federal government and lead to a reconcentration of poverty in other neighborhoods.
Memphis is prime example of this failure that has actually had some trend analysis done. What happens is the PHA can say “oh lookey, we cleaned up this neighborhood and we have 2 residents whose success stories we can sell to the press!”. A deeper analysis shows that the poverty and it attendant woes has just moved down the street. In Atlanta, the model has not been one for one replacement, so AHA can claim huge successes in moving poverty out of Atlanta, but Clayton, Douglas and other areas (even Cobb) have seen sharp increases.
There has academic research done (check out Andrew Van Slyke) on the pressure corporations such as Coca Cola put on AHA to demolish Techwood in the early 1990s.
Of course, to me, the most telling thing about this whole issue came in 2001. I was sitting in a meeting with the executive director and the general counsel of AHA discussing the Grady demolition grant I was working on. The GC said plainly, “This property is too valuable to developers for us to continue to house poor people on it”. I quit a few months later.
So if we leave folks in a concentrated environment of poverty, then it breeds social ills. But if we break up that environment and spread these same folks out, then the same social ills simply reassert themselves in new locations. That’s a nasty Catch-22 and I wish I knew the answer on how to break out of that cycle.
Of course, if we’re going to have these issues regardless of location, then why have them on prime real estate thst could be put to more productive use?
Because Robbie, what’s blighted public housing community to us is home to them. In many cases, it’s the only home they have known and the only social network. I still work with these people and it’s heartbreaking.
So these people have an “ill social network”, a “blighted home”–a bad environment they are unwilling, or unable, to change?
Robbie–“That’s a nasty Catch-22 and I wish I knew the answer on how to break out of that cycle.”
Whoa there, lets not get crazy and start thinking about the roots of social problems here, eh? Everything is fine, poor folks love being poor, and the market works great for US!
Hmmm…..
You break the cycle (of poverty) only by breaking the system that creates/needs the cycle. It’s really just that simple. People don’t want to hear it, but that doesn’t change the fact that it is true.
Again looking at the DHA site, which seems to say that the total of 288 includes Swanton Way:
http://www.decaturhousing.org/whatsnew.htm
But maybe I’m just confusing the 288 in paragraph 4 with the 288 in paragraph 1. It’s not very clearly written. Has the plan changed since 2007 (as referenced by DM above), adding 100 units to the total?
As I understand it, the two existing projects together provide 288 units. Now, Allen Wilson is being redeveloped to offer a comparable 288 units, but on less land. At some point in the future, that opens up some of the remaining land to sell off for market-rate development of up to 150 units to help finance the project overall.
Since there’s a roughly one-for-one replacement of public units and, as our existing condos have already demonstrated, the potential market-rate units will skew towards people without kids, that’s probably why CSD has not issued any statements. It’s basically a wash.
Does that mean Swanton Heights will be razed? I’m still confused.
Doubling the units… ???? Half are market rate, right?
Regardless, the renderings should have some basis in reality and the reality ain’t pretty if those renderings are the basis.
What is it with the dull architecture that continually gets passed in this town? Its Atlanta folks! Its full of global “creative types” here. This town can do better than this? No?
Surely there must be a few firms out there with an ilk of creativity?
Just out of curiosity, would anyone here purchase one of the 18 non-public housing units?
Those 18 would be rental, not for purchase. But the question is probably still relevant. It seems to have worked at East Lake Commons.
Yes, it has worked at East Lake and it can work in Decatur.
No offense, but I really doubt that the target market for these new housing units are upper middle class Decatur Metro readers. We are not really representative of Decatur or society in general.
I’m sure many working class people who work in and around Decatur who would love the opportunity to be able to live in more affordable housing in downtown Decatur and all that it offers.
An upper middle class family of four who currently lives on a third of an acre over in Great Lakes? No.
The Villages at East Lake “work” because the property has only, if I remember correctly, about 60 public housing units; market rate and reduced rate tax credit units aimed at working/middle class people make up most of the available units. There were 650 units there before. AHA is doing this on all the properties (Techwood went from 1100 to 300; 700 units were lost at Carver; Grady is going from 500 to 200 public housing units), you can see that they are simply moving the poverty out of their own back yard.
The revitalized East Lake community includes The Villages of East Lake with 542 townhouses, duplexes and garden apartments that are 50 percent affordable housing or government-subsidized housing units, and 50 percent market-rate units.
http://www.eastlakefoundation.org/sites/courses/view.asp?id=346&page=8813&newsId=99
Exactly. Tax credit units make up the majority of the “affordable” housing units. That’s a different animal than public housing.
I am curious if any of the non-public housing units are being offered to City employees. I know some of the City Commissioners would like to see affordable housing made available to teachers, firemen, police, etc… Seems like this would have been a great project for that.
I’m not sure what you mean by “made offered to”. City employees can purchase them the same as anyone else.
I think he means a program along the lines of Summerhill (I think that was the development) in the City of ATL– they made some houses available at a greatly reduced rate to City employees (police officers, teachers, firefighters, etc.), on the premise that these folks, who play very important roles in the community, often cannot afford to live where they work. I know other cities have done similar programs, mostly making them available to “essential personnel” like police, fire, and other lower- to moderate-income workers. I personally wouldn’t have a problem with giving folks like these such discounts, because heaven knows they deserve some kind of compensation to help make up for their low pay (relative to the importance of what they do).
Am I insane or weren’t those houses built 6-8 years along Oakview meant for that purpose?
I’m not sure about Oakview, but I recall hearing someone with the Decatur Housing Authority say that the townhouses at Commerce and Howard were offered at a drastically reduced rate to persons in public housing. A raffle was held and the winners basically got a windfall collectible after living in the houses for several years. I remember hearing that and thinking that a gift like that would be more suitable for people who’ve given a lot to the community in the form of some service.
Frankly, I feel a bit similarly about public housing in this location. It is a bit like winning the lotto. I think public housing should be near transportation, but this is one of the best locations in the whole metro area.
One question. What if the 150 market rate condos don’t sell for what is projected…. or just don’t sell at all. The real estate market will be a long time recovering, particularly for condos And even more particularly condos that have any sort of perceived negative.
What happens to the public housing development then? Is someone stuck with the bill or do they have to turn around and sell some of the public housing units to make up the difference?
It seems a bit risky to be raising the money after the fact.
I am very much in favor of preserving and even expanding affordable rental housing for low and moderate income families. We are fast losing the community we once were. It is a moral issue to me, and I do want my children to know all sorts of people. And I would never trust an Authority to do what is right, even here in Decatur, without significant oversight by concerned citizens.
Maybe you should apply to be on the DHA board. They’re all local people.
I am really interested in seeing how this will work. Regardless of how architecturally beautiful — or not the current project is, it is a community — trees, yards, front porches, neighbors. It doesn’t look like the new vision is exceptionally neighbor friendly. DM, you should talk to Mayor Wilson, she has some good stories of the old Buttermilk Bottom (i think that was called) before “Urban Renewal,” which upgraded housing standards, but tore apart a community. I think East Lake is unique, but it’s aim is to build community,, and it seems successful ….but NellileBellie, correct me if I’m wrong …..
It depends on your definition of success, I guess!
I hope that it looks a heck of a lot better in the end than the pictures show.
So, someone tell me if I have this right. There are now 288 public units in Swanton Heights and Allen Wilson. In various phases, the units in both of these places will be demolished and replaced with 288 nicer public units. About 85 of these 288 will be for seniors. That means that both Allen Wilson and Swanton will be replaced? I had always thought it was only Allen Wilson.
Then at some point after Swanton and Allen Wilson are replaced, another 150 units at market rate will be added. The sales of those 150 market units are helping to finance the whole project.
Is this the plan?
That’s how I understand it, Harold. Some of the information floating around has been open to, uhhh, interpretation.
Only Allen Wilson is being replaced. Swanton Heights is not being touched.
Allen Wilson when occupied in 1941 and Swanton Heights when occupied in 1970 provided a total of 288 units of public housing.
The redevelopment is only of Allen Wilson and when it is done Decatur will have 288 units of public housing, as it did in 1970.
The redevelopment consists of 4 phases. 3 phases will be the public housing and the 4th will be the addition of approximately 150 units, planned to be condominiums, of which 15-20% will be lifecycle units pursuant to the City’s lifecycle housing ordinance. The proceeds from the sale of the land will help fund the building of the new public housing units.
This is a multi-year endeavor.
The first phase will be 40 new 1, 2, and 3 bedroom apartments in 2 buildings.
Recently, I was innocently reading John Kessler’s blog in the AJC, only to be ambushed by some pretty racist comments on one of the entries. Now, I expect this sort of thing from AJC commenters on certain topics (politics, crime, etc.), but being subjected to this ridiculousness in the food section is just crazyland. Anyway, it really made me appreciate DM’s good work in keeping this place civil, so thank you DM!
No problem Paula! Thanks for the thanks!
Oh shoot – I meant to post the above comment to Free for All Friday! D’oh!
Here’s a link to the website of the firm that’s building this utter crap.
http://www.harperpartners.com/about.cfm
Why does the public housing have to be in the center of Decatur? Is the city required to take this VERY valuable land and apply it toward public housing? Never understood this.
The site has been there since 1941. As was pointed out in the article, the site is advantageous for the residents there because it is central to commerce, transportation, and the like, not out on the fringes of something in isolation.
The fact that it’s such an advantageous site for the residents is exactly why BB12 is wondering why public housing should be there. Yes, it’s a great location, but, at about two blocks off the square, it’s arguably one of the best locations in metro atlanta. Why place public housing there? Public housing needs to be close to transportation and amenities, but being in Decatur’s downtown core is an excessively ideal location for the residents. A better use for the land might have been a market rate condos and townhomes while relocating the public housing to scattered sites further away, but near transportation and necessities.
Not to mention that it was originally the site of Beacon Hill, Decatur historically black neighborhood, which despite being ragtag in some ways was a fully functioning, socially and economically sustainable place. Urban renewal replaced that functionality with single-use poverty dorms, severing many of the interdependencies that kept the place viable.
Given that, the least we can do is let the sweet in-town locale remain.
Also, if there ever was an instance of making the best of a bad past decision, this is it.
Allen Wilson was just one of the many WPA or urban renewal projects that wiped out the poorer, predominantly black neighborhood of Beacon Hill or “The Bottom.” And when I say “neighborhood” I mean houses next to grocery stores, barber shops, pharmacies, etc. A whole microcosm within the city.
And believe it or not, Allen Wilson was one of the most admirable developments in this area of the city during the 1940s-1960s…at least they were tearing down housing and providing new housing. Now in the case of DHS, they were tearing down housing, displacing the poor, and providing them with few, new options.
It’s prime real estate, yes. And it should be if we want to be accountable for our past decisions. It’s actions like this that separate Decatur from Atlanta.
Been a while since we did that Scott.
Right. And we should remain accountable, right? Or are you saying something different? It be foggy.
Yes, absolutely. Geez…I guess I didn’t finish my thought. I was building up to that and just…left it. Now that’s quality debatin’!
I think the city should be accountable to any individuals who were harmed or uprooted by the original seizure of property, but I don’t think the city should forever be obligated to provide that area to a particular group (whether they be black or poor). And I don’t think membership in such a group should entitle one to rights from the city simply on that basis. Instead, I think the city should have looked at what’s the best use of this property for the community, and by that I mean the whole city, but with special emphasis on those who live in and near the Allen Wilson homes. On those criteria, I would have gone a different route, but that may be because of the time I spent near a mega-housing project of over 20,000 very poor people. I understand that Allen Wilson is nothing like those mega-projects and believe the current project may have been the right call. I just hope that the decisionmakers made this decision for the benefit of the whole community and not just a part.
Politicians also don’t mind having like minded blocks of voters where they can keep their hands on them.
That might make sense if folks there voted in large numbers but the last time I saw local election poll data for Allen Wilson/Swanton Heights, turnout ran around 5% or maybe even less. I hope our politicians are smarter than trying to leverage those kinds of numbers.
We just returned from a walk and noticed another store closed in our city–Tastings. I am left to ponder how keeping public housing so close to central Decatur and, as I understand it, increasing the # of public housing units helps out our local businesses struggling to survive. We are filling the city core with residents that can not afford to support our community? If something was not handled correct in the past I completely understand but how long does that decision lay claim to such important property both in the sustainability of Decatur and the perception of visitors and shoppers entering our city.
Some of these families were here, either in DHA or the general community, long before many of us and certainly before the multistory condos were built. They are just as much Decaturites as anyone else. Sorry, but many of these folks are friends of my children and/or myself and I really resent the implication that they are ruining the downtown development plan or someone’s business model.
Having said that, I’m sorry about the many good businesses closing in downtown Decatur. Many of these businesses did fine before the economy tanked and DHA housing was there then too. So I doubt that the presence of DHA housing is what made operating in Decatur unprofitable. There’s lots of folks all over Decatur and surrounding areas, not just in DHA, who have been losing their jobs or earning less and who are tightening their belts.
Are you saying there is a relationship between a retail store closing in downtown and the presence of public housing nearby? Our entire community benefits from a diverse community. I don’t want to live in a sterile upper glass yuppie ghetto! Decatur has never been that, but could become that if we don’t protect housing opportunities for all.
This is just tilting at windmills. The commitment is there and the redevelopment will ensure that non-car dependent public housing remains available in Decatur for many years to come. The whole discussion confuses a philosophical issue (where/how to house the poor) with what is really just a management issue. The DHA projects seem well run. They’re not devaluing anything. I’d even venture they’re creating value because they physically reaffirm that Decatur is a welcoming, problem-solving community. Not, as Another Rick states so nicely, another “yuppie ghetto.”
There’s still plenty of asphalt around for market-driven development. No need to seize anything or boot anyone out of their neighborhood.
I read BB12’s comment differently. I think what BB12 meant was that our upscale retail and restaurants are a big draw for Decatur, both for residents and visitors, but we’ve seen an awful lot of business failures lately, just like everywhere else. That’s not b/c we have and/or may have public housing in the future, but b/c we don’t have the consumer volume that these stores need to stay alive. I think BB12’s concern is that expanding public housing on prime real estate where private housing could bring in high dollars is not going to help. Not b/c people are afraid to shop where there’s public housing, but b/c people with lots of discretionary income to spend at our struggling businesses tend to live in pricier housing, and we are passing up an opportunity to create such pricier housing. I think that was intended to be an economic argument, rather than a social argument. On that note, I’m confused about how many condos are in the plan. Is Stage 4 adding up to 127 private condos, rather than the 18 we’d heard about?
I think it’s possible that some people would steer away from downtown Decatur if they saw public housing nearby. Not many, but some. A colleague of mine once told me, when I told him we planned to send our children to Decatur public schools, that he would never send his children to our jr high and high school because there were “projects across the street.”
So yes, I agree with BB12 that some people could be deterred from our downtown due to a perception, rightly or wrongly, that it’s dangerous. And I wonder if that perception has hurt retail on the south side of the square more than the north.
I also agree with Another Rick that our community benefits from a diverse community. But I only would go so far as to say that affordable housing is extremely important. We need people to work in our community as well as to shop in it. But I don’t understand how our downtown core benefits from a large public housing project of persons who, I believe, are under the poverty level. Besides diversity, how does this benefit the downtown retail area? And wouldn’t affordable housing provide enough diversity?
I’ll speak for many, Degreatur, and say that we really don’t want people of that mindset living in Decatur, i.e., not wanting your kids to go to school with kids from public housing or would not live in an area if public housing is nearby.
If that’s the way you think, then you really shouldn’t want to live in Decatur. That is not what our City is all about. There are plenty of other cookie cutter suburbs around Atlanta with no physical evidence of poor people around (except for those that work at the grocery store or the fast food restaurants).
Careful guys. The whole “you shouldn’t live here/should move” thread gets out of hand very quickly.
Also be forewarned that Nelliebelle is particularly sensitive to it, since she’s a reformed “you shouldn’t live here” commenter. And trust me, you don’t want to be on the wrong side of a strongly worded comment from her!
Too bad I’m prohibited from the sentiment, because otherwise I would join in with Tyler and say people like THAT shouldn’t live here, but apparently we’d be talking about different people. I was quoting a colleague, not expressing my own opinion, when saying that some people had the perception our schools were unsafe because there was a “project across the street.” That colleague lives in the burbs already, so no need to kick him out.
Tyler also seems to suggest that I want to live in a city without poor people, which I didn’t say, and isn’t true. I think BB12’s concern, which I also wonder about, is about the location of the public housing considering that the downtown core of Decatur has changed so much since Allen Wilson was first built. Does this hurt or help the downtown, retail community? Are we rebuilding the homes at that location because we feel this is the best use of this land and the best place for this development, or are we rebuilding it there simply because that’s where it was before. I’m also concerned about rebuilding a large development when most other communities have gone to smaller, scattered site housing. I think these are interesting questions which I like to hear others’ opinions about, but only if those opinions don’t involve running me out of town on a rail. In that case, I withdraw all my questions and agree with everything Tyler says.
I didn’t intend to suggest that you held those views, Degreatur, but I was just saying that we in Decatur should not necessarily be all that concerned about our perception from folks who live in Alpharetta. I, personally, don’t really care what they think about their sending their kids to schools with kids in public housing or not. If they don’t like it, they have choices. But I don’t think we should change the way we do things in Decatur because of their perception.
I agree that optimally, we would spread out our subsidized housing for the poor and working class and not have it so concentrated in one place. I think that is what they are trying to do with having some market rate housing in the development. Another problem with that theory is that most people don’t want subsidized housing in their neighborhood. We do a pretty good job of it in South Decatur, but remember how neighbors around DeVry said “hell no” when someone suggested even affordable housing going into that development, much less public or subsidized housing. What do you think the reaction of the folks up in Great Lakes would be if we asked them to shelter some of the Allen Wilson residents so we didn’t have to concentrate poverty. So we have to work with what we have in certain respects.
Also, as others have mentioned, having good access to public transit and other services are more important to the poor than the middle or upper classes. I also don’t buy the far fetched argument that businesses like Tastings failed because of its proximity to public housing.
I don’t think we’re anywhere near the point where we should be worrying about our retail environment. As far as I can tell, Decatur continues to attract some really great tenants. Leon’s, Iberion Pig, Kaiser, etc.
Using natural turnover in the retail sector as a supporting argument for moving public housing out of downtown doesn’t really hold much water IMO. I see no evidence of causation (other than that two events happened within a week of each other.) Am I missing something?
I am good now!
I am not getting into this whole “it’s too valuable a parcel of real estate for poor people” argument that is the root of AHA’s destruction of its housing communities. I lived it . BUT I am going to say that what a few of you don’t seem to get is that some people are born and die in the same housing communities. Friends and extended networks of support get ripped away when these families are uprooted and scattered so another cheap box townhouse can be thrown up and Mr. and Mrs. Alpharetta can safely move “in town”. These are first and foremost communities. Please talk to a few of the residents before you make judgments on the actual value of the property.
Do you mean we should value people and community ahead of private property and, gasp, money? Sounds like socialism.
Reasonable assertion, but I not sure that it is fairly balanced. Some non-public housing residents get economically forced out by the tax increases that come with gentrification. Hmm. That seems unfair too to life-long community residents too.
Also, should be live their whole lives in housing that is paid for by others? It would be nice for a lot of folks if Decatur would drop the RE taxes or gave a rebate to those who rent.
It’s necessary that we are able to provide public housing for generations of people and some would argue that it is our moral duty to do so. However, my understanding of public housing is that it was never intended to become a lifestyle but rather a stop gap measure for families that have fallen on hard times. While there certainly are folks who have made communities out of generations of families living in the same public housing project, I would not consider this a point of pride.
I’d rather see money spent on programs designed to motivate/educate public housing residents and boost their self esteem to the point that they take can steps to get themselves out of the projects and into the real world.
With the potential for a career training center at Decatur High, I think that we have a chance at stopping the cycle of dependency. Too bad we can’t pour more money into that rather than into cheap looking buildings.
And a person named Harold becomes the voice of reason. Cheers! Right on! That’s all.
BB12, one nice thing about the new development, whether you think it’s attractive or not, is that it looks less like public housing, which should help the public perception issue that you’re concerned about.
My understanding (correct me if I am wrong) is that the LCI development will also include a significant portion of public housing.
And as the consummate moderate, the city has taken the middle ground. Did everyone just ignore this part of Paul’s statement above?
“The redevelopment consists of 4 phases. 3 phases will be the public housing and the 4th will be the addition of approximately 150 units, planned to be condominiums, of which 15-20% will be lifecycle units pursuant to the City’s lifecycle housing ordinance. The proceeds from the sale of the land will help fund the building of the new public housing units.”
The city has come up with a solution that doesn’t move any current residents, but also adds 150 condos to a piece of property that was once all public housing.
But of course there’s always room for one extreme to yell “too much land was taken!” and the other to yell “not enough land was taken!” These two sides may not agree on much but the one thing they have in common is that none of them are the public officials that have to implement a workable solution that satisfies the greatest number of people.
Brad: That is a very good point. In my (Oakhurst, North) neighborhood (I have been there 30 years) I knew several former neighbors who are lower income, but who did have full time employment, African-Americans, and were homeowners who had to leave Decatur (at least in part) because of the tremendous increase in their property tax. That is another negative impact of “gentrification”.
I feel like the following question must be some kind of breach of PC-etiquette but, for the life of me, can’t figure out specifically how. Just consider it fair warning if you want to proceed:
Anecdotally, the two downtown public housing projects appear to be totally or near-totally African American, yet surely the demographics of the poor and working poor throughout Atlanta cover the full spectrum of ethnicities — from black to white, hispanic to Asian.
If that’s the case, why aren’t our public housing projects more diverse? Or even seemingly diverse at all? What am I not getting?
That’s a good point Scott. I’m black/African-American (or whatever I’m supposed to call myself now) and I don’t find the comment offensive at all. On the way driving home, I was thinking as to why I constantly have to explain where I live when I say Decatur. Everytime I have visitors they are always surprised that this little oasis exists in Atlanta. In my opinion, I think the vast areas of unincorporated DeKalb that have adopted the Decatur name casts an adverse perception on the City of Decatur. This in turn probably leads to attracting a predominate amount of one race and less of others.
Scott and DMFuqua, you have hit upon something that has been floating around in my mind for some time. On this posting, and on others, I often see CoD residents proudly proclaiming how “diverse” the city is with regard to race. But the reality that I see mostly contradicts that notion.
Let’s take a walk through a few of our neighborhoods. Great Lakes…pretty much all white. Winnona Park…yup, same thing…white. Glenwood…white again. Then we have the Ebster area…mostly black (or African-American, choose your PC description). I believe the closest we get to a diverse neighborhood is Oakhurst.
So what do we conclude from this? My cynical self believes it’s a classic example of “I support diversity as long as it’s not MY neighborhood.” And why is that? Go ahead and brand me a racist or whatever the insult of the day is, but humans are inclined to live, work and spend time with people who are very much like them. In truth, we are more comfortable with others who share our same skin tone, or religion, or political opinion, or sexual preference, or socio-economic status or…or…or…ad nauseum.
Anyway, this is why I bristle when Decaturites brag about our city’s diversity. Because, I certainly don’t see it being practiced, and I detect the taint of hypocrisy.
Point well taken, Eric, but I can only speak for my own street in Decatur, which has at least three races well represented. Perhaps we are an outlier, but I suspect there are more of these multi-racial pockets than you might realize.
Maybe I’m just perusing this discussion too quickly, but I can’t tell if the overall theme is about race or class. Ah, I love the great American experiment. The thing, here in Decatur, is a lot of the race issues cross class boundaries–as in, to the quiet surprise of many white Decaturites, non-white races becoming a part of the class (or classes) that have been mostly white in the past. This is the South, and it is going to take a while for people to get used to it.
Paula, you’re right there are “multi-racial pockets” in my neighborhood too, but I think Eric was pointing out a lack of an even distribution of diversity that a lot of posters here seem to unrealistically take for granted. Different classes have divergent costs for membership (I am quite surprised that I made it even this far–remind me to thank my wife for that…) and those resources are naturally distributed unevenly throughout our society, but there are, and will be, more and more differences in the racial composition of each class as time goes on.
That said, I invite everyone to check out “Blazing Saddles”–if you’ve seen it, watch it again–it satirically speaks volumes to the American Way of race relations and class distribution. And to laugh is to, at least, think.
I agree with Eric in that with the exception of parts of South Decatur (Winnona Park proper is almost all white) Decatur is not very diverse in its neighborhoods.
But I would strongly disagree with his statement that “humans are inclined to live, work and spend time with people who are very much like them. In truth, we are more comfortable with others who share our same skin tone, or religion, or political opinion, or sexual preference, or socio-economic status.”
SOME human beings, that may be true, but certainly not all. If that is true, it is very sad. But I don’t think that totally explains the lack of racial diversity in some of our neighborhoods.
You all might want to have a look at this website. Pick a city, any city and have look.
http://www.umich.edu/~lawrace/seg.htm
Nice site, and now Tyler would have to agree with Eric on the concentration of different races.
What am I supposed to do, applaud the fact that most of the U.S. lives in racially segregated neighborhoods and that we should just stop trying to create a more just society for all races and economic classes? Should we just stop trying? Maybe we should just throw up our hands and say that the races are just “better off” not living in the same neighborhoods, going to the same schools, etc. Isn’t that what they said in the ’50’s and ’60’s to justify Jim Crow?
All I know that is not how I want to live and not how my friends and my neighbors want to live. Throughout my public school career (in another city) the demographics were roughly 50-50 black/white. I live on a street and a neighborhood that is about 50-50 black/white.
So don’t tell me that it is just human nature to want to live segregated. It is not the 1950’s anymore.
See my response to Paula.
Intention and wishful-thinking are not reality.
So integration is just “wishful thinking.” Wow … very revealing. So very 1950’s of you, W. Gibbets.
Ok, it appears that, other than avoiding reality, you can’t bring yourself to read what I posted before.
There is confusion between the concepts of class and race–particularly here in the South, and oh my god! is it 2008 already?–what I said before was the reality is that It will take even liberal white folks a while to get used to non-whites moving out of their past economic classifications. And there is no guarantee that they will start flooding into your Decatur neighborhood.
At an old job I worked with a group of middle and upper middle class black Southerners and where did they choose to buy their houses? Not in Decatur, but out by Old National in a neighborhood that was populated by other middle class blacks.
Keep throwing “integration” around and you’ll start to sound like you’re living in the 50’s. Our neighborhoods have moved WAY beyond those days if you think about it, but–and if it ever happens–you will probably not see complete and absolute diversity for a long time. (One question I have: how many white families live in Decatur public housing? Is it just a few? a lot?)
Eric, point well taken in that our city is technically not as beautifully diverse as we’d like it. I wish my kids knew MORE black kids who were NOT also from public housing–I wish there was a better mix. I wish there were more Asian kids who were not the children of white same-sex couples–to me that is technically not racial diversity (though I value the social diversity)! But I think Decatur is trying, and it’s still way better than where I grew up in Gwinnett County–just on the other side of the tracks from a lily-white affluent society such that the first black friend I ever had was in college. I’d still prefer my kids go to school here in Decatur with an almost 50/50 split of black/white than anywhere else. In my Winnona Park kid’s class, there are white kids from every economic spectrum as well as Somali refugees, affluent blacks, public housing kids and one half-Asian. That’s pretty good when you’re only talking 20 kids.
We may brag about a diversity that is non-existent here in Decatur, but that does not mean we do not crave it.
And I think Decatur is changing. On Sycamore, we definitely have a mix of lower-class whites and blacks, middle-class Asians and blacks and whites, plus our Porsche-driving neighbors. We have rental homes, duplexes, apartments and single-family homes on our street. Plus we have plenty of same-sex female-parented families and a sprinkling of same-sex male-parented families. I rather like the diversity of our street. It feels very comfortable. There are areas of our city that are almost completely white, and we made the conscious decision not to move into those areas 9 years ago.
Actually, I think Decatur is pretty diverse. I don’t live in South Decatur. My neighborhood (Melrose St-Adair Street) is an amazingly diverse, black and white, of many different income levels and sexual orientation. There are even Section 8 renters in some of the apartments. I am just afraid we are losing the diversity.
From today’s AJC DeKalb Vent online:
“Sorry Decatur people – if I was looking for a home to buy, I would not purchase a town home in a mixed used development that has the project people living above me! Wake up!”
Sad to say, this vent is still 41 votes to the positive. Apparently, the stigma of public/low income housing as “the projects” is all too alive & well. I wonder whether the City has done any information gathering that gives an indication as to how people here actually feel about the mixed-use project. I mean, I’m sure most of us are representative of a larger cross-section of our (Decatur’s) population, but how would they know what the actual numbers are of the people who might agree with the Venter? I guess I was more surprised by that Vent than I should have been.
Take heart. Our kids are growing up interacting on a daily basis with children who live in public housing. They invite them to birthday parties, are lab partners with them, are Decatur li’l tyke cheerleaders with them, will graduate from high school alongside them. Tell me where else middle- to upper-class kids can have that opportunity. Ours will grow up not understanding that stigma. I think that’s a good thing.
You are so right. Those of us with kids are lucky because kids make it easier to get to know other families instead of holding on to our subconscious stereotypes. I think a lot of posters on this thread have old stereotypes of 1970s projects in their heads. They don’t realize that folks in DHA homes have to qualify–and unless one is disabled or elderly, that means having a job or being in some kind of work training program. The downtown DHA neighborhood is a modest, but hard-working and decent neighborhood of working class folks. Some pay pretty hefty rents in my opinion–e.g. $850 month for a 2-bedroom–depending on their income. I know one Mom considered the rent high enough that she considered moving to the outer ‘burbs and buying a condo instead. But she chose living in a good neighborhood in a good city with good schools. Smart choice and I’m glad she and her child are still here.
We also have to remember that the old African-American working class Beacon Hill community was destroyed for MARTA and “modernization”, 1970s style. Given that, I think it’s only decent to retain a working class neighborhood in place of what used to exist. A deal’s a deal, as some tribal governments have successfully proven in recent years!
Finally, those who are put off when they whiz by DHA housing in their cars should consider a closer look. Don’t let the architecturally dated buildings put you off. Try walking through Allen Wilson Terrace playgrounds, or stopping in the community center, or meeting DHA management, or even better–but I know this is hard to do without kids–get to know residents. You’re missing something if you think this is just a stop gap measure that people should escape as soon as possible. In my opinion, any healthy community needs a mix of income levels, occupations, social backgrounds, and culture. Isn’t that how an economy or civilization works? If all the world was business consultants living in cookie cutter McMansions, could it really function? Isn’t that what “Our Town” or “Main Street” were all about? Or am I brainwashed by Disney fantasies?
Good points CSC. There are some that would love to be able to turn Decatur into a nearly all white, upper middle class, cookie cutter McMansion suburb where poor people and people of color are only seen where they work, but not live. But there are hopefully enough of us that oppose these views to stop them.
Sounds like a conspiracy to me. Today the Great Lakes, tomorrow the world! We really must do something about all these white folks with money (the worst kind, IMO) coming into our community with their ‘backward’ ideas and lack of appreciation for the dogma of diversity. And then they have the nerve to speak ill of public housing projects?!? These people are clearly not Decatur-worthy.
Of course, if they didn’t like/respect/enjoy living in a diverse community then it’s highly unlikely they would have moved here in the first place, no?
There’s more and more racial/ethnic diversity in the Great Lakes these days. I don’t believe that DHA housing is officially or unofficially a public housing project. It adds income diversity to Decatur which was becoming harder to find until the recession. Thanks to the recession, even income diversity is starting to pop up in the Great Lakes and all around Decatur. Maybe eventually DHA homes will be more diverse in terms of race/ethnicity. They are already diverse in terms of country of origin.
I’m not sure who I agree with here, but here’s what I keep wanting to say.
It’s near impossible to tell where segregation due to race ends and where segregation by choice or class begins. Even if the entire population simply stopped segregating by outward appearance, there’s still going to be an extended period of time when the results of this segregation by race hang around. Forced segregation has lead to generations of whites and blacks growing up in entirely separate cultures…not to mention varying levels of opportunity.
So, while blind racism is no longer socially acceptable and many folks are now thankfully ambivalent about the color of another’s skin, the two cultures cannot immediately meld seamlessly after living separately for centuries. Today we continue to slowly make in-roads in this area, but we’re still very much in a transitional period.
And with any cultural shift, there are various levels of participants. There are those who obsessively despise any prejudices that they may harbor thanks to their environment and use every opportunity to dispel their own knee-jerks and then there are a whole host of other variations on that up to those who don’t really consider how it has affected them.
All this to say that both Eric’s thread and Tyler’s thread have valid points. We shouldn’t get too cocky about how diverse we actually are (and what gentrification has a tendency to do) and blind ourselves with back-patting, and at the same time we shouldn’t let any less-than-perfect reality deter us rectifying this centuries old problem.
DM, you’re right on with your observation about there being a very fuzzy divide between the categories of segregation– I also believe that too many people assume that middle- and upper-class people of color automatically want to live in “white” neighborhoods. That’s not always (or often) the case. The posters who are talking about the quantifiable differences between segregation by class rather than race have very valid points; the simple fact is that a disproportionate number of folks on the lower end of the socio-economic spectrum are also racial/ethnic minorities. People of means, however well-intentioned, seldom end up living amongst those without. The obvious overlap between racial and class segregation makes it easy to confuse the two, so I understand where both sides are coming from. Even so, whenever I read things that have a classist/racist slant (however oblique the reference), I’m still taken aback by them. Like most of us here, I always hoped that such attitudes would be much less prevalent in the 21st century. There’s no doubt our society has made some great strides, but when I see things like the Vent I posted, it reminds me that we still have a hike ahead of us. Not hatin’, just sayin’.