This article has two goals:
First, to reflect on what makes a great neighborhood. My current neighbors seem divided on the issue. Nothing like a good old fashioned rezoning process to bring neighbors together, or tear them apart.
Second, I want to let people know that I am decidedly for redevelopment at Amsterdam Walk. And not some small-scale, watered-down development. The development that’s being proposed. *Gasp* Here’s why.
General Context
Amsterdam Walk (AW) is located on +/-11 acres adjacent to Piedmont Park and the Beltline, between two desirable in-town neighborhoods: Morningside and Virginia Highland. It is currently zoned commercial, with a range of retail and commercial uses in old warehouses, served by surface parking. So what is a commercial complex of old warehouses doing in the midst of “single-family” neighborhoods? And why is someone trying to rezone it?
AW is the site of the former Campbell Coal Company, founded by one Richard Orme Campbell (recognize that middle name?) This industrial site sat along the former rail tracks (today’s Beltline) and preceded the residential neighborhoods that today surround it. Note that the neighborhoods, which at the turn of the century were still forests and farmland, were originally built by developers (not altruistic ones, either: the kind who work to make money *more gasps*). They were built along a former streetcar line that ran along Boulevard/Monroe. And they were not single-family-only.
In the 1980s, Jack Halpern (Halpern Enterprises) purchased the property. At the time, the railroad was still active, the streetcar was long gone, and the inventor of the Beltline was still in high school. In the 1990s, Halpern repositioned the area from industrial to commercial while maintaining many of the existing warehouses to provide low-cost spaces for local tenants. Now, the Halpern family is ready to sell the property. As a longtime Morningside resident, Halpern knows the value of this property and wants to see it evolve into a long-term asset for the community.
My Context
What do I know about AW? Well, I live on the same block. Despite this, I rarely visit AW. I’d love to be able to walk to restaurants, or to have a place to meet friends for a drink while my kids run around, or to be able to easily get on the Beltline. But, AW doesn’t currently provide those options.
My husband and I are both urban designers, with backgrounds in architecture and city planning. I am an Atlanta native, but we moved to VaHi in 2018 when we were ready to buy a home. We chose the neighborhood because of its proximity to our jobs (we walk and bike to work), proximity to transit (we live along a bus line and the Beltline), the walkability (we have one car and can walk or bike to almost everything we need), the schools (we have young children), access to Piedmont Park, and the hope that one day our neighbor AW would transform into a great neighborhood amenity. To us, the need for and potential of Amsterdam Walk redevelopment has long been obvious.
Because of my background, and because I care deeply about where I live, I have served on the VHCA planning committee since moving to the neighborhood. For the last year, I have been involved in the AW rezoning.
What Makes a Great Neighborhood?
“Neighborhood is a word that has come to sound like a Valentine. As a sentimental concept, ‘neighborhood’ is harmful to city planning. It leads to attempts at warping city life into imitations of town or suburban life. Sentimentality plays with sweet intentions in place of good sense.” — Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities
What makes a great neighborhood? Atlanta is a city of neighborhoods, and while everyone likes to claim theirs is the best — they all share the same DNA. The best neighborhoods, in my opinion, do the following.
They enable diversity:
I’m talking about diversity of uses and people. Great neighborhoods are desirable and accessible to people of all types: young, old, rich, poor, large families, no family, etc. If people of all incomes, ages and races can’t live in your neighborhood, then what you really have is an enclave.
Enclaves exclude people; exclusion either starts or ends with us. I think we should stop. We should stop the rhetoric of fearing “others.” New people, especially renters, are often portrayed as less desirable than people who currently own a single-family home. Why? It’s just as likely that a “bad” person buys the house next to you as a “good” person rents an apartment down the street.
It’s also just as likely that a renter will stay in the neighborhood as long as someone who owns a home. They might even become someone who owns a home. Having money or choosing one lifestyle over another doesn’t make you “good’ or ‘bad.” Almost everyone has been a renter at some point in their lives. Don’t we know this by now? Apparently not. The point is, great neighborhoods allow people to rent when they need to and buy when they want to. They provide housing choices that enable a diverse population.
And what about diverse uses? If you can’t easily access non-residential uses like retail and commercial without a car, then you live in a suburb. Suburbs can make great bedroom communities, but not great neighborhoods. And I should say, if you like suburbs, that is fine! Our region specializes in delivering suburban lifestyles. Over 90 percent of our metropolitan land area can serve you. I believe urban neighborhoods, however, offer us richer and more vital life.
They are walkable:
Great neighborhoods have a walkable fabric, meaning a coherent and consistent network of streets that promote walking. The best neighborhoods accommodate cars, but create safe and comfortable environments for people to walk, bike or take other forms of transportation. It is a simple truth of cities that if people can walk, they will walk. An important benefit to neighborhoods is that when people walk, they also cross paths and speak to one another. The social life of neighborhoods is lived on the sidewalk.
Good news: we have a walkable fabric and the Beltline in our neighborhood. We should be Atlanta’s Mecca for great walking (don’t get me started on biking… did I mention that we have the Beltline but no safe way to bike to it?) The Beltline is great, but one trail for walking and biking is not nearly enough for a growing major city. In the same way that we need more housing choices in our neighborhoods, we need more mobility choices. And no, not everyone can walk or bike, but we need to provide the option for those who can.
They have great amenities:
Great neighborhoods have great public amenities like childcare, schools, parks, libraries, and transit. They also have the density needed to provide a robust tax base for these public amenities, to ensure they are of high quality. They have shops, restaurants, and other daily needs in close proximity to homes. They have easy access to all necessary jobs and services, via a variety of mobility options. You should be able to get most of what you need in your neighborhood, and to not have to travel far to get something your neighborhood lacks.
They have a strong community identity:
Great neighborhoods are full of people who love their place and work hard to make it better for everyone, whether it’s the folks who organize weekly farmers markets, festivals, park clean ups, or volunteer their time on committees. When people love a place, they put time and energy into it; this is an enduring strength of great neighborhoods. In Atlanta, a big part of our identity is our tree canopy. Great neighborhoods in Atlanta have great tree canopy, and focus just as much energy on planting new trees as protecting old ones.
They embrace change:
The best neighborhoods enable change and make it work in their favor. They welcome new neighbors as strongly as they appreciate their current ones. Great neighborhoods are adaptable; they allow residents to change their lifestyles while remaining in the neighborhood. If you can’t live in the same neighborhood through every period of your life, that’s a problem of the neighborhood — not you. Cites are not meant to be static nor to conform to the needs of the few over the many. Constraining change to produce static cities is a new experiment, invented by zoning laws in the last century and felt now in the present via unaffordable housing, unbearable commutes and scant neighborhood services.
They are vibrant:
If your neighborhood is diverse, walkable, with great amenities, and a strong community identity — it will be vibrant. Vibrant means full of life! Life is what happens outside of cars. Life, public life, is what makes a place feel beautiful, safe and loved. Public life is the hallmark of a great neighborhood.
In summary, great neighborhoods should offer choices. Housing choices for all incomes, ages, and backgrounds. Amenity choices that support daily life: parks, schools, restaurants, retail. Mobility choices that give us many ways to move around our neighborhood and city. To do any of this, we need more people and more uses (yes, this is what we planners call “density.”) It is the only proven way to avoid the self-inflicted wounds of traffic and unaffordability. If we can’t or won’t allow density and mixed uses everywhere (such as throughout the fabric of our neighborhoods, as was found in the past), then we need to allow higher concentrations in certain important locations, like Amsterdam Walk.
The Proposal
Here’s what is being proposed (and conditioned as part of the rezoning request):
- A maximum of 840 residential units (20 percent affordable for 99 years)
- A maximum of 90,000 SF restaurant and retail (12.5 percent affordable for 99 years)
- A maximum of 150,000 SF office
- A maximum of 1435 parking spaces, in below grade or screened decks, plus increased EV and bike parking requirements
- Buildings capped at 85’ (seven stories) with transitional height planes adjacent to existing single-family homes
- Buildings capped at 180’ (10-14 stories) along the Beltline
- 20 percent minimum publicly accessible open space, with robust tree replanting requirements
- Required second access point at Evelyn Drive (This is a big deal!)
- Prohibited access to Park Dr or Orme Cir
- 15+ traffic safety conditions, including improvements along Monroe Dr and throughout the neighborhoods
- 20+ urban design and architectural conditions requiring quality buildings and public spaces
Check out the VHCA website and fact sheet for more detailed information.
A Better Amsterdam Walk
The neighbors most opposed to the AW redevelopment have crafted a group called A Better Amsterdam Walk. The concerns outlined include traffic, scale, compatibility, and density. However, the main fear appears to be change itself and how change will lead to a diminished quality of life for current residents.
Let’s be very clear. The zoning that exists at AW today (C-1) allows a development that is taller, more dense, less affordable, and has much more parking. Development under the present zoning could remove just as many trees while replanting far fewer, and there would be no requirement to provide a second access point to the property, as has been proposed via Evelyn Street. There would be no requirement to provide connections from the neighborhood to the Beltline and no requirement to provide traffic calming improvements throughout our neighborhoods.
In terms of compatibility, the proposal is only incompatible with the neighborhood today in the way that building hundreds of homes was incompatible with the farmland and industrial uses that were here at the beginning of the 20th century. It probably seemed like such an abrupt change at that time; farms and fields traded for dense clusters of houses and streets. But 100 years later, we benefit directly from that change. This is a strength of cities: they change. They grow, evolve, and adapt. So do we.
What the Better Amsterdam Walk arguments fail to articulate is that change is coming, regardless of this rezoning. If this rezoning does not happen, AW will still redevelop. With property values, interest rates, and the cost to build at an all-time high, the property will certainly not be developed with “low-rise buildings, right-sized parking capacity, green open spaces, and an overall cozy atmosphere.”
One thing we do know: it will be developed as-of-right, meaning whoever develops it will not come back to the neighborhood for their thoughts and approval. They will have every right to connect to Park Drive, no need to connect to Evelyn, and every interest to cram in as much parking as they want — they could even build another parking deck for the park! And no matter what happens at AW, growth is going to continue happening all around us. We should be thankful that our city has a strong economy and great lifestyles to offer people. But if we refuse to align density with mobility options, traffic will always plague us.
The Better Amsterdam Walk neighbors are not swayed by the “scare tactics” of the as-of-right alternative. They prefer to paint a rosy picture of how a beautiful, perfect place will materialize. It will magically cause no traffic; it will destroy no views, and it will protect us from change, from new people. Folks can dream, but let’s keep in mind that Midtown Place, which has the same zoning as AW today, was originally intended to be a walkable, mixed-use development. The surrounding neighbors didn’t want it. We see what they got instead.
A Better Amsterdam Walk, For Real
Could there possibly be positive aspects of this development proposal? While I do believe this proposal will be better than the very real alternative that awaits us, I also believe it’s a good proposal. Let’s revisit what makes a great neighborhood, as this is the real standard against which we should evaluate AW:
Great neighborhoods enable diversity:
Amsterdam Walk will provide 840 new units of housing, 168 of which will be affordable for 99 years. 99 years! The typical requirement is 20 years of affordability. This ensures affordability in our neighborhood for five times longer (generations longer) than any comparable standard. And even the market-rate units will provide more affordable options for people who can’t or don’t want to own a single-family home. This means so many more people will be able to afford to live in our neighborhoods.
For those who graduate from their rental units, the hope is that they will want to stay in the neighborhood. We have the opportunity to build a new generation of VaHi and MLPA lovers who will stay and care for this place into the future: wouldn’t it be great if our kids not only want to live in our neighborhoods when they grow up but could afford to? The mixed-use nature of the project will also ensure diverse uses in the neighborhood, including office space and retail that residents can walk or bike to! That is a real and practical dream.
Great neighborhoods are walkable:
Will people drive here? Of course. But will people also walk and bike here? And eventually, take transit here? You bet! It will be easier and cheaper to walk and bike to AW, so people with that option will choose it. The residents living in the 840 new units will have the option to walk or bike to restaurants, jobs, and retail within the development, along the Beltline, in nearby Midtown, and even in VaHi and MLPA!
Enabling lifestyles that don’t require a car means fewer people will drive. A primary reason for the rezoning is to allow more residential use than their current commercial zoning allows. So if traffic is a primary concern, a shift away from primarily commercial use is the best thing we can do. Let’s keep in mind that what is currently allowed at AW is more than 2,200 parking spaces (roughly the same number of parking spaces found at Ponce City Market). So any future proposal could provide nearly 1,000 more spaces as-of-right — with no access to Evelyn Street. Ouch.
It should be said that more cars do not mean less safety. The rezoning conditions we have imposed on the AW proposal require intersection improvements at Monroe and Sherwood, Cumberland, Yorkshire, Hillpine, Evelyn, Amsterdam and Orme, all of which will ensure a safer Monroe Drive for pedestrians and motorists. I hope everyone bemoaning traffic is also supportive of the Monroe Complete Street project, an initiative to make Monroe Drive safer for all users, not just cars.
So, if less traffic makes a good neighborhood, then we should be pro-density. More people living closer to their destinations means more ability to walk and bike, and thus less reliance on cars. More people also mean more funding for transit and more demand. I hope the same neighbors fighting traffic on Monroe support transit on the Beltline.
Speaking of transit on the Beltline, the developer of this project has been outspoken about the Eastside Streetcar extension. I reached out to Mike Greene (Portman Holdings) with a comment: “Some people are confusing our position on the eastside streetcar extension project as a general position against transit or against transit on the Beltline. Nothing could be further from the truth. The right question to ask is if this project, as designed, supports transit as planned by the city. The answer to that is definitely yes.” The issue of transit on the Beltline isn’t up to this developer, nor should it be. It’s up to us — the citizens of Atlanta who will pay for it. We need transit on the Beltline; we need citizens and leadership (ahem, mayor?) that will stand up and fight for it. We also need density to support it.
If we ever want to see less traffic in the city and in our neighborhoods, we have to move people around in more efficient ways than cars. And if we ever want legitimate transit, we need to provide density to support it.
Great neighborhoods have great amenities:
Yes, our neighborhoods today have a few great amenities in a few great locations, but not everywhere and not at our future front door, the Beltline. AW will offer 90k of retail and restaurants that neighbors can walk or bike to. AW will serve as a gateway for folks in our neighborhood to access the Beltline and all of the amenities it has to offer. For those of us in the northern portion of VaHi or all of Morningside, this site will be our first and primary access to the Beltline; this cannot be overemphasized.
This is our connection point. With over 10,000 of retail stores reserved for small, local businesses, AW could become a launch pad for neighborhood entrepreneurs. Additionally, a big part of the plan is the 20 percent public open space, which will include a pedestrian plaza that fronts the Beltline. I can see myself sitting at a café table sipping a glass of wine while my kids play with their friends in this safe space. Shouldn’t every neighborhood offer this? Not to mention, the density provided here is a way for our neighborhood to increase its tax base and provide more money for our schools, parks and other public amenities.
Great neighborhoods have strong community identity:
More neighbors living in the neighborhood means more people to care about and uplift the neighborhood. Imagine all of these folks patronizing our existing businesses that we want to see grow and thrive; imagine them generating demand for new businesses! Imagine them loving the neighborhood so much that they want to stay and give back to it.
Imagine a new and robust tree canopy here, to be enjoyed for the next 50-100 years in the same way that we enjoy the canopy that was planted when our neighborhoods were built (100 years ago!). Yes, let’s remember that trees came down to build our homes, to build Piedmont Park, to build the Beltline, to build the AW that exists today. Trees come down to make places; what we need to ensure is that we aggressively replant.
The replanting conditions for this development are some of the most robust I have seen, and that’s coming from someone who served on the Tree Conservation Commission for five years. We need to stop only thinking about what we will lose and think about what we can gain. And remember, trees will come down no matter what gets built here. Stopping this rezoning will not save trees; it will just make their sacrifice more worthwhile.
Great neighborhoods embrace change:
AW will bring our neighborhoods into the future. The density and mixed uses we have the opportunity to provide will reduce traffic in our neighborhoods over the long-term, and will increase the legitimate demand for transit. AW will create a front door for our neighborhoods to the Beltline, which will benefit everyone living here today. Fighting change doesn’t mean our neighborhoods won’t change, it just means we won’t get a say when they do.
Great neighborhoods are vibrant:
Vibrancy is not only an opportunity; it should be a foremost goal. If we have the opportunity to make our neighborhoods more diverse, walkable, and vibrant, why would we choose otherwise?
So, there you have it. I truly believe that the proposal on the table will result in a Better Amsterdam Walk for current and future residents of our neighborhoods. Voting this down will almost certainly mean a worse neighborhood — one that still has traffic, but that continues to be unaffordable and exclusive and may never realize the promise of transit.
This article is absolutely ridiculous. Thank you for having so much free time to define what a great neighborhood is. Too bad you cannot see the irony of your definition, compared to the current projected plan. Eight hundred and forty units is anything but appropriate for the area. It will completely alter the organic neighborhood you profess to love, “90k of retail space” is called a mall! I do not believe the neighbors who have lovely embraced it’s growth through out the years, are against developing the area. I think they are against a project that is obviously motivated by financial incentives for the developers, not the interest of ‘making a good neighborhood’. It feels as though anyone who is ‘pro this project’, blindly started with the end forced result, and is now trying to come up with UNSUCCESSFUL reasons why it should go forth.
Of course you want this high-density development. You are an Urban Designer! That’s your job. This article is an over-the-top love letter to Portman. I got cavities just reading it. The gushing is really ridiculous as the person above pointed out.
In my opinion it’s a conflict of interest for our Planning Board Members to be urban planners, architects, and real estate agents, and developers. Who is protecting the historic homes and neighborhoods? Certainly not these people whose livelihood depends on building more, more, more. There is no balance to our Planning Boards and the result is massive developments being approved by people in the business of approving these things. It’s unfair to the residents of these neighborhoods. The majority of your neighbors don’t want this yet you voted to approve it anyway. This is a cul-de-sac lot. It seems any Urban Planner worth their salt would use common sense to see why this doesn’t work at this location. It has nothing to do with “keeping people out” and everything to do with being able to live our lives without being stuck in traffic on Monroe Drive every single day. That is wonderful you are able to walk to work, most of us don’t have that luxury. We actually use Monroe Drive every single day to get to work, drive kids to school, run errands, and how great that you do not. You are in the privileged minority. Lucky you.
Our neighborhood is already “vibrant” without the Portman Development. You make it sound like our neighborhoods are lacking because we don’t have a massive Portman development in them. You are wrong. Your job as a Board Member is to listen to the residents you represent and act accordingly. You and the other architects, builders, and developers turned your backs on the desires of your own neighborhood. Yes, Amsterdam Walk should be redeveloped with apartments, shops, and restaurants. It should not be built at the expense of the other thousands of residents that have lived here for decades. You forgot that part of the equation. This is too massive a build for this cul-de-sac lot with one residential street servicing it. As an Urban Designer you should recognize that. No mass transit, no nearby Marta Station, and everyone will be using cars to get in and out of this huge development. Why put one of the largest apartment complexes in the entire city on a single residential road? The epitome of poor planning.
ok boomer
There you go with the name calling. Come on man.
Ps. I know of many apartments in vahi and morningside that are cheaper and larger than the “affordable” ones being proposed by Portman. Their prices are in their proposal. Please read the research. Private equity is what is pricing you out of Atlanta. It’s rampant here. Portman has a history of building these monstrous buildings and then selling them to private equity. This would only make your “problem” worse.
Please come to the discussion with facts not names.
Thank you Sean. The name-calling is always the fallback position to those who don’t have anything constructive to say. There are apartments available in VaHi right now, also offering a free month of rent for new leases.
Not a boomer. Just a person with common sense. 840 apartments is not sustainable at this location with no mass transit. The 1400+ parking spaces alone tell you Portman is relying on cars to access this location. Monroe Drive currently isn’t safe for bikers or pedestrians as the author of the guest column above states in an earlier interview. Fix Monroe Drive, then build a development that adheres to the Beltline Master Plan for this location.
Good job! Stay on top of these people!
I disagree I think residential unit impacts on traffic are tiny. I’ve lived in multi-hundred unit apartments and traffic is always minimal. A brunch restaurant for example will bring in around 50+ cars per hour. Also there is virtually zero foot traffic on both Monroe and piedmont, hardly vibrant.
Get your facts correct. A better Amsterdam walk has said at every meeting they want CHANG , but not at this scale. Please be truthful. Facts don’t seem to be important to you. It is also not 11 acres . Have you walked the Single family homes between HP and Amsterdam Walk development and seen the trees the green space that will be lost for a road that empties on to an over crowded Monroe. You can’t be serious if you think this will make it more walkable, Everyone will be coming in cars to apartments, office, etc.
Here here! Thank you for taking the time to articulate the other side of the story and your hopes for our neighborhood, especially in the face of so much aggression (yikes, y’all!!). I’m excited about Amsterdam Walk’s future and proud to have you as a neighbor, Elizabeth.
I am curious, did you and chat GPT write this or did Portman just send you their talking points? *gasps*
If you had a true argument you would not need to lie about those that disagree with you. A better Amsterdam Walk encourages change. They are not against it.
If you don’t want your neighbors to fight over this, don’t produce such a condescending article littered with falsehoods. This is shameful.
Attempting to minimize the legitimate concerns of so many in our neighborhoods, which led to the grassroots community organizing and voting down of the rezoning by 77% at the NPU-F last month, and not citing any of those community organizers while giving the developer room to try to bend the truth about their position on beltline rail is incredibly irresponsible and shows a high level of bias.
Again with the scare tactics and lies about the density. AW is currently zoned for 1.1M sqft. Portman proposed 1.5M sqft. 1.5 > 1.1.
Not mentioning that AW is located in a cul-de-sac, inaccessible from anywhere else but Monroe Dr, is at least lazy if not disingenuous.
For a city planner to not mention the current, existing Beltline Subarea 6 Master Plan that describes an appropriate development with a 9 story building in the middle and up to 4 story buildings on the periphery to transition into the existing neighborhood…
Finally, your neighbors from A Better Amsterdam Walk want smart, better development (it’s in the name of the group! “Better”. It’s not “No To Amsterdam Walk”), but the heroes in your story, Portman and Happern, won’t decrease their insane proposal nor agree to maybe make a bit less money in order to build something that we can all get behind. Maybe they will if City Council sides with our NPU-F and rejects their proposal.
Learn more: https://chng.it/PsN6qbJyfK
I purchased my condo just two years ago and I am excited to see what the Beltline brings us. I was also excited by the AW redevelopment proposal, but the devil is in the details. There is literally nothing like this scale of building anywhere on the park and no chance of another. In meetings with Portman, we proposed reducing the scale of the towers ON THE PARK, stepping them back, anything so they would fit not only with the neighborhood but on the park as well. Their final proposal still has giant towers right on the park. This type of development is more appropriate in O4W if they want the scale proposed. Still, I was ready to support the final negotiated plans until Portman came out ACTIVELY against transit on the Beltline. Yes, we all know, “they are for transit but not the streetcar” but the transit options have been studied over and over again and despite its cost, the streetcar came out as the best option. Hard to support a developer wanting to build 900 apartments and against transit that would mitigate the resulting traffic.
so there you have it ….. a chatgpt suspicious essay with instructions on how you should feel about your home and neighborhood being destroyed by hyper-political activists – and developers – who are hammering , nattering , nannying , shaming , threatening all the people who actually BUILT the neighborhood …… this woman repeatedly cites diversity , inclusion , vibrancy , etc ., but does not repeatedly address fundamental aging infrastructure (not very sexy) issues and the traffic jams a project of this size will create ….. GA Tech ? really ?
Thank you for writing this article. I also look forward to AW being our vibrant access point to the Beltline.
I do too! But in a more reasonable form factor.
It seems many of the commenters are missing the central thesis here: AW is going to be redeveloped, the developer frankly can do whatever they want within the zoning code, and to expect a developer to make substantially less money out of the goodness of their heart to placate well-off strangers is utterly delusional. There is nothing stopping them from putting a storage center here. Why not? They make money and clearly there’s a local market. Or maybe Aldi’s will make their first foray into the city – surely that won’t increase traffic!
Why on earth would a developer do what YOU want? This is America, land of capitalism. The current proposal could be so much worse. It sounds great! I’m a 10 minute walk away. Please, don’t let NIMBYs let the perfect be the enemy of the good. I agree with the article 100%.
How utterly sophomoric your understanding of capitalism is Adam.
Also developers must consider what the current stakeholders in the community want. Our taxes are what pay for the schools, streets, and all the municipal functions of this city and these neighborhoods. As such these NIMBYs have a right to have a say in their backyard.
Portman has not invested in our community.
Plus their brand new Krog street development is already looking run down. Was wanking through it this past weekend. Wood planks falling off in multiple places. Loose step rails. Trash receptacles overflowing. Landscaping dead in multiple places to name just a few issues. Can’t say this one year old brand new development left me itching to see what Portman will do next in my back yard.
Probably shouldn’t be wanking in public mate
Ha ha. I agree.
I hope you took more from my comment than my simple typo.
Great reasoned and thoughtful piece. This redevelopment will make our neighborhood more vibrant and walkable. You and the VAHI Civic Association planning committee have done a great job of helping to shape the change that will come – affordable housing units and retail space, robust tree replanting, improve access and egress and more. Many in opposition have a natural instinct to fight any change and fail to truly appreciate the risk that another Midtown Place strip center with a Walmart or 60 story office tower could be built here. They are very visible and loud voices but they don’t represent all of our community. Many of us are open to change and welcome the new neighbors this development will bring with open arms.
Us naysayers are very open to change. The fact that you all keep falsely saying we are not leaves your argument without a leg to stand on. *gasp*
This is VAHighlands a community of nimbys who oppose every development that is not single family. They opposed the buried parking deck in Piedmont park because they said it would obstruct their views. They even opposed the redesign of Monroe Drive to make it more safe for pedestrians.
Tony, so funny you mention the opposition to the parking deck. Chris Nelson (who was COO of the Piedmont Park Conservancy for some 15 years) shared two funny stories with me about the parking deck:
1. At an early meeting to share the plan with the neighborhood, we asked (by show of hands) how people got to the meeting that evening. He was able to coax the audience to admit that *every single attendee* had arrived by car. No one walked, rode a bike, etc. And this was why they needed more parking.
2. Long after the deck was completed, people still occasionally dropped by his office to voice their strident opposition to the (already completed) parking deck. He would invite them to step outside his office, and would point it out to the them. It usually took them a few moments to grasp that the deck was right there, hidden int he hillside. They would then say something like “Oh, that’s pretty good. Sorry. My bad.”
BTW, I don’t live especially near AW, but do plan to visit it more as the Beltline gets completed. I do find it odd that people aren’t speaking much about what might get built if the developer simply builds what the area is already zoned for. I can appreciate that people might not love the Portman plan (and I’ll admit I’m suspicious of their plans, too) — but usually a negotiated compromise is far better than forcing someone to simply adhere to what is now an antiquated zoning classification.
Well, Sean, actually Portman is invested in our community. They purchased property in our community with money and intend to generate a profit. This is known as an investment. They will also be paying far more in taxes than any of us.
Yes, while they do have to consider the neighborhood as a part of demonstrating due diligence when applying to COA, it’s still private property, not “your” backyard. We have a right to assert our desires for the redevelopment, and they have a right to largely ignore them, unfortunately. As the author points out numerous times, Portman has gone well beyond the legal requirements to propose what is objectively better than many, many developments in the area.
And if you’re going to call people sophomoric, you’d best stop “wanking” around Krog Street.
Well said! Unfortunately, NIMBYs will NIMBY, they cannot be reasoned with….
You have not paid attention to anything we have said. Not once have we said we are against a new development at Amsterdam Walk. No one from Amsterdam Walk has ever said we were against redesigning Monroe Drive either. You are making up a narrative as it suits your need to feel entitled to label us Nimbys. Complete Streets should be done and completed BEFORE Portman does anything at Amsterdam Walk. Of course Monroe should be made safer! The author of the guest column above says herself that Complete Streets should be done BEFORE this development breaks ground.
I have never heard anyone talk about “blocking their views.” Again you are saying things that are completely false to fit your narrative. There are residents on Highland Park that have a row of old trees that buffer them from the commercial buildings at Amsterdam Walk. All of those trees will be destroyed and a retaining wall will replace it. They should be allowed to keep their small tree buffer. It is not a view of the park as you suggested. It’s at the top of the street as you pull in on the right side. Nowhere near the park. Your comments are patently false on all accounts. AW should be redeveloped, just at the scale the Beltline Master Plan stated was correct for Amsterdam Walk.
A lot of the fiesty NIMBYs are actually Morningside folks (north of Amsterdam). They’re use to deeper setbacks and driving everywhere so it’s a harder concept.
Traffic is my only concern. This proposal mitigates some of that for me. Traffic defines the decline in quality of life argument for many of the opponents. My answer is and was, drive-less. I understand this is a freedom others do not share. Others just consider their inconvenience as paramount. I find the existing zoning alternative vastly inferior, if accurately described here. With that said, I would concentrate on the traffic control aspects, as the rest is inevitable.
Some pretty breathless responses to this article! As a 50+ year resident of Morningside just a couple of blocks from the site, I think this article captures exactly what I hope to see as a vibrant addition to our community. Thanks for the thoughtful analysis!
I haven’t lived in Morningside quite as long as Tom Weyandt, but I agree with and support his sentiments. Ms Williams stated her goals and then addressed them in a way that provided history I was not aware of and arguments I had not thought of. Folks should work with Portman to achieve the best result they can rather than continue to complain and have to accept what eventually occurs. I appreciate The Saporta Report for providing this article as food for thought and discussion.
I would hope a judge would be able to dig a little deeper and see that those against are not complaining and would love to work with Portman. Portman has refused to work with us. If I am reading this right, we should just roll over and “accept what eventually occurs”. An unfortunate way to go about things indeed.
Respectfully, I don’t think we are “complaining.” We are trying to get Portman to follow the guidelines of the Beltline Master Plan. It calls for far fewer apartments (347,) and limits the height at nine stories. I am a native of Atlanta ( Fourth generation) and I am well aware of Atlanta’s penchant for building first, and worrying about infrastructure later. We can’t do that here. Thousands of residents use Monroe Drive daily. If you lived here and drove on Monroe every day, you would understand what the problem is. We aren’t “complaining” we are trying desperately to avoid a catastrophe. Not an exaggeration. If Monroe Drive is perpetually at a standstill, how can emergency services reach us? We will be stuck in our houses. Monroe is our main route to get out. Monroe is already over capacity, right now. Add in 4,000 more cars at already the most dangerous intersection on Monroe, and it is a disaster. We want redevelopment here. Just not the second largest apartment complex in all of Atlanta with no mass transit, and one road access.
Cars are horribly inefficient use of space. So many cars have only one driver and no passengers. There’s really no additional space for cars in this city.
We should give more spaces to cycling. It will requires some jerry barrier and some paint, but it would be very cheap to do so.
With the money saved, we could invest in mass transit instead.
We should also implement congestion charging, especially on personal vehicles. Words is that people in New York are loving it.
With the distance to amenities as is, this city is practically made for it.
And sell off the parking lots for workshop spaces or gardens. I would love to make things in this city but my options are limited. Or more housing units!
Anyway, with the housing crisis as is, we can’t afford to NOT build. But we can build smart. There should be places with the biggest apartments around, with the best mass transit around.
Hey Tom It looks like you live miles not blocks from the development.
People underestimate the utility of the Beltline as a bicycle trail instead of as a rail alignment. As a result, they may overestimate the automobile impacts of the AW development.
Bicycles are a serious mode of transport. They offer most of the advantages of automobiles without the disbenefits: they take you exactly where you want to go, they do it on your own schedule, and there is no “last mile” problem (which is what kills inflexible transit systems.) E-bikes make it easy to get around, even in hot weather, and Atlanta’s multi-use trail network connects much of the city (thank you, PATH Foundation and PropelATL.)
In contrast, fixed rail forces travelers to comply with the schedule and the itinerary of a streetcar. And since the Beltline mostly goes through low-density neighborhoods, a streetcar simply cannot bring may travelers to their destinations. They will have to use cars.
True neither technology is perfect. But overall, bicycles are the more useful technology.
People who move to Amsterdam Walk will be aware of the traffic problems on Monroe, so AW is likely to attract more bicycle-oriented commuters.
I am not saying the bikes are a cure-all, but most debates over traffic jams on Monroe fail to recognize the utility of bikes on the Beltline as a significant alternative to cars on Monroe.
I support development at this site, just not on this scale or by a developer who opposses transit on the Eastside Beltline. Your entire argument in his favor is a nothingburger: he wants transit, just not on the segment that will serve his high density development, which you argue we need and the transit to support it. Pick a side. That’s circular logic and does nothing to address the issues 1) traffic and 2) the developer’s “I’ll have my cake and eat it too” attitude. Do better.
Total puff piece. Get serious about mass transit on the Beltline, then build. PS I like and use the current Amsterdam Walk as do many of us who go to Urban Body Fitness. Amsterdam Bark and the pre-school are also well used.
Here here! Thank you for taking the time to articulate the other side of the story and your hopes for our neighborhood, especially in the face of so much aggression (yikes, y’all!!). I’m excited about Amsterdam Walk’s future and proud to have you as a neighbor, Elizabeth.
I’m not against redevelopment or increased density. In fact, I want those things for the neighborhood I gave lived in for 28 years. Originally I was supporting the Portman proposal. But when the developer came out actively working to kill Light Rail Transit on the adjacent BeltLine, they lost me.
I don’t believe for a minute that the deep pocketed well connected members of BAT have any interest in bringing mass transit (read affordable transportation for the masses) to this part of the city. The micro mobility they propose is for the privileged and able bodied only.
I also don’t buy the argument that another developer will build something worse. In fact, you can’t build a storage facility there as one poster suggested. The loophole that allowed ABG to do that has been closed. Because of proximity to the BeltLine, there are many restrictions layered on top of the standard industrial and commercial zoning we have at this and other prime locations around the city.
If we truly intend to build the vibrant city we all claim to want, we have to stop allowing the supporting infrastructure for density to be an afterthought. Mass transit is just one piece, but a very important piece, that makes density work in other cities.
The biggest problem is the congestion on Monroe. We don’t have the ability to make enough adjustments to avoid this. Putting in 1400 spaces for cars make a mockery of your vision of walk / bike/ transit life style. Just getting out of that lovely neighborhood will be a nightmare.
The city lies down for developers. The city has no vision of a transit city. You could work on why they keep letting big developments to be built out to the sidewalk which is left at 6-8 feet only. There is no room for walkers on sidewalks that narrow. Check it out. It horrifies me how careless the city is in it’s desire to bow down to developers.
This sounds like it could be you, Martha! I would be saying the same thing you state here…. (My roommate @RMWC 1967?) Contact me.
I really hope they don’t scale back the designs. This is an amazing opportunity to bring lots of jobs/businesses/homes. Traffic and transit will for sure be an issue but that rings true for most of the city. Atlanta needs more density and asking a developer to scale back to “better fit the neighborhood” is a poor excuse.
If you don’t think the developer should try to “better fit the neighborhood” than you haven’t read the Beltline Master Plan of the VaHi Master Plan. Both state the importance of fitting in with the neighborhood as one of their top two “must-haves.” Furthermore, the Beltline Master Plan dictates Amsterdam Walk because of its “unique lot” being landlocked on three sides, should have ONLY 9 story buildings or LESS, and 347 apartments. Should Portman be allowed to completely ignore what took several months, lots of money, and countless hours of work by the Beltline group to report what to build at Amsterdam Walk and elsewhere along the Beltline? Is their expertise to be ignored by Portman just because he wants to build more? Yes, redevelop AW but at the scale set forth by the Beltline organization.
Developer can build whatever they want under current zoning. Not sure why some people get all upset and actually think a developer should take less profits. In order for a deal to pencil and get financed, u have to max out profits and returns for investors. And if Portman owns the land they have to build asap to make money. Easiest thing to do is just sell your house and move somewhere else if u r not happy.
“Developer can build whatever they want under current zoning.”
No they can’t. Sorry this is just incorrect.
This article is about hopes and dreams. What do you think about the double water main break last Friday? How does that fit into your plans.
This article is insane and should not be taken seriously. This is written purely in the interests of development companies without taking into consideration what a middle ground may look like. We want a better Amsterdam walk. That doesn’t mean the same looking apartment building for yuppies with a yoga studio under it.
A better Amsterdam walk still means we want some change. Please don’t disguise this as making it a better community when it puts more money in your pocket
Can’t support this proposal given Mike Greene’s activism against beltline rail which is critical to support a higher density development. His bumbling clarification is still not supportive. Would be supportive of a higher density development from a developer who supports beltline rail.
Could we simply limit parking so there is no net difference in traffic? That way commuters don’t see an impact, urbanist get density and force multimodal transport, walkability, etc., local residents get more amenities, and the builder gets to proceed knowing that beltline transit is critical to their plans.
There are other considerations, of course, but we’ll need to find a compromise at some point.
Portman’s Mike Greene said “No” when asked by the ZRB Board about having less parking spaces and less apartments. He stated financing was the reason he couldn’t have fewer parking spaces. There must be mass transit available BEFORE any high density development is built anywhere. Atlanta keeps building first and worrying about infrastructure later or if ever. We need transportation first.
Thank you Elizabeth Ward Williams for articulating so well the position that I and many neighbors share about Amsterdam Walk. As someone who lives on Amsterdam and visits Amsterdam Walk several times per week, I am excited to welcome the new businesses and neighbors that will come with the redevelopment. More amenities within walking distance will make our already great community even better.
Yes, traffic on Monroe is a problem, but this is an existing problem for our city leaders to solve. Let’s push them to accelerate the Monroe complete street project. Let’s consider other ideas as well like making Piedmont bidirectional between 10th and 14th to create an alternative to Monroe. Let’s get MARTA to provide a bus service on Monroe that people can actually use by running more than once every 30-60 minutes.
We live in the heart of the city. As our population continues to grow, the only way to support that growth is by making the heart of the city denser. Midtown and O4W are already densifying. Growth will bring increased density to adjacent parts of VaHi and Morningside as well.
The Beltline is an amazing amenity that is driving growth and investment all over the city. The apartments, office space, shops, and restaurants that have sprung up along the Beltline in O4W and Inman Park make for a fun and vibrant urban environment. I for one would love to see more of this type of mixed-use re-development along the Beltline at Amsterdam Walk, Midtown Place, Midtown Promenade, and Ansley Mall.
First, establish and start building light rail on the Beltline; then allow Portman permission to proceed, as there will be a transportation alternative to Monroe Drive’s bumper-to-bumper logjam. Please note that Portman is on record opposing light rail.
This is an exciting proposal and if approved will continue to distinguish Atlanta from other cities in the US South. The possibility of adding mass transit alongside the Beltline trail only makes this site more valuable and important for redevelopment into a walkable mixed-use hub for the surrounding neighborhoods.
So many NIMBYs in the comments not getting the point. SMH. But that will serve them well when instead of a mixed use community, they get a Walmart. LOL. Darn freaking Nimbys.
I’m not anti-development either but, come on, this is *not* the right development for this space and by saying we need to take it because the next proposal will be even worse doesn’t strike me as a strong argument.
And you lost me when you mocked this goal “the property will certainly not be developed with “low-rise buildings, right-sized parking capacity, green open spaces, and an overall cozy atmosphere.” Honest question: Why *can’t* we have this?
Because the owner / developer would not be able to finance it.
Next time I have to explain to someone why living in Midtown (11 years now) is so much better (and different) than Morningside (the previous 15 years), I’ll just send them this article. Using her criteria, Midtown (especially the garden district) wins in every category. I haven’t had this much fun listening to you guys bitch at each other since the Virginia Highland Elementary kerfuffle (“my Johnny can’t lose his best friend to Springdale Park!”). Let’s just use eminent domain to expand the park so that it borders Monroe from Park Tavern all the way up to Piedmont. And widen Monroe. Problem solved.